FASID国際開発援助動向研究会（2005年5月11日） Connecting East Asia: A New Framework for Infrastructure 国際協力銀行 開発金融研究所 主任研究員 藤田 安男 What we’ll cover • The Infrastructure Challenge – With a focus on the funding story • The New Framework – Inclusive development – Coordination – Accountability and risk management • The Way Forward – 12 key policy messages The Infrastructure Challenge Five stories • • • • • Economic Spatial and demographic Environmental Political Funding – The focus of today’s presentation East Asia to require more than US$200 billion per annum for infrastructure Estimated annual infrastructure need, East Asia, 2005-2010 USD (billion) Water and Sanitation 180 160 140 Percent GDP Maintenance All excl. China Rail 8 6.9 % 7 Telecoms 6 Roads 5 120 6.3 % 3.6 % 100 4 80 60 Investment China Electricity 3 2 40 1 20 0 by economic classification by country by sector China Low income Middle income Who pays for infrastructure? FINANCIERS STATE BUDGET PROVIDERS INFRASTRUCTURE TAX PAYERS USERS growth The private sector bubble has burst… 140 … but sentiment is positive 120 80 88% 60 $11.5 billion private sector investment in EAP infrastructure 40 firm expectations on future investment in the region is strongly positive 67% 20 EAP 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 0 1990 $ billion 100 24% Total Investment in Projects with Private Participation 8% increase sustain Global firms 10% 4% decrease East Asian firms Attitudes towards infrastructure investment levels Many governments face budget constraints, poststabilization… The case of Indonesia: 18 16.0 16 14.0 14 12.0 10 8 10.0 $ billion sharp decline in public expenditure on infrastructure 12 $ billion Infrastructure a declining priority in a shrinking expenditure envelope 8.0 6.0 6 4 4.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 1996 public 2001 private Total nominal infrastructure expenditure 1994 infrastructure 2002 other Central government development spending Role of official financing varies by country Aid dependency in East Asia and the Pacific, 2002 Income Aid Per Capita Per Capita National Gross (US$) (US$) Income Investment Malaysia 3,540 4 0.1 0.4 Thailand 2,000 5 0.2 1.0 Philippines 1,030 7 0.7 3.7 China 960 1 0.1 0.3 Indonesia 710 6 0.8 5.3 PNG 530 38 7.5 Vietnam 430 16 3.6 11.3 Mongolia 430 85 18.6 60.8 Lao PDR 310 50 17.3 Cambodia 300 39 12.7 54.7 EAP Average /1 960 4 0.4 1.2 1/ For low and middle income countries. Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2004. Aid as percentage of: Chapter 2: Inclusive Development Coordination Inclusive Development Accountability and Risk Management The impact of infrastructure on poverty Three dimensions of poverty • Income and equality dimension – Substantial decline in income poverty • Quality of life – Progress on MDGs • Capabilities and Participation How does infrastructure promote inclusive development? Poverty Reduction Growth Growth Determinants Service Access Infrastructure Access Determinants But the impacts of infrastructure vary… by kind of infrastructure depending on other policies depending on the nature of poverty … and balances must be struck between growth inducing and poverty reducing infrastructure between poor and non-poor Inclusive development on the regional scale • Infrastructure and regional integration • Regional coordination – the case of Laos • Infrastructure and logistics Inclusive development on the national scale • The case of Vietnam – Large scale – Hanoi-Hai Phong corridor – Small scale Chapter 3: Coordination Coordination Inclusive Development Accountability and Risk Management Chapter 3: Coordination The “big picture”: The state’s ability to generate strategic vision and turn that vision into reality The “flying geese” theory of infrastructure The advanced economy model of coordination: • The “high-flying” geese – Japan, Hong Kong (China), Taiwan (China), Singapore, South Korea, Malaysia • Senior policy makers, politicians and strategic vision • Infrastructure driven by strong planning agencies • High growth helped maintain policy consensus • Investment anticipated demand; when following demand, responses were rapid and strategic • Much of the inner-workings hidden from public view • But under increasing stress from the 1980s Coordination challenges for the “geese trying to catch up” 1. Getting the infrastructure expenditure allocation right • Coordinating investment and financing functions • Coordinating fiscal space 2. Coordination through decentralized agencies • Horizontal coordination: Managing spillovers, Excessive fragmentation, and “Destructive Competition” • Vertical coordination • Developing the missing middle 3. The special challenge of urban management State of play in four East Asian developing countries The Philippines • Long term vision undermined in a fluid and fragmented political system Indonesia • An incomplete progression from autocratic technocracy to greater participation and decentralization State of play in four East Asian developing countries China • Decentralization + centralized strategic planning and long term vision Thailand • Shifts in relative power in the definition of strategic direction, but direction nonetheless Chapter 4: Accountability and Risk Management Coordination Inclusive Development Accountability and Risk Management Chapter 4: Accountability and Risk Management …and how they’re related Accountability • a set of institutional tools which reward organizations that consistently perform well for their stakeholders (and penalize those that perform badly) Risk Management • a set of institutional tools which endeavor to make risks and rewards commensurate with each other, in order to drive good performance When accountability and risk management fail: • Poor performance • Financial crisis • Corruption Mechanisms to strengthen accountability • Community participation – From project selection to ongoing operations – But likely to be limited to the last mile • Competition – Most effective way of bringing accountability – But East Asia not in the forefront, for a number of reasons • Regulation – The problem of holding regulators accountable – Independence is evolutionary Managing fiscal support • Subsidies – Important for a number of reasons – But blur accountability and bring risk – Accountability is a challenge • Contingent liabilities – Who bears risk is not always easy to tell Does ownership matter for accountability? • A poorly-regulated private monopoly performs as badly as a poorly-regulated public monopoly • But the private sector responds better than the public sector to good regulation or competition The Way Forward • Study provides a way of thinking about infrastructure issues in different situations – Not a blueprint or toolkit • Policy messages reflect concerns raised during our consultations – To promote the role of infrastructure in underpinning growth and poverty reduction Messages on Coordination 1. The center matters – infrastructure demands strong planning and coordination functions 2. Decentralization is important – but raises host of coordination challenges 3. Fiscal space for infrastructure is critical Messages on Accountability and Risk Management 4. Subsidy is not a dirty word – subsidies can be important, but are always risky, and should be handled with care 5. Competition is hard to achieve in infrastructure – but it’s the best way to bring accountability 6. Regulatory independence matters more in the long run than the short run Messages on Accountability and Risk Management (2) 7. Civil society has a key role to play in ensuring accountability in service provision 8. Infrastructure has to clean up its act – addressing corruption is a priority Funding Messages 9. The private sector will come back – if the right policies are in place 10. Public sector reform matters – but be realistic Funding Messages (2) 11. Local capital markets matter – but are not a panacea 12. Infrastructure needs reliable and responsive development partners
© Copyright 2024 ExpyDoc
