Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Никлас Гаремо "Роль частно-государственного партнерства в решении проблем глобальной инфраструктуры"


Published on

Nicklas Garemo "Role of PPPs in addressing global infrastructure challenges"
Никлас Гаремо "Роль частно-государственного партнерства в решении проблем глобальной инфраструктуры"

Published in: Environment
  • Login to see the comments

  • Be the first to like this

Никлас Гаремо "Роль частно-государственного партнерства в решении проблем глобальной инфраструктуры"

  1. 1. Nicklas Garemo Head of Infrastructure and Capital Projects Role of PPPs in addressing global infrastructure challenges
  2. 2. 1. The global infrastructure pipe-line 2. Financing challenging but PPPs only part of the answer 3. Infrastructure system peformance and productivity - the real problem 4. Opportunities to significantly boost productivity by replicating best- practices across countries 5. Primary benefit of PPP often not lower cost of capital but rather better execution Role of PPPs in addressing global infrastructure challenges
  3. 3. 1,100 700 400 400 Transport Telecom Power and water Infrastructure spend USD billions2, 2012 1 Represents 12% of global GDP 2 Nominal investment in Infrastructure in 2012 SOURCE: Global Insight; Euroconstruct; IMF; McKinsey; World Bank; OECD 4,150 4,150 2,300 2,600 TotalReal estate 750 1,200 350 Social infra- structure Oil, gas and mining 1 Real estate Narrow Infrastructure definition Broad Infrastructure definition The world spends USD 9 trillion each year across infrastructure assets
  4. 4. SOURCE: IMF, Bloomberg, Infrastructure Journal, Public Works Financing newsletter, Infrastructure Investor magazine; McKinsey Global Institute analysis 2 10% Average reduction, as a proportion of GDP, of G20 government spending to achieve debt targets Fiscal pressure 60:40 Debt-to-equity ratio of the Pennsylvania Turnpike in 2008, versus 85:15 for the Indiana Toll Road just two years earlier Constrained debt 70% Share of current investment pipeline comprising riskier green- field projects Emerging markets Significant challenges to finance and funding of new infrastructure going forward
  5. 5. While some countries have successfully used PPPs to finance as much as 20-25% of spend……… 76 10 35 100 100 11 58 90 13 7 21 4 20 118 89 36 20 100 96 18 84 56 64 28 16 44 4 52 82 47 81 66 156 26 10 9 Planned public, PPP, and private investment in core infrastructure Ratio per sectorUnited Kingdom 2011–15 100% = $257 billion India 2007–11 100% = $485 billion 64% (164) 23% (59) 13% (33) 17% (82) 19% (92) 64% (310) Transport Energy Communications Waste Water Electricity Roads Telecom Rail Water Ports Airports Percentage. $ billion SOURCE: HM Treasury, United Kingdom; Planning Commission, India; McKinsey Global Institute analysis Private Public Public-private partnership2
  6. 6. 2.0 1.4 0.9 1.2 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 High case 3.8 Base case 2.4 ’As is’ case 1.6 0.3 Total investment capital available for infrastructure investment Pension funds Sovereign wealth Life insurance All investors at target allocation Infra allocation in line with private equity All investors maintain current allocation US$ trillions of financing available over 2012 – 2030 SOURCE: McKinsey Global Banking Pools; McKinsey Global Insurance Pools; SWF Institute; TheCity UK; Preqin …..PPPs will only be part of the answer at the global level2
  7. 7. SOURCE: OECD Labour Productivity by Industry (ISIC Rev. 3 & Rev. 4); McKinsey Global Institute analysis Delivery system challenges Poor project delivery Biased project selection Bias towards new investments Sub-par labor productivity growth Value added per hour worked Index: 100 = 1989 for the US, 1991 for Germany 0 09052000951989 Rest of economy Construction 140 80 120 100 160 2013 Infrastructure delivery system performance and productivity3
  8. 8. SOURCE: McKinsey Global Institute analysis Strong infrastructure governance & capabilities D E Robust funding & finance framework Optimized spend Infra- structure spend Fact-based project selection A Stream- lined delivery B Making the most of existing infrastructure C ~8% ~15% ~15% -38% Percent Proven best practices rolled out globally could save about 40% of spend 4
  9. 9. Cost and time overruns historically Example: Mega project construction cost $ billion Seoul-Busan high-speed rail Incheon Inter-national airport 18 5 7 3 AdjustedPlanned 46 54 97 After ’99 Before ’99 3 41 122 After ’99Before ‘99 Overrun ..were reduced… Cost overrun Percent Between 1999 and 2006, ~60 $ billion saved (~1% of GDP) and allocated for other uses Rejected 1 Private Infrastructure Investment Center of Korea; 2 Public Investment Management Center; 3 Public & Private Infrastructure Management Center SOURCE: IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, KDI, Construction & Economy Research Institute of Korea, APA Journal … and project screening significantly improved Projects rejected Percent Korea enhanced the efficiency and transparency in infrastructure development by establishing an objective supervisory organization 4
  10. 10. SOURCE: McKinsey analysis Effective Governance Commitment Executional excellence Robust and trans- parent pipeline of viable PPP projects Clear vision for role of PPP in infrastructure delivery Positive perception of PPP by all key stakeholders 21 3 Standardized PPP- models with clear parameters for project selection Robust legal and institutional framework and regulations Effective, capable government institutions 54 6 Transparent and robust tender process Robust business plans with attrac- tive and stable risk allocation Effective controlling and feedback processes 87 9 Effective approach to PPPs4
  11. 11. … primary benefit is improved project performance due to better aligned incentives and risk allocation Lower financing costs in some countries but… Financing costs 2011-12 Percentage 4.5 India 6.4 8.2 Portugal 9.3 12.9 2.6 Brazil 5.9 5.6 UK Project Finance Public Debt 2008 Findings in UK on performance of PPPs Comparison 114 PPPs in 11 sectors vs. conventional projects OTHER BENEFITS Design for operations Design f. maintenance Level playing field Better TCO optimization etc 30 100 -70% Budget over-runs1 Percent of projectsMeeting budgets Meeting schedules Reducing overall costs 35 100 -65% Time over-runs Percent of projects 80 100 -20% Project costs2 Indexed to 100 Traditional PPP Primary benefits of PPPs often not lower cost of capital but rather improved execution 5 Note. Similar study in Australia showed 52.4 percent of conventional projects having cost overruns whereas only 27.8 percent of PPPs did SOURCE: McKinsey Global Institute analysis; UK National Audit report on “Private Finance Projects”, 2009
  12. 12. • USD 60 trillion needed until 2030 for Transport, Power and water alone • Severe headwinds to funding and finance and PPPs are only a part of the answer • Poor infrastructure system performance and productivity is the real challenge for the industry • Replicating existing best-practices at the global scale could help get significantly more and better infrastructure out of every dollar spent • Primary benefit of PPP often not lower cost of capital but rather improved execution due to better aligned incentives Summary of key messages