The Importance of Public Private Partnerships in Accomplishing True, Lasting Global Development
September 27, 2017
The World Bank Group: A case in point
By Kirtika Challa
In 2016 the World Bank Group committed nearly $64.2 billion in loans, grants, equity investments and guarantees to its members and private businesses . On the other hand, as of 2016, total GDP for Emerging markets and developing economies (EM), based on Purchasing Power Parity, totaled $69.67 trillion, compared to $50.22 trillion for advanced economies . The EM GDP passed developed GDP for the first time in 2008 and the gap has only continued to widen with the IMF forecasting EM GDP to compose more than 60% of the global GDP by 2020. It is evident then, that the need significantly outweighs the scale of the resources that the World Bank has at its disposal to achieve its dual mandate of ending extreme poverty and promoting shared prosperity.
On a more granular level, annual infrastructure investment needs in emerging markets total approximately Given the scale of the need it is apparent that for the World Bank to have a significant impact on development in the world, it must be able to leverage its own resources through the crowding in of private capital. This is the basis of current World Bank President Jim Kim’s “cascade” approach to the group’s development goals and why the WBG’s two institutions focused on private sector development. The International Finance Corporation (IFC) and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), are at the center of this strategy.
Since 1956, the IFC has leveraged about $2.6 billion in capital from member governments to deliver more than $245 billion in financing for development . In 2016, IFC’s clients provided 2.4 million jobs, helped educate 4.6 million students, and treated nearly 32 million patients. They generated power for 48 million people, distributed water to nearly 22 million, and provided gas to more than 50 million . This level of impact is only possible through leveraging of private markets. As an example of IFC’s ability to crowd in investment, a few years ago IFC provided financing for an investment in cell phone towers in an emerging market country; a key infrastructure investment important to increase access to mobile data service where it doesn’t exist. IFC provided project financing in the form of a 9-yr loan to the client. Just recently, the company was able to refinance the loan using private capital, reducing the interest rate on the loan by 400 basis points relative to the IFC financing. Thus, IFC’s willingness and ability to successfully invest in more frontier markets clearly gave private capital the confidence to enter these markets, providing investors with good returns while also reducing the financing costs of the incumbent. Further, it frees up IFC capital to invest in regions or projects that do not yet have access to capital, to hopefully repeat the outcome.
The benefits from Public Private Partnerships can also be clearly seen at MIGA. As of FY 2016, MIGA’s outstanding gross exposure was $14.2bn  of which 45% was in IDA-eligible countries , 10% were in FSC countries  and $7.5Bn of this exposure was syndicated out to the private market, clearly demonstrating the ability of MIGA to leverage its capital. Furthermore, just in 2016 MIGA issued $4.3Bn in guarantees, which catalyzed $27.3Bn of investments, providing access to $787mm of financing for SMEs, g 24.2 million people with power, and providing employment to approximately 24,000 people.
As the political dynamic of the world shifts and larger member nations of the World Bank shift away from a global approach to progress and growth towards a more nationalistic view, the importance of the public private partnership becomes even more important. The only path forward for development then lies in creating markets and environments to incentivize capital inflow and the creation of bankable projects. More importantly, although aid and grants are important to achieve development goals, the more sustainable path forward is to create marketplaces where return is also achievable. Only then will development be lasting and self-sustaining. The World Bank Group’s ability to truly meet its dual mandate relies on these public private partnerships.
 IMF DataMapper, http://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPGDP@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD
 The International Development Association (IDA) is an international financial institution which offers concessional loans and grants to the world’s poorest developing countries. As of 2012, to borrow from the IDA’s concessional lending programs, a country’s gross national income (GNI) per capita must not exceed US$1,175.
Student Blog Disclaimer
The views expressed on the Student Blog are the author’s opinions and don’t necessarily represent the Wharton Public Policy Initiative’s strategies, recommendations, or opinions.
It has been nearly eighteen months since the US-China Trade War began in July 2018, largely due to two main factors: the United States’ perception that trade between the United States and China is unequal, and that China has been participating in unfair intellectual property practices. As the trade war persists, United States exports have suffered, affecting both businesses and consumers, albeit in different ways.
President Donald Trump has shifted American trade policy since entering office, most famously starting a trade war with China. The president, however, has also started trade disputes with other nations, including long-time American allies. In particular, the United States and the European Union have faced increased trade tension. For example, the president revived a long-running disagreement between Boeing and Airbus by placing tariffs on Airbus. This dispute represents a case study into the origins and consequences of Trump’s trade policy.
Regulating Consumers’ Rights to Repair Products: The Debate Between Convenience and Intellectual Property RightsConvenience has become a top priority of many consumers in the 21st century. The onset of new systems that allow people to obtain their necessities (and desires) quicker and easier than ever has individuals increasingly calculating their time as an opportunity cost. This phenomenon extends to the field of consumer products, and has given rise to the “right to repair” movement. This movement refers to ongoing debates in the tech policy/regulation community around whether a consumer should possess the inherent and official right to repair the products they purchase without fear of voiding the product’s warranty. There are opposing sides and perspectives on this matter, both of which will be explored throughout this piece.
The longest war in United States history has dragged on for more than 17 years with no end in sight. As the Taliban only increases in strength in Afghanistan using funds from drug trafficking, U.S. counterterrorism and counternarcotics efforts in the region still undermine one another and remain unsuccessful. Even with a peak of 100,000 troops deployed in Afghanistan and upwards of 2 trillion dollars spent including some future cost obligations since 2001, one of the world’s greatest superpowers has been continually defeated by a small flower - the opium poppy.
In the past few decades, forces such as globalization and the rapid advancement of technology have dramatically changed the structure of the U.S. economy. Perhaps the starkest example of this is the decline of certain geographically-concentrated industries, such as steel, textiles, and coal. Policymakers have responded to this by giving greater consideration to regions that have been “left behind” and policies that can help revitalize these communities. The majority of these policies are “placed-based” fiscal policies which provide additional resources to certain areas to fund projects and programs that make them more desirable places for firms to do business.
How can you exercise financial discipline while also meeting unimpeachable standards of quality? It is a demand faced by those charged with financing some of the most sensitive functions of our government – in the Federal Bureau of Investigation. On the one hand, their central mission is to keep us safe – and to that end, no expense should be spared. On the other hand, they must be responsible stewards of taxpayers’ money – only spending what is necessary and maximizing the return on dollars spent. Failure on either front is an easy target for public and congressional scrutiny. This is one of the challenges for today’s FBI.
Over the past decade, technology has profoundly changed the way we live. From drone delivery systems to autonomous vehicles, our current society operates at a scale inconceivable to even the greatest innovators of past. However, with the rapid onset of technological development, questions arise regarding how the government should regulate new and unknown risks.
One of President Trump’s key campaign promises was to reevaluate the trade relationship between the U.S. and China. In 2018, the Trump administration imposed tariffs of up to 25% on over $250 billion worth of Chinese goods. In response, China imposed tariffs of similar severity on $110 billion worth of American goods, such as chemicals, coal, and medical equipment. Since then, the two largest economies in the world have been engaged in an escalating trade war, but the meeting between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping during the 2019 G20 summit signaled progress in negotiations. Here, the two leaders agreed to a ceasefire and a return to discussions for a trade deal.
K.Y. McChesney wrote a now-famous analogy between homelessness and a game of musical chairs. The people playing the game are low-income households and the chairs are affordable housing units. When the music stops, all of the players rush to claim a chair. If there are more players than seats, some players are left standing. In the same way, if there are more low-income households than available affordable housing units, some people are left homeless. In the current US game of “affordable housing musical chairs,” more players are being added and more affordable housing chairs are being removed – leaving more people standing when the music stops.
The rise of peer to peer fundraising on digital platforms has many questioning whether technology will usher in a new era for accessible capital formation. Traditionally, investment in early stage ventures is restricted to ‘accredited investors:’ those of sufficient net worth and income levels. Nonetheless, both Regulation Crowdfunding and ‘Initial Coin Offerings’ (ICOs) allow unaccredited investors to ‘get in on the action’, participating in early stage funding in return for equity.