Dias, A and Ioannou, P G (1995) Debt capacity and optimal capital structure for privately financed infrastructure projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 121(4), pp. 404-414. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Concession agreements can be used by governments to induce the private sector to develop and operate many types of infrastructure projects. Under this type of arrangement, several private-sector companies join forces, become project promoters, and form a separate company that becomes responsible for financing, building, and operating the facility. Before this company can be formed, prospective promoters must determine how to fund the associated construction and startup costs. They must decide how much to borrow, how much to infuse from their own funds, and how much to raise from outside investors. Typically, such projects must repay any debt obligations through their own net operating income, and do not provide the lenders with any other collateral (off-balance-sheet financing). Thus, the possibility of a costly bankruptcy becomes much more likely. In this paper, we show that under these circumstances the amount of debt that a project can accommodate (its debt capacity) is less than 100% debt financing. The amount of debt that maximizes the investors' return on equity is less than the project's debt capacity, and the amount of debt that maximizes the project's net present value is even smaller. Exceeding these debt amounts and moving towards debt capacity should be avoided because it can rapidly erode the project's value to the investors. An example illustrates these concepts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | promoter, financing, debt financing, startup, income, bankruptcy, infrastructure project, capital structure, agreements, investor, private sector, net present value |
| Subjects: | financial risk, sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, industry analysis, business, contract formation, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here