Infrastructure investment has long been held as an accelerator or a driver of the economy. Internationally, the UK ranks poorly with the performance of infrastructure and ranks in the lower percentile for both infrastructure investment and GDP growth rate amongst comparative nations. Faced with the uncertainty of Brexit and the likely negative economic impact this will bring, infrastructure investment may be used to strengthen the UK economy. This study aims to examine how infrastructure funding impacts economic growth and how best the UK can maximize this potential by building on existing work.
The research method is based on interviews carried out with respondents involved in infrastructure operating across various sectors. The findings show that investment in infrastructure is vital in the UK as it stimulates economic growth through employment creation due to factor productivity. However, it is critical for investment to be directed to regional opportunity areas with the potential to unlock economic growth and maximize returns whilst stimulating further growth to benefit other regions. There is also a need for policy consistency and to review UK infrastructure policy to streamline the process and to reduce cost and time overrun, with Brexit likely to impact negatively on infrastructure investment.

Cross-border infrastructure projects offer significant economic and social benefits for the Asia-Pacific region. If the required investment of $8 trillion in pan-Asian connectivity was made in the region’s infrastructure during 2010–2020, the total net income gains for developing Asia could reach about $12.98 trillion (in 2008 US dollars) during 2010–2020 and beyond, of which more than $4.43 trillion would be gained during 2010–2020 and nearly $8.55 trillion after 2020. Indeed, infrastructure connectivity helps improve regional productivity and competitiveness by facilitating the movement of goods, services and human resources, producing economies of scale, promoting trade and foreign direct investments, creating new business opportunities, stimulating inclusive industrialization and narrowing development gaps between communities, countries or sub-regions. Unfortunately, due to limited financing, progress in the development of cross-border infrastructure in the region is low.

This paper examines the key challenges faced in financing cross-border projects and discusses the roles that different stakeholders—national governments, state-owned enterprises, private sector, regional entities, development financing institutions (DFIs), affected people and civil society organizations—can play in facilitating the development of cross-border infrastructure in the region. In particular, this paper highlights the major risks that deter private sector investments and FDIs and provides recommendations to address these risks.

Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) can be an effective way of delivering infrastructure. However, achieving value for money can be difficult if government agencies are not equipped to manage them effectively. Experience from OECD countries shows that the availability of finance is not the main obstacle in delivering infrastructure. Governance—effective decision-making—is the most influential aspect on the quality of an investment, including PPP investments. In 2012, the OECD together with its member countries developed principles to ensure that PPPs deliver value for money transparently and prudently, supported by the right institutional capacities and processes to harness the upside of PPPs without jeopardizing fiscal sustainability. Survey results from OECD countries show that some dimensions of the recommended practices are well applied and past and ongoing reforms show progress. However, other principles have not been well implemented, reflecting the continuing need for improving public governance of PPPs across countries.

To analyze the effect of an increase in the quantity or quality of public investment on growth, this paper extends the World Bank’s Long-Term Growth Model (LTGM), by separating the total capital stock into public and private portions, with the former adjusted for its quality. The paper presents the LTGM public capital extension and accompanying freely downloadable Excel-based tool. It also constructs a new infrastructure efficiency index, by combining quality indicators for power, roads, and water as a cardinal measure of the quality of public capital in each country. In the model, public investment generates a larger boost to growth if existing stocks of public capital are low, or if public capital is particularly important in the production function. Through the lens of the model and utilizing newly-collated cross-country data, the paper presents three stylized facts and some related policy implications. First, the measured public capital stock is roughly constant as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) across income groups, which implies that the returns to new public investment, and its effect on growth, are roughly constant across development levels. Second, developing countries are relatively short of private capital, which means that private investment provides the largest boost to growth in low-income countries. Third, low-income countries have the lowest quality of public capital and the lowest efficient public capital stock as a share of GDP. Although this does not affect the returns to public investment, it means that improving the efficiency of public investment has a sizable effect on growth in low-income countries. Quantitatively, a permanent 1 ppt GDP increase in public investment boosts growth by around 0.1–0.2 ppts over the following few years (depending on the parameters), with the effect declining over time.

While infrastructure provides necessary public services and is vital for the socio-economic development of a nation, public funds alone cannot finance all infrastructure needs in society, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic, where many countries are facing budget deficits. Although private financing schemes, such as public-private partnerships (PPPs) and land value capture, have been considered intensively, they have yet to produce adequate private capital flows to infrastructure projects due to a lack of incentives for private investors. Against the background, this paper proposes a new financing mechanism in which governments might divert some of the increased tax revenue from the spillover effects of newly constructed infrastructures to fund the private sector through grants or subsidies. The empirical work in Vietnam shows a significant increase in tax revenues after completing two expressways, supporting our idea about spillover effects, which includes small- and medium-sized enterprise (SME) development. This study’s results suggest that spillover effects can bring new opportunities for governments and multilateral development banks (MDBs) to implement infrastructure projects with greater private sector involvement in the region. It also proposes some financial schemes, such as land capture and financing for business startups, including SMEs, to enhance the spillover effects of infrastructure.