Lably
Skip to content

Infrastructure and economics

  • 10 min read
  • 3 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Capital (economics), Fixed capital and Economic development

It has been characterized as the mechanism that delivers the "..fundamental needs of society: food, water, energy, shelter, governance ... without infrastructure, societies disintegrate and people die." Adam Smith argued that fixed asset spending was the "third rationale for the state, behind the provision of defense and justice." Societies enjoy the use of "...highway, waterway, air, and rail systems that have allowed the unparalleled mobility of people and goods. Water-borne diseases are virtually nonexistent because of water and wastewater treatment, distribution, and collection systems. In addition, telecommunications and power systems have enabled our economic growth."

This development happened over a period of several centuries. It represents a number of successes and failures in the past that were termed public works and even before that internal improvements. In the 21st century, this type of development is termed infrastructure. Infrastructure can be described as tangible capital assets (income-earning assets), whether owned by private companies or the government.

Ownership and financing of infrastructure

Infrastructure may be owned and managed by governments or by private companies, such as sole public utility or railway companies. Generally, most roads, major ports and airports, water distribution systems and sewage networks are publicly owned, whereas most energy and telecommunications networks are privately owned. Publicly owned infrastructure may be paid for from taxes, tolls, or metered user fees, whereas private infrastructure is generally paid for by metered user fees. Major investment projects are generally financed by the issuance of infrastructure bonds, specialized long-term bonds, which (often) offer interest and tax benefits.

Hence, government owned and operated infrastructure may be developed and operated in the private sector or in public-private partnerships, in addition to in the public sector. In the United States, public spending on infrastructure has varied between 2.3% and 3.6% of GDP since 1950. Many financial institutions invest in infrastructure.

Infrastructure debt

Infrastructure debt is a complex investment category reserved for highly sophisticated institutional investors who can gauge jurisdiction-specific risk parameters, assess a project’s long-term viability, understand transaction risks, conduct due diligence, negotiate (multi)creditors’ agreements, make timely decisions on consents and waivers, and analyze loan performance over time.

Research conducted by the World Pensions Council (WPC) suggests that most UK and European pensions wishing to gain a degree of exposure to infrastructure debt have done so indirectly, through investments made in infrastructure funds managed by specialised Canadian, US and Australian funds.

On November 29, 2011, the British government unveiled an unprecedented plan to encourage large-scale pension investments in new roads, hospitals, airports, etc. across the UK. The plan is aimed at enticing 20 billion pounds ($30.97 billion) of investment in domestic infrastructure projects.

Infrastructure as a new asset class for pension funds and SWFs

Pension and sovereign wealth funds are major direct investors in infrastructure. Most pension funds have long-dated liabilities, with matching long-term investments. These large institutional investors need to protect the long-term value of their investments from inflationary debasement of currency and market fluctuations, and provide recurrent cash flows to pay for retiree benefits in the short-medium term: from that perspective, think-tanks such as the World Pensions Council (WPC) have argued that infrastructure is an ideal asset class that provides tangible advantages such as long duration (facilitating cash flow matching with long-term liabilities), protection against inflation and statistical diversification (low correlation with ‘traditional’ listed assets such as equity and fixed income investments), thus reducing overall portfolio volatility. Furthermore, in order to facilitate the investment of institutional investors in developing countries' infrastructure markets, it is necessary to design risk-allocation mechanisms more carefully, given the higher risks of developing countries' markets.

Supranational and public co-investment with institutional asset owners

The notion of supranational and public co-investment in infrastructure projects jointly with private institutional asset owners has gained traction amongst IMF, World Bank and European Commission policy makers in recent years notably in the last months of 2014/early 2015: Annual Meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank Group (October 2014) and adoption of the €315 bn European Commission Investment Plan for Europe (December 2014).

Foreign ownership of 'public assets'

Some experts have warned against the risk of "infrastructure nationalism", insisting that steady investment flows from foreign pension and sovereign funds were key for the long-term success of the asset class- notably in large European jurisdictions such as France and the UK

Comparison of private versus public investment

An interesting comparison between privatisation versus government-sponsored public works involves high-speed rail (HSR) projects in East Asia. In 1998, the Taiwan government awarded the Taiwan High Speed Rail Corporation, a private organisation, to construct the 345 km line from Taipei to Kaohsiung in a 35-year concession contract. Conversely, in 2004 the South Korean government charged the Korean High Speed Rail Construction Authority, a public entity, to construct its high-speed rail line, 412 km from Seoul to Busan, in two phases. While different implementation strategies, Taiwan successfully delivered the HSR project in terms of project management (time, cost, and quality), whereas South Korea successfully delivered its HSR project in terms of product success (meeting owners' and users' needs, particularly in ridership). Additionally, South Korea successfully created a technology transfer of high-speed rail technology from French engineers, essentially creating an industry of HSR manufacturing capable of exporting knowledge, equipment, and parts worldwide.

Sign in to keep reading

2 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Economics