World Bank Urges Governments to Guarantee Private Profits

By Jomo Kwame Sundaram and Anis Chowdhury
KUALA LUMPUR and SYDNEY, Nov 24 2020 – The World Bank has been leading other multilateral development banks (MDBs) and international financial institutions to press developing country governments to ‘de-risk’ infrastructure and other private, especially foreign investments.

They promote public-private partnerships (PPPs) supposedly to mobilize more private finance to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. PPP advocacy has been stepped up after developing countries’ pleas for better international tax cooperation were blocked at the third United Nations’ Financing for Development conference (FfD3) in Addis Ababa in mid-2015.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram

Official support for infrastructure PPPs seems stronger than ever. The Bank’s Global Infrastructure Facility (GIF) was set up to coordinate MDBs, private investors and governments promoting PPPs. Meanwhile, the G20 has been trying to modify the mandates of national and international development banks to enable them to initiate infrastructure PPPs with the private sector.

De-risking?
The World Bank’s latest Guidance on PPP Contractual Provisions measures progress in terms of “successfully procured PPP transactions”. The Bank explicitly recommends ‘de-risking’ PPPs, effectively involving ‘socializing’ risks and privatizing profits.

But the term ‘de-risking’ is misleading as some risk is inherent in all project investments. After all, projects may encounter problems due to planning mistakes, poor implementation or unexpected developments. Hence, Bank advice does not really seek to reduce, let alone eliminate risk, but simply to make governments bear and absorb it.

Thus, ‘de-risking’ really means shifting risk from private investors to governments for more contingencies, including design, planning or implementation failures by private partners. This ignores the Bank’s Growth Commission’s concern that “In too many cases, the division of labor has put profits in private hands, and risks in the public lap”.

Off the books, out of sight
Both World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) research has found many governments using PPPs and other similar arrangements to keep such projects ‘off the books’ of official central government accounts, effectively reducing transparency and accountability, while compromising governance.

Anis Chowdhury

Such project financing typically involves government-guaranteed – rather than direct government – liabilities. Not booked as government development or capital expenditure, it is also not counted as part of sovereign or government debt, e.g., for parliamentary reporting and accountability.

Instead, project costs are supposed to be paid for, over time, by direct user fees or government operational or current expenditure. Hence, most governments do not extend their normal accountability procedures to cover such expenditure and related debt.

The Fund has even warned of likely abuse of such seemingly ‘easy’ or ‘free’ money, emphasising the dangers of taking more government debt and risk ‘off the books’. This is very significant as the IMF rarely criticises Bank recommendations and advice, even indirectly.

Shifting responsibility
PPP financing is typically booked as government-guaranteed liabilities, rather than as sovereign debt per se. Being ‘off the books’, governments face fewer constraints to taking on ever more debt and risk. With such commitments, they also become much more vulnerable to ‘unforeseen’ costs.

Such contractual arrangements, typically set by private partners in most PPPs, do little to improve governance and accountability. To be sure, normal government budgetary accounting and audit procedures for PPPs may not meaningfully improve transparency and accountability.

As such financing arrangements are typically long-term, related government risks are correspondingly long-term, lasting decades in many cases. This tempts ‘short-termist’ governments ‘of the day’ to make long-term commitments they are unlikely to be held personally accountable for in the near to medium-term.

Moral hazard
World Bank guidance is clear that even a private partner who fails to deliver as contracted must be compensated for work done before a government can terminate a contract. Whether private partners actually deliver as promised does not seem to matter to the Bank which provides no guidance for addressing their failures to meet contractual obligations.

The Bank thus contributes to ‘moral hazard’ in PPPs: the less likely the private partner stands to lose from poor performance, the less incentive it has to meet contractual obligations. Guaranteeing cost recovery, revenue and profit erodes the motive to deliver as promised and to consider project risks.

Enthusiastic PPP promotion – by the Bank, other MDBs and donors urging developing country governments to bear more risk – is not only encouraging ‘moral hazard’, but also creating more opportunities for the corruption and abuse they profess to lament.

Instead, private partners have greater incentives to try gouging rents from government partners, e.g., by renegotiating existing contracts to their advantage. Conversely, governments have to choose between bearing the costs of failed projects, and paying even more to save problematic ones in the hope of cutting losses.

Faced with such choices, governments have little choice but to accede to their private partners’ demands. Bank guidance has thus further undermined governments in their dealings with private partners, who are now better able to demand improved contractual conditions for themselves, at the expense of their government partners.

Ignoring evidence
Many governments can undertake large infrastructure projects themselves, or alternatively, make much better procurement arrangements. IMF research has also found, “In many countries, PPPs have not always performed better than public procurement”.

Ironically, Bank research has shown that “well-run public firms tend to match the performance of private firms in regulated sectors”, concluding, “There is no ‘killer’ rationale for public-private partnerships”.

Even the Bank’s Research Observer has published a summary of “some of the most compelling examples of this kind of emerging critique” of infrastructure PPPs in telecoms, transport, water and sanitation, waste management and electricity.

Yet, the Bank continues to promote PPPs as the preferred mode of infrastructure financing, trying to shift more risk to governments, ostensibly to attract more private investment. Meanwhile, Bank guidance typically fails to warn governments of the risks involved and their implications.

Prejudiced guidance
Bank and other PPP advocates dismiss criticisms as ‘ideological’ despite growing empirical evidence. Such damning findings have had little impact on their PPP advocacy. Instead, the new fad is for more ‘blended finance’ to PPPs, using official concessional finance to subsidise and attract more private investment.

However, as The Economist has found, “blended finance has struggled to grow” as MDBs mobilise less than US$1 of private capital for every public dollar. It concluded, “early hopes may simply have been too starry-eyed. A trillion-dollar market seems well out of reach. Even making it to the hundreds of billions a year may be a stretch”.

Unsurprisingly, despite Bank, donor and other efforts, PPPs have only generated 15~20% of developing countries’ infrastructure investments, according to the Bank’s Independent Evaluation Group, while remaining negligible in the poorest countries.

 


!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

Comments are closed

RSS Daily Times Nigeria

  • 2023 election: We didn’t endorse Tinubu — Ondo, Ekiti former speakers
    Former Speakers of the House of Assembly in Ondo and Ekiti states have dissociated themselves from the purported endorsement of a National Leader of the All-Progressive Congress (APC), Asiwaju Bola Tinubu to contest the 2023 presidential election. Recall that former speakers of Houses of Assembly in the Southwest geo-political zone had met in Ibadan, Oyo […]
  • CAN asks Buhari to stop killing of religious leaders
    The Christian Association of Nigeria, CAN, has asked the Federal Government to put an end to the abduction and killing of religious leaders by bandits in the country. CAN’s Vice Chairman (Northern region), Rev. John Hayab, was reacting to the killing of a catholic priest of the Minna Catholic diocese, Fr. John Gbakaan during the […]
  • Experts warn against fresh lockdown
    By Tunde Shorunke Uncertainty and anxiety are palpable and heightening over another likely lockdown due to the recent hike in COVID-19 confirmed cases in the country. An average of over 1000 confirmed cases has been recorded daily recently, prompting an industry expert to believe that the federal government might decide to order another lockdown to […]
  • 2023: Ohuabunwa joins presidential race
    President of the Pharmaceutical Society of Nigeria (PSN), Mazi Sam Ohuabunwa, on Sunday, joined the 2023 presidential race, expressing deep concern over deteriorating conditions of things in the country. Ohuabunwa, who is a former member of Presidential Advisory Committee on Subsidy Reinvestment & Empowerment Programme (SURE-P), lamented that the country is being run in an […]

Weather for Abuja

[forecast]

RSS Vanguard News

  • Samsung chief jailed for 2.5 years over corruption scandal
    The de facto chief of South Korea’s Samsung business empire was convicted Monday over a huge corruption scandal and jailed for two and a half years, in a ruling that deprives the tech giant of its top decision-maker. Lee Jae-yong, vice-chairman of Samsung Electronics, the world’s biggest smartphone and memory chip maker, was found guiltyRead […]
  • How FUTA Deputy Registrar was murdered by suspected kidnappers
    Dayo Johnson – Akure The Deputy Registrar in the Federal University of Technology, FUTA, Akure, Ondo State, Dr Amos Arijesuyo died after he was shot in the chest by suspected kidnappers on Saturday evening. He reportedly sat in the front seat with the driver while three other occupants sat at the back seat. Family sourceRead […]
  • If we want to build Nigeria, we must abolish State of Origin — Bishop Onuoha
    By Ugochukwu Alaribe Methodist Bishop and co-chair of the Interfaith Dialogue Forum for Peace, IDFP, Dr. Sunday Onuoha, has called for the abolition of state of origin from bio-data in Nigeria. He stated that the abolition of state of origin will stop hatred, disunity, and agitations among people of different geopolitical zones. Bishop Onuoha, whoRead […]

© 2021 Nigeria Newsline. All Rights Reserved. Log in -