Financing National Infrastructure: The Role of Sovereign Capital Mobilization Strategies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22399/ijcesen.5175Keywords:
Sovereign capital mobilization, infrastructure financing, public-private partnerships, development finance institutions, asset recycling, blended financeAbstract
Financing national infrastructure remains a critical challenge for governments seeking to support sustainable economic growth and development. This study examines the role of sovereign capital mobilization strategies in enhancing infrastructure financing capacity and improving infrastructure development outcomes. Using a quantitative research design, the study integrates composite indices, panel regression analysis, and canonical correlation analysis to evaluate the relationship between sovereign capital mobilization mechanisms and infrastructure investment performance. The findings reveal that sovereign capital mobilization strategies, including development finance capacity, public-private partnership intensity, asset recycling strategies, and blended finance utilization, significantly contribute to improved infrastructure investment intensity and financing efficiency. The results further indicate strong multivariate relationships between sovereign capital mechanisms and infrastructure development indicators. Trend analysis also demonstrates a consistent increase in infrastructure investment aligned with improvements in sovereign capital mobilization strategies. The study highlights the importance of diversified financing approaches, institutional capacity, and governance frameworks in mobilizing sovereign capital for infrastructure development. Overall, the findings suggest that sovereign capital mobilization provides a sustainable pathway for addressing infrastructure financing gaps and strengthening long-term economic development.
References
[1] Adshead, D., Thacker, S., Fuldauer, L. I., & Hall, J. W. (2019). Delivering on the Sustainable Development Goals through long-term infrastructure planning. Global Environmental Change, 59, 101975.
[2] Ahmad, E. (2021). Multilevel financing of sustainable infrastructure in China—Policy options for inclusive, resilient and green growth. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development, 5(1).
[3] Amin, H., Abdul-Rahman, A. R., & Abdul-Razak, D. (2013). An integrative approach for understanding Islamic home financing adoption in Malaysia. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 31(7), 544-573.
[4] Annamalai, T. R., & Hari, S. (2016). Innovative financial intermediation and long term capital pools for infrastructure: A case study of infrastructure debt funds. Journal of financial management of property and construction, 21(3), 231-252.
[5] Clark, R., Reed, J., & Sunderland, T. (2018). Bridging funding gaps for climate and sustainable development: Pitfalls, progress and potential of private finance. Land use policy, 71, 335-346.
[6] Dando, N., & Swift, T. (2003). Transparency and assurance minding the credibility gap. Journal of business ethics, 44(2), 195-200.
[7] Ehigiamusoe, K. U., & Samsurijan, M. S. (2021). What matters for finance‐growth nexus? A critical survey of macroeconomic stability, institutions, financial and economic development. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 26(4), 5302-5320.
[8] Foster, V., Rana, A., & Gorgulu, N. (2022). Understanding public spending trends for infrastructure in developing countries. Policy research working paper, 9903.
[9] Gatti, S., & Chiarella, C. (2020). The future of infrastructure investing: Challenges and opportunities for investors and asset managers. Disruption in the infrastructure sector: Challenges and opportunities for developers, investors and asset managers, 169-207.
[10] Gelb, A., Tordo, S., Halland, H., Arfaa, N., & Smith, G. (2014). Sovereign wealth funds and long-term development finance: risks and opportunities. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, (6776).
[11] Havemann, T., Negra, C., & Werneck, F. (2022). Blended finance for agriculture: exploring the constraints and possibilities of combining fi nancial instruments for sustainable transitions. In Social innovation and sustainability transition (pp. 347-358). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
[12] Ismath Bacha, O., & Mirakhor, A. (2018). Funding development infrastructure without leverage: A risk‐sharing alternative using innovative sukuk structures. The World Economy, 41(3), 752-762.
[13] Kirkpatrick, L. O., & Smith, M. P. (2011). The infrastructural limits to growth: Rethinking the urban growth machine in times of fiscal crisis. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 35(3), 477-503.
[14] Lateefat, T., & Bankole, F. A. (2021). Capital allocation strategies in asset management firms to maximize efficiency and support growth objectives. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation, 2(2), 478-495.
[15] Luo, P., Wang, H., & Yang, Z. (2016). Investment and financing for SMEs with a partial guarantee and jump risk. European Journal of Operational Research, 249(3), 1161-1168.
[16] Marcelo, D., Mandri-Perrott, C., House, S., & Schwartz, J. (2016). Prioritizing infrastructure investment: a framework for government decision making. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, (7674).
[17] Oyedele, J. B. (2014). Infrastructure investment and the emerging role of institutional investors: The case of pension funds and sovereign wealth funds. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 3(1), 43-54.
[18] Oyegbade, I. K., Igwe, A. N., Ofodile, O. C., & Azubuike, C. (2022). Advancing SME financing through public-private partnerships and low-cost lending: A framework for inclusive growth. Iconic Research and Engineering Journals, 6(2), 289-302.
[19] Prakash, N., & Sethi, M. (2022). A review of innovative bond instruments for sustainable development in Asia. International Journal of Innovation Science, 14(3-4), 630-647.
[20] Prelipcean, G., & Boscoianu, M. (2014). A hybrid framework for SME financing based on the mix between governmental support and the use of a specialized investment fund in the actual context of a slow recovery after crises and turbulences. Procedia Economics and Finance, 15, 738-745.
[21] Schena, P. J., & Gouett, M. (2022). Re-imaging development finance: sustainability, catalytic capital, and the role of sovereign wealth funds. In Regulation of State-Controlled Enterprises: An Interdisciplinary and Comparative Examination (pp. 307-326). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
[22] Schena, P. J., Braunstein, J., & Ali, A. (2018). The case for economic development through sovereign investment: a paradox of scarcity?. Global policy, 9(3), 365-376.
[23] Singer, D. A. (2004). Capital rules: The domestic politics of international regulatory harmonization. International Organization, 58(3), 531-565.
[24] Sperling, E., & Ross, C. (2018). Strategically Aligning Capital Improvement Prioritization to Performance Goals. Transportation Research Record, 2672(51), 68-78.
[25] Srinivasu, B., & Rao, P. S. (2013). Infrastructure development and economic growth: Prospects and perspective. Journal of business management and Social sciences research, 2(1), 81-91.
[26] Wang, T., Jiao, H., Xu, Z., & Yang, X. (2018). Entrepreneurial finance meets government investment at initial public offering: The role of minority state ownership. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 26(2), 97-117.
[27] Xu, J., & Carey, R. (2015). Post‐2015 Global Governance of Official Development Finance: Harnessing the Renaissance of Public Entrepreneurship. Journal of International Development, 27(6), 856-880.
[28] Zou, L., Shen, J. H., Zhang, J., & Lee, C. C. (2022). What is the rationale behind China's infrastructure investment under the Belt and Road Initiative. Journal of Economic Surveys, 36(3), 605-633.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 International Journal of Computational and Experimental Science and Engineering
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
