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.

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.

The objective is to determine the impact of economic growth on the externalities of infrastructure investments for the Peruvian case for the periods from 2000 to 2022. The methodologies used are descriptive, explanatory and correlational, analyzing qualitative and mainly quantitative methods. Econometric software was used, and correlations of variables were created for each proposed hypothesis. The estimated model shows that all the independent variables have a significant t-statistic greater than 2 and a probability of less than 5%, which indicates that they are significant and explains the model. The R² is 98.02% which indicates that there is a high level of explanation by the independent variables to the LOG(RGDP). The results of the estimated models demonstrate the existence of a positive and significant relationship of investments in infrastructure and externalities on the growth of the non-deterministic component of real GDP, therefore, in a practical way, private and public investment has a positive effect on the non-deterministic growth of real GDP.

The nexus between foreign direct investment, natural resource endowment, and their impact on sustained economic growth, is contentious. This study investigates the resource curse hypothesis and the effects of FDI on economic growth in Kazakhstan. The study covers the period from 1990 to 2022 and employs the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) model and Toda-Yamamoto causality methods. The Bounds cointegration results reveal the existence of long-term equilibria between per capita GDP and the predictors. The findings reveal a significant impact of oil rents on economic growth, contradicting the resource curse hypothesis and suggesting a resource boon instead. In stark contrast, the impact of FDI on Kazakhstan’s economic growth is found to be insignificant, despite the presence of a causal nexus. Furthermore, economic freedom and export diversification have a positive significant impact on economic growth, while inflation exhibits a negative but significant impact. Although governance has a direct impact on GDP per capita, it is deemed insignificant, as the negative average governance index implies poor governance. Expectedly, the result establishes a causal effect between export diversification, economic freedom, governance, oil rents, and economic growth. This underscores the fundamental role played by the interplay of diversification, economic freedom, governance, and oil rents in fostering sustainable economic growth. In addition, economic freedom stimulates gross fixed capital formation, indicating that it enhances domestic investment. Notably, the findings refute the crowding-out effect of FDI on domestic investment in Kazakhstan. Consequently, to escape the resource curse and the Dutch disease syndrome, the study advocates for enhancing good governance capabilities in Kazakhstan. Thus, we recommend that good governance could reconcile the twin goals of economic diversification and deriving benefits from oil resources, ultimately transforming oil wealth into a boon in Kazakhstan.

Given the issues of urban-rural educational inequality and difficulties for children from poor families to succeed, this study explores the impact mechanism of internet usage on rural educational investment in China within the context of the digital divide. Using data from the 2019 China Household Finance Survey (CHFS), this study analyzed the educational investment decisions of 2064 rural households. Results indicate that in the Eastern region, a high level of educational investment is primarily influenced by the per capita income of the family, with social capital and internet usage also playing supportive roles. In the Northeastern region, the key factor is the diversity of internet usage, specifically using both a smartphone and a computer. In the Central region, factors such as the diversity of internet usage, subjective risk attitudes, the appropriate age of the household head, and per capita income of the family contribute to higher levels of educational investment. In the Western region, the dominant factors are the diversity of internet usage, subjective usage and per capita income of the family. These factors enhance expected returns on the high level of educational investment and boost farmers’ confidence. High internet usage rates significantly promote diverse and stable educational investment decisions, providing evidence for policymakers to bridge the urban-rural education gap.

This paper assesses South Africa’s massive infrastructure drive to revive growth and increase employment. After years of stagnant growth, this is now facing a deep economic crisis, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. This drive also comes after years of weak infrastructure investment, widening the infrastructure deficit. The plan outlines a R1 trillion investment drive, primarily from the private sector through the Infrastructure Fund over the next 10 years (Government of South Africa, 2020). This paper argues that while infrastructure development in South Africa is much-needed, the emphasis on de-risking for private sector buy-in overshadows the key role the state must play in leading on structurally transforming the economy.