海外之声｜OMFIF主席：世界银行和国际金融公司要联合助力基建投资（中英双语）

观点速递

本文作者大卫·马什是IMI国际委员、国际货币金融机构官方论坛（OMFIF）联席主席。原文摘自OMFIF评论，OMFIF是一家总部位于伦敦的全球金融智库。

作者提出，基础设施投资在当今这个时代具有重要的意义，可以带来多项效益：既为投资基金带来收益率，也是提高增长率和生活水平的好办法。做好基建投资，既要有创新举措，也要有规则约束。一项可行的措施为将政府投资者、捐助者和项目发起人之间建立协定，搭建沟通渠道。政府投资者指全球公共投资者，主要包括主权基金和公共养老基金；捐助人是提供资金的政府部门和机构，他们如今更多地利用世界银行及其旗下的私人贷款部门国际金融公司（IFC），而这样的金融中介正在吸引越来越多的投资者加入；第三类是政府部门的基建项目发起人。

最后，作者总结，协调基础建设对于全球经济均衡发展十分重要，而世行和IFC要在其中发挥关键作用。

中文译文如下：

让基建投资运作起来

世界银行与国际金融公司可协助建立联盟

戴维·马什

翻译：蔡越

审校：肖柏高

使基础设施支出更有效地推动重建和增长是一项重要的全球性任务。为实现这一目标，世界各国政府在思想和行动上面需保持一致。

各国政府，尤其是提供发展援助的政府，必须要有创新举措，用纳税人的钱进一步带动港口、铁路、能源和教育等风险项目的商业投资。除了大胆创新，也要有规则约束。让基础设施价值链上的各个政府当局组成国际联盟不失为一项措施。

基础设施是这个时代的热词。唐纳德·特朗普在竞选总统时强调了美国在这方面的投资还有很大缺口——虽然这位总统目前也没有什么大动作来填补这一缺口。但基础设施就此成为全球性话题，而此前，很少有听上去如此技术官僚的术语被赋予这么多正面含义。

基建投资能带来多重效益。它是投资基金的理想使用渠道，也是提高增长率和生活水平的好办法。此外，基建投资能有效推动发展。如果以环保为目的来筹划投资，还有助于在发达市场和发展中市场构建低碳可持续经济。

全世界还有很多追求收益的闲置资本，各国政府和投资者正在考虑如何以最佳方式将这些资本引向基础设施建设。要做的工作还有很多。我们需要在三类人，即政府投资者、捐助者和项目发起人之间建立协定。现在，这三方很少互相对话。

第一类是全球公共投资者（Global Public Investor），包括全球的主权基金和公共养老基金。根据OMFIF的排名，这些基金与各国央行一道控制了约35万亿美元的可投资资产。它们当中有许多机构正试图从基础设施这样的“替代型”资产中获取更高的回报。

第二类包括为发展提供资金的政府部门和机构。他们日益频繁地借助复杂而强大的间接融资机制，着手提升多边机构的贷款规模和效率，这些多边机构包括世界银行及其旗下的私人贷款部门国际金融公司（IFC）等。4月份，国际货币基金组织与世界银行春季会议在华盛顿举行。会上，这些捐助方探讨了如何提供担保、让私营部门进一步参与到官方基建筹资项目中。他们提到的很多方法都与绿色融资工具有关。

北欧捐助国提供的政府担保推动了IFC“有管理的联合贷款组合计划”，官方和民营机构投资者因而得以参与到IFC的新兴市场组合贷款。而世行的贷款担保机制有了捐助方的参与，世行也得以回收旧贷款，将资金转移给私营部门的债权人。这样就能把世行的资金释放出来，用于发放新的基建贷款，并显著增加政府的资金杠杆。

第三类是来自政府部门的基建项目发起人，这些部门负责为发达市场和新兴市场创造交易。从美国亚特兰大到东非的桑给巴尔，股权和债权投资者正在四处为其投资组合战略寻找有利可图的基建项目。

几乎每个地区的银行、政府和发展机构都谈到，未来几年的基建资金需求将达到几十万亿美元。然而，百分百商业化的项目还十分供不应求。除非各国政府更坚定地推进能让投资者受益的项目，否则市场的不平衡将对投资者不利。届时会有大量资本追逐寥寥数个有利可图的项目。需求过旺会抬高价格，导致回报率降低。那时，政府养老金机构、主权基金及纳税人都会是输家。

今天，协调基建投资的呼声空前强烈。国际社会迫切需要将这一渴望变为现实，而国际世界银行和国际金融公司等机构也要在其中发挥关键作用。

英文原文如下：

Making infrastructure investment work

World Bank, IFC can help build coalition

by David Marsh in London

Thu 4 May 2017

Making infrastructure spending work more effectively as a tool for regeneration and growth is an important global task. To achieve this aim, world governments need to demonstrate more joined-up thinking and action.

Imaginative steps must be taken, especially from governments providing development aid, to allow taxpayers’ money to stretch further into boosting beneficial investment in ventures ranging from ports and railroads to energy and education. Imagination and discipline are needed. One measure could be to form an international coalition of public authorities occupying different positions on the infrastructure value chain.

Infrastructure is the word of our times. Donald Trump’s election campaign emphasised the US investment gap in this field – although the president has done little so far to try to plug it. The issue extends around the world. Rarely has one technocratic-sounding term been imbued with so many beneficial meanings.

Infrastructure investment stands for multiple benefits. It is a desirable outlet for investment funds and an attractive means of raising growth rates and living standards. Moreover, it is an efficient way of promoting development and, if designed with environmental motives, a method for building sustainable, low-carbon economies in both advanced and developing markets.

Governments and investors are considering how best to guide the world’s surplus of income-seeking investable funds down the infrastructure route. Much more needs to be done. We need a compact between three categories of officialdom which seldom speak to each other: government investors, donors, and project sponsors.

The first of these three groups are Global Public Investors. These include the world’s sovereign funds and public pension funds which, together with central banks, command around $35tn of investable assets, according to OMFIF rankings. Many of these institutions are seeking higher returns in what are popularly known as ‘alternative’ assets like infrastructure.

The second category comprises government departments and agencies that fund development. Increasingly, through sophisticated and powerful indirect financing mechanisms, they are embarking on improving the scope and efficiency of lending by multilateral agencies such as the World Bank and its private sector-focused scion, the International Finance Corporation. At April’s spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank in Washington, donors explored ways of providing guarantees for raising private sector participation in official infrastructure funding programmes. A lot of this can be linked to ‘green’ financing instruments.

Government guarantees from Nordic donors are helping catalyse the IFC’s ‘managed co-lending portfolio programme’, allowing official and private sector institutional investors access to the IFC’s emerging market loan portfolio. Donors’ involvement in a World Bank loan guarantee facility is helping the Bank to recycle older loans, transferring them to private sector creditors. This frees the Bank’s capital for fresh infrastructure loans and markedly increases government funding leverage.

The third group is made up of infrastructure project sponsors from government departments responsible for bringing deals to market, both in advanced and emerging market economies. From Atlanta to Zanzibar, providers of equity and debt are seeking bankable infrastructure projects for their portfolio strategies.

In nearly every region, banks, governments and development agencies speak of infrastructure needs running into tens of trillions of dollars for coming years. Yet demand for fully commercial projects greatly outstrips supply. Unless governments around the world make a more determined effort to promote projects in which investors can beneficially place their funds, the market imbalance will count against investors. Too much money will be chasing too few commercially propitious projects. Excessive demand will drive up prices and lead to lower returns. Government pensions agencies and sovereign funds – and with them taxpayers – will be the losers.

The need for coordination on infrastructure investment has never been greater. It is time for the international community – with bodies like the World Bank and IFC playing a key role – to turn aspiration into reality.

David Marsh is Managing Director of OMFIF.

观点整理  田雯

图文编辑  田雯

点击查看近期热文

欢迎加入群聊

为了增进与粉丝们的互动，IMI财经观察将建立微信交流群，欢迎大家参与。

入群方法：加群主为微信好友（微信号：imi605）,添加时备注个人姓名（实名认证）、单位、职务等信息，经群主审核后，即可被拉进群。

欢迎读者朋友多多留言与我们交流互动，推荐好文章可联系：邮箱[e-mail]；电话[phone]

关于我们

中国人民大学国际货币研究所（IMI）成立于2009年12月20日，是专注于货币金融理论、政策与战略研究的非营利性学术研究机构和新型专业智库。研究所聘请了来自国内外科研院所、政府部门或金融机构的80余位著名专家学者担任顾问委员、学术委员和国际委员，70余位中青年专家担任研究员。

研究所长期聚焦国际金融、宏观经济理论与政策、金融科技、财富管理、金融监管、地方金融等领域，定期举办高层次系列论坛或讲座，形成了《人民币国际化报告》《金融机构国际化报告》《中国财富管理报告》《金融科技二十讲》等一大批具有重要学术和政策影响力的产品。

2016年，研究所入围《中国智库大数据报告》影响力榜单列高校智库第4位，并在“中国经济类研究机构市场价值排行榜（2016）”中名列第32位。

国际货币网：www.imi.org.cn

微信号：IMI财经观察

（点击识别下方二维码关注我们）

只分享最有价值的财经视点

We only share the most valuable financial insights.