IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cdh/commen/473.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New and Improved: How to Bring Institutional Investment into Public Infrastructure

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Dachis

    (C.D. Howe Institute)

Abstract

Canadian governments are on the verge of the largest infrastructure spending increases in decades. The challenge for policymakers at all levels of governments is to decide whether they should seek more private funding. Canadian institutional investors – notably the seven largest Canadian public pension plans as well as global investors – are looking to participate in new user-fee-supported infrastructure: both in existing assets and in new projects. To provide Canadian retirees with the best possible returns, Canada’s largest pension plans have invested $87 billion of their $1 trillion-plus in assets in infrastructure, but mostly abroad. Meanwhile, Canadian and foreign institutional investors such as pension funds and insurance companies would likely place a high value on Canadian user-fee financed infrastructure, but Canadian governments have opened few opportunities for such investment. Indeed, this Commentary argues that government ownership of infrastructure has led to inefficient management, poor project selection, and higher risks on taxpayers disguised by low government borrowing costs. To provide opportunities for investors to meet beneficiaries’ needs through financing infrastructure, Canadian governments should create policies that support institutional investment in both existing assets and for new infrastructure. Existing government-owned, user-fee-financed assets offer the greatest potential for government revenue from asset sales, including partial sales in which governments retain economic control. Governments could use the proceeds from such institutional investment to fund new infrastructure – particularly social-service infrastructure like schools and hospitals and other non-fully-self-financing infrastructure – alongside institutional investors. Taxpayers would benefit from better use of existing assets, as would users of more efficient infrastructure. The federal government recently announced plans to create an infrastructure bank that it would initially bankroll, but with a mandate to foster institutional investment capital for new public infrastructure. It is critical that Ottawa get right the design details of such a bank as well as other related institutions. There are differences between private investment in new versus existing infrastructure. But many policy issues are the same. In addition to an infrastructure bank, Canadian governments should take the following steps to encourage more institutional infrastructure investment: • where necessary, create independent regulatory bodies to oversee infrastructure assets that ensure their owners, either government-owned corporations or institutional investors, act in the public interest ahead of private profit and for long-term sustainability; • open infrastructure investment opportunities to the highest bidder among domestic or foreign investors and do not require any provincial or federal pension funds to invest. This requires the federal government to have expertise it can lend to smaller communities on business cases for institutional investors; • seek out opportunities to “recycle” user-fee financed assets at their maximum value to taxpayers or allocate contracts to operate new non-full-user fee assets that provide the highest savings or cost-avoidance; and • provide financial encouragement to provincial and municipal governments to work with the federal infrastructure bank since they own the vast majority of existing and potential user-fee financed infrastructure of interest to institutional investors.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Dachis, 2017. "New and Improved: How to Bring Institutional Investment into Public Infrastructure," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 473, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdh:commen:473
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cdhowe.org/sites/default/files/attachments/research_papers/mixed/Commentary%20473.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elizabeth Brubaker, 2011. "A Bridge Over Troubled Waters: Alternative Financing and Delivery of Water and Wastewater Services," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 330, May.
    2. Jeffrey Church, 2017. "Defining the Public Interest in Regulatory Decisions: The Case for Economic Efficiency," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 478, May.
    3. Marcel Boyer & Éric Gravel & Sandy Mokbel, 2013. "The Valuation of Public Projects: Risks, Cost of Financing and Cost of Capital Current," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 388, September.
    4. Benjamin Dachis, 2010. "Picking up Savings: The Benefits of Competition in Municipal Waste Services," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 308, September.
    5. Bev Dahlby, 2009. "Once on the Lips, Forever on the Hips: A Benefit-Cost Analysis of Fiscal Stimulus in OECD Countries," C.D. Howe Institute Backgrounder, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 121, December.
    6. Bev Dahlby & Emily Jackson, 2015. "Striking the Right Balance: Federal Infrastructure Tansfer Programs, 2002-2015," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 8(36), November.
    7. George Vegh, 2016. "Learning from Mistakes: Improving Governance in the Ontario Electricity Sector," e-briefs 230, C.D. Howe Institute.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Daniel Schwanen, 2018. "Foreign Direct Investment in Canada – The Case for Further Openness and Transparency," e-briefs 280, C.D. Howe Institute.
    2. Benjamin Dachis, 2018. "Hosing Homebuyers: Why Cities Should Not Pay for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure with Development Charges," e-briefs 281, C.D. Howe Institute.
    3. Daniel Schwanen & Jeremy Kronick & Farah Omran, 2019. "Growth Surge: How Private Equity Can Scale Up Firms and the Economy," e-briefs 292, C.D. Howe Institute.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pierre Siklos & Andrew Spence, 2010. "Faceoff: Should the Bank of Canada Release its Projections of the Interest Rate Path? – The Cases For and Against," C.D. Howe Institute Backgrounder, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 134, October.
    2. Benjamin Dachis, 2018. "Hosing Homebuyers: Why Cities Should Not Pay for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure with Development Charges," e-briefs 281, C.D. Howe Institute.
    3. Daniel Schwanen, 2013. "Uneasy Birth: What Canadians Should Expect from a Canada-EU Trade Deal," e-briefs 163, C.D. Howe Institute.
    4. Kevin D. Moore & William Robson & Alexandre Laurin, 2010. "Canada’s Looming Retirement Challenge: Will Future Retirees Be Able to Maintain Their Living Standards upon Retirement?," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 317, December.
    5. Angelo Melino, 2011. "Moving Monetary Policy Forward: Why Small Steps - and a Lower Inflation Target - Make Sense for the Bank of Canada," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 319, January.
    6. William B.P. Robson & Colin Busby, 2010. "Freeing up Food: The Ongoing Cost, and Potential Reform, of Supply Management," C.D. Howe Institute Backgrounder, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 128, April.
    7. Moore, Mark A. & Boardman, Anthony E. & Vining, Aidan R., 2017. "Analyzing risk in PPP provision of utility services: A social welfare perspective," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 210-218.
    8. Bob Baldwin & Brian FitzGerald, 2010. "Seeking Certainty in Uncertain Times: A Review of Recent Government-Sponsored Studies on the Regulation of Canadian Pension Plans," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 310, September.
    9. Lawson A.W. Hunter, Q.C. & Edward Iacobucci & Michael J. Trebilcock, 2010. "Scrambled Signals: Canadian Content Policies in a World of Technological Abundance," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 301, January.
    10. Bev Dahlby & Ergete Ferede, 2012. "The effects of tax rate changes on tax bases and the marginal cost of public funds for Canadian provincial governments," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 19(6), pages 844-883, December.
    11. Henning Bjornlund, 2010. "The Competition for Water: Striking a Balance among Social, Environmental, and Economic Needs," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 302, April.
    12. Clyde Goodlet, 2010. "Too Big to Fail: A Misguided Policy in Times of Financial Turmoil," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 311, October.
    13. Benjamin Dachis, 2013. "How Ottawa Can Deliver a Reformed Canada Post," e-briefs 162, C.D. Howe Institute.
    14. Stuart Landon & Constance Smith, 2010. "Energy Prices and Alberta Government Revenue Volatility," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 313, November.
    15. David Longworth, 2010. "Warding Off Financial Market Failure: How to Avoid Squeezed Margins and Bad Haircuts," C.D. Howe Institute Backgrounder, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 135, December.
    16. Andrew Green & Michael Trebilcock, 2010. "The Eco-Fee Imbroglio: Lessons from Ontario’s Troubled Experiment in Charging for Waste Management," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 316, December.
    17. Steven Robins, 2017. "Surge Capacity: Selling City-owned Electricity Distributors to Meet Broader Municipal Infrastructure Needs," e-briefs 257, C.D. Howe Institute.
    18. Ben Dachis, 2016. "Getting More Buildings for our Bucks: Canadian Infrastructure Policy in 2016," e-briefs 225, C.D. Howe Institute.
    19. Martin Cave & Adrian Foster, 2010. "Solving Spectrum Gridlock: Reforms to Liberalize Radio Spectrum Management in Canada in the Face of Growing Scarcity," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 303, May.
    20. David C. Allan & Philippe Bergevin, 2010. "The Canadian ABS Market: Where Do We Go From Here?," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 315, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public Investments and Infrastructure;

    JEL classification:

    • L9 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdh:commen:473. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kristine Gray (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cdhowca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.