InfraCompass 2020

Set your infrastructure

policies in the right direction

A G20 INITIATIVE
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Contents
Acknowledgements 4

Foreword 5

Executive Summary 7
Context to InfraCompass 2020 7
Key results 7
Top 10 performers 9
Global highlights 11
Key highlights 11
The way forward 12

1. Introduction 13
1.1 Background to InfraCompass 14
1.2 Objective of InfraCompass 14
1.3 Rationale for refresh of InfraCompass 14

2. InfraCompass 2020 Framework 16

A brief description of the eight drivers 17

3. Key Results 20
Global findings 21
High Income Countries 26
Upper Middle Income Countries 30
Lower Middle Income Countries 33
Low Income Countries 36
Summary key findings 39

4. Drivers 40
Governance 41
Regulatory Framework 44
Permits 47
Planning 50
Procurement 53
Activity 56
Funding Capacity 59
Financial Markets 61

2
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

5. The Way Forward 63

6. Country Rankings 65

7. Country Profiles 74

8. Income Group And Regional Group Profiles 238

Appendix 1 –Overview Of Methodology Refresh 257

InfraCompass 2017 methodology 258
InfraCompass 2020 methodology 258

Appendix 2 – Technical Appendix 261

Introduction 262
Approach 262
Selecting metrics 263
Selecting countries 265
Preparing the data 267
Estimating metric weights 268
Deriving index scores 269
Bibliography 270

Appendix 3 – Data Sources 271

3
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Acknowledgements

InfraCompass 2020 has been produced following significant collaboration with international organisations, many of whom have their
own tools and materials on infrastructure. InfraCompass has drawn on these resources to develop a collated assessment of countries’
ability to deliver better infrastructure outcomes and guide governments to plan, deliver and manage quality infrastructure effectively.

The Global Infrastructure Hub (the GI Hub) recognises these stakeholders and greatly appreciates the expertise they provided in the
course of updating InfraCompass.

The participants of the InfraCompass collaboration workshop provided valuable contributions in the early stages of development of
InfraCompass 2020 to enhance the overall product and user experience, and avoid duplication with existing products. The workshop
participants included representatives from the World Bank Group (WBG), The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), Asian Development Bank
(ADB), and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Special thanks are due to the InfraCompass Expert Panel for generously contributing their time and expertise throughout the preparation
of InfraCompass 2020. The Expert Panel included, over the course of development of InfraCompass 2020, Sanjay Grover, Nancy
Faraday-Smith, Kira Heymans, Cristiana Vitale, Alexis Durand, Lorenzo Casullo and Fernanda Ruiz Nunez.

InfraCompass draws upon data from the following sources:

• International Monetary Fund – World Economic Outlook, Capital Account Openness

• The World Bank – World Development Indicators; Doing Business Survey; Procuring Infrastructure Public-Private Partnerships;
Benchmarking Public Procurement; Worldwide Governance Indicators

• World Economic Forum – Global Competitiveness Index

• OECD – System of National Accounts, Better Life Index, Indicators of Product Market Regulation

• GI Hub and BIS Oxford Economics – Global Infrastructure Outlook

• United Nations Conference on Trade and Development – World Investment Report

• Centre d'Études Prospectives et d'Informations Internationales – Institutional Profiles Database

• IJ Global – Procurement transactions data

• Bloomberg – Interbank lending rates

• S&P Global – Banking Industry Credit Risk Assessment

• Trading Economics – summary credit ratings

• Deloitte – in-country surveys from infrastructure and capital projects experts

Lastly, the GI Hub is pleased to have partnered with Deloitte for InfraCompass 2020. The expertise, perspective and guidance of Deloitte
contributed substantially to the InfraCompass framework refresh and helped enhance the InfraCompass tool for our users.

Limitations of Use
This report is prepared by the Global Infrastructure Hub using open source data, as available at 1 December 2019. The InfraCompass
methodology is designed for objectivity, and accordingly relies on the integrity of the source data. In this regard, while the Global
Infrastructure Hub recognises that some individual country data may have changed since it was collected by the open source data
provider, the selection of data sources for InfraCompass is based on the best data sources available in terms of broad geographical
coverage, recurrence, quality, importance to infrastructure, age and comparability of the data.

4
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Foreword

Marie Lam-Frendo, CEO, Global Infrastructure Hub Luke Houghton, Lead Partner – Infrastructure & Capital
The Global Infrastructure Hub is delighted to introduce Projects, Deloitte Asia Pacific
InfraCompass 2020. Among other enhancements, we are excited The Global Infrastructure Hub continues to support the G20’s
to extend InfraCompass to 25 new countries across several efforts to improve the delivery of quality infrastructure globally
regions, including the Pacific. We believe adding these countries and close the global infrastructure gap. Quality infrastructure is
to InfraCompass will promote greater collaboration, partnership the output of appropriate policy settings, delivery mechanisms
and knowledge transfer amongst peer countries. and capital market support.

InfraCompass 2020 provides a more comprehensive view of the The value of InfraCompass is that it pinpoints where and how
indicators that enable infrastructure investment. Through it, our governments can improve their infrastructure investment
intention is to support governments around the world to identify capabilities. It allows users – government infrastructure officials
opportunities to reduce the barriers to investment, improve and their advisers – to identify and prioritise actions and reforms
performance, including through best practice guidance, and that deliver better infrastructure investment and desirable
encourage greater investment in quality infrastructure. infrastructure outcomes.

A common ambition across countries and multinational organisations is to meet the increasing infrastructure need in the face of
sustained population growth and urbanisation, changing technologies and service needs, and the social-environmental ambitions of
the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Infrastructure is widely acknowledged as a driver of economic competitiveness, however the
divergence between the demand for infrastructure and the ability of governments to deliver continues to widen.

According to GI Hub’s Global Infrastructure Outlook, there is an estimated USD15 trillion global infrastructure investment gap over the
next two decades. Bridging this gap requires a broad set of actions, including creating robust governance and regulatory frameworks,
crowding in private finance, enhancing the efficiency of public spending, and leveraging technology and innovation in delivering and
managing infrastructure.

The good news is that we are seeing some middle and low income countries making strides towards scaling up their policy and market
drivers to enable the delivery of quality infrastructure. Rwanda, for instance, now has one of the most efficient planning and licencing
procedures for land acquisitions and permit issuance. Similarly, planning and procurement processes have materially improved in
Argentina. On the delivery of infrastructure, investment activity in Indonesia and Brazil has increased.

Importantly, we recognise that the COVID-19 pandemic could have major impacts on infrastructure investment in ways that are not
yet completely understood. The pandemic will result in increased public debt levels and constrain the ability of governments (and the
private sector) to spend on areas that are not considered a priority for responding to the immediate challenge. However, infrastructure
investment has in the past proven to be a useful stimulus for economic activity and growth.

We hope readers will find InfraCompass 2020 helpful in understanding the drivers and inhibitors of infrastructure investment
and delivery. Supported by best practice guidance, and with leadership from decision-makers, InfraCompass can help close the
infrastructure gap and increase shared prosperity.

5
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

6
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Executive Summary

Context to InfraCompass 2020 Combined with the leadership and political will to implement
InfraCompass was first released in 2017 covering 49 countries. reforms, InfraCompass can assist in identifying the factors that
It was subsequently updated in 2018 to 56 countries to include attract more infrastructure investment. It can also identify reforms
all countries participating in the G20 Compact with Africa (CwA) that deliver a greater service outcome for every dollar invested
initiative. – an important metric for capital constrained governments and
citizens in need of better services alike.
InfraCompass 2020 covers 81 countries, collectively representing
93% of global GDP and 86% of the global population. It is Through regular updates to the rankings, InfraCompass can be
the first edition to show trends in countries over time, and used to identify the reforms that are having the greatest impact
to rank countries’ performance against the drivers of quality on infrastructure markets, and provide the data to incentivise
infrastructure. continuous improvement and innovation in infrastructure
practices.
A key objective of InfraCompass is to assist countries to identify
reforms that lead to better infrastructure investment. It does Key results
this by determining the fundamental variables that impact InfraCompass 2020 has identified the most important
infrastructure outcomes in a country across eight drivers: catalysts within each infrastructure driver for unlocking quality
infrastructure across the globe:
Governance Governance and institutional settings • Governance – protections for creditors to recover their
investment if a business or project fails
Regulatory Investment policy and economic
framework regulation • Regulatory frameworks – ability of the government to formulate
and implement sound regulations to promote infrastructure
Clarity and consistency of the permits
Permits investment and delivery
and land acquisition process
Planning and infrastructure appraisal • Permits – reliability and transparency of land administration
Planning processes
processes
Efficiency of government contracting and • Planning – transparent public infrastructure project
Procurement
procurement pipelines to allow industry to prepare for projects and citizens to
The extent and nature of recent have a say
infrastructure investment activity and
• Procurement – transparency of procurement processes
Activity extent of private sector involvement over
the last five years, relative to the size of • Activity – a strong recent track record of investment in
the economy infrastructure by governments and the private sector,
Funding The capacity of governments to invest in relative to GDP
capacity infrastructure over time • Funding capacity – credit rating of the government to borrow
Financial The availability and cost of funding for money for infrastructure spending
markets infrastructure • Financial markets – overall depth of the local financial market
to sustain relatively large financial transactions
InfraCompass highlights how well countries perform against each
InfraCompass shows the goal of delivering successful, valuable,
of the eight drivers. This allows countries to identify benchmarks
quality infrastructure can be achieved through reforming key
and understand examples of better practice from across
practices. Countries can then realise the flow-on benefits of
the globe.
greater growth, productivity, jobs, trade and outcomes for the
By sharing leading infrastructure practices, InfraCompass community and environment.
encourages openness, transparency and greater dialogue among
countries, and their communities, on reforms to deliver better
quality infrastructure.

7
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Top performers

Predictable regulatory frameworks

One of the best credit ratings
that are welcoming of investment
in the world providing funding
and transparent planning of both
capacity for infrastructure
projects and strategic infrastructure
investment.
outcomes, including consideration of
socio-economic and local needs.

Denmark
United
Kingdom

United
States

The global financial

leader with a financial
market that underpins
infrastructure Singapore
investment.

Mexico

Procurement practices that are

transparent, enable competition,
High local infrastructure investment
Jordan
encourage appropriate Robust governance, leadership
activity as a share of GDP over the
allocation of risks to market, and capable institutions that
last five years to 2019 as it rolls out
and are managed well beyond support the rule of law and
new infrastructure projects.
contractual close. transparency, as well as permits
and approvals. Land acquisition
processes are timely, predictable
and navigable, minimising costly
delays in projects.

Key
Icons on the map indicate top performing country for each driver

Governance Regulatory frameworks Permits Planning Procurement Activity

Funding capacity Financial markets Top performing countries, covered by All other countries, covered by
InfraCompass 2020 InfraCompass 2020

8
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Top 10 performers
For full country rankings, see Country Rankings on page 65. A detailed description of each driver is provided in the InfraCompass 2020
Framework section on page 16.

Governance Permits

Rank Country Score Score Rank Rank Country Score Score Rank
(2020) (2020) change change (2020) (2020) change change
1 Singapore 83.4 0.1 0 1 Singapore 96.3 1.0 0
2 Denmark 82.6 0.0 1 2 New Zealand 94.0 0.1 0
3 Netherlands 82.3 -0.2 1 3 Rwanda 93.7 30.0 39
4 Canada 81.9 -1.1 -2 4 Denmark 91.5 0.0 -1
5 Austria 81.3 -0.5 1 5 Netherlands 90.8 0.3 0
6 New Zealand 81.0 -1.3 -1 6 Sweden 90.5 -0.7 -2
7 Slovenia 80.2 0.0 1 7 United Kingdom 89.2 0.9 -1
8 Japan 80.0 0.6 4 8 Turkey 87.9 12.1 17
9 Ireland 79.5 -0.3 1 9 Azerbaijan 87.9 8.6 9
10 Australia 79.5 -0.2 1 10 Qatar 86.8 2.8 0

Regulatory frameworks Planning

Rank Country Score Score Rank Rank Country Score Score Rank
(2020) (2020) change change (2020) (2020) change change
1 United Kingdom 81.2 0.3 0 1 United Kingdom 99.4 0.0 0
2 Germany 80.4 1.3 0 2 Australia 99.1 0.0 0
3 United States 79.8 2.8 3 3 Canada 98.5 0.1 0
4 Netherlands 79.6 0.7 -1 4 Colombia 98.5 0.1 0
5 Finland 78.0 1.8 2 5 Ireland 98.2 0.1 0
6 Czech Republic 77.9 1.9 2 6 Slovak Republic 97.9 -0.1 0
7 Singapore 77.9 -0.1 -3 7 Philippines 97.7 21.2 24
8 Denmark 75.8 1.2 3 8 India 97.3 0.0 -1
9 Australia 75.7 1.2 3 9 New Zealand 97.3 0.0 -1
10 Sweden 75.3 0.6 0 10 Netherlands 97.1 0.0 -1

Key

Increase from InfraCompass 2017

Decrease from InfraCompass 2017

No change from InfraCompass 2017

9
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Procurement Funding capacity

Rank Country Score Score Rank Rank Country Score Score Rank
(2020) (2020) change change (2020) (2020) change change
1 Mexico 94.9 17.6 23 1 Denmark 84.2 3.0 0
2 Netherlands 94.4 0.0 -1 2 Qatar 84.1 3.1 0
3 France 94.2 9.9 7 3 Singapore 84.1 3.1 0
4 Italy 94.1 8.8 4 4 Ireland 83.7 12.5 8
5 Croatia 93.6 18.1 22 5 United States 83.6 4.5 1
6 Slovak Republic 93.6 18.1 22 6 Australia 81.5 2.3 -1
7 Chile 93.5 0.1 -5 7 Netherlands 79.6 3.7 0
8 Canada 93.1 9.3 4 8 Sweden 79.5 0.0 -4
9 Australia 93.0 7.3 -2 9 Germany 76.4 2.7 -1
10 Singapore 92.8 9.7 7 10 Austria 75.7 3.0 -1

Activity1 Financial markets

Rank Country Score Score Rank Rank Country Score Score Rank
(2020) (2020) change change (2020) (2020) change change
1 Jordan 80.9 -5.6 1 1 United States 91.0 0.8 0
2 Mali 77.9 -11.7 -1 2 Japan 84.4 2.2 0
3 Paraguay 73.7 28.0 20 3 Sweden 78.3 1.6 2
4 Tanzania 71.2 -12.9 -1 4 United Kingdom 77.5 0.6 0
5 Ghana 65.9 -4.7 3 5 Korea 77.1 2.2 1
6 Vietnam 65.1 35.9 37 6 Canada 75.6 4.7 3
7 Australia 65.0 -9.3 0 7 China 73.2 -0.7 0
8 Turkey 63.7 5.5 4 8 Thailand 72.3 0.4 0
9 Togo 56.7 -2.9 2 9 Finland 71.8 3.7 3
10 Senegal 54.9 -0.7 4 10 South Africa 70.8 -9.8 -7

1. “Activity’ is defined as the extent and nature of recent infrastructure investment activity and the extent of private sector involvement over the last five years,
relative to the size of the economy. Therefore countries with a high proportion of infrastructure investment and smaller GDP will tend to rank higher.”

10
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Global highlights to issue construction permits and start businesses, in line with
Performance across many drivers has improved since recommendations from the World Bank Doing Business Report,
InfraCompass 2017, with Procurement seeing the biggest change and now outperform many High Income Countries that have
with almost 40% of the countries recording improvements. longer legacy processes.
The largest improvement has been in Sweden’s procurement
frameworks. Similar improvements have also been made in Activity represents the level of infrastructure investment and
Japan, Korea, Mexico, Croatia and the Slovak Republic. the value of deals closed in the last five years. It is measured as
a percentage of GDP, so that large economies do not dominate
Planning is the least improved driver since InfraCompass the rankings. Low Income and Lower-Middle Income Countries
2017. While some countries such as the Philippines have are seen to be investing more as a percentage of their GDPs to
introduced new infrastructure plans and improved their rankings, address their infrastructure gaps. As Activity considers the last
InfraCompass found that 38% of countries still do not publish five years only, countries that have had large deals close in 2013-
infrastructure plans and 28% do not publish pipelines of 2015 but not 2017-19 have fallen in rankings, as they have not
projects. In some of these countries, while there is no national maintained a consistent level of investment.
infrastructure plan, state and local governments have attempted
to outline their own infrastructure plans. The economic fallout from COVID-19 is likely to reduce funding
capacity across all countries as government borrowing increases
There has been limited movement in the Governance, Regulatory and revenues decrease due to reduced economic activity. There
frameworks and Funding capacity drivers, and more needs to be is also a potential destabilising effect on Financial markets. The
done. The rule of law, regulatory quality and credit rating represent Activity driver will also be impacted, but it is less clear how. Some
the largest gaps in performance, with High Income Countries governments may pursue policies to increase infrastructure
performing significantly better than Upper Middle, Lower Middle activity as part of economic stimulus in the recovery phase.
and Low Income Countries. Others may be too constrained by their debt positions and reduce
infrastructure investment or direct it to more efficient utilisation of
Permits is the most varied driver across income groups. Some existing assets.
Lower Middle Income Countries have reformed their procedures

Highlights

InfraCompass analyses InfraCompass countries

81 93% 86% 95% 88%

Countries Global GDP Global population Have dedicated Publish procurement
infrastructure agencies guidelines

Over USD1t USD116b Procurement

Public and private infrastructure Private infrastructure investment Is the most improved driver globally
investment globally over five years globally over five years

There is room for improvement

38% 35% Planning 70%

Countries Countries do not conduct Least improved driver Countries have taxation
lack national market soundings before globally that creates poor
infrastructure plans project procurement incentives for investment
11
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

The way forward

InfraCompass 2020 has found that critical gaps
still exist in infrastructure investment and delivery
around the world. As populations grow and the
digitalisation of services increases, so does
the pressure to provide quality infrastructure
to boost economic and social growth. To close
these gaps a proactive approach is needed by all
infrastructure participants, but particularly from
government decision-makers and policymakers.

Defining and publishing strategic infrastructure

plans is one of the areas identified by
InfraCompass 2020 in need of significant
improvement. While a country’s project pipeline
is not necessarily derived from a country’s
infrastructure plan, once an infrastructure plan is
published, it becomes easier to understand the
government’s infrastructure reform priorities and
prospective project plans. Published infrastructure
plans guide officials and the market, and can
be an important way to involve the community
and individuals in infrastructure provision and
prioritisation.

InfraCompass 2020 has also found a large spread

in the quality of regulatory frameworks across
countries, as they apply to infrastructure and
utility networks and their ability to encourage
innovation. It has highlighted the need to
strengthen regulatory frameworks for private
sector participation to attract infrastructure
investment. GI Hub is currently working on
compiling innovative funding models to support
infrastructure business cases.

Tackling the policy and funding gaps remains one

of the key objectives of GI Hub. InfraCompass
2020 provides users with strategic guidance from
international organisations and best-practice
countries on how to effectively target areas where
improvement is required.

It is hoped that InfraCompass, together with

GI Hub’s other guides and tools, such as the
Reference Tool on Governmental Processes
Facilitating Infrastructure Project Preparation2,
will help practitioners to further improve the
delivery of quality infrastructure. As the world
recovers and begins to rebuild after the COVID-19
pandemic, the delivery of quality infrastructure will
become increasingly important to drive economic
inclusivity and progress.

2. Global Infrastructure Hub, Reference Tool on

Governmental Processes Facilitating Infrastructure
Project Preparation (2019), https://www.gihub.org/
project-preparation

12
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

1. Introduction

13
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

1.1 Background to InfraCompass 1.3 Rationale for refresh of InfraCompass

The Global Infrastructure Hub (GI Hub) was created in 2014 InfraCompass was originally released in 2017 with coverage of
to support the G20’s objectives of increasing the quality and 49 countries, and subsequently updated in 2018 to include all
quantity of infrastructure globally, working collaboratively with countries participating in the G20 Compact with Africa (CwA)
governments (in both G20 and non-G20 countries), the private initiative, leading to a total coverage of 56 countries. The product
sector, Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs), international was developed with the intention to continually update it over time
organisations (IOs), and other stakeholders. to demonstrate changes in a countries’ infrastructure investment
environment and incorporate the most recent data. As the data
A country’s infrastructure investment enabling environment underlying InfraCompass has changed in the last three years,
is a major driver of investment decisions and outcomes. The the InfraCompass Framework and tool have warranted an update
enabling environment is the broad set of frameworks, institutions as well.
and practices to develop and deliver viable and high quality
infrastructure projects. This is driven by a myriad of factors, such It should be noted however, that the GI Hub uses open source
as economic, political or business conditions, legal and regulatory data (as available at 1 December 2019). The InfraCompass
frameworks, governance and institutional capabilities, and the methodology relies on the integrity of these data sources to
depth and stability of financial markets. While these are a broad maintain objectivity. Therefore, while the GI Hub recognises that
set of factors, they all contribute to infrastructure investment some individual country data may have changed since it was
outcomes to varying degrees. collected by the open source data provider the selection of data
sources for InfraCompass is based on the best data sources
The genesis of InfraCompass is that, while there were existing available in terms of broad geographical coverage, recurrence,
data and analysis on specific factors of a country’s infrastructure quality, importance to infrastructure, age and comparability of the
enabling environment, there was no product to holistically data.
measure it. A number of international organisations produced
various indicators that individually analysed a country’s The GI Hub has also taken this opportunity to re-examine the
infrastructure enabling environment. Indicators such as capital InfraCompass Framework and enhance the InfraCompass tool
account openness, rule of law and quality of regulation, all to provide a better user experience and deliver greater value to
contribute to a country’s enabling environment and its ability to end users.3 This is largely in response to internal analysis and
attract infrastructure investment and deliver quality infrastructure. stakeholder feedback, which identified that user engagement and
However, feedback from public and private stakeholders revealed uptake of InfraCompass could be improved, particularly to deliver
a distinct information gap: the compilation of all relevant a more effective ‘so what?’ to its end users.
information into one coherent framework.
Some of the key enhancements in InfraCompass 2020 include:
As a result, the GI Hub created InfraCompass in 2017 as a global
• Introducing country rankings at the driver level
framework to objectively quantify the strength of a country’s
infrastructure investment enabling environment, providing a way • Incorporating two new drivers into the InfraCompass
to show improvement over time and opportunities for reform. Framework – Funding Capacity and Financial Markets
InfraCompass takes a holistic approach by considering all relevant
• Providing guidance for best practice for the metrics that
drivers of infrastructure outcomes, for all procurement types, and
underpin the InfraCompass framework.
across both emerging and developed markets.
• Including an additional 25 countries to the previous 56 countries,
1.2 Objective of InfraCompass including five Pacific Island countries, to expand InfraCompass
The objective of InfraCompass is to help governments identify country coverage to a total of 81 countries. Note: only 76
policies and reforms that will lead to better public and private countries were ranked, with the remaining five countries (Pacific
infrastructure investment. It highlights the key enabling factors Island countries) not included in the ranking due to the high
that foster effective infrastructure outcomes. To achieve its number of interpolated data, which resulted from data coverage
objective, InfraCompass aims to: limitations.
• Improve policy changes, such as to governance and regulatory
For a detailed discussion on the technical methodology, including
frameworks, which encourage infrastructure investment,
statistical analysis used to refresh InfraCompass and treatment of
including by identifying peers that could suggest best practices
the Pacific Island countries, please see the Technical Appendix.
in policy formulation.

• Increase the availability of projects ready for investment by

providing countries with the ability to identify their capability
gaps in planning, procuring and delivering quality infrastructure
projects.

3. See Appendix 1 for an explanation of the user-centred approach that was used in the refresh.

14
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Table 1 Overview of country coverage and classification4

Region/Income Africa Americas Asia Europe Oceania

Group
High income Canada Japan Austria Australia
(economies with Chile Korea Belgium New Zealand
a Gross National United States of Qatar Croatia
Income (GNI) per America (USA) Saudi Arabia Czech Republic
capita, of $12,376 or Uruguay Singapore Denmark
more in 2018) United Arab Finland
Emirates (UAE) France
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
United Kingdom (UK)
Upper middle South Africa Argentina Azerbaijan Romania Fiji
income Brazil China Russia Samoa
(economies with Colombia Jordan
a GNI per capita Ecuador Kazakhstan
between $3,996 and Guatemala Malaysia
$12,375) Mexico Thailand
Paraguay Turkey
Peru
Lower middle Angola Bangladesh Papua New Guinea
income Cote d’Ivoire Cambodia Solomon Islands
(economies with Egypt India Vanuatu
a GNI per capita Ghana Indonesia
between $1,026 and Kenya Myanmar
$3,995) Morocco Pakistan
Nigeria Philippines
Senegal Vietnam
Tunisia
Low income Benin
(economies with a Burkina Faso
GNI per capita of Chad
$1,025 or less) Ethiopia
Guinea
Mali
Niger
Rwanda
Tanzania
Togo

Countries listed in blue indicate the additional countries added to InfraCompass 2020.

For a detailed discussion on the technical methodology, including statistical analysis used to refresh InfraCompass, please see
Appendix 2.

4. Income group classification is based on the World Bank Country and Lending Groups (https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-
world-bank-country-and-lending-groups), which is determined using the World Bank Atlas method (https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/
articles/378832-what-is-the-world-bank-atlas-method).
Region classification is based on the United Nations geoscheme, https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/

15
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

2. InfraCompass
2020 Framework

16
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

A brief description of the eight drivers

InfraCompass 2020 undertook an extensive research exercise and literature review, as well as multiple stakeholder workshops with
public, private and multi-lateral participants, to build on the InfraCompass 2017 Framework, which identified the ‘drivers’ of better
infrastructure investment.

The eight drivers represent areas of focus for countries to drive better infrastructure investment, improve their infrastructure capability,
and in doing so, increase the supply and delivery of investment-ready infrastructure projects.

Figure 1 InfraCompass 2020 Framework

Governance, institutions (including rule of law and corruption prevention), and legal
Governance
environment required to support infrastructure investment.

Importance What good looks like Metrics

The strength of a country’s governance Robust governance, leadership and • Rule of law
arrangements and its associated institutions is capable institutions that support • Recovery rate
fundamental to its overall economic performance the rule of law, transparency and
• Political stability and absence of
and infrastructure markets. The quality of the consultation, and effective and
violence score
institutional frameworks that govern infrastructure independent decision-making
markets is closely linked to the quality of the structures for infrastructure • Shareholder governance
frameworks that govern the whole economy. investment. • Infrastructure or PPP agency
• Post-completion reviews

The extent to which regulation, openness to investment, and competition frameworks

Regulatory frameworks
support infrastructure delivery.

Importance What good looks like Metrics

The more attractive a country’s regulatory Stable, consistent, predictable and • Regulatory (including competition)
environment is for investors, the more likely it is that transparent regulatory agencies and quality
capital will flow to that country. Since infrastructure decision-making processes and • Prevalence of foreign ownership
is often a monopoly asset, it is essential to regulate low barriers to investment enhance
• Product market regulatory score,
the monopoly providers, so that a balance is struck competition and drive down costs and
network sectors
between ensuring equitable access to services for increase quality of infrastructure.
consumers, incentivising quality and innovation, and • Strength of insolvency framework
achieving investment returns for the private sector. • Effect of taxation on incentives to
invest
• Investment promotion agency

The efficiency of planning and licencing procedures for the issuance of permits and
Permits
acquisitions of land required for development.

Importance What good looks like Metrics

Implementing practices to manage land, Permits, approvals and land • Quality of land administration
environment and community approvals directly acquisition processes that are timely, • Cost to start a business
impacts on the timely and cost-effective delivery of predictable and navigable, and which
• Registering property
infrastructure. minimise red tape to appropriate and
justifiable levels. • Time required to start a business
• Dealing with construction permits

17
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

A government’s ability to plan, coordinate, and select infrastructure projects.

Planning

Importance What good looks like Metrics

Infrastructure planning can be seen as the first Planning, not just of projects, but • Preparation of PPPs
step in a project’s lifecycle, and more broadly helps transparent setting of strategic social- • Published infrastructure plan
to articulate the overarching strategic objectives economic-environment goals and
• Published projects pipeline
and visions for a country’s infrastructure. It is not integrated sectoral and system plans,
separate from wider economic and spatial planning, enabling projects to be measured • Economic analysis assessment
as land use drives the demand for infrastructure, against clear objectives. • Market sounding and/or
and infrastructure enables the use of land. Given the assessment
inter-relationships between different infrastructure • Environmental impact analysis
assets (such as a rail line and the electricity that
powers it), coordination of infrastructure planning
is important. Cooperation across agencies and
levels of government, and broad consultations with
end-users and other relevant stakeholders, are key
ingredients in successful planning.

The extent to which procurement processes and bid management frameworks are
Procurement
standardised, transparent, and non-onerous to bidders.

Importance What good looks like Metrics

The procurement process is often the stage where the Procurement practices that are • Transparency in public
private sector is engaged in new infrastructure projects, transparent, enable efficient risk procurement
whether in the design and construction of assets or through allocation and innovation, deliver • Average procurement duration
outright ownership. The clarity, transparency and consistency value-for-money, enhance. – transaction RFP
of infrastructure procurement is therefore essential to
• Procurement of PPPs
ensuring effective outcomes throughout the asset lifecycle,
from construction to operations. The process of procuring • Published infrastructure
infrastructure assets is essential to ensuring value for money procurement guidelines
for the public purse and desirable outcomes for the users of • PPP contract management
the services provided by the assets.

The extent and nature of recent infrastructure investment activity and the extent of
Activity
private sector involvement over the last five years, relative to the size of the economy.

Importance What good looks like Metrics

The track record of investment activities by the public and High levels of recent • Infrastructure investment
private sectors is a good indicator of a country’s ability to infrastructure activity and high • Value of closed PPP
deliver infrastructure assets. Investment activities depend value of recent infrastructure infrastructure deals
on the willingness of the private sector to invest and the deals that involve private and
• Private infrastructure
funding capability of the government. A poor track record in foreign investment. Some
investment
delivering projects can be perceived as a high-risk investment countries prefer public investment
environment. For example, a high incidence of cancelled, over private investment in • Value of close infrastructure
distressed or renegotiated projects can signal to investors infrastructure. This is a societal deals with foreign equity
that investment in a particular country could be high risk or choice and should not be sponsorship
ultimately unsustainable. assumed as a negative

Note: Activity is measured relative

to the size of the economy,
therefore countries with a high
proportion of infrastructure
investment and smaller GDP will
tend to rank higher.

18
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Stability and sustainability of the government’s fiscal management.

Funding capacity

Importance What good looks like Metrics

Funding capacity is an indicator of the government’s capacity Fiscal sustainability that allows • Summary credit rating
to deliver projects. Regardless of the appetite of financial for the allocation of infrastructure • GDP per capita
markets, future infrastructure needs cannot be met without expenditure by governments.
• Long term GDP growth trend
the government’s ability to fund projects. Governments need
to be fiscally sustainable to provide project funding. Without • Gross government debt
fiscal settings, e.g., if a government cannot borrow money at
an affordable rate because of low credit rating, it would not be
able to fund and deliver projects.

Strength and capability of local financial markets.

Financial markets

Importance What good looks like Metrics

A well-developed financial market is important to raising Availability to provide a variety • Financial depth
long-term finance to meet the upfront costs of delivering a of capital market instruments to • Financing through local equity
project. Strong financial markets reflect investors’ appetite to encourage investors to finance market
invest in a market. These investors often include institutional infrastructure.
• Domestic credit to private
investors (sovereign wealth and pension funds), debt
sector
financing banks and fund managers. Deep financial markets
can increase a country’s pool of capital for infrastructure • Stocks traded
investment, therefore it is important for long-term financing of • Financial stability
infrastructure projects.

19
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

3. Key Results

20
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Global findings

The 81 countries covered in InfraCompass account for 93% of global GDP and 86%
of global population.5 Based on the classification by the World Bank, almost 40% of
the countries are high income countries, while the balance are middle and low income
countries.6

Top performers

Predictable regulatory frameworks

One of the best credit ratings
that are welcoming of investment
in the world providing funding
and transparent planning of both
capacity for infrastructure
projects and strategic infrastructure
investment.
outcomes, including consideration of
socio-economic and local needs.

Denmark
United
Kingdom

United
States

The global financial

leader with a financial
market that underpins
infrastructure Singapore
investment.

Mexico

Procurement practices that are

transparent, enable competition,
High local infrastructure investment
Jordan
encourage appropriate Robust governance, leadership
activity as a share of GDP over the
allocation of risks to market, and capable institutions that
last five years to 2019 as it rolls out
and are managed well beyond support the rule of law and
new infrastructure projects.
contractual close. transparency, as well as permits
and approvals. Land acquisition
processes are timely, predictable
and navigable, minimising costly
delays in projects.

Key
Icons on the map indicate top performing country for each driver

Governance Regulatory frameworks Permits Planning Procurement Activity

Funding capacity Financial markets Top performing countries, covered by All other countries, covered by
InfraCompass 2020 InfraCompass 2020

5. 81 countries are covered by InfraCompass. However, only 76 were ranked, with the remaining five countries (all Pacific Island countries) not included
in the ranking, due to the high number of interpolated data, which resulted from data coverage limitations. A detailed explanation of the treatment of
countries is provided in the Technical Appendix.
6. A summary of the regional and income group classification is provided in Table 6 in the Technical Appendix.

21
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Unlocking quality infrastructure relies on various components • Planning – existence of transparent infrastructure public project
Across all economies the most important catalysts for unlocking pipelines to allow industry to prepare for projects and citizens to
quality infrastructure environments, based on the highest have a say
weighted metric within each driver are:
• Procurement – transparency of procurement processes
• Governance – protections for creditors to recover their
• Activity – a strong, recent track record of investment in
investment if a business or project fails
infrastructure by governments and the private sector
• Regulatory Frameworks – ability of the government to establish relative to GDP
and implement sound regulations to promote infrastructure • Funding Capacity – credit rating of the government to borrow
investment and delivery money for infrastructure spending
• Permits – reliability and transparency of land administration • Financial Markets – overall depth of the local financial market
processes to sustain relatively large financial transactions

22
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

In-country survey results

InfraCompass analysed 81 countries and found that infrastructure planning and market sounding exercises are not readily
implemented or visible. It also found room for improvement in publishing project pipelines and conducting post-completion reviews
of projects.

Infrastructure plan Projects pipeline Infrastructure or PPP agency

31 50 23 58 4 77
38% 62% 28% 72% 5% 95%

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Published infrastructure Post-completion reviews Economic analysis assessment

procurement guidelines

10 71 16 65 8 73
12% 88% 20% 80% 10% 90%

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Market sounding and/or Environmental impact The survey results show that:
assessment assessment • Over 70% of countries publish project
pipelines
• Only four out of the 81 countries do not
28 53 10 71 have a dedicated infrastructure or PPP
35% 65% 12% 88% unit
• 10 countries still do not publish
guidelines for the procurement of
Yes No Yes No
infrastructure projects
• 80% of the countries conduct post-
completion reviews of infrastructure
projects
• Around 40% of countries still do not
have a national infrastructure plan

Overall, some metrics have seen fast improvements As an example, in Korea, all bid invitations issued by all public
Many metrics have improved since 2017, with transparency institutions must be published on the KONEPS (Korean On-line
in public procurement seeing the biggest change as almost e-Procurement System) according to the relevant laws, and
40% of the countries have made improvements. The biggest procurement plans outline forthcoming key procurement projects.
change has been in Sweden’s procurement frameworks. Similar KONEPS features standardised public procedures and provides
improvements have also been made in Japan, Korea and Croatia. extensive procurement information. As an additional measure,
Korea requires annual audits to monitor the proper conduct
of procurement. Together, these measures have improved
transparency in procurement in the country.

23
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

protect shareholders in infrastructure and other companies, which

Towards sustainable public procurement in Japan
drives investor confidence. On the flip side, from the high and
Transparency and fairness are essential preconditions for
upper middle income groups, Azerbaijan, Paraguay and Uruguay,
containing corruption in public procurement. In Japan,
lack measures for shareholder protection, with the lowest
numerous domestic laws and ordinances have been
performance in shareholder governance across all InfraCompass
promulgated for procurement procedures. These include the
countries.
Accounts Law (Law No. 35 of 1947), Cabinet Order concerning
the Budget, Settlement of Account and Accounting (Imperial There is an even wider gap in the length of time required to
Ordinance No. 165 of 1947), and the Local Autonomy Law (Law register properties and businesses. This is an important indicator
No. 67 of 1947), among other laws and regulations. of the ability to invest capital and mobilise labour in infrastructure
projects. The longer it takes to register a property or business,
In 2016, as part of Japan’s commitment to the implementation
the more likely it is for a project to become costly and risky.
of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, it
For Angola and Bangladesh, it can take from 190 days to one
announced the development of a National Action Plan (NAP) in
year (working days) to register a property, while for Denmark,
the following years. The NAP is one of the concrete measures
Singapore, Kazakhstan and New Zealand, it takes less than
under Japan’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
a week. In the Middle East, for Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and UAE,
Implementation Guiding Principles.7
registering a property is even lower, with registering taking up to
In 2018, the Government of Japan undertook a baseline study only one and a half days. Interestingly, countries are not clustered
with the aim of capturing the extent to which current legislation based on income group, as it can take between 1-2 months to
and policies provide transparency and fairness in business register a property in Poland and Uruguay.
processes. As part of this, the Government held consultations
There are opportunities to improve infrastructure planning and
on public procurement processes and legislations, such as the
procurement processes
Act on Promoting Green Procurement.
InfraCompass found that 38% of the countries do not publish
In July 2019, after taking into account the findings from national infrastructure plans. In some of these countries,
consultations, the Government identified transparency and while there is no national infrastructure plan, state and local
fairness in the procurement processes as one of the key governments have attempted to outline their own infrastructure
considerations of the NAP for business and human rights.8 plans. For example, while there is no national infrastructure
plan for the United States, New Jersey has its own economic
Subsequently, the Tokyo Organising Committee for Olympic and development plan, where transportation is a focus sector.9 Almost
Paralympic Games (TOCOG) developed a Sustainable Sourcing half of these countries are high income (or upper middle income)
Code. The Code was created to ensure the sustainability as in Europe and the Americas while another 12 are low and lower
well as economic rationality of all goods and services procured middle income countries across Asia, Africa and Oceania. This
by the organising committee. It also clarifies the criteria and shows that a country’s ability to develop infrastructure plans is not
operating methods by which such goods and services shall be necessarily restricted by its income level.
procured.
Developing national (or sub-jurisdictional) infrastructure strategies
Large gaps exist between economies in governance and and plans can offer a quick win. A national infrastructure plan
funding capacity sets the direction for a country’s infrastructure. It provides
Not surprisingly, when it comes to rule of law and credit rating, considerations for funding reform, optimising existing
high income countries perform better than low and middle infrastructure assets, improving service delivery, and developing
income countries. Recovery rates (amount recovered by secured new infrastructure markets and assets. These considerations
creditors during liquidation or insolvency proceedings) show a provide insights on the Government’s infrastructure intentions
similar pattern, where less than 40 cents on the dollar is recovered and suggests the pipeline of projects over the long term. The UK
in low income countries, while countries such as Denmark, National Infrastructure Plan or Philippine Development Plan and
Singapore, Canada, Belgium, Japan and Slovenia have recovery Public Investment Program are examples of integrated and cross-
rates of more than 85 cents on the dollar. sectoral infrastructure vision of the government.

For corporations, when it comes to the protection of shareholder

rights and corporate transparency, InfraCompass found that just
under half of the countries scored over 50. The low and lower-
middle income group is well represented here with eight countries
from these income group having governance safeguards that

7. Target 7 of Goal 12 of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) includes “Promoting public procurement practice that is
sustainable”.
8. Japan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Towards Formulating the National Action Plan (2019), https://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000515902.pdf
9. New Jersey Economic Development Agency (NJEDA), The State of Innovation: Building A Stronger and Fairer Economy in New Jersey
(2018), https://www.njeda.com/pdfs/StrongerAndFairerNewJerseyEconomyReport.aspx

24
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Additionally, market sounding is not systematically conducted

Investment trend: Global infrastructure investment continues
in 28 countries. GI Hub’s Reference Tool on Leading Practices
to trend upwards
in Governmental Processes Facilitating Infrastructure Project
When looking at investment activity, collectively, the top five
Preparation identified market sounding as crucial for facilitating
performers accounted for a forecast of over USD12.85 billion in
contestability during the bidding phase of the project.10 A fair
combined public and private infrastructure investment.
contest among qualified private developers is critical for achieving
an efficient price and effective project implementation. Therefore, Jordan has retained its position as having the strongest
it is critical to engage the private sector through an active market recent track record of investment activities by the government
sounding process. and private sector over the last five years. It has averaged
5% of GDP spent on infrastructure investment, driven by
Countries that perform effective market soundings are more local investment. Impressive gains have been seen in private
likely to take projects to market in a form that is commercially infrastructure investment, with a near doubling in foreign equity
deliverable, has successful market processes and ultimately financing (from 0.5% to nearly 1% of GDP), specifically with
successfully delivers projects. the sale of Queen Alia International Airport to a consortium
comprising foreign equity partners, as well as investments
Only four countries do not have a dedicated infrastructure or
in renewable energy projects This is partly underpinned by
PPP agency. All except one (Chad) of these countries are high
the World Bank’s strategic assessment of the project pipeline
income countries that have built their technical and delivery
and investment opportunities in Jordan, which identifies
capabilities over the decades, and therefore may not need
improving infrastructure, enhancing education and health
dedicated infrastructure (or PPP) agencies. Czech Republic,
and strengthening the role of the private sector to contribute
Finland and Sweden do not have dedicated PPP units since
to development as key requirements for social and economic
individual delivery agencies have over time built up the capability
growth.12
to explore and pursue PPPs. For Chad, having a dedicated
infrastructure knowledge centre can help ensure that appropriate
A notable improvement has been the strong participation
steps are taken in developing infrastructure projects and
from the private sector in financing infrastructure projects in
facilitating potential PPP activities.
Paraguay, making it the third highest performer in investment
A capital policy for improving infrastructure investment is through activity on InfraCompass, compared to 2016 when it ranked
tax incentives. InfraCompass found that 52 out of 76 countries 20th. This has been driven in large part by the country’s first
perform below 50% on effective tax incentives to invest. These ever PPP project, which involves the design, construction,
countries include high and upper middle income economies operation and maintenance of the Routes 2 and 7 toll roads.
including France, Italy, Australia, Brazil, Argentina, and Colombia. The project, which cost USD500 million and was financed by
Although providing tax incentives and encouraging foreign Goldman Sachs and Inter-American Development Bank (IDB
investor participation can often be politically contentious, these Invest), is Paraguay’s largest ever private investment in public
policy settings, such as concessional tax rates for infrastructure infrastructure.13
investors, can be implemented relatively quickly to attract
It is also important to note that while High Income Countries
infrastructure investment. The Checklist for Foreign Direct
have increased infrastructure investment, when measured as a
Investment Incentive Policies by the OECD, provides the guiding
percentage of GDP, HICs are outperformed by the Upper Middle,
principles for attracting foreign direct investment (FDI). It also
and especially the Lower Middle and Low Income Countries.
considers incentive-based policies to attract FDI, including tax
incentives.11 The following sections discuss the InfraCompass key findings
on an income group level. The income groups are based on the
World Bank classification and comprise:14
• High Income Countries (HICs): economies with a Gross
National Income (GNI) per capita, calculated using the World
Bank Atlas method15, of USD12,376 or more in 2018
• Upper Middle Income Countries (UMICs): economies with a
GNI per capita between USD3,996 and USD12,375
• Lower Middle Income Countries (LMICs): economies with a
GNI per capita between USD1,026 and USD3,995
• Low Income Countries (LICs): economies with a GNI per capita
of USD1,025 or less.
 
10. For more detail on the importance of market sounding and how to effectively conduct these, please refer to the GI Hub’s practical guide for governmental
processes in facilitating infrastructure projects, https://www.gihub.org/project-preparation/
11. Checklist for Foreign Direct Investment Incentive Policies, OECD, https://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/investment-policy/2506900.pdf
12. World Bank, Strategic Assessment: The 2019 Project Pipeline for Jordan and Investment Opportunities (2019), http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/
en/445051554135426057/pdf/Strategic-Assessment-The-2019-Project-Pipeline-for-Jordan-and-Investment-Opportunities.pdf
13. Transaction data, IJ Global (2019)
14. The World Bank Country and Lending Groups, https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups
15. The World Bank Atlas method – detailed methodology, https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/378832-what-is-the-world-bank-atlas-method

25
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

High Income Countries

Collectively, the High Income Countries (HICs) on InfraCompass account for over USD51
trillion in GDP and just under USD1 trillion forecast infrastructure investment.16 HICs are
characterised by financial stability and strong planning processes. However, there is room
for improvement in procurement processes, including cost and duration of the process.

High income
Economies with a Gross National Income (GNI) per capita, of $12,376 or more in 2018.
Key
Icons on the map
indicate top performing
Denmark country for each driver

Netherlands
Governance

Regulatory
United
frameworks
Kingdom

United Permits
States

Planning

Singapore Procurement

Activity

Funding capacity

Australia Financial markets

Top performing
countries in the
income group,
covered by
InfraCompass 2020

All other countries

in the income
group, covered by
InfraCompass 2020

• Canada • Japan • United Arab • Czech Republic • Greece • Portugal • United Kingdom
• Chile • Korea Emirates (UAE) • Denmark • Ireland • Slovak Republic (UK)
• United States of • Qatar • Austria • Finland • Italy • Slovenia • Australia
America (USA) • Saudi Arabia • Belgium • France • Netherlands • Spain • New Zealand
• Uruguay • Singapore • Croatia • Germany • Poland • Sweden

16. World Economic Outlook, International Monetary Fund 2019 (GDP data), Global Infrastructure Outlook, Oxford Economics and
Global Infrastructure Hub 2016 (infrastructure investment data).

26
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

At a glance:

Infrastructure plan Projects pipeline Infrastructure or PPP agency

12 19 5 26 3 28
39% 61% 16% 84% 10% 90%

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Published infrastructure Post-completion reviews Economic analysis assessment

procurement guidelines

5 26 3 28 6 25
16% 84% 10% 90% 19% 81%

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Market sounding and/or Environmental impact The survey results show that:
assessment assessment • Under half the countries still do not
have an infrastructure plan
• Only five out of 31 countries do not
8 23 2 29 publish project pipelines
26% 74% 6% 94% • Only three countries do not have a
dedicated infrastructure or PPP unit
• Five countries still do not publish
Yes No Yes No
guidelines for the procurement of
infrastructure projects
• 90% of the countries conduct post-
completion reviews of infrastructure
projects

Key strengths of HICs The quality of both competition and infrastructure regulators
Unsurprisingly, financial stability is one of the best performing in HICs is generally high, with mostly independent governance
metrics for HICs, underpinned by resilient and well governed of regulators, transparent and predictable processes for pricing
banking sectors. However, it can be said that strong performing decisions that provide stable regulated returns suitable for
metrics across the project lifecycle are the cornerstones of investors. The United Kingdom is a stand-out in this driver.
successfully delivering infrastructure. These include having
dedicated infrastructure (or PPP) agencies, publishing project Infrastructure spend has increased across High Income
pipelines and procurement guidelines, undertaking environmental Countries
impact assessments and post-completion assurance reviews. Key improvements for HICs compared to 2016 include an overall
More than 80% of HICs observe each of these practices. increase in GDP per capita and forecast infrastructure investment,
with governments continuing to spend on infrastructure as
Additionally, the quality of land administration is high amongst the value of economic production increases. Impressively, in
HICs. Almost all HICs also have a high degree of transparency Ireland, GDP per capita increased by just over USD14,000, while
in public procurement, with room for improvement for Greece, infrastructure investment is now at nearly one percent of GDP.
Poland, Portugal and Spain in Europe, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and
UAE in the Middle East, and Uruguay in South America.

27
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

More can be done to improve permits and procurement and Similar to the recommendations in the global findings, national (or
incentivise investment sub-jurisdictional) infrastructure strategies and plans offer some
The cost to start a business and dealing with construction permits quick wins for 12 of the 31 HICs. Infrastructure plans can provide
are critical factors for investors and contractors. Complicated considerations for projects, reforms and asset optimisation for
cost structures and lengthy permit acquisition processes can countries such as Singapore, Poland, Greece, Chile and Croatia.
serve as disincentives for potential businesses, thereby hindering
competition; or they can be factored into infrastructure project InfraCompass recognises that some mature infrastructure
costs, in turn making projects more costly or causing delays and markets in the HIC group do not have dedicated infrastructure
other investment risks. units because individual agencies have built their technical and
infrastructure delivery capabilities over the decades. However,
There is a wide gap between countries that do these measures given that there is room for improvement when it comes to PPP
well and those that do not. The UK, Slovenia, Singapore and preparation and contract management, for Czech Republic,
Canada are leaders with some of the lowest costs (as a Finland and Sweden, it is worth considering setting up specialised
percentage of GNI) to set up a business. By contrast, this cost is PPP units with government to enhance their PPP capabilities.
high in Italy, Korea, UAE and Uruguay. However, when it comes
to dealing with construction permits, the process is expeditious The Infrastructure and Structured Finance Unit (ISFU), New
in Korea, UAE and Singapore, where it takes 1 to 1.5 months to South Wales (NSW) Treasury (Australia)
acquire a permit. Conversely, this process is more rigorous in The ISFU is the dedicated infrastructure and PPP unit of
Slovenia, Canada and Uruguay, where it can take up to a year to the NSW Government in Australia. It was created with the
acquire a construction permit. task to assemble the skills required to negotiate and provide
management advice for PPPs within the state.
InfraCompass has highlighted the need for HICs to revisit
procurement settings. On average, it takes over two years from The ISFU specialises in providing commercial and financial
public announcement of a project to contract award. For all advice to the Government on procuring service enabling
but two HICs, this process takes over a year. In New Zealand infrastructure with a capital cost of over AUD100 million
and Portugal, the average duration of procurement is under six across all sectors and agencies.17 The Unit is also responsible
months, and outcomes are still being delivered, suggesting their for ensuring all PPP projects in the state comply with the
systems and processes are efficient benchmarks. requirements of the NSW PPP Guidelines.18
Investment in technology and capability enhancement is crucial The ISFU is also responsible promoting and ensuring best
to ensure efficiency in procurement processes. Incorporating practice PPP procurement process, and over the years it
contract management systems can alleviate standardised tasks has become a knowledge centre, sharing knowledge across
such as creating contract templates and communicating with agencies and disciplines. For example, ISFU supports other
bidders. Additionally, upskilling resources to ensure commercial infrastructure agencies such as Health Infrastructure NSW and
specialists are available to undertake procurement activities will Schools Infrastructure NSW to modify, renegotiate and transfer
not only create efficiencies but also ensure quality infrastructure is contracts.
delivered through the procurement of the right service providers.

In Europe, Denmark, Finland, Belgium and Sweden all have

scope to improve their preparation and contract management
processes for undertaking PPPs, as do Qatar and Saudi Arabia in
the Middle East. Both measures are good practices in ensuring
that the procurement approach is justified and that an appropriate
management framework is in place for implementation and
management (such as contract renegotiations). Australia, UK and
Canada stand out as leaders on preparation of PPPs, each with its
own dedicated PPP unit. Australia also has effective PPP contract
management processes in place, which can be used as guidance
for countries looking to improve in this area.

17. Infrastructure and Structure Finance Unit, New South Wales Treasury, https://
www.treasury.nsw.gov.au/projects-initiatives/public-private-partnerships/
infrastructure-and-structured-finance-unit
18. NSW PPP Guidelines, New South Wales Treasury, 2017, https://www.treasury.nsw.
gov.au/sites/default/files/2017-06/TPP17-07%20NSW%20Public%20Private%20
Partnerships%20Guidelines.pdf

28
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Investment trend: HICs investment activity is dynamic

Investment activities within the HIC group has seen some notable
movements. Australia has replaced Chile for the top position for
Activity within the group. This is driven by Australia having the
highest private investment in infrastructure as a share of GDP, out
of all countries within the group (1.1% of GDP). To set this in context,
private investment in infrastructure makes up one third of total
infrastructure investment. Additionally, there is over USD19 billion of
projects currently under procurement in Australia. Privatisation of
state assets, as part of the Government’s asset recycling initiative
has also boosted the value of closed infrastructure deals for
Australia.

Chile is now the second best performer, with a 0.2% percentage point
growth in infrastructure spending as a share of GDP, totalling 2.9%.
However, the value of PPP deals fell compared to 2016.

Interestingly, major global events have driven infrastructure

investment in both Qatar and the UAE. Qatar has invested USD200
billion in infrastructure works ahead of hosting the FIFA World
Cup in 2022; meanwhile the UAE has also made some significant
headway in infrastructure investment, largely driven by Dubai hosting
Expo 202019 and government-led projects, such as the expansions
of Al Maktoum International Airport (DWC), Jebel Ali Port and the
Dubai Metro Red line connecting the city centre to the Expo 2020
site. Despite these big investments driving some of the highest
infrastructure investment as a percent of GDP among the HICs, Qatar
has dropped in the overall Activity ranking due to a drop in the value
of closed PPP deals and deals with foreign equity participation. The
UAE also fell in rankings due to private infrastructure deals dropping
by 50% since 2016.

19. Note: Due to COVID-19, Expo 2020 may be postponed.

29
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Upper Middle Income Countries

Collectively, the Upper Middle Income Countries (UMICs) in InfraCompass account

for just under USD23 trillion in GDP and over USD1 trillion forecast infrastructure
investment.20 UMICs are characterised by strong infrastructure investment (highest of all
income groups) and ease of setting up a business.

Upper middle income

Economies with a GNI per capita between $3,996 and $12,375.
Key
Icons on the map
indicate top performing
country for each driver

Romania Governance

Regulatory
frameworks

Turkey Permits
China

Mexico Planning

Colombia Malaysia Procurement

Activity

Funding capacity
Jordan
Financial markets

Top performing
countries in the
income group,
covered by
InfraCompass 2020

All other countries

in the income
group, covered by
InfraCompass 2020

• South Africa • Guatemala • China • Turkey • Ecuador

• Argentina • Mexico • Jordan • Romania • Azerbaijan
• Brazil • Paraguay • Kazakhstan • Russia • Thailand
• Colombia • Peru • Malaysia • Fiji • Samoa

20. World Economic Outlook, International Monetary Fund 2019 (GDP data), Global Infrastructure Outlook, Oxford Economics and
Global Infrastructure Hub 2016 (infrastructure investment data).

30
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

In-country survey results:

Infrastructure plan Projects pipeline Infrastructure or PPP agency

7 13 6 14 0 20
35% 65% 30% 70% 0% 100%

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Published infrastructure Post-completion reviews Economic analysis assessment

procurement guidelines

1 19 6 14 0 20
5% 95% 30% 70% 0% 100%

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Market sounding and/or Environmental impact The survey results show that:
assessment assessment • Under half the countries still do not have an
infrastructure plan
• 30% of countries do not publish project
10 10 5 15 pipelines
50% 50% 25% 75% • All countries have a dedicated infrastructure
or PPP unit
• Only three out of 20 countries still do not
Yes No Yes No
publish guidelines for the procurement of
infrastructure projects
• 30% of countries do not conduct post-
completion reviews of infrastructure projects

Key strengths of UMICs Transparency in procurement processes has improved

The cost of starting a business in UMICs is one of the group’s Transparency in public procurement is the only area where UMICs
biggest strengths. When done effectively, lower cost of setting up have made notable progress since 2017. This is driven largely by
a business can attract investment and encourage competition in progress seen in Argentina, Mexico and China.
a country. This is evident in countries such as South Africa, China,
Thailand and Peru, where lower cost of starting a business also For Mexico, this can partly be attributed to the Government’s
corresponds with the high prevalence of foreign ownership. ongoing work to reform the federal e-procurement system,
CompraNet, in collaboration with the OECD. The reform has
Additionally, it can take between one week (in Azerbaijan and placed an importance on stakeholder engagement to ensure
Kazakhstan) to two months (in South Africa and Ecuador) to start greater transparency and visibility of open government and open
a business in one of the 18 countries in the UMIC group, further contracting.
reflecting the ease of setting up a business.

Together, an expeditious process and low set up costs allow

ease of establishing a business. This is further supported by the
strength of insolvency frameworks where these countries also
perform strongly.

31
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Room for improvement in planning processes can be realised

with some quick wins
Half of the 18 countries in the UMICs group do not have a
formal requirement to conduct market sounding. As mentioned
in the global findings section, market sounding allows for a
fair competition amongst contractors, which in turn enables
quality infrastructure to be delivered at competitive prices. GI
Hub provides guidance on the processes for facilitating project
preparation, including effective market soundings to facilitate
competition.21

Similarly, seven countries do not publish infrastructure plans.

Having proper infrastructure planning in place reflects the
government’s strategic as well as social and economic goals.
These countries can look to South Africa, Jordan and Colombia,
for guidance as these countries have implemented all eight of the
above measures in its planning and procurement processes.

For the six countries without project pipelines, Mexico’s Project

Hub can be seen as a best practice on how to develop and publish
a national and cross sectoral infrastructure pipelines.22

Investment trend: Impressive rise in activity in South America

Collectively the top five performers in the UMIC group account
for over USD42 billion in infrastructure investment.

Interestingly, Latin America represents the largest regional

change in investment activity since 2016. From the eight Latin
American countries in the UMICs income group, six have
seen impressive gains, with Paraguay, Colombia and Peru all
appearing as three of the top five performers for the UMIC
group.

Paraguay is ranked second in the income group, as its

infrastructure spending has increased by over USD100 million
since 2016. This is driven by an increase in the share of foreign
equity finance in domestic infrastructure investment, which
has increased three-fold to now comprise almost half of all
infrastructure deals.

On successfully closing PPP infrastructure deals, Thailand

has made the biggest improvement globally, with a 78-point
increase in its InfraCompass score. This can largely be
attributed to the Bangkok Yellow MRT Line (USD1.8 billion) and
the Bangkok Pink MRT Line (USD1.7 billion). These urban rail
transit lines will be delivered under separate PPPs. Both projects
include financing from the Asian Development Bank and
reached financial close in 2019.

On the flip side, Malaysia, Romania and South Africa have all
seen significant reductions in private financing, foreign equity
financing and PPP financing, with only marginal gains in overall
infrastructure investment from government.

21. Refer to the GI Hub’s practical guide for governmental processes in facilitating
infrastructure projects, https://www.gihub.org/project-preparation/
22. Mexico Project Hub, https://www.proyectosmexico.gob.mx/en/projects-hub/

32
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Lower Middle Income Countries

Collectively, Lower Middle Income Countries (LMICs) in InfraCompass account for over
USD6.5 trillion in GDP and just over USD300 billion forecast infrastructure investment.23
LMICs are characterised by increasing investment in infrastructure and strong project
assurance processes. However, improvement is needed in approaches to procurement
and permit issuance.

Lower middle
Economies with a GNI per capita between $1,026 and $3,995.
Key
Icons on the map
indicate top performing
Myanmar country for each driver

Governance

Regulatory
frameworks

Permits

Morocco Planning
Vietnam
Philippines Procurement
Indonesia
Activity

Funding capacity
Ghana
Kenya
Financial markets

Top performing
countries in the
income group,
covered by
InfraCompass 2020

All other countries

in the income
group, covered by
InfraCompass 2020

• Angola • Kenya • Tunisia • Indonesia • Vietnam

• Cote d’Ivoire • Morocco • Bangladesh • Myanmar • Papua New Guinea
• Egypt • Nigeria • Cambodia • Pakistan • Solomon Islands
• Ghana • Senegal • India • Philippines • Vanuatu

23. World Economic Outlook, International Monetary Fund 2019 (GDP data), Global Infrastructure Outlook, Oxford Economics and
Global Infrastructure Hub 2016 (infrastructure investment data).

33
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

In-country survey results:

Infrastructure plan Projects pipeline Infrastructure or PPP agency

8 12 7 13 0 20
40% 60% 35% 65% 0% 100%

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Published infrastructure Post-completion reviews Economic analysis assessment

procurement guidelines

1 19 4 16 2 18
5% 95% 20% 80% 10% 90%

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Market sounding and/or Environmental impact

assessment assessment

6 14 2 18
30% 70% 10% 90%

Yes No Yes No

Key strengths of LMICs Investment in infrastructure has increased as credit ratings

In line with best practice in infrastructure planning, all 20 LMICs improve and the process to set up a business is expedited
have dedicated infrastructure (or PPP) agencies, and all but one The biggest improvement for LMICs has been in forecast
(conduct economic analysis assessments and all except one infrastructure investment as a percentage of GDP, which is now
country (Vanuatu) publish infrastructure procurement guidelines. 5% higher than 2016 (see Investment Trends below).

All but two countries (Cambodia and Myanmar) undertake Notably, half of the countries in this group have improved
an economic assessment (such as cost-benefit analysis) summary credit ratings, compared to 2016. Indonesia, India,
to determine the impact of the project on the economy and Kenya and the Philippines have improved their borrowing
community. Similarly, with the exception of Ghana and Papua capability to gain more access to capital.
New Guinea, all countries also undertake environmental impact
assessment. These three measures are some of the key strengths Major improvements have also been made in strengthening the
for this income group. legal and corporate frameworks for insolvency. Kenya, Morocco
and Pakistan, in particular, have made significant headways, with
Impressively, there are four countries that undertake all eight improvements also seen in Egypt and India.
measures – Indonesia, Nigeria, Pakistan and Philippines.

Additionally, similar to high income countries, the cost of starting

a business is one of the biggest strengths for LMICs. For eight of
the 20 countries in the group, the cost of starting a business is
less than 10% of GNI. The lowest costs are in Côte d'Ivoire, Tunisia
and Morocco. Cambodia however, reports the highest cost in the
group, with a cost of 50% of GNI.

34
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

For Kenya, the improvement can be attributed to a delayed but There can be some easy wins from improvements to the project
positive response to the introduction of the Kenyan Insolvency Act planning processes within the group. For instance, Vietnam does
in 2015. Importantly, the Act has made fundamental changes to not have an infrastructure plan but undertakes all other measures,
the insolvency framework by providing an alternative to liquidation while Côte d'Ivoire and Senegal undertake all measures except
procedures, which enables a company to be administered for the market sounding. Myanmar, on the other hand, only undertakes
benefit of the company itself as well as the benefit of the creditor. four measures – environmental impact analysis, infrastructure
For instance, prior to the Act, insolvent company were required agency, publishing infrastructure procurement guidelines, and
to be wound up for the benefit of creditors, however, the Act reviewing project after completion through the local Office of the
now requires insolvent companies to first be administered in an Auditor General.
effort to steer it back to profitability. A liquidation process is only
employed when a company is considered irredeemable. There is also a wide gap in the degree of transparency in
procurement processes between countries. Ghana, Kenya,
In addition, the time required to start a business improved for 11 Morocco and Côte d'Ivoire score 75 (out of 100), while Angola,
of the 17 countries. In Nigeria and Indonesia, it now takes up to Cambodia and Senegal score zero. The remaining countries
two weeks to register a business, while in India and Vietnam, this are split between low performers (25 out of 100) and moderate
process now takes up to three weeks. Both are improvements performers (50 out of 100).
compared to the one month duration in 2016. The process has
also been expedited by a week in Myanmar and Tunisia. Similar to the high income group, investment in technology and
capability enhancements to alleviate standardised tasks such
Notwithstanding the impressive gains, there is still more as creating contract templates, communicating with bidders,
work to be done – proper planning processes can close gaps and upskilling resources to ensure commercial specialists are
between countries and offer some quick wins exercising neutrality and fairness in procuring infrastructure.
Based on the World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators, These measures create process efficiency and transparency,
most LMICs have a low score when it comes to political stability thereby enabling value for money, fair cost and quality outcomes.
and absence of violence. In InfraCompass, 15 out of 20 LMICs
score below 50 (out of 100) on this indicator, while Vietnam, Investment trends: Impressive gains have been made in
Cambodia, Ghana and the Solomon Islands score just over 50 (out infrastructure investment
of 100). The highest score among LMICs on InfraCompass is 64 Collectively, the top five performers in the LMIC group account
(out of 100) for Vanuatu. for over USD44 billion in infrastructure investment.

Lack of political stability is a strong disincentive for investments Ghana has retained the top position within this income group
in long-term projects due to shifting political priorities and the as well as ranking fifth in the overall global ranking. Senegal’s
consequent uncertainty regarding the policy and funding support combined government and private sector infrastructure
for a project. The World Bank provides guidance on developing spending account for 7.5% of GDP. Fuelled by investments in
accessible, efficient and fair justice institutions to redress violence energy, including renewables, Pakistan has had the biggest
and uphold laws.24 improvement in infrastructure investment.

There is also room to improve the quality and reliability of land On successfully closing PPP infrastructure deals, Vietnam has
administration and procurement processes. In InfraCompass, made the second biggest improvement globally, with a 74-point
16 out of 17 LMICs score below 50 (out of 100) on quality of land increase in its InfraCompass score. This performance can be
administration, while Morocco, Indonesia and Kenya score just partly attributed to the 2019 contract close on the USD483
over 50 (out of 100). Again, the highest score among LMICs is 62 million Van Don-Mong Cai Expressway. The 80-kilometre
(out of 100) for Vanuatu. highway, which will be constructed under a Build-Operate-
Transfer model, is expected to strengthen cross-border trade
Improving the reliability of land information is important to with neighbouring countries in the Association of South East
enable governments to better map the needs of the community, Asian Nations (ASEAN).
and determine how and where infrastructure projects can be
undertaken. Quality land administration means reliable and Conversely, investment activity has been low in Morocco due
accurate property information is available. The World Bank’s to low private infrastructure spend, few PPP deals and a lack of
Doing Business Report provides a detailed discussion on the participation from foreign equity.
methodology used to calculate the quality of land administration,
which can be used as guidance for areas of improvement.
For instance, the methodology states that the quality of land
administration index is determined based on five elements
– reliability of infrastructure, transparency of information,
geographic coverage, land dispute resolution and equal access to
property rights.25

24. Justice and Development, World Bank, https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/governance/brief/justice-rights-and-public-safety

25. World Bank, Methodology for Doing Business, https://www.doingbusiness.org/en/methodology/registering-property
35
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Low Income Countries

Collectively, the Low Income Countries (LICs) in InfraCompass account for almost
USD250 billion in GDP and just under USD22.3 billion forecast infrastructure investment.26
LICs are characterised by increasing investment in infrastructure and improving permits
and land administration processes. However, improvement is needed in approaches to
procurement, governance and financial markets.

Low
Key
Economies with a GNI per capita of $1,025 or less. Icons on the map
indicate top performing
country for each driver

Governance

Regulatory
frameworks

Permits

Planning

Mali Procurement

Activity
Rwanda
Guinea
Funding capacity

Togo Financial markets

Top performing
countries in the
income group,
covered by
InfraCompass 2020

All other countries

in the income
group, covered by
InfraCompass 2020

• Benin • Chad • Guinea • Niger • Tanzania

• Burkina Faso • Ethiopia • Mali • Rwanda • Togo

26. World Economic Outlook, International Monetary Fund 2019 (GDP data), Global Infrastructure Outlook, Oxford Economics and
Global Infrastructure Hub 2016 (infrastructure investment data).

36
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

In-country survey results:

Infrastructure plan Projects pipeline Infrastructure or PPP agency

4 6 5 5 1 9
40% 60% 50% 50% 10% 90%

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Published infrastructure Post-completion reviews Economic analysis assessment

procurement guidelines

3 7 3 7 0 10
30% 70% 30% 70% 0% 100%

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Market sounding and/or Environmental impact

assessment assessment

4 6 1 9
40% 60% 10% 90%

Yes No Yes No

Key strengths of LICs There is still more work to be done – proper planning processes
Many LICs have recently reformed their land administration can close gaps between countries and offer some quick wins
systems to reduce the number of days to register property rights, Only five of the 10 LICs publish pipelines of upcoming projects.
reducing lag times, project delays, and holding costs for business. Publishing a project pipeline is a relatively easy fix for most
Togo has reduced its property registration timeframes from 283 countries. There are benchmark countries in the same region and
days to 35, through an overhaul of its system. income groups (such as Togo or Benin) that can provide guidance
on establishing a pipeline. However, project pipeline also needs
Additionally, in terms of project planning, all ten countries to be supported by a strategic cross-sectoral infrastructure plan,
undertake economic analysis assessments. Except for Burkina which only four out of the 10 LICs currently have in place.
Faso, all countries have published their infrastructure plans.
Similarly, with the exception of Tanzania, all countries undertake There is also room to improve the level of market sounding
environmental impact analysis. undertaken by LICs. Burkina Faso, Guinea, Togo and Tanzania
do not conduct market soundings as a mandated step before a
LICs have concentrated on improvements to their permits and formal procurement process. As mentioned in the global findings
construction approvals process section, market sounding enables quality infrastructure to be
Ethiopia and Niger have reduced their cost to start a business as delivered at competitive prices and avoid lengthy negotiation by
a percentage of GNI by almost 25 percentage points. Similarly, helping structure projects and allocate risks efficiently before a
Rwanda has reduced its cost to start a business by almost 50 formal procurement.
percentage points and is now one of the highest ranked countries
on this metric, globally. Making businesses easier and cheaper Additionally, improvements to local insolvency frameworks
to set up encourages the growth of infrastructure services can drive the creation of new businesses and infrastructure
businesses, which leads to competition in the sector and better companies by better allocating the risk of setting up new
outcomes, It also allows for foreign business entrants to more infrastructure companies or special purpose vehicles. Rwanda
easily set up local companies or subsidiaries, bringing with them has shown some improvements in this regard and acts as a
infrastructure skills and capabilities. benchmark for other LICs.

37
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Rules for shareholder governance also need improvement across

Investment is forecast to trend upwards
all LICs. Together with other governance and regulatory reforms,
LICS attract between 0.07% and 0.7% of GDP as private
these measures can drive investments, improve local capital
investment in infrastructure, as shown in Figure 2. While this
markets and, over time, increase the financial depth of individual
has trended up recently, the magnitude of private investment
LICs. Improving the financial depth and supply of capital to these
remains quite low compared to other income groups. Tanzania
markets is another area in need of improvement.
is leading the LICs with an average of USD470 million private
Most LICs could significantly improve public procurement investment over the last 5 years comprising an USD849
transparency. Benin, Chad and Togo are the lowest performing million Mbeya Power Plan in 2016, and a number of mobile
countries in InfraCompass for transparency and public telecommunications tower expansion projects.27
procurement. Mali and Burkina Faso also have room to make their
The recent USD1.46 billion financial close of the Dar es Salaam
processes significantly more transparent. Similar to the high and
– Morogoro Railway (119KM) and Morogoro – Makutupora
lower middle income groups, some quick wins can be achieved
Railway (422KM) in February 2020 shows that Tanzania is also
by improving the transparency and efficiency of procurement
making progress in this area.
process, through technology and capability enhancements, which
can create process efficiency and transparency, thereby enabling There are only a few PPP deals in the LIC group, with the
value for money and fair cost and quality outcomes. majority of private infrastructure investment coming through
other procurement and asset models.

Figure 2 Private Infrastructure Investment in Low Income Countries

Private Investment in Infrastructure in Selected LICs

0.2% 0.4% 0.6% 0.8% 1.0%

Tanzania 469.44

Rwanda 7.57

Mali 60.97

Guinea 32.00

Burkina Faso 14.71

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Private Investment ($m)

Private Investment (% GDP) Private Investment ($m, 5 year average)

Source: Deloitte Analysis based on IJ Global

27. https://ijglobal.com/data/search-transactions

38
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Summary key findings

The key strengths, improvements and opportunities across the income groups are summarised in below.

Key Strengths Big Improvements Opportunities for improvements

Investment promotion agencies Cost to start a business Rule of law

Infrastructure or PPP agencies Shareholder governance

Published project pipeline Time required to register a property

Global Published infrastructure plans

Market sounding and/or assessment

Tax incentives to encourage

investment
Financial stability Infrastructure investment Dealing with construction permits
as % of GDP
Infrastructure or PPP agency Cost to start a business

Published project pipeline Tax incentives to encourage

investment
High Published procurement Average procurement duration
income guidelines
Environmental impact Preparation and contract management
assessment of PPPs
Post-completion reviews Published infrastructure plans

Quality of land administration Infrastructure or PPP agencies

Cost to start a business Cost to start a business Market sounding and/or assessment
Upper Time required to start a Time required to start a Published infrastructure plans
middle business business
income
Strength of insolvency Published project pipeline
framework
Infrastructure or PPP agencies Infrastructure investment Political stability and absence of
as % of GDP violence
Economic analysis assessment Summary credit rating Quality of land administration
Lower Published procurement Strength of insolvency Published infrastructure plans
middle guidelines frameworks
income
Cost to start a business Time required to start a Published project pipeline
business
Degree of transparency in public
procurement
Registering property Cost to start a business Published project pipeline

Economic analysis assessment Market sounding and/or assessment

Low Published infrastructure plans Strength of insolvency framework

income
Environmental impact Shareholder governance
assessment
Degree of transparency in public
procurement

Key
Regulatory Funding Financial
Governance Permits Planning Procurement Activity
frameworks capacity markets

39
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

4. Drivers

40
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Governance

Description
Top performing country
Governance, institutions (including rule of law and corruption prevention), and legal
environment required to support infrastructure investment. Singapore
Rank change: 0
Importance
Driver score: 83.4
The strength of a country’s governance arrangements and its associated institutions is Top metric:
fundamental to its overall economic performance and infrastructure markets. The quality of Post-completion reviews
the institutional frameworks that govern infrastructure markets is closely linked to the quality Infrastructure or PPP agency
of the frameworks that govern the whole economy.
What good looks like Most improved country
Robust governance, leadership and capable institutions that support the rule of law,
India
transparency and consultation, and effective and independent decision making structures for
Rank: 49
infrastructure investment.
Rank change: 18
Best practice guidance Driver score: 49.1
Most improved metric:
• OECD Framework for the Governance of Infrastructure (OECD) Infrastructure or PPP agency
• Fighting Bid Rigging in Public Procurement (OECD)

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Rule of law The rule of law is the foundation 21% Finland Worldwide OECD
World Governance Composite of the rules to resolve disputes, (90.9) Governance Recommendation
Indicator reflecting perceptions prevent violence and deter Indicators, on Public Integrity
of the extent to which agents corruption. Weak enforcement and World Bank
have confidence in and abide corruption decrease the security (2018)
by the rules of society, and of infrastructure investment. An
in particular the quality of investor would not be attracted
contract enforcement, property to a country with corruption and
rights, the police, and the ineffective means to settle disputes,
courts, as well as the likelihood due to the risk of investment
of crime and violence. The rule being lost without delivering the
of law reflects whether the law infrastructure required to create
imposes limits of power on returns and investors being unable to
the state, private sector and enforce rights to recover investment
individuals. from counterparties or the state.
Recovery rate This reflects the strength of 28% Japan Doing Resolving
The recovery rate is recorded creditors’ protections. Countries (91.8) Business Insolvency best
as cents on the dollar recovered with higher recovery rates will find it Survey, World practices (World
by secured creditors through easier and cheaper to obtain debt for Bank (2019) Bank)
reorganisation, liquidation or infrastructure investments. Those
debt enforcement (foreclosure countries will be viewed as less risky
or receivership) proceedings. for debt as investors on average
receive a higher percentage of their
investment back even when the
investments fail.
Political stability and absence Lack of political stability can provide 13% New Zealand Worldwide Justice Rights
of violence score a strong disincentive for investments (75.7) Governance and Public Safety
Measures perceptions of the in long-term project due to Indicators, (World Bank)
likelihood of political instability changes of political agenda and the World Bank
and/or politically-motivated consequent uncertainty regarding (2018)
violence, including terrorism. the policy and funding support for
Estimate gives the country’s a project. Policy uncertainty would
score on the aggregate deter investors from investing, and
indicator, in units of a standard too frequent changes in priorities
normal distribution, i.e. ranging may use up money on pet projects
from approximately -2.5 to 2.5. that may not proceed instead of
improving infrastructure outcomes.

41
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Governance

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Shareholder governance Setting and enforcing the duties of 15% Austria, Doing Doing Business:
Measures the governance disclosure and transparency for the Croatia, Business Good Practices
practices that protect operations of companies provides Egypt, India, Survey, World for Protecting
shareholders through three confidence to invest in them. This Indonesia, Bank (2019) Minority Investors
dimensions: the extent of applies both to entities that fund, Kazakhstan, (World Bank)
shareholder rights index finance or own infrastructure as well Saudi Arabia,
(shareholders’ rights and role in as those that deliver infrastructure. Turkey
major corporate decisions), the (60.0)
extent of ownership and control
index (governance safeguards
protecting shareholders from
undue board control and
entrenchment), and the extent
of corporate transparency
index (corporate transparency
on ownership stakes).
Infrastructure or PPP agency Dedicated infrastructure agencies/ 5% 77/81* Deloitte Public Private
Whether an infrastructure PPP units can be knowledge countries have in-country Partnership Units:
agency exists to coordinate centres, ensuring that all the a national or survey (2020) Lessons for their
an integrated approach to appropriate steps are taken in sub-national design and use in
infrastructure delivery and developing infrastructure projects infrastructure infrastructure
policy. and facilitating PPP activities. As or PPP agency.
a dedicated body, they can also (Yes)
promote PPPs within government,
and develop and manage effective
PPP frameworks. Some bodies
can also provide a communication
channel to investors, helping bidders
and financiers with information and
opportunities, as well as provide
contract management after financial
close.
Post-completion reviews Ensures procurement and asset 18% 65/81* Deloitte Framework
Whether the country conducts valuation risks are managed countries in-country to review
post-completion reviews appropriately by the government conduct post- survey (2020) programmes (UK
on infrastructure projects to through quality and compliance completion National Audit
ensure the forecast outcomes checks. In some cases, these reviews Office)
are being achieved. assurance measures also ensure (Yes)
project funding (government grants)
are appropriate and that the intended
benefits are being realised, allowing
proponents to take corrective
action if benefits are not being
delivered. The threat of an audit or
post-completion review encourages
project proponents to deliver the
project well, obtain value for money
and manage probity and other risks
effectively.

* See the full list in the country brief appendix.

42
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Governance

Top performers Top 5 most improved performers

Rank Country Rank Score Rank Country Rank Score

change change
1 Singapore 0 83.4 49 India 18 49.1
2 Denmark 1 82.6 50 Thailand 7 48.7
3 Netherlands 1 82.3 43 Argentina 6 52.4
4 Canada -2 81.9 51 Saudi Arabia 5 48.4
5 Austria 1 81.3 8 Japan 4 80.0

Top performers by region Top performers by income group

Region Country Overall Rank Score Income Country Overall Rank Score
rank change group rank change
Africa Tunisia 30 1 59.2 High Singapore 1 0 83.4
Americas Canada 4 -2 81.9 Upper
Malaysia 18 -1 74.4
middle
Asia Singapore 1 0 83.4
Lower
Indonesia 23 2 64.9
Europe Denmark 2 1 82.6 middle
Oceania New Zealand 6 -1 81.0 Low Togo 48 -3 49.3

Case study: India Consequently, India’s ranking in the World Bank Ease of Doing
Reform to India’s insolvency proceedings and recovery rates Business Index has also improved by 67 places from 2016 to
has driven India’s 18 rank increase on governance measures in 2020. This is mostly attributed to the sharp improvement in
InfraCompass. its ranking in resolving insolvency, which is one of the seven
indicators that underpin the index. In resolving insolvency, India
In 2015, the World Bank Doing Business Report ranked India 136th
jumped up 84 places since 2016, from 136 to 52, out of 190
for resolving insolvency, with a recovery rate of 25.7 cents per
countries.31
dollar.28 In October 2016, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board
of India (IBBI) was created, under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy The Code is expected to be a major driver in the increase of
Code (IBC). The IBBI is responsible for the implementation mergers and acquisitions in India, including in infrastructure
and regulation of the Code, which consolidates and amends assets, as bidders will eagerly look to acquire stressed assets.
the legislations and regulations related to reorganisation and
India’s insolvency reforms have driven improvements in
insolvency resolution of corporations.29 The Code sets out the
infrastructure governance
corporate insolvency resolution process with the aim to balance
the interests of all stakeholders. World Bank Doing Business – India
In 2019, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code Act was amended to 160 80

provide creditors of the loan defaulting companies with authority 140 70

over the distribution of proceeds in the resolution process. It also

Cents on the dollar

120 60

provided further clarity on order of priority for the distribution of 100 50

Index/rank

liquidation assets.30 80 40

Although IBC was developed just prior to InfraCompass 2017, it 60 30

has taken a few years to realise the positive impact of the reform. 40 20

At the National Company Law Tribunal, the time taken to resolve 20 10

insolvencies is 1.5 years, compared to over four years prior to the 0 0

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
IBC. Impressively, India’s recovery rate is almost 72 cents on the
dollar now, compared to 26 cents in 2016. Ease of Doing Business Index (1 = best)
Resolving Insolvency (rank out of 190 countries)
Recovery rate (cents on the dollar)

28. World Bank, Doing Business Report (2016) https://www.doingbusiness.org/content/dam/doingBusiness/media/Annual-Reports/

English/DB16-Chapters/DB16-Country-Tables.pdf. The report was published in 2016 using 2015 data.
29. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, https://www.ibbi.gov.in/about
30. Ministry of Law and Justice, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act (2019), https://www.ibbi.gov.in/uploads/
legalframwork/630af836c9fbbed047c42dbdfd2aca13.pdf
31. Index 0-16, where 16 is best and 0 is worst. The report was published in 2020 using 2019 data.
43
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Regulatory frameworks

Description
Top performing country
The extent to which regulation, openness to investment, and competition frameworks
support infrastructure delivery. United Kingdom
Rank change: 0
Importance
Driver score: 81.2
The more attractive a country’s regulatory environment is for investors, the more likely it Top metric:
is that capital will flow to that country. Since infrastructure is often a monopoly asset, it is Investment promotion agency
essential to regulate the monopoly providers, so that a balance is struck between ensuring
equitable access to services for consumers, incentivising quality and innovation, and
achieving investment returns for the private sector. Most improved country
What good looks like
Azerbaijan
Stable, consistent, predictable and transparent regulatory agencies and decision making
Rank: 28
processes and low barriers to investment enhance competition and drive down costs and
Rank change: 27
increase quality of infrastructure. Driver score: 63.6
Best practice guidance Most improved metric:
Investment promotion agency
• The Role of Economic Regulators in the Governance of Infrastructure (OECD)
• OECD Guidelines on Corporate Governance of State-Owned Enterprises

*Network sectors in the OECD’s Product market regulatory score refers to energy, telecommunications, water, road, rail, airport and ports.

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Regulatory (including Infrastructure assets tend to form 30% Singapore Worldwide The Role of
competition) quality natural monopolies. Effective (92.6) Governance Economic
Captures perceptions competition and infrastructure Indicators, World Regulators in
of the ability of the regulation is important to balance Bank (2018) the Governance
government to formulate service levels with appropriate price of Infrastructure
and implement sound controls that allow sufficient cost (OECD)
policies and regulations recovery to attract investment, and
that permit and ultimately deliver quality infrastructure
promote private sector for consumers. Poor regulatory quality
development. will deter investment.
Prevalence of foreign Foreign investment policies can either 18% United Global Checklist for
ownership promote or inhibit foreign investment Kingdom Competitiveness Foreign Direct
Score based on responses in infrastructure assets. Policies (85.7) Index, World Investment
to the World Economic that promote foreign investment will Economic Forum Incentive
Forum, Executive Opinion increase the supply of capital, promote (2019) Policies
Survey question ‘In your competition and, in theory, reduce
country, how prevalent the costs of financing and delivering UK Investment
is foreign ownership of infrastructure, as well as encouraging Policy: Seventh
companies’? This score innovation and exchange of skills. Report of
has been normalised Session 2017-
(rescaled to lie between 0 2019
and 100) to ensure all data
are expressed using the
same scale.

44
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Regulatory frameworks

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Product market Regulatory policies can either 16% United Indicators of Governance of
regulatory score, network promote or inhibit investment and Kingdom Product Market regulators
sectors competition in the network sector (86.0) Regulation –
A survey-generated score (all utilities including road, rail, ports, Sector regulators,
for a country’s regulatory airports, electricity, gas, water and OECD (2018)
management practices telecommunications). This can
across the following include price controls, licensing, and
domains: independence, governance of SOEs. It shows the
scope of action, and regulatory barriers for participants
accountability. to enter and operate in the sector.
The easier it is to enter the sector,
the more likely to attract competition
and investment that drives quality
infrastructure.
Strength of insolvency The strength of the legal and 19% Germany, Doing Business Principles
framework corporate frameworks for liquidation Rwanda, Survey, World for Effective
The strength of insolvency and restructuring. It provides an United States Bank (2019) Insolvency and
framework index is indication of the ease of conducting (93.8) Creditor/Debtor
based on four domains, business in a country. Regimes
including commencement Improving your insolvency frameworks (World Bank)
of proceedings, will encourage investment from those
management of debtor’s who require insolvency protections,
assets, reorganisation including through infrastructure
proceedings and creditor Special Purpose Vehicles, and for
participation. those dealing with local entities that
may default.
The strength of the legal and
corporate frameworks for liquidation
and restructuring. It provides an
indication of the ease of conducting
business in a country.
Improving your insolvency frameworks
will encourage investment from those
who require insolvency protections,
including through infrastructure
Special Purpose Vehicles, and for
those dealing with local entities that
may default.
Effect of taxation on Determines the extent to which 9% United Arab Global The Role of
incentives to invest tax incentives encourage or Emirates Competitiveness Economic
Score based on responses discourage investment and (84.9) Index, World Regulators
to the World Economic affect the competitiveness of the Economic Forum in the
Forum, Executive Opinion market. While this metric is not (2019) Governance of
Survey question ‘In your specific to infrastructure sectors, Infrastructure
country, to what extent do it shows general effect of taxation (OECD)
taxes reduce the incentive on investment, which includes
to invest? The index infrastructure and has flow-through
component is scored from from the broader economy to
1-7 (with 1 = to a great infrastructure assets.
extent; 7 = not at all).

45
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Regulatory frameworks

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Investment promotion Provides coordinated government 8% 79/81 Deloitte in- The Australian
agency assistance to promote, attract countries have country survey Trade and
Whether an investment/ and facilitate foreign investment, an investment (2020) Investment
trade agency exists to participation and skills in local promotion Commission
promote and coordinate infrastructure projects. This increases agency (Austrade)
foreign investment in the investment and competition in the (Yes)
local market. local market, potentially driving cost of
projects down and quality up.
* See the full list in the country brief appendix.

Top performers Top 5 most improved performers

Rank Country Rank Score Rank Country Rank Score

change change
1 United Kingdom 0 81.2 28 Azerbaijan 27 63.6
2 Germany 0 80.4 29 China 12 63.1
3 United States 3 79.8 57 Guinea 11 52.6
4 Netherlands -1 79.6 43 Kenya 11 59.8
5 Finland 2 78.0 38 Morocco 10 60.8

Top performers by region Top performers by income group

Region Country Overall Rank Score Income Country Overall Rank Score
rank change group rank change
Africa Rwanda 34 9 62.4 High United Kingdom 1 0 81.2
Americas United States 3 3 79.8 Upper
Romania 26 -1 63.9
middle
Asia Singapore 7 -3 77.9
Lower
Philippines 32 -5 62.8
Europe United Kingdom 1 0 81.2 middle
Oceania Australia 9 3 75.7 Low Rwanda 34 9 62.4

Case study: Azerbaijan Building on this, in 2019, Azerbaijan made resolving insolvency
Reform to Azerbaijan’s insolvency framework has driven easier by providing for the avoidance of preferential transactions
the country’s 27 rank increase on regulatory frameworks in (i.e. transfers or payments made to unsecured creditors that result
InfraCompass. in a creditor receiving a preference over the remaining unsecured
creditors at a time when the debtor was insolvent).
World Bank’s Doing Business Report in 2017 found that
Azerbaijan ranked 86th in resolving insolvency, with a strength of As a result of the above measures, World Bank’s 2020 Doing
insolvency framework of 13.5.32 Azerbaijan also ranked 65th in the Business Report Azerbaijan ranked 47th in resolving insolvency,
Ease of Doing Business Index out of 190 countries.33 with a strength of insolvency framework of 14.5. The 39 place
jump in ranking drove the overall improvement in Azerbaijan’s
In 2018, Azerbaijan made resolving insolvency easier by making
Ease of Doing Business Index from 65th in 2017 to 34 in 2020.34
insolvency proceedings more accessible for creditors and
granting them greater participation in the proceedings, improving
provisions on the treatment of contracts during insolvency
and introducing the possibility to obtain post-commencement
financing.

32. “Strength of insolvency framework” is a 0-16 index where 0 = worst and 16 = best.
33. World Bank, Doing Business Report, Azerbaijan (2016) http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/751231478081519340/pdf/109643-WP-DB17-PUBLIC-
Azerbaijan.pdf
34. World Bank, Doing Business Report, Azerbaijan (2020) https://www.doingbusiness.org/content/dam/doingBusiness/country/a/azerbaijan/AZE.pdf

46
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Permits

Description
Top performing country
The efficiency of planning and licencing procedures for the issuance of permits and
acquisitions of land required for development. Singapore
Rank change: 0
Importance
Driver score: 96.3
Implementing practices to manage land, environment and community approvals directly Top metric:
impacts on the timely and cost-effective delivery of infrastructure. Cost to start a business
What good looks like
Permits, approvals and land acquisition processes that are timely, predictable and navigable,
and which minimise red tape to appropriate and justifiable levels. Most improved country
Best practice guidance Rwanda
• Doing Business Report methodology Rank: 3
Rank change: 39
Driver score: 93.7
Most improved metric:
Cost to start a business

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Quality of land Quality land administration means 27% Netherlands, Doing Business Doing Business:
administration reliable and accurate property Rwanda, Survey, World Good practices
The reliability and information is available. Reliable land Singapore Bank (2019) for Registering
transparency of data information can help governments (95.0) Property (World
such as land titles, and better map the needs to the Bank)
the extent of geographic community, and determine how/
coverage of land where infrastructure projects can be
administration systems as undertaken. Better dispute resolution
well as aspects of dispute for land issues can reduce costs and
resolution for land issues. avoid delays in infrastructure projects
which often require land acquisition or
site assembly.
Cost to start a business The cost of starting a business can 29% Rwanda, Doing Business Doing Business:
Cost to start a business as be a critical factor for investors and Slovenia, Survey, World Good practices
recorded as a percentage contractors. Overly complicated cost United Bank (2019) for Starting a
of the economy’s income arrangements or costly processes Kingdom Business (World
per capita. It includes can discourage potential businesses, (100.0) Bank)
all official fees and fees including infrastructure ones, from
for legal or professional setting up in a country, hindering
services if such services competition and investment.
are required by law.
Registering property Infrastructure projects often involve 18% Qatar Doing Business Doing
Number of days taken some transfer of property rights. The (99.1) Survey, World Business:
to register a property to longer it takes the register properties, Bank (2019) Good practices
gauge the efficiency and the more costly and risky the project. for Starting
cost of the registration a Business
process. (World Bank)

47
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Permits

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Time required to start a A lengthy or expeditious process to 20% New Zealand Doing Business Doing
business set up a business can discourage (98.9) Survey, World Business:
The total number of days prospective businesses from setting Bank (2019) Good practices
required to register a firm. up in a country, including new for Starting
The measure captures infrastructure entities. a Business
the median duration that (World Bank)
incorporation lawyers
indicate is necessary to
complete a procedure with
minimum follow-up with
government agencies and
no extra payments.
Dealing with construction Indicates whether permit 7% Korea Doing Business Doing
permits acquiring processes are rigorous (91.3) Survey, World Business:
The number of days to and expeditious processes. Bank (2019) Good practices
deal with construction Most infrastructure projects for Starting
permits to gauge the require construction approvals. a Business
efficiency and cost Overly complicated processes (World Bank)
of processes that can discourage investment in
infrastructure companies infrastructure, lead to delays and make
have to undertake. investment riskier.

Top performers Top 5 most improved performers

Rank Country Rank Score Rank Country Rank Score

change change
1 Singapore 0 96.3 3 Rwanda 39 93.7
2 New Zealand 0 94.0 46 Togo 26 66.8
3 Rwanda 39 93.7 14 China 22 85.3
4 Denmark -1 91.5 20 Thailand 18 82.0
5 Netherlands 0 90.8 8 Turkey 17 87.9

Top performers by region Top performers by income group

Region Country Overall Rank Score Income Country Overall Rank Score
rank change group rank change
Africa Rwanda 3 39 93.7 High Singapore 1 0 96.3
Americas Canada 12 -4 85.5 Upper
Turkey 8 17 87.9
middle
Asia Singapore 1 0 96.3
Lower
Morocco 27 0 78.1
Europe Denmark 4 -1 91.5 middle
Oceania New Zealand 2 0 94.0 Low Rwanda 3 39 93.7

48
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Permits

Case study: Rwanda

The cost and time to establish a business in Rwanda has seen
considerable improvements following several reforms.
The reforms are a direct reaction to the World Bank’s Doing
Business Report 2019, which found that globally, while Rwanda
was the second easiest place to register property and third best
for quality of credit information systems and procedures, it lagged
behind on:
• Dealing with construction permits, where it ranked 106th
• Starting a business, where it ranked 51st
• Getting electricity35, where it ranked 68th.
On dealing with construction permits, the Rwanda Development
Board and the Rwanda Housing Authority announced in 2019
that it would reduce costs and streamline procedures in obtaining
permits.36 This included a requirement for constructors to
obtain liability insurance on buildings to improve building quality
control, as well as reducing the time to obtain water and sewage
connections.
On getting electricity, improvements have been made to the
reliability of power supply by upgrading the country’s power grid
infrastructure.
Other changes include exempting small and medium enterprises
from paying the trading licence tax for the first two years. This is
in addition to the upgrade of information technology systems by
the Rwanda Revenue Authority in 2016 to enable taxpayers to file
their taxes without red tape, an effort to reduce the ease of tax
payment and therefore the ease of doing business in the country.37
All these reforms involved scrapping unnecessary procedures
and investor requirements. As a result, the World Bank’s Doing
Business Report 2020 ranked Rwanda:
• 81st for dealing with construction permits (up by 25 positions)
• 35th for starting a business (up by 16 positions)
• 59th for getting electricity (up by 9 positions).

35. ‘Getting electricity’ refers to the procedures required for a business to

obtain a permanent electricity connection and supply. It includes factors
such as applications and contracts with electricity utilities, the necessary
inspections and clearances from distribution utilities and the connection
works between the business property and the electricity grid.
36. Rwanda Housing Authority, Building a Safer Future – Rwanda Building
Code Under Review (2019), http://www.rha.gov.rw/index.php?id=177&tx_
ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=223&cHash=ff97e0cc2c9421699816fdfdd5ea6dda
37. Rwanda Revenue Authority, RRA upgrades its website (2016), https://
www.rra.gov.rw/index.php?id=286&L=1%27A%3D0&tx_news_
pi1%5Bnews%5D=50&tx_news_pi1%5Bcontroller%5D=News&tx_news_
pi1%5Baction%5D=detail&cHash=1b51df186bc6cb25693deb53eca5fc8d

49
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Planning

Description
Top performing country
A government’s ability to plan, coordinate, and select infrastructure projects.
United Kingdom
Importance
Rank change: 0
Infrastructure planning can be seen as the first step in a project’s lifecycle, and more
Driver score: 99.4
broadly helps to articulate the overarching strategic objectives and visions for a country’s Top metric:
infrastructure. It is not separate from wider economic and spatial planning, as land use drives Published project pipeline
the demand for infrastructure, and infrastructure enables the use of land. Given the inter- Published infrastructure plan
relationships between different infrastructure assets (such as a rail line and the electricity Economic analysis assessment
Environmental impact analysis
that powers it), coordination of infrastructure planning is important. Cooperation across
Market sounding and/or
agencies and levels of government, and broad consultations with end-users and other assessment
relevant stakeholders, are key ingredients in successful planning.
What good looks like
Planning, not just of projects, but transparent setting of strategic social-economic- Most improved country
environment goals and integrated sectoral and system plans, enabling projects to be Argentina
measured against clear objectives. Rank: 45
Best practice guidance Rank change: 25
Driver score: 69.1
• Governmental Processes Facilitating Infrastructure Project Preparation (Global Most improved metric:
Infrastructure Hub) Published project pipeline
Published infrastructure plan
Economic analysis assessment
Environmental impact analysis

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Preparation of PPPs Informs the decision of whether to 15% United Procuring PPP Reference
Good practices that help undertake a PPP and ensures that Kingdom Infrastructure Guide (Global
ensure that the decision to robust analysis has been undertaken (96.0) Public-Private Infrastructure
procure a PPP is justified on the need, desired outcomes and Partnerships, Hub)
and that the procuring type of project before it proceeds, World Bank
authority is ready to helping better project options be (2018)
initiate the procurement selected by government. It includes
process. the different types of assessments
and considerations that factor into
the decision to do a PPP. This process
also includes other activities that must
be undertaken before publishing an
RFT for PPPs, such as commercial
and legal advice on contract and
tender documents as well as obtaining
land and relevant permits.
Published infrastructure Sets out the infrastructure challenges 21% 50/81* Deloitte in- Canada’s
plan and opportunities in a country, and countries country survey Long-Term
Whether the country the government’s planned responses publish an (2020) Infrastructure
has a multi-sector (through prospective projects). It infrastructure Plan
approach to planning shows the government’s areas of plan (Infrastructure
future infrastructure in an focus in terms of infrastructure (Yes) Canada)
integrated way. investment and reform.
Published project Provides detailed and informed 34% 58/81* Deloitte in- GI Hub Project
pipeline picture of the upcoming infrastructure countries country survey Preparation
Whether the country has projects opportunities. It provides publish a (2020) Tool
sufficiently articulated its infrastructure participants with a projects
prioritisation of projects clear indication of prospective and pipeline Mexico
through the public release confirmed infrastructure activity in the (Yes) Projects Hub
of an infrastructure project country.
pipeline.

50
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Planning

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Economic analysis Indicates whether governments 5% 73/81* Procuring Guide to
assessment require assessment of infrastructure countries Infrastructure Cost Benefit
The process of identifying, projects based on the impact of conduct Public-Private Analysis
calculating and comparing the project on the economy and economic Partnerships, (European
the costs and benefits community, for example change in analysis World Bank Commission)
of a proposal in order travel time or earning potential for assessment (2018)
to evaluate its merit, users. Governments with economic as part of their
either absolutely or assessment are more likely to select infrastructure
in comparison with infrastructure project options that planning
alternatives. deliver quality outcomes for the process.
economy and community. (Yes)
Market sounding and/or Market sounding tests the private 20% 53/81* Procuring Governmental
assessment sector’s ability to assume risks that countries Infrastructure Processes
A structured dialogue are to be transferred to them from conduct Public-Private Facilitating
between the private and the public sector. Market sounding market Partnerships, Infrastructure
the public sectors to test allows the public sector to ascertain sounding/ World Bank Project
viability to the project’s the private sector’s appetite for a assessment (2018) Preparation
details and obtain project, and gain up-to-date market as part of their (Global
feedback on how aspects knowledge through open and recorded infrastructure Infrastructure
of the project should be conversations. Market sounding planning Hub)
defined to ensure private allows the public sector to gain process.
sector participation and private sector input and understand (Yes)
foster competition. the associated project risks whilst
also advertising the project to ensure
prospective contractors do apply
with conforming bids. Countries that
perform effective market soundings
are more likely to take projects to
market in a form that are commercially
deliverable, have successful market
processes and ultimately successfully
deliver projects.
Environmental impact Indicates whether infrastructure 5% 71/81* Procuring Governmental
analysis project plans have considered countries Infrastructure Processes
Baseline on existing the impact of the project on the conduct Public-Private Facilitating
environmental conditions environment, for example pollution environmental Partnerships, Infrastructure
and estimate of the impact risks or deforestation. It includes impact analysis World Bank Project
of future operations on the an examination of the unintended as part of their (2018) Preparation
environment. consequences of a project and infrastructure (Global
considerations for mitigating these planning Infrastructure
risks. Environmental Impact analysis process. Hub)
allows infrastructure outcomes to be (Yes)
delivered with an awareness of the
effect on environment outcomes and
mitigates community resistance to
projects by showing that long term
environmental outcomes are being
managed.

* See the full list in the country brief appendix.

51
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Planning

Top performers Top 5 most improved performers

Rank Country Rank Score Rank Country Rank Score

change change
1 United Kingdom 0 99.4 46 Argentina* 25 69.1
2 Australia 0 99.1 29 Saudi Arabia 25 84.9
3 Canada 0 98.5 7 Philippines 24 97.7
4 Colombia 0 98.5 22 Slovenia 19 92.1
5 Ireland 0 98.2 38 Spain 14 74.3
*Argentina had the highest change in score (an increase of 54.6 points) in Planning.

Top performers by region Top performers by income group

Region Country Overall Rank Score Income Country Overall Rank Score
rank change group rank change
Africa South Africa 12 -1 96.8 High United Kingdom 1 0 99.4
Americas Canada 3 0 98.5 Upper
Colombia 4 0 98.5
middle
Asia Philippines 7 24 97.7
Lower
Philippines 7 24 97.7
Europe United Kingdom 1 0 99.4 middle
Oceania Australia 2 0 99.1 Low Mali 17 -1 95.1

Case study: Argentina The PPP Secretariat is also responsible for publishing relevant
Argentina has made great strides to improve infrastructure information related to PPP contracts’ procurement processes,
planning and governance settings. performance and auditing.38 In line with this, the Secretariat
In 2018, Argentina established the PPP Secretariat to work under has developed and published a PPP and infrastructure pipeline.
the scope of the Chief Cabinet Ministers and the Bicameral The cross-sectoral pipeline contemplates a series of energy,
Committee to oversee PPP projects. The PPP Secretariat is the transport, communications and technology, water and sanitation,
application authority of the PPP legal regime in Argentina. It health, justice and education projects to be developed across the
performs activities related to the supervision of the execution of country.39
PPP agreements in every stage in compliance with the provisions The PPP and infrastructure pipeline also serve as the country’s
of the PPP framework. It is in charge of the following: infrastructure plan, providing insights to the investment sector
and community of the Government’s infrastructure project
• Assisting the executive branch on the design of PPP priorities.
programmes and plans and in drafting the implementing
The above developments in Argentina – the PPP unit and project
regulations
planning and pipeline – are in line with the G20’s Roadmap to
• Assisting the relevant contracting agencies in the design and Infrastructure as an Asset Class.40
structuring of PPP projects, their procurement processes and in
designing the control and auditing methods

38. Argentina PPP Secretariat, https://www.argentina.gob.ar/jefatura/evaluacion-presupuestaria/que-hacemos

39. Argentina PPP pipeline, https://www.argentina.gob.ar/jefatura/evaluacion-presupuestaria/ppp
40. G20, Roadmap to Infrastructure as an Asset Class, https://www.oecd.org/g20/roadmap_to_infrastructure_as_an_asset_class_
argentina_presidency_1_0.pdf

52
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Procurement

Description
Top performing country
The extent to which procurement processes and bid management frameworks are
standardised, transparent, and non-onerous to bidders. Mexico
Rank change: 23
Importance
Driver score: 94.9
The procurement process is often the stage where the private sector is engaged in new Top metric:
infrastructure projects, whether in the design and construction of assets or through outright Transparency in public
ownership. The clarity, transparency and consistency of infrastructure procurement is procurement
therefore essential to ensuring effective outcomes throughout the asset lifecycle, from Published infrastructure
construction to operations. The process of procuring infrastructure assets is essential to procurement guidelines
ensuring value for money for the public purse and desirable outcomes for the users of the
services provided by the assets.
Most improved country
What good looks like
Sweden
Procurement practices that are transparent, enable efficient risk allocation and innovation,
Rank: 18
deliver value-for-money, and enhance competition.
Rank change: 48
Best practice guidance Driver score: 88.4
Most improved metric:
• OECD Recommendation and other guiding principles for good procurement
Transparency in public
• Reference Guide on Output Specifications for Quality Infrastructure (Global Infrastructure procurement
Hub) Published infrastructure
• PPP Risk Allocation Guide (Global Infrastructure Hub) procurement guidelines

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Transparency in public Pertinent information about the 37% 23/81* Institutional OECD Preventing
procurement procurement process should be countries Profiles Corruption
Transparency of the available to all contractors, suppliers scored 100/100 Database, CEPII in Public
process for the award of and service providers. This metric on the degree (2016) Procurement
public contracts. shows whether a country has probity of transparency
measures and exercises neutrality and in procurement.
fairness in procuring infrastructure, (100.0)
encouraging more participants and
competition, which can drive value
for money and better cost and quality
outcomes.
Average procurement Lengthy procurement adds costs, risks 5% Portugal IJ Global (2019) OECD
duration – transaction and down time to contractors bidding (94.8) Recommendation
RFP for and investing in projects. and other guiding
The time from public principles
announcement of a for good
project to the award of a procurement
contract. Shorter periods
have higher scores.
Procurement of PPPs Legal and regulatory frameworks 12% Slovak Procuring Procuring
How clear, fair and need to adhere to best practice Republic Infrastructure Infrastructure
transparent the PPP when selecting the private partner (94.0) Public-Private Public-Private
procurement process is. for PPPs. The procurement process Partnerships, Partnerships:
should include fairness, neutrality and World Bank Good practices
transparency. Fair and transparent (2018) (World Bank)
processes encourage more
participants and competition, which
can drive value for money and better
cost and quality outcomes.

53
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Procurement

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Published infrastructure The government should provide 38% 71/81* Deloitte in- Tender
procurement guidelines guidance on how to consider and countries country survey Regulations for
How well documented select a suitable procurement publish (2020) Works 2016 (The
and prescriptive the method for an infrastructure project. guidelines Netherlands
procurement process is. Some guidelines also provide a for procuring Ministry of
framework to assess the viability infrastructure Economic Affairs
of one procurement compared to projects. and Climate)
other methods (e.g. PPP instead of (Yes)
traditional procurement). The purpose
is to ensure contractors are aware
what the government’s expectations
and requirements are, and ensure the
government achieves the best value
for money.
PPP contract A contract management framework 7% Philippines Procuring Procuring
management should be in place to facilitate the (88.0) Infrastructure Infrastructure
Management of PPP implementation of PPP projects, as Public-Private Public-Private
contract changes or well as monitor and manage existing Partnerships, Partnerships:
cancellation, as well as contracts. This includes provisions for World Bank Good practices
the process to close the contract modification, renegotiation, (2018) (World Bank)
contract at the completion dispute resolution, step-in rights
of the PPP project. and contract termination. Effective
management of delivery and
operations post contract signature are
important for benefits to be realised
and projects to stay on time and
budget.

* See the full list in the country brief appendix.

Top performers Top 5 most improved performers

Rank Country Rank Score Rank Country Rank Score

change change
1 Mexico 23 94.9 18 Sweden 48 88.4
2 Netherlands -1 94.4 13 Japan 42 91.9
3 France 7 94.2 40 Philippines 32 74.6
4 Italy 4 94.1 22 China 30 84.2
5 Croatia 22 93.6 30 Argentina 28 80.9

Top performers by region Top performers by income group

Region Country Overall Rank Score Income Country Overall Rank Score
rank change group rank change
Africa South Africa 23 -10 84.0 High Netherlands 2 -1 94.4
Americas Mexico 1 23 94.9 Upper
Mexico 1 23 94.9
middle
Asia Singapore 10 7 92.8
Lower
Kenya 27 11 82.6
Europe Netherlands 2 -1 94.4 middle
Oceania Australia 9 -2 93.0 Low Rwanda 35 -12 78.3

54
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Procurement

Case study: Sweden Case study: Japan

Sweden has undertaken reforms to the principal legislations that Since 2017, Japan has worked towards making public
regulate public procurement in the country, which has resulted procurement more sustainable, transparent, fair and in line with
in Sweden’s 48 rank increase on procurement measures in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
InfraCompass. As a member of the World Trade Organisation’s Agreement on
In late 2016, in an effort to develop the public procurement law Government Procurement, Japan has developed numerous
framework, the Swedish Government introduced the following domestic laws and ordinances for procurement procedures.
reforms: These include the Accounts Law (Law No. 35 of 1947), Cabinet
Order concerning the Budget, Settlement of Account and
• Public Procurement Act (2016) – governs public procurement by Accounting (Imperial Ordinance No. 165 of 1947), and the Local
contracting authorities Autonomy Law (Law No. 67 of 1947), among other laws and
regulations.
• Utilities Procurement Act (2016) – governs the procurement
procedure of entities operating in the water, energy, transport Japan has also committed to the implementation of the UN
and postal services sector Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which among
other reasons, is an effort to increase transparency and fairness in
• Concessions Procurement Act (2016) – governs the its procurement procedures.41
procurement of building concessions and services concessions
by contracting authorities In 2016, Japan announced it would develop a National Action
Plan (NAP) over the following years, as part of the country’s
These acts entered into force in 2017, and would not yet have been commitment to the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles
reflected in the data underlying InfraCompass 2017. on Business and Human Rights. The NAP is one of the concrete
Additionally, in late 2017, the Swedish Government adopted the measures under Japan’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
National Public Procurement Strategy, to further strengthen Implementation Guiding Principles.42
the public procurement framework* The aim of the strategy In 2018, the Government of Japan undertook a baseline study
is to ensure all public procurement is efficient and encourage with the aim of capturing the extent to which current legislation
market competition, while promoting innovation and considering and policies provide transparency and fairness in business
environmental and social factors. processes. As part of this, the Government held consultations on
Based on this, the Government has formulated seven policy public procurement processes and legislations, such as the Act on
objectives: Promoting Green Procurement.
The Cabinet-approved “Growth Strategy 2018”, which set out
1. Public procurement as a strategic tool for doing good business the Government’s objectives for economic growth and progress,
2. Effective purchasing of public goods and services also listed the NAP formulation process as an important measure
that encourages Japanese companies to advance initiatives on
3. Well-functioning competition from market with a multiplicity of transparency and fairness in the context of public procurement.
participants These are essential preconditions for containing corruption in
4. Legally certain public procurement ensuring no fraud, corruption public procurement.
or conflict of interest takes place In July 2019, after taking into account the findings from
consultations, the Government identified transparency and
5. Driving innovation and promoting alternative solutions
fairness in the procurement processes as one of the key
6. Environmentally responsible public procurement considerations of the NAP for business and human rights.43

7. Socially responsible public procurement As a result of these initiatives, the Tokyo Organising Committee
for Olympic and Paralympic Games (TOCOG) developed a
The procurement strategy is aimed primarily at central Sustainable Sourcing Code to ensure the sustainability as well as
government authorities. However, the Government intends to work economic rationality of all goods and services procured by the
to ensure that municipalities and county councils as well as other organising committee.44 The Code also clarified the criteria and
contracting authorities and entities, adopt governing documents operating methods by which such goods and services shall be
to put the policy objectives and the Government’s aims for public procured.
procurement into practice within their activities.
This means that TOCOG will ensure that procurement for the
The effects of the strategy and reforms are starting to flow development of related infrastructure is aligned to international
through into deal flow, with Sweden gaining 7 ranks in the Activity agreements and codes of conduct in relevant fields of
drivers since InfraCompass 2017, driven primarily by an increase sustainability (including the SDGs, ILO Tripartite Declaration of
in private infrastructure investment and deals with foreign Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy,
sponsorship. which includes ILO core labour standards, OECD Guidelines for
* The Government of Sweden, Ministry of Finance, The National Procurement Multinational Enterprises, and United Nations Guiding Principles
Strategy, November 2017. http://www.government.se/information- on Business and Human Rights), and in consideration of
material/2017/11/national-public-procurement-strategy/
environmental issues, promotion of fair business practices, and
invigoration of regional economies.
41. Japan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan’s National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights, https://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000417741.pdf
42. Target 7 of Goal 12 of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) includes “Promoting public procurement practice that is sustainable”.
43. Japan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Towards Formulating the National Action Plan (2019), https://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000515902.pdf
44. Tokyo 2020, Sustainability (2020), https://tokyo2020.org/en/games/sustainability/
55
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Activity

Description
Top performing country
The extent and nature of recent infrastructure investment activity and the extent of private
sector involvement over the last five years, relative to the size of the economy. Jordan
Rank change: 1
Importance
Driver score: 80.9
The track record of investment activities by the public and private sectors is a good indicator Top metric:
of a country’s ability to deliver infrastructure assets. Investment activities depend on the Private infrastructure investment
willingness of the private sector to invest and the funding capability of the government. Value of close infrastructure deals
A poor track record in delivering projects can be perceived as a high-risk investment with foreign equity sponsorship
environment. For example, a high incidence of cancelled, distressed or renegotiated projects
can signal to investors that investment in a particular country could be high risk or ultimately
unsustainable. Most improved country
What good looks like Pakistan
High levels of recent infrastructure activity and high value of recent infrastructure deals that Rank: 13
involve private and foreign investment. Some countries prefer public investment over private Rank change: 45
investment in infrastructure. This is a societal choice and should not be assumed Driver score: 51.7
as a negative. Most improved metric:
Private infrastructure investment
Note: Activity is measured relative to the size of the economy, therefore countries with a high
proportion of infrastructure investment and smaller GDP will tend to rank higher.
Best practice guidance
• Private Participation in Infrastructure Report (World Bank)
• Case Studies on Leveraging Private Investment for Infrastructure (OECD)
• OECD Principles for Private Investment in Infrastructure (OECD)

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Infrastructure investment Sufficient investment in infrastructure 25% Angola, Global The
Total economic is needed to cater for the population Cambodia, Infrastructure Macroeconomic
infrastructure expenditure, and for economic growth. For Ethiopia, Outlook, Global Effects of Public
based on government and countries with a large infrastructure Rwanda, Infrastructure Investment:
multi-lateral development gap between needs and current Tanzania Hub & Oxford Evidence from
agency estimates. infrastructure stock, higher levels of (100.0) Economics (2018) Advanced
investment are required to close the Economies
gap. (IMF)

The Global
Infrastructure
Outlook (Global
Infrastructure
Hub)
Value of closed PPP The value of closed infrastructure 25% Croatia, Mali, IJ Global (2019) See driver level
infrastructure deals deals reflects the scale of Paraguay, guidance
Financial close value of infrastructure investment available Slovak
privately financed PPP in a country as well as the amount Republic,
infrastructure. investors are comfortable investing. Turkey,
The track record of financial closes Vietnam
for PPPs is an indicator of whether the (100.0)
government has the right conditions
and systems to attract private
investment in PPPs.

56
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Activity

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Private infrastructure The degree of investment of private 25% Ghana, Jordan, IJ Global (2019) Private
investment finance reflects the willingness and Paraguay Participation in
Financial close value ability of the private sector to invest in (100.0) Infrastructure
of privately financed a country’s infrastructure sector. The Report (World
economic infrastructure. track record of financial closes is an Bank)
indicator of whether the market has
the right conditions to attract private
investment.
Value of closed Indicates the scale of infrastructure 25% Jordan IJ Global (2019) See driver level
infrastructure deals with investment opportunities available for (100.0) guidance
foreign equity foreign investors. It also indicates the
Financial close value degree of foreign investment required
of privately financed in the local market to meet the capital
infrastructure transactions costs of infrastructure projects. The
with equity from foreign greater the foreign investment in a
investors (excludes country, the greater the supply of
refinancing transactions). foreign capital and competition for
infrastructure investments, potentially
bringing down financing costs.

Top performers Top 5 most improved performers

Rank Country Rank Score Rank Country Rank Score

change change
1 Jordan 1 80.9 13 Pakistan 45 51.7
2 Mali -1 77.9 6 Vietnam 37 65.1
3 Paraguay 20 73.7 28 Thailand 32 40.2
4 Tanzania -1 71.2 3 Paraguay 20 73.7
5 Ghana 3 65.9 33 Ecuador 18 37.1

Top performers by region Top performers by income group

Region Country Overall Rank Score Income Country Overall Rank Score
rank change group rank change
Africa Mali 2 -1 77.9 High Australia 7 0 65.0
Americas Paraguay 3 20 73.7 Upper
Jordan 1 1 80.9
middle
Asia Jordan 1 1 80.9
Lower
Ghana 5 3 65.9
Europe Slovak Republic 14 -9 51.6 middle
Oceania Australia 7 0 65.0 Low Mali 2 -1 77.9

57
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Activity

Case study: Pakistan Hub Coal Power Plant

Between 2016 and 2019, private infrastructure investment in In January 2017, the Private Power Infrastructure Board (PPIB)
Pakistan increased by approximately USD 5.7 billion, totalling of Pakistan signed the power purchase agreement on the USD 2
almost USD 22 billion since 2010.45 Several energy projects during billion coal-fired thermal power plant.
this period have contributed to Pakistan’s strong performance:
The project is an operations and maintenance project, consisting
Matiari-Lahore HVDC Transmission Line Project of two 660 megawatts power plants.46 Located in Hub,
In February 2019, the Private Power Infrastructure Board (PPIB) of Balochistan, approximately 45 kilometres from Karachi, Pakistan’s
Pakistan reached financial close on the USD 1.66 billion Matiari- largest city, the project is expected to support the energy needs
Lahore HVDC Transmission Line project. of approximately four million people, as well as alleviate the power
The high voltage direct current (HVDC) transmission line is shortages in Karachi.
Pakistan’s first transmission build-own-operate-transfer (BOOT) The project is a joint venture between Hub Power Company
project. The project includes the development of 878 kilometres (HUBCO), which has a 74% stake, and China Power International
of transmission line, with a capacity of 4,000 megawatts, Holding (CPIH), which has a 26% stake.
from Matiari in south Pakistan to Lahore in the north east. The
Both projects are part of the Belt and Road Initiative and
transmission line is expected to alleviate a significant power
considered priority projects under the China-Pakistan Economic
shortage in the country’s key economic hubs, the Islamabad
Corridor (CPEC).47 These projects will contribute to energy
Capital Territory and the Punjab Province (which includes Lahore).
security for Pakistan, and ultimately improve economic and social
The project has been financed by the China Electric Power progress as energy certainty allows businesses to operate more
Equipment and Technology Co Ltd (CET), which is a subsidiary of effectively and households to meet energy needs.
State Grid Corporation of China.

45. IJ Global, 2019

46. China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, HUBCO Coal Power Project (2019), http://cpec.gov.pk/project-details/6
47. China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, http://cpec.gov.pk/energy

58
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Funding capacity

Description
Top performing country
Stability and sustainability of the government’s fiscal management.
Denmark
Importance
Rank change: 0
Funding capacity is an indicator of the government’s capacity to deliver projects. Regardless
Driver score: 84.2
of the appetite of financial markets, future infrastructure needs cannot be met without the Top metric:
government’s ability to fund projects. Governments need to be fiscally sustainable to provide Summary credit rating
project funding. Without fiscal settings, e.g. if a government cannot borrow money at an
affordable rate because of low credit rating, it would not be able to fund and deliver projects.
Most improved country
What good looks like
Greece
Fiscal sustainability that allows for the allocation of infrastructure expenditure by
Rank: 50
governments.
Rank change: 28
Best practice guidance Driver score: 28
Most improved metric:
• Public Investment Management Assessment (IMF)
Summary credit rating
• Making Public Investment More Efficient (IMF)
• PPP Fiscal Risk Assessment Model (IMF)

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Summary credit rating Shows the government’s ability to 48% Australia, Summary Credit Sovereign
Capability of the borrow (cheaply) for infrastructure Denmark, Rating, Trading Credit Ratings
government to borrow spending. Governments with higher Germany, Economics Methodology
money, based on a range credit ratings can borrow at lower cost Netherlands (2019) (S&P Global)
of risks and factors, such to invest in infrastructure, reducing (100.0)
as existing government project costs. A good credit rating
debt (debt service ratio) (AAA) allows governments to be able
and political stability. to have strong access to markets and
lower costs of debt. It indicates the risk
level of the investing environment of a
country and is used by investors when
looking to invest in a country.
GDP per capita Indicator of the production per 42% Ireland World Economic See driver level
Breaks down a country’s person, which is a proxy of how much (99.2) Outlook, IMF guidance
GDP per person. It shows taxpayers can fund infrastructure. It (2019)
how much economic also indicates users’ ability to pay for
production value can infrastructure services that are funded
be attributed to each through user-pays methods.
individual citizen.
Long term GDP growth Indicator of economic growth and 5% Ethiopia World Economic See driver level
trend shows long-term ability to pay for (92.1) Outlook, IMF guidance
Trend of GDP growth, infrastructure. High long-term GDP (2019)
including long-term growth allows countries to borrow
baseline projections. and build more infrastructure now,
on expectation they need it to enable
growth and will be able to pay for it
through said growth.
Gross government debt Governments have to borrow money 5% Russia World Economic Expenditure
Gross debt consists of to fund cyclical revenue shortfalls and (87.1) Outlook, IMF Control: Key
all liabilities that require finance large infrastructure projects. (2019) Features, Stages,
payment or payments of This metric provides an indicator of and Actors (IMF)
interest and/or principal how much money the government
by the government to has borrowed and whether it can
creditors at a date or dates afford higher debt levels to fund
in the future. infrastructure.

59
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Funding capacity

Top performers Top 5 most improved performers

Rank Country Rank Score Rank Country Rank Score

change change
1 Denmark 0 84.2 50 Greece 23 28.0
2 Qatar 0 84.1 56 Kenya 16 23.2
3 Singapore 0 84.1 28 Portugal 15 47.0
4 Ireland 8 83.7 51 Vietnam 11 27.9
5 United States 1 83.6 4 Ireland 8 83.7

Top performers by region Top performers by income group

Region Country Overall Rank Score Income Country Overall Rank Score
rank change group rank change
Africa Morocco 45 -3 31.5 High Denmark 1 0 84.2
Americas United States 5 1 83.6 Upper
China 26 -2 50.5
middle
Asia Qatar 2 0 84.1
Lower
Myanmar 31 -1 41.5
Europe Denmark 1 0 84.2 middle
Oceania Australia 6 -1 81.5 Low Guinea 57 0 23.1

Case study: Greece the fiscal improvement is due to structural measures, including
Fiscal prudence and GDP growth have allowed Greece to improve pension and health care reforms as well as efforts to contain the
government debt to sustainable levels, with credit agencies public-sector wage bill and employment. The establishment of an
upgrading the country’s outlook. independent tax revenue administration (Independent Authority
for Public Revenue) in 2017 has also improved tax compliance
In 2009, Greece faced an economic crisis and entered recession
and raising tax revenue.
after defaulting on its debt, largely as a result of heavy borrowings
and overspending by the government (mainly on wages and Public debt sustainability has significantly improved over the
defence). As a direct consequence of this, until 2017 all major medium term by the debt relief package agreed with Greece’s
credit rating agencies had a stable to negative outlook for Greece, euro area creditors in June 2018. Greece has successfully re-
commensurate with ratings in the C category. established market-based funding, supported by a very large cash
cushion and strong creditor support.49
To address the crisis, Greece received financial support from the
IMF, the EU and the European Central Bank totalling USD 330 The effectiveness of the reforms is evident in the acceleration and
billion. It also implemented austerity measures that lasted for broadening of economic recovery, with a GDP growth rate of 2%
years. Reforms across the economy have been critical for Greece in 2019, and the projection for the debt-to-GDP ratio to remain
to achieve economic stability (and growth) and prudent fiscal on a downward trajectory (although long-term sustainability will
settings. require Greece to follow pro-growth policies).50 Greece also no
The reform programme appears firmly entrenched and its longer has a borrowing arrangement with the IMF, although the
implementation is starting to bear fruit. A strengthening economy two parties continue to undertake formal consultations annually
in conjunction with creditor surveillance should further reduce risk on macroeconomic and financial sector issues.51
of regression. Reforms to Greece’s public sector creditors reflects As a result, since mid-2017 Greece has achieved a consistent
the strengthening of Greece’s institutions. Competitiveness has stable to positive outlook from all major credit rating agencies,
also improved, marked by reduced labour costs and increase in with ratings in the B category.52 Credit ratings are used by
exports. Exports accounted for 36% of GDP at the end of 2018, investors to determine the credit worthiness of a country,
compared to 22% in 2010.48 therefore it has a significant impact on enabling investment in
Greece.
The track record of strong fiscal performance is now firmly
established and appears likely to be sustained, since most of

48. World Bank databank (2020), https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.EXP.GNFS.ZS?locations=GR

49. Moody’s, Upgrades to Greece’s rating to B1 stable outlook (2019), https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-upgrades-Greeces-rating-to-B1-stable-outlook--
PR_395805
50. IMF World Economic Outlook (2020), https://databank.worldbank.org/home.aspx
51. IMF Country Focus, Greece: Economy Improves, Key Reforms Still Needed (2019), https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2019/03/11/na031119-greece-economy-
improves-key-reforms-still-needed
52. Trading Economics, Greece Credit Ratings (2019), https://tradingeconomics.com/greece/rating

60
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Financial markets

Description
Top performing country
Strength and capability of local financial markets.
United States
Importance
Rank change: 0
A well-developed financial market is important to raising long-term finance to meet the
Driver score: 91
upfront costs of delivering a project. Strong financial markets reflect investors’ appetite to Top metric:
invest in a market. These investors often include institutional investors (sovereign wealth Stocks traded
and pension funds), debt financing banks and fund managers. Deep financial markets can
increase a country’s pool of capital for infrastructure investment, therefore it is important for
long-term financing of infrastructure projects. Most improved country

What good looks like Guinea

Availability to provide a variety of capital market instruments to encourage investors to Rank: 60
finance infrastructure. Rank change: 12
Driver score: 24.5
Best practice guidance Most improved metric:
• National Infrastructure Banks and Similar Financing Facilities (Global Infrastructure Hub) Financial stability

• Infrastructure Financing Instruments and Incentives (OECD)

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Financial depth Indicates the availability of financial 28% United States Global Capital market
Overall level and breadth products in the market to efficiently (91.3) Competitiveness instruments
of the financial market, meet the capital requirements for Index 4.0, World to mobilize
to sustain relatively large infrastructure projects. The deeper Economic Forum institutional
market orders. the financial market, the greater (and (2018) investors to
possibly cheaper) the supply of capital infrastructure
for infrastructure projects. and SME
financing in
emerging market
economies
(World Bank)
Financing through local Indicates the availability of local 17% United States Global Local Capital
equity market finance (often long-term finance), (78.9) Competitiveness Market
Degree of participation by including the availability of suitable Index 4.0, World Development
local equity participants, domestic partners to form consortia. Economic Forum (IFC)
such as pension funds, The greater the participation from (2018)
sovereign wealth funds local equity, the greater the supply
and fund managers. of and competition for capital for
projects.
Domestic credit to Indicates the availability of local 26% United States World Staff note
private sector finance (often short-term finance). (90.0) Development for the G20
Financial resources Similar to the depth, more credit to the Indicators, World IFAWG recent
provided to the private private sector may indicate a more Bank (2019) developments
sector by financial developed financial market able to on local
corporations, such better supply capital for infrastructure currency
as through loans or projects; alternatively too much credit bond markets
securities. The measure to private sector may indicate the in emerging
considers the current level sector is at borrowing capacity and economies
of credit to the private cannot invest much more. (World Bank)
sector.

61
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Financial markets

Metric Why is it important? Weighting Top performer Data source Best practice
(Score) (Year of data) guidance
Stocks traded Indicates the level of activity in the 23% Japan, Korea, World Stock markets
The value (or total stock market, where infrastructure United States Development are changing:
number) of shares traded, assets are bought and sold. It (100.0) Indicators, World Investors,
both domestic and measures liquidity, which is important Bank (2019) companies and
foreign. for investors to know they can extract regulators must
investments at appropriate points. be prepared
(OECD)
Financial stability Stable markets promote the growth 5% Finland Global Debt Capital
State of the financial of debt and equity participants in the (98.2) Competitiveness Market
market, such as whether country. A stable financial market Index, World Solutions (IFC)
the system is resistant to facilitates smooth flow of funds Economic
economic shocks. between investors, projects and Forum 4.0 (2018)
bankers, improving supply of capital
for projects.

Top performers Top 5 most improved performers

Rank Country Rank Score Rank Country Rank Score

change change
1 United States 0 91.0 60 Guinea 12 24.5
2 Japan 0 84.4 42 Russia 10 31.5
3 Sweden 2 78.3 43 Slovakia 6 30.8
4 United Kingdom 0 77.5 51 Slovenia 5 27.9
5 Korea 1 77.1 24 India 4 46.3

Top performers by region Top performers by income group

Region Country Overall Rank Score Income Country Overall Rank Score
rank change group rank change
Africa South Africa 10 -7 70.8 High United States 1 0 91.0
Americas United States 1 0 91.0 Upper
China 7 0 73.2
middle
Asia Japan 2 0 84.4
Lower
Vietnam 23 2 46.7
Europe Sweden 3 2 78.3 middle
Oceania Australia 12 -2 67.9 Low Rwanda 55 -1 26.5

Case study: Guinea However, evolution of local equity markets is a long process,
Guinea has taken notable initiatives to improve its financial and low local investment in infrastructure is not uncommon for
markets. For instance, in 2019 the central bank, Banque Centrale a low income country in this region, where private financing is
de la République de Guinée, invited the IMF to conduct a Financial mostly through foreign equity or targeted at private infrastructure.
Sector Stability Review (FSSR).53 Infrastructure investment has specific challenges in low income
countries related to project preparation and development, which
The FSSR found that return on equity increased by 2.6% between
can create perceptions of high risk and low return. The fact that
2017 and 2018 (to 19.3%).54 Based on an analysis of IJ Global
investors can invest through local equity markets in other sectors
data, there is little to no domestic equity involved in infrastructure
(such as in real estate or private infrastructure) should be seen as
projects.
the foundation for potential infrastructure investment in the future.

53. IMF, Guinea: Financial Sector Stability Review (2020), https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/CR/Issues/2020/02/11/Guinea-Financial-

Sector-Stability-Review-49041
54. IMF, Financial Soundness Indicators (2019), https://www.imf.org/external/np/sta/fsi/eng/fsi.htm

62
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

5. The Way Forward

63
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Infrastructure will provide an essential The findings of InfraCompass 2020 should encourage the start
of important conversations within and between the public and
economic and social service to the private sectors as well with the communities they ultimately serve.
world as it rebuilds from the impact of To complement InfraCompass, GI Hub is working to provide a
comprehensive suite of resources to further support countries in
the COVID-19 pandemic. It is therefore the efficient delivery of quality infrastructure. This includes:
more important than ever to address the
• Future of Infrastructure – developing a digital use case library to
infrastructure gaps and pain points and provide practical and relevant examples for all G20 countries
work towards providing increased quality of • Strengthening regulatory frameworks for private sector
infrastructure services. participation, in order to attract infrastructure investment.
GI Hub will work on compiling innovative funding models to
InfraCompass 2020 offers some positive findings – procurement support infrastructure business cases
processes have materially improved, the cost of doing business
is becoming more favourable and investment activity is trending • Quality Infrastructure Investment (QII) Principles - the GI Hub will
upwards across all income groups. compile case studies and project examples to demonstrate how
the G20’s QII Principles can be realised in practical terms
Notwithstanding these improvements, there is still a lot of
• InfraChallenge – a global innovation competition where
work to be done. GI Hub is committed to helping countries
applicants pitch transformational ideas, tackling the big
to develop and/or reprioritise their medium and long-term
infrastructure issues with digital solutions
infrastructure plans.
This is in addition to the numerous existing guidance tools already
shared by GI Hub, such as the PPP Risk Allocation Tool, the PPP
Contract Management Tool and the Inclusive Infrastructure Tool.

As the world recovers and begins to rebuild after the COVID-19

pandemic, the delivery of quality infrastructure will become
increasingly important to drive economic inclusivity and progress.
It is hoped that InfraCompass, together with GI Hub’s other
initiatives will encourage practitioners to further improve the
delivery of quality infrastructure.

64
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

6. Country Rankings

65
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Full country rankings

Governance

Rank Country Score Score Rank Rank Country Score Score Rank
(2020) (2020) change change (2020) (2020) change change
1 Singapore 83.4 0.1 0 39 Jordan 54.8 1.4 0

2 Denmark 82.6 0.0 1 40 Vietnam 53.4 -0.5 -3

3 Netherlands 82.3 -0.2 1 41 Pakistan 52.6 0.9 1

4 Canada 81.9 -1.1 -2 42 Ghana 52.6 0.5 -1

5 Austria 81.3 -0.5 1 43 Argentina 52.4 3.8 6

6 New Zealand 81.0 -1.3 -1 44 Senegal 51.3 1.7 2

7 Slovenia 80.2 0.0 1 45 Egypt 51.3 2.5 3

8 Japan 80.0 0.6 4 46 Brazil 50.2 0.2 -2

9 Ireland 79.5 -0.3 1 47 Cote d'Ivoire 49.9 -0.4 -4

10 Australia 79.5 -0.2 1 48 Togo 49.3 -0.3 -3

11 United Kingdom 79.5 -1.8 -4 49 India 49.1 13.1 18

12 Germany 78.5 -1.4 -3 50 Thailand 48.7 2.8 7

13 Korea 77.5 1.1 1 51 Saudi Arabia 48.4 2.6 5

14 Finland 76.7 -0.7 -1 52 Turkey 47.8 -1.3 -5

15 France 75.8 -0.5 0 53 Benin 47.6 0.6 0

16 Sweden 75.3 -0.7 0 54 Azerbaijan 47.1 -0.1 -3

17 Spain 74.9 4.9 2 55 Nigeria 47.0 -0.1 -3

18 Malaysia 74.4 1.1 -1 56 Ecuador 46.8 0.7 -1

19 Portugal 71.9 0.0 -1 57 Tanzania 46.7 -1.2 -7

20 Italy 68.2 0.0 1 58 Burkina Faso 46.5 0.4 -4

21 Poland 67.6 -0.7 -1 59 Philippines 46.5 1.0 0

22 Czech Republic 67.6 0.5 0 60 Rwanda 46.1 0.5 -2

23 Indonesia 64.9 1.7 2 61 Mali 44.2 0.0 -1

24 Colombia 63.9 -0.6 0 62 Croatia 43.8 0.3 -1

25 Slovak Republic 63.8 -3.1 -2 63 Kazakhstan 40.3 0.6 1

26 Chile 63.3 2.3 1 64 Cambodia 39.6 -0.2 -1

27 United Arab Emirates 60.7 -0.2 1 65 Romania 39.5 -0.6 -3

28 Mexico 60.5 -1.8 -2 66 Guinea 38.5 -0.9 -1

29 Belgium 60.1 -0.3 0 67 Myanmar 37.0 -1.7 -1

30 Tunisia 59.2 1.0 1 68 Kenya 35.1 3.5 1

31 Greece 58.3 0.1 -1 69 Peru 34.5 0.1 -1

32 China 57.5 3.1 4 70 Bangladesh 30.2 1.2 0

33 Uruguay 57.2 0.5 2 71 Guatemala 26.7 -0.1 1

34 Qatar 56.9 -0.8 -1 72 Niger 26.6 -0.5 -1

35 South Africa 56.7 -1.3 -3 73 Paraguay 25.8 0.9 0

36 United States 56.7 -0.9 -2 74 Ethiopia 24.8 0.3 0

37 Morocco 55.3 1.7 1 75 Angola 16.7 0.2 0

38 Russia 55.1 2.7 2 76 Chad 8.2 -0.1 0

Key

Increase from Decrease from No change from

InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017
66
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Regulatory frameworks

Rank Country Score Score Rank Rank Country Score Score Rank
(2020) (2020) change change (2020) (2020) change change
1 United Kingdom 81.2 0.3 0 39 Colombia 60.7 0.0 -4

2 Germany 80.4 1.3 0 40 Qatar 60.4 -3.3 -12

3 United States 79.8 2.8 3 41 Greece 60.2 -0.2 -5

4 Netherlands 79.6 0.7 -1 42 Indonesia 60.0 0.6 -2

5 Finland 78.0 1.8 2 43 Kenya 59.8 8.1 11

6 Czech Republic 77.9 1.9 2 44 Cambodia 59.4 -0.6 -7

7 Singapore 77.9 -0.1 -3 45 Kazakhstan 59.1 -0.7 -7

8 Denmark 75.8 1.2 3 46 South Africa 59.1 -0.7 -7

9 Australia 75.7 1.2 3 47 Paraguay 58.4 1.5 -3

10 Sweden 75.3 0.6 0 48 Turkey 56.5 1.3 -2

11 Ireland 75.2 -2.5 -6 49 Brazil 55.6 -0.9 -4

12 Canada 74.5 -1.1 -3 50 India 55.3 4.5 7

13 Japan 74.3 0.2 0 51 Jordan 54.9 2.4 1

14 Chile 72.6 -0.2 1 52 Russia 54.2 -0.6 -5

15 Slovak Republic 72.3 -0.3 1 53 Vietnam 53.5 0.4 -4

16 New Zealand 72.2 -0.7 -2 54 Pakistan 53.5 5.5 7

17 Belgium 72.0 0.8 0 55 Cote d'Ivoire 52.9 0.7 -2

18 United Arab Emirates 71.8 2.8 4 56 Senegal 52.8 -0.1 -6

19 Portugal 71.3 1.1 1 57 Guinea 52.6 7.1 11

20 Austria 70.5 0.2 -1 58 Tunisia 52.5 -0.2 -7

21 Spain 70.4 0.8 0 59 Guatemala 50.3 -0.5 -3

22 Poland 69.6 -0.8 -4 60 Argentina 50.3 1.8 0

23 France 68.3 0.5 0 61 Egypt 49.9 3.7 6

24 Korea 66.5 1.0 0 62 Burkina Faso 49.4 0.0 -3

25 Italy 64.5 0.4 1 63 Ghana 49.1 2.3 1

26 Romania 63.9 -1.0 -1 64 Togo 48.8 1.3 -1

27 Thailand 63.8 1.2 3 65 Benin 47.9 1.2 0

28 Azerbaijan 63.6 12.1 27 66 Tanzania 47.6 -1.9 -8

29 China 63.1 4.2 12 67 Mali 47.3 -0.3 -5

30 Malaysia 63.0 0.4 1 68 Nigeria 45.0 0.1 1

31 Mexico 62.9 -0.1 -2 69 Saudi Arabia 44.9 -1.6 -3

32 Philippines 62.8 -1.3 -5 70 Bangladesh 44.4 0.8 0

33 Croatia 62.8 2.0 1 71 Myanmar 42.4 0.7 0

34 Rwanda 62.4 4.1 9 72 Chad 41.3 0.1 0

35 Slovenia 61.2 2.7 7 73 Niger 40.9 0.7 0

36 Peru 61.2 -0.3 -3 74 Ethiopia 40.4 1.0 0

37 Uruguay 61.2 -1.1 -5 75 Ecuador 32.7 -0.6 0

38 Morocco 60.8 7.6 10 76 Angola 32.3 0.1 0

Key

Increase from Decrease from No change from

InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017
67
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Permits

Rank Country Score Score Rank Rank Country Score Score Rank
(2020) (2020) change change (2020) (2020) change change
1 Singapore 96.3 1.0 0 39 Tunisia 71.3 4.9 1

2 New Zealand 94.0 0.1 0 40 Indonesia 70.9 15.7 10

3 Rwanda 93.7 30.0 39 41 Colombia 70.2 0.4 -6

4 Denmark 91.5 0.0 -1 42 Jordan 70.2 -1.6 -9

5 Netherlands 90.8 0.3 0 43 Brazil 69.2 16.3 10

6 Sweden 90.5 -0.7 -2 44 Cote d'Ivoire 68.4 12.3 5

7 United Kingdom 89.2 0.9 -1 45 Peru 68.2 6.8 -1

8 Turkey 87.9 12.1 17 46 Togo 66.8 41.3 26

9 Azerbaijan 87.9 8.6 9 47 Greece 66.8 4.4 -4

10 Qatar 86.8 2.8 0 48 Mexico 66.1 2.3 -7

11 Australia 86.1 -0.2 -4 49 Niger 63.9 18.9 9

12 Canada 85.5 0.1 -4 50 Vietnam 63.5 3.5 -4

13 Russia 85.4 1.6 -2 51 South Africa 62.7 3.0 -4

14 China 85.3 16.4 22 52 Argentina 62.3 9.4 2

15 Korea 84.3 0.0 -6 53 Uruguay 60.0 -0.9 -8

16 Kazakhstan 83.3 2.8 0 54 Guatemala 60.0 8.1 2

17 United States 83.1 0.1 -4 55 India 59.7 16.5 5

18 Japan 82.2 0.4 -4 56 Ghana 58.8 4.8 -5

19 Portugal 82.1 -1.5 -7 57 Myanmar 57.5 23.9 10

20 Thailand 82.0 13.9 18 58 Senegal 56.1 20.7 8

21 France 81.1 2.1 -1 59 Benin 56.0 3.3 -4

22 Ireland 80.8 0.1 -7 60 Kenya 53.3 4.9 -3

23 Spain 80.4 0.4 -6 61 Philippines 48.5 -4.5 -9

24 Malaysia 80.1 4.3 0 62 Egypt 48.2 4.8 -3

25 Finland 79.6 1.9 -4 63 Pakistan 47.7 9.5 1

26 United Arab Emirates 79.0 0.0 -7 64 Poland 46.6 -12.8 -16

27 Morocco 78.1 3.0 0 65 Nigeria 43.9 13.6 4

28 Italy 77.3 0.9 -5 66 Guinea 42.7 10.9 2

29 Slovak Republic 76.9 2.2 0 67 Ecuador 42.2 1.2 -6

30 Slovenia 76.8 -0.9 -8 68 Bangladesh 41.6 5.8 -3

31 Saudi Arabia 75.8 8.6 8 69 Burkina Faso 40.5 1.2 -6

32 Germany 75.5 0.1 -6 70 Mali 39.4 -1.1 -8

33 Belgium 75.1 0.3 -5 71 Angola 35.7 6.3 0

34 Czech Republic 74.5 2.7 -2 72 Paraguay 29.9 0.0 -2

35 Austria 73.8 0.3 -5 73 Tanzania 28.9 6.3 0

36 Croatia 73.7 5.3 1 74 Ethiopia 26.7 5.5 0

37 Chile 73.7 3.4 -3 75 Chad 22.8 2.4 0

38 Romania 71.6 -1.5 -7 76 Cambodia 15.7 0.2 0

Key

Increase from Decrease from No change from

InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017
68
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Planning

Rank Country Score Score Rank Rank Country Score Score Rank
(2020) (2020) change change (2020) (2020) change change
1 United Kingdom 99.4 0.0 0 39 Portugal 73.7 0.1 -3

2 Australia 99.1 0.0 0 40 Poland 73.4 0.1 -3

3 Canada 98.5 0.1 0 41 Cote d'Ivoire 72.8 0.0 -3

4 Colombia 98.5 0.1 0 42 Guinea 72.7 0.0 -3

5 Ireland 98.2 0.1 0 43 Tunisia 71.4 0.0 -3

6 Slovak Republic 97.9 -0.1 0 44 Senegal 69.8 0.0 -2

7 Philippines 97.7 21.2 24 45 Korea 69.6 0.1 -2

8 India 97.3 0.0 -1 46 Argentina 69.1 54.6 25

9 New Zealand 97.3 0.0 -1 47 Togo 68.4 0.0 -3

10 Netherlands 97.1 0.0 -1 48 Singapore 67.3 -0.1 -3
11 Peru 97.1 0.0 -1 49 Brazil 66.8 0.0 -3
12 South Africa 96.8 0.0 -1 50 Finland 65.5 0.0 -3
13 Italy 96.5 0.0 -1 51 Russia 64.4 21.3 7
14 Uruguay 96.5 0.0 -1 52 Japan 63.2 0.0 -4
15 France 96.3 0.0 -1 53 Cambodia 62.2 0.0 -4
16 Kenya 95.6 0.0 -1 54 Chile 54.0 0.1 -2
17 Mali 95.1 0.0 -1 55 Ethiopia 53.6 0.0 -2
18 United Arab Emirates 95.0 0.1 0 56 Greece 52.7 -0.1 -3
19 Pakistan 95.0 0.0 -2 57 Romania 50.4 0.0 -2
20 Indonesia 94.4 0.1 -1 58 Croatia 48.0 0.0 -2
21 Rwanda 92.1 0.0 -1 59 Ecuador 46.4 0.0 -2
22 Slovenia 92.1 21.2 19 60 United States 42.1 0.0 -1
23 Jordan 91.2 0.0 -2 61 Egypt 40.9 0.0 -1
24 Benin 90.2 0.0 -2 62 Niger 39.2 0.0 -1
25 Nigeria 88.9 0.0 -2 63 Bangladesh 37.8 0.0 -1
26 Thailand 88.9 0.0 -2 64 Malaysia 37.7 0.0 -1
27 Kazakhstan 88.4 0.0 -2 65 Morocco 37.5 0.0 -1
28 Ghana 87.9 0.0 -2 66 Belgium 36.0 0.1 -1
29 Saudi Arabia 84.9 33.4 25 67 Angola 35.4 0.0 -1
30 Qatar 84.5 0.0 -3 68 Chad 32.7 0.0 -1
31 Mexico 77.4 0.0 -3 69 Sweden 31.4 21.2 5
32 Paraguay 77.1 0.0 -3 70 Turkey 19.5 -0.1 -2
33 Germany 76.6 -0.1 -3 71 Burkina Faso 18.9 0.0 -2
34 Austria 75.4 0.0 -2 72 Guatemala 18.7 0.0 -2
35 Vietnam 75.3 0.0 -2 73 Tanzania 12.6 0.0 -1
36 Czech Republic 74.4 0.0 -1 74 Denmark 10.8 -0.1 -1
37 China 74.3 -0.1 -3 75 Azerbaijan 7.4 0.0 0
38 Spain 74.3 21.1 14 76 Myanmar 7.0 0.0 0

Key

Increase from Decrease from No change from

InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017
69
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Procurement

Rank Country Score Score Rank Rank Country Score Score Rank
(2020) (2020) change change (2020) (2020) change change
1 Mexico 94.9 17.6 23 39 Poland 74.7 -9.3 -28

2 Netherlands 94.4 0.0 -1 40 Philippines 74.6 36.8 32

3 France 94.2 9.9 7 41 Guatemala 73.9 -0.3 -9

4 Italy 94.1 8.8 4 42 Egypt 73.8 0.2 -7

5 Croatia 93.6 18.1 22 43 Ecuador 73.5 9.3 13

6 Slovak Republic 93.6 18.1 22 44 Romania 73.2 -0.5 -10

7 Chile 93.5 0.1 -5 45 Tanzania 71.7 0.4 -1

8 Canada 93.1 9.3 4 46 Jordan 71.6 -0.5 -5

9 Australia 93.0 7.3 -2 47 Kazakhstan 71.4 0.0 -4

10 Singapore 92.8 9.7 7 48 Bangladesh 67.7 0.0 2

11 New Zealand 92.7 9.9 7 49 Malaysia 66.8 -0.1 2

12 United Kingdom 92.0 -1.3 -9 50 Azerbaijan 66.4 8.8 12

13 Japan 92.0 27.7 42 51 Burkina Faso 65.6 -8.9 -20

14 Slovenia 91.2 8.8 5 52 Peru 64.7 -9.3 -19

15 Korea 90.8 18.5 24 53 Greece 64.2 -18.9 -37

16 Denmark 90.7 -0.5 -11 54 Vietnam 64.0 -9.4 -18

17 Belgium 88.7 -3.0 -13 55 Mali 63.4 -8.9 -15

18 Sweden 88.4 37.6 48 56 Nigeria 63.3 0.4 1

19 Portugal 86.5 0.0 -13 57 Tunisia 63.0 -18.4 -37

20 Czech Republic 84.5 8.8 6 58 Guinea 62.0 29.2 16

21 Spain 84.5 -0.4 -12 59 Indonesia 61.6 0.8 1

22 China 84.2 18.5 30 60 Turkey 60.1 -0.8 -1

23 South Africa 84.0 0.4 -10 61 Pakistan 59.7 -9.5 -13

24 Colombia 83.8 0.2 -10 62 Myanmar 56.5 9.2 5

25 Ireland 83.4 8.8 5 63 Germany 54.0 -0.5 0

26 Uruguay 83.3 0.0 -11 64 Senegal 53.2 -27.9 -43

27 Kenya 82.6 10.1 11 65 Austria 53.2 -0.5 -1

28 Russia 82.4 9.3 9 66 United States 53.0 8.6 2

29 Morocco 81.9 10.7 16 67 Finland 52.3 8.8 2

30 Argentina 80.9 18.3 28 68 Ethiopia 51.9 9.7 2

31 Saudi Arabia 80.7 9.1 11 69 Angola 51.6 0.4 -4

32 Ghana 79.9 9.7 14 70 Benin 51.2 -8.9 -9

33 United Arab Emirates 79.9 9.7 14 71 Togo 47.1 -18.2 -17

34 Cote d'Ivoire 79.6 0.4 -12 72 Cambodia 46.9 -18.7 -19

35 Rwanda 78.3 0.4 -12 73 Qatar 40.0 0.0 -2

36 Thailand 78.3 9.2 13 74 Niger 30.9 0.4 1

37 India 75.0 0.1 -8 75 Paraguay 18.8 -18.6 -2

38 Brazil 74.8 -1.4 -13 76 Chad 10.0 -8.9 0

Key

Increase from Decrease from No change from

InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017
70
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Activity

Rank Country Score Score Rank Rank Country Score Score Rank
(2020) (2020) change change (2020) (2020) change change
1 Jordan 80.9 -5.6 1 39 Tunisia 34.9 -0.6 -3

2 Mali 77.9 -11.7 -1 40 Kenya 34.7 -3.7 -7

3 Paraguay 73.7 28.0 20 41 Indonesia 33.9 9.3 9

4 Tanzania 71.2 -12.9 -1 42 Cote d'Ivoire 33.4 -2.4 -7

5 Ghana 65.9 -4.7 3 43 Singapore 33.2 11.4 13

6 Vietnam 65.1 35.9 37 44 United Arab Emirates 33.1 6.2 4

7 Australia 65.0 -9.3 0 45 Portugal 31.7 -16.8 -23

8 Turkey 63.7 5.5 4 46 New Zealand 30.5 -11.8 -17

9 Togo 56.7 -2.9 2 47 Myanmar 30.4 6.9 5

10 Senegal 54.9 -0.7 4 48 Belgium 28.1 0.4 -2

11 Chile 53.5 -21.6 -5 49 United Kingdom 27.8 -12.6 -19

12 Colombia 53.4 4.8 9 50 Bangladesh 27.6 9.7 15

13 Pakistan 51.7 30.1 45 51 Egypt 27.5 1.2 -2

14 Slovak Republic 51.6 -24.8 -9 52 Spain 26.2 5.2 7

15 Niger 50.6 -1.7 1 53 Finland 25.4 -2.7 -8

16 Chad 49.4 -0.3 3 54 Malaysia 25.2 -17.8 -26

17 Peru 47.6 -29.9 -13 55 Sweden 24.9 6.5 7

18 Guatemala 46.7 -10.2 -5 56 Netherlands 24.5 -8.4 -17

19 Ethiopia 45.8 -6.0 -2 57 Brazil 23.4 7.2 12

20 Azerbaijan 45.2 -4.8 -2 58 Kazakhstan 23.3 1.2 -3

21 Philippines 44.9 1.4 5 59 Italy 21.7 3.8 7

22 Guinea 44.9 0.8 2 60 China 21.4 -0.2 -3

23 Benin 44.2 -4.4 -3 61 South Africa 21.4 -10.2 -21

24 Slovenia 42.2 -13.3 -9 62 Greece 21.3 4.3 5

25 Burkina Faso 41.7 1.3 6 63 Romania 20.6 -9.9 -22

26 Ireland 41.2 7.7 12 64 France 18.9 -0.2 -3

27 Morocco 41.0 -28.8 -18 65 Czech Republic 18.6 0.4 -2

28 Thailand 40.2 20.2 32 66 Poland 18.2 0.1 -2

29 Croatia 39.7 -23.1 -19 67 Mexico 17.0 5.4 5

30 Rwanda 39.4 -0.2 2 68 Denmark 16.3 -6.0 -14

31 Qatar 38.5 -5.1 -6 69 India 16.2 0.2 1

32 Uruguay 37.8 -5.4 -5 70 Saudi Arabia 15.8 -6.6 -17

33 Ecuador 37.1 13.5 18 71 Japan 13.0 3.4 3

34 Angola 37.0 7.5 8 72 Austria 12.2 -4.2 -4

35 Nigeria 36.8 0.4 -1 73 Russia 11.9 1.2 0

36 Argentina 36.7 8.5 8 74 Korea 11.5 -1.8 -3

37 Canada 36.1 2.5 0 75 United States 10.1 0.6 0

38 Cambodia 35.2 7.7 9 76 Germany 10.0 0.9 0

Key Activity represents the level of infrastructure investment and deals closed in the
last five years. It is measured as a percentage of GDP, so that large economies
Increase from Decrease from No change from do not dominate the rankings. As a result, smaller economies with larger
InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017 infrastructure investment relative to their size tend to rank higher.
71
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Funding capacity

Rank Country Score Score Rank Rank Country Score Score Rank
(2020) (2020) change change (2020) (2020) change change
1 Denmark 84.2 3.0 0 39 Philippines 36.9 3.7 1

2 Qatar 84.1 3.1 0 40 Indonesia 36.5 5.8 6

3 Singapore 84.1 3.1 0 41 Colombia 36.1 2.7 -3

4 Ireland 83.7 12.5 8 42 India 34.5 4.5 6

5 United States 83.6 4.5 1 43 Croatia 34.3 1.6 -2

6 Australia 81.5 2.3 -1 44 Azerbaijan 31.9 -3.0 -7

7 Netherlands 79.6 3.7 0 45 Morocco 31.5 -0.7 -3

8 Sweden 79.5 0.0 -4 46 Paraguay 31.4 -0.1 -2

9 Germany 76.4 2.7 -1 47 South Africa 30.7 0.0 0

10 Austria 75.7 3.0 -1 48 Guatemala 29.6 -0.1 1

11 Finland 75.1 2.9 0 49 Turkey 28.5 -4.9 -10

12 Canada 74.7 2.2 -2 50 Greece 28.0 13.5 26

13 New Zealand 71.5 2.6 1 51 Vietnam 28.0 7.3 15

14 United Arab Emirates 69.0 0.3 1 52 Bangladesh 27.1 0.4 -1

15 United Kingdom 68.5 -1.1 -2 53 Brazil 26.9 2.6 0

16 France 68.2 2.7 1 54 Cote d'Ivoire 24.1 -0.8 -2

17 Belgium 68.0 2.0 -1 55 Senegal 23.4 0.9 0

18 Korea 63.1 1.8 0 56 Kenya 23.2 7.4 19

19 Japan 59.2 0.7 1 57 Guinea 23.1 0.7 0

20 Czech Republic 56.9 3.4 1 58 Tanzania 22.9 0.7 2

21 Saudi Arabia 54.4 -4.2 -2 59 Ethiopia 22.7 -0.4 -5

22 Slovenia 52.8 9.4 6 60 Cambodia 22.2 -0.1 -2

23 Slovak Republic 52.2 0.1 -1 61 Nigeria 22.0 0.3 1

24 Chile 52.1 1.2 -1 62 Rwanda 21.8 -0.5 -3

25 Spain 51.2 5.7 0 63 Jordan 21.8 -0.6 -7

26 China 50.5 -0.2 -2 64 Mali 21.8 0.7 0

27 Italy 47.4 2.1 -1 65 Benin 21.5 0.9 2

28 Portugal 47.0 15.1 15 66 Niger 21.3 0.0 -3

29 Poland 46.9 3.3 -2 67 Chad 21.1 0.2 -2

30 Malaysia 42.8 0.8 -1 68 Ecuador 19.8 -0.6 0

31 Myanmar 41.5 1.1 -1 69 Tunisia 19.8 -7.4 -19

32 Peru 41.1 2.1 0 70 Togo 19.7 0.8 0

33 Mexico 40.6 3.2 2 71 Egypt 19.6 0.7 0

34 Thailand 40.4 1.8 -1 72 Burkina Faso 18.5 0.1 1

35 Uruguay 39.7 0.3 -4 73 Ghana 18.1 -4.0 -12

36 Kazakhstan 38.0 0.1 -2 74 Pakistan 17.0 -0.4 0

37 Romania 37.7 1.2 -1 75 Angola 16.6 -3.0 -6

38 Russia 37.3 6.2 7 76 Argentina 12.9 -5.7 -4

Key

Increase from Decrease from No change from

InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017
72
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Financial markets

Rank Country Score Score Rank Rank Country Score Score Rank
(2020) (2020) change change (2020) (2020) change change
1 United States 91.0 0.8 0 39 Czech Republic 33.4 0.6 0

2 Japan 84.4 2.2 0 40 Tunisia 32.5 -0.6 -2

3 Sweden 78.3 1.6 2 41 Poland 32.3 -0.5 -1

4 United Kingdom 77.5 0.6 0 42 Russia 31.5 3.1 10

5 Korea 77.1 2.2 1 43 Slovak Republic 30.8 2.0 6

6 Canada 75.6 4.7 3 44 Colombia 30.2 -0.3 -1

7 China 73.2 -0.7 0 45 Greece 29.9 -2.9 -4

8 Thailand 72.3 0.4 0 46 Azerbaijan 29.1 0.2 1

9 Finland 71.8 3.7 3 47 Croatia 29.0 -0.2 -3

10 South Africa 70.8 -9.8 -7 48 Mexico 28.4 -0.3 3

11 Singapore 70.0 0.3 0 49 Kenya 28.2 -1.0 -4

12 Australia 67.9 -1.9 -2 50 Peru 28.1 0.0 3

13 Denmark 63.5 1.6 0 51 Slovenia 27.9 0.9 5

14 Netherlands 62.8 1.0 0 52 Bangladesh 27.3 -0.2 3

15 Malaysia 61.2 0.7 0 53 Cote d'Ivoire 26.9 -2.0 -7

16 France 58.9 2.0 0 54 Paraguay 26.7 0.7 3

17 Germany 55.8 4.0 2 55 Rwanda 26.5 -1.0 -1

18 New Zealand 55.6 -0.2 -1 56 Togo 26.4 -2.3 -6

19 Chile 53.5 3.3 1 57 Senegal 26.1 -2.7 -9

20 Spain 52.5 -1.4 -2 58 Egypt 25.6 0.9 3

21 Italy 48.8 -0.7 0 59 Pakistan 25.2 1.7 4

22 Belgium 48.7 2.4 0 60 Guinea 24.5 6.1 12

23 Vietnam 46.7 2.9 2 61 Guatemala 24.3 1.3 3

24 India 46.3 3.6 4 62 Niger 23.6 -2.0 -4

25 Qatar 45.2 -0.4 -1 63 Ethiopia 23.3 -2.0 -4

26 Portugal 44.1 -1.8 -3 64 Ecuador 22.9 0.8 2

27 Austria 43.5 1.6 2 65 Uruguay 22.7 1.2 3

28 United Arab Emirates 43.1 -0.5 -1 66 Mali 22.3 -1.5 -4

29 Cambodia 42.0 3.1 3 67 Benin 21.6 -3.5 -7

30 Turkey 41.9 3.3 3 68 Kazakhstan 20.8 -1.0 -1

31 Myanmar 41.7 0.6 -1 69 Burkina Faso 20.7 -1.9 -4

32 Saudi Arabia 40.1 -3.7 -6 70 Ghana 20.6 0.1 -1

33 Jordan 40.1 0.6 -2 71 Tanzania 19.5 1.7 2

34 Brazil 39.6 2.2 1 72 Romania 19.2 -0.8 -2

35 Morocco 38.7 1.3 1 73 Argentina 19.0 1.9 2

36 Philippines 38.2 2.7 1 74 Nigeria 18.3 -1.1 -3

37 Ireland 35.7 -1.8 -3 75 Chad 15.7 -1.5 -1

38 Indonesia 33.7 1.0 4 76 Angola 13.7 -3.3 0

Key

Increase from Decrease from No change from

InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017 InfraCompass 2017
73
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

7. Country Profiles

74
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

The following country profiles have been developed to give

readers insights into the InfraCompass findings for the
individual 81 countries. Profiles are provided in alphabetical
order.
Note:

• ‘Top performing metrics’ are the three metrics with the

highest score out of 100 for that country. Note metrics that
are ‘yes’ or ‘no’ responses to the in-country surveys are
excluded from ‘Top performing metrics’.

• ‘Opportunities to grow’ for each country are the three metrics

with the lowest weighted score out of 100. Note metrics
that are ‘yes’ or ‘no’ responses to the in-country surveys are
included in ‘Opportunities to grow’.

• Pacific Island countries (Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Samoa,

Solomon Islands and Vanuatu) were not included in the
ranking due to the high number of interpolated data, which
resulted from data coverage limitations. Therefore, the
country profiles for these countries only show the driver
scores.

For further details on each country, including guidance on how

to improve identified metrics,
please visit https://infracompass.gihub.org.

75
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Angola

Overall performance Angola at a glance

Recent investment activity in Angola has improved significantly as Angola
has prioritised the repair, expansion and modernisation of its infrastructure
as a central element of post-civil war reconstruction and economic
development. To improve the efficiency and quality of this investment, Angola
could reform its financial markets, regulatory frameworks and infrastructure $3,038 30.1 million
governance. It trails all but a single country in InfraCompass 2020 across all GDP per capita Population
three drivers. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 75 17 7.81% of GDP 2.5% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 76 32 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 71 36

Planning 67 1 35

Procurement 69 4 52

Activity 34 8 37 40.2 $20 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 72 7 17 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 76 14 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 77.7/100 75.4/100

Infrastructure investment Cost to start a business Financial stability
Investment in infrastructure is a priority for According to the World Bank, the cost of Angola’s financial stability is satisfactory.
Angola, at 10.8% of GDP per annum, one starting a business in Angola is equal to 11% However, it trails other Lower Middle Income
of the highest investment rates across all of income per capita, easing the entry of new Countries which have an average score 83.
InfraCompass 2020 countries. The COVID-19 firms. The long-term impacts of the COVID-19
pandemic may impact these efforts. pandemic could affect financial stability.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Angola Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 No 0/100
Transparency in public procurement Published project pipeline Recovery rate
Until recently, Angola did not make public Angola does not currently have an According to the World Bank, the recovery rate
procurement notices available online. However, infrastructure pipeline of projects. The for insolvency in Angola is low. This is due to a
the new National Procurement Portal now does addition of an infrastructure pipeline could deficiency of bankruptcy and insolvency laws.
so and this metric is expected to improve in help provide infrastructure participants with a Improving the recovery rate could encourage
the future. Further transparency improvements clear indication of prospective and confirmed investors to provide finance, as they are more
could encourage more participation and infrastructure activity. likely to receive at least a portion back from
competition, which drive value for money. even failed investments.

76
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

ANGOLA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 91.5 Population (million, 2019) 30.1 Unemployment rate (2019) 7.2%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 3,038 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 66.0% Inflation rate (2019) 17.2%
GDP growth rate (annual, -0.3% Gross Government Debt (% of 95.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.33
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -16.1% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 26 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 42.7
(annual, 2019) 2008)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 43.5^ Cost to start a business 77.7
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 32.1^ Dealing with construction 41.7
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 0 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 23.3
network sectors
Rule of law 29 Regulatory (including 30 Registering property 0
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 0 Strength of insolvency 0 Time required to start a business 20.4
framework
Political stability and absence 44.7 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 100
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 0 Private infrastructure investment 2
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 35 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 42.5^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 50 Value of closed infrastructure 3.5
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 56
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
3.9 7.1
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 25.6 Financing through local equity 6.5^ Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 23.2 Stocks traded 15^
Summary credit rating 26 Financial depth 11.7
Financial stability 75.4

Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

77
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Argentina

Overall performance Argentina at a glance

The quality of Argentina’s infrastructure procurement processes improved
significantly helping to bring better value for money and quality outcomes from
investment. Regulatory reforms have also led to a marked improvement in the
ease of starting a business, encouraging investment and competition from new
suppliers. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the continued $9,888 45.1 million
threat of a sovereign debt crisis present key challenges for Argentina’s ability to GDP per capita Population
deliver future infrastructure projects. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 43 6 52 2.3% of GDP 1.5% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 60 50 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 52 2 62

Planning 46 25 69

Procurement 30 28 81

Activity 36 8 37 68.3 $526 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 73 5 13 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 73 2 19 2019)

Top performing metrics

90/100 87.9/100 75/100

Cost to start a business Financial stability Transparency in public procurement
According to the World Bank, the average cost Despite an ongoing economic recession Argentina’s public procurement notices are
of starting a business in Argentina is 5% of and the increasing risk of a sovereign debt made available online and tender documents
income per capita, down from 23% in 2013. crisis, financial stability in Argentina has been transparently detail procurement procedures.
Regulatory reforms and public funding aimed satisfactory. Basel indicators like the minimum The transparency of the process encourages
at promoting entrepreneurial projects have capital adequacy ratio and the domestic more participation and competition, which can
helped reduce establishment costs. credit-to-GDP gap are at satisfactory levels. drive value for money.
The long-term impacts of the COVID-19
pandemic is a concern.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Argentina Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 No 0.8/100
Dealing with construction permits Market sounding and/or assessment Stocks traded
According to the World Bank, it takes an According to the World Bank, there is no At 0.9% of GDP, Argentina’s value of stocks
average of 318 days to deal with construction formal requirement for a market sounding traded is far lower than the Upper Middle
permits. As most infrastructure projects require process. Adding one could allow the Income Countries’ average of 26% of GDP. As
construction approval, expediting this process government to determine if there is an this indicator measures the liquidity of equities,
could encourage investment in infrastructure interest from investors and lenders to provide it is important to infrastructure investors to
and help reduce delays. commercial financing for projects. know they can exit investments at appropriate
points.
78
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

ARGENTINA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 445.5 Population (million, 2019) 45.1 Unemployment rate (2019) 10.0%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 9,888 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 92.0% Inflation rate (2019) 54.4%
GDP growth rate (annual, -3.1% Gross Government Debt (% of 93.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.69
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -15.2% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 12 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 41.2
(annual, 2019) 2017)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 18.3 Cost to start a business 90
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 56.1 Dealing with construction 0
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 19.2 Product market regulation, 35.6 Quality of land administration 45
network sectors
Rule of law 45.2 Regulatory (including 45.1 Registering property 54
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 53.3 Strength of insolvency 59.4 Time required to start a business 74.6
framework
Political stability and absence 50.3 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 50.4^ Infrastructure investment 63.7
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 10.7
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 27 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 64.6^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 56 Value of closed infrastructure 7.7
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 74
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
12.6 7.7
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 26.9 Financing through local equity 32 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 9.4 Stocks traded 0.8
Summary credit rating 12 Financial depth 24.2
Financial stability 87.9
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

79
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Australia

Overall performance Australia at a glance

Australia’s strong credit rating and transparent public procurement processes
provide favourable conditions for investment in infrastructure projects. To
reduce investment uncertainty, Australia could look to improve procurement
processes to shorten the duration and minimise cost and risk. The long-term
impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Australia’s fiscal position may impact $53,825 25.6 million
borrowing costs. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 10 1 79 3.8% of GDP 0.3% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 9 3 76 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 11 4 86

Planning 2 99

Procurement 9 2 93

Activity 7 65 79.2 $15,547 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 6 1 81 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 12 2 68 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 98.6/100

Transparency in public procurement Summary credit rating Cost to start a business
Australia’s public procurement notices are Australia is AAA-rated by four international According to the World Bank, the average cost
made available online and tender documents credit rating agencies, with a stable outlook, of starting a businesses is 0.7% of income per
transparently detail procurement procedures. one of only four InfraCompass 2020 countries. capita, easing the entry of new firms.
A transparent process encourages more Australia’s high credit worthiness provides
participation and competition, which drive favourable borrowing costs for infrastructure
value for money. investments, but could be impacted by the
COVID-19 pandemic.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Australia Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

24.7/100 32.7/100 67.3/100

Long term GDP growth trend Average procurement duration – Gross government debt
transaction RFP
The long-term GDP growth rate for Australia Australia has one of the highest durations Australia’s gross government debt rose to 42%
is projected at 2.6% compared to the 20 from announcement of a tender to contract of GDP in 2019, a figure which may increase
year historical average of 3.2%. Long-term award at 43 months, greater than the High further due to the impact of the COVID-19
growth rates signal a country’s capacity to Income Countries average of 28.5 months. pandemic on Australia’s fiscal position.
fund infrastructure from future growth. The Lengthy procurement durations add costs,
COVID-19 pandemic may impact GDP growth risks and down time to contractors bidding
trends. for and investing in infrastructure projects.

80
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

AUSTRALIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 1376.3 Population (million, 2019) 25.6 Unemployment rate (2019) 5.3%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 53,825 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 86.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.6%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.7% Gross Government Debt (% of 42.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.71
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -4.6% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 100 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 35.8
(annual, 2019) 2014)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 38.8 Cost to start a business 98.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 75.2 Dealing with construction 61.8
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 82.7 Product market regulation, 69.1 Quality of land administration 65
network sectors
Rule of law 84.3 Regulatory (including 88.6 Registering property 96
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 46.7 Strength of insolvency 68.8 Time required to start a business 95.6
framework
Political stability and absence 66.3 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 32.7 Infrastructure investment 41.6
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 89.4
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 94 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 43.1
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 79 Value of closed infrastructure 86
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 86
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
68.7 67.1
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 67.3 Financing through local equity 69.3 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 24.7 Stocks traded 49
Summary credit rating 100 Financial depth 78.9
Financial stability 94
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

81
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Austria

Overall performance Austria at a glance

Austria’s infrastructure governance and funding capacity both rank highly among
countries in InfraCompass2020. Its strong credit rating and high GDP per capita, place
Austria in a good position to fund new infrastructure investment. In addition, the quality of
Austria’s regulatory frameworks and governance systems promote competition among
suppliers and provide strong protections against insolvency. Despite strong funding
capacity, private infrastructure investment and value of PPP infrastructure investment $50,023 9 million
remain modest. To encourage private investment Austria could start publishing GDP per capita Population
procurement guidelines and improving PPP contract management.
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
rm
)
00
6)

ad
r
de
i ng

rfo
ch
(/7

(/1
)

l le
g
20

n
irin

pe
erg
nk

nte

ba
nk

ore

Drivers
p

p
Ra

Gl o
Em
Ra

Co
As

To
(20

Sc

Governance 5 1 81 — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 20 1 70 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 35 5 74

Planning 34 2 75

Procurement 65 1 53

Activity 72 4 12 89 $102 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 10 1 76 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 27 2 43 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 96/100 92.8/100

Transparency in public procurement Summary credit rating Financial stability
Austria’s public procurement notices are Austria’s institutional strength, stable financial The International Monetary Fund’s 2019
made available online and tender documents system and high GDP per capita has helped Financial System Stability Assessment
transparently detail procurement procedures. it maintain a summary credit rating of AA+ concluded that a well-capitalised banking
The transparency of the process encourages from major agencies. This lowers the cost of system, robust regulatory framework and
more participation and competition, which can borrowing and as a result the cost of funding prudential policy actions had further lowered
drive value for money. investment in infrastructure. risks in an already resilient system. The impact
of the COVID-19 pandemic is a concern.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Austria Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No 1.1/100
Published infrastructure procurement Market sounding and/or Value of closed PPP infrastructure
guidelines assessment deals
Austria does not publish guidelines for the There is no formal requirement for a market The value of closed PPP infrastructure deals
procurement of infrastructure projects. sounding process for infrastructure projects as a proportion of GDP is the third lowest out
Publishing guidelines makes contractors aware in Austria. Adding one could allow the of the High Income Countries, at only 0.006%.
of the government’s processes, expectations government to better determine if there is This is, significantly lower than the High
and requirements. This improves transparency interest from investors and lenders to provide Income Countries’ average of 0.11%. A low
and helps achieve better value for money. commercial financing for projects. value may reflect a preference for traditional
delivery models.

82
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

AUSTRIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 447.7 Population (million, 2019) 9 Unemployment rate (2019) 4.6%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 50,023 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 58.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.5%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.6% Gross Government Debt (% of 71.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.86
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -2.6% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 96 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 30.5
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 31.2 Cost to start a business 90.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 66.6 Dealing with construction 29.6
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 79.9 Product market regulation, 64.7 Quality of land administration 76.7
network sectors
Rule of law 87.5 Regulatory (including 80.9 Registering property 81.7
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 60 Strength of insolvency 68.8 Time required to start a business 53.6
framework
Political stability and absence 65.3 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 40^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 1.9
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 68 Published procurement No Value of closed PPP 1.1
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 77 Value of closed infrastructure 5.9
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 53
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
63.8 40.5
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 44.6 Financing through local equity 59.7 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 10.3 Stocks traded 7.9
Summary credit rating 96 Financial depth 57
Financial stability 92.8
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

83
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Azerbaijan

Overall performance Azerbaijan at a glance

Azerbaijan has the most improved regulatory framework of any InfraCompass
2020 country. Azerbaijan’s regulatory frameworks support the creation of
businesses and this encourages new investment and promotes competition
among suppliers. Despite increasing investment, Azerbaijan could improve
project planning. The introduction of a project pipeline or national infrastructure $4,689 10.1 million
plan could help focus investment and deliver better quality outcomes. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 54 3 47 5.6% of GDP 0.4% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 28 27 64 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 9 9 88

Planning 75 7

Procurement 50 12 66

Activity 20 2 45 77.4 $88 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 44 7 32 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 46 1 29 2019)

Top performing metrics

97.6/100 97.5/100 96/100

Cost to start a business Infrastructure investment Registering property
According to the World Bank, the average Investment in infrastructure is a priority for According to the World Bank, it takes 4.5 days
cost of starting a business is 1% of income Azerbaijan, at 8% of GDP per annum, one of to register a property in Azerbaijan, shorter
per capita, which is lower than the average for the highest investment rates in InfraCompass than the 20 day average for Upper Middle
Upper Middle Income Countries. This eases the 2020. It is unclear if the COVID-19 pandemic Income Countries. This is due to Azerbaijan
entry of new firms. will impact these efforts. increasing the coverage of its land and
property register and digital plans.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Azerbaijan Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Published project pipeline Published infrastructure plan Market sounding and/or assessment
Azerbaijan does not currently have an Azerbaijan does not have a national or sub- According to the World Bank, there is no
infrastructure pipeline of projects. The national infrastructure plan. The addition formal requirement for a market sounding
addition of an infrastructure pipeline could of an infrastructure plan could highlight process in Azerbaijan. Adding one could allow
help provide infrastructure participants with a infrastructure challenges and opportunities the government to determine if there is an
clear indication of prospective and confirmed for investment, as well as detail the interest from investors and lenders to provide
infrastructure activity. government’s planned responses. commercial financing for projects.

84
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

AZERBAIJAN OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 47.2 Population (million, 2019) 10.1 Unemployment rate (2019) 5.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 4,689 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 56.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.8%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.7% Gross Government Debt (% of 20.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.59
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -0.7% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 50 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 26.6
(annual, 2019) 2005)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 56.1 Cost to start a business 97.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 63.9 Dealing with construction 63.2
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 39.7 Product market regulation, 64.6^ Quality of land administration 75
network sectors
Rule of law 38 Regulatory (including 42.4 Registering property 96
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 0 Strength of insolvency 84.4 Time required to start a business 92.3
framework
Political stability and absence 38.4 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 97.5
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 20.9
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 16 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 33.2^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 38 Value of closed infrastructure 29.2^
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 32
assessment?
Environmental impact No
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
6 10
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 84.6 Financing through local equity 45.6 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 21.4 Stocks traded 27.4^
Summary credit rating 50 Financial depth 28.6
Financial stability 82.7
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

85
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Bangladesh

Overall performance Bangladesh at a glance

Investment activity in Bangladesh has recently improved. There has been
an increase in both the value of PPP deals closed over the last five years
and public infrastructure investment. To continue improving the quality of
its investment, Bangladesh could reform its regulatory markets, permits
and infrastructure governance. It could also publish a pipeline of upcoming $1,906 166.6 million
projects, reduce the time taken to reach financial close on major deals, and GDP per capita Population
conduct post completion reviews. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 70 30 4.5% of GDP 1.9% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 70 44 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 68 3 42

Planning 63 1 38

Procurement 48 2 68

Activity 50 15 28 51.1 $416 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 52 1 27 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 52 3 27 2019)

Top performing metrics

82.5/100 77.7/100 72.9/100

Cost to start a business Financial stability Gross government debt
According to the World Bank, the cost of Bangladesh’s financial stability is satisfactory. Bangladesh’s gross government debt grew to
starting a business is 8% of income per capita. However, it is less stable than the Lower 34% of GDP in 2019. This remains lower than
While lower than the 17% average for Lower Middle Income Countries average of 83. A the Lower Middle Income Countries’ average
Middle Income Countries, lowering costs stable financial system facilitates the smooth of 53% but the COVID-19 pandemic may affect
further could ease the entry of new firms. flow of funds between infrastructure assets this.
and investors. The impact of the COVID-19
pandemic is a concern.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Bangladesh Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 No No
Published infrastructure plan Published project pipeline Post-completion reviews
Bangladesh does not have a national or Bangladesh does not currently publish Bangladesh does not undertake post-
sub-national infrastructure plan. The addition an infrastructure pipeline of projects. The completion reviews for infrastructure projects.
of an infrastructure plan could highlight addition of an infrastructure pipeline could The implementation of post-completion
infrastructure challenges and opportunities for help provide infrastructure participants with a reviews could help determine whether projects
investment, as well as detail the government’s clear indication of prospective and confirmed have achieved their objectives efficiently, and
planned responses. infrastructure activity. identify areas for improvement.

86
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

BANGLADESH OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 317.5 Population (million, 2019) 166.6 Unemployment rate (2019) 4.3%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 1,906 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 37.0% Inflation rate (2019) 5.5%
GDP growth rate (annual, 7.8% Gross Government Debt (% of 35.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.37
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 8.9% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 40 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 32.4
(annual, 2019) 2016)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 48.7 Cost to start a business 82.5
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 47.9 Dealing with construction 10.9
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 29.1 Product market regulation, 54.2^ Quality of land administration 21.7
network sectors
Rule of law 37.2 Regulatory (including 33.5 Registering property 0
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 33.3 Strength of insolvency 25 Time required to start a business 56.9
framework
Political stability and absence 32.8 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 0 Infrastructure investment 55.1
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 11.2
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 51 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 26.3^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 66 Value of closed infrastructure 18
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 39
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
2.4 22.6
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 72.9 Financing through local equity 43.4 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 62.6 Stocks traded 5.3
Summary credit rating 40 Financial depth 31
Financial stability 77.7
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

87
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Belgium

Overall performance Belgium at a glance

Belgium’s regulatory framework and permits support the creation of businesses
and provides tax incentives for investors. Combined with strong financial and
legal systems, this environment encourages new infrastructure investment
and promotes competition between suppliers. To increase the efficiency
of infrastructure investment, Belgium could look to develop a national $45,176 11.5 million
infrastructure plan and establish a pipeline of projects. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 29 60 — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 17 72 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 33 5 75

Planning 66 1 36

Procurement 17 13 89

Activity 48 2 28 87.3 $1,327 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 17 1 68 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 22 49 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 89.4/100 89.4/100

Transparency in public procurement Recovery rate Registering property
Belgium’s public procurement notices are World Bank data estimates the recovery rate According to the World Bank, the cost of
made available online and tender documents for investors in Belgium to be 89.4 cents on the starting a business in Belgium is equal to 5.3%
detail both procurement procedures and dollar, well above the 70.2 cent average in High of income per capita. This is slightly above
shortlisting criteria. Transparent processes Income Countries. The recovery rate reflects the 4.7% average for High Income Countries.
encourage more participants and competition, the strength of creditor protections. Lowering costs to start a business could ease
which drives value for money and improves the entry of new firms.
infrastructure quality.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Belgium Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 No No
Published infrastructure plan Published project pipeline Post-completion reviews
Belgium does not have a national or sub- Belgium does not currently have an Belgium does not undertake post-completion
national infrastructure plan. The addition infrastructure pipeline of projects. The reviews for infrastructure projects. The
of an infrastructure plan could highlight addition of an infrastructure pipeline could implementation of post-completion reviews
infrastructure challenges and opportunities for help provide infrastructure participants with a could help determine whether projects have
investment, as well as detail the government’s clear indication of prospective and confirmed achieved their objectives efficiently and
planned responses. infrastructure activity. identify areas for improvement.

88
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

BELGIUM OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 517.6 Population (million, 2019) 11.5 Unemployment rate (2019) 6.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 4,689 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 98.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.5%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.2% Gross Government Debt (% of 101.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.78
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -3.3% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 88 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 27.7
(annual, 2019) 2005)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 36.9 Cost to start a business 89.4
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 80.4 Dealing with construction 32.8
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 89.4 Product market regulation, 63.6 Quality of land administration 73.3
network sectors
Rule of law 77.4 Regulatory (including 74.7 Registering property 56.2
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 43.3 Strength of insolvency 71.9 Time required to start a business 89
framework
Political stability and absence 56.9 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 0 Infrastructure investment 40^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 24.6
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 39 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 15.8
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 79 Value of closed infrastructure 32.3
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 50
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
57.6 32.8
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 20.9 Financing through local equity 67.3 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 9.8 Stocks traded 18.7^
Summary credit rating 88 Financial depth 70.2
Financial stability 88.6
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

89
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Benin

Overall performance Benin at a glance

Benin has seen healthy progress over the past 20 years. With average long-term
growth rates above 4% and relatively low government debt to GDP at 30%, it is
not surprising that their current infrastructure investment is high at 6% of GDP.
Benin is a strong performer in permits and financial market drivers, underpinned
by low costs and short set up times to start businesses. To increase efficiency,
Benin should seek to lower the time to register property and increase the $1,217 11.8 million
transparency in the procurement process. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 53 48 6.3% of GDP 3.9% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 65 48 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 59 4 56

Planning 24 2 90

Procurement 70 9 51

Activity 23 3 44 40.2 —
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 63 22 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 67 7 22 2019)

Top performing metrics

93.1/100 81.2/100 77/100

Cost to start a business Time required to start a business Financial stability
According to the World Bank, the cost of According to the World Bank, the time required According to the World Bank, the stability
starting a business in Benin is equal to 3.5% of to start a business in Benin is 8.5 days, below of Benin’s financial sector remains strong,
income per capita, the second lowest of Low the Low Income Countries’ average of 18 however the impacts of the COVID-19
Income Countries, easing the entry of new days. Shorter times to set up businesses can pandemic may negatively affect this figure.
firms. persuade businesses to set up in a country, The stability of the financial system facilitates
including new infrastructure entities. the smooth flow of funds between parties,
improving the supply of capital for projects.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Benin Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 0/100 1.6/100

Transparency in public procurement Registering property GDP per capita
Benin does not make public procurement It takes 120 days to register a property Despite more than doubling over the past 20
notices available online that detail both in Benin, the longest duration of the Low years, Benin’s GDP per capita is still relatively
procurement procedures and shortlisting Income Countries. As infrastructure projects low at USD 1,217. Yet, this still represents the
criteria. A more transparent process could often involve property rights, the longer the highest value of the Low Income Countries,
encourage more participation and competition, time to register properties, the more costly and Benin can expect to graduate to Lower
which drive value for money. and risky the project. Middle Income in the foreseeable future.

90
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

BENIN OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 14.4 Population (million, 2019) 11.8 Unemployment rate (2019) 2.0%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 1,217 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 47.0% Inflation rate (2019) -0.3%
GDP growth rate (annual, 6.6% Gross Government Debt (% of 41.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.22
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -2% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 32 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 47.8
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 25.9 Cost to start a business 93.1
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 46.2 Dealing with construction 72.1
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 23.9 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 30
network sectors
Rule of law 36.5 Regulatory (including 43.2 Registering property 0
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 26.7 Strength of insolvency 56.2 Time required to start a business 81.2
framework
Political stability and absence 47.8 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 70.6
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 0 Private infrastructure investment 34.7^
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 36 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 42.5^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 53 Value of closed infrastructure 28.9
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 45
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
1.6 11.1
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 67.9 Financing through local equity 37.3 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 41 Stocks traded 15^
Summary credit rating 32 Financial depth 17.2
Financial stability 77
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

91
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Brazil

Overall performance Brazil at a glance

Brazil’s regulatory environment supports the creation of businesses and
provides a high level of protection for insolvency. This promotes competition
between suppliers which, coupled with a resilient financial sector, helps to
attract capital supply for infrastructure projects. The funding capacity of the
Brazilian government together with slow economic growth indicate potential $8,797 210 million
challenges in publicly funding future major infrastructure projects. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 46 2 50 2.9% of GDP 1.9% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 49 4 56 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 43 10 69

Planning 49 3 67

Procurement 38 13 75

Activity 57 12 23 65.5 $3,656 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 53 27 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 34 1 40 2019)

Top performing metrics

92.8/100 92.7/100 81.2/100

Cost to start a business Financial stability Strength of insolvency framework
According to the World Bank, the average cost Despite the recent recession, Brazil’s financial Brazil has a solid framework for reorganisation
of starting a business is 4.2% of income per sector has remained resilient. The International and bankruptcy which governs formal
capita, substantially lower than the Americas Monetary Fund notes that Brazil has prudent insolvency. This ensures investors have
average of 31.4% of income per capita. Brazil lending standards, high interest margins and appropriate protection and helps attract
is the second cheapest Americas country in fees that support profitability and help banks investment for potential infrastructure
which to start a business, trailing only Chile (at to remain liquid. The long-term impact of the projects.
2.7% of income per capita). COVID-19 pandemic is a concern.

For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the Brazil Country Page on the InfraCompass website.
Opportunities to grow

0/100 No No
Dealing with construction permits Environmental impact analysis Market sounding and/or assessment
According to the World Bank, in Brazil it According to the World Bank, Brazil does not have According to the World Bank, there is no
takes 338 days to obtain a construction a standardized requirement for environmental regulated requirement to undertake market
permit, one of the longest timeframes among impact assessment. However, Brazil has policy soundings in Brazil. Adding one could allow
InfraCompass countries. Expediting this guidelines and a systematic framework in the government to determine if there is an
process could significantly impact investment place to determine and mitigate the potential interest from investors and lenders to provide
in infrastructure by helping to reduce delays. environmental impact of all new infrastructure commercial financing for projects.
developments through its planning process, and
a environmental assessment of all PPP projects
are mandatory by law.

92
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

BRAZIL OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 1,847 Population (million, 2019) 210 Unemployment rate (2019) 12.2%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 8,797 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 87.0% Inflation rate (2019) 3.8%
GDP growth rate (annual, 0.9% Gross Government Debt (% of 92.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.68
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -1.8% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 42 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 53.3
(annual, 2019) 2017)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 13.6 Cost to start a business 92.8
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 53.5 Dealing with construction 0
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 18.2 Product market regulation, 51.4 Quality of land administration 55
network sectors
Rule of law 44.4 Regulatory (including 43.7 Registering property 78.1
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 46.7 Strength of insolvency 81.2 Time required to start a business 70.2
framework
Political stability and absence 44 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 52.4 Infrastructure investment 35.6
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 21.2
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 47 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 13.5
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 80 Value of closed infrastructure 23.3
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 76
assessment?
Environmental impact No
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
11.2 29.7
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 28.3 Financing through local equity 42.1 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 11.5 Stocks traded 37.4
Summary credit rating 42 Financial depth 39.5
Financial stability 92.7
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

93
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Burkina Faso

Overall performance Burkina Faso at a glance

Burkina Faso’s fair and transparent procurement and permit processes fosters
competition and facilitates new infrastructure entities to set up domestic
operations. To further encourage investment, the government of Burkina Faso
should seek to publish a national project pipeline and infrastructure plan, as well
as perform market soundings and assessments. $718 20.3 million
GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 58 4 47 — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 62 3 49 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 69 6 41

Planning 71 2 19

Procurement 51 20 66

Activity 25 6 42 34.8 $15 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 68 1 18 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 69 4 21 2019)

Top performing metrics

84.5/100 83/100 71.3/100

Financial stability Procurement of PPPs Time required to start a business
Burkina Faso has a financial stability score Burkina Faso’s procurement processes are fair According to the World Bank, the time required
above the Low Income Countries’ average and transparent, resulting in the highest score to start a business in Burkina Faso is 13
of 80, yet the implications of the COVID-19 of all African and Low Income Countries. Fair days, resulting in a score higher than the Low
pandemic may negatively impact this. The and transparent processes encourage more Income Countries’ average of 18 days. Shorter
stability of the financial system facilitates participation and competition, which help drive times to set up businesses can persuade
the smooth flow of funds between parties, value for money and improve the quality of businesses to set up in a country, including
improving the supply of capital for projects. outcomes. new infrastructure entities.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Burkina Faso Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Published project pipeline Published infrastructure plan Market sounding and/or assessment
Burkina Faso does not currently publish Burkina Faso does not have a national or According to the World Bank, there is an
an infrastructure pipeline of projects. The sub-national infrastructure plan. The addition absence of market sounding process in
addition of an infrastructure pipeline could of an infrastructure plan could highlight Burkina Faso. Adding one could allow the
help provide infrastructure participants with a infrastructure challenges and opportunities government to determine if there is an
clear indication of prospective and confirmed for investment, as well as detail the interest from investors and lenders to provide
infrastructure activity. government’s planned responses. commercial financing for projects.

94
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

BURKINA FASO OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 14.6 Population (million, 2019) 20.3 Unemployment rate (2019) 6.1%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 718 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 29.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.1%
GDP growth rate (annual, 6% Gross Government Debt (% of 43.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.24
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 0.3% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 25 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 35.3
(annual, 2019) 2014)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 35.4^ Cost to start a business 14.1
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 51.1^ Dealing with construction 61.6
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 23.6 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 41.7
network sectors
Rule of law 41.1 Regulatory (including 42.3 Registering property 40.2
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 26.7 Strength of insolvency 56.2 Time required to start a business 71.3
framework
Political stability and absence 32.7 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 91.9^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 25 Private infrastructure investment 10.6
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 56 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 42.5^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 83 Value of closed infrastructure 21.7
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 65
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
0.9 14.7
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 66.4 Financing through local equity 22.9^ Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 54.6 Stocks traded 15^
Summary credit rating 25 Financial depth 18
Financial stability 84.5

Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

95
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Cambodia

Overall performance Cambodia at a glance

Cambodia’s investment in infrastructure remains high. There has been an increase
in both the value of PPP deals closed over the last five years and public infrastructure
investment. To improve the quality of its investment, Cambodia could reform its
procurement processes by improving the transparency of tender processes, including
through online procurement systems and publishing of guidelines. Cambodia’s
permit processes could also be significantly improved by reducing the time to obtain $1,621 16.5 million
construction or business permits and reducing delays to projects and investments. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 64 1 40 7.6% of GDP 3.3% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 44 7 59 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 76 16

Planning 53 4 62

Procurement 72 19 47

Activity 38 9 35 54.9 $3 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 59 1 22 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 29 3 42 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 83.5/100 81.2/100

Financial stability Financial stability Strength of insolvency framework
Investment in infrastructure is a priority for Cambodia’s financial stability is satisfactory. Cambodia has a framework for reorganisation
Cambodia, at 8.7% of GDP per annum, one It is equivalent to the Lower Middle Income and bankruptcy which governs formal
of the highest investment rates among all Countries’ average of 83. A stable financial insolvency. This protects investors and helps
InfraCompass 2020 countries. It is unclear system facilitates the smooth flow of funds attract investment for potential infrastructure
if the COVID-19 pandemic will impact these between infrastructure assets and investors. projects.
efforts.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Cambodia Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 0/100 0/100

Cost to start a business Market sounding and/or assessment Transparency in public procurement
According to the World Bank, the cost of According to the World Bank, there is no Cambodia does not make public procurement
starting a business in Cambodia is 53% of formal requirement for a market sounding notices available online that detail both
income per capita, one of the most expensive in process in Cambodia. Adding one could allow procurement procedures and shortlisting
InfraCompass 2020 countries. Lowering start- the government to determine if there is an criteria. A more transparent process
up costs could ease the entry of new firms. interest from investors and lenders to provide could encourage more participation and
commercial financing for projects. competition, which drive value for money.

96
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

CAMBODIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 26.7 Population (million, 2019) 16.5 Unemployment rate (2019) 1.0%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 1,621 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 23.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.2%
GDP growth rate (annual, 7.0% Gross Government Debt (% of 30.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.4
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 7.7% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 30 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, NA) NA
(annual, 2019)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 46.4 Cost to start a business 0
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 58.4 Dealing with construction 0
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 14.6 Product market regulation, 58.3^ Quality of land administration 25
network sectors
Rule of law 22.7 Regulatory (including 39.9 Registering property 50.9
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 0 Strength of insolvency 81.2 Time required to start a business 0
framework
Political stability and absence 51.8 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 50^ Infrastructure investment 100
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 0 Private infrastructure investment 1.3
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 14 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 36.6^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis No Procurement of PPPs 13 Value of closed infrastructure 2.8
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 64
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
2.1 47.9
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 76.8 Financing through local equity 24.4 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 60 Stocks traded 53.6^
Summary credit rating 30 Financial depth 29.7
Financial stability 83.5
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

97
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Canada

Overall performance Canada at a glance

Canada’s infrastructure planning and procurement processes rank among the best in
the world. Having sub-national infrastructure authorities responsible for infrastructure
governance and regulation, combined with a high quality administrative and legal
system, have helped promote quality project planning and delivery in Canada. However,
sluggish GDP growth and rising public debt levels threaten to further decrease Canada’s
infrastructure expenditure. The long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on $46,213 37.5 million
infrastructure investment levels remains an outstanding question. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 4 2 82 2.5% of GDP 0% of GD
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 12 3 75 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 12 4 86

Planning 3 98

Procurement 8 4 93

Activity 37 36 80.8 $7,534 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 12 2 75 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 6 3 76 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 99.4/100 99/100

Transparency in public procurement Cost to start a business Summary credit rating
Public procurement processes are governed According to the World Bank, the cost to start Canada is AAA-rated by four international
by rigorous legislative, regulatory and policy a business is 0.3% of income per capita, the credit rating agencies, with a stable outlook.
measures. The Government of Canada is one of lowest in the Americas, easing the entry of Canada’s high credit worthiness provides
the largest public buyers of goods and services new firms. favourable borrowing costs for infrastructure
in Canada, purchasing approximately CAD 22 investments, but could be impacted by the
billion annually. COVID-19 pandemic

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Canada Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

16/100 21.1/100 31.5/100

Long term GDP growth trend Dealing with construction permits Gross government debt
Long-term GDP growth in Canada is projected According to the World Bank, it takes an Canada’s gross government debt sits at 87%
to be lower than past performance, partially average of 249 days to obtain construction of GDP and is higher than the High Income
due to declining levels of business investment permits, the third longest of all High Countries average of 74% of GDP. Considering
and increasing levels of household debt. Income Countries. Expediting this process the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic,
Canada has a strong reliance on its energy could significantly impact investment in this may hinder Canada’s ability to invest in
sector and falling oil prices are contributing to infrastructure by helping to reduce delays. infrastructure.
slower economic growth.

98
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

CANADA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 1730.9 Population (million, 2019) 37.5 Unemployment rate (2019) 6.1%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 46,213 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 81.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.0%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.5% Gross Government Debt (% of 88.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.69
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -0.2% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 99 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 34
(annual, 2019) 2013)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 48.9 Cost to start a business 99.4
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 74.3 Dealing with construction 21.1
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 86.7 Product market regulation, 66.5 Quality of land administration 71.7
network sectors
Rule of law 85.4 Regulatory (including 83.3 Registering property 96.4
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 53.3 Strength of insolvency 68.8 Time required to start a business 96.7
framework
Political stability and absence 66.5 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 79.7 Infrastructure investment 29.5
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 43.8
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 90 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 53.4
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 76 Value of closed infrastructure 17.6
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 61
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
59 73.3^
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 31.5 Financing through local equity 70.8 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 16 Stocks traded 72.8
Summary credit rating 99 Financial depth 79.5
Financial stability 94.5
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

99
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Chad

Overall performance Chad at a glance

Despite satisfactory performance in permit and funding capacity metrics, Chad
is consistently ranked at near the bottom of all drivers. To improve its standing
within its regional and income group it should seek to lower the cost to start a
business (currently the highest of all InfraCompass 2020 countries), increase
transparency in the procurement process and publish a national project pipeline. $861 1.28 million
GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 76 8 — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 72 41 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 75 23

Planning 68 1 33

Procurement 76 10

Activity 16 3 49 30.5 —
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 67 1 21 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 75 1 16 2019)

Top performing metrics

74.1/100 72.8/100 65/100

Registering Property Financial stability Gross government debt
It takes 29 days to register a property in Chad, Financial stability scores for Chad are the Chad’s gross government debt amounts to
below the Low Income Countries’ average of second lowest of all InfraCompass 2020 45% of GDP, below the Low Income Countries’
46. As infrastructure projects often involve countries, largely due to low diversification average of 49%. While the full impact of the
property rights, the shorter the time to register in asset holdings. A stable financial system COVID-19 pandemic remains unknown, Chad’s
properties, the less costly and risky the project. facilitates the smooth flow of funds between government is currently in a stronger fiscal
infrastructure and investors, improving position to fund infrastructure than many of
capital supply for projects. its peers.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Chad Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 0/100 No
Published infrastructure procurement Transparency in public Published project pipeline
guidelines procurement
Chad does not publish national guidelines for Chad does not make public procurement Chad does not currently have an infrastructure
the procurement of infrastructure projects. notices available online that detail both pipeline of projects. The addition of an
Publishing guidelines makes contractors aware procurement procedures and shortlisting infrastructure pipeline could help provide
of the government’s processes, expectations criteria. A more transparent process infrastructure participants with a clear
and requirements. This improves transparency could encourage more participation and indication of prospective and confirmed
and helps achieve better value for money. competition, which drive value for money. infrastructure activity.

100
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

CHAD OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 11 Population (million, 2019) 12.8 Unemployment rate (2019) 2.3%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 861 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 23.0% Inflation rate (2019) 3.0%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.3% Gross Government Debt (% of 45.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.23
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -2.7% Sovereign risk rating (2019) NA Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 43.3
(annual, 2019) 2011)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 28.3 Cost to start a business 0-
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ No Prevalence of foreign 33.9 Dealing with construction 28.4
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 0 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 28.3
network sectors
Rule of law 23.9 Regulatory (including 27.8 Registering property 74.1
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 0 Strength of insolvency 56.2 Time required to start a business 0
framework
Political stability and absence 25.4 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 91.9^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 0 Private infrastructure investment 34.7^
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 17 Published procurement No Value of closed PPP 42.5^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 37 Value of closed infrastructure 28.4
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 30
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
1.1 4.7
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 65 Financing through local equity 23.6 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 33.7 Stocks traded 15^
Summary credit rating 32.5^ Financial depth 11.5
Financial stability 72.8
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

101
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Chile

Overall performance Chile at a glance

Chile’s strong performance in procurement and permit rules is largely
underpinned by its transparent procurement processes and its low cost to start
a business. Combined with a strong rule of law and robust financial market
performance driven by its financial stability, Chile outperforms its peers in the
Americas on many infrastructure drivers. To increase its efficiency during the $15,399 19.1 million
planning and procurement process, Chile could publish a national infrastructure GDP per capita Population
plan, conduct market soundings and assessments and publish procurement (USD, 2019) (2019)
guidelines.
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
r
de
i ng

rfo
(/1
ch
(/7

l le
)

i ng
20

pe
erg
nk

ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers

p
Ra

Gl o
Em
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
(20

Governance 26 1 63 2.7% of GDP 0.6% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 14 1 73 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 37 3 74

Planning 54 4 54

Procurement 7 5 93

Activity 11 5 54 76.3 $1,941 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 24 1 52 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 19 1 53 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 94.6/100 94.4/100

Transparency in public procurement Cost to start a business Financial stability
Chile’s public procurement notices are made According to the World Bank, the average Chile ranks third for financial stability
available online and tender documents cost of starting a business is 2.7% of income among all InfraCompass 2020 countries,
transparently detail procurement procedures. per capita in 2019, down from 5.9% in 2018. outperforming all countries except Canada and
The transparency of the process encourages This is the primary driver in Chile’s improved Finland. A stable financial market improves
the supply of capital by facilitating the smooth
more participation and competition, which performance over the period and eases the
flow of funds between infrastructure assets
drive value for money. entry of new firms.
and investors.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Chile Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No 29.2/100
Published infrastructure plan Market sounding and/or assessment Long term GDP growth trend
Chile does not have a national or sub- Chile currently lacks a market sounding Chile’s long-term GDP growth trend has
national infrastructure plan. The addition process for infrastructure projects. Adding decreased to 3% in InfraCompass 2020, down
of an infrastructure plan could highlight one could allow the government to better from 3.8% in InfraCompass 2017. It remains
infrastructure challenges and opportunities for determine if there is interest from investors above the High Income Countries’ average
of 1.9%, suggesting some capacity to fund
investment, as well as detail the government’s and lenders to provide commercial financing
infrastructure from future growth. However,
planned responses. for projects.
recent political events have dampened
economic prospects and the effects of the
COVID-19 pandemic are a concern.

102
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

CHILE OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 294.2 Population (million, 2019) 19.1 Unemployment rate (2019) 7.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 15,399 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 88.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.2%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.5% Gross Government Debt (% of 28.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.76
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -3.2% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 78 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 46.6
(annual, 2019) 2017)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 42 Cost to start a business 94.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 75.3 Dealing with construction 38.2
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 41.9 Product market regulation, 62.1 Quality of land administration 46.7
network sectors
Rule of law 72.3 Regulatory (including 76.9 Registering property 74.6
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 40 Strength of insolvency 75 Time required to start a business 91.2
framework
Political stability and absence 57.1 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 58.3 Infrastructure investment 35
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 64
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 67 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 55.7
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 72 Value of closed infrastructure 59.6
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 87
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
19.6 56.1
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 78.5 Financing through local equity 66.8 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 29.2 Stocks traded 13.3
Summary credit rating 80 Financial depth 69
Financial stability 94.4
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

103
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

China

Overall performance China at a glance

China has seen strong improvement across its procurement and permit processes and
regulatory markets since 2017. This has been driven by reductions in cost to start a
business, time to register property and the transparency of its procurement processes.
China’s infrastructure investment remains high at 6.7% of GDP, but its private infrastructure
investment remains low as a percent of GDP. To improve this, China could introduce a
requirement to sound out the market before formal procurement processes to help design $10,099 1400.2 million
better market engagements. The long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on quality GDP per capita Population
infrastructure investment remains uncertain. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
r
de
i ng

rfo
ch

(/1
(/7

l le
i ng
20

pe
erg
nk

ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers

p
Ra

Gl o
Em
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
(20

Governance 32 4 57 6.1% of GDP 0.4% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 29 12 63 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 14 22 85

Planning 37 3 74

Procurement 22 30 84

Activity 60 3 21 77.9 $908 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 26 2 51 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 7 73 2019)

Top performing metrics

97.2/100 92/100 87.2/100

Cost to start a business Registering property Stocks traded
According to the World Bank, the cost of starting According to the World Bank, it takes nine days China has one of the highest values of
a business is 1.1% of income per capita. This to register a property in China, significantly stocks traded as a share of GDP out of all
is lower than the average of Upper Middle lower than the Upper Middle Income Countries’ InfraCompass 2020 countries, at 96%. As this
Income Countries of 11%. China has recently average of 20 days. As infrastructure projects indicator measures the liquidity of equities, it is
implemented reforms to improve business often involve property rights, the shorter the important to infrastructure investors to know
processes, easing the entry of new firms. time to register properties, the less costly and they can exit investments at appropriate points.
risky the project.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
China Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 0.8/100 1/100
Market sounding and/or assessment Private infrastructure investment Value of closed infrastructure deals
with foreign equity sponsorship
China currently lacks a market sounding Despite its low score, China is seeking to Among the Upper Middle Income Countries,
process for infrastructure projects. Adding such increase private investment to boost growth China has a score significantly lower than
a process could allow the government to better without adding public debt. China could the average of 32. A low value may reflect
determine if there is enough interest from consider new approaches for accelerating uncertainty around trade conditions and
investors and lenders to provide commercial the flow of private capital into infrastructure. barriers within the business environment.
financing for projects. However, the COVID-19 pandemic may Additionally, any long-term impacts of
impact this. the COVID-19 pandemic are yet to be fully
determined.

104
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

CHINA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 14140.2 Population (million, 2019) 1400.2 Unemployment rate (2019) 4.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 10,099 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 59.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.3%
GDP growth rate (annual, 6.1% Gross Government Debt (% of 56.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.59
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 5.4% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 80 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 38.6
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 57 Cost to start a business 97.2
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 58.1 Dealing with construction 60.2
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 36.9 Product market regulation, 58.3^ Quality of land administration 78.3
network sectors
Rule of law 46 Regulatory (including 47.3 Registering property 92
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 56.7 Strength of insolvency 84.4 Time required to start a business 80.1
framework
Political stability and absence 45.6 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 50^ Infrastructure investment 80.9
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 0.8
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 61 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 2.9
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 82 Value of closed infrastructure 1
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 76
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
12.9 77.5
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 56.5 Financing through local equity 57.9 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 75.3 Stocks traded 87.2
Summary credit rating 80 Financial depth 65.4
Financial stability 80.1
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

105
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Colombia

Overall performance Colombia at a glance

Colombia has a top tier performance in the preparation of PPPs which may have
contributed to a high level of PPP infrastructure activity over the last five years.
Improving the depth and liquidity of its financial markets and strengthening
its regulatory frameworks, particularly taxation incentives, would likely enable
higher private sector investment. $6,508 GDP per 50.4 million
capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 24 64 2.5% of GDP 0.9% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 39 4 61 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 41 6 70

Planning 4 98

Procurement 24 10 84

Activity 12 9 53 64.3 $1,449 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 41 3 36 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 44 1 30 2019)

Top performing metrics

98/100 92.7/100 90/100

Value of closed PPP infrastructure deals Financial stability Preparation of PPPs
In the Americas, Colombia has the second Colombia is third among Upper Middle At 90, Colombia ranks third on the preparation
highest values of closed infrastructure deals Income Countries on financial stability. A of PPPs among all InfraCompass 2020
with foreign equity sponsorship at 0.52% of stable financial system facilitates the smooth countries. Good practices at the preparation
GDP. A high value may reflect a recent track flow of funds between infrastructure assets stage helps to ensure that a decision is
record of completing PPPs but going forward and investors. The long-term impacts of the justified and that the procuring authority is
could be impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 pandemic is a concern. ready to initiate the procurement process.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Colombia Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

3.7/100 33.2/100 25.1/100

Stocks traded Long term GDP growth trend Effect of taxation on incentives
to invest
Colombia traded stocks worth 4.1% of GDP Colombia’s long-term GDP growth trend has At 25.1 Colombia’s score is significantly below
in 2019, far below the Upper Middle Income decreased from a peak of 4.8% in 2014 to the Upper Middle Income Countries’ average
Countries’ average of 25%. As this indicator 3.5% in 2019. Combined with the uncertain score of 41. Colombia has some measures in
measures the liquidity of equities, it is impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, this low place to promote investment, however, it could
important to infrastructure investors to know growth trend may hamper Colombia’s ability be improved. A low score could discourage
they can exit investments at appropriate points. to borrow and build more infrastructure. investment and affect the competitiveness of
the market.

106
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

COLOMBIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 327.9 Population (million, 2019) 50.4 Unemployment rate (2019) 9.2%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 6,508 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 81.0% Inflation rate (2019) 3.6%
GDP growth rate (annual, 3.4% Gross Government Debt (% of 51.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.64
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -2.0% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 58 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 49.7
(annual, 2019) 2017)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 25.1 Cost to start a business 71.7
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 55.8 Dealing with construction 58.2
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 68.7 Product market regulation, 64.8 Quality of land administration 55
network sectors
Rule of law 41.8 Regulatory (including 56.6 Registering property 86.6
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 53.3 Strength of insolvency 68.8 Time required to start a business 77.9
framework
Political stability and absence 36.4 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 54.2 Infrastructure investment 33.7
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 55.5
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 90 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 98
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 79 Value of closed infrastructure 26.4
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 72
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
8.3 24.1
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 60 Financing through local equity 40.1 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 33.2 Stocks traded 3.7
Summary credit rating 58 Financial depth 40.6
Financial stability 92.7
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

107
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Cote d’ivoire

Overall performance Cote d’ivoire at a glance

Cote d’Ivoire fosters competition among businesses by creating a regulatory
environment that supports new companies. Despite improvements in political
stability and transparency in public procurement processes, Cote d’Ivoire still
faces challenges to improve the attractiveness of investment opportunities for
capital flow into infrastructure projects. $1,691 GDP per 26.3 million
capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 47 4 50 4.8% of GDP 0.9% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 55 2 53 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 44 5 68

Planning 41 3 73

Procurement 34 12 80

Activity 42 7 33 — —
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 54 2 24 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 53 7 27 2019)

Top performing metrics

94.6/100 86.7/100 75/100

Cost to start a business Time required to start a business Transparency in public procurement
According to the World Bank, the average cost According to the World Bank, the time Cote d’Ivoire’s public procurement notices are
of starting a business in Cote d’Ivoire is 2.7% of required to start a business in Cote d’Ivoire made available online and tender documents
income per capita in 2019, lower than the Lower is six days, which is lower than the Lower transparently detail procurement procedures.
Middle Income Countries average of 17%. This Middle Income Countries’ average of 17 The transparency of the process encourages
days. Shorter times to set up businesses can more participation and competition, which can
eases the entry of new firms.
persuade businesses to set up in a country, drive value for money.
including new infrastructure entities.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Cote d’ivoire Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 32.1/100 12.6/100
Market sounding and/or assessment Effect of taxation on incentives Domestic credit to private
to invest sector
According to the World Bank, there is an Cote d’Ivoire’s score is slightly lower Cote d’Ivoire has domestic credit to its private
absence of market sounding process in than the Lower Middle Income Countries sector valued at 26% of its GDP, which is lower
Cote d’Ivoire. Adding one could allow the average score of 46. Cote d’Ivoire has some than the Lower Middle Income Countries’
government to determine if there is an measures in place to promote investment, average score of 44%. A low value could reflect
however, it could be improved. A low score
interest from investors and lenders to provide limited availability of capital for infrastructure
could discourage investment and affect the
commercial financing for projects. projects.
competitiveness of the market.

108
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

COTE D’IVOIRE OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 44.4 Population (million, 2019) 26.3 Unemployment rate (2019) 2.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 1,691 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 51.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.0%
GDP growth rate (annual, 7.5% Gross Government Debt (% of 53.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, NA
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 0.6% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 37 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 25.9
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 32.1 Cost to start a business 94.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 66 Dealing with construction 48.3
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 36.8 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 33.3
network sectors
Rule of law 38.4 Regulatory (including 46.2 Registering property 65.2
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 26.7 Strength of insolvency 56.2 Time required to start a business 86.7
framework
Political stability and absence 34.5 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 51.2
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 18
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 51 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 43.1
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 56 Value of closed infrastructure 21.3
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 48
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
2^ 12.6
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 57.9^ Financing through local equity 51.6 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 49.6^ Stocks traded 15^
Summary credit rating 37 Financial depth 25.3^
Financial stability 80.9^
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

109
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Croatia

Overall performance Croatia at a glance

The quality of Croatia’s infrastructure procurement processes improved
significantly. In combination with permit rules that support the creation of
businesses, this has helped keep infrastructure activity high, albeit at lower
levels than those recorded in 2016. To increase the efficiency of infrastructure
investment, Croatia could look to develop a national infrastructure plan and $14,950 4.1 million
conduct post-completion reviews. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 62 1 44 4.2% of GDP 0.6% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 33 1 63 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 36 1 74

Planning 58 2 48

Procurement 5 22 94

Activity 29 19 40 78.2 $30 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 43 2 34 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 47 3 29 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 87.6/100

Transparency in public procurement Value of closed PPP infrastructure Cost to start a business
deals
Croatia’s public procurement notices are The value of recent privately financed PPP According to the World Bank, the cost of
made available online and tender documents infrastructure projects in Croatia remains starting a business in Croatia is 6.2% of
transparently detail procurement procedures. The high, averaging 0.8% of GDP across the last income per capita, down 1.2% from 2016,
transparency of the process encourages more five years. This is significantly above the High easing the entry of new firms.
participation and competition, which drives value Income Countries average of 0.1%.
for money and better quality outcomes.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Croatia Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Post-completion reviews Published infrastructure Market sounding and/or
plan assessment
Croatia does not undertake post-completion Croatia does not have a national or sub- According to the World Bank, there is no
reviews for infrastructure projects. The national infrastructure plan. The addition formal requirement for a market sounding
implementation of post-completion reviews of an infrastructure plan could highlight process in Croatia. Adding one could allow
could help determine whether projects have infrastructure challenges and opportunities the government to determine if there is an
achieved their objectives efficiently, and identify for investment, as well as detail the interest from investors and lenders to provide
areas for improvement. government’s planned responses. commercial financing for projects.

110
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

CROATIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 60.7 Population (million, 2019) 4.1 Unemployment rate (2019) 7.8%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 14,950 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 57.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.0%
GDP growth rate (annual, 3.0% Gross Government Debt (% of 71.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.65
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 0.5% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 50 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 41.5
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 28.7 Cost to start a business 87.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 55.1 Dealing with construction 53.7
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 35.2 Product market regulation, 64.6^ Quality of land administration 78.3
network sectors
Rule of law 56.5 Regulatory (including 58.9 Registering property 70.5
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 60 Strength of insolvency 75 Time required to start a business 56.9
framework
Political stability and absence 62.8 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 46.2
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 0.3
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 60 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 100
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis No Procurement of PPPs 87 Value of closed infrastructure 12.4
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 67
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
19.1 26.8
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 44.3 Financing through local equity 34 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 0 Stocks traded 0.4
Summary credit rating 50 Financial depth 41.8
Financial stability 84.1
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

111
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Czech Republic

Overall performance Czech Republic at a glance

The Czech Republic’s regulatory frameworks support the creation of businesses and
provides strong protections from insolvency. Combined with a significant improvement in
procurement processes and a stable financial system, this encourages new investment
and promotes competition among suppliers. To further improve the planning of projects,
the Czech Republic should consider establishing a national cross-sectoral infrastructure
plan and creating a national infrastructure or PPP agency to aid consistent design and $23,214 10.6 million
project implementation. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 22 68 — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 6 2 78 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 34 2 75

Planning 36 1 74

Procurement 20 6 85

Activity 65 2 19 83.8 $2 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 20 1 57 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 39 33 2019)

Top performing metrics

97.8/100 93.7/100 87.5/100

Cost to start a business Financial stability Strength of insolvency framework
According to the World Bank, the cost of The stability of the Czech Republics’ financial The World Bank rates the strength of the
starting a business in the Czech Republic sector remains strong, with Czech banks Czech Republic’s insolvency framework highly.
is 1.1% of income per capita, well below the among the world’s soundest. Stable financial Strong insolvency protections help to attract
average of 4.7% for High Income Countries, systems facilitate the smooth flow of funds investment in infrastructure.
easing the entry of new firms. between parties, improving the supply of
capital for projects. The long-term impacts of
the COVID-19 pandemic are to be determined.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Czech Republic Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No 0.1/100
Infrastructure or PPP agency Published infrastructure plan Private infrastructure investment
The Czech Republic does not have a national The Czech Republic does not have a national Among High Income Countries, the Czech
agency dedicated to infrastructure or PPPs. or sub-national infrastructure plan. The Republic has the lowest level of private
The addition of a national agency or PPP addition of an infrastructure plan could infrastructure investment as a proportion
unit could help with the development of highlight infrastructure challenges and of GDP over the last five years. Increasing
infrastructure frameworks to aid consistent opportunities for investment, as well as detail private infrastructure investment can bring
design and implementation of infrastructure the government’s planned responses. greater cost discipline, innovation and value
projects. for money.

112
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

CZECH REPUBLIC OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 247 Population (million, 2019) 10.6 Unemployment rate (2019) 2.5%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 23,214 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 74.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.6%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.5% Gross Government Debt (% of 32.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.72
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 0.4% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 83 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 31.1
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 49 Cost to start a business 97.8
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ No Prevalence of foreign 83.5 Dealing with construction 22
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 67.5 Product market regulation, 70.7 Quality of land administration 83.3
network sectors
Rule of law 71 Regulatory (including 75.2 Registering property 75.4
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 46.7 Strength of insolvency 87.5 Time required to start a business 45.9
framework
Political stability and absence 67.3 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 40^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 0.1
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 71 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 33.2^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 87 Value of closed infrastructure 1.1
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 70
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
29.6 25.1
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 75.2 Financing through local equity 44.6 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 14.9 Stocks traded 5.8^
Summary credit rating 83 Financial depth 46.5
Financial stability 93.7
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

113
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Denmark

Overall performance Denmark at a glance

Denmark is a global leader in infrastructure governance and funding capacity.
Its strong credit rating, low government debt and high GDP per capita, places
it in an excellent position to fund infrastructure investment. In addition, the
quality of Denmark’s regulatory frameworks and governance systems promote
competition among suppliers and encourage private investment. To improve
the efficiency of infrastructure investment, Denmark could look to develop a $59,795 5.8 million
national infrastructure plan and publish a pipeline of future projects. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 2 1 83 ­– –
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 8 3 76 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 4 1 91

Planning 74 1 11

Procurement 16 11 91

Activity 68 14 16 87.1 $113 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 1 84 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 13 63 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 99.6/100

Transparency in public procurement Summary credit rating Cost to start a business
Denmark’s public procurement notices are Denmark’s institutional strength and high According to the World Bank, it costs only 0.2%
made available online and tender documents GDP per capita has seen it maintain a of income per capita to start a business in
detail both procurement procedures and AAA credit rating from the major ratings Denmark, far lower than the average of 4.7%for
shortlisting criteria. This transparency agencies. Denmark’s credit rating allows the High Income Countries, easing the entry of
encourages more participation and government to borrow at a lower cost to fund new firms.
competition, which drives value for money. investment in infrastructure.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Denmark Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Published project pipeline Published infrastructure plan Market sounding and/or
assessment
Denmark does not publish a national list of Denmark does not have a national or sub- According to the World Bank, there is no
infrastructure projects. The addition of an national infrastructure plan. The addition formal requirement for a market sounding
infrastructure pipeline could help provide of an infrastructure plan could highlight process in Denmark. Adding one could allow
infrastructure participants with a clear infrastructure challenges and opportunities the government to determine if there is an
indication of prospective and confirmed for investment, as well as detail the interest from investors and lenders to provide
infrastructure activity. government’s planned responses. commercial financing for projects.

114
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

DENMARK OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 347.2 Population (million, 2019) 5.8 Unemployment rate (2019) 4.8%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 59,795 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 88.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.3%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.7% Gross Government Debt (% of 33.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.79
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -1.8 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 100 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 28.2
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 34.5 Cost to start a business 99.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 76.4 Dealing with construction 79.7
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 88.5 Product market regulation, 72.4 Quality of land administration 81.7
network sectors
Rule of law 86.7 Regulatory (including 83.5 Registering property 96.4
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 53.3 Strength of insolvency 75 Time required to start a business 92.3
framework
Political stability and absence 66 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 40^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 3.5
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 36 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 4.3
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis No Procurement of PPPs 77 Value of closed infrastructure 17.4
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 45
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
76.3 77.8
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 74.2 Financing through local equity 53.3 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 9.1 Stocks traded 29.1^
Summary credit rating 100 Financial depth 79.3
Financial stability 93.8
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

115
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Ecuador

Overall performance Ecuador at a glance

Ecuador’s strong financial markets and high transparency in procurement
processes have contributed to increasing private financing of infrastructure
investment over the past five years, more than doubling from 0.1% of GDP to
0.25%. Although the value of foreign equity in infrastructure deals has steadily
climbed since 2016, to continue this trend Ecuador should seek to form a
national investment agency to promote and coordinate foreign investment in $6,249 17.3 million
local markets, aided by publishing a national infrastructure plan. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 56 1 47 2.6% of GDP 1.6% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 75 33 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 67 6 42

Planning 59 2 46

Procurement 43 13 73

Activity 33 18 37 69.1 $212 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 64 20 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 64 2 23 2019)

Top performing metrics

91/100 76.8/100 75/100

Financial stability Registering property Transparency in public procurement
According to the World Economic Forum, In Ecuador it takes 26 days to register a Ecuador’s public procurement notices are
Ecuador has high financial stability, although property, longer than the 22 day Upper Middle made available online and tender documents
the COVID-19 pandemic may impact this. A Income Countries’ average. As infrastructure transparently detail procurement procedures.
stable financial system facilitates the smooth projects often involve some transfer of The transparency of the process encourages
flow of funds between infrastructure and property rights, an efficient registration more participation and competition, which can
investors, improving capital supply for projects. process reduces project cost and risk. drive value for money.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Ecuador Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 No No
Time required to start a business Published infrastructure plan Market sounding and/or assessment
According to the World Bank, the time required Ecuador does not have a national or sub- According to the World Bank, there is no
to start a business in Ecuador is 48 days, above national infrastructure plan. The addition formal requirement for a market sounding
the 17.5 day average for Upper Middle Income of an infrastructure plan could highlight process in Ecuador. Adding one could allow
Countries. A more efficient set up process infrastructure challenges and opportunities for the government to determine if there is an
eases the entry of new businesses, which investment, as well as detail the government’s interest from investors and lenders to provide
has the potential to increase competition and planned responses. commercial financing for projects.
investment.

116
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

ECUADOR OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 107.9 Population (million, 2019) 17.3 Unemployment rate (2019) 4.0%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 6,249 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 64.0% Inflation rate (2019) 0.4%
GDP growth rate (annual, -0.5% Gross Government Debt (% of 49.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.57
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -1.9 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 23 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 44.7
(annual, 2019) 2017)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 19.6 Cost to start a business 33.8
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 38 Dealing with construction 58.2
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 18.3 Product market regulation, 53.7^ Quality of land administration 55
network sectors
Rule of law 37.4 Regulatory (including 32.2 Registering property 76.8
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 30 Strength of insolvency 31.2 Time required to start a business 0
framework
Political stability and absence 48.8 Investment promotion agency? No
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 0 Infrastructure investment 34.1
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 27.8
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 52 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 47.6
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 35 Value of closed infrastructure 39
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 43
assessment?
Environmental impact No
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
8 17.2
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 61.6 Financing through local equity 37 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 27.4 Stocks traded 0.1^
Summary credit rating 25 Financial depth 26.4
Financial stability 91
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

117
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Egypt

Overall performance Egypt at a glance

Egypt has undergone significant economic reforms aimed at attracting
investment and encouraging private-sector led growth. Egypt has a strong PPP
procurement process in place that supports a fair and competitive market.
Despite improvements in the planning of projects, there is scope to provide
more guidance around national infrastructure projects. $3,047 99.2 million
GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 45 3 51 3.8% of GDP 1.8% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 61 6 50 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 62 3 48

Planning 61 1 41

Procurement 42 7 74

Activity 51 2 27 73.1 $354 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 67 20 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 58 3 26 2019)

Top performing metrics

84.4/100 72.4/100 72/100

Financial stability Time required to start a business Procurement of PPPs
Egypt’s economic reforms have helped According to the World Bank, the time required Egypt has a competitive selection process in
strengthen economic growth and reduce public to start a business in Egypt is now 12.5 days place for the procurement of PPPs which is
debt. These reforms also helped to increase following Egypt reviewing and simplifying overseen by the Supreme Committee for Public
foreign reserves which can provide a stable the procedures to establish a business in Private Partnership Affairs. This is designed
base to attract investment in infrastructure. The 2018. Shorter times to set up businesses to ensure the process is fair and transparent
long-term impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic can ease businesses entry, including for new which can help drive value for money.
are to be determined. infrastructure entities.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Egypt Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No 5.2/100
Published project pipeline Published infrastructure plan Stocks traded
Egypt does not currently have an infrastructure Egypt does not have a national or sub- At 6% of GDP, Egypt’s value of stocks traded
pipeline of projects. The addition of an national infrastructure plan. The addition is lower than the Lower Middle Income
infrastructure pipeline could help provide of an infrastructure plan could highlight Countries’ average of 15% of GDP. As this
infrastructure participants with a clear infrastructure challenges and opportunities indicator measures the liquidity of equities,
indication of prospective and confirmed for investment, as well as detail the it is important to infrastructure investors to
infrastructure activity. government’s planned responses. know they can exit investments at appropriate
points.

118
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

EGYPT OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 302.3 Population (million, 2019) 99.2 Unemployment rate (2019) 11.3%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 3,047 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 43.0% Inflation rate (2019) 13.9%
GDP growth rate (annual, 5.5% Gross Government Debt (% of 85.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.53
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 18.4 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 30 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 31.8
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 44.9 Cost to start a business 59.2
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 45.4 Dealing with construction 45.2
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 23.3 Product market regulation, 54.2^ Quality of land administration 30
network sectors
Rule of law 41.8 Regulatory (including 32.7 Registering property 32.1
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 60 Strength of insolvency 59.4 Time required to start a business 72.4
framework
Political stability and absence 30.6 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 60.4^ Infrastructure investment 66.3
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 10.7
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 71 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 22.4
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 72 Value of closed infrastructure 10.5
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 71
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
3.9 12.3
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 33.5 Financing through local equity 54.9 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 36.1 Stocks traded 5.2
Summary credit rating 30 Financial depth 26.5
Financial stability 84.4
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

119
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Ethiopia

Overall performance Ethiopia at a glance

Ethiopia’s significant investment in infrastructure has helped it remain among
the fastest growing countries in the world. The increased openness of public
procurement and foreign investment policies have also attracted greater
investment from foreign equity in local projects. Despite areas of marked
improvement, Ethiopia still faces challenges to reform its broader regulatory, $953 95.6 million
planning and financial systems. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 74 25 17.9% of GDP 5.6% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 74 40 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 74 27

Planning 54 4 54

Procurement 68 2 52

Activity 19 2 46 43.4 –
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 58 4 23 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 63 4 23 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 92.1/100

Transparency in public procurement Infrastructure investment Long term GDP growth trend
Public procurement regulation in Ethiopia Investment in infrastructure is a priority Ethiopia is one of the fastest growing
follows international best practices, recognising under Ethiopia’s Growth and Transformation economies in the world, with an average GDP
a range of procurement processes and Plans (GTP) I and II. As part of GTP II, the growth of 9.9% a year from 2008 to 2018. This
ensuring access to information about tendering government is continuing to expand physical has been driven by economic reforms and
opportunities. Open bidding accounted for infrastructure through public investments. public investment programs fostering growth
almost 95% of procurements in 2019. in the private sector.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Ethiopia Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Published project pipeline Post-completion reviews Published infrastructure procurement
guidelines
Ethiopia does not currently have a pipeline Ethiopia does not undertake post-completion While its transparency in public procurement
of infrastructure projects. The addition of reviews for infrastructure projects. The is excellent, Ethiopia does not publish
an infrastructure pipeline could help provide implementation of post-completion reviews infrastructure specific guidelines for
infrastructure participants with a clear could help determine whether projects have procurement. Publishing guidelines makes
indication of prospective and confirmed achieved their objectives efficiently, and contractors more aware of the government’s
infrastructure activity. better identify areas of improvement. processes, expectations and requirements.

120
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

ETHIOPIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 91.2 Population (million, 2019) 95.6 Unemployment rate (2019) 1.8%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 953 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 21.0% Inflation rate (2019) 14.6%
GDP growth rate (annual, 7.4% Gross Government Debt (% of 59.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.27
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 11.8 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 31 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 35
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 41.4 Cost to start a business 8.9
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 44.4 Dealing with construction 56.9
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 27.3 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 18.3
network sectors
Rule of law 41.4 Regulatory (including 30.5 Registering property 53.6
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 0 Strength of insolvency 31.2 Time required to start a business 29.3
framework
Political stability and absence 27.6 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 100
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 34.7^
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 15 Published procurement No Value of closed PPP 42.5^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 69 Value of closed infrastructure 5.8
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 41
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
1.2 10^
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 53.7 Financing through local equity 39.2 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 92.1 Stocks traded 15^
Summary credit rating 31 Financial depth 24.1
Financial stability 73.4
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

121
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Fiji

Overall performance Fiji at a glance

Fiji has shown consistent economic growth and high infrastructure deal activity,
closing several recent deals with foreign equity sponsorship. To improve the
efficiency of infrastructure projects, Fiji could look to shorten the duration
of procurement processes and minimise cost and risk. Weak domestic
production levels in key sectors and the potential economic fallout from the $6,380 0.9 million
COVID-19 pandemic all present challenges to Fiji’s ability to fund infrastructure GDP per capita Population
investment. (USD, 2019) (2019)
e
ng

er

er
a
)

rm
00

ch

ad
r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1

20

l le
g
ore

n
irin

pe
erg
17-
ore

nte

ba
Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
(20
Sc

Co
As

To

Governance 59 –
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 50 1 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 51 2

Planning 60

Procurement 74 2

Activity 58 8
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 26 1 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 43 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 88.6/100 70.9/100

Value of closed infrastructure deals Financial stability Cost to start a business
with foreign equity sponsorship
Fiji has one of the highest values of closed Fiji’s financial stability is satisfactory and According to the World Bank, the cost to start
infrastructure deals with foreign equity equal to the Upper Middle Income Countries a business in Fiji is 14.5% of income per capita.
sponsorship at 0.54% of GDP. A high value may average, supported by foreign reserves. A Low business start-up costs could ease the
reflect favourable trade conditions and lower stable financial system facilitates the smooth entry of new firms.
flow of funds between infrastructure assets
barriers to foreign investment, but the COVID-19
and investors. The long-term impacts of the
pandemic may impact international capital flows.
COVID-19 pandemic is a concern.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Fiji Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 30.5/100 42.2/100
Published project pipeline Long term GDP growth trend Average procurement duration
– transaction RFP
Fiji does not currently publish an infrastructure Fiji’s long-term GDP growth has averaged At 37 months, Fiji has a higher than average
pipeline of projects. The addition of a pipeline 3.2%, similar to the average for Upper Middle period of time from announcement of a tender
could help provide infrastructure participants Income Countries. Long-term growth signals to contract award. Lengthy procurement
with a clear indication of prospective and a country’s capacity to fund infrastructure processes add costs, risks and down time for
confirmed infrastructure activity. from future growth. The COVID-19 pandemic infrastructure contractors.
may impact this GDP growth.

122
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

FIJI OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 5.7 Population (million, 2019) 0.9 Unemployment rate (2019) 4.2%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 6,380 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 56.0% Inflation rate (2019) 3.5%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.7% Gross Government Debt (% of 47.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.46
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 2.8 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 37 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 36.7
(annual, 2019) 2013)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 41.4^ Cost to start a business 70.9
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 56.7^ Dealing with construction 55.3
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 46.5 Product market regulation, 46.9^ Quality of land administration 65
network sectors
Rule of law 47.4 Regulatory (including 45.6 Registering property 38.4
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 33.3 Strength of insolvency 37.5 Time required to start a business 11.6
framework
Political stability and absence 62.4 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 42.2^ Infrastructure investment 48.4^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 56.9^ Private infrastructure investment 17.8
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 55^ Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 64.1^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 64.3^ Value of closed infrastructure 100
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 64.6^
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
8.1 45
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 63.4 Financing through local equity 44.7^ Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 30.5 Stocks traded 28.5^
Summary credit rating 37 Financial depth 42.7^
Financial stability 88.6^
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

123
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Finland

Overall performance Finland at a glance

Finland’s regulatory frameworks support the creation of businesses and provide strong
protections against insolvency. Combined with a high-quality legal system and stable
financial sector, this encourages new investment and promotes competition among
suppliers. Despite an improvement in process transparency, the length of Finland’s
procurement processes add costs and down-time for contractors bidding for and
investing in projects. It could further improve procurement processes by publishing $48,869 5.5 million
procurement guidelines for infrastructure projects. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 14 1 77 – –
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 5 2 78 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 25 4 80

Planning 50 2 66

Procurement 67 2 52

Activity 53 8 25 83.4 $377 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 11 75 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 9 3 72 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 98.6/100 98.2/100

Transparency in public procurement Cost to start a business Financial stability
Finland’s public procurement notices are made According to the World Bank, it costs 0.7% According to the World Bank, the quality of
available online and tender documents detail of income per capita to start a business in Finland’s financial sector ranks third globally,
both procurement procedures and shortlisting Finland, well below the 4.7% average for High with Finnish banks rated as the most sound.
criteria. This transparency encourages more Income Countries, easing the entry of new Finland’s stable financial system facilitates the
smooth flow of funds between investors and
participation and competition, which drives firms.
projects, improving capital supply for projects.
value for money and improves outcomes.
The long-term impact of the COVID-19
pandemic is a concern.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Finland Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Infrastructure or PPP agency Published infrastructure plan Published infrastructure procurement
guidelines
Finland does not have a national agency Finland does not have a national or sub- Finland does not publish guidelines for the
dedicated to Infrastructure or PPP. The addition national infrastructure plan. The addition procurement of infrastructure projects.
of a national agency or PPP unit could help with of an infrastructure plan could highlight Publishing guidelines makes contractors aware
the development of infrastructure frameworks infrastructure challenges and opportunities of the government’s processes, expectations
and requirements, improves transparency and
to aid consistent design and implementation of for investment, as well as detail the
helps the government achieve better value for
infrastructure projects. government’s planned responses.
money.

124
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

FINLAND OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 269.7 Population (million, 2019) 5.5 Unemployment rate (2019) 7.3%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 48,869 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 85.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.2%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.2% Gross Government Debt (% of 59.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.81
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -1.7 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 96 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 27.1
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 54.2 Cost to start a business 98.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ No Prevalence of foreign 70.4 Dealing with construction 79.4
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 88 Product market regulation, 59.2 Quality of land administration 88.3
network sectors
Rule of law 90.9 Regulatory (including 85.7 Registering property 45.1
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 43.3 Strength of insolvency 90.6 Time required to start a business 71.3
framework
Political stability and absence 65.4 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 40^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 11.3
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 46 Published procurement No Value of closed PPP 5.9
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis No Procurement of PPPs 73 Value of closed infrastructure 44.4
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 47
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
62.3 45.1
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 53.8 Financing through local equity 65.4 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 2.3 Stocks traded 86.9^
Summary credit rating 96 Financial depth 83
Financial stability 98.2
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

125
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

France

Overall performance France at a glance

France’s infrastructure procurement processes rank among the best in the
world. In combination with strong financial markets and a regulatory framework
that supports the creation of new businesses, this promotes competition
among providers and helps bring better value for money and higher quality
outcomes from investment. However, sluggish GDP growth, poor tax incentives,
growing public debt and the economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic may $41,761 64.8 million
hinder France’s ability to fund future infrastructure expenditure. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 15 76 2.6% of GDP 0% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 23 68 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 21 1 81

Planning 15 1 96

Procurement 3 7 94

Activity 64 3 19 89.7 $2,691 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 16 1 68 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 16 59 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 98.6/100 92.5/100

Transparency in public procurement Cost to start a business Financial stability
France’s public procurement notices are made According to the World Bank, it costs 0.7% According to the International Monetary Fund,
available online and tender documents detail of income per capita to start a business in French authorities have improved system
both procurement procedures and shortlisting France, well below the 4.7% High Income stability through the establishment of the High
criteria. Transparency encourages more Countries average, easing the entry of new Council for Financial Stability and enhanced
participation and competition, which drives firms. monitoring of stability risks. The long-term
value for money and improves outcomes. impact of the COVID-19 pandemic is a concern.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
France Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

8.8/100 22.2/100 32.5/100

Long term GDP growth trend Gross government debt Dealing with construction permits
France’s long-term GDP growth trend France’s gross government debt rose to 99% According to the World Bank it takes an
increased to 1.3%, up slightly from 0.9% of GDP in 2019, well above the High Income average of 213 days to obtain construction
in InfraCompass 2017. Long-term growth Countries’ average of 74%. With the COVID-19 permits in France. Expediting this process
rates signal a country’s capacity to fund pandemic impact on borrowing, servicing could significantly impact investment in
infrastructure from future growth. The debt may hinder the French government’s infrastructure by helping to reduce delays.
COVID-19 pandemic may impact GDP growth ability to fund infrastructure through public
trends. investment.

126
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

FRANCE OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 2707.1 Population (million, 2019) 64.8 Unemployment rate (2019) 9.1%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 41,761 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 80.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.2%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.2% Gross Government Debt (% of 99.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.75
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -2.8 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 92 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 32.7
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 28.8 Cost to start a business 98.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 74.2 Dealing with construction 32.5
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 74.8 Product market regulation, 57.9 Quality of land administration 80
network sectors
Rule of law 78.8 Regulatory (including 73.5 Registering property 62.5
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 56.7 Strength of insolvency 68.8 Time required to start a business 91.2
framework
Political stability and absence 51.8 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 81.3 Infrastructure investment 28
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 13
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 76 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 12.6
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 89 Value of closed infrastructure 22.1
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 53
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
53.3 50.4
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 22.2 Financing through local equity 65.2 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 8.8 Stocks traded 37.2^
Summary credit rating 92 Financial depth 75.2
Financial stability 92.5
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

127
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Germany

Overall performance Germany at a glance

Germany’s regulatory frameworks and permit rules support the creation of new
businesses and provide strong protections against business insolvency for creditors.
Combined with a high recovery rate, quality legal system and stable financial sector,
this encourages new investment and promotes competition among suppliers. Despite
transparency in procurement processes, the length of Germany’s procurement processes
add costs for contractors. Its activity, which measures recent investment as a share of $46,564 83 million
GDP, is low as it has already established, quality infrastructure and is a large economy. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 12 3 79 1.5% of GDP 0% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 2 80 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 32 6 75

Planning 33 3 77

Procurement 63 54

Activity 76 10 90.2 $3,378 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 9 1 76 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 17 2 56 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 93.8/100

Transparency in public procurement Summary credit rating Strength of insolvency framework
Germany’s public procurement notices are Germany’s institutional strength and high The World Bank rates the strength of
made available online and tender documents GDP per capita has seen it maintain a AAA Germany’s insolvency framework highly.
detail both procurement procedures and credit rating from the major ratings agencies. Strong insolvency protections help to attract
shortlisting criteria. The transparency of the Germany’s good credit rating allows the investment in infrastructure.
process encourages more participation and government to borrow at a lower cost.
competition, which drive value for money.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Germany Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No 12.7/100
Published infrastructure plan Published infrastructure Long term GDP growth trend
procurement guidelines
Germany does not have a cross-sectoral Germany does not publish guidelines for Global trade tensions and a persistent
national or sub-national infrastructure plan. the procurement of infrastructure projects. downturn in the automotive industry have seen
An infrastructure plan, in addition to the Publishing guidelines makes contractors German GDP growth forecasts reduced. This
existing transport sector plan, could highlight aware of the government’s processes, is likely to be compounded by the long-term
infrastructure challenges, opportunities for expectations and requirements, improves impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on global
investment and the government’s planned transparency and helps the government economic activity.
responses. achieve better value for money.

128
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

GERMANY OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 3863.3 Population (million, 2019) 83 Unemployment rate (2019) 3.2%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 46564 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 77.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.5%
GDP growth rate (annual, 0.5% Gross Government Debt (% of 59.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.84
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -2.3 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 100 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 31.7
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 59.6 Cost to start a business 87
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 68.8 Dealing with construction 60.1
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 79.8 Product market regulation, 70.4 Quality of land administration 76.7
network sectors
Rule of law 82.6 Regulatory (including 85 Registering property 53.6
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 53.3 Strength of insolvency 93.8 Time required to start a business 82.3
framework
Political stability and absence 60.1 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 16.9
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 8.5
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 86 Published procurement No Value of closed PPP 3.7
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 74 Value of closed infrastructure 11
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 69
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
59.4 37.8
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 54.1 Financing through local equity 73.5 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 12.7 Stocks traded 37.2
Summary credit rating 100 Financial depth 71
Financial stability 91.7
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

129
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Ghana

Overall performance Ghana at a glance

Ghana’s infrastructure expenditure has continued to grow substantially, thanks
in part to greater private and foreign equity investment in addition to public
funding. A continued reduction in business start-up costs has also helped foster
competition and new investment. Despite increasing investment, Ghana lacks
adequate project planning. The introduction of a project pipeline or national $2,223 30.2 million
infrastructure plan could help focus investment and deliver better quality GDP per capita Population
outcomes. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 42 1 53 5.0% of GDP 2.8% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 63 1 49 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 56 5 59

Planning 28 2 88

Procurement 32 14 80

Activity 5 3 66 46.6 $871 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 70 10 18 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 70 1 21 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 80.1/100 75.3/100

Private infrastructure investment Financial stability Cost to start a business
Private infrastructure investment continues The passing of the Fiscal Responsibility Act The cost to start a business in Ghana is 12%
to increase in Ghana largely due to its energy and establishment of a Fiscal Council and of income per capita, lower than the African
sector. There was a USD 550 million Armandi a Financial Stability Council in Ghana has regional average of 20%, easing the entry of
Energy Power Plan investment in 2016, USD helped to restore stability and confidence, new firms.
953 million Bridge Power natural gas plan and following a major banking crisis in 2019.
a USD 580 million concession for its electricity The full long-term impacts of the COVID-19
distribution business in 2019. pandemic are yet to be determined.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Ghana Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 0.4/100 2.8/100
Environmental impact analysis Stocks traded GDP per capita
According to the World Bank, only certain Ghana’s value of stocks traded is 9%, lower Ghana has a low GDP per capita of USD 2,223
projects may require an environmental impact than the Lower Middle Income Countries’ but is growing at a long-term rate of 7% per
analysis and it is based on how complex the average of 26%. As this indicator measures annum due to its oil and gas sector. High
project is. Undertaking environmental feasibility the liquidity of equities, it is important to growth, should it not be overly impacted by
studies can help countries understand and infrastructure investors to know they can exit COVID-19, can be expected to correlate with
balance environmental and infrastructure investments at appropriate points. greater infrastructure spending.
outcomes.

130
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

GHANA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 67.1 Population (million, 2019) 30.2 Unemployment rate (2019) 6.8%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 2,223 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 56.0% Inflation rate (2019) 9.3%
GDP growth rate (annual, 7.5% Gross Government Debt (% of 64.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.45
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 0.3 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 23 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 43.5
(annual, 2019) 2016)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 42.3 Cost to start a business 75.3
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 69.3 Dealing with construction 46.1
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 24 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 26.7
network sectors
Rule of law 51.4 Regulatory (including 48.4 Registering property 70.5
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 36.7 Strength of insolvency 25 Time required to start a business 71.3
framework
Political stability and absence 50.5 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 50.8
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 100
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 56 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 42.5^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 61 Value of closed infrastructure 70.3
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 44
assessment?
Environmental impact No
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
2.8 5.6
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 50.1 Financing through local equity 46 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 67 Stocks traded 0.4^
Summary credit rating 23 Financial depth 25.2
Financial stability 80.1
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

131
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Greece

Overall performance Greece at a glance

Greece is the most improved country in InfraCompass 2020 for its funding capacity,
having improved from below investment grade credit rating to BB with a positive outlook.
Continued improvements to its credit rating would further reduce its high borrowing
costs, which limit its ability to fund infrastructure. Further improvement to its credit
rating could reduce borrowing costs for infrastructure investment. Greece does well in its
processes to procure PPPs, but it will continue to struggle to attract quality infrastructure $19,974 10.7 million
investment without further improvements in its creditworthiness. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 31 1 58 – –
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 41 5 60 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 47 4 67

Planning 56 3 53

Procurement 53 37 64

Activity 62 5 21 77.7 $204 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 50 23 28 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 45 4 30 2019)

Top performing metrics

97/100 91.2/100 91/100

Cost to start a business Time required to start a business Procurement of PPPs
According to the World Bank, the cost to start Due to a new streamlined registration Greece’s legal and regulatory frameworks
a business in Greece is 1.5% of income per process, the time required to start a business which govern how private partners are
capita, well below the average of 4.7% for High in Greece has decreased significantly selected for PPPs encourage fairness
Income Countries, easing the entry of new since 2016, from 13 days to just 4. A more and transparency. Fair and transparent
firms. efficient set up process eases the entry of processes encourage more participation and
new businesses, which has the potential to competition, which drive value for money and
increase competition and investment. better quality outcomes.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Greece Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 0/100 0/100
Published infrastructure plan Market sounding and/or Gross government debt
assessment
Greece does not have a national or sub- According to the World Bank, there is no At 176.6% of GDP, Greece’s gross government
national infrastructure plan. The addition formal requirement for a market sounding debt is more than double the High Income
of an infrastructure plan could highlight process in Greece. Adding one could allow Countries’ average of 74%. With the COVID-19
infrastructure challenges and opportunities for the government to determine if there is an pandemic likely to result in further borrowing,
investment, as well as detail the government’s interest from investors and lenders to provide servicing this significant debt may hinder
planned responses. commercial financing for projects. Greece’s ability to fund infrastructure.

132
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

GREECE OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 214 Population (million, 2019) 10.7 Unemployment rate (2019) 18.1%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 19,974 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 79.0% Inflation rate (2019) 0.6%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2% Gross Government Debt (% of 177.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.61
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -1.7 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 36 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 36
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 13.5 Cost to start a business 97
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 53.5 Dealing with construction 42.9
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 32 Product market regulation, 68.7 Quality of land administration 15
network sectors
Rule of law 53.1 Regulatory (including 55.9 Registering property 76.8
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 56.7 Strength of insolvency 71.9 Time required to start a business 91.2
framework
Political stability and absence 51.5 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 24 Infrastructure investment 40^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 25 Private infrastructure investment 10.4
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 58 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 2.4
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 91 Value of closed infrastructure 32.3
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 59
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
25.5 42.9
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 0 Financing through local equity 19.3 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 0 Stocks traded 4.9
Summary credit rating 36 Financial depth 39.1
Financial stability 62.3
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

133
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Guatemala

Overall performance Guatemala at a glance

Guatemala has satisfactory overall investment in infrastructure at 3.4% of GDP. However,
financial closes for private infrastructure investment have declined in the five years to
2020. Guatemala could reform its infrastructure governance and planning to attract
better quality investment. Setting out a strategic infrastructure plan for the nation,
publishing a project pipeline and conducting post-completion reviews on infrastructure $4,617 17.6 million
projects could contribute to an improved infrastructure investment environment. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 71 1 27 – –
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 59 3 50 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 54 2 60

Planning 72 2 19

Procurement 41 9 74

Activity 18 5 47 55.9 $143 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 48 1 30 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 61 3 24 2019)

Top performing metrics

93.8/100 80.2/100 78.6/100

Financial stability Gross government debt Registering property
According to the World Economic Forum, Guatemala’s gross government debt grew to It takes 24 days to register a property in
Guatemala has good financial stability, above 25% of GDP in 2019 from 24% in 2016. This Guatemala, similar to the Upper Middle
the average of 88 for Upper Middle Income remains lower than the average of 47% for Income Countries’ average of 23.5 days. As
Countries. The long-term impact of the Upper Middle Income Countries but the fiscal infrastructure projects often involve property
COVID-19 pandemic is to be determined. impact of COVID-19 pandemic may affect rights, shorter time to register properties
this. means less cost and lower to projects.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Guatemala Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Published project pipeline Market sounding and/or Published infrastructure plan
assessment
Guatemala does not currently publish an According to the World Bank, there is no Guatemala does not have a national or sub-
infrastructure pipeline of projects. The formal requirement for a market sounding national infrastructure plan. The addition
addition of an infrastructure pipeline could process in Guatemala. Adding one could of an infrastructure plan could highlight
help provide infrastructure participants with a allow the government to determine if there infrastructure challenges and opportunities for
clear indication of prospective and confirmed is an interest from investors and lenders to investment, as well as detail the government’s
infrastructure activity. provide commercial financing for projects. planned responses.

134
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

GUATEMALA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 81.3 Population (million, 2019) 17.6 Unemployment rate (2019) 2.7%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 4,617 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 51.0% Inflation rate (2019) 4.2%
GDP growth rate (annual, 3.4% Gross Government Debt (% of 25.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.52
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 1.6 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 45 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 48.3
(annual, 2019) 2014)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 52.3 Cost to start a business 65.3
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 58.5 Dealing with construction 28.4
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 28.1 Product market regulation, 53.7^ Quality of land administration 45
network sectors
Rule of law 29 Regulatory (including 46.1 Registering property 78.6
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 16.7 Strength of insolvency 25 Time required to start a business 66.9
framework
Political stability and absence 41 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 50.4^ Infrastructure investment 41.6^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 18.6
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 55 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 64.6^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 78 Value of closed infrastructure 61.8
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 68
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
5.9 15.8
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 80.2 Financing through local equity 32.7 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 29.9 Stocks traded 7.9^
Summary credit rating 45 Financial depth 28.2
Financial stability 93.8
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

135
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Guinea

Overall performance Guinea at a glance

Guinea’s financial markets performed impressively compared with its regional and
income group peers. This has been driven by improvements in liquidity conditions in
the banking sector and strong deposit growth. Guinean banks are largely domestically
funded and independent of their respective foreign-owned parent companies. To
efficiently utilise these solid foundations and increase the productive capacity of Guinean
infrastructure markets, the Guinean government could seek to increase the strength of $981 13.6 million
regulatory frameworks through stronger legal protections for shareholders. In addition,
GDP per capita Population
conducting market soundings would help allocate private capital more effectively.
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 66 1 38 7.0% of GDP 5.2% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 57 11 53 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 66 2 43

Planning 42 2 73

Procurement 58 16 62

Activity 22 2 45 41.7 $32 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 57 23 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 60 12 25 2019)

Top performing metrics

88.8/100 69.7/100 66.9/100

Financial stability Prevalence of foreign ownership Time required to start a business
Guinea’s financial stability score is the third Among Low Income Countries, Guinea has According to the World Bank, the time required
highest among African Countries. A stable the highest prevalence of foreign ownership. to start a business in Guinea is 15 days, faster
financial market smooths the flow of funds Policies that promote foreign investment than the Low Income Countries’ average of 18
between infrastructure assets and investors, can increase the supply of capital, promote days. Shorter times to set up businesses can
although the long-term impacts of the COVID-19 competition and, in theory, reduce the costs persuade businesses to set up in a country,
pandemic could affect Guinea’s financial stability. of financing and delivering infrastructure. including new infrastructure entities.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Guinea Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 0/100 1.3/100
Market sounding and/or assessment Shareholder governance GDP per capita
According to the World Bank, there is an Guinea is not considered to have strong Despite a 20 year average long-term growth
absence of a market sounding process in legal protections for shareholders. A figure of over 6%, Guinea still has one of
Guinea. Adding one could allow the government failure to adequately enforce disclosure the lowest levels of GDP per capita of all
to determine if there is an interest from and transparency standards lowers the InfraCompass 2020 countries, at only USD 981
investors and lenders to provide commercial confidence of investors, hurting entities that in 2019. Despite this, GDP per capita has more
financing for projects. fund or deliver infrastructure. than doubled in the past 20 years, with this
trend expected to continue.

136
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

GUINEA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 13.4 Population (million, 2019) 13.6 Unemployment rate (2019) 3.6%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 981 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 36.0% Inflation rate (2019) 8.9%
GDP growth rate (annual, 5.9% Gross Government Debt (% of 45.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.21
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 7.8 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) NA Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 33.7
(annual, 2019) 2014)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 60.4 Cost to start a business 32.1
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 69.7 Dealing with construction 52.1
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 19.4 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 21.7
network sectors
Rule of law 25.8 Regulatory (including 34.4 Registering property 60.7
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 0 Strength of insolvency 56.2 Time required to start a business 66.9
framework
Political stability and absence 35.4 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 59.4
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 25 Private infrastructure investment 27.2
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 50 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 42.5^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 61 Value of closed infrastructure 50.3
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 52
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
1.3 4.3
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 64.5 Financing through local equity 60.1 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 49.6 Stocks traded 15^
Summary credit rating 35 Financial depth 18.2
Financial stability 88.8
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

137
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

India

Overall performance India at a glance

India is the most improved country in infrastructure Governance since InfraCompass
2017. The quality of India’s infrastructure procurement processes has also improved
significantly helping to bring better value for money and better quality outcomes from
investment. Regulatory and permits reforms have led to a marked improvement in
the ease of starting a business, encouraging investment and competition from new
suppliers. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the lack of private $2,172 1351.8 million
investment in infrastructure projects present as key challenges for India’s ability to close
GDP per capita Population
the infrastructure gap and deliver future projects.
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 49 18 49 4.5% of GDP 0.6% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 50 7 55 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 55 5 60

Planning 8 1 97

Procurement 37 8 75

Activity 69 1 16 68.1 $1,314 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 42 6 34 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 24 4 46 2019)

Top performing metrics

83.2/100 82/100 81.3/100

Financial stability Preparation of PPPs Cost to start a business
Despite a recent downturn, India’s banking At 82, India’s score on the preparation of According to the World Bank, it costs
sector is showing signs of improved stability in PPPs is much higher than the Lower Middle approximately 7% of income per capita to
part due to the recapitalisation of Public Sector Income Countries’ average of 49. Good start a business in India. This has improved
Banks by the Government and regulatory practices at the preparation stage helps to significantly since 2017 due to reforms which
reforms. The long-term impact of the COVID-19 ensure that a decision is justified and that included abolishing filing fees to establish
pandemic is a concern. the procuring authority is ready to initiate the a corporation and the establishment of
procurement process. electronic record systems.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
India Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 2.7/100 3.7/100
Post-completion reviews Value of closed PPP infrastructure Private infrastructure investment
deals
India does not undertake post-completion The value of closed PPP infrastructure deals Private investment is low. This may reflect
reviews for infrastructure projects. The is low in India compared to the Lower Middle poor sentiment from investors or government
implementation of post-completion reviews Income Countries’ average of 38. A low value choices to publicly fund infrastructure. This
could help determine whether projects have may reflect government choices to publicly may be further impacted by the COVID-19
achieved their objectives efficiently, and identify fund infrastructure and may be further pandemic.
areas of improvement. impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

138
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

INDIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 2935.6 Population (million, 2019) 1351.8 Unemployment rate (2019) 2.6%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 2,172 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 34.0% Inflation rate (2019) 3.4%
GDP growth rate (annual, 6.1% Gross Government Debt (% of 69.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.51
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 6.6 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 57 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 35.7
(annual, 2019) 2011)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 58.9 Cost to start a business 81.3
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 58.9 Dealing with construction 68.9
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 71.6 Product market regulation, 54.2^ Quality of land administration 46.7
network sectors
Rule of law 50.5 Regulatory (including 46.3 Registering property 39.3
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 60 Strength of insolvency 46.9 Time required to start a business 60.2
framework
Political stability and absence 34.1 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 69.3 Infrastructure investment 53
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 3.7
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 82 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 2.7
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 72 Value of closed infrastructure 5.5
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 80
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
2.8 24.1
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 45.9 Financing through local equity 55 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 70.9 Stocks traded 42.1
Summary credit rating 57 Financial depth 58.6
Financial stability 83.2
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

139
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Indonesia

Overall performance Indonesia at a glance

As one of Southeast Asia’s largest economic and population hubs, Indonesia
is favourably positioned to continue expanding its infrastructure activities.
Underpinning this momentum are reforms that have increased the efficiency of
permit processes, with associated costs and times to start a business reduced
significantly since InfraCompass 2017. To further expand capacity, Indonesia $4,164 267 million
could enact policies that seek to shorten procurement durations and increase GDP per capita Population
liquidity in its stock market. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 23 2 65 5.0% of GDP 0.2% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 42 2 60 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 40 10 71

Planning 20 1 94

Procurement 59 1 62

Activity 41 9 34 67.7 $3,658 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 40 6 37 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 38 4 34 2019)

Top performing metrics

89.9/100 88.6/100 77.9/100

Financial stability Cost to start a business Time required to start a business
Indonesia’s financial stability is above the According to the World Bank, the cost of According to the World Bank, it takes 10
average of 83 for Lower Middle Income starting a business in Indonesia is 5.7% days to start a business in Indonesia, which
Countries. Stable financial markets facilitate the of income per capita, having significantly is significantly faster than the Lower Middle
smooth flow of funds between infrastructure improved from 19% in 2016, easing the entry Income Countries average of 20.4 days.
assets and investors. However, the impact of of new firms. Indonesia recently reviewed the process to start
the COVID-19 pandemic is a concern. a business, reducing it from 23 days in 2016.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Indonesia Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

16/100 9.1/100 5.3/100

Average procurement duration – Stocks traded GDP per capita
transaction RFP
At 53 months, Indonesia has one of the highest At 10% of GDP, Indonesia’s value of stocks Indonesia has a low GDP per capita of USD
durations from announcement of a tender traded is below the Lower Middle Income 4,163 but is growing at a long-term average
to contract award. Lengthy procurement Countries’ average of 14% of GDP. As this rate of 7.4% per annum. High growth, should
durations add costs, risks and down time indicator measures the liquidity of equities, it not be overly impacted by COVID-19,
to contractors bidding for and investing in it is important to infrastructure investors can be expected to correlate with greater
infrastructure projects. to know they can exit investments at infrastructure spending.
appropriate points.

140
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

INDONESIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 1111.7 Population (million, 2019) 267 Unemployment rate (2019) 4.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 4,164 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 55.0% Inflation rate (2019) 3.2%
GDP growth rate (annual, 5.0% Gross Government Debt (% of 30.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.46
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 7.6 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 58 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 38.1
(annual, 2019) 2017)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 52.9 Cost to start a business 88.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 60.4 Dealing with construction 39.5
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 65.1 Product market regulation, 58.3^ Quality of land administration 51.7
network sectors
Rule of law 43.7 Regulatory (including 48.6 Registering property 75
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 60 Strength of insolvency 65.6 Time required to start a business 77.9
framework
Political stability and absence 41.1 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 16 Infrastructure investment 58.2
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 25 Private infrastructure investment 33.5
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 63 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 22.4
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 74 Value of closed infrastructure 21.3
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 58
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
5.3 18.7
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 76.3 Financing through local equity 58.6 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 51.2 Stocks traded 9.1
Summary credit rating 58 Financial depth 43
Financial stability 89.9
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

141
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Ireland

Overall performance Ireland at a glance

Ireland’s infrastructure planning processes and funding capacity are among the best
in InfraCompass2020. Ireland’s strong credit rating and high GDP per capita places
it in an excellent position to fund infrastructure investment. In addition, the quality of
Ireland’s regulatory frameworks and governance systems promote competition among
suppliers and encourage private investment. Despite an overall increase in the quality of
procurement processes since InfraCompass 2017, Ireland could look to improve stock $77,771 5 million
market liquidity, reduce its debt levels and reduce the duration of public procurement GDP per capita Population
processes. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 9 1 80
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 11 6 75 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 22 7 81

Planning 5 98

Procurement 25 5 83

Activity 26 12 41 77 $926 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 4 8 84 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 37 3 36 2019)

Top performing metrics

99.8/100 99.2/100 88/100

Cost to start a business GDP per capita Preparation of PPPs
According to the World Bank, the cost of Over the last decade, Ireland’s GDP per capita At 88, Ireland’s score on the preparation of
starting a business in Ireland is 0.1% of income has increased by 49% to USD 77,771 in 2019. PPPs is much higher than the High Income
per capita, well below the High Income This means Ireland has the highest GDP per Countries average of 67. Good practices at the
Countries’ average of 4.7%, easing the entry of capita of countries in InfraCompass2020, preparation stage help ensure that a decision
new firms. although this is partly due to many multi- is justified and that the procuring authority is
national companies realising profits in ready to initiate the process.
Ireland.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Ireland Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

7.6/100 49.6/100 52.3/100

Stocks traded Long term GDP growth trend Gross government debt
The total value of stocks traded in Ireland Ireland’s long-term GDP growth of 5.2% is Ireland’s gross government debt has fallen
amounts to 8.39% of GDP, significantly below above average for High Income Countries. substantially since 2016 and is now 60.9%
the High Income Countries’ average of 43%. As The uncertain impact of the COVID-19 of GDP. With the impact of the COVID-19
this indicator measures the liquidity of equities, pandemic may still present a challenge to pandemic on the government’s fiscal
it is important to infrastructure investors to Ireland’s strong growth. position, servicing debt may hinder the Irish
know they can exit investments at appropriate government’s ability to fund infrastructure
points. through public investment.

142
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

IRELAND OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 384.9 Population (million, 2019) 5 Unemployment rate (2019) 5.3%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 77,771 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 63.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.2%
GDP growth rate (annual, 4.3% Gross Government Debt (% of 61.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.66
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -0.7 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 78 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 31.8
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 57.8 Cost to start a business 99.8
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 80.1 Dealing with construction 48
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 86.1 Product market regulation, 66 Quality of land administration 78.3
network sectors
Rule of law 79.3 Regulatory (including 81.9 Registering property 71.9
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 46.7 Strength of insolvency 65.6 Time required to start a business 75.7
framework
Political stability and absence 67.2 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 40^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 39.4
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 88 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 11.6
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 78 Value of closed infrastructure 73.8
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 70
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
99.2 19.8
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 52.3 Financing through local equity 47.7 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 49.6 Stocks traded 7.6
Summary credit rating 77 Financial depth 58.7
Financial stability 80.8
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

143
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Italy

Overall performance Italy at a glance

The continued quality of Italy’s planning and procurement processes promotes
competition among suppliers and, in turn, provides better value for money and
outcomes for infrastructure investment. High levels of public debt, the impacts
of the COVID-19 pandemic and an economy struggling following a decade of
negative growth may hinder Italy’s ability to invest in new infrastructure. However,
the Government is working on new measures to support public investment, by $32,947 60.4 million
simplifying administrative procedures in areas that are crucial to the relaunch of GDP per capita Population
public and private investment, such as procurement, and procedures for public works
(USD, 2019) (2019)
and ultra-broadband.
ge

er
an

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
g

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
n

i ng
nk

n
rgi

pe
17-

Drivers
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 20 1 68 2.5% of GDP 0.6% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 25 1 65 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 28 5 77

Planning 13 1 96

Procurement 4 4 94

Activity 59 7 22 84.1 $1,833 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 27 1 47 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 21 49 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 88.3/100 86/100

Transparency in public procurement Quality of land administration Procurement of PPPs
Public procurement in Italy has undergone The Italian Revenue Agency provides land Italy’s procurement processes are fair,
significant change in recent years. A new public and property information services free transparent and encourage competition. Public
procurement code has been introduced with of charge to access property information procurement notices are posted online and
sector-specific regulations and e-procurement including ownership rights. This data is companies receive a minimum of 35 days to
platforms have seen increased use. maintained by local councils and is used to submit bids. Shortlisting criteria are published,
determine local property taxes. as are the results of the procurement process.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Italy Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

16.2/100 0/100 0/100

Effect of taxation on incentives to invest Gross government debt Long term GDP growth trend
According to the World Economic Forum, At 133% of GDP, Italy’s gross government debt is Italy’s real GDP per capita has fallen almost
Italy scores 16.2 on the extent to which the third largest among High Income Countries. 19% since the Global Financial Crisis. Italy’s
taxes reduce the incentive to invest. This However, around two-thirds is domestic debt. Prior to poor economic performance has been driven
is below the High Income Countries’ COVID-19, as Italy reduced its budget deficit, the EU by negative labour productivity growth, high
average score of 47.3. A low score could Commission considered Italy’s debt to GDP ratio to be levels of government debt and challenging
discourage investment and affect the stable. Nevertheless, given the impacts of COVID-19, economic conditions globally. This is likely to
competitiveness of the market. the cost of servicing  debt may be a significant burden be exacerbated by the impact of COVID-19.
on Italy’s ability to invest in new infrastructure.

144
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

ITALY OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 1988.6 Population (million, 2019) 60.4 Unemployment rate (2019) 9.2%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 32,947 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 70.0% Inflation rate (2019) 0.7%
GDP growth rate (annual, 0% Gross Government Debt (% of 133.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.77
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -4.0 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 62 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 35.4
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 16.2 Cost to start a business 72.3
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 47.1 Dealing with construction 39.9
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 65.6 Product market regulation, 71.9 Quality of land administration 88.3
network sectors
Rule of law 54.9 Regulatory (including 63.4 Registering property 85.7
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 53.3 Strength of insolvency 84.4 Time required to start a business 75.7
framework
Political stability and absence 55.2 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 25.6
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 9.2
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 77 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 31.8
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 86 Value of closed infrastructure 20.2
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 76
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
42 37
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 0 Financing through local equity 39 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 0 Stocks traded 56.1^
Summary credit rating 62 Financial depth 54.6
Financial stability 76.4
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

145
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Japan

Overall performance Japan at a glance

Japan is one of the most improved countries in procurement processes.
It has transparent procurement procedures, which increases fairness and
competitiveness for infrastructure investment. Japan provides significant
protection for investors, with a highly liquid capital market and the ability to
secure cheap lending to invest in infrastructure. $40,847 126.2 million
GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 8 4 80 3.0% of GDP 0.1% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 13 74 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 18 4 82

Planning 52 4 63

Procurement 13 42 92

Activity 71 3 13 93.2 $3,856 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 19 1 59 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 2 84 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 91.8/100

Transparency in public procurement Stocks traded Recovery rate
Japan’s public procurement notices are At 127% of GDP, Japan’s value of stocks According to the World Bank, Japan has the
made available online and tender documents traded is the third highest of all InfraCompass highest recovery rate of all InfraCompass 2020
transparently detail procurement procedures. 2020 countries. As this indicator measures countries, at 91.8 cents on the dollar in 2019.
The transparency of the process encourages the liquidity of equities, it is important to
more participation and competition, which infrastructure investors to know they can exit
drive value for money. investments at appropriate points.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Japan Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 0/100 0.7/100
Published project pipeline Gross government debt Value of closed infrastructure deals
with foreign equity sponsorship
Japan does not currently have an infrastructure Japan’s gross government debt rose to Among the High Income Countries, Japan
pipeline of projects. The addition of an 238% of GDP in 2019, the highest of all has the lowest value of closed infrastructure
infrastructure pipeline could help provide InfraCompass 2020 countries. Given the deals with foreign equity sponsorship, at only
infrastructure participants with a clear impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, if Japan’s 0.003%. Increasing foreign investment may
indication of prospective and confirmed debt or cost of servicing its existing debt reduce financing costs as a result of greater
infrastructure activity. were to rise, it may hinder the Japanese competition.
government’s ability to fund infrastructure.

146
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

JAPAN OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 5154.5 Population (million, 2019) 126.2 Unemployment rate (2019) 2.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 40,847 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 92.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.0%
GDP growth rate (annual, 0.9% Gross Government Debt (% of 238.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.83
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 3.9 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 77 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 32.1
(annual, 2019) 2008)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 50 Cost to start a business 84.9
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 74.1 Dealing with construction 65.8
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 91.8 Product market regulation, 62.8 Quality of land administration 85
network sectors
Rule of law 80.7 Regulatory (including 76.6 Registering property 88.4
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 36.7 Strength of insolvency 81.2 Time required to start a business 74.6
framework
Political stability and absence 67.7 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 50^ Infrastructure investment 34.1
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 10.9
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 78 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 6.2
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 70 Value of closed infrastructure 0.7
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 75
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
52.1 81.2
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 0 Financing through local equity 67.9 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 6.7 Stocks traded 100
Summary credit rating 77 Financial depth 83
Financial stability 90.8
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

147
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Jordan

Overall performance Jordan at a glance

Jordan is the highest ranked country in the Activity driver for InfraCompass 2020. This is
driven by high levels of private and foreign infrastructure investment relative to the size
of its economy, over the past five years. Jordan implemented structural reforms in 2019
which included improving public procurement processes to help bring better value for
money and better quality outcomes from investment. High levels of gross government
debt, low GDP growth and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic present as key $4,387 10.1 million
challenges for Jordan’s ability to deliver future infrastructure projects. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 39 55 4.8% of GDP 1.2% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 51 1 55 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 42 9 70

Planning 23 2 91

Procurement 46 5 72

Activity 1 1 81 67.4 $693 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 62 6 22 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 33 2 40 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 91.4/100

Private infrastructure investment Value of closed infrastructure deals Financial stability
with foreign equity sponsorship
At 1.4% of GDP, Jordan has one of the highest At 0.83% of GDP, Jordan has one of the highest Jordan has stable financial markets, supported
levels of private investment in infrastructure as levels of closed infrastructure deals with foreign by a higher than required Capital Adequacy
a share of GDP globally. To continue attracting equity sponsorship among InfraCompass 2020 Ratio of 16.9%. A stable financial system
capital to fund infrastructure projects, Jordan countries. A high value may reflect favourable facilitates the smooth flow of funds between
trade conditions and lower barriers to foreign
has developed a pipeline of projects to infrastructure assets and investors. The long-
investment. The COVID-19 pandemic may
identify medium and long-term investment term impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic may
impact international capital flows.
opportunities. affect stability.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Jordan Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

5.1/100 25.9/100 26/100

Stocks traded Gross government debt Long term GDP growth trend
Jordan traded stocks worth approximately At 94.6% of GDP, Jordan has the highest level Jordan’s long-term GDP growth is 2.7%,
5.5% of GDP in 2019, below the Upper Middle of gross government debt among Upper which is lower than the 3.1% average for Upper
Income Countries’ average of 25.6% of GDP. As Middle Income Countries. Considering the Middle Income Countries. Combined with the
this indicator measures the liquidity of equities, existing high level of debt and the impacts uncertain impact of the COVID-19 pandemic,
it is important to infrastructure investors to of the COVID-19 pandemic, this may hinder this growth trend may hamper Jordan’s ability
know they can exit investments at appropriate Jordan’s ability to invest in infrastructure to borrow and build more infrastructure.
points. projects.
148
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

JORDAN OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 44.2 Population (million, 2019) 10.1 Unemployment rate (2019) 14.9%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 4,387 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 91.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.0%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.2% Gross Government Debt (% of 95.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.55
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 2.7 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 35 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 33.7
(annual, 2019) 2010)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 35.5 Cost to start a business 53.2
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 56.1 Dealing with construction 79.1
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 27.3 Product market regulation, 54.2^ Quality of land administration 75
network sectors
Rule of law 54.7 Regulatory (including 51.7 Registering property 84.8
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 46.7 Strength of insolvency 50 Time required to start a business 72.4
framework
Political stability and absence 43.7 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 41.1 Infrastructure investment 55.6
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 100
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 42 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 68.1
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 68 Value of closed infrastructure 100
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 60
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
5.6 37.3
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 25.9 Financing through local equity 53.9 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 26 Stocks traded 5.1
Summary credit rating 35 Financial depth 54.1
Financial stability 91.4
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

149
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Kazakhstan

Overall performance Kazakhstan at a glance

Kazakhstan has made positive progress in recent years to increase support
for the creation of businesses and reforms aimed at increasing protection
for insolvency. Despite efforts to increase foreign investment, there is
an opportunity to increase the efficiency of infrastructure investment by
introducing additional planning measures and improving infrastructure $9,139 18.6 million
governance through conducting post-completion reviews. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 63 1 40 3.4% of GDP 1.3% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 45 7 59 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 16 83

Planning 27 2 88

Procurement 47 4 71

Activity 58 3 23 68.3 $216 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 36 2 38 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 68 1 21 2019)

Top performing metrics

99.6/100 96/100 90.6/100

Cost to start a business Registering property Strength of insolvency framework
According to the World Bank, the cost to start a According to the World Bank, it takes 4.5 days Reforms to modernise Kazakhstan’s
business in Kazakhstan is 0.2% of income per to register a property in Kazakhstan, lower insolvency framework were implemented
capita, easing the entry of new firms. than the Upper Middle Income Countries’ in 2014, resulting in a score higher than the
average of 20 days. In 2019, Kazakhstan Upper Middle Income Countries’ average of
reviewed the process to register a property 63. Strong insolvency protections help attract
and decreased the cost of registration fees. companies to invest locally.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Kazakhstan Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No 0.5/100
Post-completion reviews Environmental impact analysis Value of closed infrastructure deals
with foreign equity sponsorship
Kazakhstan does not undertake post- According to the World Bank, Kazakhstan Kazakhstan had 0.02% of GDP in deals with
completion reviews for infrastructure projects. does not have a regulated requirement foreign equity over the last five years, lower
The implementation of post-completion for environmental impact assessment. than the Upper Middle Income Countries’
reviews could help determine whether projects Undertaking environmental feasibility studies average of 0.14%. Kazakhstan is working
have achieved their objectives efficiently, and can help countries understand and balance to increase this, launching the Astana
better identify areas for improvement. environmental and infrastructure outcomes. International Financial Centre in 2018 to
facilitate an increased flow of foreign capital.

150
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

KAZAKHSTAN OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 170.3 Population (million, 2019) 18.6 Unemployment rate (2019) 5.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 9,139 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 57.0% Inflation rate (2019) 5.3%
GDP growth rate (annual, 3.8% Gross Government Debt (% of 21.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.67
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -2.8 % Sovereign risk rating (2019) 56 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 27.5
(annual, 2019) 2017)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 43.1 Cost to start a business 99.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 47.5 Dealing with construction 67.5
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 39.8 Product market regulation, 35 Quality of land administration 56.7
network sectors
Rule of law 41.4 Regulatory (including 52.8 Registering property 96
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 60 Strength of insolvency 90.6 Time required to start a business 89
framework
Political stability and absence 50 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 81.7 Infrastructure investment 50.1
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 9.5
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 59 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 33.2^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 51 Value of closed infrastructure 0.5
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 59
assessment?
Environmental impact No
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
11.7 12.5
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 83.7 Financing through local equity 31.5 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 39.2 Stocks traded 0.6
Summary credit rating 56 Financial depth 27.7
Financial stability 82.8
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

151
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Kenya

Overall performance Kenya at a glance

Due to recent reforms, Kenya’s regulatory framework has improved significantly
in the past three years, with its insolvency frameworks second strongest in
all of Africa. Combined with stable financial markets, Kenya’s infrastructure
investment activity has remained high. For continued progress in its domestic
infrastructure environment, the Kenyan government could seek to conduct post $1,998 49.4 million
completion reviews and enact policies that increase the domestic liquidity in GDP per capita Population
financial markets. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 68 1 35 7.0% of GDP 1.3% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 43 11 60 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 60 3 53

Planning 16 1 96

Procurement 27 11 83

Activity 40 7 35 53.6 $245 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 56 16 23 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 49 4 28 2019)

Top performing metrics

90.6/100 83.5/100 78.2/100

Strength of insolvency framework Financial stability Infrastructure investment
Kenya has a solid framework for reorganisation Kenya’s financial stability is satisfactory. It Investment in infrastructure is high in Kenya,
and bankruptcy which governs formal is similar to the average of 83 for the Lower at 6.5% of GDP per annum. The COVID-19
insolvency. This ensures investors have Middle Income Countries. A stable financial pandemic may impact these efforts.
appropriate protection and helps attract system facilitates the smooth flow of funds
investment for potential infrastructure projects. between infrastructure assets and investors.
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic is a
concern.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Kenya Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 1.1/100 2.5/100
Post-completion reviews Stocks traded GDP per capita
Kenya does not undertake post-completion At 1% of GDP, Kenya’s value of stocks traded Kenya has a low GDP per capita of USD 1,998
reviews for infrastructure projects. Doing so is significantly below the Lower Middle but is growing at a long-term average rate of
could help determine whether projects have Income Countries’ average of 14% of GDP. 5.6% per annum. High growth, should it not be
achieved their objectives efficiently and identify As this indicator measures the liquidity of overly impacted by COVID-19, can be expected
areas for improvement. equities, it is important to infrastructure to correlate with greater infrastructure
investors to know they can exit investments spending.
at appropriate points.

152
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

KENYA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 98.6 Population (million, 2019) 49.4 Unemployment rate (2019) 9.3%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 1,998 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 27.0% Inflation rate (2019) 5.6%
GDP growth rate (annual, 5.6% Gross Government Debt (% of 62.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.45
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 9.1% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 35 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 40.8
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 42.9 Cost to start a business 55
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 63.3 Dealing with construction 49.6
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 31.8 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 50
network sectors
Rule of law 41.8 Regulatory (including 45.5 Registering property 61.2
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 56.7 Strength of insolvency 90.6 Time required to start a business 49.2
framework
Political stability and absence 30.6 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 59.9 Infrastructure investment 78.2
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 21.8
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 71 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 19
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 75 Value of closed infrastructure 19.8
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 59
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
2.5 13.4
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 51.8 Financing through local equity 56.8 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 53.4 Stocks traded 1.1
Summary credit rating 35 Financial depth 37.2
Financial stability 83.5
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

153
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Korea, Republic Of

Overall performance Republic of Korea at a glance

The Republic of Korea has increased the transparency and fairness of public
procurement, which help drive investment activity in infrastructure projects.
This is also supported by a highly liquid capital market and increased ease
of doing business within the country, promoting competition. To improve
infrastructure investment outcomes, Korea could implement some measures to $31,431 51.8 million
better assess infrastructure opportunities to maximise return on infrastructure GDP per capita Population
investments. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 13 1 78 3.1% of GDP 0.1% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 24 66 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 15 6 84

Planning 45 2 70

Procurement 15 24 91

Activity 74 3 11 92.1 $956 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 18 63 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 5 1 77 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 95.1/100

Transparency in public procurement Stocks traded Registering property
Korea’s public procurement notices are At 152%, Korea’s value of stocks traded as According to the World Bank, it takes five and
made available online and tender documents a share of GDP is the second highest of all a half days to register a property in Korea.
transparently detail both procurement InfraCompass 2020 countries. This is a This is significantly less time than the High
procedures. The transparency of the relative decline from Korea’s peak of 187% in Income Countries’ average of 24.6 days. As
2009. As this indicator measures the liquidity
process encourages more participation and infrastructure projects often involve property
of equities, it is important to infrastructure
competition, which drive value for money. rights, the shorter time to register properties,
investors to know they can exit investments
the less costly and risky the project.
at appropriate points.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Republic of Korea Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No 0.8/100
Environmental impact analysis Market sounding and/or Value of closed PPP infrastructure
assessment deals
According to the World Bank, the Republic of The Republic of Korea currently lacks a The value of closed PPP infrastructure deals
Korea does not have a regulated requirement requirement for market sounding processes as a proportion of GDP is the lowest out of the
for environmental impact assessment. for infrastructure projects. Adding one could High Income Countries, at only 0.004%. This
Undertaking environmental feasibility studies allow the government to better determine if is significantly lower than the High Income
can help countries understand and balance there is interest from investors and lenders to Countries’ average of 0.11%. A low value may
environmental and infrastructure outcomes. provide commercial financing for projects. reflect a preference for publicly-funded models.

154
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

KOREA, REPUBLIC OF OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 1629.5 Population (million, 2019) 51.8 Unemployment rate (2019) 3.7%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 31,431 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 81.0% Inflation rate (2019) 0.5%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.0% Gross Government Debt (% of 40.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.86
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -5.7% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 86 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 31.6
(annual, 2019) 2012)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 49.4 Cost to start a business 70.7
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 55.8 Dealing with construction 91.3
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 84.3 Product market regulation, 50.6 Quality of land administration 91.7
network sectors
Rule of law 74.7 Regulatory (including 71.9 Registering property 95.1
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 50 Strength of insolvency 75 Time required to start a business 82.3
framework
Political stability and absence 59.1 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 50^ Infrastructure investment 37.9
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 6.2
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 65 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 0.8
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 66 Value of closed infrastructure 1
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 66
assessment?
Environmental impact No
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
40.1 72.3
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 68.6 Financing through local equity 52.9 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 30 Stocks traded 100
Summary credit rating 86 Financial depth 74.7
Financial stability 89.6
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

155
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Malaysia

Overall performance Malaysia at a glance

Malaysia has established systems and processes in place that provide
favourable regulatory conditions for investing in infrastructure that are
supported by a resilient financial sector. To improve the efficiency of
infrastructure investment, Malaysia could look to develop a national
infrastructure plan and publish a pipeline of future projects. This may help $11,137 32.8 million
Malaysia identify necessary infrastructure projects and provide investors with a GDP per capita Population
clearer view of investment opportunities. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 18 1 74 3.7% of GDP 0.6% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 30 1 63 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 24 80

Planning 64 1 38

Procurement 49 2 67

Activity 54 26 25 78 $1,498 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 30 1 43 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 15 61 2019)

Top performing metrics

89.7/100 89/100 88.3/100

Registering property Financial stability Quality of land administration
In Malaysia, it takes 11.5 days to register Malaysia has high financial stability, although Malaysia has one of the highest quality of
a property, which is less than the Upper the COVID-19 pandemic may impact this. land administration out of the InfraCompass
Middle Income Countries’ average of 21.7 A stable financial system facilitates the 2020 countries. A high quality system ensures
days. As infrastructure projects often involve smooth flow of funds between infrastructure reliable and accurate information is available
some transfer of property rights, an efficient and investors, improving capital supply for to help governments determine where
registration process reduces project cost and projects. infrastructure projects can be undertaken.
risk.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Malaysia Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No 7.9/100
Published project pipeline Published infrastructure plan Value of closed PPP infrastructure
deals
Malaysia does not currently publish an Malaysia does not have a national or At only 0.04% of GDP, the value of closed
infrastructure pipeline of projects. The sub-national infrastructure plan. The PPP infrastructure deals is one of the lowest
addition of an infrastructure pipeline could addition of an infrastructure plan could among Upper Middle Income Countries and
help provide infrastructure participants with a highlight challenges and opportunities for well below the average of 0.11%. A low value
clear indication of prospective and confirmed infrastructure investment, as well as detail may reflect a preference for publicly-funded
infrastructure activity. the government’s planned responses. models.

156
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

MALAYSIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 365.3 Population (million, 2019) 32.8 Unemployment rate (2019) 3.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 11,137 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 76.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.0%
GDP growth rate (annual, 4.5% Gross Government Debt (% of 56.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.69
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 0.6% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 66 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 41
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 60.2 Cost to start a business 77.7
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 68 Dealing with construction 87
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 81 Product market regulation, 58.3^ Quality of land administration 88.3
network sectors
Rule of law 62.5 Regulatory (including 63.6 Registering property 89.7
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 56.7 Strength of insolvency 46.9 Time required to start a business 61.3
framework
Political stability and absence 54 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 50^ Infrastructure investment 45.2
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 23.8
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 50 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 7.9
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 42 Value of closed infrastructure 24
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 33
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
14.2 57.9
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 55.9 Financing through local equity 63.4 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 44.9 Stocks traded 34.3
Summary credit rating 66 Financial depth 80.2
Financial stability 89
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

157
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Mali

Overall performance Mali at a glance

Mali’s continued high levels of infrastructure activity, particularly in projects with
PPP and foreign financing, showcases the country as a benchmark for African
and Low Income Countries. Despite such strong activity in the market, there is
a strong need for reform to the domestic permit process and funding capacity,
epitomised by the high business start-up costs and low credit ratings, which if $924 19.1 million
not addressed may hinder future activity. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 61 1 44 - -
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 67 5 47 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 70 8 39

Planning 17 1 95

Procurement 55 15 63

Activity 2 1 78 43.9 $61 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 64 22 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 66 4 22 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 82.9/100 77/100

Value of closed PPP infrastructure Value of closed infrastructure deals Financial stability
deals with foreign equity sponsorship
The value of privately financed PPP Mali has the second highest values of closed Financial stability is one of the lowest among
infrastructure projects as a share of GDP in Mali infrastructure deals with foreign equity all InfraCompass 2020 countries in part due
remains the highest in Africa. The continued sponsorship in Africa at 0.37% of GDP. A high to political and social fragility, which may be
availability of investment opportunities has value may reflect favourable trade conditions exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. A
helped attract private investment. However, and lower barriers to foreign investment. stable financial system facilitates the smooth
the COVID-19 pandemic may impact levels of However, the COVID-19 pandemic may flow of funds between infrastructure and
private finance. impact international capital flows. investors.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Mali Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 15.8/100 1.2/100

Cost to start a business Political stability and absence of GDP per capita
violence score
According to the World Bank, the cost of Mali has one of the lowest levels of political Despite more than tripling over the past 20
starting a business in Mali is 55% of income stability among all InfraCompass 2020 years, Mali’s GDP per capita is still relatively
per capita, the second most expensive among countries. Government instability impedes low at USD 924. High growth, should it not be
InfraCompass 2020 countries. Lowering costs governance and economic reforms, and can overly impacted by COVID-19, can be expected
could ease the entry of new firms. deter investors from committing capital to to correlate with greater infrastructure
long-term infrastructure projects. spending.
158
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

MALI OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 17.6 Population (million, 2019) 19.1 Unemployment rate (2019) 9.8%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 924 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 42.0% Inflation rate (2019) 0.2%
GDP growth rate (annual, 5.0% Gross Government Debt (% of 38.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.29
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -0.3% Sovereign risk rating (2019) NA Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 33
(annual, 2019) 2009)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 42 Cost to start a business 0
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 41.8 Dealing with construction 60.7
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 28.3 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 26.7
network sectors
Rule of law 34 Regulatory (including 39 Registering property 74.1
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 26.7 Strength of insolvency 56.2 Time required to start a business 75.7
framework
Political stability and absence 15.8 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 68.6^ Infrastructure investment 91.9^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 25 Private infrastructure investment 36.7
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 68 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 100
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 62 Value of closed infrastructure 82.9
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 70
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
1.2 12.2
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 70.6 Financing through local equity 34.8 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 41.6 Stocks traded 15^
Summary credit rating 32.5^ Financial depth 20.4
Financial stability 77
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

159
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Mexico

Overall performance Mexico at a glance

Mexico is the highest ranked country for procurement in InfraCompass 2020. At a federal level,
Mexico’s public procurement processes are transparent and, as of 2017, there are new guidelines
specifically for infrastructure and PPP projects. According to the World Bank, Mexico’s processes
for the procurement of PPPs and contract management of PPPs during delivery and operations
are highly rated.Mexico also has favourable regulatory conditions for investing in infrastructure,
supported by a stable financial sector. However, slow economic growth and small stock market
capitalization are likely to present key challenges for Mexico’s ability to attract capital and deliver $10,118 125.9 million
future infrastructure projects. This is also likely to be exacerbated by the long-term impacts of the GDP per capita Population
COVID-19 pandemic.
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 28 2 60 1.5% of GDP 1.3% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 31 2 63 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 48 7 66

Planning 31 3 77

Procurement 1 23 95

Activity 67 5 17 72.4 $1,836 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 33 2 41 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 48 3 28 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 92/100 84/100

Transparency in public procurement Financial stability PPP contract management
Mexico’s public procurement notices are Mexico’s financial markets have shown Mexico enacted PPP laws in 2012, supported
made available online and tender documents stability, driven by a commitment to fiscal by increased transparency measures. The
transparently detail procurement procedures. prudence. However, a slowdown in economic Ministry of Finance and Public Credit is one of
The transparency of the process encourages growth, recent stagnation of investment and the principal authorities for PPPs in Mexico.
more participation and competition, which can the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic may Effective management of PPP projects are
drive value for money. pose a risk to Mexico’s financial stability. important to help projects stay on time and
budget.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Mexico Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 20.5/100 7/100
Market sounding and/or assessment Long term GDP growth trend Stocks traded
According to the World Bank, there is an Mexico’s long-term GDP growth was 2.2%. Mexico traded stocks worth 7.7% of GDP
absence of market sounding process in Mexico. GDP growth may decrease following the in 2019, below the Upper Middle Income
Adding one could allow the government to impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Countries’ average of 25.6% of GDP. As this
determine if there is interest from investors and indicator measures the liquidity of equities,
lenders to provide commercial financing for it is important to infrastructure investors to
projects. know they can exit investments at appropriate
points.

160
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

MEXICO OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 1274.2 Population (million, 2019) 125.9 Unemployment rate (2019) 3.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 10,118 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 80.0% Inflation rate (2019) 3.8%
GDP growth rate (annual, 0.4% Gross Government Debt (% of 54.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.6
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 3.3% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 63 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 48.3
(annual, 2019) 2016)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 40.2 Cost to start a business 67.3
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 72.1 Dealing with construction 75.9
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 63.9 Product market regulation, 54.6 Quality of land administration 53.3
network sectors
Rule of law 36.5 Regulatory (including 53 Registering property 62.5
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 43.3 Strength of insolvency 71.9 Time required to start a business 81.2
framework
Political stability and absence 40.5 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 65.8 Infrastructure investment 18.7
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 14.9
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 81 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 13.7
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 82 Value of closed infrastructure 20.7
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 84
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
12.9 16.6
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 57.8 Financing through local equity 44.5 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 20.5 Stocks traded 7
Summary credit rating 65 Financial depth 35.8
Financial stability 92
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

161
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Morocco

Overall performance Morocco at a glance

Morocco has established efficient processes that aid starting a business, encouraging
investment and competition from new suppliers. Morocco needs to reform its
infrastructure governance to attract better quality investment. Setting out a strategic
infrastructure plan for the nation and publishing a project pipeline could contribute to
improved infrastructure investment. Morocco has demonstrated financial stability,
but the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the lack of liquidity in capital $3,345 35.6 million
markets may pose challenges to attracting investment in future infrastructure projects. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 37 1 55 6.0% of GDP 1.0% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 38 10 61 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 27 78

Planning 65 1 38

Procurement 29 16 82

Activity 27 18 41 72.6 $863 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 45 3 31 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 35 1 39 2019)

Top performing metrics

92.8/100 89/100 82.1/100

Cost to start a business Financial stability Registering property
According to the World Bank, the cost of The Moroccan financial system is adequately According to the World Bank, it takes 20 days
starting a business in Morocco is 3.6% of capitalised and resilient to severe shocks. to register a property in Morocco, which is
income per capita, which is significantly lower Morocco scores above the Lower Middle the fastest among Lower Middle Income
than the average of 16.9% for Lower Middle Income Countries average of 83. Despite Countries. This follows Morocco reviewing the
Income Countries, easing the entry of new being in a good position, the COVID-19 processes to register a property and reducing
firms. pandemic may impact this. the time to obtain a property certificate.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Morocco Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No 3/100
Published project pipeline Published infrastructure plan Stocks traded
Morocco does not currently publish an Morocco does not have a national or sub- At 3.3% of GDP, Morocco’s value of stocks
infrastructure pipeline of projects. The national infrastructure plan. The addition traded is lower than the Lower Middle Income
addition of an infrastructure pipeline could of an infrastructure plan could highlight Countries average of 15.5% of GDP. As this
help provide infrastructure participants with a infrastructure challenges and opportunities indicator measures the liquidity of equities,
clear indication of prospective and confirmed for investment, as well as detail the it is important to infrastructure investors to
infrastructure activity. government’s planned responses. know they can exit investments at appropriate
points.

162
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

MOROCCO OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 119 Population (million, 2019) 35.6 Unemployment rate (2019) 9.0%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 3,345 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 62.0% Inflation rate (2019) 0.6%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.7% Gross Government Debt (% of 65.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.56
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -0.6% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 53 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 39.5
(annual, 2019) 2013)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 50.6 Cost to start a business 92.8
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 65.7 Dealing with construction 81.6
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 28.7 Product market regulation, 54.2^ Quality of land administration 56.7
network sectors
Rule of law 47.2 Regulatory (including 45.1 Registering property 82.1
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 56.7 Strength of insolvency 75 Time required to start a business 80.1
framework
Political stability and absence 44.5 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 72.3 Infrastructure investment 68.3
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 29.9
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 49 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 37.5
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 62 Value of closed infrastructure 28.2
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 63
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
4.3 41
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 48.9 Financing through local equity 53.7 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 34.4 Stocks traded 3
Summary credit rating 53 Financial depth 48.1
Financial stability 89
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

163
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Myanmar

Overall performance Myanmar at a glance

Myanmar’s regulatory frameworks support the creation of businesses,
encourage new investment and promotes competition among suppliers. To
improve the efficiency of infrastructure investment, Myanmar could look to
develop a national infrastructure plan and publish a pipeline of future projects.
This could also help attract private or foreign equity investors to help reduce the $1,245 53 million
infrastructure gap. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 67 1 37 4.1% of GDP 3.9% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 71 42 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 57 10 57

Planning 76 7

Procurement 62 5 56

Activity 47 5 30 $85 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 31 1 42 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 31 1 42 2019)

Top performing metrics

84.5/100 73.3/100 72.1/100

Time required to start a business Cost to start a business Dealing with construction permits
According to the World Bank, it takes 7 days According to the World Bank, it costs 13.3% According to the World Bank, it takes 88
to start a business in Myanmar, which is of income per capita to start a business days to obtain construction permits, which is
significantly faster than the Lower Middle in Myanmar, which has improved due to a the second fastest period for Lower Middle
Income Countries average of 20.4 days. This reduction in incorporation fees in 2019. The Income Countries and well below the cohort
follows Myanmar reviewing the process to start cost is slightly lower than the Lower Middle average of 174.9 days. This improved due to
a business and introducing an online platform Income Countries average of 17% of income Myanmar making services available online.
to simplify registration. per capita, easing the entry of new firms.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Myanmar Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Published project pipeline Published infrastructure plan Market sounding and/or assessment
Myanmar does not currently publish an Myanmar does not have a national or According to the World Bank, there is no
infrastructure pipeline of projects. The sub-national infrastructure plan. The formal requirement for a market sounding
addition of an infrastructure pipeline could addition of an infrastructure plan could process in Myanmar. Adding one could allow
help provide infrastructure participants with a highlight challenges and opportunities for the government to determine if there is an
clear indication of prospective and confirmed infrastructure investment, as well as detail interest from investors and lenders to provide
infrastructure activity. the government’s planned responses. commercial financing for projects.

164
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

MYANMAR OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 66 Population (million, 2019) 53 Unemployment rate (2019) 1.6%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 1,245 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 31.0% Inflation rate (2019) 7.8%
GDP growth rate (annual, 6.2% Gross Government Debt (% of 39.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.26
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -4.2% Sovereign risk rating (2019) NA Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 38.1
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 55.2 Cost to start a business 73.3
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 27.4 Dealing with construction 72.1
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 14.7 Product market regulation, 58.3^ Quality of land administration 26.7
network sectors
Rule of law 29.3 Regulatory (including 34.9 Registering property 42
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 0 Strength of insolvency 25 Time required to start a business 84.5
framework
Political stability and absence 28.2 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 50^ Infrastructure investment 61.6
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 25 Private infrastructure investment 13.3
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 11 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 36.6^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis No Procurement of PPPs 37 Value of closed infrastructure 9.9
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 27
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
1.6 12.1
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 69.7 Financing through local equity 18.5
Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 60.1 Stocks traded 53.6^
Summary credit rating 71.3^ Financial depth 64.6^
Financial stability 89.3^
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

165
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Netherlands

Overall performance Netherlands at a glance

The Netherlands’ infrastructure procurement processes rank second among
InfraCompass2020 countries. Combined with strong regulatory frameworks and
infrastructure governance systems this helps encourage infrastructure investment and
competition among suppliers. Additionally, with a strong credit rating and high GDP per
capita, the Netherlands has a strong infrastructure funding capacity. However, sluggish
long-term GDP growth, relatively high public debt and the potential economic fallout from $52,368 17.2 million
the COVID-19 pandemic may adversely affect Netherlands’ ability to fund infrastructure
GDP per capita Population
investment in the future.
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
r
(/1

de
g

rfo
ch
(/7

l le
)

g
20

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nk

nte

ba
nk

Drivers
e

p
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
Ra

Co
As

To
(20

Governance 3 1 82 — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 4 1 80 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 5 91

Planning 10 1 97

Procurement 2 1 94

Activity 56 17 25 94.3 $2,194 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 7 80 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 14 63 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 97.8/100

Transparency in public procurement Summary credit rating Registering property
The Netherland’s public procurement The Netherlands’ institutional strength and high In the Netherlands it takes just 2.5 days to
notices are made available online and tender per capita income have helped it maintain a AAA register a property, a fraction of the 25 day
documents transparently detail procurement credit rating from the major ratings agencies. European average. As infrastructure projects
procedures. The transparency of the The Netherlands’ credit rating and sound macro- often involve some transfer of property rights,
process encourages more participation financial management allow the government an efficient registration process reduces project
and competition, which can drive value for to borrow at a lower cost to fund investment in cost and risk.
money. infrastructure.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Netherlands Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

8.7/100 61.4/100 49/100

Long term GDP growth trend Gross government debt Dealing with construction permits

The Netherlands’ long-term GDP growth trend The Netherlands’ gross government debt According to the World Bank, in the Netherlands
decreased to 0.9%, below the High Income sits at 49% of GDP, lower than the High it takes an average of 161 days to deal with
Countries’ average of 1.9%. Combined with the Income Countries’ average of 74% of GDP. construction permits. Expediting this process
uncertain impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, low However, the impacts of the COVID-19 could significantly impact investment in
growth may hamper the Netherlands’ ability to pandemic may expand government debt infrastructure by helping to reduce delays.
borrow and build more infrastructure. further, and hinder Netherland’s ability to
invest in infrastructure.
166
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

NETHERLANDS OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 902.4 Population (million, 2019) 17.2 Unemployment rate (2019) 3.8%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 52,368 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 91.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.5%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.8% Gross Government Debt (% of 49.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.84
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -1.6% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 100 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 28.2
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 67.8 Cost to start a business 92
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 71.6 Dealing with construction 49
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 90.1 Product market regulation, 74.2 Quality of land administration 95
network sectors
Rule of law 86.3 Regulatory (including 90.4 Registering property 97.8
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 50 Strength of insolvency 71.9 Time required to start a business 92.3
framework
Political stability and absence 64.5 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 73.4 Infrastructure investment 40^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 19.3
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 81 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 23.7
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 80 Value of closed infrastructure 15.2
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 75
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
66.8 50.9
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 61.4 Financing through local equity 69.6 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 8.7 Stocks traded 48.5^
Summary credit rating 100 Financial depth 76.3
Financial stability 93.1
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

167
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

New Zealand

Overall performance New Zealand at a glance

New Zealand’s transparent public procurement processes provide favourable
conditions for investment in infrastructure projects. This is supported by
the ability to easily establish a business, which promotes competition. To
encourage investment in infrastructure projects and provide security for
investors, New Zealand could improve the liquidity of its financial market and $40,634 5 million
reduce government debt to make financing projects cheaper. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 6 1 81 2.8% of GDP 0.3% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 16 2 72 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 2 94

Planning 9 1 97

Procurement 11 7 93

Activity 46 17 31 75.5 $565 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 13 1 72 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 18 1 56 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 99.6/100 98.9/100

Transparency in public procurement Cost to start a business Time required to start a business
New Zealand’s public procurement notices are According to the World Bank, the average According to the World Bank, it only takes half
made available online and tender documents cost of starting a business in New Zealand is a day to start a business in New Zealand, the
transparently detail procurement procedures. 0.2% of income per capita, easing the entry of shortest timeframe of any InfraCompass 2020
The transparency of the process encourages new firms. country. Shorter times to set up can persuade
more participation and greater competition, businesses, including new infrastructure
which drive value for money. entities, to set up in a country.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
New Zealand Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

24.3/100 5.4/100 76.8/100

Long term GDP growth trend Stocks traded Gross government debt
Although New Zealand’s long-term GDP growth New Zealand’s value of stocks traded as New Zealand’s gross government debt fell
rate has risen to 2.6% from a 20-year low in a share of GDP was 6%, compared to the to 29.5% of GDP in 2019, a decline that has
2015 of 2.1%, it is still lower than its 20 year average of 43% for High Income Countries. continued from a peak of 35.7% of GDP
average of 3%. Long-term growth rates signal a As this indicator measures the liquidity of in 2012. Although higher than the 20 year
country’s capacity to fund infrastructure from equities, it is important to infrastructure average of 28%, the 2019 figure is still lower
future growth. investors to know they can exit investments than the High Income Countries’ average of
at appropriate points. 74% of GDP, suggesting capacity to borrow to
fund infrastructure.

168
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

NEW ZEALAND OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 204.7 Population (million, 2019) 5 Unemployment rate (2019) 4.8%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 40,634 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 87.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.4%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.5% Gross Government Debt (% of 30.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.71
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -1.4% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 93 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, NA) NA
(annual, 2019)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 64.1 Cost to start a business 99.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 73.8 Dealing with construction 70.5
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 79.7 Product market regulation, 50.8 Quality of land administration 88.3
network sectors
Rule of law 87.5 Regulatory (including 89.6 Registering property 96.9
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 50 Strength of insolvency 53.1 Time required to start a business 98.9
framework
Political stability and absence 75.7 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 89.9 Infrastructure investment 33.5
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 16.1
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 82 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 33.7
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 67 Value of closed infrastructure 38.8
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 63
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
51.8 76.2
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 76.8 Financing through local equity 71 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 24.3 Stocks traded 5.4
Summary credit rating 93 Financial depth 61.8
Financial stability 94
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

169
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Niger

Overall performance Niger at a glance

Niger has dramatically improved its position in permit processes since 2016,
reducing the cost to start a business from 32% to 8% of income per capita and
the time to register a property from 36 days to only 13, placing them among the
top African countries for Permits. To build on these efficiency gains, the Niger
government should seek to publish an infrastructure plan and project pipeline, $405 23.3 million
as well as perform post-completion reviews. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 72 1 27 — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 73 41 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 49 9 64

Planning 62 1 39

Procurement 74 1 31

Activity 15 1 51 — —
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 66 3 21 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 62 4 24 2019)

Top performing metrics

88.4/100 84.1/100 77.9/100

Registering property Cost to start a business Time required to start a business
It takes 13 days to register a property in Niger, According to the World Bank, the cost of According to the World Bank, the time required
the second lowest of Low Income and African starting a business in Niger is equal to 8% of to start a business in Niger is 10 days, which
Countries. This is down from 36 days in income per capita, far lower than the African is faster than the African average of 19 days.
2017. As infrastructure projects often involve average of 27%, easing the entry of new Shorter times to set up businesses can
property rights, the shorter the time to register firms. persuade businesses to set up in a country,
properties, the less costly and risky the project. including new infrastructure entities.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Niger Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Published project pipeline Published infrastructure Published infrastructure plan
procurement guidelines
Niger does not currently publish an Niger does not publish guidelines for the Niger does not have a national or sub-
infrastructure pipeline of projects. The procurement of infrastructure projects. national infrastructure plan. The addition
addition of an infrastructure pipeline could Publishing guidelines makes contractors of an infrastructure plan could highlight
help provide infrastructure participants with a aware of the government’s processes, infrastructure challenges and opportunities for
clear indication of prospective and confirmed expectations and requirements, improves investment, as well as detail the government’s
infrastructure activity. transparency and helps the government planned responses.
achieve better value for money.

170
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

NIGER OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 9.4 Population (million, 2019) 23.3 Unemployment rate (2019) 0.3%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 405 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 16.0% Inflation rate (2019) -1.3%
GDP growth rate (annual, 6.3% Gross Government Debt (% of 56.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.16
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -2.2% Sovereign risk rating (2019) NA Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 34.3
(annual, 2019) 2014)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 41.3^ Cost to start a business 84.1
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 54.1^ Dealing with construction 68.9
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 20.9 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 13.3
network sectors
Rule of law 38.4 Regulatory (including 37.2 Registering property 88.4
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 26.7 Strength of insolvency 56.2 Time required to start a business 77.9
framework
Political stability and absence 29 Investment promotion agency? No
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 91.9^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 34.7^
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 60 Published procurement No Value of closed PPP 42.5^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 43 Value of closed infrastructure 33.2
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 52
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
0.5 6.8
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 56.3 Financing through local equity 41.2^ Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 52.3 Stocks traded 15^
Summary credit rating 32.5^ Financial depth 25.3^
Financial stability 80.9^
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

171
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Nigeria

Overall performance Nigeria at a glance

Africa’s largest economic and population centre, Nigeria has the foundations to
become a hub for future investment opportunities. Nigeria has improved permit
processing as the time required to start a business has shortened from 24 to
seven days since 2017. To make further efficiency gains in permit processes,
the Nigerian government could seek to shorten the days required to register $2,222 201 million
property and enact policies that increase the domestic liquidity in financial GDP per capita Population
markets. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 55 3 47 4.0% of GDP 1.2% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 68 1 45 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 65 4 44

Planning 25 2 89

Procurement 56 1 63

Activity 35 1 37 39.7 $489 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 60 1 22 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 74 3 18 2019)

Top performing metrics

84.5/100 81.5/100 76.7/100

Time required to start a business Financial stability Gross government debt
According to the World Bank, it takes seven Nigeria’s financial stability is slightly below Nigeria’s gross government debt amounts
days to start a business in Nigeria, which is the average of 83 for the Lower Middle to 29% of GDP, lower than the Lower Middle
significantly faster than the Lower Middle Income Countries. Stable financial markets Income Countries’ average of 54%. The
Income Countries average of 20.4 days. Shorter facilitate the smooth flow of funds between COVID-19 pandemic, and recent developments
times can ease businesses entry into a market, infrastructure assets and investors. The in the oil market, may increase debt levels, but
including for new infrastructure entities. impact of the COVID-19 pandemic is a Nigeria is currently in a better fiscal position to
concern. fund infrastructure than its peers.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Nigeria Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0.6/100 6.2/100 2.8/100

Stocks traded Registering property GDP per capita

At 0.6% of GDP, Nigeria’s value of stocks traded It takes 105 days to register a property in Nigeria has a low GDP per capita of USD 2,222
is significantly below the Lower Middle Income Nigeria, compared to an average of 63 days but is growing at a long-term average rate of
Countries’ average of 14% of GDP. As this among Lower Middle Income Countries. 4.4% per annum. High growth, should it not be
indicator measures the liquidity of equities, it is As infrastructure projects often involve overly impacted by COVID-19, can be expected
important to infrastructure investors to know property rights, the longer the time to register to correlate with greater infrastructure
they can exit investments at appropriate points. properties, the more costly and risky the spending.
project.

172
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

NIGERIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 446.5 Population (million, 2019) 201 Unemployment rate (2019) 6.1%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 2,222 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 50.0% Inflation rate (2019) 11.3%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.3% Gross Government Debt (% of 30.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.42
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 9.3% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 31 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 43
(annual, 2019) 2009)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 51.8 Cost to start a business 47.4
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 61.9 Dealing with construction 64.8
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 27.8 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 30
network sectors
Rule of law 32.4 Regulatory (including 32.3 Registering property 6.2
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 50 Strength of insolvency 31.2 Time required to start a business 84.5
framework
Political stability and absence 13.5 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 63.4
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 25 Private infrastructure investment 19.9
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 27 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 42.5^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 71 Value of closed infrastructure 21.5
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 53
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
2.8 5.3
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 76.7 Financing through local equity 50.4 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 41.9 Stocks traded 0.6
Summary credit rating 31 Financial depth 14.1
Financial stability 81.5
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

173
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Pakistan

Overall performance Pakistan at a glance

Pakistan is the most improved country in the activity driver in InfraCompass 2020,
increasing its ranking by 45 since InfraCompass 2017. This is driven by an increase in
private infrastructure investment as a percentage of GDP over the last five years and
investments under The Belt and Road Initiative and will help address Pakistan’s large
infrastructure gap. The key to improving infrastructure investment in Pakistan is to
reduce political instability, improve permit processes for registering property and grow its $1,388 204.7 million
GDP per capita. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic presents a key challenge
GDP per capita Population
for Pakistan’s ability to deliver future infrastructure projects and growth.
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng
(/1
(/7

20

rfo

l le
i ng
nk

n
erg
ore

nte

ba
pe
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

p
Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 41 1 53 3.4% of GDP 1.1% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 54 7 54 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 63 1 48

Planning 19 2 95

Procurement 61 13 60

Activity 13 45 52 55.6 $2,061 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 71 17 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 59 4 25 2019)

Top performing metrics

86.1/100 83.8/100 78.6/100

Cost to start a business Financial stability Private infrastructure investment
According to the World Bank, the cost to start Pakistan’s financial stability is satisfactory Pakistan needs to maintain the flow of private
a business in Pakistan is 6.9% of income per and in line with other Lower Middle Income capital into infrastructure projects, particularly
capita, well below the Lower Middle Income countries.Pakistan has a strong Capital given the long-term impacts of the COVID-19
Countries average of 17%. Low start-up costs Adequacy Ratio well above minimum regulated pandemic are yet to be determined. Increasing
private infrastructure investment can bring
ease the entry of new firms. level and high liquidity in funds, which can
greater cost discipline, innovation and value to
improve the supply of capital for infrastructure.
money.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Pakistan Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 1.8/100 12.2/100

Registering property GDP per capita Political stability and
absence of violence score
According to the World Bank, it takes an Pakistan’s GDP per capita was USD 1,388 Pakistan has the lowest level of political
average of 105 days to register a property. in 2019, growing at a long term rate of stability among all InfraCompass 2020
In 2019, Pakistan improved the process 3.7%. Pakistan’s funding capacity for major countries. Government instability impedes
of registering a property by increasing the infrastructure spending is limited by its low governance and economic reforms, and can
transparency of the land administration GDP per capita and this could be further deter investors from committing capital to
system, which is expected to improve this impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. long-term infrastructure projects.
score over the foreseeable future.

174
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

PAKISTAN OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 284.2 Population (million, 2019) 204.7 Unemployment rate (2019) 3.0%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 1,388 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 37.0% Inflation rate (2019) 7.3%
GDP growth rate (annual, 3.3% Gross Government Debt (% of 77.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.4
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -11.3% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 25 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 33.5
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 40.5 Cost to start a business 86.1
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 46.9 Dealing with construction 57.5
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 41.7 Product market regulation, 54.2^ Quality of land administration 23.3
network sectors
Rule of law 36.5 Regulatory (including 37.1 Registering property 0
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 56.7 Strength of insolvency 71.9 Time required to start a business 63.5
framework
Political stability and absence 12.2 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 28.4^ Infrastructure investment 37.8
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 25 Private infrastructure investment 78.6
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 67 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 50
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 66 Value of closed infrastructure 40.6
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 37
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
1.8 9.1
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 39.9 Financing through local equity 46.5 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 35.5 Stocks traded 9
Summary credit rating 26 Financial depth 30.3
Financial stability 83.8
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

175
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Papua New Guinea

Overall performance Papua New Guinea at a glance

Papua New Guinea has a reasonable level of recent infrastructure activity for the size of
its economy, with overall investment at 5.4% of GDP per annum. However, its financial
markets lack depth and its permits and planning of infrastructure could be reformed.
Papua New Guinea could benefit from publishing a pipeline of infrastructure projects
and an overarching national infrastructure plan. It could also set formal requirements
for environmental impact statements, improve the quality of land administration, and $2,742 8.6 million
better prepare for infrastructure and PPP market processes to attract better quality GDP per capita Population
infrastructure investment. (USD, 2019) (2019)
e
ng

er

er
a
)

rm
00

ch

ad
r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1

20

l le
g
ore

n
irin

pe
erg
17-
ore

nte

ba
Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
(20
Sc

Co
As

To

Governance 48 — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 50 1 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 34 1

Planning 27

Procurement 56 2

Activity 42 8 — —
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 22 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 25 2019)

Top performing metrics

82.8/100 67.6/100 66/100

Financial stability Gross government debt Infrastructure investment
Papua New Guinea’s financial stability is similar Papua New Guinea’s gross government Investment in infrastructure is high in Papua
to the average of 83 for Lower Middle Income debt amounts to 41% of GDP, lower than the New Guinea, at 5.4% of GDP per annum. The
Countries. Stable financial markets facilitate the Lower Middle Income Countries’ average of COVID-19 pandemic may impact these efforts.
smooth flow of funds between infrastructure 54%. However, its credit rating is only B, and
assets and investors. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic may increase debt
the COVID-19 pandemic is a concern. levels.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Papua New Guinea Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Published project pipeline Published infrastructure Environmental impact analysis
plan
Papua New Guinea does not currently publish Papua New Guinea does not have a national According to the World Bank, Papua New
an infrastructure pipeline of projects. The or sub-national infrastructure plan. The Guinea does not have a regulated requirement
addition of an infrastructure pipeline could addition of an infrastructure plan could for environmental impact assessment.
help provide infrastructure participants with a highlight infrastructure challenges and Undertaking environmental feasibility studies
clear indication of prospective and confirmed opportunities for investment, as well as detail can help countries understand and balance
infrastructure activity. the government’s planned responses. environmental and infrastructure outcomes.

176
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

PAPUA NEW GUINEA OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 23.6 Population (million, 2019) 8.6 Unemployment rate (2019) 2.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 2,742 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 13.0% Inflation rate (2019) 3.9%
GDP growth rate (annual, 5.0% Gross Government Debt (% of 41.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.34
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -0.3% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 30 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 41.9
(annual, 2019) 2009)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 46.5^ Cost to start a business 62.7
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 56.8^ Dealing with construction 31.2
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 24.9 Product market regulation, 54.2^ Quality of land administration 18.3
network sectors
Rule of law 34.7 Regulatory (including 39.1 Registering property 35.7
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 36.7 Strength of insolvency 37.5 Time required to start a business 9.4
framework
Political stability and absence 38.9 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 44.7^ Infrastructure investment 66^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 38.2^ Private infrastructure investment 38.6^
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 15 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 40.9^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis No Procurement of PPPs 7 Value of closed infrastructure 23.7^
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 9
assessment?
Environmental impact No
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
3.5 9.3
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 67.6 Financing through local equity 48.6^ Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 52.3 Stocks traded 0.4
Summary credit rating 30 Financial depth 34.7^
Financial stability 82.8^
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

177
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Paraguay

Overall performance Paraguay at a glance

Paraguay has seen a significant increase in infrastructure investment, thanks
in part to greater private financing and foreign equity investment. With relatively
low levels of public debt and a stable financial system, the supply of capital
for infrastructure projects is likely to remain strong, subject to longer-term
global macroeconomic uncertainties resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. $5,692 7.2 million
Despite some improvements in the regulatory environment, the ease and GDP per capita Population
cost of starting a business remains a weak point, hindering competition and (USD, 2019) (2019)
investment.
20 ge

er
)

er
00
n
6)

rm
r
a

ad
de
ng
(/1
(/7

ch

rfo
g
)

l le
n
rgi

irin
ore

nte
nk
nk

pe
Drivers
17-

ba
e

p
Em
Ra
Ra

Co
Sc

As

Gl o
(20

To
Governance 73 26 6.0% of GDP 1.5% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 47 3 58 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 72 2 30

Planning 32 3 77

Procurement 75 2 19

Activity 3 20 74 59.8 —
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 46 2 31 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 54 3 27 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 90.7/100

Private infrastructure investment Value of closed PPP infrastructure deals Financial stability
Paraguay had a high level of private The value of privately financed PPP Paraguay’s financial system remains stable
infrastructure investment as a share of GDP infrastructure projects in Paraguay remains with solvency indicators in line with the Basel
over the last five years, at 1.1%. It has enacted high. Government reforms, a stable financial capital requirements. The government has
new legislation governing PPPs and turnkey system and the continued availability of also continued to improve regulation of the
projects aimed at attracting private investment investment opportunities, have all helped sector which should help maintain stability.
in infrastructure projects. attract private investment. However, the long-term impact of the COVID-19
pandemic is a concern.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Paraguay Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 0/100 No
Cost to start a business Transparency in public Published infrastructure procurement
procurement guidelines
According to the World Bank, the cost of Paraguay does not make public procurement Paraguay does not publish guidelines for
starting a business is 52.2% of income per notices available online that detail both the procurement of infrastructure projects.
capita. Reducing the cost to start a business procurement procedures and shortlisting Publishing guidelines makes contractors
could ease the entry of new firms, and increase criteria. A more transparent process aware of the government’s processes,
the appeal of Paraguay to international firms could encourage more participation and expectations and requirements, improves
looking to expand. competition, which drive value for money. transparency and helps the government
achieve better value for money.

178
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

PARAGUAY OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 40.7 Population (million, 2019) 7.2 Unemployment rate (2019) 4.7%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 5,692 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 62.0% Inflation rate (2019) 3.5%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.0% Gross Government Debt (% of 24.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.54
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -4.1% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 46 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 48.8
(annual, 2019) 2017)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 67 Cost to start a business 0
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 57.2 Dealing with construction 61.6
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 23 Product market regulation, 53.7^ Quality of land administration 40
network sectors
Rule of law 39.2 Regulatory (including 47.5 Registering property 58.9
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 0 Strength of insolvency 59.4 Time required to start a business 22.7
framework
Political stability and absence 48 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 55.7 Infrastructure investment 52.8
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 0 Private infrastructure investment 100
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 89 Published procurement No Value of closed PPP 100
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 80 Value of closed infrastructure 41.8
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 83
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
7.3 20.8
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 81.4 Financing through local equity 44.9 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 41.6 Stocks traded 0.1^
Summary credit rating 46 Financial depth 31.6
Financial stability 90.7
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

179
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Peru

Overall performance Peru at a glance

Peru has prioritised infrastructure investment, creating a plan to attract
the necessary investment to fund its infrastructure projects and close the
infrastructure gap. Peru’s regulatory environment supports the creation of
businesses promoting competition and investment. Despite a resilient financial
sector, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, low GDP growth and lack of $7,047 32.5 million
liquidity in the capital market may hinder Peru’s ability to attract capital and GDP per capita Population
deliver infrastructure projects. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 69 1 34 4.8% of GDP 0.9% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 36 3 61 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 45 1 68

Planning 11 1 97

Procurement 52 19 65

Activity 17 13 48 62.3 $1,643 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 32 41 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 50 3 28 2019)

Top performing metrics

91.5/100 90.1/100 81.1/100

Registering property Financial stability Cost to start a business
According to the World Bank, it takes 9.5 days to Peru has become more financially stable According to the World Bank, it costs 9.4% of
register a property in Peru, which is lower than and ranks slightly above the Upper Middle income per capita to start a business in Peru,
the Upper Middle Income Countries average of Income Countries’ average of 88.6. The slightly lower than the Upper Middle Income
21.7 days. As infrastructure projects often involve stability is driven by strong capital buffers Countries average of 11%, easing the entry of
property rights, the shorter the time to register and profitability of the banking sector. The new firms.
properties, the less cost and risk to the project. COVID-19 pandemic may test this resilience.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Peru Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 0.9/100 41.6/100
Post-completion reviews Stocks traded Long term GDP growth trend
Peru does not undertake post-completion At 1% of GDP, Peru’s value of stocks traded Peru’s long-term GDP growth is 4.4%, which
reviews for infrastructure projects. The is far lower than the Upper Middle Income is higher than the Upper Middle Income
implementation of post-completion reviews Countries’ average of 26%. As this indicator Countries’ average of 3.1%. Its relatively high
could help determine whether projects have measures the liquidity of equities, it is growth, should it not be overly impacted by
achieved their objectives efficiently and identify important to infrastructure investors to know COVID-19, can be expected to correlate with
areas for improvement. they can exit investments at appropriate greater infrastructure spending.
points.

180
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

PERU OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 229 Population (million, 2019) 32.5 Unemployment rate (2019) 2.9%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 7,047 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 78.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.2%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.6% Gross Government Debt (% of 27.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.55
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 0.6% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 65 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 43.3
(annual, 2019) 2017)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 43.3 Cost to start a business 81.1
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 62.8 Dealing with construction 56.6
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 31.3 Product market regulation, 53.7^ Quality of land administration 60
network sectors
Rule of law 39.7 Regulatory (including 60.4 Registering property 91.5
competition) quality
Shareholder g overnance 43.3 Strength of insolvency 59.4 Time required to start a business 42.5
framework
Political stability and absence 45.7 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 67.6 Infrastructure investment 65.6
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 25 Private infrastructure investment 54.7
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 81 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 43.4
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 66 Value of closed infrastructure 26.6
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 78
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
9 21.2
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 78.9 Financing through local equity 43.2 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 41.6 Stocks traded 0.9
Summary credit rating 65 Financial depth 36.7
Financial stability 90.1
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

181
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Poland

Overall performance Poland at a glance

Poland’s regulatory framework and infrastructure governance systems are
designed to encourage private investment and industry competition. Despite
these systems and strong infrastructure funding capacity, infrastructure
activity and private infrastructure investment remain low. To encourage greater
investment and improve competition Poland could do more to support the
creation of new businesses. This could be done by reducing start-up costs, the $14,902 38 million
time required to start a business, or by improving the efficiency of processes to GDP per capita Population
register property. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)
ch

ad
)

de
i ng
(/1
(/7

20

rfo
i ng

l le
nk

n
erg
ore

nte

pe
nk

pi r

ba
Drivers
Ra

Em
(20
Ra

p
Co
Sc

As

Gl o
To
Governance 21 1 68 3.6% of GDP 0.5% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 22 4 70 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 64 16 47

Planning 40 3 73

Procurement 39 28 75

Activity 66 2 18 81.2 $249 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 29 2 47 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 41 1 32 2019)

Top performing metrics

90.4/100 87.5/100 87/100

Financial stability Strength of insolvency framework Procurement of PPPs
Poland ranks among the most financially stable The World Bank rates the strength of Poland’s legal and regulatory frameworks
countries in InfraCompass 2020. The stability Poland’s insolvency framework highly. which govern how private partners are
of the financial system facilitates the smooth Strong insolvency protections help to attract selected for PPPs encourage fairness
flow of funds between parties, improving the investment in infrastructure. and transparency. Fair and transparent
supply of capital for projects. The COVID-19 processes encourage more participation and
pandemic may impact this. competition, which drive value for money and
better quality outcomes.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Poland Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 0/100 0.9/100
Published infrastructure plan Registering property Value of closed PPP infrastructure deals
Poland does not have a national or sub- In Poland it takes 135 days to register a The value of closed PPP infrastructure deals
national infrastructure plan. The addition property, significantly above the 25 day in Poland is the second lowest out of High
of an infrastructure plan could highlight average for High Income Countries. As Income Countries, at 0.005% of GDP. This is a
infrastructure challenges and opportunities for infrastructure projects often involve some fraction of the High Income Countries’ average
investment, as well as detail the government’s transfer of property rights, a lengthy of 0.14%. A low value may reflect a preference
planned responses. registration process increases project cost for traditional delivery models.
and risk.

182
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

POLAND OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 565.9 Population (million, 2019) 38 Unemployment rate (2019) 3.3%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 14,902 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 60.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.4%
GDP growth rate (annual, 4.0% Gross Government Debt (% of 48.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.69
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -3.4% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 71 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 31.8
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 37.7 Cost to start a business 76.7
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 65.6 Dealing with construction 56.6
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 60.9 Product market regulation, 59.2 Quality of land administration 63.3
network sectors
Rule of law 58.6 Regulatory (including 67.6 Registering property 0
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 50 Strength of insolvency 87.5 Time required to start a business 18.2
framework
Political stability and absence 59.1 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 66.2 Infrastructure investment 44.5
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 4.2
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 65 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 0.9
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 87 Value of closed infrastructure 23.1
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 54
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
19 25.3
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 62.6 Financing through local equity 42.7 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 32.9 Stocks traded 8.5
Summary credit rating 71 Financial depth 41.8
Financial stability 90.4
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

183
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Portugal

Overall performance Portugal at a glance

Portugal’s regulatory frameworks and permit system support the creation of
new businesses and provide strong protections for investors against insolvency.
Combined with high quality procurement processes and a stable financial
system, this environment helps attract investment in infrastructure. Despite an
improvement in funding capacity from InfraCompass2017, Portugal’s sluggish
GDP growth, significant public debt and the potential economic fallout from the $23,031 10.3 million
COVID-19 pandemic may hinder future infrastructure expenditure. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 19 72 — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 19 1 71 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 19 7 82

Planning 39 3 74

Procurement 19 13 86

Activity 45 23 32 83.6 $177 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 28 15 47 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 26 3 44 2019)

Top performing metrics

96.2/100 94.8/100 91.1/100

Cost to start a business Average procurement duration – Registering property
transaction RFP
According to the World Bank, the cost of At just over three months, Portugal has one In Portugal it takes 10 days to register a
starting a business in Portugal is 1.9% of of the lowest periods from announcement property, well below the 25 day High Income
income per capita, well below the High Income of a tender to contract award. Efficient Countries’ average. As infrastructure projects
Countries’ average of 4.7%, easing the entry of procurement processes reduce costs, risks often involve some transfer of property rights,
new firms. and down time for infrastructure contractors. an efficient registration process reduces
project cost and risk.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Portugal Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 2.4/100 7.9/100
Published infrastructure plan Long term GDP growth trend Gross government debt
Portugal does not have a national or sub- Portugal’s long-term GDP growth trend has At 118% of GDP, Portugal’s gross government
national infrastructure plan. The addition increased to 0.7% since 2017, but this is still debt is the fourth largest among High
of an infrastructure plan could highlight below the High Income Countries average of Income Countries. Combined with a current
infrastructure challenges and opportunities for 1.8%. Combined with the uncertain impact credit rating of BBB and the impacts of the
investment, as well as detail the government’s of the COVID-19 pandemic, this low growth COVID-19 pandemic, servicing this debt is a
planned responses. trend may hamper Portugal’s ability to significant burden on Portugal’s ability to fund
borrow and build more infrastructure. infrastructure.

184
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

PORTUGAL OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 236.4 Population (million, 2019) 10.3 Unemployment rate (2019) 6.1%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 23,031 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 65.0% Inflation rate (2019) 0.9%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.9% Gross Government Debt (% of 118.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.79
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -1.7% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 71 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 35.5
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 34.6 Cost to start a business 96.2
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 63.8 Dealing with construction 49.3
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 64.8 Product market regulation, 69.4 Quality of land administration 66.7
network sectors
Rule of law 72.8 Regulatory (including 67.8 Registering property 91.1
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 43.3 Strength of insolvency 90.6 Time required to start a business 85.6
framework
Political stability and absence 69 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 94.8 Infrastructure investment 40^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 2
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 67 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 1.8
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 81 Value of closed infrastructure 82.9
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 78
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
29.4 46.9
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 7.9 Financing through local equity 34.8 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 2.4 Stocks traded 19.3^
Summary credit rating 71 Financial depth 61.7
Financial stability 76.7
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

185
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Qatar

Overall performance Qatar at a glance

Qatar’s resource wealth, good credit rating and relatively low public debt
continue to support its ability to fund future infrastructure projects. Recent
reforms have also made creating a business easier, helping to bring new
investment and competition. To increase the efficiency of infrastructure
investment, Qatar could look to establish a national infrastructure agency and $69,688 2.8 million
develop a national infrastructure plan. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 34 1 57 — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 40 12 60 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 10 87

Planning 30 3 84

Procurement 73 2 40

Activity 31 6 39 81.6 $1,423 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 2 84 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 25 1 45 2019)

Top performing metrics

99.1/100 88.9/100 87.4/100

Registering property GDP per capita Cost to start a business
According to the World Bank, it takes one day to Qatar’s GDP per capita has been increasing According to the World Bank it takes 6.3% of
register a property in Qatar. This is a significant since 2016 and was USD 68,794 in 2018. income per capita to start a business in Qatar.
improvement on the previous average of 12 Qatar has one of the highest GDP per capita This is slightly above the 4.7% average for High
days due to a review of procedures and the rates in the world, driven by large natural Income Countries. Lowering costs to start a
digitisation of registration records. resource reserves. business could ease the entry of new firms.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Qatar Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No 28/100
Published infrastructure Economic analysis assessment PPP contract management
procurement guidelines
Qatar does not publish guidelines for the According to the World Bank, Qatar does According to the World Bank, Qatar’s
procurement of infrastructure projects. not require the assessment of infrastructure management of contracts requires better
Publishing guidelines makes contractors aware projects based on their impact on the training systems and guidance for staff,
of the government’s processes, expectations and economy or community. Adding this effective milestone tracking systems, and
requirements, improves transparency and helps requirement could improve the socio- public reporting of financial or operating
the government achieve better value for money. economic outcomes of infrastructure projects. performance.

186
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

QATAR OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 191.8 Population (million, 2019) 2.8 Unemployment rate (2019) 0.1%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 69,688 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 99.0% Inflation rate (2019) -0.4%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.0% Gross Government Debt (% of 53.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.71
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -1.0% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 85 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, NA) NA
(annual, 2019)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 82.4 Cost to start a business 87.4
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 55.2 Dealing with construction 72.3
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 30 Product market regulation, 54.2^ Quality of land administration 86.7
network sectors
Rule of law 64.7 Regulatory (including 60.3 Registering property 99.1
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 26.7 Strength of insolvency 43.8 Time required to start a business 80.1
framework
Political stability and absence 61.3 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 65.2 Infrastructure investment 54.5^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 60.8
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 31 Published procurement No Value of closed PPP 28.3^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis No Procurement of PPPs 55 Value of closed infrastructure 10.5
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 28
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
88.9 37.1
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 58.3 Financing through local equity 70 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 62 Stocks traded 9
Summary credit rating 85 Financial depth 61.4
Financial stability 81
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

187
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Romania

Overall performance Romania at a glance

Romania’s regulatory framework and permit system generally support the creation of
new businesses and provide robust protections for investors. Combined with a stable
financial system, this environment helps encourage new infrastructure investment and
promotes competition between suppliers. Despite a modest increase in infrastructure
investment from InfraCompass 2017, Romania lacks adequate project planning. The
introduction of a national infrastructure plan and the implementing of post-completion $12,483 19.5 million
reviews could help improve the efficiency of investment and deliver better quality GDP per capita Population
outcomes. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 65 3 40 4.0% of GDP 0.2% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 26 1 64 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 38 7 72

Planning 57 2 50

Procurement 44 10 73

Activity 63 22 21 71.7 $311 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 37 1 38 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 72 2 19 2019)

Top performing metrics

99.4/100 87.1/100 86.6/100

Cost to start a business Registering property Financial stability
The cost of starting a business in Romania is In Romania it takes 14.5 days to register a According to the World Economic Forum,
0.3% of income per capita, far below the Upper property, well below the 22 day Upper Middle Romania has high financial stability, although
Middle Income Countries’ average of 11%, Income Countries’ average. As infrastructure the long-term impacts of the COVID-19
easing the entry of new firms. projects often involve some transfer of pandemic remain unknown. A stable financial
property rights, an efficient registration system facilitates the smooth flow of funds
process reduces project cost and risk. between infrastructure and investors,
improving capital supply for projects.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Romania Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Post-completion reviews Market sounding and/or assessment Published infrastructure plan
Romania does not undertake post-completion According to the World Bank, there is no Romania does not have a national or sub-
reviews for infrastructure projects. The formal requirement for a market sounding national infrastructure plan. The addition
implementation of post-completion reviews process in Romania. Adding one could allow of an infrastructure plan could highlight
could help determine whether projects have the government to determine if there is an infrastructure challenges and opportunities for
achieved their objectives efficiently, and identify interest from investors and lenders to provide investment, as well as detail the government’s
areas for improvement. commercial financing for projects. planned responses.

188
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

ROMANIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 243.7 Population (million, 2019) 19.5 Unemployment rate (2019) 4.2%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 12,483 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 54.0% Inflation rate (2019) 4.2%
GDP growth rate (annual, 4.0% Gross Government Debt (% of 37.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.64
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 1.7% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 55 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 35.9
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 30.9 Cost to start a business 99.4
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 53.7 Dealing with construction 17.6
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 34.4 Product market regulation, 64.6^ Quality of land administration 56.7
network sectors
Rule of law 56.5 Regulatory (including 58.9 Registering property 87.1
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 43.3 Strength of insolvency 81.2 Time required to start a business 55.8
framework
Political stability and absence 51 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 48.3
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 0.1
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 43 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 33.2^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 77 Value of closed infrastructure 0.8
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 59
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
15.9 12.5
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 70.7 Financing through local equity 26.6 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 20.2 Stocks traded 0.7^
Summary credit rating 55 Financial depth 24.2
Financial stability 86.6
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

189
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Russian Federation

Overall performance Russia at a glance

Russia’s permit systems support the creation of new businesses through low start-up
costs and efficient property registration processes. This encourages the entry of new
businesses, including infrastructure ones, increasing competition as a result. Despite
a solid fiscal position, overall infrastructure investment in Russia ranks as the second
lowest among Upper Middle Income Countries. To increase infrastructure investment
Russia could improve taxation incentives aimed at encouraging investment, strengthen $11,163 146.7 million
creditors’ protections and conduct market sounding prior to help the government GDP per capita Population
determine if private financing is available.
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 37 2 55 2.8% of GDP* 1.5% of GDP
Infrastructure investment Infrastructure gap
Regulatory frameworks 52 5 54 (2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)

Permits 13 2 85

Planning 59 1 43

Procurement 28 9 82 73.8 $794 million**

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Activity 73 12 (0-100, 100 is best, 2019) investment
(5-year average, USD, 2019)
Funding capacity 38 7 37
*Compared to Oxford Economics data, Russia’s InfraOne Research states this to be
4.5 per cent of GDP in 2019.
Financial markets 42 10 32 **Compared to IJ Global data, Russia’s InfraOne Research states this to be $37.5
billion in 2019.

Top performing metrics

98.2/100 87.5/100 87.1/100

Cost to start a business Registering property Gross government debt
The cost of starting a business in Russia is In Russia it takes 14 days to register a Russia’s gross government debt amounts to
0.9% of income per capita, well below the Upper property, well below the 22 day Upper Middle only 16% of GDP, the second lowest among
Middle Income average of 11%, easing the entry Income Countries’ average. As infrastructure countries covered in InfraCompass 2020. The
of new firms. projects often involve some transfer of COVID-19 pandemic may impact this, but
property rights, an efficient registration Russia’s government is currently in a strong
process reduces project cost and risk. fiscal position to fund infrastructure.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Russia Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

35/100 2.2/100 No
Financial depth Value of closed infrastructure deals with Market sounding and/or assessment
Russia’s score for financial depth is below the average foreign equity sponsorship Russia currently lacks a market sounding process for
for Upper Middle Income Countries. The Russian Among the Upper Middle Income Countries, Russia infrastructure projects, although they are increasing
infrastructure market is characterised by few equity has a score significantly lower than the average of 32. efforts to facilitate transparent communication in
investors and long-term institutional investors, the Foreign pension funds and institutional investors are the infrastructure market through the development
absence of a secondary securities market, and the not present in the Russian infrastructure market. A of digital platforms, such as ROSINFRA. Adding
participation of Russian state pension funds only in low value may reflect a limited scale of infrastructure a market sounding process could allow the
debt financing. Improving the depth of the financial investment opportunities available for foreign government to better determine if there is sufficient
market could allow Russia to more efficiently meet investors and may increase financing costs as a result interest from investors and lenders to provide
the capital requirements for future infrastructure of lower levels of competition. commercial financing for projects.
projects.

190
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

RUSSIAN FEDERATION OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 1637.9 Population (million, 2019) 146.7 Unemployment rate (2019) 4.5%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 11,163 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 74.0% Inflation rate (2019) 4.7%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.1% Gross Government Debt (% of 17.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.74
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -1.1% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 55 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 37.7
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 36.3 Cost to start a business 98.2
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 40 Dealing with construction 49.3
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 43 Product market regulation, 64.6^ Quality of land administration 86.7
network sectors
Rule of law 33.7 Regulatory (including 39.2 Registering property 87.5
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 50 Strength of insolvency 71.9 Time required to start a business 75.7
framework
Political stability and absence 41.6 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 70.1 Infrastructure investment 32.3
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 5.8
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 31 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 7.4
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 67 Value of closed infrastructure 2.2
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 63
assessment?
Environmental impact No
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
14.2 36.5
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 87.1 Financing through local equity 35.8 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 9.3 Stocks traded 8.1
Summary credit rating 55 Financial depth 35
Financial stability 79.5
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

191
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Rwanda

Overall performance Rwanda at a glance

In part due to reforms conducted in 2019, Rwanda is a global top performer in permit
processes for infrastructure markets, with no costs to start businesses and the highest
scores on quality of land administration. This has enabled strong activity growth in
Rwanda, with some of the highest levels of infrastructure investment relative to a
country’s GDP among InfraCompass 2020 countries although the COVID-19 pandemic
may impact these efforts. Despite such impressive activity figures, private sector $825 12.4 million
involvement is minimal. This may be due to low legal protections for stakeholders. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
ch

r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 60 2 46 8.8% of GDP 2.6% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 34 9 62 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 3 39 94

Planning 21 1 92

Procurement 35 12 78

Activity 30 2 39 52 $8 million
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 61 2 22 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 55 1 27 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 95/100

Cost to start a business Infrastructure investment Quality of land administration
Through reforms conducted in 2019, Rwanda Rwanda, like many of its African peers, is Rwanda is one of three countries with the
is now the top global performer (along with the a global top performer in infrastructure highest score in quality of land administration
United Kingdom and Slovenia) in this metric investment as a proportion of GDP, seeing out of all InfraCompass 2020 countries. A high
with no costs to start a business. This ease the an increase from 4% in 2012 to almost 9% in quality system ensures reliable and accurate
entry of new firms. 2019. The COVID-19 pandemic may impact information is available to help governments
these efforts. determine where infrastructure projects can
be undertaken.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Rwanda Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 1.1/100 8/100

Shareholder governance GDP per capita Private infrastructure investment
Rwanda is not considered to have strong Despite being one of the fastest growing Despite high overall infrastructure investment,
legal protections for shareholders. A failure nations in Africa with a long-term GDP Rwanda performs poorly on private sector
to adequately enforce disclosure and growth over 7%, Rwanda’s GDP per capita investment in infrastructure markets. At 0.07%
transparency standards lowers the confidence is low at USD 787. High growth, should of GDP, Rwandan private sector activity in the
of investors, hurting entities that fund or deliver it not be overly impacted by COVID-19, domestic infrastructure market is the second
infrastructure. can be expected to correlate with greater lowest in Africa. This may reflect government
infrastructure spending. choices to publicly fund infrastructure.

192
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

RWANDA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 10.2 Population (million, 2019) 12.4 Unemployment rate (2019) 1.0%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 825 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 17.0% Inflation rate (2019) 3.5%
GDP growth rate (annual, 7.8% Gross Government Debt (% of 49.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.43
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 4.9% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 31 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 43.7
(annual, 2019) 2016)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 54.5 Cost to start a business 100
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 58.3 Dealing with construction 69.3
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 19.3 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 95
network sectors
Rule of law 52.4 Regulatory (including 51.7 Registering property 93.8
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 0 Strength of insolvency 93.8 Time required to start a business 91.2
framework
Political stability and absence 51.9 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 100
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 8
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 48 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 14.1
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 51 Value of closed infrastructure 35.7
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 39
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
1.1 10.4
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 61.5 Financing through local equity 43 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 66.9 Stocks traded 15^
Summary credit rating 31 Financial depth 30.6
Financial stability 85.3
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

193
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Samoa

Overall performance Samoa at a glance

Samoa has achieved high levels of foreign investment in infrastructure projects and
this is supported by a stable financial market. To capitalise on these strengths, the
introduction of a published project pipeline could help focus investment and deliver better
quality outcomes. Low GDP growth, the current lack of legal protections for shareholders
and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic may also inhibit Samoa’s ability to deliver $4,501 0.2 million
future infrastructure projects and close the infrastructure gap. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
e
ng

er

er
a
)

rm
00

ch

ad
r
i ng
)

de

rfo
(/1

20

l le
g
ore

n
irin

pe
erg
17-
ore

nte

ba
Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
(20
Sc

Co
As

To

Governance 51 — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 53 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 73

Planning 60

Procurement 74 2

Activity 63 7 — —
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 30 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 42 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 88.6/100 86.6/100

Value of closed infrastructure deals Financial stability Registering property
with foreign equity sponsorship
Samoa has the highest value of closed infrastructure Samoa’s financial stability is satisfactory and In Samoa is takes 15 days to register a property,
deals with foreign equity sponsorship out of all the equal to the Upper Middle Income Countries which is less than the Upper Middle Income
InfraCompass 2020 countries at 6.9%. A high value average. A stable financial system facilitates the Countries’ average of 21.7 days. As infrastructure
may reflect favourable trade conditions and lower smooth flow of funds between infrastructure projects often involve some transfer of property
barriers to foreign investment. However, the COVID-19 assets and investors. The long-term impacts of rights, an efficient registration process reduces
pandemic may impact international capital flows. the COVID-19 pandemic is a concern. project cost and risk.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Samoa Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 0/100 9.1/100
Published project pipeline Shareholder governance Long term GDP growth trend
Samoa does not currently publish an Samoa is not considered to have strong Samoa has the lowest long-term GDP growth
infrastructure pipeline of projects. The addition legal protections for shareholders. A failure trend at 0.96% among the Upper Middle
of an infrastructure pipeline could help provide to adequately enforce disclosure and Income Countries which average 3.1%.
infrastructure participants with a clear indication transparency standards lowers the confidence Combined with the uncertain impact of the
of prospective and confirmed infrastructure of investors, hurting entities that fund or COVID-19 pandemic, this low growth trend
activity. deliver infrastructure. may hamper Samoa’s ability to borrow and
build more infrastructure.

194
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

SAMOA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 0.9 Population (million, 2019) 0.2 Unemployment rate (2019) 8.5%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 4,501 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 18.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.9%
GDP growth rate (annual, 3.4% Gross Government Debt (% of 49.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.36
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 4.1% Sovereign risk rating (2019) NA Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 38.7
(annual, 2019) 2013)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 41.1^ Cost to start a business 86.1
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 56.7^ Dealing with construction 81.9
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 18.5 Product market regulation, 46.9^ Quality of land administration 41.7
network sectors
Rule of law 66.5 Regulatory (including 47.7 Registering property 86.6
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 0 Strength of insolvency 46.9 Time required to start a business 80.1
framework
Political stability and absence 69.8 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 42.2^ Infrastructure investment 48.4^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 56.9^ Private infrastructure investment 38.6^
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 55^ Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 64.1^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 64.3^ Value of closed infrastructure 100
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 64.6^
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
5.7 42
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 61.4 Financing through local equity 44.7^ Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 9.1 Stocks traded 28.5^
Summary credit rating 50.3^ Financial depth 42.7^
Financial stability 88.6^
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

195
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Saudi Arabia
Overall performance
Saudi Arabia at a glance
The government is implementing significant economic reforms as a part of Saudi
Arabia’s Vision 2030, including reforms to the ease of doing business, getting
construction permits, access to credit, resolving insolvency and improvement across
its procurement and permit processes. These reforms are encouraging the entry of new
businesses, adding transparency to procurement processes, and increasing competition.
While government debt levels have increased, and may be affected over the long-term by $22,865 34.1 million
the COVID-19 pandemic, Saudi Arabia remains in a comfortable position to fund future GDP per capita Population
infrastructure projects and continues its reforms. Most recently, newly implemented
(USD, 2019) (2019)
insolvency and procurement laws have been implemented, which is yet to be reflected in
InfraCompass rankings. ge er
an ) r m er
g
6) ch 00 e r d
(/7 ank -20) (/1 gi n ng nd rfo lea
k R e er iri nte pe b al
Drivers an 7 r m p p
R 01 Sco E As Co To Gl
o
(2
2.5% of GDP 0.5% of GDP
Governance 51 5 48
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 69 3 45 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 31 8 76

Planning 29 25 85

Procurement 31 11 81
78.1 $764 million
Activity 70 17 16 Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
(0-100, 100 is best, investment
Funding capacity 21 2 54
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 32 6 40 2019)

Top performing metrics

98.7/100 90.7/100 89.2/100

Registering property Financial stability Cost to start a business
According to the World Bank, it now takes an average Saudi Arabia’s banking sector shows resilience According to the World Bank it takes 5.4% of
of one and a half days to register a property in Saudi and stability, with indicators showing a liquid income per capita to start a business, slightly
Arabia. This marks a significant improvement on and well-capitalised system. above the 4.7% average for High Income
the average of 8 days it took in 2014 and compares Countries. Lowering costs to start a business
favourably with the 26.6 day average across the Middle could ease the entry of new firms.
East and North Africa.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Saudi Arabia Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 0/100 0/100
Economic analysis assessment Recovery rate* Strength of insolvency framework
According to the World Bank, Saudi Arabia does According to the World Bank, the recovery rate Historically, Saudi Arabia has lacked modern
not require the assessment of infrastructure for insolvency in Saudi Arabia is low, due to a bankruptcy regulations. However, given the
projects based on their impact on the economy deficiency of bankruptcy and insolvency laws. recent introduction of a new Insolvency Law,
or community. However, Saudi Arabia has recognised this and this metric is also anticipated to improve in the
a new Insolvency Law was introduced in April foreseeable future.
2019 as part of Saudi Vision 2030. Given this, it
*The World Bank’s Doing Business Report data for these metrics
is anticipated that this metric will improve in the was collected between February and June 2019. The data does
foreseeable future. not account for the outcomes of the new Insolvency Law.

196
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

SAUDI ARABIA OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 779.3 Population (million, 2019) 34.1 Unemployment rate (2019) 5.9%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 22,865 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 84.0% Inflation rate (2019) -1.1%
GDP growth rate (annual, 0.2% Gross Government Debt (% of 23.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.67
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -2.9% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 76 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, NA) 42.2
(annual, 2019)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 55.4 Cost to start a business 89.2
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 47.6 Dealing with construction 68.3
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 0 Product market regulation, 54.2^ Quality of land administration 46.7
network sectors
Rule of law 52.8 Regulatory (including 49.1 Registering property 98.7
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 60 Strength of insolvency 0 Time required to start a business 76.8
framework
Political stability and absence 41.4 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 70.4 Infrastructure investment 33.4
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 14.1
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 34 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 10.9
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis No Procurement of PPPs 71 Value of closed infrastructure 4.7
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 33
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
29.2 26
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 81.8 Financing through local equity 55.6 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 30.5 Stocks traded 26.5
Summary credit rating 76 Financial depth 46.1
Financial stability 90.7
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

197
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Senegal

Overall performance Senegal at a glance

Senegal has made significant economic improvements and has one of the fastest
economic growth rates in Africa. Senegal offers a stable political environment and has
actively prioritised attracting investment for infrastructure projects. There is a large
infrastructure gap and to ensure capital is used efficiently, Senegal could implement
transparent procedures for public procurement and conduct market sounding. Low GDP
per capita and the COVID-19 pandemic represent key challenges for Senegal’s ability to $1,428 16.8 million
deliver future infrastructure projects. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 44 2 51 To 10.0% of GDP 3.0% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 56 6 53 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 58 8 56

Planning 44 2 70

Procurement 64 43 53

Activity 10 4 55 51.3 $91 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 55 23 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 57 9 26 2019)

Top performing metrics

86.7/100 80.9/100 74.7/100

Time required to start a business Financial stability Infrastructure investment
According to the World Bank, it takes six days to start Senegal’s financial stability is satisfactory. Senegal’ infrastructure investment is 6.2%
a business in Senegal, which is significantly lower However, it is less stable than the Lower of GDP, higher than the average of 4.6% for
than the average of 20 days for Lower Middle Income Middle Income Countries average of 83. A all InfraCompass 2020 countries. Senegal’s
Countries. Shorter times to set up businesses can stable financial system facilitates the smooth government has prioritised investment in
persuade businesses to set up in a country, including flow of funds between infrastructure assets infrastructure, and encouraged PPPs. It is
new infrastructure entities. and investors. The impacts of the COVID-19 uncertain how the COVID-19 pandemic will
pandemic is a concern. affect investment in the future.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Senegal Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 No 1.8/100
Transparency in public procurement Market sounding and/or assessment GDP per capita
Senegal does not make public procurement According to the World Bank, there is Senegal has a low GDP per capita of USD
notices that detail both procurement procedures an absence of formal market sounding 1,428 but is growing at a long-term average
and shortlisting criteria available online. A more processes in Senegal. Adding one could allow rate of 4.7% per annum. Its relatively high
transparent process could encourage more the government to determine if there is an growth, should it not be overly impacted by
participation and competition, which drive value interest from investors and lenders to provide COVID-19, can be expected to correlate with
for money. commercial financing for projects. greater infrastructure spending.

198
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

SENEGAL OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 23.9 Population (million, 2019) 16.8 Unemployment rate (2019) 6.5%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 1,428 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 47.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.0%
GDP growth rate (annual, 6.0% Gross Government Debt (% of 63.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.35
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -0.9% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 37 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 40.3
(annual, 2019) 2011)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 39.7 Cost to start a business 54.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 58.9 Dealing with construction 43.9
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 30 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 33.3
network sectors
Rule of law 45.8 Regulatory (including 47.8 Registering property 63.4
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 26.7 Strength of insolvency 56.2 Time required to start a business 86.7
framework
Political stability and absence 48.5 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 67.3 Infrastructure investment 74.7
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 0 Private infrastructure investment 29
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 31 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 42.5^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 62 Value of closed infrastructure 73.5
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 55
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
1.8 13.6
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 50.4 Financing through local equity 40.6 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 45.7 Stocks traded 15^
Summary credit rating 37 Financial depth 28.2
Financial stability 80.9
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

199
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Singapore

Overall performance Singapore at a glance

Singapore has implemented practices that increase the transparency and
fairness of public procurement, which help drive investment activity in
infrastructure projects. This is supported by Singapore’s ability to borrow debt
at low rates to fund investments. To improve the efficiency of infrastructure
projects, Singapore could implement a national infrastructure agency to oversee 5.7 million
$63,987
the development of an infrastructure plan and project pipeline. Population
GDP per capita
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 1 83 To 1.0% of GDP 0% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 7 3 78 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 1 96

Planning 47 2 67

Procurement 10 7 93

Activity 43 13 33 95.4 $635 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 3 84 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 11 70 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 99.2/100 98/100

Transparency in public procurement Cost to start a business Summary credit rating
Singapore’s public procurement notices are According to the World Bank, Singapore has Singapore is AAA-rated by four international
made available online and tender documents the second lowest cost to start a business as credit ratings agencies, with a stable outlook,
transparently detail procurement procedures. a share of per capita income in Asia, at 0.4%, the highest of all Asian InfraCompass 2020
The transparency of the process encourages easing the entry of new firms. countries. Singapore’s credit rating allows the
more participation and competition, which government to borrow at a lower cost.
drive value for money.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Singapore Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No 10.6/100
Published infrastructure plan Environmental impact analysis Gross government debt
Singapore does not have a national or sub- According to the World Bank, Singapore does not Singapore’s gross government debt is 114%
national infrastructure plan. The addition of an have a regulated requirement for environmental of GDP, above the High Income Countries’
infrastructure plan could highlight infrastructure impact assessment. However, Singapore has a average of 74% of GDP. However, Singapore’s
challenges and opportunities for investment, systematic framework in place to determine and balance sheet is stronger than this figure
as well as detail the government’s planned mitigate the potential environmental impact of suggests, with the country being a net creditor
responses. all new infrastructure developments through its once assets are taken into account.
development planning process.

200
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

SINGAPORE OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 362.8 Population (million, 2019) 5.7 Unemployment rate (2019) 3.6%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 63,987 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 100.0% Inflation rate (2019) 0.7%
GDP growth rate (annual, 0.5% Gross Government Debt (% of 114.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.87
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -0.9% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 98 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, NA) NA
(annual, 2019)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 81.9 Cost to start a business 99.2
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 84.8 Dealing with construction 88.7
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 88.7 Product market regulation, 58.3^ Quality of land administration 95
network sectors
Rule of law 86.9 Regulatory (including 92.6 Registering property 96
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 50 Strength of insolvency 53.1 Time required to start a business 96.7
framework
Political stability and absence 75.2 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 71.1 Infrastructure investment 12.3
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 17.2
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 60 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 30.3
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 76 Value of closed infrastructure 73.2
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 62
assessment?
Environmental impact No
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
81.6 58.6
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 10.6 Financing through local equity 74.6 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 44.3 Stocks traded 54.7
Summary credit rating 98 Financial depth 86.3
Financial stability 93.1
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

201
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Slovak Republic

Overall performance Slovak Republic at a glance

The quality of the Slovak Republic’s infrastructure procurement processes have improved
significantly since 2017 and it now ranks among the best in InfraCompass. Combined
with regulatory frameworks which encourage investment and high quality project
planning, it has kept the value of PPP infrastructure deals and activity as a whole high. To
improve private investment in infrastructure the Slovak Republic should look to improve 5.5 million
$19,548
the quality of its financial markets, which lack financial depth and stock market liquidity. Population
GDP per capita
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 25 2 64 To — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 15 1 72 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 29 77

Planning 6 98

Procurement 6 22 94

Activity 14 9 52 78.6 $393 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 23 1 52 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 43 6 31 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 98/100

Transparency in public procurement Value of closed PPP infrastructure deals Cost to start a business
The Slovak Republic’s public procurement notices At 0.7% of GDP the Slovak Republic has one of According to the World Bank, the cost of
are made available online and tender documents the highest value of closed PPP deals among starting a business in the Slovak Republic is
transparently detail procurement procedures. The InfraCompass2020 countries. Investment 1% of income per capita, well below the 4.7%
transparency of the process encourages more opportunities for foreign equity may reduce average in High Income Countries, easing the
participation and competition, which can drive financing costs, although the impacts of the entry of new firms.
value for money. COVID-19 pandemic remain unknown.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Slovak Republic Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0.1/100 4.9/100 21.7/100

Stocks traded Dealing with construction permits Long term GDP growth trend
The total value of stocks traded in the Slovak According to the World Bank, in the Slovak The Slovak Republic’s long-term GDP growth
Republic was 0.1% of GDP, a small fraction of the Republic it takes an average of 300 days to trend decreased to 2.3%, down from 3.7%
High Income Countries’ average of 43%. As this obtain construction permits. Expediting this in 2016. Long-term growth rates signal a
indicator measures the liquidity of equities, it is process could significantly impact investment country’s capacity to fund infrastructure from
important to infrastructure investors to know in infrastructure by helping to reduce delays. future growth. The economic fallout from
they can exit investments at appropriate points. the COVID-19 pandemic may impact growth
trends.

202
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

SLOVAKIA REPUBLIC OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 106.6 Population (million, 2019) 5.5 Unemployment rate (2019) 6.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 19,548 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 54.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.6%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.6% Gross Government Debt (% of 48.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.69
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -0.2% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 78 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 26.5
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 42.9 Cost to start a business 98
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 81.9 Dealing with construction 4.9
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 46.1 Product market regulation, 64.8 Quality of land administration 85
network sectors
Rule of law 60.6 Regulatory (including 66.2 Registering property 85.3
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 46.7 Strength of insolvency 81.2 Time required to start a business 52.5
framework
Political stability and absence 62.5 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 40^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 38.5
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 86 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 100
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 94 Value of closed infrastructure 28.1
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 55
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
24.9 29.7
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 62.1 Financing through local equity 41.3 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 21.7 Stocks traded 0.1^
Summary credit rating 78 Financial depth 39.3
Financial stability 94.2
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

203
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Slovenia

Overall performance Slovenia at a glance

Slovenia’s infrastructure governance systems rank among the best for countries in InfraCompass
2020. The introduction of a national infrastructure plan since InfraCompass2017 has also helped
substantially improve project planning, which, in turn, helps inform suppliers of prospective projects
and opportunities ahead of time. Combined with Slovenia’s high quality procurement processes and
regulatory frameworks, this encourages competition among suppliers and improves value for money.
Despite low levels of private investment, Slovenia’s strong funding capacity and the significant value
of foreign equity sponsorship have kept infrastructure activity high, albeit at lower levels than those
reported in InfraCompass2017. To encourage greater private investment to help keep activity high, $26,170 2.1 million
Slovenia should look to improve the quality of its financial markets. Population
GDP per capita
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 7 1 80 To — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 35 7 61 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 30 8 77

Planning 22 19 92

Procurement 14 5 91

Activity 24 9 42 78.1 $115 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 22 6 53 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 51 5 28 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 95.5/100

Cost to start a business Transparency in public procurement Value of closed infrastructure deals
with foreign equity sponsorship
According to the World Bank, there are no costs Slovenia’s public procurement notices are Slovenia has the highest value of closed
associated with starting a business in Slovenia, made available online and tender documents infrastructure deals with foreign equity
easing the entry of new firms. transparently detail procurement procedures. sponsorship of High Income Countries at 0.4%.
The transparency of the process encourages Significant investment opportunities for foreign
equity may reduce financing costs, although
more participation and competition, which can
the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on
drive value for money.
investment remain unknown.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Slovenia Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0.3/100 0.6/100 7.6/100

Private infrastructure investment Stocks traded Long term GDP growth trend
In Slovenia, private infrastructure investment The total value of stocks traded in Slovenia Slovenia’s long-term GDP growth trend
over the last five years is among the lowest amounts to 0.6% of GDP, a fraction of the High increased to 1.8%, below the average of
in High Income Countries. A lack of private Income Countries’ average of 43%. As this 1.9% for High Income Countries. Long-term
investment could reflect low investor indicator measures the liquidity of equities, growth rates signal a country’s capacity to
confidence, which the long-term impacts of it is important to infrastructure investors to fund infrastructure from future growth. The
the COVID-19 pandemic may yet lower further. know they can exit investments at appropriate economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic
points. may impact GDP growth trends.

204
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

SLOVENIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 54.2 Population (million, 2019) 2.1 Unemployment rate (2019) 5.5%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 26,170 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 55.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.8%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.9% Gross Government Debt (% of 67.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.71
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 0.1% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 75 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 25.4
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 33.7 Cost to start a business 100
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 48.6 Dealing with construction 21.6
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 90 Product market regulation, 53.5 Quality of land administration 76.7
network sectors
Rule of law 71.2 Regulatory (including 63.9 Registering property 54.9
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 56.7 Strength of insolvency 71.9 Time required to start a business 82.3
framework
Political stability and absence 65.2 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 40^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 0.3
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 48 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 33.2^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 81 Value of closed infrastructure 95.5
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 45
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
33.4 20.9
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 47.5 Financing through local equity 34.8 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 7.6 Stocks traded 0.6
Summary credit rating 75 Financial depth 42.3
Financial stability 87.3
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

205
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Solomon Islands

Overall performance Solomon Islands at a glance

For an economy of its size, the Solomon Islands has experienced a high value
of recent private investment activity, with the completion of a few major deals.
However, it could improve its procurement processes by conducting formal
market soundings and reducing procurement durations. Its governance of
infrastructure could also be improved, including through reforms to shareholder
protections for infrastructure businesses. $2,247 0.6 million
GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
e
ng

er

er
)
a

rm
00
ch

ad
r
)
(/1

de
i ng

rfo
20

l le
i ng
ore

pe
erg
17-
ore

nte

ba
pi r

Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
(20
Sc

Co
As

To

Governance 46 — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 48 1 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 47 1

Planning 69

Procurement 60 3

Activity 77 9 — —
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 20 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 29 1 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 91.5/100

Private infrastructure investment Value of closed infrastructure deals with Gross government debt
foreign equity sponsorship
At 1.4% of GDP, the Solomon Islands had The Solomon Islands has one of the highest The Solomon Islands gross government debt
the highest value of private infrastructure values of closed infrastructure deals with foreign amounts to 10% of GDP, lower than the Lower
investment as a share of GDP over the equity sponsorship among InfraCompass 2020 Middle Income Countries’ average of 54%.
last five years of all InfraCompass 2020 Countries, at 0.5% of GDP. A high value may The COVID-19 pandemic may increase debt
reflect favourable trade conditions and lower
countries. This may be impacted by the levels, but the Solomon Islands is currently in
barriers to foreign investment, but the COVID-19
COVID-19 pandemic. a stronger fiscal position to fund infrastructure
pandemic may impact international capital flows.
than its peers.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Solomon Islands Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 No 0/100
Average procurement duration – Market sounding and/or assessment Shareholder governance
transaction RFP
According to the World Bank, there is no The Solomon Islands is not considered to have
At 98 months, the Solomon Islands has the formal requirement for a market sounding strong legal protections for shareholders. A
longest duration from announcement of a tender process in the Solomon Islands. Adding one failure to adequately enforce disclosure and
to contract award of any InfraCompass 2020 could allow the government to determine if transparency standards lowers the confidence
country. Lengthy procurement durations add there is an interest from investors and lenders of investors, hurting entities that fund or
costs, risks and down time to contractors bidding to provide commercial financing for projects. deliver infrastructure.
for and investing in infrastructure projects.

206
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

SOLOMON ISLANDS OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 1.4 Population (million, 2019) 0.6 Unemployment rate (2019) 1.8%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 2,247 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 24.0% Inflation rate (2019) 0.4%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.7% Gross Government Debt (% of 11.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.27
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 2.3% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 25 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 37.1
(annual, 2019) 2013)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 46.5^ Cost to start a business 45
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 56.8^ Dealing with construction 68.6
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 24.4 Product market regulation, 54.2^ Quality of land administration 36.7
network sectors
Rule of law 45.4 Regulatory (including 33.2 Registering property 22.8
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 0 Strength of insolvency 37.5 Time required to start a business 80.1
framework
Political stability and absence 55 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 0 Infrastructure investment 66^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 38.2^ Private infrastructure investment 100
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 28 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 40.9^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis No Procurement of PPPs 54 Value of closed infrastructure 100
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 14
assessment?
Environmental impact No
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
2.9 17.1
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 91.5 Financing through local equity 48.6^ Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 36.4 Stocks traded 11.6^
Summary credit rating 25 Financial depth 34.7^
Financial stability 82.8^
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

207
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

South Africa

Overall performance South Africa at a glance

South Africa is one of the most well-developed African countries and has implemented
processes to facilitate the creation of businesses, fostering competition and investment.
Despite recent progress, low GDP growth reflects high levels of inequality and is likely to hinder
future investment in infrastructure. Increasing government debt limits South Africa’s ability to
use public funds for infrastructure projects. This, combined with South Africa’s low levels of
foreign equity sponsorship and PPP deals, represent key challenges for South Africa obtaining
capital for infrastructure projects. $6,100 58.8 million
GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 35 3 57 To 3.1% of GDP 1.3% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 46 7 59 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 51 4 63

Planning 12 1 97

Procurement 23 10 84

Activity 61 21 21 68.1 $1,110 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 47 31 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 10 7 71 2019)

Top performing metrics

99.6/100 90/100 79.5/100

Cost to start a business Financial stability Registering property
According to the World Bank, South Africa South Africa has the largest financial market According to the World Bank, it takes 23 days
has one of the lowest costs of starting a in Africa. A stable financial system improves to register a property in South Africa, which
business out of all InfraCompass 2020 the supply of capital by facilitating the smooth is slightly higher than the average of 21.7
countries at 0.2% of income per capita, flow of funds between infrastructure assets and days for Upper Middle Income Countries. As
easing the entry of new firms. investors. The COVID-19 pandemic may impact infrastructure projects often involve some
South Africa’s financial stability. transfer of property rights, an efficient process
reduces project cost and risk.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
South Africa Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

14.3/100 5.5/100 7.1/100

Long term GDP growth trend Value of closed PPP infrastructure deals Value of closed infrastructure deals
with foreign equity sponsorship
South Africa’s long-term GDP growth trend The value of closed PPP infrastructure deals South Africa has a low value of closed
is 1.5%, which is lower than the Upper Middle is the second lowest out of the Upper Middle infrastructure deals with foreign equity
Income Countries average of 3.1%. Combined Income Countries, at only 0.03% of GDP. This sponsorship, at only 0.03%. A low value
with the uncertain impact of the COVID-19 is, significantly lower than the Upper Middle may reflect a limited scale of infrastructure
pandemic, this low growth trend may hamper Income Countries’ average of 0.30%. A low investment opportunities available for foreign
South Africa’s ability to borrow and build more value may reflect a preference for traditional investors and may increase financing costs as
infrastructure. delivery models. a result of lower levels of competition.

208
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

SOUTH AFRICA OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 358.8 Population (million, 2019) 58.8 Unemployment rate (2019) 27.3%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 6,100 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 66.0% Inflation rate (2019) 4.4%
GDP growth rate (annual, 0.7% Gross Government Debt (% of 60.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.64
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -4.0% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 50 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 63
(annual, 2019) 2014)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 45.7 Cost to start a business 99.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 64.8 Dealing with construction 50.9
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 34.7 Product market regulation, 35.2 Quality of land administration 51.7
network sectors
Rule of law 48 Regulatory (including 53.4 Registering property 79.5
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 53.3 Strength of insolvency 71.9 Time required to start a business 11.6
framework
Political stability and absence 45.4 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 39.1
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 34
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 79 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 5.5
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 73 Value of closed infrastructure 7.1
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 79
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
7.8 66.7
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 53.1 Financing through local equity 60.6 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 14.3 Stocks traded 72.7
Summary credit rating 50 Financial depth 75.7
Financial stability 90
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

209
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Spain

Overall performance Spain at a glance

The quality of Spain’s regulatory frameworks support the creation of new businesses
which, combined with fair and transparent procurement processes, promote competition
among suppliers. This drives better value for money from infrastructure investment and
delivers higher quality outcomes. To improve the quality of planning processes Spain
could create a national infrastructure agency and develop a national infrastructure plan.
High levels of public debt and the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic also present as $29,961 46.7 million
significant challenges to Spain’s ability to invest in new infrastructure. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 17 7 75 To 3.0% of GDP 0.1% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 21 70 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 23 6 80

Planning 54 2 53

Procurement 21 12 85

Activity 52 7 26 90.3 $684 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 25 51 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 20 2 53 2019)

Top performing metrics

92.2/100 88.4/100 87/100

Cost to start a business Registering property Procurement of PPPs
According to the World Bank, the cost of In Spain it takes 13 days to register a property. Spain’s procurement processes are fair and
starting a business in Spain is 3.9% of An efficient registration process reduces project transparent. Fair and transparent processes
income per capita, below the High Income cost and risk, incentivising investment and encourage more participation and competition,
Countries’ average of 4.7%, easing the entry reducing delays. which help drive value for money.
of new firms.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Spain Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

3.4/100 4.3/100 No
Value of closed PPP deals Long term GDP growth trend Market sounding and/or assessment
The value of closed PPP infrastructure deals Spain’s long-term GDP growth trend is According to the World Bank, there is no formal
is low in Spain compared to the High Income 0.45%, below the High Income Countries’ requirement for a market sounding process across
Countries’ average of 23. A low value may average of 1.8%. Long-term growth all infrastructure sectors in Spain. However, there is
reflect government choices to publicly fund rates signal a country’s capacity to fund one for the road sector. Adding a market sounding
infrastructure and may be further impacted by infrastructure from future growth. The process to other sectors could allow the government
the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 pandemic may impact this GDP to determine if there is an interest from investors and
growth trend. lenders to provide commercial financing for projects.

210
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

SPAIN OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 1397.9 Population (million, 2019) 46.7 Unemployment rate (2019) 14.7%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 29,961 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 80.0% Inflation rate (2019) 0.7%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.2% Gross Government Debt (% of 96.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.77
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -2.5% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 70 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 36.2
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 40.2 Cost to start a business 92.2
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 69.5 Dealing with construction 53.4
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 77.5 Product market regulation, 71.3 Quality of land administration 75
network sectors
Rule of law 69.4 Regulatory (including 68.9 Registering property 88.4
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 56.7 Strength of insolvency 75 Time required to start a business 72.4
framework
Political stability and absence 54.2 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 32.5
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 6.7
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 61 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 3.4
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 87 Value of closed infrastructure 62.3
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 70
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
38.2 47.9
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 24.5 Financing through local equity 44.4 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 4.3 Stocks traded 39.9
Summary credit rating 70 Financial depth 66.1
Financial stability 86.2
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

211
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Sweden

Overall performance Sweden at a glance

Sweden is the most improved country in procurement processes, and its financial
markets and funding capacity rank among the best in InfraCompass 2020. Its strong
credit rating, low government debt and high income per capita, place it in an excellent
position to fund infrastructure investment. In addition, the quality of Sweden’s regulatory
frameworks, financial markets and permits promote competition among suppliers and
encourage private investment. To improve the efficiency of infrastructure investment, $51,242 10.3 million
Sweden could look to develop a national infrastructure plan and publish a pipeline of GDP per capita Population
future projects. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 16 75 To — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 10 75 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 6 2 91

Planning 69 5 31

Procurement 18 48 88

Activity 55 7 25 84 $274 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 8 4 80 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 3 2 78 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 99/100 99/100

Transparency in public procurement Summary credit rating Cost to start a business
Sweden’s public procurement notices are Sweden’s institutional strength and high income According to the World Bank, the cost of starting
made available online and tender documents per capita have helped maintain a AAA credit a business in Sweden is 0.5% of income per
transparently detail procurement procedures. rating from the major ratings agencies. Sweden’s capita, well below the High Income Countries’
The transparency of the process encourages strong credit rating allows the government to average of 4.7%, easing the entry of new firms.
more participation and competition, which borrow at a lower cost to fund investment in
can drive value for money. infrastructure.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Sweden Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Published project pipeline Infrastructure or PPP agency Market sounding and/or assessment
Sweden does not currently have an Sweden does not have a national agency According to the World Bank, there is no
infrastructure pipeline of projects. The addition dedicated to Infrastructure or PPP. The formal requirement for a market sounding
of an infrastructure pipeline could help provide addition of a national agency or PPP unit could process in the Sweden. Adding one could allow
infrastructure participants with a clear indication help with the development of infrastructure the government to determine if there is an
of prospective and confirmed infrastructure frameworks to aid consistent design and interest from investors and lenders to provide
activity. implementation of infrastructure projects. commercial financing for projects.

212
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

SWEDEN OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 528.9 Population (million, 2019) 10.3 Unemployment rate (2019) 6.8%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 51,242 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 87.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.7%
GDP growth rate (annual, 0.9% Gross Government Debt (% of 37.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.83
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -5.7% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 99 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 29.2
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 43.3 Cost to start a business 99
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ No Prevalence of foreign 74.4 Dealing with construction 62.9
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 78.1 Product market regulation, 61.9 Quality of land administration 91.7
network sectors
Rule of law 87.9 Regulatory (including 86 Registering property 93.8
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 56.7 Strength of insolvency 75 Time required to start a business 83.4
framework
Political stability and absence 65.2 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 52.3^ Infrastructure investment 40^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 5.1
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 32 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 33.2^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis No Procurement of PPPs 65 Value of closed infrastructure 21.4
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 34
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
65.4 63.4
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 71.1 Financing through local equity 73.8 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 18.7 Stocks traded 87.2^
Summary credit rating 99 Financial depth 84.7
Financial stability 94.2
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

213
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Tanzania

Overall performance Tanzania at a glance

Tanzania’s is a global top performer in infrastructure activity. This is
underpinned by the highest values of financial stability and infrastructure
deals with foreign equity among Low Income Countries. To increase efficiency
further for foreign and domestic investors, the Tanzanian government
should seek to publish an infrastructure plan and project pipeline, as well as
conduct environmental impact analysis to better balance environmental and $1,105 56.3 million
infrastructure outcomes. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 57 7 47 To 10.6% of GDP 5.6% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 66 8 48 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 73 29

Planning 73 1 13

Procurement 45 1 72

Activity 4 1 71 44.9 $469 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 58 2 23 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 71 2 19 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 86.5/100 82.7/100

Infrastructure investment Value of closed infrastructure deals with Financial stability
foreign equity sponsorship
At 10%, Tanzania has the third highest value Among the Low Income Countries, Tanzania Tanzania ranks among the most financially
of infrastructure investment as a share of has the highest value of closed infrastructure stable Low Income Countries in InfraCompass
GDP of all InfraCompass 2020 countries, deals with foreign equity sponsorship at 0.38% 2020. The stability of the financial system
behind only Ethiopia and Angola. It is unclear of GDP. A high value may reflect favourable facilitates the smooth flow of funds between
if the COVID-19 pandemic will impact these trade conditions and lower barriers to foreign parties, improving the supply of capital for
efforts. investment. However, the COVID-19 pandemic projects. The COVID-19 pandemic may impact
may impact international capital flows. this.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Tanzania Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Published project pipeline Published infrastructure plan Market sounding and/or assessment

Tanzania does not currently publish an Tanzania does not have a national or sub- According to the World Bank, there is no
infrastructure pipeline of projects. The addition national infrastructure plan. The addition formal requirement for a market sounding
of an infrastructure pipeline could help provide of an infrastructure plan could highlight process in the Tanzania. Adding one could
infrastructure participants with a clear indication infrastructure challenges and opportunities for allow the government to determine if there
of prospective and confirmed infrastructure investment, as well as detail the government’s is an interest from investors and lenders to
activity. planned responses. provide commercial financing for projects.

214
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

TANZANIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 62.2 Population (million, 2019) 56.3 Unemployment rate (2019) 1.9%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 1,105 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 34.0% Inflation rate (2019) 3.6%
GDP growth rate (annual, 5.2% Gross Government Debt (% of 38.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.34
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 6.3% Sovereign risk rating (2019) NA Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 37.8
(annual, 2019) 2011)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 32.9 Cost to start a business 18.5
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 49.9 Dealing with construction 41.7
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 20.4 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 25
network sectors
Rule of law 38.9 Regulatory (including 37.7 Registering property 40.2
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 30 Strength of insolvency 56.2 Time required to start a business 34.8
framework
Political stability and absence 40.7 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 100
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 55.7
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 50 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 42.5^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 68 Value of closed infrastructure 86.5
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 46
assessment?
Environmental impact No
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
1.4 6.3
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 70.5 Financing through local equity 43.8 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 61.6 Stocks traded 0^
Summary credit rating 32.5^ Financial depth 21.8
Financial stability 82.7
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

215
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Thailand

Overall performance Thailand at a glance

Thailand has made significant social and economic developments and is
working on transitioning to an innovative and sustainable economy through its
Thailand 4.0 economic plan. Thailand has implemented processes that support
the creation of businesses, helping to foster competition and investment.
Thailand has focused on investing in infrastructure and could focus on boosting
foreign investment to reduce financing costs for infrastructure projects. $7,792 67.9 million
GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 50 7 49 To 3.1% of GDP 0.7% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 27 3 64 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 20 18 82

Planning 26 2 89

Procurement 36 13 78

Activity 28 32 40 67.8 $1,322 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 34 1 40 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 8 72 2019)

Top performing metrics

94/100 93/100 92/100

Cost to start a business Financial stability Registering property
According to the World Bank, the cost of Thailand is the second most financially stable It takes nine days to register a property in
starting a business in Thailand is equal to country among Upper Middle Income Countries. Thailand, less than half the Upper Middle
3% of income per capita, which is below the Thailand’s financial sector is well positioned to Income Countries’ average of 21.5 days. As
average of 11% for Upper Middle Income withstand wider economic shocks. However, the infrastructure projects often involve property
Countries, easing the entry of new firms. impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic is a concern. rights, the shorter the time to register
properties, the less costly and risky the project.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Thailand Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 31.5/100 7.1/100
Post-completion reviews Long term GDP growth trend Value of closed infrastructure deals
with foreign equity sponsorship
Thailand does not undertake post-completion Thailand’s long-term GDP growth trend is Thailand has a low value of closed
reviews infrastructure projects. The 3.3%, slightly higher than the Upper Middle infrastructure deals with foreign equity
implementation of post-completion reviews Income Countries average of 3.1%. Combined sponsorship, at only 0.03%. A low value
could help determine whether projects have with the uncertain impact of the COVID-19 may reflect a limited scale of infrastructure
achieved their objectives efficiently, and identify pandemic, this low growth trend may hamper investment opportunities available for foreign
areas for improvement. Thailand’s ability to borrow and build more investors and may increase financing costs as
infrastructure. a result of lower levels of competition.

216
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

THAILAND OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 529.2 Population (million, 2019) 67.9 Unemployment rate (2019) 0.7%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 7,792 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 50.0% Inflation rate (2019) 0.9%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.9% Gross Government Debt (% of 42.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.62
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 4.6% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 65 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 36.5
(annual, 2019) 2017)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 52.2 Cost to start a business 94
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 62.8 Dealing with construction 64.2
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 70.1 Product market regulation, 58.3^ Quality of land administration 63.3
network sectors
Rule of law 50.5 Regulatory (including 52.2 Registering property 92
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 56.7 Strength of insolvency 78.1 Time required to start a business 86.7
framework
Political stability and absence 37.8 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 50^ Infrastructure investment 36.2
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 35.5
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 27 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 82
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 45 Value of closed infrastructure 7.1
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 58
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
9.9 69.5
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 66.8 Financing through local equity 65.9 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 31.5 Stocks traded 69.5
Summary credit rating 65 Financial depth 77.2
Financial stability 93
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

217
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

The Philippines

Overall performance The Philippines at a glance

The Philippines is a global leader in infrastructure planning, with a public pipeline of
projects and national infrastructure plan in place. The Philippines procurement processes
for infrastructure projects are also strong, with one of the best systems for managing
infrastructure contracts during delivery and operations out of all InfraCompass countries.
To improve the efficiency and quality of its infrastructure investment, the Philippines
could seek to deepen its financial markets and reduce procurement durations. It could $3,294 108.3 million
also reform permit procedures and regulatory frameworks, where its peers in Asia and
GDP per capita Population
the Lower Middle Income Countries have made considerable progress.
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er

er
)

rm
00
6)

ad
r
ch

de
i ng
)

rfo
(/1
(/7

20

l le
i ng
nk

pe
erg
ore

nte

ba
nk

pi r
Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Ra

(20

Co
Sc

As

To
Governance 59 47 3.7% of GDP 0.5% of GDP
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 32 5 63 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 61 9 48

Planning 7 24 98

Procurement 40 32 75

Activity 21 5 45 57.8 $2,206 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 39 1 37 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 36 1 38 2019)

Top performing metrics

91.1/100 88/100 87.5/100

Financial stability PPP contract management Strength of insolvency framework
The Philippines’ financial stability is well According to the World Bank, the Philippines’ The Philippines has a solid framework for
above the average of 83 for Lower Middle management of contracts is world class. It reorganisation and bankruptcy which governs
Income Countries. Stable financial markets has well-trained staff, effective guidance, formal insolvency. This ensures investors
facilitate the smooth flow of funds between milestone tracking systems, and public have appropriate protection and helps attract
infrastructure assets and investors. The impact reporting of the contractor’s financial or investment for potential infrastructure projects.
of the COVID-19 pandemic is a concern. operating performance.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
The Philippines Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

4.2/100 8/100 40.5/100

GDP per capita Stocks traded Average procurement duration
– transaction RFP
The Philippines has a low GDP per capita At 9% of GDP, the Philippines’ value of stocks The average duration from announcement of
of USD 3,294 but is growing at a long-term traded is significantly below the Lower Middle a tender to contract award was 38 months.
average rate of 5.8% per annum. Its long-term Income Countries’ average of 14% of GDP. Lengthy procurement durations add costs,
growth suggests there will be improvement in As this indicator measures the liquidity of risks and down time to contractors bidding for
future capacity to fund major infrastructure. equities, it is important to infrastructure and investing in infrastructure projects.
However the COVID-19 pandemic may impact investors to know they can exit investments
this trend. at appropriate points.

218
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

THE PHILIPPINES OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 356.8 Population (million, 2019) 108.3 Unemployment rate (2019) 2.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 3,294 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 47.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.5%
GDP growth rate (annual, 5.7% Gross Government Debt (% of 39.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.49
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 6.1% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 61 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 44.4
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 41.2 Cost to start a business 53.2
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 54.9 Dealing with construction 62
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 21.1 Product market regulation, 58.3^ Quality of land administration 41.7
network sectors
Rule of law 40.4 Regulatory (including 50.9 Registering property 68.8
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 33.3 Strength of insolvency 87.5 Time required to start a business 27.1
framework
Political stability and absence 31.3 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 40.5 Infrastructure investment 44.8
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 50 Private infrastructure investment 67.9
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 85 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 43.6
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 76 Value of closed infrastructure 23.3
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 88
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
4.2 31.9
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 69.2 Financing through local equity 55.2 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 55.2 Stocks traded 8
Summary credit rating 60 Financial depth 49.4
Financial stability 91.1
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

219
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Togo

Overall performance Togo at a glance

Togo’s performance in permit processes has increased significantly since 2017
by reducing the time and cost to start a business as well as the time it takes to
register property. Consequently, Togo has a more favourable position to attract
domestic and foreign investment in infrastructure markets than many of its
economic and regional peers. To better enable future outcomes, procurement
processes could be made more transparent, with market soundings and $671 8.2 million
assessments cold be to better determine private sector interest in investment GDP per capita Population
opportunities. (USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 48 3 49 To — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 64 1 49 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 46 26 67

Planning 47 3 68

Procurement 71 17 47

Activity 9 2 57 — —
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 66 20 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 56 6 26 2019)

Top performing metrics

94.5/100 83.7/100 68.8/100

Time required to start a business Cost to start a business Registering property

At two and a half days, Togo has the Togo sits well below the average cost to start a Registering a property in Togo takes 35
shortest time required to start a business business for African countries, at 8% of income days which is less than the African average
among African countries. Shorter times can per capita compared to the average of 27%, of 53 days. As infrastructure projects often
persuade businesses to set up in a country, easing the entry of new firms. involve property rights, the shorter the time to
including new infrastructure entities. register properties, the less costly and risky
the project.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Togo Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 No 0.9/100
Transparency in public procurement Market sounding and/or assessment GDP per capita
Togo does not make public procurement notices According to the World Bank, there is an Although Togo has a long-term GDP growth
that detail both procurement procedures and absence of market sounding process in Togo. of near 6%, Togo has the second lowest GDP
shortlisting criteria available online. A more Adding one could allow the government to per capita of all InfraCompass 2020 Countries,
transparent process could encourage more determine if there is an interest from investors at USD 671. Despite this, Togo has seen a
participation and competition, which drive value and lenders to provide commercial financing doubling of their GDP per capita over the
for money. for projects. past 20 years and this trend is expected to
continue.

220
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

TOGO OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 5.5 Population (million, 2019) 8.2 Unemployment rate (2019) 1.7%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 671 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 42.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.4%
GDP growth rate (annual, 5.1% Gross Government Debt (% of 73.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.25
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 0.2% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 30 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 43.1
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 41.3^ Cost to start a business 83.7
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 54.1^ Dealing with construction 46.6
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 35.1 Product market regulation, 35.2^ Quality of land administration 31.7
network sectors
Rule of law 38.2 Regulatory (including 37 Registering property 68.8
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 26.7 Strength of insolvency 56.2 Time required to start a business 94.5
framework
Political stability and absence 33.6 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 63.6^ Infrastructure investment 91.9^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 0 Private infrastructure investment 34.7^
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 22 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 42.5^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 16 Value of closed infrastructure 57.8
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 52
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
0.9 17.5
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 43.1 Financing through local equity 41.2^ Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 54.3 Stocks traded 15^
Summary credit rating 30 Financial depth 25.3^
Financial stability 80.9^
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

221
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Tunisia

Overall performance Tunisia at a glance

Tunisia has implemented processes that encourage the creation of businesses,
promoting competition and investment. Despite having a reasonably stable
financial sector, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic may present a challenge
to obtaining finance for infrastructure investments. To encourage investment in
infrastructure projects and provide security for investors, Tunisia could improve
the liquidity of its financial market and boost GDP growth to secure funding for $3,287 11.8 million
future projects. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 30 1 59 To 3.7% of GDP 1.4% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 58 7 53 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 39 1 71

Planning 43 3 71

Procurement 57 37 63

Activity 39 3 35 62.7 —
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 65 15 20 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 40 2 32 2019)

Top performing metrics

94.2/100 80.1/100 74.7/100

Cost to start a business Time required to start a business Financial stability
According to the World Bank, the cost to start According to the World Bank, the time required Tunisia’s financial stability is satisfactory,
a business in Tunisia is 2.9% of income per to start a business in Tunisia is nine days, which however it is the lowest ranked among Lower
capita, the second lowest for Lower Middle is less than Lower Middle Income Countries Middle Income Countries. A stable financial
Income Countries. A review of processes average of 20.4 days. Shorter times to set up system facilitates the smooth flow of funds
resulted in a reduction of fees to start a businesses can persuade businesses to set up in between infrastructure and investors, improving
business, easing the entry of new firms. a country, including new infrastructure entities. capital supply for projects.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Tunisia Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 2/100 20.1/100
Market sounding and/or assessment Stocks traded Long term GDP growth trend

Tunisia currently lacks a market sounding Tunisia traded stocks worth approximately Tunisia’s long-term GDP growth is 2.1%, the
process for infrastructure projects. Adding such 2.2% of GDP in 2019, scoring it below the lowest value compared to other Lower Middle
a process could allow the government to better Lower Middle Income Countries average of Income Countries where the average is 4.9%.
determine if there is interest from investors and 15.5%. As this indicator measures the liquidity Combined with the uncertain impact of the
lenders to provide commercial financing for of equities, it is important to infrastructure COVID-19 pandemic, this low growth trend
projects. investors to know they can exit investments at may hamper Tunisia’s ability to borrow and
appropriate points. build more infrastructure.

222
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

TUNISIA OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 38.7 Population (million, 2019) 11.8 Unemployment rate (2019) 15.5%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 3,287 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 69.0% Inflation rate (2019) 6.6%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.5% Gross Government Debt (% of 74.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.56
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -3.9% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 31 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 32.8
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 45.5 Cost to start a business 94.2
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 51 Dealing with construction 57.8
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 51.3 Product market regulation, 54.2^ Quality of land administration 45
network sectors
Rule of law 50.8 Regulatory (including 41.8 Registering property 68.8
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 43.3 Strength of insolvency 53.1 Time required to start a business 80.1
framework
Political stability and absence 35 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 60.4^ Infrastructure investment 48.9
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 25 Private infrastructure investment 53.4^
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 42 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 28.3^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 59 Value of closed infrastructure 8.9
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 71
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
4.2 32.7
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 41.7 Financing through local equity 46.9 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 20.1 Stocks traded 2^
Summary credit rating 31 Financial depth 41.2
Financial stability 74.7
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

223
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Turkey

Overall performance Turkey at a glance

Turkey is a top performer in the Activity driver. This is driven by the high value of PPP
deals that have reached financial close in Turkey over the last five years. Despite
some financial and political uncertainty since 2017, Turkey has managed to increase
investment resulting in some of the highest values of PPP infrastructure deals and private
infrastructure investment globally. To build on this momentum, the Turkish government
should seek to enhance its planning processes through publishing project pipelines and $8,958 83 million
infrastructure plans, as well as conducting market soundings and assessments.
GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 52 5 48 To 2.0% of GDP 1.2% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 48 2 57 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 8 17 88

Planning 70 2 20

Procurement 60 1 60

Activity 8 4 64 74.3 $8,038 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 49 10 28 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 30 3 42 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 96/100 95.9/100

Value of closed PPP infrastructure deals Registering property Private infrastructure investment
Among InfraCompass 2020 countries, According to the World Bank, it takes four and a At 0.9% of GDP, Turkey has had a high value of
Turkey has the second highest value of half days to register a property in Turkey, placing private infrastructure investment over the past
closed infrastructure deals with foreign Turkey in the top three for Upper Middle Income five years compared to the average of 0.3% for
equity sponsorship, at 0.96% of GDP. A high Countries. As infrastructure projects often Upper Middle Income Countries. Investment
value may reflect a strong recent track record involve property rights, the shorter the time to has been across a broad range of infrastructure
of closing PPPs, although this may impacted register properties, the less costly and risky the sectors, including energy, transport, water and
by the COVID-19 pandemic. project. health.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Turkey Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Published project pipeline Published infrastructure plan Market sounding and/or assessment
Turkey does not currently publish an Turkey does not have a national or sub- According to the World Bank, there is an
infrastructure pipeline of projects. The addition national infrastructure plan. The addition absence of a market sounding process
of an infrastructure pipeline could help provide of an infrastructure plan could highlight in Turkey. Adding one could allow the
infrastructure participants with a clear indication infrastructure challenges and opportunities for government to determine if there is an
of prospective and confirmed infrastructure investment, as well as detail the government’s interest from investors and lenders to provide
activity. planned responses. commercial financing for projects.

224
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

TURKEY OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 743.7 Population (million, 2019) 83 Unemployment rate (2019) 11.9%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 8,958 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 75.0% Inflation rate (2019) 15.7%
GDP growth rate (annual, 0.2% Gross Government Debt (% of 30.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.63
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -4.8% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 36 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 41.9
(annual, 2019) 2016)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 42.9 Cost to start a business 88
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 51.3 Dealing with construction 68.3
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 10.5 Product market regulation, 51.6 Quality of land administration 90
network sectors
Rule of law 43.6 Regulatory (including 49.1 Registering property 96
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 60 Strength of insolvency 65.6 Time required to start a business 84.5
framework
Political stability and absence 27.9 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 15 Infrastructure investment 33.9
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 25 Private infrastructure investment 95.9
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 60 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 100
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 58 Value of closed infrastructure 25.1
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or No PPP contract management 65
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
11.4 32.7
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 76.4 Financing through local equity 47.5
Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 50.1 Stocks traded 43.5
Summary credit rating 36 Financial depth 37.3
Financial stability 88.1
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

225
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

United Arab Emirates

Overall performance United Arab Emirates at a glance

The United Arab Emirates resource wealth and strong credit rating support its
ability to fund infrastructure projects. The processes around starting a business
and registering property, which promote competition, have also been improved.
To attract more investment capital, the United Arab Emirates could look to
improve stock market liquidity and invest in larger infrastructure deals.
$37,750 10.7 million
GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 27 1 61 To — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 18 4 72 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 26 7 79

Planning 18 95

Procurement 33 14 80

Activity 44 4 33 88.5 $1,130 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 14 1 69 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 28 1 43 2019)

Top performing metrics

98.7/100 91.2/100 90/100

Registering property Time required to start a business Summary credit rating
According to the World Bank, registering a According to the World Bank, the time required The United Arab Emirates has a strong credit
property takes one and a half days in the to start a business has decreased dramatically rating, with a stable outlook. The United Arab
United Arab Emirates. This is significantly over the decade from 15.5 days in 2009 to only Emirates high credit worthiness provides
less time than the High Income Countries’ four days in 2019. Shorter times to set up can favourable borrowing costs for infrastructure
average of 24.6, placing the United Arab persuade businesses to set up in a country, investments.
Emirates in the top five for InfraCompass including new infrastructure entities.
2020 countries for the metric.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
United Arab Emirates Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

2.7/100 26.1/100 5.6/100

Value of closed PPP infrastructure deals Long term GDP growth trend Stocks traded

The value of closed PPP infrastructure deals as The long-term GDP growth rate for the United The value of stocks traded as a proportion of
a proportion of GDP is substantially less than the Arab Emirates remains at 2.6% compared to GDP has fallen quite dramatically in the United
average for the High Income Countries, at only the 20 year historical average of 4.7%. Long- Arab Emirates from 36% in 2014 to 6% in
0.01% compared to 0.11%. This low value may term growth rates signal a country’s capacity 2018. As this indicator measures the liquidity
reflect the limited availability of PPP investments to fund infrastructure from future growth. The of equities, it is important to infrastructure
in the country. COVID-19 pandemic may impact GDP growth investors to know they can exit investments at
trends. appropriate points.

226
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 405.8 Population (million, 2019) 10.7 Unemployment rate (2019) 2.6%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 37,750 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 87.0% Inflation rate (2019) -1.5%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.6% Gross Government Debt (% of 20.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.82
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -4.9% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 90 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, NA) NA
(annual, 2019)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 84.9 Cost to start a business 65.5
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 76.9 Dealing with construction 84.9
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 27.7 Product market regulation, 54.2^ Quality of land administration 70
network sectors
Rule of law 66.1 Regulatory (including 68.6 Registering property 98.7
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 53.3 Strength of insolvency 68.8 Time required to start a business 91.2
framework
Political stability and absence 62.4 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 53.1 Infrastructure investment 54.5^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 55.6
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 67 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 2.7
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 60 Value of closed infrastructure 19.7
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 52
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
48.2 37.8
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 84.2 Financing through local equity 66.8 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 26.1 Stocks traded 5.6
Summary credit rating 90 Financial depth 56.6
Financial stability 88.5
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

227
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

United Kingdom

Overall performance United Kingdom at a glance

The United Kingdom is a world leader in infrastructure regulation and planning. National
level infrastructure plans, detailed PPP preparation and economic impact assessments
help the United Kingdom deliver infrastructure projects efficiently. In addition, the quality
of the United Kingdom’s infrastructure governance systems and financial markets help to
attract investment in infrastructure and improve project outcomes. However, significant
government debt, low long-term GDP growth and the potential economic fallout from $41,030 66.9 million
BREXIT and the COVID-19 pandemic presents challenges to the United Kingdom’s ability
GDP per capita Population
to fund infrastructure investment.
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 11 4 79 To 1.9% of GDP 0.1% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 1 81 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 7 1 89

Planning 1 99

Procurement 12 9 92

Activity 49 19 28 88.9 $10,570 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 15 2 68 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 4 77 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 96/100

Cost to start a business Transparency in public procurement Preparation of PPPs
According to the World Bank, there are no The United Kingdom’s public procurement At 96, the United Kingdom’s score on the
costs associated with starting a business in notices are made available online and tender preparation of PPPs is much higher than the
the United Kingdom, easing the entry of new documents detail both procurement procedures High Income Countries average of 67. Good
firms. and shortlisting criteria. The transparency of practices at the preparation stage help ensure
the process encourages more participation and that a decision is justified and that the procuring
competition. authority is ready to initiate the process.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
United Kingdom Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

12.2/100 17/100 33/100

Long term GDP growth trend Average procurement duration – Gross government debt
transaction RFP
The United Kingdom’s long-term GDP growth At 53 months, the United Kingdom has one The United Kingdom’s gross government debt
trend is 1.3%, below the High Income Countries’ of the highest periods of time between the sits at 86% of GDP, above the average of 74%
average of 1.8%. Long-term growth rates signal public announcement of a tender and the for High Income Countries. The impacts of
a country’s capacity to fund infrastructure from awarding of a contract of all InfraCompass the COVID-19 pandemic on debt levels may
future growth. The COVID-19 pandemic may 2020 countries. Lengthy procurement hinder the UK government’s ability to fund
impact GDP growth trends. processes add costs, risks and down time for infrastructure.
infrastructure contractors.

228
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

UNITED KINGDOM OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 2743.6 Population (million, 2019) 66.9 Unemployment rate (2019) 3.8%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 41,030 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 83.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.8%
GDP growth rate (annual, 1.2% Gross Government Debt (% of 86.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.76
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate -3.6% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 92 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 33.2
(annual, 2019) 2015)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 60.5 Cost to start a business 100
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 85.7 Dealing with construction 72.7
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 85.4 Product market regulation, 86 Quality of land administration 86.7
network sectors
Rule of law 82.8 Regulatory (including 85.2 Registering property 80.8
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 56.7 Strength of insolvency 68.8 Time required to start a business 90.1
framework
Political stability and absence 50.8 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 17 Infrastructure investment 23.9
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 35
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 96 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 10.8
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 86 Value of closed infrastructure 41.4
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 71
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
52.3 64.8
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 33 Financing through local equity 77.8 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 12.2 Stocks traded 81^
Summary credit rating 92 Financial depth 83.3
Financial stability 93.5
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

229
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

United States Of America

Overall performance United States at a glance

The United States is the highest ranked country for the financial markets. It
has transparent procurement processes, supported by highly liquid financial
markets that encourages investment in infrastructure. To increase the efficiency
of infrastructure investment, the United States could look to publish a national
project pipeline and a national infrastructure plan.
$65,112 329.3 million
GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 36 2 57 To 1.6% of GDP 0.6% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 3 3 80 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 17 14 83

Planning 60 1 42

Procurement 66 2 53

Activity 75 10 87.9 $17,161 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 5 1 84 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 1 91 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 100/100 98/100

Transparency in public procurement Stocks traded Summary credit rating

The United States’ procurement notices As the largest financial system in the world, the The United States, although not AAA-rated,
are made available online and tender United States is the top performer of stocks holds a unique position in the sovereign debt
documents detail procurement procedures. traded out of all InfraCompass 2020 countries, market, with US Treasuries considered one of
The transparency of the process encourages with a value of 160% of GDP. the safest stores of value globally. As a result, it
more participation and competition, which has a low credit risk and can borrow at low cost
drive value for money. to fund infrastructure.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
United States Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Published project pipeline Published infrastructure procurement Published infrastructure plan
guidelines
The United States does not currently have a The United States does not publish The United States does not have a national
national infrastructure pipeline of projects, national guidelines for the procurement of plan. Nor do some of its major states. The
although some states do. The addition of a infrastructure projects. Publishing guidelines addition of an infrastructure plan could
national one could help provide infrastructure makes contractors aware of the government’s highlight infrastructure challenges and
participants with a clear indication of prospective processes, expectations and requirements. opportunities for investment, as well as detail
and confirmed infrastructure activity. This improves transparency and helps achieve the government’s planned responses.
better value for money.

230
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA OVERVIEW

GDP ($US billion, 2019) 21439.5 Population (million, 2019) 329.3 Unemployment rate (2019) 3.9%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 65,112 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 82.0% Inflation rate (2019) 1.8%
GDP growth rate (annual, 2.4% Gross Government Debt (% of 106.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.75
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 3.6% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 98 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 41.5
(annual, 2019) 2016)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? No Effect of taxation on incentives 62 Cost to start a business 97.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 73.6 Dealing with construction 71.8
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 81 Product market regulation, 66.5^ Quality of land administration 60
network sectors
Rule of law 79.1 Regulatory (including 81.6 Registering property 89.3
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 33.3 Strength of insolvency 93.8 Time required to start a business 91.2
framework
Political stability and absence 58 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 49.1 Infrastructure investment 17.9
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 100 Private infrastructure investment 9.5
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 79 Published procurement No Value of closed PPP 4
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 74 Value of closed infrastructure 8.8
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 57
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
83.1 90
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 16.8 Financing through local equity 78.9 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 17.1 Stocks traded 100
Summary credit rating 98 Financial depth 91.3
Financial stability 93.2
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

231
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Uruguay

Overall performance Uruguay at a glance

Uruguay’s resilient financial sector supports the inflow of capital into the
infrastructure sector, which is supported by a robust PPP process which helps
instil confidence and attract investors. To improve efficiency, Uruguay could
publish a project pipeline and a national infrastructure plan to provide a clear
indication of planned infrastructure investments.
$17,029 3.5 million
GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 33 2 57 To 3.0% of GDP 0.5% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 37 5 61 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 53 8 60

Planning 14 1 96

Procurement 26 11 83

Activity 32 5 38 68.7 $228 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 35 4 40 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 65 3 23 2019)

Top performing metrics

88.8/100 85.6/100 77/100

Financial stability Time required to start a business Preparation of PPPs
According to the World Economic Forum, According to the World Bank, the time required At 77, Uruguay’s score on the preparation of
Uruguay has high financial stability. The to start a business in Uruguay has decreased PPPs is much higher than the High Income
minimum capital adequacy ratio and dramatically over the decade from 64 days in Countries’ average of 66. Good practices at the
the domestic credit-to-GDP gap are at 2009 to only six and a half days in 2019. Shorter preparation stage of the PPP helps to ensure
satisfactory levels. The long-term impact times can persuade businesses to set up in a that a decision is justified, and that the procuring
of the COVID-19 pandemic is yet to be country, including new infrastructure entities. authority is ready to initiate the procurement
determined. process.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Uruguay Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

0/100 16/100 33.1/100

Shareholder governance Dealing with construction permits Long term GDP growth trend
Uruguay’s long-term GDP growth trend has
Uruguay is not considered to have strong According to the World Bank, it takes an
decreased to 3.4% in InfraCompass 2020,
legal protections for shareholders. A failure to average of 265 days to obtain construction
down from 4.6% in InfraCompass 2017. It
adequately enforce disclosure and transparency permits in Uruguay. Expediting this process
remains above the High Income Countries’
standards lowers the confidence of investors, could significantly impact investment in
average of 1.9%, suggesting some capacity
hurting entities that fund or deliver infrastructure. infrastructure by helping to reduce delays.
to fund infrastructure from future growth.
However, the effects of the COVID-19
pandemic remain uncertain.

232
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

URUGUAY OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 59.9 Population (million, 2019) 3.5 Unemployment rate (2019) 7.9%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 17,029 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 95.0% Inflation rate (2019) 7.6%
GDP growth rate (annual, 0.4% Gross Government Debt (% of 64.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.76
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 0.1% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 55 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 39.5
(annual, 2019) 2017)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 36.6 Cost to start a business 51.6
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 66.8 Dealing with construction 16
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 44.4 Product market regulation, 53.7^ Quality of land administration 75
network sectors
Rule of law 62 Regulatory (including 60 Registering property 41.1
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 0 Strength of insolvency 59.4 Time required to start a business 85.6
framework
Political stability and absence 67.4 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 64.7 Infrastructure investment 35
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? Yes Degree of transparency in 75 Private infrastructure investment 41.8
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 77 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 39.8
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 73 Value of closed infrastructure 34.7
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 68
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
21.7 13.2
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 49.8 Financing through local equity 28 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 33.1 Stocks traded 7.9^
Summary credit rating 55 Financial depth 28.5
Financial stability 88.8
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

233
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Vanuatu

Overall performance Vanuatu at a glance

Vanuatu has a high level of infrastructure activity, particularly with private investment
for the size of its economy. Despite strong recent activity in the market, there is a need
to reform its procurement processes through publishing guidelines for infrastructure
procurement and improving its tender processes. It also lacks a long-term infrastructure
plan, which could help set the strategic vision and actions required for the nation’s
infrastructure development. Due to the small size of its economy, its funding capacity $3,260 0.3 million
remains limited. GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
e
ng

er

er
a
)

rm
00

ch

ad
r
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/1

20

l le
i ng
ore

pe
erg
17-
ore

nte

ba
pi r

Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
(20
Sc

Co
As

To

Governance 56 1 — —
Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 50 1 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 45 1

Planning 38 2

Procurement 28 2

Activity 58 7 — —
Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 25 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 33 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 82.8/100 66/100

Private infrastructure investment Financial stability Infrastructure investment
At 1% of GDP, Vanuatu has one of the highest Vanuatu’s financial stability is similar to Total public and private investment in
values of private infrastructure investment the average of 83 for Lower Middle Income infrastructure is high in Vanuatu, at 5.4% of GDP
over the last five years of all InfraCompass Countries. Stable financial markets facilitate the per annum. The COVID-19 pandemic may impact
2020 countries. This may be impacted by the smooth flow of funds between infrastructure these efforts.
COVID-19 pandemic. assets and investors. However, the impact of the
COVID-19 pandemic is a concern.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Vanuatu Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No No No
Published project pipeline Published infrastructure plan Published infrastructure procurement
guidelines
Vanuatu does not currently publish an Vanuatu does not have a national or sub- Vanuatu does not publish guidelines for the
infrastructure pipeline of projects. The addition national infrastructure plan. The addition procurement of infrastructure projects. Publishing
of an infrastructure pipeline could help provide of an infrastructure plan could highlight guidelines makes contractors aware of the
infrastructure participants with a clear indication infrastructure challenges and opportunities government’s processes, expectations and
of prospective and confirmed infrastructure for investment, as well as detail the requirements, improves transparency and helps
activity. government’s planned responses. the government achieve better value for money.

234
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

VANUATU OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 1 Population (million, 2019) 0.3 Unemployment rate (2019) 5.4%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 3,260 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 25.0% Inflation rate (2019) 2.0%
GDP growth rate (annual, 3.8% Gross Government Debt (% of 49.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.32
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 0.2% Sovereign risk rating (2019) NA Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 37.6
(annual, 2019) 2010)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 46.5^ Cost to start a business 14.7
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 56.8^ Dealing with construction 61
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 45.8 Product market regulation, 54.2^ Quality of land administration 61.7
network sectors
Rule of law 56.7 Regulatory (including 40.5 Registering property 48.2
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 0 Strength of insolvency 37.5 Time required to start a business 60.2
framework
Political stability and absence 64 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? No Average procurement duration 44.7^ Infrastructure investment 66^
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 38.2^ Private infrastructure investment 100
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 51.9^ Published procurement No Value of closed PPP 40.9^
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 61.7^ Value of closed infrastructure 23.7^
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 57.4^
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
4.2 29.6
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 61.5 Financing through local equity 48.6^ Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 22.2 Stocks traded 11.6^
Summary credit rating 38.6^ Financial depth 34.7^
Financial stability 82.8^
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

235
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Vietnam

Overall performance Vietnam at a glance

Vietnam is one of the strongest emerging economies in South-East Asia. Despite low GDP per
capita, the economy has experienced significant expansion over the last two
decades. The continued growth of the economy, together with the closure of
recent PPP infrastructure deals positions Vietnam well to continue attracting
investment for infrastructure projects.
$2,740 95.5 million
GDP per capita Population
(USD, 2019) (2019)
17- ange

er
)

er
00

rm
6)

ad
ch

r
(/1
)

de
g

rfo
(/7

20

l le
n

g
nk

n
rgi

irin
ore

pe
nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Ra

Gl o
Em
Sc
(20
Ra

Co
As

Governance 40 3 53 To 6.3% of GDP 1.2% of GDP

Infrastructure Infrastructure
Regulatory frameworks 53 4 54 investment gap
(2019 estimate) (2019 estimate)
Permits 50 4 63

Planning 35 2 75

Procurement 54 18 64

Activity 6 37 65 65.9 $992 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 51 11 28 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 23 2 47 2019)

Top performing metrics

100/100 88.8/100 83/100

Value of closed PPP infrastructure deals Cost to start a business Financial stability
As an emerging economy, Vietnam According to the World Bank, the cost to start Vietnam’s financial sector has experienced
is working to increase investment in a business in Vietnam is 5.6% of income per significant growth and development. Ongoing
infrastructure. In 2019, Vietnam closed one capita, well below the 17.4% average cost for regulatory reforms, such as the recent adoption
of the largest deals in the power sector, the Lower Middle Income Countries, easing the of Basel II requirements in December 2019, have
Nghi Son 2, a USD 2.3 billion project. entry of new firms. helped to promote stability and ensure sufficient
liquidity and capital in the sector. The long-term
impact of the COVID-19 pandemic is a concern.

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Vietnam Country Page on the InfraCompass website.

No 3.5/100 57.4/100
Published infrastructure plan GDP per capita Gross government debt
Vietnam does not have a national or sub- Despite being one of South-East Asia’s Vietnam’s gross government debt amounts to
national infrastructure plan. The addition of fastest growing economics, Vietnam’s GDP 53% of GDP. If public debt continues to grow
an infrastructure plan could help place greater per capita is still relatively low at USD 2,567. it could significantly affect the ability of the
emphasis on the planning phase of projects, in Since 2002, GDP per capita has increased government to fund new infrastructure projects.
turn helping to focus infrastructure spending in two and a half times and is expected to
the right areas to achieve the best results. continue to improve.

236
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

VIETNAM OVERVIEW
GDP ($US billion, 2019) 261.6 Population (million, 2019) 95.5 Unemployment rate (2019) 1.9%
GDP per capita ($US, 2019) 2,740 Urbanisation ratio (2018) 36.0% Inflation rate (2019) 3.6%
GDP growth rate (annual, 6.5% Gross Government Debt (% of 54.0% Digital Adoption Index (0-1 best, 0.52
2019) GDP, 2019) 2016)
GDP per capita growth rate 7.4% Sovereign risk rating (2019) 43 Gini coefficient (0-100 worst, 35.3
(annual, 2019) 2016)

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? Yes Effect of taxation on incentives 44.2 Cost to start a business 88.8
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ Yes Prevalence of foreign 52.8 Dealing with construction 47.4
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 21.3 Product market regulation, 58.3^ Quality of land administration 46.7
network sectors
Rule of law 49.9 Regulatory (including 42.3 Registering property 52.2
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 46.7 Strength of insolvency 53.1 Time required to start a business 64.6
framework
Political stability and absence 53.4 Investment promotion agency? Yes
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? Yes Average procurement duration 50^ Infrastructure investment 74
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? No Degree of transparency in 25 Private infrastructure investment 61.2
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 77 Published procurement Yes Value of closed PPP 100
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis Yes Procurement of PPPs 77 Value of closed infrastructure 25.1
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or Yes PPP contract management 62
assessment?
Environmental impact Yes
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
3.5 64
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 57.4 Financing through local equity 47.7 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 58.3 Stocks traded 19.5
Summary credit rating 43 Financial depth 45.8
Financial stability 83
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
‘Top performing metrics’ are the metrics with the highest score out of 100.
‘Opportunities to grow’ are generally the metrics with the lowest weighted score out of 100.
^Denotes interpolated metric data. See Technical Appendix for further explanation on the interpolation techniques.

237
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

8. Income Group
And Regional
Group Profiles

238
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

High Income Group

(Economies with a GNI per capita of $12,375 or more)

Overall performance High income countries at a glance

Collectively, the High Income Countries (HICs) on InfraCompass account for
over USD 51 trillion in GDP. HICs are characterised by financial stability and
strong infrastructure planning processes. Since InfraCompass 2017, the most
significant improvement has been in procurement processes, particularly the
transparency of procurement. However, there is room for improvement in the $39,486 1118.7 million
cost and duration of the procurement process. GDP per capita Population
(regional average, USD, 2019) (regional total, 2019)
e
17- hang

er

er
rm
6)

ad
r
c
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/7

20

l le
g
ore

n
irin

pe
erg

nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
As

To

Governance 71 2.7% of GDP 0.3% of GDP

Infrastructure investment Infrastructure gap
Regulatory frameworks 71 (regional average, 2019 (regional average, 2019
estimate) estimate)
Permits 80 1

Planning 75 3

Procurement 82 7

Activity 28 4 84 $77,382 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 64 3 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
regional average, 2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 53 1 2019)

Top performing metrics

91/100 90/100 89/100

Cost to start a business Transparency in public Financial stability

procurement

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Group Page on the InfraCompass website.

18/100 46/100 55/100

Long term GDP growth Gross government debt Average procurement duration –
trend transaction RFP

239
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Group members
Australia Chile France Italy Poland Singapore Sweden United
Kingdom
Austria Czech Germany Japan Portugal Slovak United Arab United States
Republic Republic Emirates of America
Belgium Denmark Greece Korea Qatar Slovenia Uruguay
Canada Finland Ireland Netherlands Saudi Spain
Arabia

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? 28/31 Effect of taxation on incentives 47 Cost to start a business 91
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ 28/31 Prevalence of foreign 69 Dealing with construction 53
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 68 Product market regulation, 64 Quality of land administration 76
network sectors
Rule of law 74 Regulatory (including 75 Registering property 79
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 48 Strength of insolvency 71 Time required to start a business 79
framework
Political stability and absence 62 Investment promotion agency? 31/31
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? 26/31 Average procurement duration 55 Infrastructure investment 36
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? 19/31 Degree of transparency in 90 Private infrastructure investment 21
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 67 Published procurement 26/31 Value of closed PPP 24
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis 25/31 Procurement of PPPs 77 Value of closed infrastructure 32
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or 23/31 PPP contract management 61
assessment?
Environmental impact 29/31
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
50 48
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 46 Financing through local equity 57 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 18 Stocks traded 36
Summary credit rating 83 Financial depth 64
Financial stability 89
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
The income groups are based on the World Bank classification as of July 2019, which is calculated using the World Bank Atlas method.
‘Top performing metrics’ and ‘Opportunities to grow’ are based on the average of normalized scores within the income group.
240
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Upper Middle Income Group

(Economies with a GNI per capita of between $3,996 and $12,375)

Overall performance Upper middle income countries at a glance

Collectively, the Upper Middle Income Countries (UMICs) in InfraCompass account
for just under USD23 trillion in GDP. UMICs are characterised by strong infrastructure
investment (highest of all income groups) and ease of setting up a business. Since
InfraCompass 2017, the most significant improvement has been in permits regarding
the quality of land administration, registering property and costs to start a business.
However, there is room for improvement in financial markets, regulatory frameworks and $7,787 2354.8 million
infrastructure planning. GDP per capita Population
(regional average, USD, 2019) (regional total, 2019)
e
17- hang

er

er
rm
6)

ad
r
c
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/7

20

l le
g
ore

n
irin

pe
erg

nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
As

To

Governance 50 1 3.6% of GDP 1.1% of GDP

Infrastructure investment Infrastructure gap
Regulatory frameworks 57 1 (regional average, 2019 (regional average, 2019
estimate) estimate)
Permits 69 5

Planning 64 4

Procurement 73 3

Activity 40 1 69 $24,441 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 33 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
regional average, 2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 38 2019)

Top performing metrics

89/100 81/100 78/100

Financial stability Registering property Cost to start a business

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Group Page on the InfraCompass website.

29/100 50/100 63/100

Long term GDP growth Average procurement duration – Gross government debt
trend transaction RFP

241
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Group members
Argentina Colombia Jordan Paraguay Samoa
Azerbaijan Ecuador Kazakhstan Peru South Africa
Brazil Fiji Malaysia Romania Thailand
China Guatemala Mexico Russia Turkey

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? 14/20 Effect of taxation on incentives 41 Cost to start a business 78
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ 20/20 Prevalence of foreign 57 Dealing with construction 54
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 38 Product market regulation, 53 Quality of land administration 62
network sectors
Rule of law 45 Regulatory (including 49 Registering property 81
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 40 Strength of insolvency 63 Time required to start a business 62
framework
Political stability and absence 46 Investment promotion agency? 19/20
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? 14/20 Average procurement duration 50 Infrastructure investment 48
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? 13/20 Degree of transparency in 57 Private infrastructure investment 34
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 55 Published procurement 19/20 Value of closed PPP 47
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis 20/20 Procurement of PPPs 64 Value of closed infrastructure 32
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or 10/20 PPP contract management 65
assessment?
Environmental impact 15/20
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
10 33
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 63 Financing through local equity 45 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 29 Stocks traded 23
Summary credit rating 50 Financial depth 43
Financial stability 89
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
The income groups are based on the World Bank classification as of July 2019, which is calculated using the World Bank Atlas method.
‘Top performing metrics’ and ‘Opportunities to grow’ are based on the average of normalized scores within the income group.
242
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Lower Middle Income Group

(Economies with a GNI per capita of between $1.026 and $3,995)

Overall performance Lower middle income countries at a glance

Collectively, Lower Middle Income Countries (LMICs) in InfraCompass
account for over USD 6.5 trillion in GDP. LMICs are characterised by increasing
investment in infrastructure and improving project assurance processes.
Since InfraCompass 2017, the most significant improvement has been in
permits through lower costs and time to start a business. There is room $2,453 2773.3 million
for improvement in financial markets, funding capacity and infrastructure GDP per capita Population
governance. (regional average, USD, 2019) (regional total, 2019)
e
17- hang

er

er
rm
6)

ad
r
c
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/7

20

l le
g
ore

n
irin

pe
erg

nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
As

To

Governance 47 1 5.4% of GDP 1.7% of GDP

Infrastructure investment Infrastructure gap
Regulatory frameworks 52 2 (regional average, 2019 (regional average, 2019
estimate) estimate)
Permits 52 7

Planning 65 1

Procurement 64 1

Activity 42 5 57.4 $13,689 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 25 1 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
regional average, 2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 31 2019)

Top performing metrics

83/100 66/100 64/100

Financial stability Cost to start a business Infrastructure investment

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Group Page on the InfraCompass website.

29/100 47/100 48/100

GDP per capita Long term GDP growth trend Average procurement duration –
transaction RFP

243
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Group members
Angola Egypt Kenya Pakistan Solomon Islands
Bangladesh Ghana Morocco Papua New Guinea Tunisia
Cambodia India Myanmar Philippines Vanuatu
Cote d’Ivoire Indonesia Nigeria Senegal Vietnam

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? 16/20 Effect of taxation on incentives 46 Cost to start a business 66
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ 20/20 Prevalence of foreign 55 Dealing with construction 50
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 31 Product market regulation, 50 Quality of land administration 36
network sectors
Rule of law 42 Regulatory (including 41 Registering property 44
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 34 Strength of insolvency 51 Time required to start a business 61
framework
Political stability and absence 39 Investment promotion agency? 20/20
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? 13/20 Average procurement duration 48 Infrastructure investment 64
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? 12/20 Degree of transparency in 38 Private infrastructure investment 40
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 49 Published procurement 19/20 Value of closed PPP 38
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis 18/20 Procurement of PPPs 59 Value of closed infrastructure 28
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or 14/20 PPP contract management 53
assessment?
Environmental impact 18/20
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
3 21
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 58 Financing through local equity 45 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 47 Stocks traded 14
Summary credit rating 39 Financial depth 36
Financial stability 83
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
The income groups are based on the World Bank classification as of July 2019, which is calculated using the World Bank Atlas method.
‘Top performing metrics’ and ‘Opportunities to grow’ are based on the average of normalized scores within the income group.
244
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Low Income Group

(Economies with a GNI per capita of $1,025 or less)

Overall performance Low income countries at a glance

Collectively, the Low Income Countries (LICs) in InfraCompass account for
almost USD 250 billion in GDP. LICs are characterised by increasing investment
in infrastructure as a percentage of GDP as they seek to close their gap.
The most significant improvements for LICS has been in permits and land
administration processes. However, improvement is needed in approaches to $866 273.4 million
procurement, governance and financial markets. GDP per capita Population
(regional average, USD, 2019) (regional total, 2019)
e
17- hang

er

er
rm
6)

ad
r
c
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/7

20

l le
g
ore

n
irin

pe
erg

nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
As

To

Governance 38 10.1% of GDP 4.6% of GDP

Infrastructure investment Infrastructure gap
Regulatory frameworks 48 1 (regional average, 2019 (regional average, 2019
estimate) estimate)
Permits 48 12

Planning 58

Procurement 53 1

Activity 52 4 41.4 $585 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 21 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
regional average, 2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 22 1 2019)

Top performing metrics

89/100 80/100 64/100

Infrastructure investment Financial stability Average procurement duration –

transaction RFP

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Group Page on the InfraCompass website.

1/100 16/100 10/100

GDP per capita Shareholder governance Domestic credit to private sector

245
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Group members
Benin Chad Guinea Niger Tanzania
Burkina Faso Ethiopia Mali Rwanda Togo

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? 7/10 Effect of taxation on incentives 40 Cost to start a business 43
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ 9/10 Prevalence of foreign 50 Dealing with construction 56
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 22 Product market regulation, 35 Quality of land administration 33
network sectors
Rule of law 37 Regulatory (including 38 Registering property 59
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 16 Strength of insolvency 58 Time required to start a business 62
framework
Political stability and absence 34 Investment promotion agency? 9/10
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? 5/10 Average procurement duration 64 Infrastructure investment 89
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? 6/10 Degree of transparency in 35 Private infrastructure investment 31
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 42 Published procurement 7/10 Value of closed PPP 45
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis 10/10 Procurement of PPPs 54 Value of closed infrastructure 43
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or 6/10 PPP contract management 49
assessment?
Environmental impact 9/10
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
1 10
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 62 Financing through local equity 39 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 55 Stocks traded 13
Summary credit rating 31 Financial depth 21
Financial stability 80
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
The income groups are based on the World Bank classification as of July 2019, which is calculated using the World Bank Atlas method.
‘Top performing metrics’ and ‘Opportunities to grow’ are based on the average of normalized scores within the income group.
246
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Africa

Overall performance Africa at a glance

The African countries in InfraCompass have averaged total infrastructure investment of
7% of GDP per annum and attracted USD 4.6 billion in private infrastructure investment
over the past five years. African countries are characterised by increasing overall
investment in infrastructure as a percentage of GDP. They are, however, constrained by
low funding capacity and limited depth of their financial markets. While infrastructure
governance, regulation and permits have been improving, more could be done to give $1,852 832.6 million
infrastructure investors confidence they will be able to extract a reasonable return. GDP per capita Population
(regional average, USD, 2019) (regional total, 2019)
e
17- hang

er

er
rm
6)

ad
r
c
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/7

20

l le
g
ore

n
irin

pe
erg

nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
As

To

Governance 43 7.1% of GDP 2.7% of GDP

Infrastructure investment Infrastructure gap
Regulatory frameworks 50 2 (regional average, 2019 (regional average, 2019
estimate) estimate)
Permits 53 10

Planning 64

Procurement 62 1

Activity 45 4 49.4 $4,627 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 22 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
regional average, 2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 26 1 2019)

Top performing metrics

81/100 77/100 64/100

Financial stability Infrastructure investment Average procurement duration –

transaction RFP

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Group Page on the InfraCompass website.

2/100 47/100 55/100

GDP per capita Long term GDP growth trend Gross government debt

247
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Group members
Angola Egypt Mali Senegal
Benin Ethiopia Morocco South Africa
Burkina Faso Ghana Niger Tanzania
Chad Guinea Nigeria Togo
Cote d’Ivoire Kenya Rwanda Tunisia

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? 15/20 Effect of taxation on incentives 42 Cost to start a business 59
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ 19/20 Prevalence of foreign 54 Dealing with construction 54
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 25 Product market regulation, 38 Quality of land administration 36
network sectors
Rule of law 40 Regulatory (including 40 Registering property 56
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 29 Strength of insolvency 55 Time required to start a business 63
framework
Political stability and absence 36 Investment promotion agency? 19/20
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? 12/20 Average procurement duration 64 Infrastructure investment 77
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? 13/20 Degree of transparency in 41 Private infrastructure investment 32
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 47 Published procurement 17/20 Value of closed PPP 39
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis 20/20 Procurement of PPPs 59 Value of closed infrastructure 35
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or 13/20 PPP contract management 55
assessment?
Environmental impact 18/20
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
2 15
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 55 Financing through local equity 43 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 47 Stocks traded 13
Summary credit rating 33 Financial depth 27
Financial stability 81
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
The income groups are based on the World Bank classification as of July 2019, which is calculated using the World Bank Atlas method.
‘Top performing metrics’ and ‘Opportunities to grow’ are based on the average of normalized scores within the income group.
248
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Americas

Overall performance Americas at a glance

The Americas have averaged total infrastructure investment of 2.9% of GDP per annum
and attracted USD 36 billion in private infrastructure investment over the past five years.
The Americas are characterised by good planning and procurement and adequate
regulatory frameworks. The Americas have increased across all drivers on average, with
infrastructure planning seeing the largest increase. To improve further, financial markets
in the Latin American countries will need to be further developed and funding capacity $16,889 895.4 million
improved. Governance frameworks for shareholders in infrastructure businesses could GDP per capita Population
also be improved. (regional average, USD, 2019) (regional total, 2019)
e
17- hang

er

er
rm
6)

ad
r
c
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/7

20

l le
g
ore

n
irin

pe
erg

nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
As

To

Governance 52 2.9% of GDP 1.0% of GDP

Infrastructure investment Infrastructure gap
Regulatory frameworks 60 (regional average, 2019 (regional average, 2019
estimate) estimate)
Permits 64 4

Planning 70 5

Procurement 74 3

Activity 39 69.3 $36,327 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 41 1 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
regional average, 2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 38 1 2019)

Top performing metrics

92/100 74/100 71/100

Financial stability Registering property PPP contract management

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Group Page on the InfraCompass website.

26/100 54/100 54/100

Long term GDP growth Average procurement duration – Gross government debt
trend transaction RFP

249
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Group members
Argentina Colombia Paraguay
Brazil Ecuador Peru
Canada Guatemala United States of America (USA)
Chile Mexico Uruguay

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? 8/12 Effect of taxation on incentives 39 Cost to start a business 70
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ 12/12 Prevalence of foreign 62 Dealing with construction 40
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 44 Product market regulation, 56 Quality of land administration 55
network sectors
Rule of law 51 Regulatory (including 57 Registering property 74
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 34 Strength of insolvency 63 Time required to start a business 67
framework
Political stability and absence 50 Investment promotion agency? 11/12
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? 10/12 Average procurement duration 54 Infrastructure investment 39
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? 7/12 Degree of transparency in 69 Private infrastructure investment 39
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 70 Published procurement 10/12 Value of closed PPP 50
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis 12/12 Procurement of PPPs 71 Value of closed infrastructure 31
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or 6/12 PPP contract management 71
assessment?
Environmental impact 10/12
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
22 32
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 54 Financing through local equity 47 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 26 Stocks traded 21
Summary credit rating 58 Financial depth 44
Financial stability 92
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
The income groups are based on the World Bank classification as of July 2019, which is calculated using the World Bank Atlas method.
‘Top performing metrics’ and ‘Opportunities to grow’ are based on the average of normalized scores within the income group.
250
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Asia

Overall performance Asia at a glance

The Asian countries in InfraCompass have averaged total infrastructure investment of 4%
of GDP per annum and attracted USD 32 billion in private infrastructure investment over
the past five years. Asian countries are characterised by good procurement, planning
and permit procedures. The regional average of these three drivers have all seen a score
increase of at least 5. There has also been rising infrastructure investment activity in
Asia, with an increase in the value of closed PPP deals and those with foreign equity $16,252 4117.4 million
sponsorship. To improve, Asian countries could pursue policies that continue to increase
GDP per capita Population
deals involving foreign investment, and develop financial markets across the region.
(regional average, USD, 2019) (regional total, 2019)
e
17- hang

er

er
rm
6)

ad
r
de
i ng

rfo
(/7

c
)

l le
g
20
ore

n
irin

pe
erg

nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
Ra

Co
As

To
(20

Governance 55 1 4.1% of GDP 1.0% of GDP

Infrastructure investment Infrastructure gap
Regulatory frameworks 60 1 (regional average, 2019 (regional average, 2019
estimate) estimate)
Permits 71 7

Planning 68 3

Procurement 71 6

Activity 36 5 73.1 $32,263 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 43 1 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
regional average, 2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 48 1 2019)

Top performing metrics

87/100 79/100 74/100

Financial stability Cost to start a business Registering property

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Group Page on the InfraCompass website.

45/100 48/100 60/100

Long term GDP growth Average procurement duration – Gross government debt
trend transaction RFP

251
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Group members
Azerbaijan India Kazakhstan Pakistan Singapore Vietnam
Bangladesh Indonesia Korea Philippines Thailand
Cambodia Japan Malaysia Qatar Turkey
China Jordan Myanmar Saudi Arabia United Arab
Emirates

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? 17/21 Effect of taxation on incentives 54 Cost to start a business 79
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ 21/21 Prevalence of foreign 58 Dealing with construction 63
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 43 Product market regulation, 56 Quality of land administration 61
network sectors
Rule of law 51 Regulatory (including 53 Registering property 74
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 43 Strength of insolvency 61 Time required to start a business 72
framework
Political stability and absence 45 Investment promotion agency? 21/21
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? 15/21 Average procurement duration 48 Infrastructure investment 53
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? 14/21 Degree of transparency in 55 Private infrastructure investment 34
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 52 Published procurement 20/21 Value of closed PPP 35
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis 17/21 Procurement of PPPs 60 Value of closed infrastructure 21
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or 15/21 PPP contract management 55
assessment?
Environmental impact 17/21
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
21 40
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 60 Financing through local equity 53 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 45 Stocks traded 36
Summary credit rating 61 Financial depth 54
Financial stability 87
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
The income groups are based on the World Bank classification as of July 2019, which is calculated using the World Bank Atlas method.
‘Top performing metrics’ and ‘Opportunities to grow’ are based on the average of normalized scores within the income group.
252
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Europe

Overall performance Europe at a glance

The European countries in InfraCompass have averaged total infrastructure investment of 2.9% of
GDP per annum and attracted USD 26 billion in private infrastructure investment over the past five
years. Europe is characterised by some of the best procurement practices and regulatory frameworks
in InfraCompass. Europe has also seen a large increase in funding capacity, as its economies
recovered following the GFC; however this is now expected to be diminished by the COVID-19
pandemic. Its continued low long-term GDP growth and mostly already established infrastructure $35,378 633.6 million
means that investment activity is low. To improve, more long-term planning of infrastructure that sets
GDP per capita Population
out cross-sectoral strategy and actions is needed.
(regional average, USD, 2019) (regional total, 2019)
e
17- hang

er

er
rm
6)

ad
r
c
)

de
i ng

rfo
(/7

20

l le
g
ore

n
irin

pe
erg

nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
(20
Ra

Co
As

To

Governance 70 2.9% of GDP 0.4% of GDP

Infrastructure investment Infrastructure gap
Regulatory frameworks 71 1 (regional average, 2019 (regional average, 2019
estimate) estimate)
Permits 78

Planning 71 4

Procurement 82 5

Activity 25 4 83.4 $26,746 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 60 4 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
regional average, 2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 46 1 2019)

Top performing metrics

94/100 87/100 86/100

Cost to start a business Financial stability Transparency in public

procurement

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Group Page on the InfraCompass website.

12/100 46/100 53/100

Long term GDP growth Gross government debt Average procurement duration –
trend transaction RFP

253
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Group members
Austria Denmark Greece Poland Spain Russia
Belgium Finland Ireland Portugal Sweden
Croatia France Italy Slovak Republic United Kingdom
Czech Republic Germany Netherlands Slovenia Romania

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? 18/21 Effect of taxation on incentives 40 Cost to start a business 94
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ 18/21 Prevalence of foreign 67 Dealing with construction 46
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 69 Product market regulation, 67 Quality of land administration 76
network sectors
Rule of law 71 Regulatory (including 72 Registering property 73
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 52 Strength of insolvency 78 Time required to start a business 73
framework
Political stability and absence 60 Investment promotion agency? 21/21
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? 18/21 Average procurement duration 53 Infrastructure investment 37
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? 11/21 Degree of transparency in 86 Private infrastructure investment 11
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 63 Published procurement 18/21 Value of closed PPP 22
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis 17/21 Procurement of PPPs 81 Value of closed infrastructure 31
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or 13/21 PPP contract management 60
assessment?
Environmental impact 20/21
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
45 40
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 46 Financing through local equity 50 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 12 Stocks traded 28
Summary credit rating 78 Financial depth 59
Financial stability 87
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
The income groups are based on the World Bank classification as of July 2019, which is calculated using the World Bank Atlas method.
‘Top performing metrics’ and ‘Opportunities to grow’ are based on the average of normalized scores within the income group.
254
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Oceania Regional Group

Overall performance Oceania at a glance

Oceania averaged total infrastructure investment of 3.3% of GDP per annum and
attracted USD 16 billion in private infrastructure investment over the past five years.
Oceania is characterised by strong procurement practices, investment activity
and infrastructure planning. Both procurement and activity have improved since
InfraCompass 2017, with the Pacific Islands having high ratios of private investment in
infrastructure compared to their GDP and Australia and New Zealand also having high $16,227 41.2 million
levels of infrastructure investment for High Income Countries. To improve, the funding
GDP per capita Population
capacity of Pacific Islands could be improved, as well as the depth of financial markets
(regional average, USD, 2019) (regional total, 2019)
and quality of regulatory frameworks.
e
17- hang

er

er
rm
6)

ad
r
de
i ng

rfo
(/7

c
)

l le
g
20
ore

n
irin

pe
erg

nte

ba
nk

Drivers
Sc

Gl o
Em
Ra

Co
As

To
(20

Governance 60 3.3% of GDP 0.3% of GDP

Infrastructure investment Infrastructure gap
Regulatory frameworks 57 (regional average, 2019 (regional average, 2019
estimate) estimate)
Permits 61

Planning 64

Procurement 68 2

Activity 56 2 77.3 $16,133 million

Infrastructure quality Private infrastructure
Funding capacity 39 1 (0-100, 100 is best, investment
regional average, 2019) (5-year average, USD,
Financial markets 42 2019)

Top performing metrics

88/100 70/100 68/100

Financial stability Gross government debt Cost to start a business

Opportunities to grow For guidance on how to improve these metrics, please see the
Group Page on the InfraCompass website.

29/100 42/100 70/100

Long term GDP growth Average procurement duration – Gross government debt
trend transaction RFP

255
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Group members
Australia Papua New Guinea Vanuatu
Fiji Samoa
New Zealand Solomon Islands

METRIC SCORES
The below metrics are normalised so that they all range from 0 to 100. For original metrics and data sources,
please see https://infracompass.gihub.org/

GOVERNANCE REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS PERMITS

Post-completion reviews? 7/7 Effect of taxation on incentives 46 Cost to start a business 68
to invest
Infrastructure or PPP unit/ 7/7 Prevalence of foreign 62 Dealing with construction 61
agency? ownership permits
Recovery rate 46 Product market regulation, 54 Quality of land administration 54
network sectors
Rule of law 60 Regulatory (including 55 Registering property 61
competition) quality
Shareholder governance 24 Strength of insolvency 46 Time required to start a business 62
framework
Political stability and absence 62 Investment promotion agency? 7/7
of violence

PLANNING PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY

Published project pipeline? 3/7 Average procurement duration 42 Infrastructure investment 53
– transaction RFP
Published infrastructure plan? 5/7 Degree of transparency in 61 Private infrastructure investment 57
public procurement
Preparation of PPPs 54 Published procurement 6/7 Value of closed PPP 47
guidelines? infrastructure deals
Economic analysis 7/7 Procurement of PPPs 57 Value of closed infrastructure 67
assessment? deals with foreign equity
sponsorship
Market sounding and/or 6/7 PPP contract management 51
assessment?
Environmental impact 6/7
analysis?

FUNDING CAPACITY FINANCIAL MARKETS Drawing on data from: International

GDP per capita Domestic credit to private Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic
21 41
sector Co-operation and Development, World Bank,
World Economic Forum, IJ Global, CEPII,
Gross government debt 70 Financing through local equity 54 Oxford Economics, Trading Economics, and
market
Deloitte.
Long term GDP growth trend 29 Stocks traded 19
Summary credit rating 53 Financial depth 47
Financial stability 88
Metric key:
Increase from InfraCompass 2017 Decrease from InfraCompass 2017 No change from InfraCompass 2017

Note:
The income groups are based on the World Bank classification as of July 2019, which is calculated using the World Bank Atlas method.
‘Top performing metrics’ and ‘Opportunities to grow’ are based on the average of normalized scores within the income group.
256
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Appendix 1 –
Overview Of
Methodology Refresh

257
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

InfraCompass 2017 methodology Stage 1: User-centred research and design

In 2017, InfraCompass produced the following outputs for The first step to refreshing InfraCompass included conducting
49 countries: user research interviews and facilitating a collaboration workshop
with key infrastructure players. The purpose of this approach
• Normalised scores for 38 metrics across six drivers
was to understand user feedback on the original InfraCompass
• Weightings for each metric based on principal component Framework and the insights they sought from the InfraCompass
analysis and linear regression (see the Technical Appendix) tool. This was to complement existing stakeholder feedback
gathered since InfraCompass 2017.
• A weighted score for each driver, based on the combination of
normalised scores of each metric and their respective weighting. The primary research question was – “How might we make the
InfraCompass tool more valuable to its users, so that they can
The normalised metric values were also produced for metrics
identify and prioritise the actions and reforms required to drive
related to the Funding and Financing drivers. However, these were
better investment in infrastructure?”
not weighted to produce a driver score.
The user-centred research and design involved conducting a
Developed and emerging country averages were also calculated
series of user research interviews with government infrastructure
as a basis for comparison.
policy advisers from a cross-section of geographies to
InfraCompass was subsequently updated in 2018 to include all understand how they might use the InfraCompass tool, and
countries participating in the G20 Compact with Africa (CwA) facilitating a collaboration workshop with multilateral agencies.
initiative, which led to a total of 56 countries.
Ten user interviews were conducted with three main user
InfraCompass 2020 methodology segments – treasury and finance ministries, multi-lateral
The refresh of InfraCompass does not substantially deviate from organisations, and infrastructure advisors and regulatory bodies.
the original InfraCompass Framework. Instead, the approach The interviews covered Africa and Middle East, Asia, Europe,
to InfraCompass 2020 was to re-examine the InfraCompass Latin America, global organisations, as well as GI Hub’s Strategic
Framework and undertake a methodology refresh that focused Advisory Council, as a subset of the G20 countries.
on addressing user needs and changing how the outputs are
The collaboration workshop included participants from the World
delivered to more effectively answer the “so what?” question.
Bank, the Economist Intelligence Unit, Asian Development Bank
There were two key stages of the refresh process: and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation (OECD).

• User-centred research and design Figure 1 shows the process for this stage.

• Methodology refresh.

Figure 1 Approach to user research

Context and current knowledge review User research and ongoing synthesis Workshop and reporting

October 7th – 18th October 21st – November 8th November 11th – 15th

Intent and Current Workshop

1:1 research Ongoing Workshop 1:1 research Ongoing
ideation knowledge and research
interviews synthesis design interviews synthesis
session review planning

Define Gather and Complete Gather user Synthesise Prepare for Gather user Synthesise
research synthesise detailed needs and research to collaboration needs and research to
focus existing research plan insights identify insight workshop insights identify insight
question and materials and draft themes themes
workshop workshop
intent agenda

Source: Global Infrastructure Hub and Deloitte

258
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

There were six core insights that emerged from the user research. A summary of the recommendations derived from this process is
provided in Table 1 below. A detailed report is provided in Appendix 1 (User-centric approach).

Table 1 Insights gathered from users

Insights Summary
01. Accuracy, timeliness and Users require visibility of the methodology and primary sources used to reach data points in order to
transparency are key in trust the tool as a reliable source.
building trust with users Users see collaboration with the ’key players’ and countries as critical to the success of a tool like
InfraCompass, with the ability to easily trace the primary data source.
02. Users require a greater There is a desire for broader scope of countries and data to enable accurate comparison and
breadth and depth of data to decision making.
assist with accurate decision Users also want the ability to dig deeper into data points when needed, providing them the
making necessary support to drive policy reform.
03. There is a need for a Users find it difficult to gain a comprehensive view of infrastructure globally, as the approach differs
consistent approach to from country to country.
measuring infrastructure Users desire a consistent approach and definition of infrastructure, to enable accurate comparison
globally, while allowing for and planning, while allowing for country-specific nuances that may impact analysis.
country nuances
04. Infrastructure data is only Users question the ‘so what’ of comparison data unless it is clear how they can use it to drive
valuable to users if they improvement.
understand how to use it to They desire an analysis, or narrative, of the data to help them accurately plan ‘next steps’ for their
drive improvement country. They recognise the value of trend analysis, to help create this narrative.
05. There is a strong desire for Infrastructure data is spread across multiple sources, leading to time-consuming, complex and
an ‘aggregator’ of global manual tasks.
infrastructure data There is a strong desire for an ‘aggregator’ to streamline and simplify these processes.
06. Users are unclear on how There is a lack of clarity on who the key users of InfraCompass are and their specific use cases.
InfraCompass fits into Users are unclear on how they should utilise InfraCompass in their day-to-day role, turning to other
the broader infrastructure tools and resources first, and to InfraCompass for only specific comparison points.
ecosystem

Stage 2: Enhancements to the InfraCompass 2017 tool

Based on user feedback, including the above insights, enhancements have been made to the methodology underlying the original
InfraCompass Framework and the InfraCompass tool. Table 2 provides a summary of the enhancements to the InfraCompass tool.

Table 2 Summary of enhancements to the InfraCompass 2020 tool.

InfraCompass 2020 tool Addressing feedback from users

enhancements
01. Added two new drivers – Add Financial Markets and Funding Capacity drivers – some of the most important drivers of
funding capacity and financial infrastructure investment – to the InfraCompass Framework
markets
02. Tested a range of new Retest old metrics and tested new metrics that are components of an infrastructure enabling
metrics for inclusion, and environment.
included weightings Calculate and report weightings on the metrics, to understand how each driver score is reached and
improve transparency
03. Added 25 new countries, Broaden scope of countries currently included in InfraCompass, across both emerging and
including 5 Pacific Island developed economies
countries
04. Introduced driver-level Introduce driver ranks and overview of trends (improved or decreased performance)
country rankings

259
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

InfraCompass 2020 tool Addressing feedback from users

enhancements
05. Recalculated 2017 scores Introduce driver ranks and overview of trends (improved or decreased performance)
under the refreshed
framework to derive changes
in index scores and ranks
between 2017 and 2020
06. Identified top 3 metrics for Identify the key metric with the greatest opportunity for improvement, the best performing
improvement and top 3 areas countries, and provide guidance on the ‘how’ and ‘why’ to improve performance
of high performance for each
country (with best practice
guidance provided on the
InfraCompass tool)

As part of the InfraCompass Framework refresh, the GI Hub reviewed the importance and validity of existing metrics. This included
testing a range of new metrics for inclusion in the Framework. A modelling approach and metric filtering process identified 41 metrics
across eight drivers that enable better infrastructure outcomes, from an initial list of 82 metrics. This approach is shown in Figure 2.

Further econometric modelling was undertaken to derive weights for each metric. A detailed explanation of this modelling approach is
provided in the Technical Appendix.

Figure 2: Overview of metric filtering process in 2017 and 2020

138
total metrics
71
total metrics
57
‘medium’ list
38
‘final’ list metrics with
considered considered metrics 2017 weightings 2017
InfraCompass 2017

Covering: Refined based on: Refined further by: Principal component

Governance; Planning; 1. Data coverage 1. Relationship with ‘effective’ regression conducted
Procurement; Permits;Regulatory 2. GI Hub objectives infrastructure variable 1. 20 Financial markets &
Frameworks; Delivery; 3. Metric definitions 2. Country coverage Funding capacity metrics
Financial markets & Funding 4. Stakeholder consultations 3. InfraCompass framework 2. 4 duplicate metrics removed
capacity. objectives 3. + 5 Deliver metrics.

Metric weights used to calculate

driver scores

82
‘long’ list metrics
41
‘short’ list metrics
41
Weighted ‘short’ list metrics
2020 2020 2020
InfraCompass 2020

Refined based on: Refined further by: Principal component

1. Replace discontinued metrics 1. Relationship with ‘effective’ regression conducted on 41
2. Add new metrics infrastructure variable metrics
2. Country coverage
Metric weights used to
3. InfraCompass framework
calculate driver scores
objectives
4. Continuity with 2017
5. Duplicate metrics removed

Source: Global Infrastructure Hub and Deloitte

Limitations of Use
This report is prepared by the Global Infrastructure Hub using open source data, as available at 1 December 2019. The InfraCompass methodology
is designed for objectivity, and accordingly relies on the integrity of the source data. In this regard, while the Global Infrastructure Hub recognises
that some individual country data may have changed since it was collected by the open source data provider, the selection of data sources for
InfraCompass is based on the best data sources available in terms of broad geographical coverage, recurrence, quality, importance to infrastructure,
age and comparability of the data.

260
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Appendix 2 –
Technical Appendix

261
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Introduction • Preparing the data – data was cleaned and prepared for
InfraCompass seeks to help countries deliver better infrastructure analysis. This included the imputation of missing values,
outcomes by providing policy makers and other users with normalisation and standardisation to ensure comparability of
supporting and enabling information. InfraCompass 2020, which different metrics.
builds on the previous release, provides scores and rankings
• Estimating metric weights – Principal components analysis
for 76 countries across eight drivers of infrastructure quality.
(PCA) and multivariate linear regression was used as the basis
Underpinning the driver scores are 41 individual metrics that
of determining weights for each metric.
have been selected due to their linkages to efficient and effective
infrastructure and grouped by their relevance to each driver. • Deriving index score – index scores were derived by applying
the weights to each metric in each driver.
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a detailed description
of the InfraCompass 2020 methodological framework (the The cut off period for all data collection was December 2019.
Framework), which covers details on the analytical approach
to preparing data, shortlisting metrics, estimating weights and This approach has several advantages, including:
developing scores. • It is objective, data driven and replicable over time and across
countries.
Approach
The objective of InfraCompass is to determine the key variables • A dependent variable is used to determine if any of the
that impact infrastructure outcomes in a country across eight hypothesised relationships are empirically relevant.
drivers: • Metrics are assessed for their relevance to infrastructure
outcomes.
Governance Governance and institutional settings
• Issues related to correlation are resolved via several statistical
Regulatory Investment policy and economic techniques.
framework regulation • Combining variables into a multi-variate modelling framework
Clarity and consistency of the permits provides a view on relative importance.
Permits
and land acquisition process
Defining the dependent (or outcome) variable
Planning and infrastructure appraisal
Planning Key to the framework is to define what an effective infrastructure
processes
market means. For most statistical modelling approaches, this
Efficiency of government contracting and reflects the definition of a dependent variable (the outcome
Procurement
procurement variable that is being influenced by the explanatory metrics). The
The extent and nature of infrastructure first step in the statistical modelling process is therefore to identify
Activity investment activity and extent of private what ‘effective’ looks like in the context of an infrastructure
sector involvement market. In InfraCompass 2017, the dependent variable was
Funding The capacity of countries to invest in derived applying a fuzzy clustering approach55 across three series:
capacity infrastructure over time
01. Quality of Infrastructure
Financial The availability and cost of funding for Source: WEF Global Competitiveness Index 2016-17 –
markets infrastructure Incorporates a range of infrastructure metrics within the
overall “Pillar 2” value (Infrastructure).
The following six steps described in detail in the sections that
follow, were undertaken to develop InfraCompass 2020: 02. Total infrastructure expenditure (economic infrastructure
only), % of GDP (5 year average)
• Defining the dependent (or outcome) variable – a simplified
Source: Oxford Economics research based on government
approach to determine an ‘effective’ infrastructure market
and multi-lateral development agency estimates.
culminated in using Quality of Infrastructure (from WEF Global
Competitiveness Index) as a single outcome variable for the 03. Total private sector investment in infrastructure, % of GDP
statistical modelling. (5 year average)
Source: IJ Global research on private transactions reaching
• Selecting metrics – a long list of 80 metrics was refined to a financial close.
short list of 41 based on five criteria.

• Selecting countries – Aligning country coverage with the Global

Infrastructure Outlook was the primary determinant. Country
data quality and coverage were also considered in selecting the
countries to be included.

55. See Global Infrastructure Hub (2017), Technical Appendix, InfraCompass.

262
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

The dependent variable was defined as the degree of membership Selecting metrics
(a percentage continuous variable for each of the 76 countries) Starting with a longlist of over 80 potential metrics, a series
of the ‘optimal cluster’ that was most correlated with Quality of of filtering procedures resulted in a shortlist of 41 metrics for
Infrastructure. inclusion in the Framework.

In InfraCompass 2020, this approach was simplified with only Developing a long list of metrics
the Quality of Infrastructure used as the dependent variable. This A longlist of potential metrics was selected for InfraCompass 2017
approach was chosen for several reasons: based on the criteria shown in Table 3 below. The 2017 long list
was updated for InfraCompass 2020 using the same criteria, but
• Ease of interpretability by stakeholders and users
replacing discontinued metrics and adding new metrics that had
• Shortlisted 41 metrics had similar and statistically significant been created since 2017. Of the over 80 metrics in the longlist, the
correlations with both Quality of Infrastructure and degree of vast majority were multi-country and publicly available datasets
membership variables from international organisations such as the OECD, World Bank,
IMF and World Economic Forum.
• Strong theoretical appeal in Quality of Infrastructure being
associated with better infrastructure outcomes. The other two The process of data collection also revealed gaps in data, for
metrics used in InfraCompass 2017 (private infrastructure example on project planning and appraisal techniques. To close
investment and total infrastructure investment) could be these gaps, a global survey was conducted with Deloitte in-
considered as inputs that explain the outcome. Also, the ‘total country infrastructure experts in each region to collect additional
infrastructure investment’ metric from InfraCompass 2017 had information.
not been updated.

Table 3: Criteria for long list of metrics data selection

Metric criteria Description

Aligned A clear link should exist between metrics and the objectives of the organisation. The
Aligns with The Global Infrastructure Hub metrics should be aligned with strong performance of a country in lowering barriers to
Mission Statement investment, preparing quality infrastructure projects and improving supporting policies
and processes.
Intertemporal The data supporting each metric should be collected and reported at regular intervals
Allows change over time to be detected at over time.
regular intervals
Important Metrics should clearly reflect what matters to users, as noted in literature and
Meaningful to, and likely to be perceived as, consultations.
important by users
Quality Data should have high levels of accuracy and robustness ensuring it is representative
High quality (statistically appropriate, free of of the country’s infrastructure market, free from errors, bias, missing records or
errors, duplications) duplications.
Recurrent The data collection body should have an established system for collecting and reporting
Defined and repeatable system and metrics.
publication intention
Comprehensive Data supporting metrics should cover a sufficiently high range of countries to support a
High coverage of relevant countries robust comparison and analysis.

Source: Global Infrastructure Hub

263
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Developing a shortlist of metrics Coverage

To further refine the list of metrics, the following five criteria were Metrics that had the highest levels of coverage across countries
used to reduce the longlist into a shortlist: and time were shortlisted. With a view to increasing the accuracy
of the InfraCompass 2020 scores, metrics that required a large
• Correlation: The strength of the relationship (positive
degree of imputation across countries or that were out-of-date
or negative) and statistical significance with Quality of
were dropped.
Infrastructure dependent variable

• Coverage: Driver coverage over time (2017 and 2020) and Relevance
across countries To determine the relevance of metrics, the objectives of the
Framework, the rationale for each driver and economic theory
• Continuity: Whether the metric was included in InfraCompass were all relied upon. Those with low relevance were excluded.
2017 Those with high relevance to InfraCompass, but that failed the
• Relevance: Alignment to the purpose of the Framework and the correlation test (which is typical for discrete variables, such as
objective of the drivers survey questions in the Planning driver), were included if there
was a strong theoretical basis and if the driver had less than four
• Duplicates: Removal of metrics that provided very similar metrics.
information to others.
Duplicates
Correlation To filter out metrics with similar information, cross-correlation
Pearson correlation was assessed for each metric in the longlist tests were completed for all longlisted metrics. In cases where
against the Quality of Infrastructure outcome variable. In general, two or more metrics were highly correlated, only metrics that
only the metrics that had the largest magnitude (positive or revealed strong correlation with the dependent variable (Quality of
negative correlation) and statistical significance (p-value), within a Infrastructure) were retained.
driver, were shortlisted. These results are reported in the Table 4.
The above criteria resulted in 41 metrics being selected for the
InfraCompass 2020. Four to six metrics were chosen for each of
the eight drivers in the Framework.

Table 4: Correlation between shortlisted metric and Quality of Infrastructure dependent variable

Correlation with Quality of

Metric P value
Infrastructure
Governance
Rule of law index score 0.80 0.00
Recovery rate, cents on the dollar 0.72 0.00
Political stability and absence of violence score 0.71 0.00
Shareholder governance index 0.60 0.00
Does the country have a dedicated National or Sub-National Infrastructure or PPP -0.14 0.25
Unit/Agency?
Does the country do Post-Completion Reviews (Assurance) 0.14 0.24
Regulatory frameworks
Regulatory (including competition) quality index 0.80 0.00
Prevalence of foreign ownership 0.60 0.00
Product market regulatory score, network sectors -0.61 0.00
Strength of insolvency framework index 0.47 0.00
Effect of taxation on incentives to invest 0.21 0.08
Does the country have an national agency dedicated to investment promotion and/or -0.18 0.12
trade to attract investment in infrastructure? (Y/N)
Permits
Quality of land administration index 0.78 0.00
Cost to start a business, % of GNI per capita -0.54 0.00
Registering property, No. of days -0.45 0.00
Time required to start a business (number of days) -0.35 0.00
Dealing with construction permits, No. of days -0.15 0.19

264
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Correlation with Quality of

Metric P value
Infrastructure
Planning
Preparation of PPPs, 0-100 (best) 0.41 0.00
Does the country have a National or Sub-National Infrastructure Plan? -0.08 0.48
Do the National and Sub-National Infrastructure Plans contain a list of specific 0.09 0.46
projects (Pipeline)?
Economic analysis assessment (Y/N with methodology) -0.07 0.53
Market sounding and/or assessment 0.08 0.51
Environmental impact analysis -0.03 0.83
Procurement
Degree of transparency in public procurement score 0.70 0.00
Average procurement duration (in months) – Transaction RFP -0.17 0.32
Procurement of PPPs, 0-100 (best) 0.43 0.00
Does the country publish guidelines for the procurement of infrastructure projects? -0.04 0.72
PPP contract management, 0-100 (best) 0.25 0.03
Activity
Value of closed infrastructure deals with foreign equity sponsorship, % of GDP 0.45 0.00
Infrastructure investment, % of GDP -0.56 0.00
Value of closed PPP infrastructure deals, % of GDP -0.40 0.00
Private finance infrastructure, % of GDP -0.21 0.08
Funding
Summary credit rating 0.82 0.00
GDP per capita 0.74 0.00
Long term GDP growth trend -0.58 0.00
Gross government debt, % of GDP 0.32 0.01
Financial
Financial depth (0-100) 0.79 0.00
Financing through local equity market 0.57 0.00
Domestic credit to private sector, % of GDP 0.67 0.00
Stocks traded, total value, % of GDP 0.50 0.00
Financial stability (0-100) 0.47 0.00

Source: Various data sources, Deloitte calculations

Selecting countries • Data availability – the availability of data that covers the
A list of 76 countries was selected to undertake the statistical relevant metrics, since the robustness of statistical analysis is
analysis, which was based on several factors, including: driven by the quality of the underlying data.
• Data quality – the quality, consistency and frequency of the
• Alignment with Global Infrastructure Outlook
data, given that the GI Hub intends to update the Framework on
• Membership – membership in various international a periodic basis.
organisations and sufficient global coverage, so that the
analysis is not biased by geographic concentrations or by a
specific set of country characteristics such as wealth or size.

265
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

The selected countries are detailed below.

Table 5: Countries selected for statistical modelling in InfraCompass 2020

Region/Income Africa Americas Asia Europe Oceania

Group
High income Canada Japan Austria Australia
(economies with Chile Korea Belgium New Zealand
a Gross National United States of Qatar Croatia
Income (GNI) per America (USA) Saudi Arabia Czech Republic
capita, of $12,376 or Uruguay Singapore Denmark
more in 2018) United Arab Finland
Emirates (UAE) France
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
United Kingdom (UK)
Upper middle South Africa Argentina Azerbaijan Romania Fiji
income Brazil China Russia Samoa
(economies with Colombia Jordan
a GNI per capita Ecuador Kazakhstan
between $3,996 and Guatemala Malaysia
$12,375) Mexico Thailand
Paraguay Turkey
Peru
Lower middle Angola Bangladesh Papua New Guinea
income Cote d’Ivoire Cambodia Solomon Islands
(economies with Egypt India Vanuatu
a GNI per capita Ghana Indonesia
between $1,026 and Kenya Myanmar
$3,995) Morocco Pakistan
Nigeria Philippines
Senegal Vietnam
Tunisia
Low income Benin
(economies with a Burkina Faso
GNI per capita of Chad
$1,025 or less) Ethiopia
Guinea
Mali
Niger
Rwanda
Tanzania
Togo

Five additional Pacific Island countries were added following stakeholder consultation, to bring the total number of countries to 81.
*

Data is provided on these five countries, where available, but they are not included in the rankings due to limited data availability and
quality issues.

Countries listed in blue indicate the additional countries added to InfraCompass 2020.

266
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Preparing the data Table 6: Summary of interpolations for 2019 dataset (76 countries,
Given the range of data sources and the varying units of excluding Pacific Islands56)
measurement, the collected data underwent a rigorous
Technique 2019 Share
preparation process to assess quality and ensure consistency
of unit measurement, facilitating fair comparison and suitability Actual data 2916 94%
for statistical analysis. The following section summarises this AR or MA 25 1%
process, starting with the treatment of missing values and then Regional Average 165 5%
the normalisation of the data. Global Average 10 0%
Total observations 3116 100%
Imputation
While the selection of metrics and countries was informed by Normalisation
the availability of data, there were still some gaps which required Each metric is based on a certain scale or measuring unit. For
imputation. instance, some metrics are discrete survey responses (“yes” or
“no”), while others are continuous integer values or index values.
The following imputation techniques were applied in the order
below, where more accurate techniques have been prioritised. Data that are expressed using different scales cannot be
When data requirements for a technique were not met, the next aggregated to develop comparable metrics without rescaling in an
on the list was attempted. This process continued until a value appropriate way. The aggregation process therefore requires that
was imputed. raw data for each metric to be manipulated, such that all data are
• Available past or future value – The value for up to three years expressed using the same scale.
prior to 2019 or available values from 2020 were coded as
For InfraCompass 2020, all data was rescaled to lie between 0 and
2019. This technique was applied to metrics that were relatively
100. For survey questions, ‘no’ responses were coded as 0, and
stable but did not have a long time series. Similar approach was
‘yes’ responses as 100. For metrics that had discrete answers (e.g.
followed for 2016 data.
1 to 7), they were rescaled to lie between 0 and 100 (e.g. 7 became
• Auto Regressive (AR) or Moving Average (MA) model – An AR 100). All continuous metrics were rescaled based on the minimum
or MA model was used to impute values based on a time series and maximums of the data over the sample period of 2016 to
of previous values. This technique was used for data with a 2019. For most variables, a lower limit of zero was subsequently
relatively long time series, and standard time series criteria (AIC, set (this applied for variables that cannot be negative, e.g.
BIC, Akaike) were applied to derive optimal number of lags. procedures to start a business).
• Regional average – The regional average of member countries Treating outliers
was used when a country did not have any data available. Prior to rescaling, where relevant, metrics were adjusted to remove
Pacific Island countries were not included in these averages. the impact of outliers which can skew the index score ranges. The
• Global average – The global average was used when there list of metrics where outliers were recoded is broadly consistent
were limited countries with data within a region. Pacific Island with InfraCompass 2017. Outliers above the median were recoded
countries were not included in these averages. to be equal to the third quintile plus 1.5 times the interquartile
range. Outliers below the median were recoded to be equal to the
Like any approach to estimation, this method has limitations first quintile minus 1.5 times the interquartile range.
and required assumptions to be made about the similarities
across countries. However, the scale of the missing data issues
is immaterial to the overall outcomes of the analysis. For
InfraCompass 2020, less than 6 per cent of all data was imputed.

56. For the five Pacific Island countries, we use relevant Income Group metric-
averages instead of Regional Averages to impute missing values. Where
relevant, other techniques such AR, MA, or Global Averages were also
applied. In total, 77/205 Pacific Island observations were interpolated.
However, we have included Pacific Islands in Regional (Oceania) and Income
Group (Low, Lower-Middle) pages.

267
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Figure 3: Interpretation of outliers

The actual How a histogram How a boxplot

values in a would display the would display
distribution values (rotated) the values

Outliers

1.5 x IQR

Whisker to
farthest non-
outlier point

75th percentile
Inter-Quartile
50th percentile Range (IQR)
25th percentile

Source: Hadley Wickham

Standardising direction of metrics • Degrees of freedom: Since there are 41 metrics per country, an
Where relevant, some metrics were subsequently inverted after appropriate econometric approach would be to estimate a panel
normalisation to standardise all metrics to be strictly increasing in econometric model to capture country-specific fixed effects.
their relationship with Quality of Infrastructure. For example, since However, this approach is problematic since degrees of freedom
lower compliance costs make it easier to invest in infrastructure, would be limited, given the number parameters that need to be
the normalised value of ‘number of procedures to start a business’ estimated. This would compromise the robustness of estimated
was reversed such that, lower numbers for compliance were parameters and standard errors.
standardised to be closer to 100, and high numbers closer to 0. In
other words, normalised metrics that had negative relationships There are several statistical techniques that can be used to
with Quality of Infrastructure were inverted, so that all metrics had alleviate these issues. Principal component analysis (PCA)
positive relationships with good infrastructure outcomes. addresses both issues by reducing the number of explanatory
variables and controlling for correlation between them.
Estimating metric weights
Principal component analysis In InfraCompass 2020, PCA reduced the number of explanatory
A simple approach to determining weights is to regress the variables from 41 metrics to 14 principal components.57 The
chosen shortlist of variables against the dependent variable. number of principal components was chosen based on their
However, a multi-variate analysis of this nature will face several ability to explain at least 90 percent of the cumulative variance of
challenges: the dataset. The PCA model was also restricted to non-negative
factor loadings to ensure that metric weights are non-negative.
• Multicollinearity: While steps (during short listing) were taken to
remove metrics that are correlated, many of the metrics are not
statistically independent and will continue to be linearly related,
leading to multicollinearity issues in the regression analysis.
This would result in unreliable coefficients and metric weights.

57. Principal component analysis (PCA) is a technique for feature extraction — it groups input variables in a specific way so that it drops the “least
important” information in the variables while still retaining the most valuable parts of all of the variables (that are essential in explaining the
variability in the outcome variable). The result is that the regression is carried out with a much smaller number of variables and those variables
are all independent of one another.

268
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Multivariate Linear Regression align with the objectives of the Framework, we have assigned
To determine the metric weights, the principal components were equal weights for all metrics in the Activity driver (25% each). To
regressed against the single dependent variable – Quality of provide an alternative to equal weighting of metrics, would be to
Infrastructure. The regression was restricted to non-negative impose a subjective judgement and artificial bias into the process
coefficients to ensure that metric weights are non-negative. without any clear supporting evidence.
The resulting coefficients were then multiplied by the loadings
of each metric in each principal component. This resulted in Deriving index scores
one aggregate weight for each metric. The metric weights were To derive country scores for each driver, the normalised data was
then rescaled to sum to 100, within each driver. As a result, all multiplied by the derived metric weights. The total driver score is
weights across the eight drivers sum to 800. We also rescaled all calculated as the sum of the weighted metric scores.
estimated weights to ensure a minimum weight of 5%.
InfraCompass 2020 scored countries separately for two years –
The only exception to this approach was the four metrics in the 2017 and 2020. The weights were determined using 2020 data
Activity driver (infrastructure investment as a share of GDP, private and applied to both 2017 and 2020 data to determine the final
finance infrastructure investment as a share of GDP, value of scores. Testing of weights across multiple sample years revealed
closed infrastructure deals with foreign equity sponsorship as relative stability.
share of GDP, value of closed PPP infrastructure deals as share of
GDP). The regression results revealed near zero coefficients for
these four metrics in explaining Quality of Infrastructure. However,
since there is a strong theoretical basis for their inclusion as
measures of infrastructure investment activity, and because they

269
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Bibliography Infrastructure Investments: Selected Case Studies”, OECD Working

OECD (2015), Policy Framework for Investment 2015 Edition, OECD Papers on Finance, Insurance and Private Pensions, No. 35, OECD
Publishing, Paris Publishing, Paris

OECD (2015), Fostering investment in infrastructure: lessons WEF 2013, The Green Investment Report, The ways and means
learned from OECD Investment Policy Reviews, OECD Paris to unlock private finance for green growth, a Report of the Green
Growth Action Alliance
World Bank Group and the OECD (2015), Project Checklist for
Public-Private Partnerships AMP Capital 2013, The impact of increased bank regulation, 10
July 2013
OECD (2015), Infrastructure Financing Instruments and Incentives,
OECD Press, Paris B20 Australia 2014, B20 Infrastructure & Investment Taskforce
Policy Summary, July 2014
G20/OECD (2014), Checklist on Long-Term Investment Financing
Strategies and Institutional Investors, OECD Paris OECD (2011), Pension Funds Investment in Infrastructure: A
Survey, Project on Strategic Transport Infrastructure to 2030,
WEF (2014), Infrastructure Investment Policy Blueprint, February September 2011
2014
World Bank (2013), Long-Term Finance for Growth and
WEF (2014), Strategic Infrastructure: Steps to Operate and Development: Umbrella Paper, February 2013
Maintain Infrastructure Efficiently and Effectively, April 2014
ICC (2012), ICC Guidelines for International Investment,
WEF (2012), Strategic Infrastructure: Steps to Prioritize and Deliver International Chamber of Commerce, Paris
Infrastructure Effectively and Efficiently, September 2012
OECD (2015), OECD FDI Regulatory Restrictiveness Index
WEF (2010), Positive Infrastructure: A Framework for Revitalizing
the Global Economy OECD, 2015, Towards a Framework for the Governance of
Infrastructure, September 2015
OECD (2009), Principles for Private Sector Participation in
Infrastructure, OECD Paris ADB (2009), Infrastructure for a Seamless Asia, Asian
Development Bank Institute, Tokyo
APEC (2011), Filling the Infrastructure Gaps in the APEC’s
Developing Economies, Investment Experts’ Group

Kaminker, C. et al. (2013), “Institutional Investors and Green

270
InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Appendix 3 –
Data Sources
Data source Dataset Latest release Update frequency Country coverage
International World Economic Outlook 2019 Biennial 81 countries
Monetary Fund (April and October)
Central Bank Policy Rates 2019 Annual 81 countries (some
(International Financial Satistics) countries used earlier
datasets, as not all
countries were covered in
the latest year release)
The World Bank World Development Indicators 2018 Annual 81 countries
Doing Business Report 2019 Annual 81 countries
Procuring Infrastructure Public- 2018 One time 78 countries
Private Partnerships publication
Worldwide Governance Indicators 2018 Annual 81 countries
Digital Adoption Index 2016 2014, 2016 80 countries
(no update since)
World Economic Global Competitiveness Index 2019 Annual 70 countries
Forum
Organisation for System of National Accounts 2019 Annual 31 countries
Economic Co- Indicators of Product Market 2018 Every 5 years 31 countries
operation Regulation
Global Infrastructure Global Infrastructure Outlook 2017 Annual 54 countries (InfraCompass
Hub (Forecasts 1.0), with only historical data
BIS Oxford Economics until 2040) available for another 20
countries
United Nations World Investment Report 2019 Annual 81 countries
Conference on Trade
and Development
Centre d’Etudes Institutional Profiles Database 2016 Every 4 years 76 countries
Prospectives et
d’Informations
Internationales
Chinn-Ito Index Chinn-Ito Index on Capital Account 2019 Annual 81 countries
Openness
IJ Global Procurement transactions data 2019 Annual 81 countries
The Economist Sovereign Risk scores 2018 Annual 66 countries
Intelligence Unit

Trading Economics Summary credit ratings 2019 Annual 73 countries

271
 InfraCompass 2020 | Set your infrastructure policies in the right direction

Creative Commons Licence

This publication is provided for use under a Creative Commons
Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence, except that no licence is provided
for the GI Hub’s logo and branding, photographs, other artistic
works or third-party content (as marked). Apart from any use
granted under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia
Licence or permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), all
other rights in the content are reserved. Requests and inquiries
concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to
contact@gihub.org.

The Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence is

a standard form licence agreement that allows you to copy,
distribute, transmit and adapt this publication, provided that you
attribute the work. A summary of the licence terms is available
from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en.
The full licence terms are available from https://creativecommons.
org/terms/. The GI Hub requires that you attribute this publication
(and any materials sourced from it) using the following wording:
‘Source: Licensed from the Global Infrastructure Hub Ltd under a
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence. To the extent
permitted by law, the GI Hub disclaims liability to any person or
organisation in respect of anything done, or omitted to be done, in
reliance upon information contained in this publication’.

Disclaimer
This report has been prepared by the GI Hub in collaboration
with Deloitte. The opinions, findings and recommendations
contained are not necessarily the views of the G20 member
countries, or of other countries that are donors of the GI Hub. The
material contained in this publication is made available on the
understanding that the GI Hub is not providing professional advice,
and that users exercise their own skill and care with respect to its
use, and seek independent advice if necessary.
The GI Hub makes no representations or warranties as to
the contents or accuracy of the information contained in this
publication. To the extent permitted by law, the GI Hub disclaims
liability to any person or organisation in respect of anything done,
or omitted to be done, in reliance upon information contained in
this publication.

272
CONTACT US
GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE HUB

E: CONTACT@GIHUB.ORG
P: +61 2 8315 5300
W: GIHUB.ORG

Unless otherwise noted, copyright (and any other intellectual

property rights, if any) in this publication is owned by the Global
infrastructure Hub.
© Global Infrastructure Hub 2020.
ACN 602 505 064.
ABN 46 602 505 064.
Online resource ISBN: 978-0-6488571-1-2 (InfraCompass 2020)
Hard copy ISBN: 978-0-6488571-0-5 (InfraCompass 2020)