INVESTING IN INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PRO-POOR GROWTH AND POVERTY REDUCTION Ernest Aryeetey ISSER, UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Jan 11, 2016
INVESTING IN INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PRO-POOR GROWTH AND POVERTY REDUCTION
Ernest Aryeetey
ISSER, UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
OUTLINE
Introduction Overview of Infrastructure in Africa Changing Perspectives on Investment in
Infrastructure - Ownership Evidence of Infrastructure Investment Impact
on Poverty Reduction Making Infrastructure more beneficial for the
Poor
INTRODUCTION
There has been a lot of discussion of what constitutes infrastructure: e.g. economic and social infrastructure, hard and soft infrastructure, etc.
There is also a growing recognition of the role that different types of infrastructure play in reducing poverty.
Beyond social infrastructure, such as those for health and education, economic infrastructure is expected to underpin poverty reduction:
Introduction (Contd)
Energy, flood protection and drainage, irrigation, information and communications technologies (ICT), transport, water and sanitation.
Infrastructure enhances the productivity of the poor.
Enhances the employment-creation effects of economic growth.
Infrastructure can offer social protection.
SOME STATISTICS ON INFRASTRUCTURE PROVISION
In Burkina Faso, Uganda, and Zambia, walking is the principal means of transport for 87%of rural households. In most SSA countries it is over 80%
Less than half the people in Sub-Saharan Africa have access to safe drinking water.
Over two-thirds of the continent’s population lack adequate sanitation services.
Some Statistics….
Only about 5 percent of Africa’s rural residents have access to modern electricity, while over 95 percent are dependent on traditional fuels, mainly wood or cow dung for cooking, heating and lighting.
Telephone lines serve primarily urban areas in Africa; very few African villages have a single telephone. The average disparity of “teledensity” (number of lines per person) between urban and rural areas in Africa is estimated to be as high as 25:1
CHANGING PERSPECTIVES ON INFRASTRUCTURE OWNERSHIP/ MANAGEMENT Reforms in the 1980s led to the dominant public sector role
being muted with efforts to draw in private participation with controversial outcomes.
Transport: Proposals for improved efficiency included efforts to
develop BOT arrangements and the use of labour intensive methods for road construction, using local labour.
Reason: If encouraged, local firms partnering with foreign firms
would be better suited to finding technical solutions appropriate to local skills and resources, and to manage the work within local commercial, social and political constraints.
Changing Perspectives …… Water Supply and Sanitation:
Efforts to attract private participation in urban water has been most controversial;
Rural Water Supply and Sanitation (WSS) infrastructure is considered community or local government -owned.
Investment decisions are made on the basis of perceived needs.
Cost sharing has been extremely problematic in many parts of Africa, both urban and rural.
The result is that supply systems are still ineffective and inefficient, with little investment.
Changing Perspectives ……
Telecommunications: Historically, telecommunication services have been
provided by monopoly agencies or state owned enterprises.
Service has been dominated by the urban areas, with rural extensions consisting primarily of pay phones and public call offices at national post and telecommunications offices.
Currently, with new technologies, varying degrees of liberalization are occurring and have opened opportunities for innovative private sector participation to expand access to rural areas.
Changing Perspectives ……
Energy: For electricity, the national monopoly utilities,
financially crippled by below-cost universal tariffs, are unable to expand service to meet demand.
Low tariffs make it difficult to attract private investment.
The technology available puts the service beyond the reach of poor households
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AS CHANNEL FOR POVERTY REDUCTION
Enable individuals, firms, governments – to respond to new types of demand in different places.
Creating employment to serve as social protection and as a counter-cyclical policy in times of recession.
Enhancing human capital by improving access to schools and health centers.
Improving environmental conditions, which link to improved livelihoods, better health and reduced vulnerability of the poor.
SOME PLANNED REGIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
West Africa For energy, there is large scope for economic regional and cross
border investments among countries in West Africa.
In 2000 the heads of state of ECOWAS approved a master plan to complete the integration of national electricity grids and to establish a regional electricity market, the West African Power Pool (WAPP).
Phase 1 of the transmission projects were completed in 2002 (between Ivory Coast and Burkina Faso, and between Mali, Senegal and Mauritania)
Two others were due in 2006 (between Ivory Coast/Mali, and Nigeria/Benin). For 2008, there is Ghana to Togo/Benin
Planned Regional Projects …..
East Africa In October 2004, the African Development Fund approved
funding for a study to determine the optimum solution for the operation of a railway line between Isaka (Tanzania) and Kigali (Rwanda).
Covered regions are Shinyanga and Kagera in Tanzania, Burundi, and the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo.
The area is mainly rural, but has an abundant mineral wealth
The aim of the project is to open up new development opportunities to create employment, increase income and reduce poverty.
INVESTMENT IN INFRASTRUCTURE AND POVERTY REDUCTION: EVIDENCE
There are hardly any studies of the direct effect of infrastructure on poverty reduction in Africa.
There are, however, good examples from Asia where Yao (2003) has documented the poverty reducing effects of rural roads in India and the People’s Republic of China.
Table 1: Poverty Reducing Effects of Rural Road Investment
Poverty Reducing Effects Rural Road Investment
India
Elasticity* % Share
Peoples Republic of China
Elasticity* % Share
Direct effect throughincrease in agriculturalproductivity
-0.0119 17.92 -0.0450 28.46
Direct effect throughincrease in non-farmemployment
-0.0300 45.18 -.0417 26.38
Direct effect throughincrease in rural wages
-0.0204 30.72 -0.0399 25.24
Indirect follow-on effectthrough higher economicgrowth
-0.0041 6.18 -0.0315 19.92
Overall -0.0664 100.00 -0.1581 100.00
* The elasticity estimates measure the percentage changes of the rural poverty incidence with respect to road infrastructure investments, working through different channels.
Ghana: Indirect Evidence
Steady growth over 24 years propelled by steady capital expenditures has been assessed to be pro-poor (Aryeetey and McKay 2005);
Infrastructure investments (10% of total expenditures) have risen steadily in roads, health and education infrastructure and rural water
3530
39
6468
38
19
52
23
11
25
39
59
29
20
40
8 1017
24
46
1713
29
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Public SectorEmployment
PrivateFormal
Employment
PrivateInformal
Employment
ExportFarming
Food CropFarming
Non-FarmSelf-
Empolyment
Non-Working
Ghana
Main Economic Activity
Inci
denc
e (in
per
cent
)
1991/92 1998/99 2005/06
Poverty Incidence by Main Economic ActivityPoverty Incidence by Main Economic Activity
60
44
26
48
57
41
65 63
88
67
52
27
48
5
4438
28
36
69
8488
40
18 20
1215
31
20
29
52
88
70
29
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
WesternCentral Gt.Accra
Eastern Volta Ashanti BrongAhafo
Northern UpperWest
UpperEast
Ghana
Administrative Regions
Inci
den
ce (
in p
erce
nta
ge)
1991/92 1998/99 2005/06
Poverty Incidence by Administrative Regions
CONCLUSION: MAKING INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT WORK FOR THE POOR
Private participation is not necessarily the problem;
For water and energy, not being able to influence technology is what makes it difficult to sustain infrastructure;
Use new regulatory regimes to enforce standards that take into account the poverty of the poor. New research should help.
End
Thank You