MSG Team's other articles

12243 Accounting for Player Contracts

Sporting franchise clubs are business entities at the end of the day. Even though some of them may not be running their operations to maximize their profit, they are still considered to be “for-profit” entities. Hence, ideally, their accounting is supposed to be similar to other business entities. However, this is not the case. There […]

11937 Why Blockchain May Not be Suitable for Commercial Banking?

As far as technology enthusiasts are concerned, blockchain is the most important invention since the wheel! It is very easy to find literature where technical gurus are praising blockchain as being the solution to all technology-related problems being faced by mankind. This overenthusiasm is the reason that most people believe that blockchain will revolutionize many […]

10919 Regret Aversion Bias

In order to be successful at investing, an investor not only needs to have mastery over their numbers, but they also need to have mastery over their emotions as well. In the past few articles, we have already discussed how emotional biases can lead to suboptimal performance in investing. In this article, we will try […]

12319 The Alliance between Car Companies and Ride Hailing Apps

Automobile companies in India have been facing tough competition amongst themselves. Firstly, increasing traffic congestion in the cities is making the millennials shy away from buying cars. Secondly, the number of automobile companies, as well as the models that they produce, are increasing rapidly every day. Hence, registering any kind of growth is difficult in […]

10262 Managing Money Laundering Risks in Commercial Banks

Up until now, we have seen various ways in which commercial banks are able to serve their corporate clients. Almost all the products and services created by commercial banks are created with the intention to serve their customers. However, corporate customers are not the only stakeholders that the banks have. Commercial banks are also answerable […]

Search with tags

  • No tags available.

As explained in the previous articles, the infrastructure sector is facing a significant funding gap. There is an urgent need to double the spending on infrastructure projects. One of the ways to fulfill this gap is by increasing the participation of the private sector in infrastructure projects. At the present moment, the private sector is not participating in infrastructure projects because of several reasons. Some of these reasons have been listed down in the article below.

Lack of Project Pipelines

Identification of viable financial projects which can be pitched to the private sector is a significant problem. Developing countries fail to identify infrastructure projects which are viable financially. If these projects are identified on time, they can be pitched to global investors, and funding can be generated. This problem is not confined to developing countries alone.

Even in developed countries i.e., the G-20 countries, less than 50% have a formal mechanism in place to identify projects which need to be pitched to global investors.

After all, investors cannot invest in projects which they don’t know about. A lot of time-critical needs stay unfulfilled because of this communication gap.

Countries that have set up a formal mechanism of creating a project pipeline i.e., a way to identify and rank projects, have seen a remarkable increase in the private sector participation in infrastructure funding projects.

Lack of Controls

The private sector can only help if they receive some surety that their capital will be protected once they make the investment. The problem is that a lot of time investments have to be made in third world countries where there is a significant law and order problem. Africa is a perfect example of this.

A lot of sub-Saharan African countries face problems with water. People have to walk miles to gain access to clean water. However, it is very difficult to get the private sector to fund infrastructure projects, which would improve access to clean water. Financial viability becomes a problem. This is not because the project is inherently unviable.

Rather, this is because of the fact that there is a lot of leakage in the supply chain. Unmetered supply of water and even thefts are very common. If a better system is created, where investors have more control over their projects, the amount of funding can increase by leaps and bounds.

Lower Adjusted Rate of Return

Governments all over the world claim that infrastructure projects have very little risk. However, private investors have a different point of view. There have been numerous cases wherein entire projects and investments made by the private sector have got stuck due to change in government policies.

Also, many infrastructure projects have significant legal hurdles, as well. In many cases, land acquisitions get significantly delayed, and environmental clearances are hard to come by. In such cases, the gestation period of the project gets prolonged, and the returns do not increase proportionately. This ends up reducing the annualized yield for the project.

Infrastructure projects are notorious for high levels of corruption, and hence, there is an additional risk for the investors involved. It is for this reason that investors seek a higher rate of return. This return is higher in nominal terms. However, where the additional risk is factored in, the returns can be considered to be normal.

Another problem is that infrastructure projects all over the world are under a lot of public scrutiny. Hence, if a firm is seen as taking advantage and gaining a higher rate of return, it could cause damage to their reputation. The lower IRR’s provided by the government are not very attractive for the private sector in the absence of any special tax incentives.

Unstable Regulatory Environment

A lot of investor demand for infrastructure projects is created by providing tax incentives. Banks are also given certain concessions in their capital adequacy ratios if they invest in infrastructure projects. However, the problem is that if the demand can be created by policies, it can also be taken away by a change in the policies.

This has happened multiple times in different parts of the world, and investors are quite aware of the possible impact. Basel III and Solvency II norms have already impacted investors who had invested in infrastructure projects. Hence, investors are wary of such changes. Infrastructure projects require investors to put in significant sums of money upfront. As a result, investors are not comfortable unless they are reasonably certain that the policies which are working in their favor will not change drastically during the course of the project.

High Transaction Costs

Private investors have to pay up a lot of money to obtain the right to work on an infrastructure project. For other investment classes, the transaction cost hovers around 2% of the project cost.

However, in the case of infrastructure projects, the transaction cost may go as high as 10%. This is because a lot of advisory fees, lawyer fee, and the official’s time has to be invested in bidding for a project. Higher transaction costs eat into the annualized return making the project less viable.

Since private sector funding is the need of the hour, governments all over the world should try to reduce the impact of the above-mentioned problems. This will help increase the flow of funds to the cash-starved infrastructure sector.

Article Written by

MSG Team

An insightful writer passionate about sharing expertise, trends, and tips, dedicated to inspiring and informing readers through engaging and thoughtful content.


Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Articles

Cost Overruns in Infrastructure Projects

MSG Team

Usage of Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDO) in Infrastructure Finance

MSG Team

Causes for Cost Overruns in Infrastructure Projects

MSG Team