the changing landscape in infrastructure funding and financing.deloitte_090710

8/9/2019 The Changing Landscape in Infrastructure Funding and Financing.deloitte_090710

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-changing-landscape-in-infrastructure-funding-and-financingdeloitte090710 1/16

Deloitte Research – The changing landscape or inrastructure unding and nance

A Deloitte Research study

The changing landscapeor inrastructureunding and fnance



16 Deloitte Research – The changing landscape or inrastructure unding and nance

Contents

Disclaimer

This publication contains general inormation only and Deloitte Services LP is not, by

means o this publication, rendering accounting, business, nancial, investment, legal,

tax, or other proessional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute or such

proessional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis or any decision or action

that may aect your business. Beore making any decision or taking any action that may

aect your business, you should consult a qualied proessional advisor. Deloitte Services

LP, its aliates and related entities shall not be responsible or any loss sustained by any

person who relies on this publication.

About Deloitte Research

Deloitte Research, a part o Deloitte Services LP, identies, analyzes and explains

the major issues driving today’s business dynamics and shaping tomorrow’s global

marketplace. From provocative points o view about strategy and organizational

change to straight talk about economics, regulation and technology, Deloitte Research

delivers innovative, practical insights companies can use to improve their bottom-

line perormance. Operating through a network o ded icated research proessionals,

senior consulting practitioners o the various member rms o Deloitte Touche

Tohmatsu, academics and technology specialists, Deloitte Research exhibits deep

industry knowledge, unctional understanding and commitment to thought leadership.

In boardrooms and business journals, Deloitte Research is known or bringing new

perspective to real-world concerns. For more inormation, please contact William

Eggers, Deloitte Services LP, at +1 202 246 9684 or [email protected].

1 Introduction

2 On the demand side

5 On the supply side

7 In summary

8 Endnotes

9 About the authors

11 Recent Deloitte Research public sector thought leadership

12 Contacts




Introduction

Two years on, policy makers are still sorting through the

wreckage ollowing the nancial tsunami that roiled the

world in 2008 and the ensuing global recession, the

deepest in generations. The inrastructure sector was not

immune. In act, it could be argued that inrastructure

is uniquely disadvantaged in the crisis and its atermath.

At this point only one thing is certain: the landscape or

inrastructure unding and nance has been dramatically

altered and could remain so or at least the near term.

Two trends are now evident. First, governments are using

increased inrastructure spending as an economic stimulus

tactic. Second, tightened credit markets are posing an

obstacle to raising debt nance or inrastructure delivery

models — public or private — that depend on high levels

o up-ront capital repaid over the long term through user

ees or general taxation.

This article discusses these trends and the impact o each

on inrastructure unding/nance, particularly with respect

to the prospects or public-private partnerships (PPPs) in

the United States and around the world.

Figure 1 portrays the emerging contours o the new

inrastructure unding/nance landscape, outlining

conditions on both sides o the market: the “demand”

or inrastructure unding/nance and the “supply” o

unding/nance on the part o the public and privatesectors.

Figure 1. How the inrastructure landscape has changed in the wake o the credit crisis

‘Pre-credit crisis’ trends ‘Post-credit crisis’ trends

Demand

• Limitedpublicmoneyforinfrastructure

• Highconstructioncosts

• Fiscaldynamicsencouraginggovernmentstoexplore alternative delivery models

Supply

• Well-functioningdebtcapitalmarketsandinternational project nance loan market

• Highlygearedcapitalstructuresandattractiveequityreturns

• Dominanceofactiveequityinvestorsandemergenceof inrastructure unds

Demand

• Infusionofpublicmoneyforinfrastructure

• Fallingconstructioncosts

• Fiscaldistresssolidifyinginterestinalternativedeliverymodels

Supply

• Challengeddebtcapitalmarketsaidedbynewborrowing instruments

• Priceandtenorconstraintsininternationalprojectnanceloanmarket

• Variabilityinequityreturns

• Impairmentofsomeactiveequityplayersbalancedbycontinuedgrowth in inrastructure unds

Source: Deloitte




On the demand side

Inusion o public money or inrastructure. Ater

a period o underinvestment in public inrastructure, the

2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)

has directed substantial public unding to transportation,

energy and IT inrastructure, schools and ederal build ing

modernization, among other areas. Investing in public

works to stimulate economic activity is hardly a U.S.

phenomenon. Around the world, inrastructure investment

has become a signicant component o a number o

economic stimulus packages developed to respond tothe global recession. The European Union has committed

upward o $200 billion to inrastructure. Further east, India

is investing around $30 billion in upgrading the country’s

infrastructure,whileChinaannouncedthathalfofits$585

billion stimulus package would go to inrastructure. While

the sizable infux o government stimulus dollars will not

come anywhere close to eliminating the “inrastructure

decit,” stimulus unds should certainly help improve the

condition o inrastructure badly neglected over the past

ew decades.1

Falling construction costs. As o March 2009,

investment spending (which includes construction) wasdown 12 percent in the United States, and over 20

percent in several Asian and Middle East markets, with

worldwide construction activity levels not expected to

return to their 2008 peak until at least 2011.2 Due to

diminished global demand (or both residential and

nonresidential construction), commodity prices have allen

globally, and other construction prices have allen in some

jurisdictions.3 With new stimulus unds now available or

inrastructure, government leaders can take advantage

o lower construction costs while providing a needed

boost to employment. An estimated $50 million project

at Baltimore’s BWI Airport, or example, will be built or

$8 million less than original estimates in part because o

increased competition among contractors.4

Low prices, however, may only be a temporary

phenomenon. The need to spend new government unds

quickly could actually send construction costs in the other

direction i demand outstrips capacity in local and regional

markets. Another distortion could occur i contractors

adopt a “low-bid” strategy and subsequently recoup the

discount through change orders. Governments should be

aware o these risks and develop strategies to mitigate

them through careul staging o capital programs and

aggressive contract management.

Changing shape o the demand or PPPs. It is too

early to tell or certain whether the inusion o public

money will dampen or stimulate governments’ demand

or public-private partnerships or other creative nancing

solutions. During the rst wave o stimulus spending in

the United States, or example, the emphasis has been

on ast delivery and job creation. I there are later waves,

attention will likely turn back toward achieving the goals

that various PPP models were intended to satisy: more

inrastructure, delivered better, aster, and cheaper.5

More public subsidy does not have to mean less privatecapital. In act, it could actually oster the reverse: better

project economics, better credit and more private capital

put to work. I the hundreds o billions in planned

inrastructure spending in the stimulus packages can be

leveraged with private unds, then stimulus dollars can

generate an even more proound impact on nations’

economies.

Indeed, there are many viable options or integrating

stimulus unds into PPP project structures. In many

countries, PPPs have been successully executed or

projects that required public subsidy to be viable. In those

cases, government unding was used to “write down”

particular project costs (capital and/or operating) or risk

elements either up ront or over the entire project lie

cycle. Such an approach could be used to leverage the

stimulus unding.




In addition to writing down particular project costs,

jurisdictions are increasingly looking or innovative ways

to make projects viable by involving multiple public sector

entities, both within and across jurisdictions. Public-public-

private-partnerships, or “P4s,” are starting to emerge as a

way to get projects o the ground by combining multiple

levels o public support. For instance, a new energy-

rom-waste project being developed in Staordshire in

The ARRA is impacting the inrastructure sector in two

ways: the act increases ederal spending on projects; and

it expands the instruments available in the U.S. municipal

bond market to help ease recent tight credit conditions.

We review each o these developments in turn.

Increased ederal spending on inrastructure.

While ARRA spending will increase inrastructure

investment, the ocus on speedy job creation has thus ar

directed the bulk o the money toward more traditional

delivery and maintenance projects and away rom new

innovative and transormative inrastructure projectsand delivery mechanisms. Specically, the combination

o “use it or lose it,” “shovel-ready,” and maintenance-

o-eort provisions has meant that the money will need

to be spent on projects that are near the end o or past

the permitting stages and that can obtain nancing

immediately. Except or a ew PPP projects that have

been mothballed or delayed, it is unlikely that most

PPPswillbeabletomeetthesetimelines.Coupled

with the additional time and eort that state and local

governments are spending to ensure compliance with

the heightened accountability standards, the result

is that most inrastructure developers simply do not

have the increased up-ront time required to ashion

innovative delivery mechanisms in order to use ARRA

unds in PPPs.

It is important to note, though, that while the ARRA

may slow down PPP activity in the short term, the act

could serve to accelerate it in the long term. As we have

indicated, the amount o money being spent on stimulus

alls ar short o what is required. Using stimulus unds

to “catch up” on deerred maintenance may ree up

the United Kingdom is a collaborative eort o a number

o local governments that are banding together to

achieve economies o scale that will make the project

viable. Meanwhile, the United States has or decades

employed public-public partnerships to develop and

nance inrastructure through the creation o joint powers

agencies, multistate authorities, regional development

agencies and other vehicles.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act o 2009 and PPPs

budgetary and other resources in the uture, helping

to pave the way or development o new inrastructure

through more innovative delivery mechanisms.

Changes in municipal bonds. The ARRA includes a

number o provisions designed to broaden the base o

investors in municipal bonds, thereby increasing private

investment in inrastructure. While many o the newly

created instruments are expansions or renements o

previous programs, one, Build America Bonds (BABs),

represents a signicant shit in the way municipal debt

isstructured.Historically,interestearnedonmunicipalbonds issued or most governmental purposes has

been exempt rom ederal income taxation. This implicit

subsidy has lowered the cost o capital or state and

localgovernments.However,ithasalsolimitedthe

investor base to parties or whom exemption rom

ederal taxation has value — U.S. taxpayers.

BABs are ederally taxable bonds oered by

municipalities in which the ederal government makes

the subsidy “explicit” by providing a reimbursement

o 35 percent o the bond interest payable, either to

the municipal bond issuer (in cash) or to the municipal

bond holder (in the orm o a tax credit). To date, all

BABs interest reimbursements have been remitted to

the municipal bond issuer. (The bond holder tax credit

option is believed to be less ecient as a subsidy

mechanism.) BABs, as taxable instruments widely

salable beyond the traditional connes o the U.S.

municipal bond investor base, have the potential not

only to broaden the investor base but also to impact

the discussion on inrastructure nancing, as the ederal

subsidy becomes more transparent.




American Recovery and Reinvestment Act o 2009 and PPPs (cont.)

While BABs are unlikely to be used or PPPs because

o the nongovernmental nature o the use o proceeds

in PPP structures, there are two other ARRA municipal

bond provisions that could prove directly benecial to

PPPs.

Private activity bonds (PABs) have been

exempted rom the alternative minimum tax

(AMT), making such bonds ully tax ree.

This exemption applies to PABs issued in 2009 and

2010, as well as to new PABs issued to reund bonds

issued between 2004 and 2009. Use o PABs in PPP

capital structures has been impeded by the application

o AMT. The exemption has both lowered the cost

and broadened the investor base or PABs, making the

U.S. debt capital markets a more attractive source o

nancing alongside the traditional project nance loan

market.

The Secretary o Transportation has been given

a $1.5 billion allocation or Transportation

Investment Generating Economic Recovery

(TIGER) discretionary grants or transportation,

o which up to $200 million can be used to

support the Transportation Inrastructure

Finance and Innovation Act o 1998 (TIFIA)

program, or up to $2 billion in estimated new

TIFIA loans.

TIFIA credit support has become an increasingly

important component o U.S. PPP nancing strategies,

partly in response to credit market conditions. In many

recent deals, the advantageous price o a TIFIA credit

acility has been a key driver o a successul bid. But

renewed interest in TIFIA has led to a situation where

loan authority is being rapidly depleted, and so this

increased capacity should be well received and rapidly

utilized.




On the supply side

Tightened credit markets. Financing markets are

improving, but they may remain less attractive than usual

or the near term. In this context, nancing markets

include both government bond markets such as the U.S.

municipal bond market (where inrastructure capital is

traditionally raised), and the international project nance

loan markets that provide capital or many PPPs.

While many market participants have viewed inrastructure

as an attractive deensive asset class during thisrecessionary period, the dynamics o the credit markets,

particularly with respect to the tenor o debt, have moved

in the opposite direction. As a result, deal volume is down.

Transactions that are being executed are taking more time,

incurring higher costs and relying more heavily on ocial

nancing rom institutions like the European Investment

Bank and TIFIA. In the U.S., traditional municipal bond

investors have been tapped through the use o Private

Activity Bonds (PABs) and governments have been making

grants or equity contributions to capital structures. While

several sizable, precedent-setting transactions (the UK’s

M25, Florida’s I-595, and Texas’ North Tarrant Express and

LBJ Freeway) have closed during this period, several others(ChicagoMidwayAirportandFlorida’sAlligatorAlley)

have not proceeded in part because o conditions in the

nancing markets.

The table below highlights the range o capital structures

executed recently or major inrastructure projects in

the United States. As shown, gearing levels vary widely,

with one transaction completed on an all-equity basis,

two transactions in the more traditional high 80 percent

debt range, and more recent transactions involving a

70/30 gearing ratio with government grants to ll out the

unding.

A number o governments are proactively trying to ensure

that the credit crisis does not stall needed inrastructure

projects. The UK government has decided it is better to

provide additional government-backed debt nance than

to delay projects or restructure scores o scheduled PPP

transactions. Toward this end, the UK Treasury announced

in February 2009 that it will lend directly to those PrivateFinance Initiative (PFI) projects that cannot on their own

raise sucient debt nance on acceptable terms. Across

the EU, the European Investment Bank has increased

lending to ensure that signicant deals are executed.

Similarly, the U.S. Department o Transportation will

expand its TIFIA credit program or inrastructure (see

nearby box).

Variability in equity returns. In principle, the great variety

o PPP structures makes it dicult to generalize about equity

returns in the inrastructure market. For example, in some PPP

structures, reduced gearing can lead to lower equity returns.

In others, it can have the opposite eect. The dierence liesin the nature o the revenue supporting the structure. For

example, in availability payment–style structures where debt

costs are passed through to a government payor, equity

returns are stable or rising; in availability payment–style

structures where revenues are xed, equity returns are stable

or declining. That said, growing competition in the sector

should put pressure on returns over time, which could prove

problematic or some market participants who achieved

early dominance.

Table 1. A look at the capital structure o recent U.S. PPP deals

Transaction

TexasSH130

VirginiaCapitalBeltway

Chicagoparkingmeters

Florida I-595

Texas North Tarrant Express

Texas LBJ Freeway

Date

3/08

6/08

2/09

3/09

12/09

6/10

Value ($millions)

$1,360

$1,930

$1,150

$1,670

$2,051

$2,550

Debt ($millions)

$1,190

$1,180

None

$1,460

$1,050

$1,465

Grants

–

–

–

–

$573

$445

Debt/equity ratio*

87/13

61/39

0/100

87/13

71/29

70/30

*Does not include grants.




Potential fight to quality. On the plus side o the

equity equation, there is likely to be an eventual “fight

to quality,” with investors seeking sound prospects in the

inrastructure sector, particularly i other asset classes

remain impaired until economic growth resumes. This is

particularly relevant or pension unds, since long-term

inrastructure projects are a good t or pension und

liabilities. Over the past several years, billions o dollars

have migrated to inrastructure unds — the total value o

which now ar exceeds the likely equity component o PPPprojects in the pipeline (see table 2).

Table 2. Inrastructure investors

Strategic buyers/ concessionaires

Inrastructureunds

Financialsponsors

•Traditionally,operators,developersorcontractors in the inrastructure sector•Oftenbenetfromsectoroperational

expertise, which can enhance the value otheir bids•Long-terminvestmentstrategy

•Privateorlistedequityfundsfocusedon

inrastructure investments•Strongliquidityawaitinginvestment

opportunities•Lowerequityreturnsthanfornancial

sponsors•Typicallylooktotakepartinaconsortium•Medium-tolong-terminvestmentstrategy•Fundsizesaresmallerthanfornancial

sponsors

•Privateequityfundswithshorterexit strategy•Highequityreturns(+20%)maylimitability

to bid competitively, but have been achiev-able in certain opportunities•Normallylookforshort-terminvestments

with a clear exit strategy

•Typicallylooktotakepartinaconsortium•Fundsizesrangefrom$6bnto$16bn

•Abertis•ACS•Acciona•Aecom•Bombardier•Bouygues•Brisa

•ABN-Amro

•AlindaCapital•AMPCapital•Borealis•Carlyle•Challenger•CII•CPPInvestment

Board

•Apollo•BainCapital•Blackstone•Clayton,

Dubilier & Rice

•Cintra/Ferrovial•FCC•GlobalVia•Hochtief•Kiewitt•Laing•OHL

•Colonial

•Commonwealth•EQT•GIP•GoldmanSachs•Hastings•IndustryFunds

Management•JPMorgan

•KKR•MDP•Providence

Equity

•Sacyr•Siemens•Skanska•Transurban•Veolia•Vinci•Zachry

•KKR

•Macquarie•Meridiam•MorganStanley•OntarioTeachers’•Prudential•RREEF•UBS

•ThomasH.Lee•TPG•WarburgPincus




In summary

Inrastructure unding and nance is in a period o fux. On

both sides o the equation — supply and demand — there

are positive and negative infuences resulting rom the

creditcrisisandgovernments’responsestoit.Howthose

infuences will settle out over time remains to be seen,

but it is clear that inrastructure needs remain pressing

the world over and that governments will struggle to

meet them, particularly on the heels o a global economic

downturn that will have deleterious scal impacts.

Given that dynamic, there should be an ongoing role or

the private sector in the development o inrastructure and

the public services delivered through it. The credit crisis

may have temporarily changed the economics o public-

private partnerships as nancial transactions, but it has

only served to highlight the need or new approaches to

solving the world’s inrastructure problem.




1 AmericanSocietyofCivilEngineers,“2009ReportCard

or America’s Inrastructure,” January 2009

<http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2009/index.cm>.

2 JimHaughey,“SinkingWorldConstructionDemand

WillKeepCostFalling,”Reed Construction Data, April

14, 2009. <http://www.reedconstructiondata.com/

news/2009/04/sinking-world-construction-demand-will-

keep-cost-alling/>.

3 JimHaughey,“ConstructionMaterialsPriceIndex

DeclinesforSixthConsecutiveMonth,”Reed

Construction Data, April 15, 2009 <http://www.

reedconstructiondata.com/news/2009/04/construction-

materials-price-index-declines-or-sixth-consecutive-

month/>.

4 ErickM.Weiss,“BidsPourInforStateConstruction

Jobs:MoreBangfortheStimulusBuckasFirmsClamber

forContracts,”The Washington Post , April 8, 2009

<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/

article/2009/04/07/AR2009040703828.html>.

5 See“ClosingtheInfrastructureGap:TheRoleofPublic-

Private Partnerships,” Deloitte Research, 2006 or more

inormation on the benets o PPP models.

Endnotes




About the authors

Tiany Dovey

Deloitte Services LP

Tel: +1 571 882 6247

Email: [email protected]

Tiany Dovey is a research manager with Deloitte

Research where she has responsibility or public sector

research and thought leadership. She has written

extensively on a wide range o public policy and

management issues and is the co-author o States of Transition(DeloitteResearch,2006).Herworkhas

appeared in a number o publications, including Public

CIO, Governing and Education Week . Tiany holds a

Bachelor o Arts in philosophy and public health and

community medicine rom University o Washington and

a Masters in Public Policy rom The George Washington

University.

William D. Eggers

Deloitte Services LP

Tel: +1 202 378 5292


William D. Eggers is the Executive Director o Deloitte’s

Public Leadership Institute and the Global Director or

Deloitte Research-Public Sector where he leads the public

sector industry research program. A recognized expert

on government reorm, he is the author o numerous

books including: Governing by Network: The New Shape

of the Public Sector (Brookings, 2004), Government 2.0:

Using Technology to Improve Education, Cut Red Tape,

Reduce Gridlock , and Enhance Democracy (Rowman and

Littleeld, 2005) and States of Transition (Deloitte Research

2006).Heisthewinnerofthe2005LouisBrownlow

award or best book on public management, the 2002

APEX award or excellence in business journalism, the

1996 Roe Award or leadership and innovation in public

policy research, and the 1995 Sir Antony Fisher award

or best book promoting an understanding o the ree

economy. A ormer manager o the Texas Perormance

Review, he has advised dozens o governments around the

world.Hiscommentaryhasappearedindozensofmajor

media outlets including the New York Times and Wall

Street Journal.Hisupcomingbook,If We Can Put a Man

on the Moon…Getting Big Things Done in Government,

willbepublishedbyHarvardBusinessSchoolPressinthe

all o 2009.

Michael Flynn

Deloitte Ireland

Tel: +353 1 4172515


MichaelFlynnisaCorporateFinancePartneratDeloitte

in Ireland and leads the Specialised Finance Practice

including Government & Inrastructure, Debt Advisory

andFinancialModellingservices.Headvisesthepublic,

private and banking sectors on inrastructure (includingPPP) and public sector related transactions in Ireland

and internationally across a variety o sectors, including

transport (roads and rail), health, education, housing,

justice, waste and energy. Michael is a member o the

Deloitte Global Inrastructure Leaders Steering Group

and supports Deloitte teams on inrastructure projects

aroundtheworld.Heisaregularcontributortoindustry

publications and presents to public and private sector

organisations on inrastructure and PPP related topics.

Irene Walsh

DeloitteCorporateFinanceLLC

Tel: +1 212 436 4620


Irene Walsh is a Managing Director and leader o

the U.S. Inrastructure Advisory practice o Deloitte

CorporateFinanceLLC.Sheprovidesstrategicand

transactional advice to public and private sector sponsors

o inrastructure projects. Irene has more than twenty-

ve years o experience in inrastructure nance globally

across the spectrum o ratings, advisory, debt capital

markets, credit banking, project nance, and international

developmentbanking.Commencinghercareerinthe

U.S. public nance industry and then London-based ora decade, she has worked in more than hal a dozen

countries on many precedent-setting projects, most

notablyinthetransportationsector.IreneholdsanMCRP

fromHarvardUniversity’sKennedySchoolofGovernment,

and a BA in Urban Aairs rom George Washington

University.




Jim Ziglar

DeloitteCorporateFinanceLLC

Tel: +1 212 436 7630


JimZiglarisaSeniorVicePresidentintheInfrastructure

AdvisorypracticeofDeloitteCorporateFinanceLLC.

Hefocusesonadvisinggovernmentandprivatesector

entities on the structuring, execution and operation o

infrastructurepublicprivatepartnerships.Hehasmore

than teen years o experience in U.S. municipal nance,

strategicconsulting,andmarketingandCRMconsulting.

Prior to joining Deloitte, Jim worked at a bulge-bracket

investment bank where he served U.S. municipalities as an

investment banker and derivatives marketer. Jim has broad

experience in helping municipalities meet their nancial

challenges and und inrastructure and other projects

through traditional and creative structured nancing

solutions. Jim has an MBA in Finance and Strategic

Management rom the Wharton School, University o

Pennsylvania, and a BA in Economics rom Yale University.




Recent Deloitte Researchpublic sector thought leadership

•The Public Innovator’s Playbook: Nurturing Bold

Ideas in Government

• Changing the Game: The Role o the Private and

Public Sectors in Protecting Data

• Government Reorm’s Next Wave: Redesigning

GovernmenttoMeettheChallengesofthe21st

Century

•Web 2.0:TheFutureofCollaborativeGovernment

•Changing Lanes:AddressingAmerica’sCongestion

Problems Through Road User Pricing•Mastering Finance in Government: Transorming

the Government Enterprise Through Better Financial

Management

•One Size Fits Few:UsingCustomerInsightto

Transorm Government

•Bolstering Human Capital: HowthePublicSector

CanBeattheComingTalentCrisis

•Serving the Aging Citizen

• Closing America’s Inrastructure Gap: The Role o

Public-Private Partnerships

• Closing the Inrastructure Gap: The Role o Public-

Private Partnerships

•States o Transition: Tackling Government’s ToughestPolicyandManagementChallenges

•Building Flexibility: New Models or Public

Inrastructure Projects

• Pushing the Boundaries: Making a Success o Local

Government Reorganization

•Governing Forward: New Directions or Public

Leadership

• Paying or Tomorrow: Practical Strategies or Tackling

thePublicPensionCrisis

•Medicaid Makeover: Six Tough (and Unavoidable)

ChoicesontheRoadtoReform

•Driving More Money into the Classroom: The

Promise o Shared Services• Are We There Yet:ARoadmapforIntegratingHealth

andHumanServices

•Government 2.0: Using Technology to Improve

Education,CutRedTape,ReduceGridlock,andEnhance

Democracy (Rowman and Littleeld, 2005)

•Governing by Network: The New Shape o the Public

Sector (Brookings, 2004)

•Prospering in the Secure Economy

•Combating Gridlock:HowPricingRoadUseCanEase

Congestion

•Citizen Advantage: Enhancing Economic

CompetitivenessthroughE-Government

•Cutting Fat, Adding Muscle: The Power oInormation in Addressing Budget Shortalls

•Show Me the Money:Cost-CuttingSolutionsfor

Cash-StrappedStates




Contacts

Global

Greg Pellegrino

Global Industry Leader

United States

+1 617 437 2776

[email protected]

Jud Payne

ChiefofStaff

United States+1 202 370 2415

[email protected]

Australia

SimonCook

+61 02 9322 7739

[email protected]

Austria

Gundi Wentner

+43 1 537 00 2500

[email protected]

Belgium

HansDebruyne

+ 32 2 800 29 31

[email protected]

Brazil

Edgar Jabbour

+55 11 5186 6652

[email protected]

Bulgaria

Desislava Dinkova+359 (2) 8023 182

[email protected]

Canada

Paul Macmillan

+1 416 874 4203

[email protected]

Bill Eggers

Deloitte Research Director

United States

+1 202 378 5292

[email protected]

Karen Lang

Marketing Director

United States+1 517-437-2126

[email protected]

Gemma Martin

Public Relations

United States

+1 212 492 4305

[email protected]

Canada

GianniCiufo

+1 416 775 7443

[email protected]

Caribbean Cluster

Taron Jackman

1 (345) 814 2212

[email protected]

Central Europe

Martin Buransky

+420 246 042 349

mburansky@deloittece.

com

Central Europe

John Nicholson

+381 (11) 3812 124

[email protected]

CISMaxim Lubomudrov

+74957870600 x3093

[email protected]

Cyprus

Panicos Papamichael

+357 22 360 805

ppapamichael@deloitte.

com

Denmark

Lynge Skovgaard

+45 36102666

[email protected]

Finland

Markus Kaihoniemi

+358 20755 5370

mkaihoniemi@deloitte.

France

Gilles Pedini

+33 1 40 88 22 21

[email protected]

Germany

Thomas Northo

+49 (89) 29036 85 66

[email protected]

Greece

VasilisPallios

+30 210 678 1100

[email protected]

Guam

Dan Fitzgerald

(671) 646-3884 x 229

[email protected]

Hungary

CsabaMarkus

+36 (1) 428 6793

[email protected]

Iceland

Gudmundur Kjartansson

+354 580 3054

[email protected]

India

Kamlesh K. Mittal

+91 11 6662 2000

kamleshmittal@deloitte.

com

Ireland

HarryGoddard

+353 1 4172589

[email protected]

IrelandMichael Flynn

+353 1 4172515

[email protected]

Israel

ChaimBen-David

+972 2 5018860

[email protected]

Italy

Roberto Lolato

+39 0636749216

[email protected]

Japan

Yuji Morita

03 6213 1532

yuji.morita@tohmatsu.

co.jp

Korea

MinKeunChung

82 2 6676 3101

[email protected]

LATCO

Armando Guibert

+54 11 43204022

[email protected]

LuxembourgDan Arendt

+352 45145 2621

[email protected]

Malaysia

AzmanM.Zain

+603 7723 6500

azmanmzain@deloitte.

com


The ollowing individuals represent the contacts or the Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu mem-

ber rms in their respective countries.




Mexico

EnriqueClemente

+52 55 9123535

[email protected]

Mexico

MauricioCostemalle

+52 55 5080 6393

mcostemalle@deloittemx.

com

Mid Arica

Joe Eshun

+255 (22) 2116006

[email protected]

Middle East

Anis Jabsheh

+9626 4634605

[email protected]

Morocco

Fawzi Britel(22) 94 07 50/51

[email protected]

Netherlands

HansvanVliet

+31621272828

[email protected]

Netherlands

KeesZachariasse

+31882882127

[email protected]

New Zealand

Aloysius Teh

+64 4 495 3934

[email protected]

Norway

ArveHogseth

+47 95268730

[email protected]

Poland

Maria Rzepnikowska

+48 (22) 5110930

mrzepnikowska@deloittece.

com

Portugal

Raul Mascarenhas

(+351) 210423832

ramascarenhas@deloitte.

com

Singapore

Patricia Lee

+65 6216 3283

[email protected]

SingaporeGene Sullivan

+65 62163 206

[email protected]

South Arica

Lwazi Bam

+27 (0) 11 209 8807

[email protected]

Southern Arica

André Pottas

+27 (0)11 209 6401

[email protected]

Spain

GustavoGarciaCapo

+34 915145000 x2036

[email protected]

Spain

Andres Rebollo

+ 34 915145000 x1883

[email protected]

Sweden

CarolineAndersson

+46850672306

[email protected]

Thailand

Marasri Kanjanataweewat

+66 (0) 2676 5700

mkanjanataweewat@delo-

itte.com

Turkey

Gokhan Alpman

+90 212 366 60 86

[email protected]

Ukraine

Andriy Stepanov+380444909000 x3633

[email protected]

United Kingdom

Mike Turley

+44 207 303 3162

[email protected]

United Kingdom

Nick Prior

+44 20 7007 9858

[email protected]

United States

John Bigalke

+1 407 246 8235

[email protected]

United States

Robin Lineberger

+1 703 747 3104

[email protected]

United States

BobCampbell

+1 512 226 4210

[email protected]

United States

Irene Walsh

+1 212 436 4620

[email protected]

United States

Mike Slattery

+1 312 486 3125

[email protected]

Vietnam

Paul Meiklejohn

+ 84 4 3 852 [email protected]

Deloitte Research – The changing landscape or inrastructure undingand nance



14 Deloitte Research The changing landscape or inrastr ct re nding and nance

This publication contains general inormation only and is based on the experiences and research o Deloitte practitioners. Deloitte is not, by means o this publication, rendering business,nancial, investment, or other proessional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute or such proessional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis or any decision oraction that may aect your business. Beore making any decision or taking any action that may aect your business, you should consult a qualied proessional advisor. Deloitte, its ali-ates, and related entities shall not be responsible or any loss sustained by any person who relies on this publication.

As used in this document, ‘Deloitte’ means Deloitte LLP (and its subsidiaries). Please see deloitte.com/us/about or a detailed description o the legal structure o Deloitte LLP and itssubsidiaries.

MemberofDeloitteToucheTohmatsu.Copyright©2010DeloitteDevelopmentLLC.Allrightsreserved.

the changing landscape in infrastructure funding and financing.deloitte_090710

Documents