2014年-世界发展银行全球_Resource_Financed_Infrastructure___A_Discussion_on_a_New_Form_of_Infrastructure_Financing_111页_4mb

报告摘要

Resource Financed Infrastructure: A World Bank Study Summary

Core Content

This document presents a World Bank study on Resource Financed Infrastructure (RFI), a new form of infrastructure financing that links infrastructure development to the revenue streams from extractive industries such as oil and minerals. The report is authored by Håvard Halland, John Beardsworth, Bryan Land, and James Schmidt with contributions from Paul Collier, Alan Gelb, Justin Yifu Lin, Yan Wang, Clare Short, and Louis T. Wells. The study aims to provide an analytical framework for understanding RFI from a project finance perspective and to stimulate further research and debate on its implications.

Main Points

1. What is Resource Financed Infrastructure (RFI)?

RFI is a financing model where a loan for current infrastructure construction is securitized against the net present value of a future revenue stream from extractive activities (e.g., oil or mineral extraction).
Infrastructure loans are typically disbursed shortly after a joint infrastructure-resource extraction contract is signed.
Repayment of the loan begins a decade or more later, after the initial capital investments in extractive projects have been recovered.

2. Key Characteristics of RFI

Securitization of future revenues: The infrastructure loan is secured by the expected returns from extractive projects.
Grace period: The time between loan disbursement and repayment depends on the time to develop the resource project, initial investment size, and rate of return.
Infrastructure types: Includes power plants, railways, roads, ICT projects, schools, hospitals, and water works.

3. Origins of RFI

RFI was pioneered in Angola in the 1980s and 1990s by banks such as Standard Chartered Bank, BNP Paribas, and Commerzbank.
It has since been used in several African countries, primarily by Chinese banks like the China ExIm Bank, and more recently by the Korea ExIm Bank for projects in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).
The total value of signed RFI contracts in Africa is estimated to be at least $30 billion, though the extent of implementation is unclear.

4. RFI vs. Traditional Models

RFI is a derivative of traditional models including resource concessions, government infrastructure purchasing, project finance, and public-private partnerships (PPPs).
It is distinct in that it links infrastructure financing directly to extractive revenue, offering a unique way to mobilize development finance in low- and lower-middle-income countries.

5. Risks and Criticisms

RFI may reduce fiscal flexibility by earmarking future revenues for infrastructure.
Critics argue that it could lead to capital flight or misuse of resource revenues, especially in countries with weak financial and political institutions.
There is a risk of revenue leakage, where extractive revenues are not included in the national budget or are misused.

6. Benefits and Justifications

RFI can provide quick returns to citizens, enhancing government legitimacy.
It offers a commitment mechanism that ensures resource revenues are used for infrastructure development rather than recurrent spending.
It helps overcome financial and governance constraints in low-income, resource-rich countries.
It may reduce currency mismatch in infrastructure loans by aligning the currency of the loan with the currency of the extractive revenue (often U.S. dollars).

7. Context and Trends

Many developing countries face large financing gaps for public infrastructure, with Africa requiring $93 billion annually.
The global financial crisis has reduced access to traditional and long-term finance.
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in the extractives sector has increased, especially in Africa, where it has quintupled from $10 billion in 2000 to $50 billion in 2012.
Countries with limited access to capital markets often use natural resources as collateral to access financing for development.

Key Issues Examined

Financial characteristics: How RFI loans are structured, valued, and related to fiscal regimes.
Risk sharing: How risks and liabilities are distributed among stakeholders.
Dispute resolution: Current practices and challenges in settling disputes.
Construction supervision: How infrastructure is managed and supervised.
Technical standards and monitoring: Requirements for ensuring quality and compliance.
Operations and maintenance: How infrastructure is managed post-construction.

Comments from Experts

Paul Collier: Argues that RFI can be a useful commitment mechanism in contexts with high spending pressures and weak public administration. However, governments should not tie up capital indefinitely.
Alan Gelb: Highlights the risk of revenue leakage and the importance of RFI in precommitting to infrastructure investment.
Justin Yifu Lin and Yan Wang: Support RFI as a way to address financial and governance constraints and to align infrastructure with comparative advantage.
Clare Short: Emphasizes the need for transparent and accountable infrastructure financing, linking RFI to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI).
Louis T. Wells: Notes that RFI is similar to signature bonuses, which are also used to secure access to natural resources.

Conclusion

RFI is a new form of infrastructure financing that has emerged in response to financial and institutional challenges in resource-rich developing countries. It offers a unique mechanism to secure financing for infrastructure through resource revenues, but it also raises important concerns about fiscal flexibility, revenue management, and public accountability. The study concludes that RFI should be subject to rigorous public policy scrutiny, similar to other development financing instruments.

Key Takeaways

RFI is a contractual and financial model that links infrastructure development to resource extraction.
It is used in resource-rich countries, particularly in Africa, by Chinese and Korean banks.
RFI can help mobilize development finance in countries with limited access to capital markets.
It may reduce currency mismatch and exchange rate risks.
There are significant risks, including revenue leakage, fiscal rigidity, and lack of transparency.
The study does not aim to present a World Bank-supported view, but rather to stimulate debate and further research on RFI.

Authors and Commentators

Håvard Halland: Natural resource economist at the World Bank.
John Beardsworth: Partner and global head at Hunton & Williams LLP.
Bryan Land: Lead mining specialist at the World Bank.
James Schmidt: Counsel at Hunton & Williams LLP.
Paul Collier: Economist and public policy professor at Oxford.
Alan Gelb: Senior fellow at the Center for Global Development.
Justin Yifu Lin: Professor at Peking University and former World Bank Chief Economist.
Yan Wang: Senior visiting fellow at Peking University and visiting professor at George Washington University.
Clare Short: Chair of the EITI Board.
Louis T. Wells: Emeritus professor at Harvard Business School.

References

Brautigam, D. (2011): Resource Financed Infrastructure: A New Form of Infrastructure Financing.
Foster, V. and Briceno-Garmendia, C. (2010): Africa's Infrastructure: A New Vision.
Alves, M. (2013): Resource Financed Infrastructure: A New Approach to Development Finance.
UNCTAD (2013): World Investment Report.

Figures and Tables

Figures: Include examples of traditional resource development, government infrastructure purchasing, project finance, and public-private partnership models.
Tables: Provide detailed comparisons of traditional models and RFI.

Legal and Institutional Framework

The study is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license.
It is a product of the World Bank staff and external consultants.
The report does not represent the official views of the World Bank or its Board of Executive Directors.

Summary

This World Bank study explores Resource Financed Infrastructure (RFI) as a new model of infrastructure financing that links infrastructure development to resource extraction. It provides an analytical discussion of RFI from a project finance perspective and includes comments from leading economists and policy makers. The study outlines the origins, characteristics, risks, and benefits of RFI, highlighting its role in addressing development finance gaps in low- and lower-middle-income countries. While RFI offers a unique approach to infrastructure financing, it also raises important concerns about fiscal flexibility, revenue management, and public accountability. The report encourages rigorous policy scrutiny and further research into the implications and effectiveness of RFI.