Promises and Perils of Infrastructure Projects in Brazil

  • 1,250 views
Uploaded on

Presentation done in the "Development in Brazil: Still the Country of the Future?", University of Toronto, Canada, Jan 20, 20011. The event was advertised at: …

Presentation done in the "Development in Brazil: Still the Country of the Future?", University of Toronto, Canada, Jan 20, 20011. The event was advertised at: http://las.utoronto.ca/component/illbethere/public/development

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,250
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
19
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Image  in  public  domain   The  Promises  and  Perils  of  Infrastructure   Projects  in  Brazil   Mauricio  Portugal  Ribeiro   Development  in  Brazil:  S;ll  the  Country  of  the  Future?   University  of  Toronto     01/20/2012  
  • 2. Contents  1.  Recent  history  of  infrastructure  investments    in  Brazil  and  the  main   challenges  2.  How  to  meet  the  challenges?  3.  Difficul;es  to  involve  private  par;cipa;on  in  infrastructure  in  Brazil  4.  Agenda  Annexes    A:  state  of  Brazil  infrastructure  (quality  and  access)  and  infrastructure  investments  B:  private  par;cipa;on  in  infrastructure  C:  main  features  of  the  legal  framework  for  the  priva;za;ons  and  PPP  program  in  Brazil      
  • 3. 1.  Recent  history  on  infrastructure  investments   in  Brazil  •  Brazil  investments  in  infrastructure/GDP  have  decreased  since  the  80’s   70’s  -­‐  5.42%;  80’s  –  3.62%;  90’s  –  2.69%;  00’s  –  2.22%      •  In  the  90’s,  due  to  priva;za;ons,  in  some  sectors  investments  have   picked  up  (v.g.  telecom,  power  transmission)   –  Telecom  -­‐  70’s  –  0.8%;  80’s  –  0.43%;  90’s  –  0.73%;  00’s  –  0.73%    •  However  in  many  other  sectors  private  par;cipa;on  fell  short  on   replacing  public  investment,  due  to:     –  regulatory  uncertainty  (water,  sanita;on,  solid  waste,  and  energy  genera;on)     –  bureaucra;c  obstacles    to  structure  new  projects  for  private  par;cipa;on   (roads)     –  badly  structured  priva;za;ons  that  did  not  include  adequate  mechanisms  to   foster  network  expansion  (railroads)   –  ideological  prejudice  against  private  par;cipa;on  (airports)    
  • 4. 1.  Recent  history  on  infrastructure  investments   in  Brazil  (cont.)  •  PAC  I  and  II  –  the  na;onal  programs  to  accelerate  investments   in  infrastructure,  in  place  since  2005,  have  been  slow  on  the   execu;on  of  investments,  although  it  is  improving  year  by  year   –  The  success  of  PAC  is  mainly  in  the  sectors  of  Oil  and  Gas,   transmission  and  genera;on  of  power  due  to  Petrobras  and   Eletrobras  capacity  of  invest     •  About  94%  of  foreseen  investment  for  these  companies  were  done  for  2010   budget  period       –  The  other  sectors  are  always  legging  behind,  although  year  by  year  it   is  improving   –  Although  there  is  no  empirical  data  on  quality  of  PAC  investments,   there  is  anecdotal  evidence  that  the  quality/cost  rela;on  is  not  good   –  PAC  does  not  include  a  long  term  policy  of  maintenance  of   infrastructure  
  • 5. 1.  Recent  history  on  infrastructure  investments   in  Brazil  (cont.)   –  During  the  90’s,  when  the  country  tried  to  move  investments  in  infrastructure   to  the  private  sector,  public  sector  lost  its  capacity  of  doing  investments,   which  it  has  not  yet  recuperated   –  New  fiscal  issues  have  arisen  in  the  post  crisis,  which  reduced  significantly  the   resources  available  for  public  investments  •  Currently,  Brazil  infrastructure:   –  quality  is  lower  than  peer  countries     •  84th  in  infrastructure,  WEF  2010)   •  104th  in  infrastructure,  WEF  2011   –  level  of  investments  too   –  level  of  access  to  u;li;es  and  telecom  is   •  Very  good  for  power  (99%  of  the  popula;on  have  access)   •  Good  for  telephone  (84.3%  including  cell  services)   •  Not  bad  for  water  (84.4%  has  access)   •  Very  bad  for  wastewater  collec;on  and  treatment  (52.5%  has  access)   Source:  PNAD,  2009  •  As  investments  every  year  are  lower  than  what  is  needed,  the  country   will  keep  lagging  behind  if  it  keeps  the  current  levels  of  investment  
  • 6. 2.  How  to  meet  the  challenge?  •  There  are  evidences  that  private  par;cipa;on  in   infrastructure  in  Brazil  is  a  quicker,  more  reliable,   and  beher  cost/quality  way  of  enhancing   infrastructure  quality/quan;ty   – Overall,  private  par;cipa;on  in  infrastructure  has   enhanced  quality  and  access  to  infrastructure   – Main  complaints  where  private  par;cipa;on  was   introduced  are  related  to  the  cost  of  tariffs    •  Shijing  focus  from  public  sector  investment  to   private  sector  investment  in  infrastructure  can  be   the  best  way  to  tackle  the  current  issues  
  • 7. 2.  How  to  meet  the  challenge?  (cont.)  •  There  are  currently  very  favorable  condi;ons  in  Brazil  to  private   sector  investment  in  infrastructure:   –  High  demand  for  infrastructure   –  Macroeconomic  stability  (stable  currency,  controlled  infla;on,   tendency  of  reduc;on  of  interest  rates,  and  investment  grade  status)   –  Experience  with  the  involvement  of  and  regula;on  of  private  sector   par;cipa;on  in  infrastructure   –  Ins;tu;onal  and  poli;cal  maturity  and  widespread  respect  in  any   place  of  the  poli;cal  spectrum  to  the  content  of  contracts  signed  by   the  Government   –  High  quality  of  the  legal  framework  for  private  par;cipa;on  in   infrastructure   •  Fiscal  responsibility  protec;ons   •  Possibility  of  selng  backstop  facility  to  Gov  payments  in  cases  of  low  credit   ra;ng  of  the  en;ty  
  • 8. 3.  Difficul;es  to  involve  private  par;cipa;on  in   infrastructure  in  Brazil  •  Difficul;es  related  to:   –  Ideological  prejudice,  labor  unions  opposi;on  and  poli;cal   sensi;veness  of  the  topic  priva;za;ons     –  Incompa;bili;es  between  poli;cal  ;me  frame  and  technical  ;me   frame  to  structure  projects   –  Public  sector  technical  capacity  to  structure  PPPs   –  Coordina;on  between  public  agencies  (Fed  Gov,  State  and   Municipality)  and  also  among  agencies  of  the  same  level  of  Gov   –  The  lack  of  a  permanent  and  organized  ac;vity  of  developing  projects   with  clear  and  stable  pipeline   –  The  existence  of  hidden  tax  incen;ves  and  subsidies  for  the  states  and   municipali;es  to  do  public  investments  instead  of  private  investments   –  Main  source  of  long  term  finance  for  the  private  sector  is  s;ll  BNDES  
  • 9. 4.  Agenda  •  Expanding  the  capacity  of  EBP  and  of  the  partnership  IFC/BNDES/IDB  to   assist  Governments  to  structure  PPPs  •  Keeping  structuring  projects  in  12-­‐18  months  in  order  to  create  a  new   track  record  on  the  ;me  required  to  structure  and  bid  out  projects  for   private  par;cipa;on  •  Structuring  and  manage  a  pipeline  with  credible  ;meframe  to  implement   projects  •  Develop  alterna;ve  means  of  long  term  financing  to  BNDES   –  Foster  the  development  of  capital  market  tools  to  finance  infrastructure  projects   debt   •  Crowding  out  by  the  treasury  bonds  market   •  Recent  correc;on  of  tax  disincen;ves  to  the  development  of  secondary  market  of  long  term   bonds   •  Create  tools  to  provide  transparency  of  the  secondary  market  deals  in  order  to  create  public   price  references  for  the  bonds        
  • 10. 4.  Agenda(cont.)  •  Enhance  the  mechanisms  to  protect  the  independency  of   the  regulatory  agencies     –  The  main  regulatory  agencies  (the  Federal  Gov  ones)  do  not  have   financial  autonomy   –  The  way  appointments  of  commissioners  were  managed  in  the  last   years,  have  in  my  opinion,  reduced  the  capacity  of  the  agencies  to   take  decisions  and  resis;ng  to  poli;cal  pressures  •  If  the  Gov  decide  to  pursue  this  course  of  ac;on,  it  will  make   sense  to  change  the  hidden  disincen;ves  and  face  the   poli;cal  opposi;ons  and  resistances  to  private  par;cipa;on   in  infrastructure    •  Control  current  spending  to  save  money  for  public   investment  in  sectors  like  health,  educa;on  and  safety,  and   give  room  for  the  private  sector  to  invest  in  infrastructure