财视中国：整个亚洲PPP模式的现状是怎么样的?中国能从全球PPP项目中学习到哪些经验?What is the Asian situation of PPP, what has been the international experience and how China can learn from it?
Adolfo Guerrero: Asian PPP experiences are very diverse. Wide in a sense of the variety of projects and sectors, and on the particularities of the implementation processes. Even in China there are some interesting ones. There are good experiences to learn from, but even those consider good experiences because the projects are moving forward with no major hiccups, may not have been done in an a very orthodox manner.
整个亚洲PPP项目是很多样性的。多样性体现在各个领域、项目以及在项目实施过程中的特殊性。即使在中国国内也有很多差异性。有很多好的项目经验可以学习，但即使被认为是“好的经验”，也可能由于项目过程中没有遇到一些实际阻碍，可能不是常规意义的学习案例。
There are minimum standards though, like making sure there is sufficient risk transfer and competition to arrive to these arrangements that in Asian countries are not always taken sufficiently into consideration.
好的项目的基本的标准是，项目必须包含足够的风险转移，并且通过充分竞争达成最终项目安排，而亚洲许多国家对这两点常常考虑不足。
Although most of the time poorly documented, failures are cases where you can get interesting learning experiences.
而一些不良的、失败的案例，尽管常常不被仔细记录，恰恰是我们可以从中学习经验的好机会。
In this regard, I think that China could learn from making sure that the specific adaptation that PPPs will take into China are keeping the minimum standards that will maintain sufficient credibility in the market for this process to remain efficient. Another important lesson is to acquire the concepts of success and not the items of success, in other words, not to copy from previous projects. These projects are very sensitive to the environmental conditions where they are created, to such extend that a successful project in the same place in a different timeline may result into failure. Every project needs to be specifically adapted to the circumstances and there is not such a thing as standard projects.
从这个角度来说，我认为中国其实可以从中国项目本身的特性入手，保持一些基本的标准，来确保项目的充分可信，这样整个市场就能保持高效。另一方面可以学习的是获取成功的理念而不是成功的条款，换而言之，不要去简单的复制过去的项目。很多成功的项目都依赖于当时的环境和条件而成功的。即使同样的项目在同样的地方但是由于时间不同也可能失败。每个项目都需要根据其特性，其环境来评估，这里没有什么标准的案例。
财视中国：快速增长的基建需求成了政府的重担，PPP可能是一条出路，那么政府应该担任什么角色呢?当项目失败或者项目所处的环境发生变化是，应该采取什么补救措施?The fast increasing of infrastructure needs become a financial burden on officials, using PPP maybe one way out, but what role should government take?What remedies are there when projects fail or are faced with changing circumstances?
Adolfo Guerrero:PPPs are one instrument to contribute to mobilize resources (not only financial) for public officials to do their job, which is providing public infrastructures and public services, but they are not the magic wand.
PPP是政府机关调动资源的一个工具(不光从融资角度而言)，它可以提供基础设施和公关服务，但他不是魔杖。
In countries with lots of experience and successful PPP programs this procurement modality accounts only for around 15% of their total infrastructure investment so it is naïve to think that PPP will solve all the problems, in particular all financial problems. PPPs are to be used when they provide real benefits provided by sufficient risk transfer and real value for money, if not, private sector involvement becomes unnecessary.
The main role of the government is making sure these two elements are there in whatever project they apply private sector participation, and doing it with sufficient criteria. At the end this is a partnership where every party wins something.
即使在PPP项目执行很成功的国家，PPP项目占他们整个公共采购的比例也就在15%左右。如果认为PPP能解决所有的问题，特别是融资问题，那是很幼稚的。PPP项目只有在具有足够风险转移和物有所值这两个基础上，才能真正带来收益，如果没有这些基础私人部门不会愿意介入这样的项目的。政府部门的工作是在任何私营部门参与的项目中确保这两个基础要素的存在，并且设立严格标准，毕竟这是一个合作关系，双方都要获利。
Changes are inevitable and unpredictable, but not necessarily uncontrollable. There is sufficient experience in the world to produce contracts that can mitigate most common issues. It is a matter of getting the right advice.
变化是不可避免也不可预期的，当然这并不意味面对变化时项目会失控。全球有大量的案例和方法可以合理的迁移到这些一般性的变化。问题的关键是要得到正确的指导。
For those which don’t, the principle of partnership must apply. This is like creating a company with partners. You don’t have everything tied up from the beginning, but if the principle of partnership is strong adaptation to the circumstances will not be so difficult.
此时，合作伙伴精神就很重要了。PPP项目就像组建一个公司一样，你不可能一开始把所有都设定好，但是如果能一开始就强化这是一个合作的过程，并被参与各方高度认可的话，整个项目执行过程将会容易很多。
财视中国：投资人在哪里，如何吸引他们，他们的预期和底线又是什么?Where is the investors, how to attack them, what are their expectations and limits?
Adolfo Guerrero:Investors can be anywhere. Typically the first ones to be attracted should be the domestic ones, but it is not easy to get Chinese sponsors. There is neither sufficient culture yet, nor do many of them provide a wide spectrum of services, which requires cooperation with other companies. I think this is the biggest constrain for projects to prosper. Opening to foreign companies will be a smart choice. If they know their businesses well they will not dare to do it alone, so Chinese companies will benefit of the learning process and then these Chinese companies will be able to work and compete abroad in these businesses in the future.
投资人其实到处都有。通常来讲，首先要在国内找你的投资人，但是中国找投资人不太容易。中国目前还比较缺乏这个氛围，而且许多公司服务范围比较窄，这就要求其与其他公司合作参与项目。我认为这是目前PPP在中国大发展最大的障碍。对外资开放可能是一个很好的选择。如果外资对自身公司有清晰认识，它是不敢贸然单独接下项目的，它必然会找中国本地了解国情的公司一起参与，这样中国企业就有机会去学习，并且在不久的将来可以去承接项目并甚至能去海外参与PPP项目。
To attract investors, foreign or domestic, public officials have to make sure their projects are sound, because resources are limited and only those who prepare better projects will be able to attract those resources.
要吸引无论是国外还是国内的投资人，政府部门必须确保项目前期准备充分。因为资源是有限的，只有更好的项目才能吸引投资人。
Money is, however, very cautious, even fearful. Therefore the implementation of the first projects is crucial. Projects implemented in a rush with low fundamentals can easily fail, paralyzing future investments and taking the whole program off the board.
资金本身是谨小慎微的。因此第一个项目的执行很关键。项目准备不充分，实施时又赶时间是很容易导致失败的。这将对未来的投资项目产生不利影响，最终导致整个项目的失败。
It is said that you have to be able to walk before you think on running. Although China has all the conditions to surpass any other program in private investment of public infrastructure, the first steps need to be taken carefully, and the quality of execution in the first projects will weight on the evolution of the whole PPP program.
古语云：在你想要跑之前先要学会走路。尽管目前任何私人部门投资公共基础建设的项目，在中国客观条件都是允许的，但是首先必须要小心谨慎，第一个项目执行的效果将对整个PPP项目产生举足轻重的影响。
This process is not limitless, but it is difficult to say how far can go. The fact is that PPPs are a very flexible instrument for public officials, that if it is well structured and executed can go really far, but people should be realistic about what can it be used for and how.
PPP模式并不是无限量的，问题的关键是如何使它更有效。事实上PPP是政府一个很灵活的工具，如果能很好的规划和执行将产生巨大的效益，但是人们需要切合实际的运用这个工具。
财视中国：作为银行、资本市场参与ppp项目最主要的诉求是什么?What is the key requirement of bank lenders and capital markets to do such investment?
Adolfo Guerrero:I may not be the right person to answer these questions. You should ask the markets. But wherever this process is successful, lenders and capital markets involved ask for pretty much the same things: good projects, with sound fundamentals (technical and financial), executed by professionals in their discipline under a fair play environment where disputes can be settled according to rules that are known and apply the same to all parties. The more you get of all these, the more parties you can involve in the investment and financing.
我可能不是回答这个问题最合适的人，这个问题应该问市场。但是，不管怎样，作为出借人和资本市场都有着同样的需求：好的项目，好的基础(技术层面和资金层面)，专业的人才在一个公平的市场竞争氛围来执行这个项目，任何问题、争执能在各方都认可的合理的规则下进行。这些条件满足的越充分，将越有可能获得投资和融资。
财视中国：PPP项目的资产证券化是否会成为风险管理的一个好的方法，投行、产业基金和其他金融机构如何从中获益?Will PPP securitization being a good way of risk management, how can investment banking, industrial funds and other FIs benefit from it?
Adolfo Guerrero:Securitization can help to make the market more dynamic, but will not provide any better risk management, at least not at the project level. What will help is to make greenfield projects cheaper since the biggest risks are at the beginning of the project and securitization can help to refinance at more moderate rates. In addition, it can release equity from sponsors to board other projects, so they expertise can be used in more projects.
资产证券化可以使整个市场更加活跃，但并不能提供更好的风险管理的方式，至少从项目层面而言。降低新项目的成本将有所帮助，因为最大的风险是在项目和资产证券化的开始阶段，而证券化可以用更好的利率再融资。此外，它可以让投资人释放股权，参与其他项目，使更多的项目受惠。
For the authorities though, it may be a source of uncertainty that will have to be regulated to a certain extend. Funds are seldom organized for 25 years or more than PPP contracts can last.
从政府部门的角度考虑，资产证券化一般情况下也存在着一种不确定性，基金很少能存在超过25年的或者超过PPP项目的时间的。
We have to emphasize that PPP is a procurement process for the administration to procure services and infrastructures (normally together) and not a financial mechanism. These financial instruments that are coming along these processes and investments need to be put behind the real meaning, at the service of the PPP contract and not the other way around.
需要强调的是PPP是一个采购公共服务和基础设施(通常是一体的)的过程，并不是一个融资机制。伴随着采购过程和投资所使用的融资方式应被放在实际意义的后面，它是为PPP合同服务的，我们不应该本末倒置。
财视中国：中国PPP项目和其他项目的主要不同体现在哪里?What is main differences of PPP from China to others?
Adolfo Guerrero:Many and a few. I think there are very few real PPP arrangements in China and I am hoping that with all the new regulations and directives of MOF and NDRC there will be many more real PPPs. This is, contracts arrangements with non-public authorities (private sector) that provide assets, investments or services (or all of the above) with sufficient risks transfer to the private party.
我认为中国正真意义上的PPP项目目前还很少，但是伴随着财政部和国家发改委推行的新政策，我也希望未来中国会出现很多真正意义上的PPP项目。那就是，非公共部门(私人部门)提供资产、投资或者服务(或者以上所有)，并运用私人部门充分的风险转移功能。
I think that the biggest difference between PPPs in China and with other countries is the special characteristic of the lack of real private sector to deliver public services or facilities. In most countries, there are a few, or a lot, of private sector capable to provide many services and they are typically more efficient that any administration. This is because private sector must overcome competition if they want to survive, the public sector does not have this motivation. In China, coming from a socialist regime, the public sector has occupied the whole market space. Trying to adapt to the market condition, these state instruments have spanned off as SOEs, but they are far from operating in real market conditions, and therefore not yet able, or willing, to provide significant efficiencies.
我认为，中国PPP项目与其他国家最大的不同在于特殊的国家属性造成了真正意义上能提供公共服务或设施的私人部门的缺失。大多数国家，或多或少私人部门都能提供服务或基础设施，并且比政府部门更高效。这是因为私人部门想要生存就需要应对外部的竞争，，而政府部门则没有这样的动力。在中国，社会主义政治体制下，公共部门覆盖了整个市场。公共部门大量通过国有企业提供服务，而这些试图适应市场经济的国有企业其实力真正的市场经济还很远，自然也就不能或不愿提供高效的服务了。
It is true that PPPs in China cannot move ahead without SOE participation, but they will have to behave as real private sector if China wants PPPs to be an advantage and not a drag.
在中国想操作没有国有企业的PPP项目是不可能的，但是如果中国真的想利用PPP推进经济而不是产生反效果的话，国有企业就必须更市场化、更像私营部门。
BHI客服1
