Difference between revisions of "Promotion of Private Sector Participation"

From energypedia
***** (***** | *****)
***** (***** | *****)
Line 44: Line 44:
 
*lending for a particular project (sometimes termed "direct lending"). The organization responsible for project implementation - which may well be government or utility - has to form a separate and financially independent entity to manage this project. With such Project Loans, loan sums are redeemed from the cash flow generated by the project. The borrower's debt is subordinate to indebtedness incurred directly by gov­ernment or utility. The lender has recourse only to the assets created out of his loan; hence he is lending with "limited re­course". The value of the assets created is his security or collateral but he will naturally look for more far-reaching guarantees from governments - his own and the borrower's ­and from national and international agencies.
 
*lending for a particular project (sometimes termed "direct lending"). The organization responsible for project implementation - which may well be government or utility - has to form a separate and financially independent entity to manage this project. With such Project Loans, loan sums are redeemed from the cash flow generated by the project. The borrower's debt is subordinate to indebtedness incurred directly by gov­ernment or utility. The lender has recourse only to the assets created out of his loan; hence he is lending with "limited re­course". The value of the assets created is his security or collateral but he will naturally look for more far-reaching guarantees from governments - his own and the borrower's ­and from national and international agencies.
  
The two alternative loan arrangements are presented in the diagram. Programme lending at government or utility level is still widely practised by public and private financing institutions, especially also in connection with the structural adjustment of economic resources. The focus is however moving more towards project lending and hence towards closer involvement of the lender in the disbursement of the funds and in the objectives of the development proposal. Private-sector inputs, particularly for small schemes, tend now to concentrate on the funding of specific projects, even in the face of opposition to the proposed development on social or environmental grounds. [[Image:Loan arrangements]]
+
The two alternative loan arrangements are presented in the diagram. Programme lending at government or utility level is still widely practised by public and private financing institutions, especially also in connection with the structural adjustment of economic resources. The focus is however moving more towards project lending and hence towards closer involvement of the lender in the disbursement of the funds and in the objectives of the development proposal. Private-sector inputs, particularly for small schemes, tend now to concentrate on the funding of specific projects, even in the face of opposition to the proposed development on social or environmental grounds.  
 +
 
 +
[[Image:Loan arrangements.jpg|thumb|Loan arrangements]]

Revision as of 19:21, 8 June 2009

The term 'private' loosely describes all non-governmental parties; it has come into general use although its precise meaning is not always clear. The term is applied conventionally in contrast to governmental or quasi-governmental, in effect to the public sector. Perhaps it would be more correct to employ the term non-governmental which is in any case more appropriate in connection with small-scale power supply where a number of non-governmental bodies other than strictly private individuals or corporations can playa significant role. The key to sectoral definition is perhaps that the promoter - the driving force for initiating and implementing a project - should be independent of government although he may well be subject to some measure of government supervision and, in some cases, benefit from active government participation.

The general approach to participation of the private sector in public electricity supply can be grouped into three categories:

  • an open market policy in which the whole electricity sector, or particular sections of it, are available to investment of private capital under minimal governmental direction or control and allow free range to market forces;
  • a controlled policy with government or public utility - as an instrument of government determining where and to what extent a private initiative can be brought to bear, the private sector activity being closely supervised and exposed to market forces to only a limited extent. Naturally, there are various degrees of control, mitigated through enabling measures to make the venture sufficiently attractive for private enterprise;
  • a promotional policy for encouraging non-governmental organizations to participate in local electrification where it is of special concern to them. Here again, the range of possibilities is wide and may extend from exclusive licensing of non profit-making bodies to cost and benefit sharing with private promoters on a fully commercial basis. Regulatory arrangements will be shaped accordingly.

There are basically five ways by which participation by the private sector can be brought about:

  • by government - national or local - through advertisement or direct approach to known interest groups or potential developers;
  • by technical assistance or aid agencies who, having identified a problem area, are looking for a developer whom they can propose to government;
  • by interest groups or concerned organizations who wish to foster electrification in a given locality;
  • by individuals or corporations who are attracted by the commercial prospects of an electrification proposal;
  • by companies looking for markets for their equipment and services.

A combination of any of these initiatives is possible; both local and foreign sources can be employed.


The choice of potential non-governmental sources that can be tapped for expertise and finance is wide but becomes narrowed in the context of the local situation. Whoever carries out the pre-investment studies - utility, development agency or consultant - will have to examine what sources are appropriate for the particular case and draw up an activities and funding schedule as a basis for further progression of the project. This schedule sets out the sequence of actions that must be taken and identifies potential investors who could contribute to the funding requirements. Many small hydro schemes have failed to materialize in spite of a favourable and bankable feasibility report because the implementation schedule, or action plan, was not acted upon; the link between the investigator and the developer had not been established. A contributory factor was also in many cases that grants or aid funds were available for the pre-investment work but were not sufficient to bring the project to fruition. New sources had to be looked for and a procedure for doing so had not been set up.

The significance of support from the private sector in the context of small-scale electrification, primarily from hydropower, the preconditions to be met and the issues involved are discussed below.Three types of private sector inputs are presented:

  • loan,
  • equity participation,
  • concessionary finance.


Loan

There is still considerable sensitivity in government circles to the opening-up of strategically and economically important public services - not only in the electricity sector - to non-governmental participation, even if carefully regulated and controlled. At the same time, there is also some nervousness in the private sector over entering into long-term commitments in a government dominated field, particularly in view of the risks to which the private party may be exposed.

Both parties may therefore aim initially at only an "arm's length" relationship with minimal mutual involvement and strictly limited risks. This can be achieved through subscription to loan capital - bonds or debentures - issued by governments or government controlled and quasi-governmental utilities. The private sector can thus contribute through arm's length financing to the capital needs for power system expansion without being in any way involved in the management and operation of any part of the utility service or being dependent on its financial success. Bonds and debentures, backed by the government or by governmental agencies, national or international, offer a fixed and guaranteed yield and have a firm redemption life (often termed loan life). The lender is thus shielded from a variable and, to some extent, unpredictable performance of the utility. The governmental utility service is free to develop and run its system as it considers appropriate. Marginal electricity supply development can be financially supported in this way provided the utility has the capacity to take on the necessary development effort and cope with subsequent exploitation. One of the causes of marginalisation is, however, that this capacity has been fully absorbed by the effort devoted to the central areas and that no significant spare capacity can be mobilized for local electrification.

Participation of private capital by way of loans may be more attractive in cases where a small scheme is promoted from the outset as a non-governmental venture by particular interest groups or NGOs. The developer or promoter may then actively canvass for private support and attempt to manage the risk of failing to meet loan redemption commitments. The private investor will remain shielded from the commercial performance of the enterprise and yet have the satisfaction of contributing to a socially and economically important activity, if only in a strictly local context. This role may be particularly attractive for charitable bodies.

Private sector contributions to loan financing can also be secured indirectly through the provision of funds to aid and financing agencies which in turn support or invest in electrification projects. There are many possibilities, from donations to charitable or non profit-making bodies to the purchase of loan stock or bonds issued by multi-lateral agencies - the World Bank and Regional Investment Banks, for example. The funds solicited by multi-lateral agencies are not normally earmarked for a specific purpose but regular statements on the disposition of such funds are published; a fixed return is guaranteed by the governments supporting the agencies in question.

A clear distinction has to be made between:

  • lending to government or utility. The disbursement of funds for a specific project remains the responsibility of one of these bodies. The lender stays at "arm's length" although he may wish to scrutinize the development programme for which finance is sought; this is certainly done by the financing agencies. Programme loans (which are not tied to a specific project) form a corporate or sovereign debt and a prior charge on the balance sheet of the undertaking concerned; the loan charges incurred by the undertaking have to be met before any other of its borrowings are paid off. Debt management can be difficult where there is scarcity of development capital and defaulting on sovereign debt is not uncommon. Programme lending can therefore be risky in spite of its priority status.
  • lending for a particular project (sometimes termed "direct lending"). The organization responsible for project implementation - which may well be government or utility - has to form a separate and financially independent entity to manage this project. With such Project Loans, loan sums are redeemed from the cash flow generated by the project. The borrower's debt is subordinate to indebtedness incurred directly by gov­ernment or utility. The lender has recourse only to the assets created out of his loan; hence he is lending with "limited re­course". The value of the assets created is his security or collateral but he will naturally look for more far-reaching guarantees from governments - his own and the borrower's ­and from national and international agencies.

The two alternative loan arrangements are presented in the diagram. Programme lending at government or utility level is still widely practised by public and private financing institutions, especially also in connection with the structural adjustment of economic resources. The focus is however moving more towards project lending and hence towards closer involvement of the lender in the disbursement of the funds and in the objectives of the development proposal. Private-sector inputs, particularly for small schemes, tend now to concentrate on the funding of specific projects, even in the face of opposition to the proposed development on social or environmental grounds.

Loan arrangements