Search results

Developing countries are increasingly looking to private sector investment for infrastructure development. Successful development of private infrastructure projects, however, depends on adequate availability of long-term debt to complement private sector equity. As domestic bond markets in many emerging countries are not very deep, availability of long-term debt funding for infrastructure has been limited. Recently, a new form of financial intermediation has emerged in India with the creation of infrastructure debt funds (IDFs) to create capital pools for long-term debt funding. This paper aims to analyse the effectiveness of IDFs for financing infrastructure projects.

This paper uses a case study approach. The case studies were written using both secondary and primary information. Secondary information was obtained from various sources such as policy papers, websites and other published sources. Primary information was obtained from interviews with the top management of three IDFs. Information obtained from multiple sources was triangulated for consistency and correctness.

IDFs have emerged as an effective intermediation mechanism for attracting long-term capital by offering a new investment product with appropriate risk-adjusted returns. For the fund seekers, IDFs are able to provide long-term capital at lower rates and higher flexibility. Unlike commercial banks, IDFs are able to add value to the projects apart from funding by periodic monitoring of the projects.

Creating new forms of financial intermediation can help in reducing the financing gap for infrastructure projects, especially in emerging countries.

IDFs have been analysed from a perspective of financial intermediation. The effectiveness of IDFs in bridging the funding shortfall has been evaluated from multiple perspectives.

This paper aims to identify gaps and critical issues in policy framework for infrastructure debt fund (IDF) to become financially viable in the Indian context. Growth of any economy is dependent on successful implementation of infrastructure projects. However, infrastructure development is linked to availability of equity and debt funds to finance these projects. IDF is an instrument which aims at enabling financing of infrastructure.

The exploratory research adopted is qualitative and based on secondary data related to infrastructure needs, challenges, factors influencing infrastructure financing and options available for infrastructure financing in the Indian context. It investigates the relationship between external factors, internal factors and viability of IDF and provides recommendations to policy makers to roll-out an enabling policy and regulatory environment.

Findings show that issues such as entry barriers for banks, insufficient tax incentives, restrictions on type of projects to be considered for funding and meeting the expectation of low-cost funds need to be addressed so that IDFs can contribute toward funding requirement of the infrastructure sector.

IDFs have been recently introduced in India and the use of primary and secondary data has been limited. Comparison of IDF guidelines in India with guidelines for similar instruments in developed countries has been left for a later stage.

Value of this study is that it identifies the issues in current guidelines of IDF through the understanding of the policy and regulatory framework that governs IDF. The study also makes recommendations to the government and regulators which would enable IDF to become a viable instrument.

After studying and analysing this case, students would be able to evaluate and understand the importance and need of an infrastructure sector in a country, its inherent risks and scope of infrastructure investment and financing in India – National Infrastructure Pipeline and the important role of Non-Banking Finance Company’s (NBFC) vis-à-vis banks in infrastructure financing in India; critically analyse and recommend alternative decisions in a business problem situation using multi-criteria decision analysis, which is a tool used for business portfolio analysis; understand and evaluate the corporate portfolio management (CPM) tools used for an optimum portfolio mix to turn around companies; identify and suggest an optimum portfolio mix to turn around a finance company using CPM assessment applied to Pidun matrix; and recommend operational and strategic levers for successful turnaround implementation by using the integrated canvas on turnaround.

On 10 May 2020, in New Delhi, India, J. Ray took charge as a full-time director of an Indian Non-Banking Finance Company – Infrastructure Finance Company (NBFC-IFC). The NBFC-IFC of the Indian Government extended long-term financial assistance to infrastructure projects in India. During the financial year (FY) 2017–2018 till FY 2019–2020, the company suffered substantial losses to the tune of US$13.7bn, with profitability experiencing a notable decline – return on assets at a negligible 0.11% and return on equity of only 0.68%.

The NBFC-IFC had a declining yield on advances at 7.05%, net interest margins (NIMs) of 2.08% against a high cost of borrowing at 7.66%, a declining loan book (by 4.35%) of US$336.27bn and a fast-deteriorating asset quality with highest ever non-performing assets (NPAs) at 19.70% of its loan book. Such financial parameters, compared with that of the industry average of banks and finance companies, meant that the NBFC-IFC Ray had taken over was fast bleeding and was on the brink of being declared a sick company. In comparison, private and other government players had profitable and much healthier financials, and Ray felt that there was a need for improvement. To make things worse, Ray got to know that the Indian Government was in the final stages of setting up a new development finance institution focused on long-term infrastructure financing in India. Ray realized the question was not only of the NBFC-IFC remaining relevant but also of its existence in the fast-evolving sector. Ray wondered what could his his integrated canvas be for a turnaround strategy that could include effective management of an optimal portfolio mix.

With a healthy capital-to-risk (weighted) assets ratio of 30.85% and a satisfactorily improved net worth of US$103.1bn, in the given Reserve Bank of India regulatory provisions for the NBFC-IFC including restrictive exposure norms and NBFC-IFC’s operational mandate prescribed by the Indian Government, Ray had to shift the product and sectorial investment of the NBFC-IFC to reduce the NPAs, increase loan book size and improve the yield of advances and its NIM to effectively turn around the company’s profitability. Ray realized that he needed his team to evaluate and select a product and sector strategy for this change.

The present case of financing investment in infrastructure is interesting for implementation in developing economies because a lack of infrastructure is a common problem and there is a necessity of achieving a more developed infrastructure system to support accelerated economic growth in these countries. This case can be used in elective courses on corporate finance strategy and corporate portfolio management for infrastructure finance companies. This case can be taught in elective courses in post-graduate and MBA programs. This case can also be included in management development programs (MDP), executive MBA programs and executive-level courses that have subjects such as corporate finance strategy, corporate portfolio management and strategy management that focus on turnaround strategies including portfolio management for banks and finance companies.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 11: Strategy.

The paper aims to understand the factors that have limited the development of this market in India. With a conservative bank-based economy in the backdrop and with the Central Bank pulling the strings, the sovereign debt market occupies the most space in the bonds universe of India. The latter and almost minuscule portion of this market is occupied by the corporate and industrial houses that have forayed into the market to raise finances. This has led to a cycle where lack of participation leads to lack of liquidity and underdeveloped rating mechanisms which further pressurizes the development of this market in India.

The paper is designed as a literature review which has attempted to identify the commonly agreed upon factors that have constrained the development of Corporate Bond markets in India especially and some other emerging economies who are successful or unsuccessful in their attempt to establish a corporate bond markets. These factors have then been categorized into broader heads and commented upon as a part of the analysis.

Corporate bond markets in India, although steadily progressing, is still impeded by the nature of the market itself. While the necessary steps have been taken to implement some of the recommendations by the Expert Committee, the response solicited has not quite been as expected. The poor liquidity, weak rating-mechanisms, absence of standardization and disclosure nomenclatures and illiquidity in the government bond market itself need to be addressed objectively.

The research adopted attempts to validate prior research and the attempts by regulators to implement an action plan. However, further progress on the changing scenarios is encouraged to be tested through a quantitative analysis.

The government and the Central Bank have constantly emphasized the importance of developing the Corporate debt market. Several studies have attempted to analyze the factors that have crippled the growth and steps taken by the Central Bank and Securities and Exchange Board of India by appointing an Expert Committee. This paper has attempted to visit all these factors and analyze the attempts to overcome by the Expert Committee including the backdrop of other nations who have a vibrant corporate debt market today. It sets the tone for further quantitative or statistical analysis.

The case describes the structure of Infrastructure Investment Trusts (InvITs) created and launched in Indian markets in 2017. Besides introducing InvITs and their potential role in relaxing the financing constraint created by the lack of an active corporate debt market in India, the case can help in analysing why the market is discounting the IndiGrid unit price relative to its issue price. It also offers an opportunity to value IndiGrid's Patran acquisition.

This study aims to explore the perceptions of investors regarding the risks associated with funding renewable energy projects in India, as well as the various factors that influence these perceptions. The investigation is limited to debt providers and seeks to pinpoint the primary risks that bankers perceive and the drivers that shape these perceptions.

This study draws on interviews and surveys of Indian bank executives, investigating how finance providers perceive risks in the Indian context and the factors driving such perceptions. Qualitative interviews have been used for operationalizing “risk perception” within the renewable energy domain, followed by a quantitative survey and exploratory factor analysis.

The authors find that experience and capacity are the most important factors that account for 30% of the overall variance. The second factor, which accounts for 15% of the variance, includes the perceived risks in funding renewable energy projects as compared to infrastructure projects. Among individual risks, the authors find that bankers perceive technological risk to be the lowest (5%) and contractual and regulatory risks as the highest (66%) in renewable energy projects.

The study contextualizes risk perception toward renewable energy investments in the Indian context by drawing from the risk perception literature and qualitative interviews with senior bankers. It presents empirical evidence on the decision-making behavior of bankers, who are important stakeholders of the renewable energy ecosystem. The main limitation of the study is the relatively small sample, and generalizing the results to the broader population might require a larger sample. This will facilitate the use of confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling, which can facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of risk perceptions in renewables financing.

Insights gained can be used to provide policy recommendations for improving the financing ecosystem of renewable energy projects. The research significantly contributes to the extant literature within the renewable energy financing domain for emerging economies.

The purpose of this study is to empirically investigate the variables having an impact on profitability of public private partnerships (PPPs) in India using a balanced panel data of 171 unlisted PPPs from different infrastructure sectors such as road, power generation, real estate and ports.

Estimations were done using Arellano–Bond dynamic panel data estimation and seemingly unrelated regression models on a balanced panel data of 855 firm-years for 171 unlisted PPPs in India. To further test the estimation robustness, panel-corrected standard errors model was used.

The study findings indicate that in firm-specific factors, leverage, size, non-debt tax shield, growth and risk have significant positive impact on PPPs’ profitability, whereas in macroeconomic factors, only inflation has significant positive relationship. Although the relationship of all determinants is in sync with various theories and approaches, but these are not significant. Using the robustness test, the results are found to be robust and consistent with resource-based view and strategy-structure-performance approaches.

As PPPs are gaining prominence in the development of infrastructural resources, their profitability is of significant importance to drive private investments in infrastructure development, the identification of factors which determine profitability is critical for researchers, practitioners, policymakers and fund providers such as equity investors and debt providers.

The empirical literature on profitability determinants is focused on various sectors including small and mid-size enterprises (SMEs) and micro firms, but to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study, in both developed and developing economies, to empirically investigate the determinants of profitability for PPPs.

This case is based on the IPO of the first Infrastructure Investment Trust (InvIT) in India that was based on a portfolio of operating toll roads. InvIT enabled the construction company, which was also the sole equity investor, to release part of its equity to future toll road investments. The case describes the structure and functioning of the InvIT. It requires participants to assess its future potential for providing long term financing to not only toll roads but also other infrastructure projects.

This study aims to test the dynamic impact of public debt and economic growth on newly democratized African countries (South Africa and Namibia) and compare the findings with those of newly democratized European countries (Germany and Ukraine) during the period 1990–2022.

The methodology involves three stages: identifying the appropriate transition variable, assessing the linearity between public debt and economic growth and selecting the order m of the transition function. The linearity test helps identify the nature of relationships between public debt and economic growth. The wild cluster bootstrap-Lagrange Multiplier test is used to evaluate the model’s appropriateness. All these tests would be executed using the Lagrange Multiplier type of test.

The results signify the policy switch, as the authors find that the relationship between public debt and economic growth is characterized by two transitions that symbolize that the current stage of the relationship is beyond the U-shape; however, an S-shape. The results show that for newly democratized African countries, the threshold during the first waves was 50% of GDP, represented by a U-shape, which then transits to an inverted U-shape with a threshold of 65% of GDP. Then, for the European case, it was 60% of GDP, which is now 72% of GDP.

The findings suggest that an escalating level of public debt has a negative impact on economic growth; therefore, it is important to implement fiscal discipline, prioritize government spending and reduce reliance on debt financing. This can be achieved by focusing on revenue generation, implementing effective taxation policies, reducing wasteful expenditures and promoting investment and productivity-enhancing measures.