2015 년도민간투자정책연구보고서 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아 민간투자사업비교연구 김강수외

한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구 김강수외

2015 년도민간투자정책연구보고서 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아 민간투자사업비교연구 김강수외

< > 김강수선임연구위원 연구총괄 정민웅전문위원고유은전문연구원박미수전문연구원 Alma Porciuncula 필리핀 PPP 컨설턴트 Danang Parikesit 인도네시아가자마다 (Gadjah Mada) 대학교수

목차 제 1 장서론 1 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 3 제 절민간투자법률및제도 3 민간투자제도의규범체계 3 민간투자제도의변천 5 민간투자추진방식 10 민간투자추진가능대상시설 13 제 절민간투자사업의추진절차 15 정부고시사업 15 민간제안사업 21 임대형민간투자사업 23 제 절민간투자사업관련기관 25 민간투자사업주관부처 25 민간투자사업지원기관 27 제 절민간투자사업의재정지원 31 재정지원 31 재정위험관리방안 36 제 절민간투자사업수행실적 42 민간투자사업추진실적 42 사업현황 54

목차 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 57 제 절필리핀의경제현황 57 경제현황 57 재정현황및정책방향 61 사회기반시설에대한투자전망 62 제 절민간투자법률및제도 64 민간투자제도의규범체계 64 민간투자제도의변천 68 민간투자추진방식 71 민간투자추진가능대상시설 72 제 절민간투자사업의추진절차 73 정부고시사업 73 민간제안사업 80 평가및사업시행자지정절차 83 제 절민간투자사업관련기관 84 민간투자사업주관부처 84 민간투자사업지원기관 86 민간투자사업기타관련기관 88 제 절민간투자사업의재정지원 90 재정지원개요 90 재정위험관리 94 제 절민간투자사업수행실적 99 민간투자사업추진실적 99 사업현황 103 제 절필리핀제도의시사점 104 위험관리의제도화 105

민간제안방식추진 106 사업데이터보고 취합및관리강화 106 사업시행을위한역량강화지속 107 지방정부를위한사업개발기금필요 107 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 108 제 절인도네시아의경제현황및투자전망 108 인도네시아국가계획 108 거시경제동향 110 사회기반시설투자정책및전망 112 제 절민간투자법률및제도 118 민간투자제도의규범체계 118 민간투자제도의변천 119 민간투자사업추진방식 124 민간투자추진가능대상시설 125 제 절민간투자사업의추진절차 125 정부고시사업 125 민간제안사업 136 제 절민간투자사업관련기관 138 민간투자사업주관부처 138 민간투자사업지원기관 141 민간투자사업기타관련기관 144 제 절민간투자사업수행실적 145 민간투자사업추진실적 145 사업현황 146 제 절민간투자사업의재정지원 150 재정지원 150

목차 인도네시아예산편성 154 제 절인도네시아제도의시사점및개선방안 158 사업을위한거시경제정책의부재 158 정부예산편성과정에 사업계획단계통합의필요성 159 지방정부의 사업활성화필요 159 재무부산하 센터의역할강화 160 토지수용을위한정부의재원조달유연성제고 160 재정투자사업과 사업의조달과정통합 161 실시협약 재협상및분쟁조정해결방안필요 161 인도네시아사회기반시설은행설립 162 공기업의역할재조명 162 사업관련정보공개 163 네트워크구축및 정책수립 163 제5 장민간투자제도비교분석 165 제 절한국 인도네시아 필리핀민간투자제도분석 165 민간투자규범체계 166 민간투자추진방식 166 추진가능대상시설 167 사업추진절차 168 민간투자사업관련기관및역할 169 정부지원 170 참고문헌 174 부록 179 Ⅰ 181 Ⅱ 238

표목차 표 한국의민간투자규범체계 표 한국의민간투자법령의변천 표 민간투자 사업지정의일반원칙 민간투자사업기본계획 표 민간투자사업기본계획제 조민간투자 사업의추진방식 표 민간투자사업추진가능사회기반시설유형 민간투자법제 조 표 보증의종류및지급률 표 자금조달활성화방안 표 예비타당성조사단계민간투자적격성판단대상 표 추진방식별민간투자사업현황 표 추진방식및발주방식별민간투자사업현황 표 대상시설별민간투자사업현황 표 추진방식및대상시설별민간투자사업현황 표 연도및추진방식별민간투자사업현황 표 연도및추진주체별민간투자사업현황 표 연도및발주방식별민간투자사업현황 표 추진주체별민간투자사업현황 표 추진주체및추진방식별민간투자사업현황 표 추진주체및대상시설별민간투자사업현황 표 발주방식별민간투자사업현황 표 발주방식및대상시설별민간투자사업현황 표 추진단계별민간투자사업현황 표 추진단계및대상시설별민간투자사업현황 표 수익형사업의추진단계별현황 표 임대형사업의추진단계별현황

표목차 표 필리핀 구성요소추이 표 성장및인플레이션전망 표 대비민간투자사업협약체결현황 표 필리핀민간투자사업추진방식 표 사업승인기관및기준 표 정부고시사업추진절차 단계평가방식 표 정부고시사업추진절차 단계평가방식 표 민간제안사업추진절차 표 사업에대한정부재정지원유형 표 사업의위험배분분석 표 필리핀민간투자사업현황 년 표 조달단계의 사업 년 표 인도네시아경제동향 년 표 인도네시아사회기반시설부문별필요투자규모 년 표 인도네시아 법률연혁 표 사회기반시설분야투자규모 기준 표 년 민간투자사업현황 표 민간투자사업리스트 년 기준 표 사업주체에따른민간투자사업현황 년기준 표 사업자가지정된민간투자사업현황 년 기준 표 지방정부예산주요문서 표 예산기획연도일정표 표 년예산편성과정예시 표 한국 필리핀 인도네시아의민간투자제도비교

그림목차 그림 수익형민간투자사업 추진절차 정부고시사업 그림 정부고시사업의대상사업지정절차 재정사업으로예비타당성조사를신청한경우 그림 정부고시사업의대상사업지정절차 정부고시민자사업으로예비타당성조사및타당성분석을신청한경우 그림 수익형민자사업 추진절차 민간제안사업 그림 임대형민자사업 의정부고시사업추진절차 그림 인프라펀드투자구조 그림 보고서에서권장하는사업추진방식결정단계 그림 예산순계대비민간투자사업재정부담비율추정 그림 연도별사업수및총투자비추이 그림 연도별사업수및평균투자비추이 그림 대비사회기반시설부문공공지출추이 년 그림 국가의전반적사회기반시설수준 년 그림 실질 성장 년 그림 수요측면에서의 구성요소 년 그림 필리핀주요교역대상국가 년 분기 그림 대비정부세입 년 그림 대비정부미상환국가부채비율 년 그림 정부고시사업의평가방식별추진절차 그림 필리핀정부고시사업흐름도 단계평가방식기준 그림 민간제안사업절차개요 그림 운영단계필리핀 사업의부문구성 비용별 그림 운영단계필리핀 사업의부문구성 사업수별

그림목차 그림 기금유형별사회기반시설부문지출 중앙정부예산 지방정부예산 공기업 민간부문 그림 교통부문의필요투자규모 그림 인도네시아인프라부문에대한민간 기업참여증가 그림 재원부족분및자금조달원 그림 재원조달부문별 사회기반시설에필요한투자금액 년 그림 정부고시사업추진절차 그림 민간투자 사업추진절차 그림 민간제안사업추진절차 그림 인도네시아 구성 그림 인도네시아사회기반시설개발기관 의주요기능

약 어 필리핀 약어기관명 영어 기관명 한국어 투자유치위원회 포괄적이고통합적인사회기반시설프로그램 감사위원회 개발예산조정원회 예산관리국 재정부 보건부 환경관리국 전력산업개혁법 예산승인에관한일반세출법 공기업을위한지배구조위원회 공기업 정부금융기관 우선위험배분매트릭스 투자조정위원회 사회기반시설위원회 투자우선순위계획 합작투자 공적개발원조 공기업법무관리국

약어 기관명 영어 기관명 한국어 종합투자법 법무차관실 다년간채무부담인가권 국가경제개발청 천연수자원이사회 사전자격입찰승인위원회 주정부 시정부 지자체개발투자프로그램 사업개발및관리기금 필리핀개발계획 전략적지원지금

인도네시아 약어기관명 영어 기관명 한국어 환경영향평가 지방정부예산 중앙정부예산 수정예산 국회예산위원회 지역개발기획청 국가개발계획부 석유가스감독관리청 인도네시아유료도로관리청 인도네시아정보통신관리청 상업운영 예산집행체크리스트 지방의회 부채상환비율 경제적내부수익율 기대현재가치 재무적내부수익율 주무관청 지방정부대표 사회기반시설금융조달기구 인도네시아사회기반시설 보증기금 지방정부거버넌스시행보고서 독립전력사업자 일본국제협기구 사회기반시설정책위원회 사회기반시설개발촉진위원회

약어기관명 영어 기관명 한국어 민간투자사업 기초예산정책 지방정부성과보고서 다기준분석 재무부 중장기경제개발기본계획 중기개발계획 중앙정부 센터 지방수자원공사 인도네시아에너지공사 정부투자센터 인도네시아전력공사 전력수급계약 임시예산우선순위 재원조달수준 인도네시아고속도로공사 인프라투자공사 지방정부업무계획 위험관리센터 국가중기개발계획 지방정부부서업무계획 사업이행자금

제 1 장 서론 한국은 1994년민간투자 (Public-Private Partnership: PPP) 제도를도입한이후 20여년동안제도개선과투자환경조성을위한노력을지속해왔다. 매년민간투자기본계획을수정 고시함으로써민간투자시장의여건변화에대응하고있으며, 각종평가와집행과정에대한지침개발과적격성조사, 시설사업기본계획및실시협약등을표준화하여사업추진과정에서투명성과공정성을제고하고자노력하고있다. 이러한가운데, 일부동남아국가에서는 1990년대중후반이후민간투자사업활성화를위해정부의역할을확대하고있다. 특히필리핀및인도네시아정부는자국의추진경험을바탕으로해외선진제도의벤치마킹을통해민간투자사업활성화를위한법 제도적기반을마련해왔다. 필리핀의경우한국이민간투자제도를도입하기전인 1990년도에 BOT법을제정하였고, 1994년동법의개정을통하여대상시설과사업방식을확대하고민간제안사업을도입하는등법적체계를확립하고있다. 인도네시아에서도민간투자사업의민관협력에관하여 1998년대통령령을제정하였고, 2015년최종개정을통하여민간제안사업의기준과토지수용, 정부지원내용및사업추진절차의명확화등제도적틀을마련하였다. 본연구의목적은정부차원에서민간투자제도를정비하며적극적으로민간투자사업을추진하고있는필리핀과인도네시아의민간투자의제도체계, 추진절차, 기관간역할분담, 사업의관리방안, 사업추진현황, 관련문제점및제도개선방안등을우리나라의민간투자사업제도와비교함으로써필리핀과인도네시아의민간투자시장에진출하고자하는우리나라기업과금융기관들에성공적인투자기회확보에유용한정보를제공하는데있다. 제 1 장서론 1

본연구는총 5개의장과 < 부록 > 으로구성되어있다. 구체적으로는제1장서론, 제 2장한국의민간투자사업제도, 제3장필리핀의민간투자사업제도, 제4장인도네시아의민간투자사업제도, 제5장민간투자사업제도비교 분석으로구성되어있다. 제2장 ~ 제4장에서는각각한국, 필리핀, 인도네시아의경제현황및투자전망, 민간투자사업법률및제도, 추진절차, 관련기관, 재정지원, 수행실적현황을수록하였고, 제5장에서는한국과인도네시아및필리핀의민간투자사업제도를비교 분석하였다. 본연구를수행하기위해기존에수행된국내외문헌조사, 현황자료등의선행연구를조사하였고, 인도네시아와필리핀의사례조사는현지교수및컨설턴트로부터자문을통해각나라별최근의경제현황및투자전망, 민간투자사업법률및제도, 추진절차, 관련기관, 재정지원, 수행실적등을최근내용으로분석하였다. 각국가별로상이한제도를최대한병렬적으로분석하기위해동일한질의서 (template) 가제공되었으며, 이를답변 서술하는방식으로연구를추진하였다. 정보의정확한전달을위해인도네시아와필리핀사례의경우현지연구자의영문본은 < 부록 > 에수록하였다. 민간투자사업은대규모투자액과장기적인투자회수기간이소요되므로사업준비, 건설및운영과정에서해당국의정치 경제 사회 문화적영향을받게된다. 특히필리핀및인도네시아등동남아시아국가의제도적기반및정부의의지는우리나라기업이해당국가의민간사업에진출하는데있어매우중요한요소이다. 많은개발도상국의경우정치적불안정성, 제도적추진절차의미비, 법령 제도의잦은변화, 담당공무원의경험부족등이민간사업자의사업추진을어렵게하는원인이되고있는바, 이러한문제점에대한우리정부의지원과더불어민간투자시장에대한현실파악이우리나라기업이성공적인 PPP 진출전략을마련하는데도움을줄것이다. 우리나라와유사하게민간투자사업을부족한재정재원을보완하는목적으로적극활용하고있는필리핀및인도네시아의추진경험에대한소개와해당국가의민간투자제도추진절차및제도현황에대한정보는국내기업및공공기관이동국가들에대한민간투자사업진출의이해도와성공을제고하는데일조할것으로기대된다. 2 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

제 2 장 한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 제 1 절민간투자법률및제도 민간투자제도의규범체계 한국은민간투자사업을 PPP 사업으로규정하고있으며, 현재 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법 이라는법이제정되어민간투자제도를운용하고있다. 대륙법체계를따른한국은 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법 을제정하여 PPP 고유의법체계를창설하였다. 이법률에따라전통적인조달방식과차별화된방식으로서민간이투자하여사회기반시설을조달하는구조를창설하였고, 정부와민간이체결하는계약에대한구속력을법률에서선언함으로써 PPP 고유의법체계를제도화하였다. 한국의민간투자제도를규율하는규범체계는법률로서 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법 ( 이하 민간투자법 ), 대통령령으로서민간투자법시행령그리고기획재정부공고로서민간투자사업기본계획 ( 이하 기본계획 ) 으로구성된다. 또한민간투자사업의추진절차에서의세부지침과요령은공공투자관리센터의세부요령으로제정된다. 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 3

표 한국의민간투자규범체계 체계규범제정 작성권자 민간투자법 사회기반시설특정 추진방식 민간투자사업추진절차 사업시행자의권리 산업기반신용보증기금 사회기반시설투융자집합투자기구 민간투자사업분쟁조정위원회 관리감독 제도적지원 벌칙 국회 단 행정부발의가능 민간투자법시행령법률위임사항구체화대통령 민간투자사업기본계획 세부요령및지침 매년도정책추진방향과투자계획 민간투자사업추진일반지침 민간투자사업추진절차 적격성조사세부요령 자금재조달세부요령 평가및협상세부요령등 기획재정부장관 공공투자관리센터의장 가 민간투자법과시행령 민간투자법은총 5장으로, 시행령은민간투자법에서위임한사항중심으로구성된다. 민간투자법의세부구성은다음과같다. 제1장총칙, 제2장사회기반시설사업제1절민간투자사업기본계획, 제2절사회기반시설사업의시행, 제3절사회기반시설의관리운영, 제4절산업기반신용보증기금, 제 5절사회기반시설투융자집합투자기구, 제6절이의신청및민간투자사업분쟁조정위원회, 제3장감독, 제4장보칙, 제5장벌칙조항으로구성되어있다. 나 민간투자사업기본계획 기본계획은정부가민간투자법제7조에따라기획재정부장관이관계중앙행정기관의장과협의하여심의위원회의심의를거쳐수립하고, 매년기획재정부가공고하는형식으로진행된다. 총 4편으로구성된기본계획은제1편에서민간투자제도정책추진방향및매년도투자계획을새롭게정하여제시하고, 제2편 ( 민간투자사업추진일반지침 ) 및제3편 ( 민간투자사업추진절차 ) 을통해민간투자사업의추진에관한일반적인사항과개별 구체적인사항을담고있으며, 제4편 ( 보칙 ) 에서는민간투자법과시행령에서정한사항들을구체화하는가이드라인을포함하고있다. 이러한기본계획은민간투자사업에적용되는규범이기는하지만, 일반국민에대 4 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

한구속력과법규성을가지는민간투자법및동법시행령과는달리원칙적으로주무관청을규율하도록하는지침의성격을가지고있다. 기본계획이법규성을가지고개별민간투자사업참가자에대한대외적구속력이있는지에대해서는법적인논의가진행중이다. 다만, 개별민간투자사업을추진하는주무관청에대한사실상의구속력을가지고있고, 민간투자사업정책방향을제시함으로써주무관청의계약상대방인사업시행자에대한사실상의규범력을부인할수는없을것이다. 다 세부요령 공공투자관리센터는민간투자사업의투명성 객관성을유지하고주무관청의민간투자사업업무수행을지원하기위하여기획재정부장관과의사전협의를거쳐다음업무별시행요령등을작성하여공표한다. 1. 민간투자사업타당성분석및적격성조사에관한세부요령 2. 민간투자사업시설사업기본계획작성요령및표준안 3. 사업계획평가관리에관한세부요령 4. 자금재조달에관한세부요령 5. 임대형민자사업시설관리 운영에관한세부요령 6. 표준실시협약안 7. 임대형민자사업타당성분석에관한세부요령 8. 임대형민자사업시설사업기본계획작성요령 9. 복합화시설사업표준기본협정서안 10. 부대사업검토세부요령 11. 경쟁적협의절차에관한세부요령 12. 수익형민자사업의투자위험분담에관한세부요령 13. 관리운영권설정기간만료사업에관한세부요령 민간투자제도의변천 한국민간투자법의변천을제정또는전면개정을기준으로크게분류하여보면, 제 1 기 (1994~98 년, 사회간접자본시설에대한민간자본유치촉진법, 이하 민자유치촉 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 5

진법 ), 제2기 (1999~2004 년, 사회간접자본시설에대한민간투자법, 이하 ( 舊 ) 민간투자법 ), 제3기 (2005년 ~ 현재, 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법, 이하 ( 新 ) 민간투자법 ) 로구별하여볼수있을것인데, 그변화의배경은다음과같은것으로이해된다. 우선제1기의민자유치촉진법은제정당시모든생산활동의기반이되는동시에국민생활에편익을주는사회기반시설의수요를공급이따라가지못하는현실을개선하고자하는배경에서정부가발의하였다. 민자유치촉진법을통해다양한사회간접자본시설에공통적으로적용될수있는민자유치의절차와방법, 수익성과경영권의보장등각종지원사항을규정함으로써, 동법의제정이전까지개별법에의해이루어지던민자유치의미비점을보완하고민자유치를체계적으로관리할수있는기틀을마련하고자한것이다. 그러나이러한민자유치촉진법에도불구하고정부가특혜시비를우려해사업의수익성을제한하는등제도를지나치게경직적으로운영한나머지민자유치실적이매우부진하였다는비판이제기되었다. 이러한인식하에국회는사회간접자본시설에대한민간자본유치제도를국제기준에맞게전면개편하고, 수익성의제고등적극적인유인체계를제공함으로써외국자본등민간투자를적극활성화하고자, 민자유치촉진법을 ( 舊 ) 민간투자법으로전면개정함으로써민간투자법제2기를열었다. 이러한거듭된노력에도불구하고 ( 舊 ) 민간투자법은민간투자의대상시설및사업추진방식을협소하게정의하고, 집합투자기구 ( 이하 펀드 ) 를통한간접투자방식등을명문화하고있지않는등민간투자사업의내실화및활성화에있어한계를드러내어, 2005년에이르러국회는 ( 舊 ) 민간투자법을기본적인틀에서현행법령과유사한 ( 新 ) 민간투자법으로개정하였다. 요컨대일련의제 개정과정을통하여, 민간투자법은제1조 ( 목적 ) 에서정한바와같이 민간의투자를촉진하여창의적이고효율적인사회기반시설의확충 운영을도모함으로써국민경제의발전에이바지 하여온것으로보이는바, 다음에서는각시기별로그구체적인변화의모습을살펴보고자한다. 6 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

표 한국의민간투자법령의변천 시기 의의 제 기 년 사회간접자본시설에대한민간자본유치촉진법 제정 민자유치에관한체계적관리의시작 제 기 년 제 기 년 현재 사회간접자본시설에대한민간투자법 으로전부개정 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법 으로개정 사회기반시설에관한민관협력 기본법으로서의도약 민간투자사업의공공성관리체계확립및민간투자활성화를위한각종제도적지원강화 가 제 기 민자유치촉진법의시기 민자유치촉진법은사회간접자본시설을공공성이강한시설 (1종시설 ) 과그렇지않은시설 (2종시설 ) 로구분하여, 1종시설에대해서는재정지원등정부의지원을강화하는대신원칙적으로해당시설의소유권을국가에귀속시키도록하면서무상사용 수익권을부여하도록하는특징을가지고있다. 또한사업시행자의선정및지원등에관한내용을포함하는민자유치기본계획 ( 現민간투자사업기본계획 ) 을민자유치사업심의회 ( 現민간투자사업심의위원회 ) 에서결정하도록함으로써사업추진절차의투명성을확보토록하고, 각종인 허가의제규정 ( 법제15조 ) 을두면서사업시행자에게토지수용권을부여 ( 법제18조 ) 하는등사업추진의원활성제고를위한민간투자법상각종지원규정들의모태를정하였다. 뿐만아니라사업시행자의안정적인경영권보장을위하여물권의성질을가지는관리운영권을설정 ( 법제24조 ) 할수있도록하면서공공부문의출자또는의결권을제한 ( 법제44조 ) 하고, 사업시행자의수익성제고에도도움이될수있도록부대사업을허용 ( 법제20조 ) 하였다. 그러나한편으로는사회간접자본시설이가지는공익적성격등을감안하여감독명령 ( 법제40조 ), 법령위반등에대한처분 ( 법제41조 ), 공익을위한처분 ( 법제42조 ) 이가능토록함으로써, 사업시행자의자율성남용을견제하면서효율성과공공성사이에서의조화와균형을도모하였다. 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 7

나 제 기 舊 민간투자법의시기 이후민자유치촉진법은부분적인개정을거쳐 1998년 ( 舊 ) 민간투자법으로전부개정 (1999. 4. 1. 시행 ) 되었다. 이러한전부개정을통해, 정부의필요와주도하에재원조달의한방식으로서민자유치를촉진하는성격만이강조되었던민자유치촉진법의한계를넘어, 민간과정부가대등한위치에서사회간접자본시설에관한민관협력 (PPP) 을이룰수있도록유도하는기본법으로서의성격이강화되었다. ( 舊 ) 민간투자법의구체적인내용을살펴보면, 우선 1종시설과 2종시설로구별하였던대상시설의구분을폐지하고, 새로운유형인 BOT 방식을포함한추진방식에관한규정을신설 ( 법제4조 ) 하는등사업추진방식의다양화를도모하였다. 또한대상사업에포함되지아니한사업일지라도민간투자방식으로추진할수있다면민간부문이그사업을제안할수있도록허용 ( 법제9조 ) 함으로써, 민간투자사업의범위가대폭확대될수있는계기를마련하였다. 나아가민간의창의와효율에의하여공기단축또는사업비절감이발생하는경우에는총사업비를변경하지않도록하고 ( 법시행령제22조제3항 ), 산업기반신용보증기금제도를강화하는한편, 사회간접자본투융자회사의설립및운영근거를명문화 ( 법제41조내지제44조 ) 하였을뿐만아니라, 사업시행자에게매수청구권을부여 ( 법제59조 ) 함으로써민간에대한지원을강화하였다. 특히, 제2기에는최소운영수입보장 (Minimum Revenue Guarantee) 등정부의민간투자사업에대한재정지원을강화함으로써, 민간투자사업에대한민간부문의참여를촉진하는계기를마련하였다. 다른한편으로는, 객관적이고질높은타당성분석에근거하여대상사업이선정될수있도록사전타당성분석을의무화 ( 법제8조제2항 ) 하고, 민간투자지원센터의설치 ( 법제23조 ) 를통해그타당성분석이내실있게이루어지도록함으로써민간투자사업의추진을돕고자하였다. 이후 ( 舊 ) 민간투자법은 2005년 1월에이르러 ( 新 ) 민간투자법으로개정및시행되기까지민간제안사업의절차, 대상시설등의확대, 귀속시설사업에대한국 공유재산의사용수익기간연장, 사업시행자의자금조달원활성을높이기위한다양한방안마련등의부분적인개정을거쳤다. 8 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

다 제 기 新 민간투자법의시기 2005년에개정된 ( 新 ) 민간투자법이그전의 ( 舊 ) 민간투자법과크게달라진점은, 사회간접자본이라는용어대신 사회기반시설 이라는용어를사용하기시작한것과임대형민간투자사업 (BTL) 방식을도입한것이라고할수있다. 또한도로, 철도, 항만등경제적인프라를중심으로이루어졌던대상사업을학교, 병원, 하수관거등사회적인프라로대폭확대한점도주요변화라고할수있다. 그리고 3천억원이상의민간제안사업에대해서는적격성이인정된경우에만민간투자사업으로추진될수있도록그근거 ( 법시행령제7조제5항 ) 를마련하였으며, ( 舊 ) 민간투자법상민간투자지원센터는 공공투자관리센터 로개칭하면서그소속및편제, 역할등을확대 재편 ( 법제23조 ) 하였다. 이후몇차례의법령개정을통해대상사업은꾸준히확대되었으며, 이러한과정에서공공성관리도적절히이루어질수있도록적격성조사 (3천억원이상 2천억원이상 ) 및민간투자사업심의위원회의심의대상을함께확대하였으며, BTL 사업에대한통제를강화하기위해정부지급금의규모를국회에제출 ( 법제24조의 2, 2009년신설 ) 토록하였다. 또한사업시행자의자금조달여건을개선하기위하여사회기반시설투융자집합투자기구의범위를회사형만이아닌신탁형까지확대 ( 법제41조, 2011년개정 ) 하고운용의유연성을도모하고자하였으며, 부대사업의대상을대폭확대 ( 법제21조, 2011년개정 ) 함으로써민간의창의를활용할수있는수익구조를다변화하고자하였다. 뿐만아니라정부조달협정또는국제협정이적용되는민간투자사업의범위를명시 ( 법제3조의2, 2012년신설 ) 하고, 국제협정에따라의무화된민간투자사업에서의이의신청처리절차를도입 ( 법제44조의2, 2012년신설 ) 하였으며, 민간투자사업을시행하는과정에서발생하는분쟁들을신속 효율적으로해결하기위하여대체적분쟁해결기구 (Alternative Dispute Resolution, 이하 ADR ) 로서의 민간투자사업분쟁조정위원회 를신설 ( 법제44조의2 내지제44조의13, 2012년신설 ) 하였다. 요컨대민간투자법은대상시설및부대사업의확대와각종지원제도의보완등민간투자사업 ( 시장 ) 의활성화를위한다양한규정을지속적으로도입하는한편, 공공성의관리를위한타당성분석및적격성조사를정교화하고, 국회, 주무관청, 기획재정부를통한관리 감독및통제와견제가효과적으로이루어질수있도록함으로써절 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 9

차의투명성을높이는방향으로점차개정되어왔음을확인할수있다. 이러한변천을통해, 민간투자법은민간자본의유치를촉진하기위한촉진법적성격에머무르는것이아니라, 민간투자사업에관한민관협력 (PPP) 의구조를법제화하는기본법으로서기능할수있도록변화해온것으로보인다. 민간투자추진방식 한국의민간투자법은민간투자사업의추진방식에대해서는예시적열거의방식을취하고있다. 민간투자법제4조제1호는 BTO( 수익형 ), 제2호는 BTL( 임대형 ), 제3호는 BOT, 제4호는 BOO형사업방식을특정하여열거하면서도, 제5호와제6호에서는기타의방식이가능하도록포괄적인허용규정을둠으로써추진방식이다양화될수있는유연성을확보하고있는것이다. 그런데이러한민간투자법제4조의구조를자세히살펴보면, 추진방식은다음과같은단계적인고려를통해그유형이세분화된것으로보인다. 즉, 1차적으로는 해당사회기반시설의소유권을국가또는지방자치단체등공공에귀속 (Transfer) 시키는지여부 에따라, 귀속시설방식 (BTO, BTL, BOT) 과비귀속시설방식 (BOO) 을구별하였다. 그리고 2차적으로 ( 민간 ) 사업시행자가투자금을회수하는방식 에따라, 사업시행자가해당시설의사용자로부터사용료를직접징수하는방식 (BTO, BOT, BOO) 과국가등을통해투자금을회수하는방식 (BTL) 을구별한것으로보인다. 나아가마지막으로 ( 사용료를사용자로부터직접징수하는경우 ) 사용료의징수권원이무엇인지 에따라, 징수권원이관리운영권인방식 (BTO) 과소유권인방식 (BOT, BOO) 을구별한것으로이해된다. 민간투자사업의추진절차는크게두가지로, 첫째, 재정투자사업중사업성이우수하고정부보다민간이추진하는것이더효율적일것으로예상되는사업을정부가선정하여민간사업자를공모하는정부고시사업과, 둘째, 민간사업자가공공투자사업중수익성이있다고판단되는사업을자체적으로발굴하여정부에제안하는민간제안사업이그것이다. 10 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

표 민간투자 사업지정의일반원칙 민간투자사업기본계획 제4조 ( 민간투자사업지정의일반원칙 ) 1. 수익자부담능력원칙 : 기존저부담의이용시설에대비해양질의서비스제공이가능하고, 이용자가이와같은고편익에상응하여고부담사용료를부담할의사가있다고판단되는사업 2. 수익성원칙 : 정부가허용가능하고이용자가지불가능한사용료, 정부가지원가능한건설보조금범위내에서민간사업자의투자를충족시킬수있는수익률을확보할수있는사업 3. 사업편익의원칙 : 정부재정사업추진시예산제약등으로조기시설건설과서비스제공이어려우나민간투자사업으로추진시목표연도내사업을완료함으로써사업편익의조기창출효과가기대되는사업 4. 효율성원칙 : 민간의창의 효율을활용함으로써재정사업으로추진하는경우에비해사업편익증진및사업비용경감, 정부재정시설과의경쟁촉진으로서비스질제고등이기대되는사업 민간투자사업의추진방식은주로 BTO 방식과 BTL 방식이있으며, 기타 BOT, BOO 방식등으로도추진이가능하다. BTO 및 BTL 방식은준공과동시에시설을주무관청에기부채납하고, 민간투자법에따라관리운영권을사업시행자에게부여하는방식이다. 민간투자사업의추진방식은 민간투자사업기본계획 제3조에열거되어있으며, 제시된 10가지외에민간부문이제시하고주무관청이타당하다고인정하거나주무관청이 민간투자시설사업기본계획 에제시하는방식으로도추진할수있다. 표 민간투자사업기본계획제 조민간투자 사업의추진방식 1. BTO(Build-Transfer-Operate) 방식 : 사회기반시설의준공과동시에해당시설의소유권이국가또는지방자치단체에귀속되며, 사업시행자에게일정기간의시설관리운영권을인정하는방식 2. BTL(Build-Transfer-Lease) 방식 : 사회기반시설의준공과동시에해당시설의소유권이국가또는지방자치단체에귀속되며사업시행자에게일정기간의시설관리운영권을인정하되, 그시설을국가또는지방자치단체등이협약에서정한기간동안임차하여사용 수익하는방식 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 11

표 의계속 3. BOT(Build-Operate-Transfer) 방식 : 사회기반시설준공후일정기간동안사업시행자에게당해시설의소유권이인정되며그기간의만료시시설소유권이국가또는지방자치단체에귀속되는방식 4. BOO(Build-Own-Operate) 방식 : 사회기반시설의준공과동시에사업시행자에게당해시설의소유권이인정되는방식 5. BLT(Build-Lease-Transfer) 방식 : 사업시행자가사회기반시설을준공한후일정기간동안타인에게임대하고, 임대기간종료후시설물을국가또는지방자치단체에이전하는방식 6. RTO(Rehabilitate-Transfer-Operate) 방식 : 국가또는지방자치단체소유의기존시설을개량 보수 증설또는확장한후해당시설의소유권이국가또는지방자치단체에귀속되며, 사업시행자에게일정기간의시설관리운영권을인정하는방식 7. ROT(Rehabilitate-Operate-Transfer) 방식 : 국가또는지방자치단체소유의기존시설을개량 보수 증설또는확장한사업시행자에게일정기간해당시설에대한운영권을인정하고, 그기간의만료시시설소유권이국가또는지방자치단체에귀속되는방식 8. ROO(Rehabilitate-Own-Operate) 방식 : 기존시설을개량 보수 증설또는확장한사업시행자에게해당시설의소유권을인정하는방식 9. RTL(Rehabilitate-Transfer-Lease) 방식 : 국가또는지방자치단체소유의기존시설을개량 보수 증설또는확장한후해당시설의소유권이국가또는지방자치단체에귀속되며, 사업시행자에게일정기간의시설관리운영권을인정하되그시설을국가또는지방자치단체등이협약에서정한기간동안임차하여사용 수익하는방식 10. 법제4조제6호에따라주무관청이정부고시사업으로추진하기위해시설사업기본계획에제시하는방식으로제1호와제2호를혼합한방식 ( 이하 혼합형 이라한다 ) 을포함한다. 11. 그밖에민간부문이제시하고주무관청이타당하다고인정하거나주무관청이민간투자시설사업기본계획에제시하는방식 ( 교육청이사립학교시설을제2호와유사한방식으로추진하는경우를포함한다 ) 12 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

민간투자추진가능대상시설 한국의민간투자법은민관협력의대상이되는 사회기반시설의범위 를한정적으 로열거하고있다. 한정적열거방식을채택한이유는민간투자법의적용범위를명확 히함으로써예측가능성과법적안정성을확보할수있기때문이다. 표 민간투자사업추진가능사회기반시설유형 민간투자법제 조 분야소관부처사회기반시설유형 도로 철도 항만 국토교통부 국토교통부 해양수산부 도로및도로의부속물 노외주차장 복합환승센터 지능형교통체계 철도 도시철도 철도시설 항만시설 어항시설 공항 국토교통부공항시설 수자원 정보통신 에너지 국토교통부 환경부 미래창조과학부 방송통신위원회미래창조과학부 국토교통부 산업통상자원부 배후간선망연결시설및기반시설 다목적댐 하천시설 수도 중수도 전기통신설비 초고속정보통신망 정보통신망 공간정보체계 유비쿼터스도시기반시설 전원설비 가스공급시설 집단에너지시설 신 재생에너지설비 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 13

표 의계속 분야소관부처사회기반시설유형 환경 유통 문화체육관광 교육 환경부 국토교통부 문화체육관광부 안전행정부 여성가족부 미래창조과학부 국토교통부 교육부 하수도 공공하수처리시설 분뇨처리시설 하 폐수처리수재이용시설 폐기물처리시설 폐수종말처리시설 공공처리시설 재활용시설 물류터미널 물류단지 여객자동차터미널 관광지 관광단지 전문체육시설 생활체육시설 도서관 박물관 미술관 국제회의시설 문화시설 자전거이용시설 청소년수련시설 과학관 도시공원 유치원 초 중등학교 고등학교 국방 국방부국방 군사시설중교육 복지시설등 주택 국토교통부공공건설임대주택 산업단지 산업통상자원부산업집적기반시설 복지 산림 보건복지부 산림청 어린이집 노인주거복지시설 노인의료복지시설 재가노인복지시설 공공보건의료기관 장애인복지시설 자연휴양림 수목원 14 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

제 2 절민간투자사업의추진절차 수익형민간투자사업 (BTO) 은주무관청이민간투자시설사업기본계획에따라대상 사업을지정하고고시하는 정부고시사업 과민간부문이사업을제안하는 민간제안 사업 으로구분된다. 1 정부고시사업 정부고시사업은주무관청이국가정책상중요한사업중민간투자방식으로추진하는것이효율적이라고인정되는사업에대해서는원칙적으로사전계획을수립하여정부고시사업으로추진하여야하며, 기본계획제4조 ( 민간투자사업지정의일반원칙 ), 민간투자법제2조제1호에정한시설및사회기반시설과관련된중장기계획및국가투자사업의우선순위에부합요건을충족하여야한다. 제 조 민간투자사업지정의일반원칙 민간투자사업기본계획 주무관청은민간투자사업을지정함에있어다음각호의일반원칙을고려하여야한다 수익자부담능력원칙 기존저부담의이용시설에대비해양질의서비스제공이가능하고 이용자가이와같은고편익에상응하여고부담사용료를부담할의사가있다고판단되는 사업 수익성원칙 정부가허용가능하고이용자가지불가능한사용료 정부가지원가능한건설 보조금범위내에서민간사업자의투자를충족시킬수있는수익률을확보할수있는사업 사업편익의원칙 정부재정사업추진시예산제약등으로조기시설건설과서비스제공 이어려우나 민간투자사업으로추진시목표연도내사업을완료함으로써사업편익의조 기창출효과가기대되는사업 효율성원칙 민간의창의 효율을활용함으로써재정사업으로추진하는경우에비해사업 편익증진및사업비용경감 정부재정시설과의경쟁촉진으로서비스질제고등이기대 되는사업 1 임대형민간투자사업 (BTL) 은 2016 년 3 월민간투자법의개정으로, 민간제안방식으로추진가능하게되었다. 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 15

최근들어재정사업중민간투자사업으로의전환을검토하는사례가늘고있다. 이러한경우정부고시사업으로추진된다고볼수있다. 주무관청은예비타당성조사단계에서민간투자사업으로추진가능성이있다고판단되는재정사업에대해서는재정여건, 사용료수준, 그밖에정책방향등을고려하여정부고시사업으로의추진여부를검토하여야한다. 정부고시사업의경우주무관청은사회기반시설사업의추진을위하여민간부문의투자가필요하다고인정될때에는당해연도대상사업으로지정된후 1년이내에 민간투자시설사업기본계획 을수립하여야한다. 또한주무관청은수립된시설사업기본계획을대통령령이정하는바에따라고시하여야하며, 이에따라민간부문에서사업계획서를제출하게된다. 주무관청은제출된사업계획을대통령령이정하는바에따라검토 평가한후사업계획을제출한자중협상대상자를지정하여, 상당기간동안협상을진행한다. 이후협상대상자와실시협약을체결하고최종적으로사업시행자를지정하여사업을시행하게된다. 수익형민자사업 (BTO) 이정부고시사업인경우주무관청은사회기반시설사업의추진을위하여민간부문의투자가필요하다고인정될때에는당해연도대상사업으로지정된후 1년이내에 민간투자시설사업기본계획 을수립하여야한다. 또한주무관청은수립된시설사업기본계획을대통령령이정하는바에따라고시하여야하며, 이에따라민간부문에서사업계획서를제출하게된다. 주무관청은제출된사업계획을대통령령이정하는바에따라검토 평가한후사업계획을제출한자중협상대상자를지정하여, 상당기간동안협상을진행한다. 이후협상대상자와실시협약을체결하고최종적으로사업시행자를지정하여사업을시행하게된다. 지정된사업시행자는실시설계를포함한실시계획승인을신청하며, 주무관청은이를승인및심사결과를통보한후공사를시행한다. 16 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

그림 수익형민간투자사업 추진절차 정부고시사업 사업시행자 정부 주요내용 자료 기획재정부 민간투자사업기본계획 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 17

가 재정사업으로예비타당성조사를신청한경우 총사업비가 500억원이상인사업중국고지원이 300억원이상인사업의경우에해당하며, 기획재정부는필수민자검토대상시설에해당하는지검토한다. 대상에해당하지않으면일반예비타당성조사를수행하고, 민자검토대상에해당할경우공공투자관리센터의예비타당성조사를시행하는데, 이때민자사업으로적격한지를판단하는 VfM 분석을수행하게된다. 민간투자사업으로적격하지않은것으로판단되면재정사업으로수행하고, 적격한경우는민간투자대상사업으로지정및고시하게된다. 나 정부고시민자사업으로예비타당성조사및타당성분석을신청한경우 정부고시민간투자대상사업은총사업비가 500억원이상이고국고지원이 300억원이상인사업일경우예비타당성조사및타당성분석을시행한다. 예비타당성조사및타당성분석이란예비타당성조사와동일한방법을통하여타당성판단및적격성판단 (VfM 분석 ) 을일괄시행하는것이다. 시행기관은공공투자관리센터이며, 단총사업비가 2천억원 (BTL 유형의경우 1천억원 ) 미만이면서국고지원이 300억원미만인사업은전문기관을통해시행할수있다. 민자사업으로추진하는것이적격하다고판단되면민간투자대상사업으로지정및고시한다. 18 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

그림 정부고시사업의대상사업지정절차 재정사업으로예비타당성조사를신청한경우 예비타당성조사대상사업으로신청 중앙관서의장 기획재정부장관 총사업비 억원이상사업중국고지원 억원이상사업 예비타당성조사대상사업선정 기획재정부 재정사업평가자문회의 예비타당성조사시행 시행기관 공공투자관리센터 분석 등종합판단 민자추진가능성 평가 No 민간투자가능사업 Yes 예비 조사 시행기관 공공투자관리센터 총사업비 천억원 유형 천억원 이상재정사업 No 타당성분석 Yes 총사업비 천억원 유형 천억원 이상사업 검토의뢰 주무관청 공공투자관리센터 주무관청은타당성조사및민자적격성조사결과 관련자료제출 총사업비 천억원미만사업 주무관청 연구기관등 민간투자대상사업지정신청 주무관청 기획재정부 천억원미만사업제외 재정사업 민간투자대상사업지정 고시 총사업비 천억원이상사업 심의위원회심의를거쳐대상사업지정 총사업비 천억원미만사업 주무관청자체지정및고시후기획재정부통보 자료 기획재정부 민간투자사업기본계획 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 19

그림 정부고시사업의대상사업지정절차 정부고시민자사업으로예비타당성조사및타당 성분석을신청한경우 예비타당성조사및 타당성분석대상사업신청 중앙관서의장 기획재정부장관 총사업비 억원이상사업중국고지원 억원이상사업 정부고시민자사업대상 예비타당성조사및 타당성분석대상사업선정 기획재정부 재정사업평가자문회의 No Yes Yes 예비타당성조사와타당성분석일괄시행 등종합분석 예비타당성조사와동일방법 을통한타당성판단및적격성판단 시행 시행기관 공공투자관리센터 주무관청은해당사업관련자료제출 총사업비 천억원 유형 천억원 미만이면서국고지원이 억원미만사업 주무관청 전문기관 주무관청 기획재정부 천억원이상사업또는국고지원대상사업 사업은한도액편성및국회의결필요 총사업비 천억원 유형 천억원 이상사업또는국고지원대상사업 심의위원회심의를거쳐대상사업지정 총사업비 천억원 유형 천억원 미만이고국고지원비대상사업 주무관청자체지정및고시후기획재정부통보 자료 기획재정부 민간투자사업기본계획 20 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

민간제안사업 민간제안사업은주무관청이민간투자사업지정일반원칙, 민간투자법제2조제1호에정한시설및사회기반시설과관련된중장기계획및국가투자사업의우선순위에의부합요건을충족하고사업내용에대해비용 편익분석등을포함한적격성조사를실시하여국가경제적으로추진타당성이확보되고, 민간제안및민간투자실행대안이재정투자사업으로추진하는것보다정부부담을줄이고서비스질의제고등이가능한경우추진대상사업으로선정하도록하고있다. 민간제안사업의경우민간사업자가제안서를주무관청에제출함으로써사업이시작된다. 주무관청은제안서가형식적요건을갖추고, 법령및주무관청의정책에부합한다고판단되는경우에제안된사업을민간투자사업으로추진할것인지의여부를확정하기전공공투자관리센터의장에게당해제안서내용의검토를의뢰하여야한다. 공공투자관리센터의장은당해제안서에대한의견을주무관청및기획재정부장관에게제출해야하고, 주무관청은공공투자관리센터의장의의견등을고려하여당해제안서에대한의견을제안자에게서면으로통지하여야한다. 이때타당하다고인정되는경우당해사업에대한제안자외의제3자에의한제안이가능하도록당해제안내용의개요를관보, 세개이상의일간지및주무관청의인터넷홈페이지에공고하여야한다. 다른제안이있을경우, 최초제안자의제안서와제3자의제안서에대한평가를통해협상대상자를지정하며, 협상을거쳐실시협약을체결한후사업의시행에이르게된다. 제 조 민간부문제안사업의추진절차 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법시행령 1 법제 조제 항에따른제안서에는다음각호의사항이포함되어야한다 제안사업에대한타당성조사의내용 사업계획내용 총사업비의명세및자금조달계획 무상사용기간또는소유 수익기간산정명세 귀속시설만해당한다 시설의관리운영계획 사용료등수입및지출계획 부대사업을시행하는경우그내용및사유 그밖에제안자가해당사업의시행을위하여필요하다고인정하는사항 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 21

최근대부분의수익형민간투자사업 (BTO) 은정부고시사업보다는민간제안사업의 형태로추진되고있다. 그림 수익형민자사업 추진절차 민간제안사업 제안서제출제안서접수 제안서채택불가통지 주무관청 제안자 제안서내용검토의뢰 제안서내용검토 적격성조사 검토의견제출 YES 제안내용공고 주무관청 타제안없을경우 타제안있을경우 제안자를협상대상자로지정 제안서검토 평가 협상대상자지정 사업시행자지정 실시계획승인신청 실시설계포함 실시계획승인 주무관청 공사시행 준공확인 주무관청 자료 기획재정부 민간투자사업기본계획 22 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

임대형민간투자사업 임대형민간투자사업의선정은법적적합성, 경제적 재무적적합성및사업의시급성등을고려해서지정한다. 첫째, 법적적합성측면에서는국가 지자체가국민에게기초적서비스를제공하기위해의무적으로건설해야하는국 공립시설및이미국가또는지방자치단체의재정부담으로시설투자가이루어지고있는유형의사업과관계법령등에근거하여수립된중장기투자계획등에반영된사업에한하여임대형민자사업으로선정하도록하고있다. 둘째, 경제적 재무적적합성측면에서는 1 민간의창의 효율을활용함으로써재정사업으로추진하는경우에비해적기완공으로사업편익조기향유, 시설물의품질 안전도향상, 서비스질제고등사업편익증진과설계, 건설, 운영을포함한특정사업의생애주기동안발생하는총비용의절감등사업비용경감을기대할수있는사업, 2 사업의생애주기비용중운영유지비용의비중이크고설계, 건설, 운영 유지등에대한일괄적인관리로효율이나타나는사업, 3 시설이용자로부터사용료부과가어렵거나사용료부과만으로는투자비회수가구조적으로어려운사업, 다만, 사용료수입및건설보조금등의일부지원으로투자비회수가가능한사업은수익형민자사업으로추진, 4 시설물이물리적으로구분되어독립적사업관리와회계처리가가능한사업등에한하여임대형민자사업으로선정하도록하고있다. 셋째, 사업의시급성및그밖에고려할만한사항으로는 1 사업편익이크고, 시설의조기확충이시급하나, 재정여건상투자가더디게이루어지고있는시설로서선투자의필요성이높은사업, 2 민간자본을유치하여건설된시설의소유권을준공시점에서국가 지방자치단체에기부채납하도록할수있는사업, 3 민간사업자에게요구하는서비스의수준을객관적이고명확하게제시할수있는사업등에한하여임대형민자사업으로선정하도록하고있다. 그밖의고려사항으로주무관청은한도액이설정된해당연도내에사업실시가가능하도록 1 시설확충에수반되는추가운영인력확보등원활한집행이가능한사업, 2 건축시설은사업부지가확보되고관련인 허가등이조속히마무리될수있는 2 임대형민간투자사업도 2016 년 3 월민간투자법의개정으로수익형민간투자사업과같이민간제안방식으로사업추진이가능하게되었다. 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 23

그림 임대형민자사업 의정부고시사업추진절차 < 사업시행자 > < 정부 > < 주요내용 > 자료 기획재정부 민간투자사업기본계획 24 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

사업, 3 토목시설은기본설계완료, 관련인 허가의원활한진행등으로조기착공이가능한사업, 4 기존시설이용자의이주대책 대체수용시설마련이가능하고환경등민원처리에큰어려움이없는등사업집행상의애로사항이없거나신속한해결이가능한사업을감안하여대상사업을선정하여야한다. 제 3 절민간투자사업관련기관 민간투자사업주관부처 가 기획재정부 민간투자사업과관련된주요정부부처로는기획재정부와사업주무부처등이있다. 기획재정부는민간투자법, 시행령, 기본계획등을소관하며, 민간투자사업과관련된예산편성도담당한다. 기획재정부와일선부처들사이의상호작용과관련하여중요한정책이슈중하나는재정규율에관한것이다. 기획재정부는예산편성뿐만아니라민간투자사업의투자계획을마련하고시행하는데에도중심적인역할을한다. 주된예산관련결정은기획재정부와일선부처사이의상호협의를통해내려진다. 민간투자사업에정부와민간부문이모두관여한다는점과사업부처들이최초의접점이라는점때문에일부사안들에대해서는각당사자의이해관계에바탕을둔이견이제기된다. 기획재정부에는이런견해들을조율해야하는과제가있는데, 관련당사자들사이에서합의를도출하는데에는종종시간이걸린다. 그런까닭에기획재정부는시행단계에서공공지출에대해강력한통제권을행사한다. 부처들은예산집행계획에정해진한도내에서지출할것을요구받는다. 필요하다고판단될경우기획재정부는민간투자사업에대한정부지출을연기하거나중단할수있다. 민간투자사업심의위원회민간투자법에따라기획재정부안에민간투자사업심의위원회가구성 운영되고있다. 민간투자사업심의위원회는주요정책의수립과관련된사항들을검토하며대규모민간투자사업의시행과정에서핵심적인결정을내린다. 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 25

위원회는기획재정부장관 ( 위원장 ), 사업추진부처의차관들, 그리고민간투자사업과관련한지식과경험이있는민간전문가들로구성되며, 주로다음사항들을심의한다. 민간투자와관련된주요정책의수립 민간투자사업기본계획의수립및변경 대형민간투자사업 ( 총사업비 2,000억원이상 ) 의지정및취소 시설사업기본계획의수립및변경 대형민간투자사업의사업시행자지정 부대사업의시행 공익을위한처분 민간투자사업에대한종합평가 민간투자사업의원활한추진을위해기획재정부장관이회의에부치는사항등 민간투자사업분쟁조정위원회협약당사자들 ( 주무관청과사업시행법인 ) 은위험과책임의분담이명확한실시협약을작성하고사업시행과정에서일어날수있는문제들을해결하기위하여협력하여야한다. 하지만협약당사자들이분쟁에있어합의에도달하지못하는경우가있을수있다. 제3자에의해중재될필요가있는복잡한사안과분쟁의수가증가함에따라, 정부는 2011년민간투자법과시행령을개정하여기획재정부장관직속으로민간투자사업분쟁조정위원회 ( 분쟁조정위원회 ) 를설치했다. 분쟁조정위원회는위원장 1명을포함해 9명이내의위원으로구성된다. 위원은정부를대표하는위원, 사업시행자를대표하는위원, 그리고공익을대변하는위원으로이루어진다. 분쟁조정위원회는계약당사자가운데어느일방으로부터요청이있으면해당민간투자사업과관련한분쟁을심사하고중재한다. 분쟁조정위원회는요청을접수한날로부터 90일이내에사건을심사하고중재안을마련해야한다. 중재안을접수하면각당사자는그중재안을받아들일지여부를 15일이내에위원회에통보해야한다. 분쟁조정위원회는갈수록늘어나는분쟁사건을처리함에있어중요한역할을할것으로기대된다. 하지만위원회의중재제안은법적구속력이없다는한계가있다. 26 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

민간투자사업지원기관 가 공공투자관리센터 설립목적및역할공공투자관리센터는 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법 에근거하여민간사업자와주무관청이추진하는민간투자사업을지원하는역할을담당한다. 특히민간투자법에근거하여대규모민자사업의타당성분석, 사업계획의평가등총괄지원기관으로공공투자관리센터가지정되어있다. 특히 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법시행령 에서명시하고있는공공투자관리센터의업무는아래와같다. 제20조 ( 공공투자관리센터의업무 ) 1 공공투자관리센터는다음각호의업무를수행한다. 1. 민간투자사업기본계획의수립과관련된업무의지원 2. 시설사업기본계획의수립과관련된업무의지원 3. 법제13조제2항및제3항에따른사업계획의검토 평가, 실시협약체결등사업시행자지정과관련된업무의지원 4. 제7조제2항부터제7항까지의규정에따른민간부문의사업제안에대한검토 평가 5. 민간투자사업관련인가 허가등신청업무의대행 6. 외국인민간투자자를위한투자상담및민간투자사업에대한외국자본유치활동의지원 7. 민간투자대상사업의검토및타당성분석 8. 민간투자사업추진관련교육프로그램개발및운영 9. 민간투자제도의개선및관련분야연구 10. 민간투자대상사업의발굴과관련된업무의지원 11. 그밖에민간투자사업추진과관련하여필요한업무공공투자관리센터는사회기반시설에대한민간투자사업뿐만아니라재정투자사업, 공공기관투자사업의수행과정에서중요한수문장 (Gatekeeper) 의역할을담당하고있다. 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 27

먼저 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법 에의해추진되는민간제안사업의주무관청은사업규모와관계없이공공투자관리센터의검토를받아추진여부를결정하도록되어있다. 특히민간제안사업중총사업비 2,000억원이상인사업에대하여는수요추정의적정성, 재정사업으로추진할경우와비교한비용편익분석등을내용으로하는적격성조사를실시하여야한다. 국가또는지자체가수행하는재정투자사업의경우총사업비가 500억원이상이면서국가의재정지원규모가 300억원이상인건설사업, 정보화사업, 국가연구개발사업의경우공공투자관리센터에서예비타당성조사를시행하며그결과를기획재정부에통보하고있다. 또한공공기관이수행하는사업중총사업비가 500억원이상이면서국가의재정지원및공공기관부담분의합이 300억원이상인신규투자사업, 자본출자에해당하는모든사업도공공투자관리센터에서예비타당성조사를시행하며그결과를기획재정부에통보하고있다. 이렇듯 KDI 공공투자관리센터는정부, 민간및공공기관등이추진하는대규모투자사업의타당성을평가하는전문기관으로서그책임을다하고있으며, 객관적이며합리적인분석 평가를위해조사방법론뿐만아니라관련된다양한분야의연구를활발하게진행하고있다. 공공투자관리센터는공공투자제도및정책관련포럼과대내외홍보 교육프로그램등을운영하고있으며, 세계은행, OECD, IMF 등국제기구를비롯하여해외의다양한기관들과의협력강화를통해국제협력교류및국제네트워크활성화를도모하고있다. 또한공공투자관리센터는공공투자사업전단계를효율적으로관리하기위한데이터베이스를지속적으로구축 보완하고있으며, 글로벌정책이슈를공유하고개발도상국가와국가간경제협력을강화함으로써우리기업의해외민간투자시장진출에도노력하고있다. 설립연혁및업무추진근거공공투자관리센터는 1999년 5월 예산회계법시행령 제9조제2항에따른예비타당성조사가도입됨에따라 2001년 1월 KDI 내부조직으로설립되었다. 이후 2005년 1 월 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법 의개정에따라 KDI 부설기관으로공공투자관리센터가발족됨과동시에국토연구원민간투자지원센터가 KDI 공공투자관리센터로 28 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

이관되었다. 국토연구원민간투자지원센터는 1998년 8월 인프라시설에대한민자유치종합대책 수립과 1998년 12월 사회간접자본시설에대한민간투자법 공포이후 1999년 4월국토연구원의내부조직으로설립되었다. 공공투자관리센터에서수행하는업무의법적추진근거는다음과같이구분된다. 예비타당성조사는 국가재정법 제8조의 2( 재정사업평가등에대한전문적인조사 연구기관의지정등 ) 및동법제38조 ( 예비타당성조사 ) 의 예비타당성조사운용지침 에근거하여국가연구개발사업을제외한대규모재정사업에대한예비타당성조사총괄수행기관으로한국개발연구원공공투자관리센터가지정되어있다. 조세특례예비타당성조사는 조세특례제한법 제142조및 조세특례제한법시행령 제135 조의2 에근거하여조세특례평가등에대한전문적인조사 연구기관으로한국개발연구원공공투자관리센터가지정되어있다. 민간투자지원사업은 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법 제23조에근거한대규모민자사업의타당성분석, 사업계획의평가등총괄지원기관으로공공투자관리센터가지정되어있다. 공공기관사업예비타당성조사는 공공기관의운영에관한법률 제50조및 공기업 준정부기관예산편성지침 과 공기업 준정부기관사업예비타당성조사세부시행계획 에근거한공공기관사업예비타당성조사전문기관으로공공투자관리센터가지정되어있다. 조직및인원구성공공투자관리센터는재정투자평가실, 민간투자지원실, 공공투자정책실등 3실체계로구성되어있다. 재정투자평가실, 민간투자지원실, 공공투자정책실은별도의세부팀조직을갖추고있는데실별세부팀조직을살펴보면다음과같다. 재정투자평가실은예비타당성조사 1팀, 예비타당성조사 2팀, 타당성재조사팀, 민간투자지원실은사업조사팀, 사업지원팀, 사업관리팀, 공공투자정책실은공공투자정책팀, 공공기관사업팀, 조세지출평가팀의세부팀을갖추고있다. 공공투자관리센터의인원은 2015년 12월말기준총원 101명으로경제, 경영, 회계, 법률, 토목, 건축, 환경등의공학분야와함께다양한분야의전문가들로구성되어있다. 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 29

나 산업기반신용보증기금 산업기반신용보증기금은대출기관등으로부터민간투자사업자금의융자를받는사업시행자등에대해신용보증하기위해민간투자법에따라설치되었다. 사업시행자등이대출기관등으로부터민간투자사업자금의대출, 급부등을받음으로써부담하는금전채무, 사회기반시설채권을발행함으로써부담하는금전채무및그채권의원리금지급을위한대출등을받음으로써부담하는금전채무를기금의부담으로보증할수있다. 기금의보증료는민간투자법시행령에서정한연율 100분의 1.5범위내에서가능하며, 민간투자기본계획에보증료기준에따라차등적용할수있다. 사업시행자는기금에대해보증상담을거쳐신용보증을신청할수있으며, 관리기관은신청자에대하여신용조사를실시한후신용보증약정을체결하고신용보증서를발급한다. 또한산업기반신용보증기금은지방자치단체등에대한민간투자제도교육, 지역중소업체에대한무료금융자문및주선서비스등을제공할수있다. 표 보증의종류및지급률 보증종류내용보증료율 사회기반시설채권보증 산업기반대출보증 시설자금보증 운영자금보증 재정지원보증 리파이낸싱보증 브릿지파이낸싱보증 산업기반유동화회사보증 민간선투자대출보증 법제 조에따라발행한사회기반시설채권및그채권의원리금지급을위한자금조달에대한보증 건설기간에필요한자금에대한보증 운영기간에필요한자금에대한보증 재정지원을주무관청으로부터보조받기전에일시적으로자금조달하기위한보증 자금재조달에대한보증 건설기간에필요한자금을주무관청으로부터지급받기전에일시적으로자금조달하기위한보증 보상비를선조달하기위한보증제외 주무관청으로부터보조금을지급받기전보상비를선조달하기위해일시적으로자금조달하기위한보증 유동화회사를통하여법제 조에따라발행한사회기반시설채권및그채권의원리금지급을위한자금조달에대한보증 민간선투자사업자 가민간선투자사업을위해조달하는자금에대한보증 주 사업리스크 기업신용도및자금용도등에따라보증료율을차등적용함 정부발주사업을초과시공하는자중기획재정부장관이필요하다고인정한자 30 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

제 4 절민간투자사업의재정지원 재정지원 가 재정지원의법률상근거 민간투자법은귀속시설사업을원활하게시행하기위하여필요하면국가또는지방자치단체가보조금 (subsidy) 또는장기대부의형식으로민간투자사업의사업시행자에게재정지원을할수있도록하고있다. 민간투자법시행령은국가또는지방자치단체가재정지원을할수있는사유로다음을제시하고있다. 1. 법인의해산을방지하기위하여불가피한경우 2. 사용료를적정수준으로유지하기위하여불가피한경우 3. 용지보상비가지나치게많이들어사업의수익성이떨어짐으로써민간자본유치가어려운경우 4. 실제운영수입 ( 해당시설의수요량에사용료를곱한금액을말한다 ) 이실시협약에서정한추정운영수입에훨씬못미쳐해당시설의운영이어려운경우 5. 민간투자사업에포함된시설사업중그자체만으로는민간투자사업으로서의수익성이적으나전체사업과함께시행되면공사기간이나경비가크게줄어드는등사업의효율성을높일수있는시설사업에대하여, 사전에보조금의지급또는장기대부가이루어지지아니하면그민간투자사업을원활하게시행하기가어렵다고판단되는경우 6. 지나친환율변동으로인하여사업시행자가타인자본으로조달하는건설자금용외화차입금에대한환차손이발생한경우 나 실시협약에따른정부의지원 주무관청은민간투자법에서정한재정지원근거에따라개별사업의실시협약에서 재정지원을할수있다. 이러한재정지원은시설별로재정지원이없다는전제하에계 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 31

산된사용료와대체시설과비교하여발생하는편익과경쟁력등을고려한적정사용료를비교하여적정사용료수준을유지하기위하여필요한범위에서민간투자법제 53조에근거하여이루어진다. 주로이루어지는재정지원형식은, 건설단계에서건설보조금지급과운영기간중사업시행자의운영위험을분담하는방식의재정지원을약정하고있다. 또한실시협약의해지시에는사업의청산또는손해배상액의성격으로해지시지급금을지급하도록약정하고있다. 건설보조금건설단계에서의재정지원은건설보조금형태로이루어지는데, 사업시행자의자기자본투입계획과연계하여재정지원시기를실시협약에서정한다. 건설보조금은사업의공정률과자기자본투입일정및규모등을감안하여일정연도에집중되지않도록연도별분기별로적정하게배분하고, 직전분기말까지의물가지수를적용하여산정한다. 협약에서정한바에따라자기자본출자가이루어지지않거나자금차입계약이해지되는경우또는누계공정률이일정비율이하일경우에는주무관청의건설보조금지급을중단하거나감액할수있다. 최소운영수입보장등투자위험분담 2009년이전에는실시협약에서정한운영수입의일정비율을정부가보장해주는최소운영수입보장제도를통하여민간투자사업의운영위험을정부가분담했다. 제도초기의민간사업자의위험부담을줄여민간투자사업의활성화에기여한최소운영수입보장 (MRG) 제도는수요과다예측으로인한정부분담분이증가하는부작용이발생하였고, 2009년이후체결하는새로운사업의실시협약에서는최소운영수입보장 (MRG) 약정을하지않고있다. 2015년기본계획의개정을통하여, 투자위험분담형과손익공유형방식의투자위험분담을통하여사업시행자의투자위험분담제도의영역을넓혔다. 해지시지급금 실시협약이해지될경우주무관청은해지시지급금을지급한다. 해지시지급금은 소유권이정부에귀속되는시설에대하여실시협약이해지됨으로써정부가누리게 32 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

되는소유권의이익이부당한이득이되지않도록하는취지에서도입되었고, 해지시지급금을보장함으로써민간사업시행자는기투입한민간투자자금의일정정도및 / 또는미래기대수익의일정부분을보상받을수있다는점에서프로젝트에자금을대출하여주는선순위대주들의채권확보를위한필수적인조치로인식되고있다. 기본계획은해지시지급금의산정기준을수익형과임대형으로구분하여표준지침화하여공고하고있다. 기본적으로는, 수익형민간투자사업의경우, 건설기간중에는기투입민간투자자금을기준으로하되, 투입자금의기회비용보상범위는귀책사유별로지급수준을차등화하여산정하고, 운영기간중에는기투입민간투자자금의상각액과미래기대수익의현가액을기준으로하되, 귀책사유별로지급수준을차등화하여산정하고있다. 임대형민간투자사업의경우건설기간중에는기투입된민간투자자금 ( 민간투자비 -건설이자 ) 을기준으로하되, 투입자금의기회비용보상금액을귀책사유별로차등화하여산정하고, 운영기간중에는잔여기간의시설임대료의현가액을기준으로하되, 귀책사유별로차등화하여산정한다. 다 자금조달의편의제공 산업기반신용보증기금설립산업기반신용보증기금은사업시행자에대한신용보증형태의지원방식이다. 민간투자사업의사업시행자가대출기관등으로부터민간투자비의융자를받을경우사업시행자에대한신용보증을하기위하여산업기반신용보증기금을설치한다. 보증대상은사업시행자가대출등을받음으로써부담하는금전채무, 사회기반시설채권을발행함으로써부담하는금전채무및그채권의원리금지급을위한대출등을받음으로써부담하는금전채무를기금의부담으로보증한다. 기금의조성은민간투자법제31조에따라정부및지방자치단체의출연금, 그외의자의출연금, 보증료수입, 기금의운용수익, 그리고금융회사등또는다른기금으로부터의차입금을재원으로조성한다. 인프라펀드관련규제완화 민간투자사업에대한자금조달지원책의하나로집합투자기구 (Collective investment vehicle) 의설립근거를법률에서명문화하고특례규정을마련하였으며, 집합투자기 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 33

구형식을다양화하는제도적지원책을마련하였다. 민간투자법은사회기반시설사업에자산을투자하는인프라펀드의설립근거를제공하고있다. 또한집합투자기구에관한일반법인자본시장과금융투자업에관한법률의특례를마련하였다. 인프라펀드의유형을시장에서보다광범위하게활용되고있는투자신탁형으로확대하여, 사회기반시설사업에대한자금조달활성화방안을마련하였다. 표 자금조달활성화방안 설립절차 기획재정부협의 금융위등록 직접대출허용 투융자회사의경우직접대출이가능 투융자신탁의경우 수익증권총액의 이하 직접대출이가능 환매금지형 차입금의허용및한도 자본금의 수익증권총액의 설정 신주발행의허용 주식상장의의무화 투자한도의제한적용배제 의결권제한의적용배제 민간투자법은 2011년 8월개정으로자금조달여건개선등을위하여 사회기반시설투융자집합투자기구 의유형을기존의 회사형 외에 투자신탁형 으로확대하였다. 위와같은민간투자법의제도적지원하에한국에서는최초의공모형인프라펀드가설립되었고, 회사형신탁형인프라펀드의설립이활성화됨으로써민간투자사업에대한재원조달수단이다양화되었다. 그림 인프라펀드투자구조 34 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

현재한국의인프라펀드는주로연기금, 보험회사등이간접출자방식으로투자하는집합투자기구설립이주를이루고있으며, 설립된펀드는주로민간투자사업시행법인의주식을취득하거나채권취득, 사업시행법인에대한대출방식으로투자하고있다. 사회기반시설채권의발행사회기반시설채권 (SOC채권 ) 이란민간투자사업추진에필요한재원을마련하기위하여발행되는채권을말하며, 민간투자법은사업시행자, 자산유동화법에따른유동화전문회사및일정금융회사등이사회기반시설채권을발행할수있는근거를마련하고있다. SOC채권은도입당시장기채권투자에대한분리과세로절세효과가뛰어나고, 채권을통하여자금을조달할경우이자율의절감, 장기금융투자자들이선호하는결과리파이낸싱위험이적은등자금조달방식으로호응이클것으로예상되어민간투자법에사업시행자가채권을발행할수있는근거를마련하였다. 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법제 조 사회기반시설채권의발행 1 사업시행자 자산유동화에관한법률 에따른유동화전문회사또는대통령령으로정하는 금융회사등은대통령령으로정하는바에따라민간투자사업의추진에필요한재원의조 달또는민간투자사업으로인한채무의상환을위하여채권 이하 사회기반시설채권 이라한다 을발행할수있다 2 제 항에따른사회기반시설채권에의하여조달된재원은민간투자사업을위한용도외로사용하여서는아니된다 제 조 사회기반시설채권의발행 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법시행령 1 법제 조제 항에서 대통령령으로정하는금융회사등 이란다음각호의어느하나에해당하는것을말한다 은행법 에따라인가를받아설립된은행 한국산업은행법 에따른한국산업은행 중소기업은행법 에따른중소기업은행 한국정책금융공사법 에따른한국정책금융공사 2 법제 조제 항에따른채권 이하 사회기반시설채권 이라한다 을발행할때에는 상법 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 35

자산유동화에관한법률 등관련되는법률에따라발행하며 사회기반시설채권임을표시하여야한다 3 제 항에따라사회기반시설채권을발행한자는매사업연도가끝난후 개월이내에전년 도의사회기반시설채권발행액및발행조건등에관한사항을기획재정부장관에게보고하여야한다 라 부담금및조세감면 민간투자법은민간투자사업의사업시행자가부담하는부담금등의감면과조세감면의근거를마련하되, 구체적인감면조치는각해당법률에서정하도록하고있다. 국가및지방자치단체는민간투자사업과관련하여농지법, 산지관리법에서정하는바에따라농지보전부담금또는대체산림자원조성비를감면할수있다. 또한 개발이익환수에관한법률 또는 수도권정비계획법 에서정하는바에따라개발부담금또는과밀부담금을감면할수있다 ( 민간투자법제56조 ). 한편, 민간투자법에서정하는특례제도외에국가또는지방자치단체는 조세특례제한법 또는 지방세특례제한법 에서정하는바에따라조세를감면할수있다 ( 민간투자법제57조 ). 재정위험관리방안 공공투자사업관리는사업기획, 사업평가, 재원조달, 예산편성과이들을총괄하는정부조직및인력관리의거버넌스 (governance) 시스템등과직접연계되어있다. 민간투자사업을효율적으로관리하기위해서는민간투자사업도재정투자사업과같은공공투자사업관리의틀과기준을적용해사업을점검하고통제하는새로운재정준칙의설정이필요하다. 가 재정투자사업과민간투자사업의통합관리 최근각국에서민간투자사업이확대됨에따라민간투자사업에대한관리와재정투 36 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

자사업에대한관리를하나의체계로통합시키려는노력이지속되고있다. 넓은의미에서두종류의사업모두재정이투입된다는점에서, 어떤종류의사업으로추진하는것이더많은재정투입효과를발휘할지를분석하고이를사업추진재정결정에반영하는작업이필요하다. 각사업의특성, 즉사업의비용이나위험도등에따라재정투자사업으로진행하는것이더나은경우가있고민간투자사업으로진행하는것이더나은경우도있기때문이다. 이같은결정을효과적으로하기위해서는재정투자사업과민간투자사업을별도로분리해서관리하기보다는통합관리하는것이필요하다는시각이지배적이고이를반영하는움직임들이나타나고있다. 선진국의인프라투자결정과정을살펴보았을때, 재정투자사업과민간투자사업중사업의추진방식을결정하는데있어서편향이없이 VfM만을고려한선택이강조되고있다. 2010년 4월에발간된 OECD 보고서 How to Attain Value for Money: Comparing PPP and Traditional Infrastructure Public Procurement 에서는각국의인프라투자의사결정과정을비교하고, 이를통해인프라투자방식에대한결정에있어서재정투자방식이나민간투자방식중사전적으로우선시되는방식이없이통일된검증절차를통해보다많은 VfM을가지는사업방식으로선택해야한다고말하고있다. 그리고이를위해인프라투자결정초기에간이 VfM 분석과사업추진방식결정테스트 (procurement option pre-test) 를거쳐서사업특성에맞는적절한사업추진방식을결정하기를권장하고있다. 이를통해각사업마다최적의사업추진방식을결정하여최대한의 VfM을달성할수있기때문이다. 다음 [ 그림 2-7] 에서는 OECD에서권장하는사업추진방식의결정과정을보여주고있다. 우리나라에서도현재예비타당성조사를거치는재정투자사업에대해일정조건을만족하는경우민간투자사업추진가능여부와이에따르는 VfM 분석을진행하고있다. 하지만 OECD 보고서에서강조하듯이, 처음사업을기획하는단계에서부터사업추진방식에대하여중립적인시각을가지고최적의추진방식을결정하는단계를거치는방식의적용을모색해볼필요가있다. 그리고사업추진방식결정시중립적인시각에악영향을미치는요인들이없는지살펴보고, 만약있다면이를개선할필요성이있다. 즉, 사업제안단계, 타당성검증단계, 예산반영단계, 입찰및협상단계, 자금조달단계, 사업관리단계, 정부회계기준, 사후평가절차등에서특정사업방식에대해서편향을유도하는제도는없는지검토하여만약그러한제도가있다면개선해야한다. 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 37

그림 보고서에서권장하는사업추진방식결정단계 자료 2015년민간투자기본계획이변경되어재정사업으로추진중인사업의민자적격성판단근거가신설되었다. 민간투자기본계획제64조에기획재정부장관은재정사업과민간투자사업의연계강화및정부고시사업의활성화를위해필수민자검토대상시설에해당하는사업에대해서는예비타당성조사단계에서민자적격성판단을수행한후민간투자사업전환여부를결정한다. 다만, 예타면제사업및법제4조제2호유형에따른민간투자사업은민자적격성판단대상에서제외하도록규정되었다. 이에공공투자관리센터는민간투자법시행령제20조 ( 공공투자관리센터의업무 ) 및민간투자사업기본계획제64조 ( 재정추진사업의민자적격성판단 ) 에의하여재정사업과민간투자사업의연계강화및정부고시사업의활성화를위해예비타당성조사단계에서민자적격성판단을수행한후민간투자사업전환여부를결정한다. 민간투자사업전환대상사업은기본계획에따른필수민자검토대상사업으로, 1 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법 제2조제1호의사회기반시설중다음 < 표 2-8> 의 38 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

유형에해당하는사업과 2 투자비회수등을위해이용자로부터사용료등을징수 할수있는기타시설을말한다. 표 예비타당성조사단계민간투자적격성판단대상 분야도로철도항만 공항수자원환경 시설 유료도로 유료터널 유료교량 노외주차장 철도 도시철도 철도시설 항만시설 공항시설 수도및중수도 하수도 공공하수처리시설 분뇨처리시설 하폐수처리수재이용시설 폐기물처리시설 폐수종말처리시설 재활용시설 민간투자사업기본계획 제 조 예비타당성조사 주무관청은제 항에따라기획재정부장관에게예비타당성조사를신청하는경우에는 예비타당성조사운용지침에따른예비타당성조사와법제 조의 및제 조제 호에 따른타당성분석을함께실시할수있도록예비타당성조사및타당성분석대상사업으로신청하여야한다 제 조 재정추진사업의민자적격성판단 기획재정부장관은재정사업과민간투자사업의연계강화및정부고시사업의활성화를 위해별표 과같이필수민자검토대상시설에해당하는사업에대해서는예비타당성조사단계에서민자적격성판단을수행한후민간투자사업전환여부를결정한다 다만 예타면제사업및법제 조제 호유형에따른민간투자사업은민자적격성판단대상에서제외한다 민자적격성판단은예비타당성조사결과에따라정부실행대안과민간투자대안을비교 분석하여재정사업으로추진하는것보다민간투자사업으로추진하는것이적격한지여부를분석하는방법으로시행한다 민자적격성판단은원칙적으로예비타당성조사단계에서예비타당성조사시행기관에서 실시하며 민자적격성판단을거친사업에대해서는제 조에따른타당성분석을실시한것으로본다 주무관청은제 항및제 항에따른민자적격성판단결과민간투자사업으로추진하는 것이적합하다고판단한사업은재정여건 사용료수준및그밖의정책방향등을고려하여정부고시민간투자사업으로추진하여야한다 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 39

나 정부지급금의총량관리 민간투자사업을수행하면서재정건전성을유지하기위해서는사업을통해지출되는정부예산규모의총량을사업추진전에설정하고관리하는것이필요하다. 한국의경우 2000년도이후민간투자사업에대한재정지원이본격적으로제공되면서재정규율의필요성이제기되었다. 이에따라 2008년말민간투자법개정을통해기획재정부는임대형민간투자사업 (BTL) 의정부지급금의총한도액, 대상시설별한도액, 예비한도액등을국회에제출하여의결하도록하여, 차기연도의정부지급금규모를국회에제출하고있다. 또한국회가정부지급금한도액을증액하고자하는경우에도기획재정부의동의를받도록하였다. 2010년에는임대형민자사업 (BTL) 에대해향후 5 년간의정부지급금추계서를작성하도록요구하는법개정이이루어졌다. 한편, 정부는민간투자사업의재정부담 3 을예산순계 4 의 2% 이내에서관리하고있다. 분석에따르면 2009년부터 2025년까지예상되는민간투자사업에대한정부지출이정부예산의 2% 를넘지않을것으로보여예산당국은이를준용하고있으며, 주무관청이국고지원이포함된사업의실시협약을체결하는경우기획재정부의견조회를거치는등민자사업을관리및추진하고있다. 그림 예산순계대비민간투자사업재정부담비율추정 ( 단위 : %) 3 민간투자사업의재정부담은용지보상비, 건설보조금, 최소운영수입보장 (MRG), 임대형민자사업 (BTL) 의정부지급금을말한다. 4 예산순계는중앙정부및지자체의일반회계를말하며, 교육비특별회계를포함한다. 40 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

다 회계처리기준설정을통한국가부채관리 민간투자사업은부외금융 (off balance sheet) 이가능하다는점에서국가재정을보완하는도구로사용되고있다. 하지만이러한장점이남용될경우재정건전성의악화를초래할수있으므로민간투자사업에대한회계처리기준을설정하여국가부채를관리할필요가있다. 다만, 지나친부채관리는민간투자를위축시킬수있기때문에사업의필요성과재정건전성을동시에신중히고려해야한다. 한국의수익형민간투자사업 (BTO) 은독립채산형사업방식으로서, 민간사업자가인프라시설을건설한후정부에기부채납하고운영하는방식이다. 정부는시설의기부채납대가로민간사업자에게관리운영권이라는권리를부여하고, 민간사업자는관리운영권에근거하여시설의이용료를이용자에게징수한다. 수익형민자사업 (BTO) 의경우시설의준공후국가에기부채납시해당자산이취득된것으로회계처리하며, 민간사업자에부여된관리운영권은자산의차감계정인사용수익권으로계상한다. 사용수익권은권리의제공기간에걸쳐서상각된다. 수익형민자사업 (BTO) 으로취득한자산은경제적내용연수에걸쳐정액법등으로감가상각을실시한다. 최소운영수입보장 (MRG) 이있는사업의경우최소운영수입보장금액을우발채무로인식하여국가부채로계상하지는않고있다. 한편, 임대형민간투자사업 (BTL) 의경우서비스구매형사업방식으로서, 민간사업자가인프라시설을건설하고정부에기부채납후이를정부로부터임대하는방식이다. 정부는시설의기부채납대가로민간사업자에관리운영권을부여하고, 민간사업자는권리운영권에근거하여정부에시설을임대하고시설임대료와운영비를지급받는다. 임대형민자사업 (BTL) 을통해정부가인프라시설을취득하는경우정부가지급하는임대료를실질적인자산의취득대가로보고장기연불조건으로시설물을취득하는회계처리를수행한다. 민간투자비를자산의취득원가로계상하고임대료지급액을부채로계상한다. 시설임대료는해당시설의준공및기부채납을통해정부가지급의무를가지게되기때문이다. 다만, 정부가민간사업자에게시설관리 운영의대가로매년지급하는운영비의경우지급시점에비용으로회계처리한다. 임대형민자사업 (BTL) 으로취득한자산은경제적내용연수에걸쳐정액법등으로감가상각을실시한다. 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 41

라 사업시행조건조정검토 2014년기본계획에서는 MRG 사업에만적용해왔던사업재구조화기법을운영부실및재정투입이과도한사업등에확대적용하기위해기본계획제33조의 2( 사업시행조건조정 ) 조항이개정되었다. 대상사업에는 MRG 보장하한규정 (50%) 으로 MRG 를지급하지않으나적자규모가심각한사업, 해지시지급금발생으로정부의일시적재정부담이과다한사업등이며, 사업시행조건조정을통해주무관청의재정부담을경감하고자하는제도이다. 공공투자관리센터는주무관청이사업시행조건을조정할경우업무를지원하고있으며, 대상사업이심의위원회심의를거친사업인경우주무관청의의뢰를받아사전검토를거친후기획재정부장관과협의토록하고있다. 제 5 절민간투자사업수행실적 2014년 12월말까지협약이체결되어추진중인민간투자사업은총 662개사업, 총투자비 5 는 99.4조원이다. 추진방식별로살펴보면, BTO 방식은 211개사업, 69.8조원이고, BOT BOO 방식은 11개사업, 1.9조원이며, BTL 방식은 440개사업, 27.7조원이다. 대상시설을총투자비기준으로보면, 도로사업이 42.4조원 (42.6%) 으로가장큰비중을차지하고다음으로철도사업 17.3조원 (17.4%), 환경사업 12.9조원 (13.0%), 교육사업 9.7조원 (9.8%), 항만사업 6.9조원 (7.0%) 순이다. 민간투자사업추진실적 가 추진방식별민간투자사업현황 민간투자사업은민간투자법제 4 조 ( 민간투자사업의추진방식 ) 규정에따라 BTO, 5 총투자비 = 1 건설보조 ( 경상 ) + 타인자본 ( 경상 ) + 자기자본 ( 경상 ) 2 총사업비 + 물가변동비 ( 본사업시설의준공을위해소요되는총사업비에소비자물가상승률을추가한금액 ) + 건설이자 ( 건설자금차입계약에따라대주단등에게지급하는이자 ) 42 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

BOT, BOO, BTL 방식등으로추진할수있으나, 대부분이 BTO와 BTL 방식으로추진된다. 사업수는 BTL 방식이 66.5% 로다수를차지하고있으나, 총투자금액은 BTO 방식이 70.2% 로가장큰비중을차지한다. 사업수기준으로보면, BTL 방식이 440개, BTO 방식이 211개, BOO 방식이 7개, BOT방식이 4개순이다. 투자비기준으로보면, BTO 방식이 69.8조원, BTL 방식이 27.7조원순이다. 추진방식별로평균투자금액을비교하면, BTO 방식의평균투자비가 3,307억원으로 BTL 방식의평균투자비 630억원의약 5.25배수준이다. 표 추진방식별민간투자사업현황 단위 억원 사업수총투자비평균투자비비중비중 수익형 소계 임대형 합계 추진방식및발주방식에따른민간투자사업의현황을보면, 수익형의경우사업수 와총투자비모두민간제안사업의비중이높다. 표 추진방식및발주방식별민간투자사업현황 단위 억원 사업수총투자비평균투자비비중비중 고시 수익형 제안 소계 임대형 고시 합계 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 43

나 대상시설별민간투자사업현황 대상시설별로구분하면, 사업수는교육사업 (223개) 과환경사업 (176개), 투자비는도로사업 (42.4조원 ) 과철도사업 (17.3조원 ) 이큰비중을차지하고있다. 초 중 고등학교시설에대한교육사업은 223개사업, 총투자비 9.7조원으로, 사업당평균투자비는 437억원수준이다. 도로사업은 84개사업, 총투자비 42.4조원으로, 사업당평균투자비는 5,046억원수준이다. 사업당평균투자비가가장큰사업은철도사업으로 1.3 조원수준이다. 표 대상시설별민간투자사업현황 단위 억원 사업수총투자비평균투자비비중비중 교육 환경 도로 국방 문화관광 항만 철도 공항 복지 유통 정보통신 총합계 추진방식별대상시설을사업수기준으로구분하면, BTO 사업의경우도로사업 (84 개 ) 및환경사업 (81개) 이전체 BTO 사업의 78.2% 를차지하고, BTL 사업의경우교육사업 (222개) 및환경사업 (95개) 이전체 BTL 사업의 72.0% 를차지한다. BOO와 BOT 방식으로추진된사업은문화관광, 유통사업을중심으로 11개사업이다. 투자금액기준으로구분하면도로사업이전체 BTO 사업의 60.7%(42.4 조원 ) 를차지하고, 교육사업 (9.7조원 ) 이전체 BTL 사업의 35.0% 를차지한다. 44 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

표 추진방식및대상시설별민간투자사업현황 단위 억원 사업수 비중 총투자비 비중 평균투자비 도로 환경 항만 공항 철도 문화관광 교육 정보통신 소계 문화관광 유통 소계 유통 문화관광 소계 교육 환경 국방 문화관광 복지 정보통신 철도 소계 합계 주 비중은추진방식별로구분됨 다 연도별민간투자사업현황 1994년에민간투자제도의법적근거가마련된이후사업수와투자비가지속적으로증가해왔으나, 1999년민간제안방식과 MRG가도입된이후민간투자사업에대한투자금액이크게늘어나기시작하였다. 임대형방식이도입된 2005년이후에사업수가큰폭으로증가하고, 2007년에사 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 45

업수 (121개) 와투자금액 (11.3조원 ) 모두최고치를기록하였다. 2000년이후민간제안방식도입과 MRG의활용으로대규모사업이추진되기시작하였으며, 2006년이후에는임대형사업도입의영향으로사업수는크게증가했지만평균투자비규모는감소하였다. 그림 연도별사업수및총투자비추이 그림 연도별사업수및평균투자비추이 46 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

연도별로추진방식을비교하면, 다음 < 표 2-13> 과같다. 수익형민자사업 (BTO) 방식으로민간투자를유치한실적은약 71.7조원이며, 임대형민자사업 (BTL) 은약 27.7 조원에이르고있다. 만약민간투자제도가도입되지않았다면민간이투자한금액중상당부분은정부의부담으로작용했을것이며, 재정부담의이유로사업을추진하지못한경우에는국민의편의가그만큼줄었을것이다. 표 연도및추진방식별민간투자사업현황 연도 사업수 총투자비 평균투자비 수익형 임대형 단위 억원 사업수총투자비사업수총투자비 합계 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 47

연도별로추진주체를비교하면, 임대형사업이도입된 2005 년이후지자체에서추 진한사업수가국가관리, 국가보조지자체관리사업보다사업수는더많지만총투 자비는더적다. 표 연도및추진주체별민간투자사업현황 연도사업수총투자비 국가관리 국가보조지자체관리 지자체관리 단위 억원 사업수총투자비사업수총투자비사업수총투자비 합계 48 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

연도별로발주방식을비교하면, 정부고시수익형민간투자사업은 2007 년이후로 급감하였으나민간제안사업은급감하는추세를보이지않아, 수익형의경우정부고 시보다는민간제안의발주방식이선호된것을볼수있다. 표 연도및발주방식별민간투자사업현황 연도사업수총투자비 수익형 정부고시 임대형 민간제안 수익형 단위 억원 사업수총투자비사업수총투자비사업수총투자비 합계 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 49

라 추진주체별민간투자사업현황 추진주체별민간투자사업의현황을비교하면, 사업수측면에서는지자체사업 (321 개 ) 이국가사업 (173개) 의약 2배수준이지만, 총투자비는국가사업 (60.5조원 ) 이지자체사업 (15.0조원 ) 보다규모가크다. 국가사업의사업당평균투자비는 3,496억원이며, 지자체사업의평균투자비는 469억원이다. 표 추진주체별민간투자사업현황 단위 억원 사업수총투자비평균투자비비중비중 국가 국가보조지자체 지방자치단체 총합계 추진주체별사업추진방식을살펴보면, 국가관리사업과국가보조지자체관리사업의경우사업수는 BTL 방식, 투자금액은 BTO 방식이가장큰비중을차지하며, 지자체사업의경우사업수와투자금액모두 BTO 방식이가장큰비중을차지한다. 국가관리사업은 BTO 방식이사업수의 35.8%, 투자금액의 78.2%, 국가보조지자체관리사업은 BTL 방식이사업수의 79.8%, 투자금액의 33.1%, 지자체사업은 BTL 방식이사업수의 62.3%, 투자금액의 51.7% 를차지한다. 50 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

표 추진주체및추진방식별민간투자사업현황 국가관리 국가보조지자체관리 지자체관리 단위 억원 사업방식사업수총투자비평균투자비비중비중 소계 소계 소계 합계 추진주체별대상사업은사업수를기준으로할경우국가관리사업 (173건) 은국방, 교육, 도로, 항만순이며, 국가보조지자체관리사업 (168건) 은환경사업이 108건으로가장많고지자체관리사업 (321건) 은교육사업이 195건으로가장많은수를차지하고있다. 투자금액을기준으로할경우국가사업은도로사업이가장큰비중을차지하며, 국가보조지자체관리사업은환경사업이, 지자체관리사업은교육사업이가장큰비중을차지한다. 주체별로추진된대상시설유형이서로상이하다. 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 51

표 추진주체및대상시설별민간투자사업현황 단위 억원 국가관리 국가보조지자체관리 지자체관리 사업분야사업수총투자비비중 비중 평균투자비 국방 교육 도로 항만 공항 철도 유통 환경 정보통신 문화관광 복지 소계 환경 문화관광 도로 복지 철도 교육 소계 교육 환경 도로 문화관광 정보통신 유통 소계 합계 52 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

마 발주방식별민간투자사업현황 발주방식별로구분하면사업수와총투자비모두정부고시사업의비중이높지만, 평균투자비는민간제안방식이더큰것으로나타났다. 정부고시사업의경우 542개사업, 총투자비는 57.7조원으로사업당평균 1,065억원이고, 민간제안사업의경우 120개사업, 총투자비는 41.7조원으로사업당평균 3,474 억원이다. 표 발주방식별민간투자사업현황 단위 억원 사업수 비중 총투자비 비중 평균투자비 정부고시사업 수익형 임대형 민간제안사업 합계 발주방식을대상시설별로구분할경우, 사업수를기준으로정부고시사업은교육사업 (223건), 환경사업 (117건), 국방사업 (71건), 도로사업 (43건) 등의순서이며, 민간제안사업은환경사업 (59건) 과도로사업 (41건) 순이다. 총투자비기준으로정부고시사업은도로사업이 14.4조원, 철도사업 12.0조원으로많은비중을차지하고, 민간제안사업은도로사업이 28.0조원으로가장높게나타났다. 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 53

표 발주방식및대상시설별민간투자사업현황 단위 억원 정부고시 민간제안 수익형 임대형 사업수 총투자비 사업수 총투자비 사업수 총투자비 사업수 총투자비 교육 환경 국방 도로 문화관광 항만 공항 복지 철도 정보통신 유통 합계 사업현황 추진단계별로보면, 전체 662개사업중에서운영중인사업은 552개사업으로 83.4% 수준이다. 각추진단계별로대상시설을구분하면운영중인사업은교육사업 216건과환경사업 139건이사업수기준으로높은비중을차지하고, 투자금액기준으로는도로사업 표 추진단계별민간투자사업현황 단위 억원 사업수총투자비평균투자비비중비중 운영중 시공중 시공준비중 합계 54 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

22.5 조원과철도사업 10.6 조원으로많은비중을차지한다. 시공중인사업은환경사 업 23 건과도로사업 20 건으로사업수기준으로높은비중을차지한다. 2014 년기준 으로시공준비중인사업은총 55 개사업으로나타났다. 표 추진단계및대상시설별민간투자사업현황 단위 억원 운영중 시공중 시공준비중 전체 사업수 금액 사업수 금액 사업수 금액 사업수 금액 교육 환경 도로 국방 문화관광 항만 철도 공항 복지 유통 정보통신 합계 수익형사업을추진단계별로구분하면, 운영중인사업은 159개사업 43.3조원, 시공중인사업은 40개사업 18.9조원, 시공준비중인사업은 23개사업 9.5조원규모이다. 총투자비기준으로운영중인사업은 60.4%, 시공중인사업은 26.3%, 시공준비중인사업은 13.2% 를차지한다. 표 수익형사업의추진단계별현황 단위 억원 사업수총투자비평균투자비비중비중 운영중 시공중 시공준비중 합계 제 2 장한국의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 55

임대형사업을추진단계별로구분하면, 운영중인사업은 393개사업 21.3조원, 시공중인사업은 15개사업 2.4조원, 그리고시공준비중인사업은 32개사업 4.0조원규모이며, 총투자비기준으로운영중인사업은 76.9%, 시공중인사업은 8.7%, 시공준비중인사업은 14.4% 를차지한다. 표 임대형사업의추진단계별현황 단위 억원 사업수총투자비평균투자비비중비중 운영중 시공중 시공준비중 합계 56 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

제 3 장 필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 제 1 절필리핀의경제현황 경제현황 지난 5년간필리핀은견실한경제성장을이루었다. 2012년에서 2014년기간동안필리핀은 6~7% 의성장세를지속하며동남아시아국가연합 (ASEAN) 국가중가장빠른경제성장을이룩했다. 그러나필리핀의가장큰당면과제는보다안정적인성장을통해체계적인방식으로빈곤을점진적으로퇴치하는것이다. 다른무엇보다물리적인사회기반시설의확충이필요한시기이며, 이를통해시장및사회서비스에대한국민들의접근성을개선할필요성이있다. 필리핀정부는 2016년까지사회기반시설에대한공공지출을 GDP의 5% 까지확대하는것을목표로하고있다. 공공부문지출은 2010년 1.74% 에서 2011년 1.41% 로소폭감소 ( 기타정부지출항목포함 ) 한이후몇년간조금씩증가해왔다. 그럼에도불구하고, 2014년에는 2.01% 수준에그친것을보면 GDP 대비 5% 의목표를달성하기위한노력이여전히요구된다. 높은성장세의지속을방해하는제약요인중하나는사회기반시설과서비스수준이다. 필리핀의열악한사회기반시설은기업들이물자를동원하고물류단지연결및국제적, 지역적생산망을연계하는비용을증가시키는등국가경쟁력에영향을미친다. 세계경제포럼 (World Economic Forum: WEF) 의 2012년도국가경쟁력평가의전 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 57

반적인인프라수준부문에서필리핀은싱가포르, 말레이시아, 태국, 인도네시아보다 하위를차지했고, 베트남보다조금높은순위에그쳤다. 그림 대비사회기반시설부문공공지출추이 년 자료 필리핀예산관리부 그림 국가의전반적사회기반시설수준 년 자료 세계경제포럼 58 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

그림 실질 성장 년 자료 필리핀통계청 필리핀의국내총생산 (GDP) 은 2000년이후연평균 5.1% 의성장세를기록했다. 2014년 GDP 성장률은 6.1% 를기록하며최근몇년간성장세를지속하고있다. GDP 성장의대부분은가계소비의지속적인성장에기인했고, 이는 GDP의가장큰부분을차지하고있다. 그외 GDP 구성요소들은상이한성장양상을보였으며, 순수출과투자등의국제적, 지역적추이변동과정부지출등재정여건변화의영향을받았다. 그림 수요측면에서의 구성요소 년 자료 필리핀통계청 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 59

표 필리핀 구성요소추이 가계최종소비 정부소비 투자및자본형성 순수출 수출 수입 자료 필리핀통계청 한편, 필리핀은 ASEAN 회원국들을주요교역대상으로하고있으며, 그외일본, 중국, 미국이주요교역국가이다. 그림 필리핀주요교역대상국가 년 분기 자료 필리핀통계청 60 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

재정현황및정책방향 2000년에서 2013년까지정부세입은 GDP 대비 13~17% 대의수준을유지하고있다. 2010년초세입이소폭증가한데서알수있듯정부는신규조세부담정책없이정부세입을늘리는데성공했다. 이는세금징수노력강화, 탈세자추적프로그램시행및관세징수당국의개혁단행등일련의조치를통해가능한것이었다. 과거에공공지출은법에따른자동채무상환의무로인해제약을받았다. 자동채무상환의무는정부의사회기반시설부문등의공공지출가용범위를제한해왔다. 그러나최근건실한재정관리를통해필리핀정부의대외부채감소가가능했고, 2004년 GDP 대비 74.45% 에육박했던총부채를 2013년에 49.2% 로줄이는데성공했다. 이는세입창출노력의개선, 세계저금리기조에힘입은대외부채조기상환및국내유동성시장으로부터의차입금증가와대외시장의존도축소를기반으로한부채구조조정을통하여이룰수있었다. 가용재정범위가확대됨에따라, 정부는사회기반시설부문투자등공공지출확대에중점을두게되었다. 필리핀개발계획 (Philippine Development Plan: PDP) 2011~2016 은주요발전제약요인에대한연구결과를인용하며, 국가기반시설의양 질적부족이경제성장을저해 그림 대비정부세입 년 자료 필리핀재정부 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 61

그림 대비정부미상환국가부채비율 년 자료 필리핀재정부 하는주요제약요인이라고강조했다. 6 필리핀개발계획 (PDP) 2011~2016 은사회기반시설개발을위한목표들을설정하면서, 사회기반시설부문의투자를유치하기위해사회기반시설부문의제도및규제환경을개선하고, 민간투자사업을적극적으로장려하는등필리핀정부는사회기반시설에대한공공투자를적극확대하고, 민간투자사업이행을통해민간재원을활용하고자노력하고있다. 사회기반시설에대한투자전망 앞서 [ 그림 3-1] 에서보았듯이, 2014년 GDP 대비인프라부문공공지출은 2.01% 로 GDP 대비 5% 목표를달성하기에는아직부족하다. 그럼에도불구하고, 민간투자사업의활성화가보완재역할을하고있고, 정부의인프라부문지출의중요한부분을차지하고있다. 향후세계경제악화로인해필리핀의경제성장이둔화될것으로예상되나, 낮고안정적인인플레이션, 탄탄한경상수지흑자, 부채부담의감소및건전한통화및재무정책덕분에필리핀은당분간성장세를지속할여력이존재한다. 또한민간부문 ( 비즈 6 아시아개발은행, Philippines: Critical Development Constraints, 2007 년 12 월. 62 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

니스프로세스아웃소싱, 부동산, 금융및일부제조업부문 ) 이국내외적투자를지속할수있으며확대된가용재정이대규모사회기반시설프로젝트에운용되어필리핀은단기적으로 6.5% 의성장률을지속할가능성이있다. 필리핀정부는지속적인성장을통해빈곤인구비율을 18~20% 로감축하겠다는목표를가지고있다. 표 성장및인플레이션전망 필리핀 성장률 필리핀 인플레이션 전세계성장률 자료 세계은행 단위 5~6% 대민간소비의꾸준한성장세와더불어 6.5% 대의 GDP 성장률유지는근본적으로정부의예산집행능력에달려있다. 2014년정부지출은 GDP의 10.19% 를차지했다. 특히 2016년까지 GDP의 5% 를사회기반시설부문에투자하고, PPP 투자프로그램을순조롭게추진해야할필요성이있다. 세계은행에따르면, 필리핀의필요한투자와실제투자사이의차이인 investment gap은 GDP 대비 6.8% 수준으로, 이중에서인프라부문이 GDP 대비 2.5% 의투자격차를보이고있고사회복지서비스부문에서 4.3% 의격차가발생하고있다. 7 항만및도로교통정체악화와 2015년의전력부족가능성은투자를확대해야할필요성을잘보여준다. 사회기반시설부문의투자확대는국가경쟁력을높이고, 그과정에서주요수출부문의활성화를가능하게할것이다. 이를위해필리핀정부는지출조달부문의장애요소를해결하고, 사법, 행정법령을명료화및간소화하고자신규예산법의초안을마련하는등예산시스템개선을위해노력하고있다. 또한조달이나토지수용등주무관청에서해결할수있는문제를중심으로기승인사업중지연되고있는사업의추진을촉진하고있다. 다행히국내자금조달조건의용이성, 저금리체제의유지등민간투자사업이행을지원할시장여건은긍정적인상황이다. < 표 3-3> 에서보는바와같이필리핀의사회기반시설에대한공공투자는회복세를 7 세계은행, Philippine Economic Update, 2015 년 1 월. 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 63

보이고있고, 공공투자성장을보완해주는민간투자사업역시 2008 년이후현재까지 상당히증가했다. 필리핀정부는사회기반시설발전목표를달성하기위해민간투자 활성화에힘쓰고있다. 표 대비민간투자사업협약체결현황 연도 협약체결기준 사업규모 단위 억페소 대비협약체결기준 사업비중 단위 년 월기준 미정 주 년부터 년까지 년부터 년까지는협약체결된민간투자사업이없음 제 2 절민간투자법률및제도 민간투자제도의규범체계 필리핀정부는 BOT법 으로알려진필리핀법 7718호및이행규정 (Republic Act (R. A.) No. 7718 and its Implementing Rules and Regulations(IRR)), 공기업의합작투자가이드라인행정명령 423호 (Charters of Government Owned and Controlled Corporations) 와필리핀법 7160호또는지방정부법령 (The Local Government Code, R. A. 7160) 에 PPP 사업의수행근거를마련하였다. 필리핀은 1980년대후반부터 1990년대초까지심각한수준의전력부족문제에부딪힘에따라사회기반시설개발을촉진하기위한새로운제도도입의필요성이제기되었다. 부족한전력산업에대한재원을조달하고건설 운영에대한민간부문의참여를허용함으로써, 민간부문의자금과효율적인경영기법을적극활용하기위해 BOT법에근거하여민간투자제도를도입하게되었다. 64 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

BOT법은대표적인민간투자법률로인식되고있는데, 민간투자에우호적인위험보상비율, 협약을구조화하는다양한방식, 조달과협약체결절차의투명성제고등의시행지침이동법의특징으로주로언급된다. BOT법과시행령및시행규칙은 PPP 사업추진, 감독및투명성과관련된가장중요한규제도구의역할을한다. PPP 사업의오랜역사가 BOT법의전반적인타당성을입증하고있으나, 사업시행과관련된대부분의문제는법체계의취약성때문이아니라주로사업의특성과장애요인들에기인한효율성저하로인해발생한다. 한편, 정부산하기관들은투명성제고조치등 BOT법의일부장점을번거로운절차로여기기도한다. 지방정부들은가장유리한협약을체결하기위해자치권을행사하며경쟁조달의요건뿐아니라중앙정부의감독을회피하기위해지방정부법령을활용한다. 또한지방정부법령의허점을이용해합작투자에참가하고, 사업및협약의승인을지방의회만의권한으로한정하기도한다. 현재명확한가이드라인의부재로관련절차나요건이표준화되어있지않고, 추진절차의투명성이부족한상황이다. 이러한이유로중앙정부와지방정부간협약과정의정직성과질에서상당한차이를보인다. 가 법 개정된필리핀 BOT법인 R. A. 7718호는 13개조항과시행령으로구성되어있다. BOT, BOO, BT 등 PPP 사업방식, 사업자에대한평가및선정방법, 수행절차, 참가자격등에대한사항을다루고있다. 또한 PPP 사업에있어서민간부문의역할, 민간자본의유치를위한인센티브, 정부개입의최소화및사업자귀책없이사업이정부에의해해지되거나종료된경우보상등의규정을명시하고있다. 동법령은또한사업및실시협약의승인과관련한지침을규정하고있다. BOT법은중앙정부와지방정부가민간투자사업협약체결시적용하는일반법이다. 동법은민간부문이국가경제성장과발전의주요동력임을인식하고, 사회기반시설의건설, 운영및관리등전통적으로정부가담당해온개발사업에있어민간자원을활용할수있도록환경을조성하고인센티브를제공하는국가의정책을명시하고있다. BOT법과시행령및시행규칙은 PPP 대상사업목록과허용가능한추진방식을규 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 65

정하고있다. 동법령은중앙정부및하급행정기관사업에대한정부의승인권, 사업및실시협약의승인과관련한지침을규정하고있다. 또한민간투자에있어위험배분원칙을인정하여사용료나정부지원금을이용하여투자비용회수와투자수익을보장하고자한다. 경쟁입찰을표준입찰방식으로인정하여선정요건및절차에대한개요를제시하고, 단독입찰자나민간제안사업에대해협상에의한계약조항도포함한다. 정부고시사업의경우, 정부는사업의경제적 재무적수익에따라정부지원금이총사업비의 50% 를상회하지않는범위에서지분투자, 보조금지원또는신용보강및운영수입보장등을제공할수있다. BOT법에의거하여수행되는모든민간투자사업의무상사용기간은최대 50년까지이다. 민간제안방식은신개념이나신기술을수반하는사업에만허용된다. 또한정부의비용분담이나위험분담이없어야하며, 제3자의제안을허용하되최초제안자에 30일이내로경쟁자의제안과경쟁하기위해다시제안할수있는권리가부여된다. 나 공기업을위한합작투자가이드라인 가이드라인 PPP 사업수행의규정중하나인공기업의합자투자가이드라인행정명령 423호는정부와민간기업간합작투자 (Joint Venture: JV) 에대한지침으로, 각당사자는당사자간의협약에따른수익, 위험및손실배분을위한정책들을조정하고관리할권리를갖는다. 합작투자는협약 JV(Contractual JV) 나합작기업형태 (Corporate JV) 의방식으로이루어질수있다. 경쟁시장의상황에따라일방당사자는타당사자에소유권을이전할수있다. 합작투자 (JV) 조달및협약에관한가이드라인은 BOT법의경쟁과책임의원칙을따르고있다. BOT법과의유일한차이점은최초제안자의수정제안제도가없다는점이다. 제3자제안 (Comparative challenge) 이허용되는것을조건으로민간제안이허용된다. 또한정부의합작투자 (JV) 지분은총사업비의 50% 를상회할수없다. 이사회는최대 1억 5천만페소의정부지분을포함한사업계약을승인할권한이있고, 이를상회하는경우상위감독기관의승인이필요하다. 66 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

다 지방정부법령 지방정부법령은지방정부에대한중앙정부의권한을규율하기위해제정되었으며, 지방정부의권한을강화하여기초서비스의제공, 재정관리및공공행정에대한책임있는자치권한부여를목적으로한다. 지방정부들이추가재원활용방안으로합작투자에참여할수있는조항을마련했다. 동법령제66조는 지방정부는특정기초서비스제공, 역량강화및생계개선사업, 생산성소득향상을위한지역기업육성, 농업다변화, 외곽지역산업육성, 생태학적균형도모, 주민들의사회경제적복지향상등을위해합작투자나시민기구, NGO 혹은민간부문과의협력사업을추진할수있다 고명시하고있다. BOT법의부칙 ( 임시조항 ) 들이지방정부법령의개정을반영하고있지않아지방정부들은지방정부법령을적용하고있다. 그러나지방정부법령을적용하는가장큰이유는국가감독기관의 PPP 사업심의를회피할수있기때문이다. 조달이나위험분담에관한구체적인내용이없기때문에 BOT법보다투명성이떨어진다. 라 기타관련법령 기타관련법령들도 PPP 사업추진에영향을미친다. 일부법령들은 PPP 사업추진과관련해추가적인인센티브를제공하거나 ( 예 : 신재생에너지사업 ), 사업추진시지원사항 ( 예 : 토지취득완화, 일시제한명령또는가처분명령해제, 분쟁해결책대안제시등에관한법령 ) 을포함하고있다. 1. 주무관청의행정규칙 -일부주무관청에서특허, 규제기능을행사함에있어행정규칙자체내에서서로충돌하는규정을두고있다. 권한분리가법제화되기전까지는관련규정을계속해서적용하고, 정부감독기관 ( 특히투자조정위원회 ) 이관련기준을제시하는것이필요하다. 2. 부문별공공시설의경제규제에관한법령- 특정법령들은공공시설에대해독점사용권부여와사용료에관한규정을명시하고있다. BOT법은협약이시행되면사업추진으로공익이실현되고, 사업시행자의요청에따라규제당국은자동적으로협약에명시된사용료징수권을사업시행자에부여하고있다. 과거에규제 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 67

기관이운영권및사용료징수권부여에동의하지않고, 사업시행자가내부검토, 요건충족등승인절차를거치도록한일부사례가있었다. 규제사항들을입찰요건에명시하고, 규제당국의대표를입찰심의위원회 (Bid and Award Committee) 에참여하게하였다. 3. 정부감사에관한법률- 필리핀감사위원회 (Commission on Audit: COA) 는헌법에명시된독립기관이다. 감사위원회는필리핀정부의예산과기금지출및자산의검토, 감사및결산의임무를수행한다. 과도하고부당한정부지출이나기금및자산이용을방지할수있다. 부조리를단속하고처벌하기위하여옴부즈맨이나사법재판소에사안을회부할수있다. 감사위원회 (COA) 는다음의권한을갖는다. ⅰ. 국세징수기관에개인및기업이제출한재무제표와문서를검토한다. ⅱ. 부담금지급기관, 정부지분을갖고있는비정부기관, 정부보조금을받는비정부기관, 정부로부터자금을받거나정부의기부금으로자금의일부를조달받는비정부기관을방문할권한을행사한다. 그러나이방문권한은정부로부터받은자금이나보조금을감사하는목적으로만행사할수있다. ⅲ. 특허세결정을위해요율결정과관련한해당규제청의권한행사와관련하여공공시설의회계장부, 기록및계정을검토하고감사한다. 감사위원회 (COA) 의이러한활동은민간기업에포괄적이고지나치게구속적인것으로받아들여지고있으며, 감사대상역시지나치게민간기업들에편중되어수행하는것으로간주되고있다. 민간투자사업관리에대한지침이불충분하기에이러한상황이더악화되고있고, 사업시행자가사업을기획하는데있어서어려움을겪고있다. 현재 PPP센터와감사위원회 (COA) 간에 PPP 사업의지침을마련하기위한논의가진행중이다. 민간투자제도의변천 민간투자사업은필리핀사회기반시설개발전략의초석중하나였다. 필리핀의민간투자사업은 1980년말부터 1990년중반까지극심한전력난에대응하기위해민간부문이전력발전프로젝트에참여하면서시작되었다. 당시필리핀대통령은발전소에대한민간투자를활성화하기위해 1987년행정명령 215호를발표했으나, 당시 68 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

PPP 는법률로제정된공공조달지침범위하에서제한적인사업에만적용되었다. 가 법제정및개정 1990년 7월필리핀정부는부족한인프라를확충하고개발사업에민간부문의중추적역할을촉진하기위한목적으로일명 BOT법 (An Act on Authorizing the Financing, Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Infrastructure Projects by the Private Sector and Other Purposes, Republic Act 6957) 을제정하였다. 그러나인프라의부족과심각한재정적자를해결하지못한필리핀정부는 1994년 5월, 기존의 BOT법 (R. A. 6957) 의일부조항을개정 (R. A. 7718) 하여민간투자사업활성화를도모하였다. 1994년 5월 7718호로개정된동법에서는민간부문이건설 운영할수있는분야를전력부문이외에도로, 통신, 항만, 공항및상하수도부문등 18개산업으로확대하였고, 추진방식도법에서정한 9가지방식과기타대통령이승인하는방식등으로다양화하였다. 또한사업제안주체를중앙부처, 지방정부등공공부문뿐만아니라민간부문으로도확대하여민간제안사업을활성화하는등유연한법적체계를확립하였다. 개정법에서는계약방식을다양화하고, 협상에의한계약방식을허용하여조달의투명성과유연성을제고하고, 민간참여를유인하기위한인센티브도규정하였다. 민간부문의창의적제안과명확하고유연한정책적틀을구축하였다. 나 법개정이후제도현황 1990년에서 2014년까지금융약정을체결한 PPP 사업건수중 70%, 총투자비기준 46% 가전력사업으로추진되었고, 필리핀의표준화되고제도화된민간투자 (PPP) 위험분담정책이전력산업에많은영향을끼쳤다. 전력분야는 2001년전력산업개혁법 (Electric Power Reform Act: EPIRA) 의통과와함께대대적인개혁작업이추진되었다. 주요개혁으로발전서비스의전력생산, 송전및배전을분리한것을들수있다. 전력생산이완전히민영화되었고 ( 그에따라 2001년이후시행된발전사업은 BOT 법이아닌 EPIRA법에의거 ) 송전은초기에는공공부문에의해이루어졌으나점진적으로민영화되고있으며, 배전은계속해서민간에서담당하고있다. 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 69

1999년에서 2000년, 특히 1997년에 GDP의 15.5% 에달하는투자가행해지며동기간민자사업이대폭늘어났다. 1990년대초부터공기업들이교통, 상수와정보기술분야의민자사업들을수행했다. 정부산하기관과지방정부단체들이공공시장이나교통터미널설립등의수익형민자사업에관심을보였다. 1990년대필리핀의민간투자사업이활성화된요인으로정치지도층, 특히대통령의적극적인지원이꼽힌다. 또한새로운법적틀을도입하여명확한정책및시행지침을제공하였으며, 대통령직속산하 BOT센터를설립하였다. 동센터는프로젝트개발에기술적지원제공, 주무관청의역량강화도모, 사업홍보, 마케팅및기관간합의를요하는정책개혁의조정등을담당한다. 견실한거시경제상황과함께민간부문의관심이높은것도필리핀민간투자사업활성화의한가지요인으로작용하였다. 이는민간제안사업이증가한사실에서도잘나타난다. 90년대말정권교체와함께민영화된발전사업을제외한타분야의민간투자사업의성과는부진했다. 일부사업시행과관련한거버넌스문제가대두되었고, 마닐라국제공항터미널 3 개발사업등높은관심을받았던사업이실패하였다. 또한정치적소요로대통령이탄핵되고, 부정선거의혹으로차기대통령권한의정당성에대한의문이제기되었으며, 정부최고위층에서는부패가만연했다. 따라서 2001년에서 2010 년사이에너지부문을제외한타부문에서는민간투자사업이거의추진되지않았다. 아키노필리핀대통령 ( 재임기간 2010~16 년 ) 은반부패와빈곤감축공약에힘입어당선되었다. 아키노정권의개발계획은탄탄한경제적성과와사회적평등을기반으로한포용적인성장에중점을두고있다. 지속가능한성장을이룩하기위한핵심전략중하나는사회기반시설및서비스의수준을향상시켜저조한공급을충족시킬뿐만아니라다른생산부문의발전을촉진하는것이다. 이를위해정부는이원적접근을택했다. 즉, 공공투자를현저히확대하는한편, 민간투자사업을통해민간자금을활용하여정부재원을운용하는전략이다. 필리핀정부는민간투자 (PPP) 프로그램의활성화를위한주요개혁안을준비하였고과거의경험으로부터교훈을얻어이해당사자들의건설적인비판과의견을경청한후, 민간투자사업프로그램의제도화를위한조치및이를위한기반을마련하였다. 먼저, 대통령이민간투자사업을개발전략의용도로활용하는명확한정책성명을발표하였고, 주무관청으로하여금전체투자프로그램중민간투자 (PPP) 제도를합리 70 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

적으로개선토록하였다. 또한정부는민간투자 (PPP) 사업의법적근간이되는시행령및규칙 (BOT법과공기업을위한합작투자 (JV) 가이드라인 ) 을개정하여입찰가이드라인과주무관청의책임을강화하였으며, 승인절차를간소화하고사업모니터링및평가절차를개선하였다. 그리고 PPP센터를개편하였으며, 정책이행의감독기능이나사업의준비및평가기준마련, 사업모니터링및평가등을위한주무관청교육기능을추가하여센터의역량을강화하였다. PPP센터는주무관청이사용할수있는 사업개발및관리기금 (Project Development and Monitoring Fund: PDMF) 을설치, 기금을통해파산사업에대비하고자문서비스이용시활용하며, 정부고시사업의현금흐름을개선하고자하였다. PPP 사업환경의개선을위한개혁들은계속해서진행되고있다. 현재 BOT법개정안이계류중인데, 동개정안의골자는 PPP 방식중합작투자를포함시키고, 민간제안사업의문제점을개선하며, 사업개발및감독기구를제도화하는것이다. 공기업들의이해갈등문제를해결하기위해규제와소유기능을분리하고, 국가중점사업 목록을만들어지방자치단체의조례나지방비및지방세적용을받지않도록하고있다. 이와더불어 PPP 사업수행을위한중앙정부기관및지방정부의역량강화와지방정부를위한맞춤형사업을포함시키기위해 사업개발및관리기금 (PDMF) 을확대하는계획을추진중에있다. 사업평가와관련하여, 민자적격성조사 (Value for Money Analysis) 가검토되고있으나, 정부실행대안을위한정보구축이여전히진행중이다. 그중가장중요한계획은재정부가개발중인재정위험관리프로그램구축이다. 재정위험관리프로그램은 PPP 사업수행에있어우발채무등정부의위험노출에대해관리할예정이다. 민간투자추진방식 민간투자사업방식은 < 표 3-4> 와같이총 9가지종류로규정하고있으나, 이외에대통령의승인에의해변형된방식도가능하다. 다양한프로젝트조건에맞는여러가지 PPP 방식을확대 허용함으로써공공부문과민간부문모두에게유연성을제공하고있다. 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 71

표 필리핀의민간투자사업추진방식 사업종류내용 무상사용기간을 년으로제한 사업시행자의지분중 이상을필리핀국민이소유해야함 사업시행자가재원조달을하여건설 완공한후정부또는관련기관에소유권을이전하고 정부는투자비와적정수익을지급 보안또는전략적인이유로시설운영을정부만이하여야하는경우 경제개발청투자조정위원회의추천에따라대통령의승인을얻는사업에한정 사업시행자가재원조달을하여건설 완공한후사업시행자는정부와임대계약으로시설운영권을갖고 계약종료후정부또는관련기관에소유권을이전하는방식 시설을완공한후정부 관련기관에소유권을이전하고사업시행자가운영권을갖는방식 정부로부터운영권을갖게된기존시설에사업시행자가더추가하여건설하고 일정기간운영권을갖는방식 본사업과관련된연관사업의개발과운영 소유권을이전하는방식 기존시설을정비하고 일정기간운영권을갖는방식 기존시설의정비후소유권을갖는방식 BOT 혹은 BOO 방식으로추진되는사업의경우, 민간사업자는정해진기간동안사용요금을징수할권한이있다. BOT 방식의경우운영기간은최대 50년까지이다. 그러나 BOO 방식의경우사업시행자가시행기간과운영권이나계약을갱신할경우계속해서요금을징수할수있다. BTO, BL(Build-Lease) 혹은 BLT 방식의경우민간사업자는주무관청으로부터분할상환의방식으로투자비용을회수한다. 한편, 민간사업자는상업개발권을받거나매립지의일정지분을받는등비금전적인방식으로비용을회수할수도있다. 민간투자추진가능대상시설 필리핀의 BOT 사업대상시설은 BOT 법에서규정하고있다. 일반적으로민간이재 72 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

원조달, 운영하는사업으로서도로, 철도, 내륙용수도 (inland waterways), 항만, 공항, 전력, 통신, 정보기술 (IT), 관개, 수도공급및하수도, 교육및보건, 간척, 산업및관광단지, 공공청사및주택, 시장및도축장, 곡물창고시설, 어항시설, 환경및폐기물시설등이다. 제 3 절민간투자사업의추진절차 필리핀민간투자사업은주무관청이사업을제안하는정부고시사업과민간부문이 제안하는민간제안사업의두방식으로진행된다. 기본입찰방식은경쟁입찰이다. 정부고시사업 주무관청이추진하는민간투자사업개발은크게세단계로나눌수있다. 사업지정및우선순위선정필리핀의 PPP 사업개발체계는 PPP 프로그램의주요특징중하나로사업추진의우선순위는국가개발계획에대한경제적목표에따라결정되고있다. 민간투자사업개발은필리핀개발계획 (Philippine Development Plan: PDP) 과부문별종합계획에따라진행된다. 민간투자사업은개발계획의목표와부합하여야하며, 민간투자사업으로서적합성을판단하기위해다기준분석방법을활용한심사를받는다. 인정된사업들은이후필리핀개발계획 (PDP) 에포함된포괄적이고통합적인사회기반시설프로그램 (Comprehensive and Integrated Infrastructure Program: CIIP) 에포함된다. 필리핀개발계획 (PDP) 과사회기반시설프로그램 (CIIP) 은필리핀경제개발청 (National Economic and Development Authority: NEDA) 이사회의승인을받으며매년수정및갱신된다. 이후주무관청은사업계획수립또는사전타당성조사를실시하며우선순위사업의민간추진을준비한다. 타당성이있다고판단되는사업은세부적인타당성조사를거친다. 주무관청은타당성조사를바탕으로사업개발및관리기금 (Project Development and Monitoring Fund: PDMF) 의자금지원을신청하거나예산편성을요청할수있다. 타당성조사의결과에따라정부지원의유형과지원수준이결정된다. 보조금 (Viability Gap Funding) 이필요한사업에대해주무관청은예산편성시연간지출계획 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 73

에포함할수있다. 다년도에걸치는예산편성제도는없으나, 사회기반시설관련기 관들은우선시되어야할주요투자부문을통보하기위하여재정부에 3 개년계획을제 출해야한다. 사업승인사업을주무관청예산에포함시키기전에정부기관의대표 ( 장관 ), 공기업이사회및지방정부의회등의내부승인을거쳐야한다. 다음 < 표 3-5> 는정부감독기관의승인요건을보여준다. 표 사업승인기관및기준 주무관청승인기관승인기준 중앙정부기관 주무부처 공기업 지방정부기관 주정부 시정부 지자체 필리핀경제개발청 이사회투자조정위원회 필리핀경제개발청 이사회 투자조정위원회 의권고에따라 지자체개발의회 주정부개발의회 시정부개발의회 지역개발의회 투자조정위원회 최대 억페소 만달러 억페소이상 협상에의한사업 예 민간제안사업 최대 만페소 만페소이상 만페소이하 최대 만페소 만페소이상 억페소이하 억페소이상 투자조정위원회 (Investment Coordination Committee: ICC) 는필리핀경제개발청 (NEDA), 재무부 (Department of Finance: DOF), PPP센터대표로이루어진기술실무전담반을구성하고법에규정된지침에따라사업을평가한다. 필리핀경제개발청 (NEDA) 은상위개발계획과의부합여부및기여도의측면에서사업을평가한다. 또한경제적비용편익분석을통해사업의사회경제적인측면을평가하고, 현행법규준수여부를확인한다. PPP센터는사업의민자적격성조사및재무분석을담당하고, 특히사업성과재무구조의건전성을평가한다. 이를통해재원조달계획의타당성을검증한다. 74 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

DOF 는정부의직간접채무, 기회비용분석을바탕으로위험구조와사업의재정요 건, 정부부채, 내부수익률과재정적지속가능성에대한영향을평가한다. 정부지원 과입찰을위한예산의승인을얻기위해감독기관들의승인이선행되어야한다. 입찰필리핀 PPP 사업의기본입찰방식은경쟁입찰이다. 협상에의한계약 (negotiated contract) 또한법에의해허용되고있으나단독입찰인경우에한한다. 정부고시사업의조달방식은두가지로나뉜다. 첫번째는시설사업기본계획 (Request for Proposals: RFP) 고시전사전자격심사 (Pre-qualification) 를수행하는 2단계평가절차이고, 두번째는입찰절차에평가가포함되어있는 1단계평가절차방식이다. 각각의추진절차는다음과같다. 그림 정부고시사업의평가방식별추진절차 2 단계평가방식의경우사업시행자는사전자격심사서류를공고된제출마감일안 에제출하며, 주무관청은법적요건의충족여부, 사업자의경험, 재무상태를심사하 여적격여부를판단하여제출자에게통보한다. 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 75

PQ서류가제출되면모든사전입찰과입찰절차를책임지고있는사전자격입찰승인위원회 (Pre-qualification, Bids, and Awards Committee: PBAC) 를통해평가가이루어지게되며, 평가후 PQ서류에적격또는부적격이표시되어주무관청의승인을받게되고, 승인후 PBAC는 7일이내에제안자들에게사전적격여부를통보한다. 부적격자에게는부적합성에대한사유를알려야하며, 부적격판정을받은제안자는통지를받은날로부터 15일이내에이의를제기할수있다. 해당주무관청은모든사전자격입찰자에게입찰관련서류를제공하여야한다. 서류에는과업지시서, 최소설계수준, 성과수준등이포함되며, 당사자간에법적관계를다룬계약초안과입찰서양식등이포함된다. 제안서평가제안서에대한평가는두단계로나누어진행된다. 첫단계에서는사업에대한기술적, 운영적, 환경적, 재무적타당성에대한평가가이루어지고, 첫번째단계의평가에서자격을얻은제출자들은두번째단계로서제안된자금조달방법에대한평가를받아야한다. 실시협약체결및사업시행평가완료후 30일이내에체결여부를결정하며승인기관에서사업추진을승인하면사업자에게이를통보한다. 낙찰자는통지를받은후 7일이내에실시협약을체결해야한다. 제안자는지시된최소한의설계기준에근거한상세설계도서를주무관청에제출해야하며, 주무관청은이를검토하여공사이행을승인한다. 76 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

표 정부고시사업추진절차 단계평가방식 단계 주요내용 사업선정및준비 승인권자승인 이사회등 및입찰제안공고 서류준비 입찰자사전심사 공고 계획서제출및평가 실시협약의승인 사업시행승인 실시협약의체결 사업개시통지 주무관청은사업의타당성조사및사업승인에필요한모든서류를준비함 승인기관의사업승인까지의소요일수는 일임 승인이완료되면 주무관청은 주연속신문에매주 회게재하여공고함 사업제안자는공고일마지막날부터 일까지서류를준비할수있음 주무관청은제출일이후 일이내 통과여부를제안자에게공지함 를통과한제안자를대상으로 를공고하며제안자는 일 사업규모에따라상이 동안서류를준비함 제안자는기술평가와가격평가를위한서류를주무관청에제출함 주무관청은제출일이후 일이내에평가를완료함 는평가완료후 일이내에주무관청에실시협약체결에대한권고를제출함 주무관청은 권고문제출이후 일이내에권고문을승인함 입찰탈락자는서면으로그결과를통보받아야함 주무관청은입찰통과자에게사업시행승인서를발급하여사업수행을위한필요자료를요청함 입찰통과자는 일이내에관련서류를구비하여제출하며 미제출시주무관청은사업시행승인을무효화할수있음 서류제출완료후조건충족시주무관청과사업시행자간협약을체결함 주무관청은협약체결이후 일이내에사업개시통지서를발급함 자료 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 77

표 정부고시사업추진절차 단계평가방식 단계 주요내용 사업선정및준비 승인권자승인 이사회등 및입찰제안공고 공고 계획서제출및평가 실시협약의승인 사업시행승인 실시협약의체결 사업개시통지 주무관청은사업의타당성조사및사업승인에필요한모든서류를준비함 승인기관의사업승인까지의소요일수는 일임 승인이완료되면 주무관청은 주연속신문에매주 회게재하여공고함 주무관청은 를공고하며제안자는 일 사업규모에따라상이 동안서류를준비함 제안자는자격평가 기술평가와가격평가를위한서류를주무관청에제출함 주무관청은 일이내에모든평가를완료함 는평가완료후 일이내에주무관청에실시협약체결에대한권고를제출함 주무관청은 권고문제출이후 일이내에권고문을승인함 입찰탈락자는서면으로그결과를통보받아야함 주무관청은입찰통과자에게사업시행승인서를발급하여사업수행을위한필요자료를요청함 입찰통과자는 일이내에관련서류를구비하여제출하며 미제출시주무관청은사업시행승인을무효화할수있음 서류제출완료후조건충족시주무관청과사업시행자간협약을체결함 주무관청은협약체결이후 일이내에사업개시통지서를발급함 자료 78 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

그림 필리핀정부고시사업흐름도 단계평가방식기준 사업선정및준비 주무관청 대상사업선정승인 불승인 승인 프로젝트중지또는정부조달로전환검토 사전자격심사 및입찰제안공고 사전적격성심사서류준비 사업제안자 입찰자사전심사 공고 입찰서류제출및평가 사업시행자지정승인 협약승인 실시협약체결 착공지시서발급 사업개시 자료 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 79

민간제안사업 민간제안사업은다음세가지요건을모두충족할경우추진될수있다. 첫째, 주무관청이정한신개념또는신기술을수반하거나우선순위사업목록에등재되어있지않는사업이다. 우선순위사업이란중기필리핀개발계획, 중기재정투자프로그램, 지역개발프로그램, 지역개발투자프로그램등에포함되어있는사업들을말한다. 또한이미정부고시사업추진을승인받은사업의경우도민간제안사업으로추진할수없다. 둘째, 정부의직접보증, 보조금, 지분투자가필요하지않는사업이다. 정부보증이란사업시행자가사업실행으로인해직접적으로초래하는채무에대해정부의상환을보증하는것을의미한다. 셋째, 주무관청이 3주연속신문공고를통해제3자제안을공개적으로요청하였는데, 공고후 60일동안제3자제안제출이없는경우민간제안사업으로추진할수있다. 이경우최초제안자가즉시사업의최종낙찰자가된다. 만약제3자제안이있고제3자가제시한가격제안이최초제안보다나은경우, 최초제안자는제3자의제안결과를통보받은날로부터 30일이내에수정가격제안서를제출할수있다. 만약최초제안자가해당기간동안수정가격제안서를제출하지못하는경우에는, 제3자가최종낙찰자로선정된다. [ 그림 3-10] 은민간제안사업의절차를보여준다. 그림 민간제안사업절차개요 자료 필리핀 센터 80 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

사업제안제안자는완성된사업제안서, 타당성검토, 회사소개서및계약서초안을준비하여주무관청에제출하고, 주무관청은 7일이내에제출된서류가충분한지등을제안자에게통보한다. 제안이완료되면주무관청은사업을평가한후 30일이내에제안의승인여부를제안자에게통보한다. 제안이승인될경우제안자는최초제안자로서의지위를갖는다. 최초제안자의자격심사후협상승인기관에서사업의타당성을승인하면사업제안자와주무관청은협상을실시한다. 협상은 90일이내에이루어진다. 민간제안사업의경우사용료산식과운영기간동안의사용료조정기준에대해제3자제안공고전사업승인기관의승인을미리받아야하며, 최초제안자는협상을통해변경조건을수용하는절차를거친다. 주무관청의사업승인 주무관청은최초제안자와협상을거쳐승인기관의조건수용여부를확인하고, 모 든조건이받아들여지면사업승인통지서를발급한다. 경쟁입찰공고주무관청은경쟁입찰초청공고를하고, 경쟁입찰에참여할참여자들은입찰서를준비하여정해진기간내에주무관청에제출한다. 한편, 최초제안자는사업에대해입찰보증한다. 입찰제안서평가및우선협상대상자선정주무관청은제출된입찰제안서를바탕으로자격심사, 제안서평가및가격의적합성등을차례로평가하고, 제3자혹은최초제안자중가장경쟁력있는가격을제시한제안자가낙찰되게된다. 만약제3자가제시한가격제안이최초제안보다나은경우, 최초제안자는수정가격제안서를제출할수있다. 만약최초제안자가해당기간동안수정가격제안서를제출하지못하는경우에는, 제3자가최종낙찰자로선정된다. 제3자의가격제안이최초제안자보다경쟁력이없는경우최초제안자가즉시최종낙찰자로선정된다. 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 81

표 민간제안사업추진절차 단계 사업제안서제출 사업제안서평가 최초제안자와협상 제안서및협약안승인 이사회등 사용료조건조정 최초제안자조건수용 제 자제안공고 제 자제안준비및제출 제안서평가 실시협약의승인 사업시행승인 실시협약의체결 사업개시통지 주요내용 민간제안자가사업제안서를해당주무관청에제출하면주무관청은 일이내제안서수신을확인해주어야함 주무관청은 일이내제안서를평가하여제안수락여부를결정하며 수락할경우제안자는최초제안자지위가부여됨 주무관청은사업의수락여부에대해승인권자에게통보하고 수락할경우관련서류를승인기관에제출함 주무관청은협상시작전승인권자로부터수익률 안 에대해사전에확인받아야함 협상은 일이내완료되어야하며 완료된이후주무관청은협상완료보고서를승인기관에제출하여야함 주무관청은 일이내제안사업및협약안을승인하여야 하며 승인할경우승인기관은최초제안자에게승인서를발급하여야함 주무관청은입찰전사업에적용할사용료공식과이후사용료조정시사용할물가지수등을승인기관에확인받아야함 최초제안자는승인기관에서승인한모든조건을수용한다는내용을서면으로주무관청에제출하여야함 주무관청은 주연속신문에매주 회제 자제안공고를게재함 최초제안자는입찰보증하고제 자제안공고에따라제안서를재작성함 제 자제안자에게는서류준비를위해 일이주어지며 자격평가 기술평가및가격평가서류를주무관청에제출해야함 주무관청은제출일이후 일이내에평가를완료함 는평가완료후 일이내에주무관청에실시협약체결에대한권고를제출함 주무관청은 권고문제출이후 일이내에권고문을승인함 입찰탈락자는서면으로그결과를통보받아야함 주무관청은입찰통과자에게사업시행승인서를발급하여사업수행을위한필요자료를요청함 입찰통과자는 일이내에관련서류를구비하여제출하며 미제출시주무관청은사업시행승인을무효화할수있음 서류제출완료후조건충족시주무관청과사업시행자간협약을체결함 주무관청은협약체결이후 일이내에사업개시통지서를발급함 자료 82 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

평가및사업시행자지정절차 BOT법은공공조달을규율하는다른법령과구분되어 PPP 사업의전체적인조달절차를규율한다. 조달과정의법규준수여부를감독하기위해 PPP센터, 투자조정위원회 (Investment Coordination Committee: ICC), 감사위원회 (Commission on Audit: COA) 등다양한기관이참여한다. 정부고시사업과민간제안사업의입찰평가는크게세단계로구분된다. 입찰자의자격심사, 기술제안서의최소성과요구수준에의부합여부및입찰기준과관련된가격제안서의세부사항을평가한다. 입찰자들은각각자격심사서류, 기술제안서및가격제안서를동봉해서제출해야한다. 서류심사도단계별로이루어진다. 자격심사를통과한입찰자의기술제안서만평가대상이되고, 기술제안서가통과된입찰자에한해가격평가가이루어진다. 다만, 정부고시사업의 2단계평가방식에서는자격요건평가는사전자격심사 (Pre-qualification) 단계를별도로거쳐서이루어진다. 자격요건평가입찰자격요건을갖추기위해사업시행자는다음과같은법적, 기술적, 재무적능력에대한요건을충족해야한다. 1 법적요건 - 공익시설을운영하는사업의운영자는필리핀인이거나법인일경우회사지분의최소 60% 이상을필리핀인이소유해야한다. 토목공사시공업체는필리핀건설업자승인위원회 (Philippine Constructors Accreditation Board) 의적법한승인을받아야한다. 2 사업참여경험및실적 - 사업제안자는사업과관련한충분한경험을보유해야한다. 사업경험은전체컨소시엄구성원을평가한다. 3 재무능력 - 사업제안자는구체적인시공설계, 건설, 운영및유지관리단계에서필요한재원을조달할수있는충분한능력을보유해야한다. 재무능력은지분투자 ( 순가치혹은보유예금 ) 와타인자본조달 ( 국내종합 / 상업은행, 필리핀내자회사 / 지점을보유한해외은행또는필리핀중앙은행에의해재편된해외은 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 83

행의추천서 ) 가능여부에대한증빙서류로판단한다. 기술제안서평가기술평가단계에서설계, 성과요구수준, 환경기준등의준수여부를평가한다. 이러한기준은입찰설명서와평가기준에명시되어있다. 평가자들은제안서상기술적으로최소성과요구수준을충족할수있는지의여부를검증한다. 이단계에서최소요건을충족하는지여부에따라 통과또는탈락 으로나누어진다. 기술평가를통과한입찰자들만이다음단계인가격평가를받을수있다. 가격제안서평가정부에가장이익이되는제안자를선정하기위해입찰제안서의가격평가를수행하며, 다음의기준중하나이상을적용한다. 1 입찰설명서에사전합의에따른사용요금조정공식이제시된경우, 사업운영시작단계에가장낮은비용을제안한제안서 2 사업기간동안지원될정부보조금의현재가치가가장낮은제안서 3 정부에지급하는금액의현가가가장높은제안서 4 기타승인기관의승인을받은적절한가격제안서평가기준적용가능 제 4 절민간투자사업관련기관 민간투자사업주관부처 가 필리핀경제개발청 필리핀경제개발청 (National Economic and Development Authority: NEDA) 은국가사회경제발전계획을위한전략을수립하고, PPP 제도를통해공공부문과민간부문의자금을조달받는투자프로그램의우선순위를정하는임무를수행한다. 또한대통령을대표로하는국가최고정책결정기구인 NEDA 이사회에기술자문역할을한다. NEDA 이사회하에는주요정책부문별로다음과같은상임위원회가설립되어 PPP 프 84 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

로그램과관련한역할을수행한다. 투자조정위원회 (Investment Coordination Committee: ICC) 는주요국가사업의재무, 회계, 균형재정지출을평가하고, 사업평가지침을발간하며, 사업의내부적경제수익의지표가되는사회적할인율을설정한다. 개발예산조정위원회 (Development and Budget Coordination Committee: DBCC) 는연간정부지출프로그램과경제사회발전, 국방, 일반행정및부채상환을위한정부지출의상한을권고한다. 사회기반시설위원회 (Infrastructure Committee: InfraCom) 는국가개발목표에부합하는사회기반시설개발정책을의회와대통령에제언하고, 사회기반시설개발프로그램및전략적투자프로그램과정부사회기반시설기관의계획을조정한다. 한편, 필리핀경제개발청 (NEDA) 은 BOT법시행규정을제정및개정하는내부기관간위원회의의장역할을수행한다. 또한공기업을위한합작투자지침을마련하는한편타당성조사평가및검증, 사업평가보고서작성, 공공부문의자금을조달받는주요사업에대한투자조정위원회 (ICC) 의승인을권고하는임무를수행한다. 필리핀경제개발청 (NEDA) 은승인기준, 여건, 타당성지표마련및정책형성과관련된사안을다루며공적개발원조의지원을받는사업을평가하고감시한다. PPP 사업에대해필리핀경제개발청 (NEDA) 이사업의경제적분석을검토하고, 이후 PPP 사업에대한투자조정위원회 (ICC) 의승인을위해사업종합평가보고서를작성하여제출한다. BOT법에의거하여투자조정위원회 (ICC) 와 NEDA 이사회는 PPP 사업에대한승인권을갖는다. 투자조정위원회 (ICC) 는정부출자가 1억 5천만페소를상회하는공기업의합작투자사업에대한승인권한을갖고있다. 그리고이와관련해 PPP 평가및위험분담에관한지침을마련하고있다. 나 재무부 재무부 (Department of Finance: DOF) 는직접채무및우발채무등정부채권을승 인하고, 공적개발원조차관이나국채등정부채권발행을필요로하는 PPP 협약을 승인한다. 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 85

다 예산관리부 예산관리부 (Department of Budget and Management: DBM) 는일반세출법에의거하 여의회승인을받기위한국가지출계획을작성한다. 정부의계획및재정관리기관과 의긴밀한협의를통해총예산을편성하고정부부처별예산을편성한다. 민간투자사업지원기관 가 센터 2010년필리핀대통령은행정명령제8호를발표하여 BOT센터를개편하고필리핀 PPP센터로명칭을변경하였으며, 정부중앙부처인필리핀경제개발청 (National Economic and Development Authority: NEDA) 산하에센터를비치하였다. 행정명령제8호에따라 PPP센터는민간투자프로그램및사업시행의제약요인을제거하여주무관청의사업추진을촉진및지원하고, 사업준비및개발단계에서자문, 기술지원, 교육등을제공한다. 또한관련감독위원회, 주무관청및민간부문간협의를통해민간투자사업과관련된계획, 정책및시행지침을권고한다. PPP센터는프로그램및사업계획서, 사전타당성조사및타당성조사, PPP 프로그램이나사업과관련한자료를준비하기위한 사업개발및관리기금 (Project Development and Monitoring Fund: PDMF) 을관리하고운용하는기능을수행하기도한다. 그리고기관들의우선순위사업프로그램및사업시행을감독및촉진하며, PPP 프로그램및사업에대한중앙 DB시스템을구축및관리한다. 또한민간투자사업프로그램및사업제안일정의개선안을권고하고모든기관의법규준수여부를감독하며, 정부의 PPP 프로그램및사업에관한시행보고서를작성하여매년말대통령에제출한다. PPP센터는민간투자사업의정의와추진방식에관한정보제공을위한가이드라인의준비와더불어정부기관을위한지침과매뉴얼을발간한다. PPP센터는시행중인사업과향후추진가능한민간투자사업목록도작성한다. 행정명령제8호는이후민간투자사업을위한정책결정을강화하기위해행정명령제136 호로개정되었다. 개정을통해 PPP센터의리더십을강화하고민간투자사업에관한정보제공역할을추가로부여했다. 특히행정명령제136 호는사회경제기획부 86 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

장관 (Secretary for Socio-Economic Planning) 을의장으로하고민간투자와관련된모든사안을관할하는최고정책결정기구인 PPP 이사회 (PPP Governing Board) 를설립했다. PPP센터장을차관급으로승격했으며, 지방정부를포함한모든정부기관이민간투자제도하에시행되는사업에대한보고서를 PPP센터에제출하도록했다. PPP센터는민간투자협약등자료를축적하는역할을수행하며, 감독및평가팀을통해중요한사업관련데이터를수집하고분석한다. 개편이후 PPP센터는상당한성과를달성하고있다. PPP센터는사업개발및관리기금 (Project Development and Monitoring Fund: PDMF) 을통해프로젝트개발을촉진하고, 사업평가를수행하며사업에관심있는민간사업자에정부가제시하는자격요건과승인절차, 조달및계약에관한지침을제공하고있다. 2010년부터현재까지 6 개사업에약 10억 5백만달러규모의사업들을성공적으로입찰, 협약체결, 시행하는데중요한역할을했다. 동센터의훌륭한성과를입증하듯 2014년 UK 파트너십포럼이후원하는 2014 파트너십시상중최고의중앙정부 PPP 수행기관부문에서금상을수여했다. PPP센터는경제학자, 금융및공공기관, 엔지니어, 변호사등다양한분야로구성되어있다. 센터초기 (2011~13 년 ) 에는내부역량강화, 정책연구조사및민간투자사업수행에관한주무관청교육등의임무를맡은전문가들로구성되었다. PPP센터의팀은주무관청의 PPP 전담부서를대상으로프로젝트개발과정및사업준비 평가를위한사업개발및관리기금 (PDMF) 운영에관한교육과자문을제공한다. PPP센터의팀은사업의기술적, 제도적, 재무적분석을담당한다. 여러기능중 PPP센터의팀은프로그램감독과평가, 민간투자협약데이터베이스구축의기능을강화할필요가있는바, 이기능에관한시행지침은아직마련되어있지않다. PPP센터의또다른제약은제한적인운영범위라고할수있다. 지역사무소가따로없기때문에지방정부는활용할수없는한계가있다. 또한센터에대한수요가증가하면서센터의자원도확장되고있다. PPP센터는보유자원을활용하여서비스공급자들을교육하고, 교육을받은서비스공급자들이전국의지방정부를교육하고자문을제공할수있어야한다. 이를위해 PPP센터는최근일부교육기관과파트너십을맺어이를해결하려노력하고있다. 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 87

민간투자사업기타관련기관 PPP 프로그램에서중요한역할을하는주요관련기관은주무관청, 감독기관, 재원운영기관, 규제기관등으로나눌수있다. 주무관청으로는프로젝트개발을지원하는중앙정부의주무부처, 지방정부, 공기업등을들수있다. PPP 담당부처를보유한공공사업고속도로부, 교통통신부, 교육부, 복지부, 농업부등의정부부처는내부정책지침수립, 사업준비, 조달, 입찰및감시등사업전단계를조정함에있어핵심적인역할을하고있다. 대부분의기관별 PPP 전담부서는차관에게보고하거나고위관료를대표로두고있다. 이러한부서는정책결정, 자원분배및협약구성을담당하는정책결정자들과직접업무를수행한다. 기관별 PPP 전담부서는기술지원, 사업개발및관리기금 (Project Development and Monitoring Fund: PDMF) 의활용, 민간투자프로그램보고및민간투자협약제출등과관련하여 PPP센터와협력한다. 감독기관은기획, 정책수립, 예산분배, 사업평가및승인, 계약승인등을담당하는정부기관혹은위원회등이다. 필리핀에는민간투자사업을포함한주요사회기반시설사업의승인을담당하는독립감독기관인투자조정위원회가있다. 규제기관은경제적사안 ( 요금, 성과등 ), 안전, 환경등의규제를담당한다. 재원운영기관은정부의연간예산을준비하는기관이다. 가 감독기관 공기업을위한지배구조위원회 공기업 (Government Owned and Controlled Corporations: GOCC) 을위한지배구조위원회 (Governance Commission for GOCC: GCG) 는공기업의성과를감시하고, 합자투자 (JV) 계약상공기업과민간기업이합작 (JV) 기업을설립할경우, GCG가이를검토한후대통령에게권고하고합작 (JV) 설립안승인혹은불승인의견을제시한다. 법무차관실 법무차관실 (Office of the Solicitor General: OSG) 은중앙정부및지방정부의법적자문역할을수행한다. 기관대표의승인을받기전모든 PPP 협약에대한 OSG의검토와승인이선행되어야한다. 88 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

공기업법무관리국 공기업법무관리국 (Office of the Government Corporate Counsel: OGCC) 은공기업의법적자문역할을수행한다. 각공기업이사회의승인을받기위해 PPP 협약에대한 OGCC의검토와승인이선행되어야한다. 나 규제기관 경제규제기관부문별로살펴보면, 전력 ( 에너지규제위원회 ), 도로 ( 유료도로규제위원회 ), 항만 ( 필리핀항만관리국 ), 공항 ( 필리핀민간항공관리국 ), 철도 ( 경전철관리국및필리핀철도국 ), 수자원 ( 지역상수도관리국및민간상수도사업자를위한국가수자원위원회 ) 으로, 각규제기관은운영권발급, 성과요구수준설정, 요금책정및조정등의경제적규제를시행한다. 사업은승인되기이전에규제기관과의사전협의를거치며, 규제관련요건들은입찰서류에고지된다. 사업시행자와주무관청이협약을시행하면규제당국은자동적으로사업시행자에시설운영권을허가하고, 유료도로요금, 임대료등협약에명시된요금을징수하도록한다. 기타규제기관수자원규제기관인수자원이사회 (Natural Water Resources Board: NWRB) 는수자원배분, 상수확보및이용에대한허가를발급한다. 보건부 (Department of Health: DOH) 는수질에관한행정명령을결정하고, 수자원시설의법규준수여부를감시한다. 환경관리국 (Environment Management Bureau: EMB) 은사업에대한환경준수증명서를발급하고세부법령에입각한환경보호기준및지침을마련한다. 세부법령은사회기반시설사업의환경영향평가준비에관한대통령령 1586, 공화국법제8749 호청정대기법, 공화국법제9003 호생태고형폐기물관리법, 공화국법제9275 호수질청정법등을포함한다. 감사위원회 감사위원회 (Commission on Audit: COA) 는헌법적정부감사기구로, 정부회계와감 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 89

사기준을수립한다. BOT법에의거, 감사위원회 (COA) 는제안되는사업으로부터주무관청에발생한모든수익, 지분및수입금을감사한다. 또한정부가소유혹은위탁하거나정부에속하는자금및자산의비용이나사용등에대한수익률 (IRR) 은감사의대상이된다. 이러한수익, 지분, 수입금이모두올바르게처리되어주무관청에송금되었는지여부와협상에의한협약이나독점적성격을지닌공익사업의경우규정된수익률이준수되는지여부를확인한다. 그러나사업시행자에발생하거나귀속되는모든수입금과그에따른이자수익은민간자금으로간주되어협약에따라사업수행자에직접적으로송금되어야하며, 이러한사항은협약에규정될수있다. 다 지방정부기구 지방정부의회 지방정부의회는지방정부사업, 투자프로그램, 예산, 재원조달및요금을승인 한다. 지방개발위원회지방개발위원회는비용상한선을두고지방정부의민간투자사업을승인한다. 각지자체별비용상한선은지자체개발의회의경우최대 2,000만페소, 주정부개발의회의경우 2,000만페소이상 5,000만페소이하이며, 지역개발의회의경우 5,000만페소이상 2 억페소이하이다. 제 5 절민간투자사업의재정지원 재정지원개요 재정지원과관련하여 BOT 법에나타난정부의재정지원및보장은매우다양하지 만크게보조금및비용분담, 조세혜택, 환율변동에대한신용보강등으로구분할수 있다. 90 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

필리핀의민간제안사업역시관련법규에따라여러가지형태의정부지원을받을수있지만직접보증, 보조금및지분출자의형태로는지원받을수없으며, 이경우정부자산 ( 부지등 ) 에대한사용권매각또는임대는직접적인보조금이나지분출자로간주되지않는다. 정부지원을받는사업중경제적으로타당하나재무적으로타당하지않은사업의경우다음과같은재정지원을받을수있다. 표 사업에대한정부재정지원유형 유형설명비고 직접지원 간접지원 양허성차관 최소운영수익보장 비용분담혹은배분 공공자산이용권혹은후순위채권을통한형태의재정지원 사용자대신정부가요금지급 차관은정부금융기관 과의온렌딩 계약주 을통해 가정부보증으로공여국으로부터차관을받고 가민간사업자에다시빌려주는형식으로이루어짐 정부는 에외환위험커버 와보증비용 을부과하고 이는스프레드와함께 에서차입자에게넘겨짐 저금리기조가지속되면서 차관금리는시장금리와거의비슷하거나약간높은수준임 차관의큰강점은장기로대출이가능하다는점 시중대출은 년임에비해상대적으로장기인 년 임 사전에합의된채무혹은채무에투자수익을더한금액에대한정부의최소수익보장 비용분담시주무관청의예산 차관으로조달가능 주무관청의예산 정부는민간사업자의직접채무를보장하지는않음 가민간사업자의신용위험을떠안으므로 신용보증 담보혹은수입과계약상권리의양도를요구함 우발채무는고려되지않음 주 일반적으로 정부가은행에대출자금을빌려주어은행이대상기업심사를통해대출해주는간접대출제도로 정책금융기관이중개금융기관에저리의자금을제공하고중개금융기관이평가를거쳐대출하는방식임 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 91

가 보조금 과비용분담 투자규모가크고민간부문에서재원조달이어려운사업의경우정부원조나공적개발원조 (Official Development Assistance: ODA) 를통해총사업비의 50% 를초과하지않는한도내에서조달이가능하도록규정하고있다. 이는정부가사회기반시설의개발과관련한자본비용과운영비용의일부를부담하는형태라고볼수있다. 관련인프라의공급, 부지사용권제공, 사업시행자가지급해야할금액의감면또는지급연기, 그리고프로젝트에대한지분출자및일부자금조달등의형태로제공하고있다. 나 조세혜택 사업비가 10억페소이상으로투자유치위원회 (Board of Investment: BOI) 에등록된프로젝트와 10억페소이하의규모이지만투자유치위원회의투자우선순위계획 (Investment Priorities Plan: IPP) 에포함된경우에는종합투자법 (Omnibus Investment Code: OIC) 규정에따라세제혜택이제공된다. 또한관련법령과지방정부법에따라조세면제또는감면등의추가적인혜택을제공할수있으며, 국내자본재에대해서는조세를면제하기도한다. 다 신용보강 필리핀정부는민간투자사업의위험분담을위하여불가항력발생시와환율변동및기타프로젝트위험에대하여신용보강방안을제공하고있다. 계약서에서규정한특정사고및위험이발생할경우에지원을제공하며, 사업시행자및주무관청은직접또는간접적인지원으로서토지사용권의취득, 주무관청의계약이행또는의무에대한보증, 발전소프로젝트에서의 Take or Pay 계약 8 등에대하여보증을제공할수있다. 정부가사업시행자와합의한의무사항을이행하지않는경우, 또는불이행상태가 8 의무인수계약, 즉상품구입자가일정기간동안일정량의상품을인도받지않더라도대금을지불해야하는거래관행임. 92 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

불합리한기간동안지속되는경우사업시행자는일정기일을정하여계약의해지를선언할수있다. 이경우사업시행자는계약내용에따라건설비에상당하는또는계약된비율에따라정부의보상을받을수있으며, 사업시행자의과실이나상호합의에의하지않고정부가계약을일방적으로파기하는경우정부는그에상당하는금액을보상하여야한다. 보상의범위는사업에투입된실질비용과투자된자본의기회비용을포함하나협약상합의된금액을초과하지못한다. 라 사업지원기금 사업개발및관리기금 (Project Development and Monitoring Fund: PDMF) 은필리핀정부, 호주및캐나다정부가투자환경조성및사업발굴을위해조성한기금이다. 초기에호주원조기관인 AusAID 는 ADB의기술자문사업의일환으로 6백만달러 (USD) 를출연하였으며, 필리핀정부가 7백만달러 (USD) 를출연하였다. 이후호주정부와필리핀정부의추가적인자금지원 ( 각각 9백만달러 (USD) 와 11.5백만달러 (USD)) 으로기금이마련되어현재운영되고있다. 투자가이행되기전다양한준비과정 (pre-investment activities) 을지원하는데, 사전타당성조사및타당성조사, 사업구조개발, 입찰및협약서작성, 거래 advisory 지원, 입찰및평가지원, 경쟁을통한사업자선정등이있다. 9 한편, 전략적지원기금 (Strategic Support Fund: SSF) 의경우설계및이주등토지매입에대해주무관청을지원하는기금이다. 9 다음과같은민간기관의컨설팅서비스를제공받는다 : Manabat San Agustin & Co., Rebel Group International BV, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India Pvt.Ltd, CPCS Transcom Ltd.(Canada), Ernst & Young Australia Infrastructure Advisory, PricewaterhouseCoopers Services LLP(Singapore), ICRA Management Consulting Services Ltd.(India), Hill International SA(Luxemburg), SMEC International Pty Ltd.(Australia), IMC Worldwide Ltd.(UK), MMM Group Ltd.(Canada), Ove Arup & Partners Hong Kong Ltd.(China), PARY & Co Chartered Accountants(India), Punongbayan & Araullo(Philippines), Feedback Infrastructure Services Pvt. Ltd.(India) 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 93

재정위험관리 가 위험분담을통한재정관리 프로젝트단위에서는사업위험의식별, 측정, 합리적배분및완화를위한여러가지절차와방안이제도화되어있다. 현재필리핀정부의사업위험을완화하기위한방안을살펴보면먼저, 우선순위사업목록이필리핀개발계획과부문별종합계획의목표와전략에기반하도록하고있으며, 사업준비단계에서사업이타당한지, 특히경제적타당성분석을위한타당성조사가이루어지고있다. 정부는최근에 PPP 사업타당성분석에 value for money 분석을요구하고있다. 또한정부는재정위험분석수행을공식적으로요구하고있는데, 이를위해프로젝트차원에서주무관청은투자조정위원회 (ICC) 에허가 ( 사업승인의일부 ) 를신청한다. 신청요건중하나는정부부담과우발채무와관련된사업평가서를작성하는것이다. 2012년부터투자조정위원회 (ICC) 는이양식을사용하여사업시행자에게 1 정부부담유형및 2 사업으로발생될수있는정부의우발채무에대한상세한비용분담방안을제시할것을요청했다. 토지취득, 이주대책, 사용료에대한보조금, 국세혹은부담금, 지방세혹은사용료, 부담금, 정부지원책등여러형태의정부부담사항을더상세히기술하도록하고있다. 반면, 우발채무관련부분은담당기관을재무부로하고있다는정도만언급하는등신청서상자세한서술을요구하지는않고있다. 위험분담분석은 2012년투자조정위원회 (ICC) 가도입한일반적인위험배분매트릭스 (Generic Preferred Risk Allocation Matrix: GPRAM) 를활용한다. 사업제안기관, 사업평가자, 감독기관은 GPRAM 을활용하여 PPP 사업의위험을분석한다. GPRAM 은 PPP 제도에서흔히직면하는위험들을유형별로행렬의행에나타내고, 열에는해당위험의정의, 위험배분우선순위, 위험배분근거, 위험완화전략및배분방안을보여준다. 현재필리핀의 PPP 사업포트폴리오에서다양한 PPP 사업별정부가부담하는위험은다음과같다. 94 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

표 사업의위험배분분석 목표 수단 직접비용 우발 적용대상 협약상운영수익확실성확보 표준우발채무 보험으로커버되지않는불가항력적인자연재해에대한구제및보상 정치적불가항력에대한보상 정부귀책으로인한조기종료사업별구체적인부담 대부분의사업 대부분의사업 대부분의사업 계약 발전소 대규모상수도사업 임대료 설비비용 학교건물 사업시행비감축 토지취득운영불확실성최소화 최소운영수익보장 사업이행자금 기타운영보조금 합의된요금조정공식적용보장자본동원 대부분의유료도로사업 철도및발전사업마닐라철도 호선마닐라정형외과 카섹난다목적댐메트로 마닐라수도사업 대부분의유료도로사업 정부지분 공기업의합작투자 상기언급된위험중정부에가장큰부담이되는것은최소운영수익보장과운영보조금지원이다. 그러므로향후프로젝트에대해정부는우발채무가발생하는지원보다는보조금이나비용분담등직접비용을통해재정지원하는것으로방향을바꾸고있다. 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 95

나 예산절차를통한부채관리 PPP 사업시행은예산절차와밀접한관련이있다. 토지취득이나도로등의부수적인사회기반시설, 비용부담또는지분투자등의정부직접채무는기관별예산에포함된다. 또한이하소개될마닐라전철사업 (Metro Rail Transit) 과카섹난다목적댐사업사례가보여주듯이우발채무에대한예상지원금도포함한다. 예측하지못한요청이발생할경우를대비해서바로지불할수있도록총액형태로예산을편성한다. 예산은법령에따라매년편성된다. 그러므로다년간예산편성이필요한사업을위해주무관청은예산관리부 (Department of Budget and Management: DBM) 로부터다년간채무부담인가권 (Multi-year Obligational Authority: MYOA) 을승인받는다. 이를통해주무관청은전체사업비용을포함하는협약을체결할수있다. MYOA 는연도별사업비용을세분화하고, 주무관청이연간예산안에사업종료까지매년지불해야할금액을포함시키도록하고있다. 주무관청의예산안은 4월말경에제출되고, 국가예산은 7월말에확정된다. 주무관청은예산안에사업을포함하거나직접채무로전환될정부부채를추산하기위해약 9개월의준비기간을갖는다. PPP 사업의예산은기관예산편성과미편성예산총액의두가지방식으로조달된다. 기관의예산편성방식에따라기관은토지취득, 사업이행자금, 선불비용분담또는정부보증으로부터발생하는지불금등에대한예산을요청하며, 이러한요청사항이주무관청의예산안에반영된다. 미편성예산총액방식의경우, 당해연도에발생하는예측하지못한우발채무를위해사용할수있다. 또한예산관리국 (Department of Budget and Management: DBM) 은당해연도예산편성이후새로이추진되는사업에활용할수있도록미편성예산총액방식을사용할수있도록하였다. 다 재정위험관리 거시경제차원에서 PPP 프로그램에서발생되는재정위험은필리핀국가경제개발청 (National Economic and Development Authority: NEDA) 이사회의개발예산조정위원회 (Development Budget Coordinating Committee: DBCC) 10 가분석하고매년 재정위험보 10 필리핀개발예산조정위원회 (DBCC) 는예산관리부, 재무부, NEDA, 대통령실로구성되어있으며, 예산관 96 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

고서 란제목의연차보고서발간을통해관리되고있다. 재정위험연차보고서 (2010년첫발간 ) 는민간투자사업으로인한재정위험뿐만아니라전세계경제의불확실성, 정부와기업부문관리, 지방정부의실적및자연재해 재난에대한노출등사업외의상황이나활동으로인해발생되는재정위험도분석하고있다. 재정위험보고서 는재정위험에대한평가만담고있고, 우발채무추정액에대한분석은포함되지않는다. 2013년 재정위험보고서 는다음과같은평가를내렸다. 사업시행단계의우발채무 (legacy contingent liabilities) 는감당할만한수준이며재정지속가능성에큰영향을미치지않을것으로전망된다. 시행단계사업 (legacy project) 의우발채무는대개협약과구매조항에서승인된요금의부족분을채우기위한정부보조금으로이루어져있고, 사업이수년간운영되어온사실을보면우발채무가완화될것으로보인다. 또한일부우발채무는정부가해당기관에지불한선금으로충당되었다. 2014년 재정위험보고서 는전세계경제성장의불확실성과자연재해와관련된위험및대응방안과같은주제들에더중점을두고있다. 그럼에도 2014년보고서역시위험완화전략으로민간투자사업에우발채무부담을언급하고있고, 정부가국가예산에서비프로그램화기금 (Unprogrammed Fund) 을활용해우발채무를충당한다. 2014년부터 예산승인에관한일반세출법 (General Appropriations Act: GAA) 하의비프로그램화기금 (Unprogrammed Fund) 에민간투자사업의우발채무를위한 200억페소 (4억 5,400만달러 ) 규모의예산이포함되었다. 민간투자포트폴리오에서발생하는우발채무액수를정부가공개하지않았기에 200억페소의기금으로전체우발채무중얼마정도를충당할수있는지는명확하지않다. 일반세출법의비프로그램화기금에 리부에서위원회의사무국역할을한다. 필리핀중앙은행 (Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas; BSP) 이재원조달기관의역할을수행하며통화정책을위한긴밀한협력을위해위원회회의에참석하도록초청된다. 한편, DBCC 는다음의기능을수행한다. 연간정부지출프로그램과경제사회개발, 국방, 일반행정및부채상환을위한정부지출상한에대한대통령승인을위한권고안제시 대통령에게현재운영비와자본지출을감안하여각각의개발사업에대한적절한지출배분권고 대통령에게다양한자본및사회기반시설프로젝트개발을위한적절한자본지출배분권고 세입추정의신뢰도평가 적절한세제및세입정책, 차입금수준및유형권고 개발사업시행의비용, 성과및성과기준에대한정기검토및종합점검실질적으로 PPP 사업이국가예산의지원을받아야할경우 DBCC 가 PPP 사업추진에개입할수있다. DBCC 가정부기관별예산의상한선을정하기때문에 PPP 사업운영에대한정부지원수준의가이드라인을제공한다. 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 97

200억페소의예산이편성된이유는동기금이실제지불금액에대해서만활용되기때문에행정부의예산지출목표에대한평가를크게해하지않으면서채무를상환할수있는권한을주기위한것이다. 한편, 사업평가자들이역량강화훈련을통해우발채무의발생요인인지및우발채무추정방식에대한교육을받고있지만, 우발채무평가에대한공식적인기준이없기때문에사업평가자들의추정치를종합하는것이힘든실정이다. 또한현재까지포트폴리오상개별사업에우발채무추정치나개별추정치를합산한경우가있는지여부를확인한공식보고서는발표된바가없다. 이러한문제를해결하기위한방안을모색중이다. 한가지방안으로사업준비설명서에우발채무산정액을포함시키도록한다. 신용도가높은회사와사업개발및관리기금 (PDMF) 을통해준비된사업은우발채무에대한심층분석이가능하다. 주요사업의다수가사업개발및관리기금 (PDMF) 을통해준비되었다. 또한정부는우발채무산정등에대한투자조정위원회 (ICC) 평가지침개정을위한용역연구를발주했다. 한편, 우발채무와보증에대한정확한수치가공개되지는않지만개별사업비용과필리핀 PPP 사업포트폴리오의총비용은예산관련서류의일부로공개되고있다. 우발채무에대해기대손실평가법 (expected loss valuation method) 대신최대손실평가법 (maximum loss valuation method) 을적용하고, 사업인수혹은해지를가정해보면이론상최악의시나리오 ( 프로젝트조기해지혹은조기인수 ) 에서최대손실은 PPP 프로그램에대한정부의부담금으로평가될수있을것이다. 이렇게산정된현재진행중인 PPP 포트폴리오의총산정비용이 166억 1,000만달러로추정되며, 이는 2014 년필리핀 GDP의약 5% 를차지한다. 그러나 PPP 프로그램이성공적일지라도우발채무의명목가치와미래가치는분명히증가할것이다. 그러므로재무부가준비중인재정위험관리프로그램은이러한문제를해결하는데역할을할것이다. 교통, 상수등주요서비스부문에서 PPP 사업수가증가함에따라정부는기초서비스는원활히제공하면서부채를상환할수있는능력을확보해야할필요성이있다. ODA 차관의경우, 법령에따라예산일부가부채상환금으로편성되어부채상환이보장된반면, PPP 사업의채무상환은명시적으로보장되지않는다. 98 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

제 6 절민간투자사업수행실적 민간투자사업추진실적 1990 년에서 2015 년사이사업종료후정부에소유권이이전된사업, 운영단계에 있는사업, 협약체결후공사중인사업등단계별사업추진현황을다음 < 표 3-11> 에제시하였다. 표 필리핀민간투자사업현황 년 사업수 개 사업규모 백만 종료후정부에이전 운영단계 종료후협약체결 낙찰통지합계정부에이전 운영단계 협약체결 낙찰통지 전력 에너지 정보기술 상수 자산개발 의료 교육 합계 자료 필리핀 센터 예산관리부 합계 교육사업 ( 초중고생을위한학교설립 ) 을제외하고모두수익형사업이다. 대부분의사업들은사용료로사업비및운영비를충당하도록설계되었으며, 이에따라정부채무는우발적이거나최종사용자사용료로분산되었다. 예를들어, 발전사업이나대규모수처리사업은최소구매계약 (Minimum Offtake) 조항이있긴하나대부분의사업비용은최종사용자의사용료에의해회수된다. 그러나비록소수이긴하나, 사용료만으로는사업비회수가불가능한운영수익을보장해야하는고비용사업들이있고그대표적인예가바로도시철도사업과다목적댐건설사업이다. 이사업들은다음에서소개되는부실사업의사례이다. 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 99

전체사업의약 1/3( 특히 1994년에서 2012년사이시행된사업 ) 이민간제안사업이었고, 이들대부분은입찰경쟁이없어최초제안자에게로사업이돌아갔다. 낮은입찰경쟁의원인으로는최초제안자를선호하는주무관청의편향성과법령에따라 60일이라는단기간의제3자제안을위한준비기간이꼽혔다. 대부분의부실사업은민간제안입찰이나단독입찰등협상에의한입찰 (negotiated proposals) 로체결되었다. 19건의민간제안사업중 1건의대형프로젝트 ( 마닐라국제공항터미널 3) 와 3건의지방정부소규모인프라사업등총 4건은중단되었다. 사업실패의주요원인으로주무관청의사업설계및구조검토의부실함, 제안자에게유리한위험분담이있었다. 한개의특수한경우에서는승인기관에의해이미승인된계약규정과다르게계약을갱신 ( 연장 ) 한사례를들수있다. 카섹난다목적댐 건설사업 년 방식민간제안사업 카섹난다목적댐건설사업은다음두가지사유로필리핀정부에부담을안긴사례이다 첫째는부실설계로인한공사지연이고 둘째는높은사용료인데 사용자가부담하는요금수 준이낮아필리핀관개청 이추가로사업시행자에게보조금을지불해야했다 공사가지연된이유는사업시행자인 의불충분한지리물리학적조사로인해 사업현장여건의예측이실패했기때문이다 이에따라장비재설계와건설방식의부분적수 정이이루어져야했다 본사업이취한스위스경합 방식은경쟁입찰방식이 아니기때문에최초제안자의장비와건설방식이최고의가치를제공하는지의여부를알길이없었다 게다가주무관청인 의설계평가역량도부족했다 는신기술평가및비용합리성을측정하기위한역량도부족했다 신기술과대규모자 본투자를수반하는대형사업은경쟁입찰방식을통해재무적으로나기술적으로정부에게최적인대안을찾는것이중요했다 는사용료에반영될합의된금액으로관개용수에대한최소구매계약을체결했다 그러 나정치적 사회적수용가능성을고려해야하는압박으로인해 는최소구매가격을지불하 기에는불충분한수준으로최종사용자의수도요금을책정해야했다 결과적으로 는사업 시행자에지불되는수도요금에대한보조금을지급해야만했다 사업시행자는또한수익이부족하여전체사업기간동안약 억달러에달하는정부구제금융을요청했다 100 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

본사업의관개부문에정부보조금이필요했던점을보면 방식의민간제안사업형식 이본사업을위한최적의방식이아니었음을알수있다 동사업건설을민간자금으로추진 하는대신정부는직접자금조달을통해관개시설건설을추진할수있었을것이다 공공자 금의비용이민간자금보다현저히낮은점을감안하면 이러한방식으로사업비용을감축할수있었을것이다 자료 년경제거버넌스개혁프로젝트파트너십하 및 사업에대한카스탈리아보고서 마닐라국제공항터미널 년 방식 민간제안사업 마닐라국제공항터미널 사업은정부에높은임대료를제시한제안자에게낙찰되었는데 대법원은본계약에대해다음의근거로무효판정을내렸다 낙찰자는최소재무요건을충족하지못했기에부적격한입찰자로간주됐다 동입찰자의 순자산증명에는컨소시엄구성원중하나인개인은행의전체순자산이포함됐다 은행이 한기업에순자산의 이상을출자하는것이금지되었기때문에대법원은해당은행의전체순자산은인정되지않는다는판결을내렸다 공개입찰에서제시된실시협약안과실제서명되고집행되는실시협약은중요한규정에있 어상이했다 가 입찰자가징수하는공공시설수익과비공공시설수익의변경에관한조항과 나 채무불이행시정부의입찰자채무인수에관한조항에서차이를보였다 이러한변경 은공공사업에관한규정과민간제안사업에대한정부직접보증을금지하는정부승인기관의승인요건을위반한다 외국투자자의컨소시엄구성원에대한출자액이필리핀컨소시엄구성원출자액의 혹은이를상회하여필리핀의반더미법 을위반했다 동법상 법에서 도규정 공공시설의소유권은필리핀인혹은지분의 이상을필리핀인이소유한기업에귀속한다 필리핀법원은필리핀컨소시엄구성원에 억 백만달러의인수가를지불할것을판결했 다 한편 해당외국컨소시엄구성원은 억달러를요구하고있다 현재동사안은국제투자분쟁해결센터 에서중재중이다 여기서 더미 는명의만빌려주어실제투자자 주주 의역할을대신해주는명의상의주주를의미하며 필리핀에서는더미를내세워사업을하는행위를금하고있다 자료 대법원판결 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 101

마닐라전철 호선 년 방식 단독입찰 마닐라전철 호선사업은 방식으로 체결됐다 민간컨소시엄이시설을건설한후 년의사업기간동안정부에임대하면 정부 는교통부관할로시설을운영한다 대중교통통합체계의기틀을마련하고 철도분야에민간 참여를도입하며마닐라의주요도로의교통혼잡을줄이는데기여하고자하였으나정부가 과도하게위험부담을하는등미흡한사업설계로비판을받고있다 또한비용회수가가능한수준보다낮게교통요금을책정하는등사전계획에없던보조금 을지불하고있다 낮은수준의교통요금과사업수익을보충하기위한보조금을정기적으로 지급하고있다 또한전철의수용력을넘는운영으로인해유지보수비용도증가하고있다 즉 본사업을위해정부는 호선시점에서종점까지승객 명의운임비용으로 페 소를지불하고있으며 이는지하철사용료인 페소보다 페소나높은수준이며이러한 손실을보존하기위해정부는매년 억페소 약 억 백만달러 의정부보조금을지원하 고있다 이러한정부부담을완화하기위해교통당국은요금을점진적으로인상중이며 전 철의여객수송량을늘리기위해추가철도차량제조협약을체결했다 협약특성상민간사업시행자는 호선의성장을위해투자하고 승객수를최대로늘 리거나전철운영의비용효율성을증대시켜야할유인이거의없고쾌적함등서비스가악 화되었다 높은수준의보조금 정부가약 억달러를지출 을고려하여 정부는 년동 사업을인수하기로결정했다 인수추정액은약 억 천달러 동사업의주요취약점은 사업의구조와관련되어있다 사업의기능과위험이적정 하게배분되지않았다 수요등핵심위험요인에대한철저한분석과제 자검토역시행해 지지않았다 보다철저한마케팅전략과민간제안자들과의협의가있었다면보다유리한구 조로사업이추진될수있었을것이다 자료 년경제거버넌스개혁프로젝트파트너십하 및 사업에대한카스탈리아보고서 년대통령국정연설발췌 102 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

사업현황 2015년현재 20개사업, 135억달러에달하는민간투자사업이조달중에있다. 2015 년에조달시장에많은사업이유입된것은대통령의사회기반시설개발가속화요청에대한주무관청의대응과대기업들이공공인프라사업에투자를확대하고있기때문이다. 사업개발및관리기금 (Project Development and Monitoring Fund: PDMF) 은사업개발및활성화에중요한역할을하고있다. 표 조달단계의 사업 년 부문 사업수 개 사업규모 백만 교통 정보기술 상수 기타 교도소 가스관 합계 자료 필리핀 센터 [ 그림 3-11] 과 [ 그림 3-12] 에서나타나는운영단계의민간투자사업의부문별구성은다각화된민간투자포트폴리오를보여준다. 민간투자사업은여러사회기반시설분야를아우르고있다. 비용측면에서포트폴리오를살펴보면, 물, 전기, 교통의주요세분야에대규모투자가이루어지고있는데, 특성상높은사업비를수반한다. 민간투자사업은다양한분야에걸쳐있지만사업간위험의연관성은낮다. 그러나최근낙찰되거나조달중인사업들이시행되면위험분산효과가약화된다. 추정가치가 180억달러에달하는총 26개의사업자지정후조달단계에있는사업들가운데 86% 가교통관련사업이다. 교통부문에대한투자의절반은철도사업에, 1/3 은유료도로사업에서이루어졌다. MRT 3호선사업의경험을바탕으로정부는위험분담에보다신중하고조심스러운태도를가지게되었다. 우선, 도시철도사업은더이상최소운영수익을보장하지않고, 그대신사용료만으로는비용회수가불가능한사업에대해서는보조금이나비용분담을통한정부지원을활용한다. 또한토지개간을포함하는일괄유료도로 / 제방건설사업등부가적인사업을수반하는사업들이설계되고있다. 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 103

그림 운영단계필리핀 사업의부문구성 비용별 그림 운영단계필리핀 사업의부문구성 사업수별 제 7 절필리핀제도의시사점 필리핀의민간투자사업프로그램은엄격히제도화된구조뿐만아니라귀중한교 훈을제공하는긴역사등많은장점을가지고있다. 그러나여전히정책의도와시 104 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

행간에는차이가존재하는데, 이는미흡한거버넌스역량한계혹은집행제도의취 약성에기인한다. 이와관련해해결되어야할주요문제는다음과같다. 위험관리의제도화 필리핀에서는위험관리전담반신설을포함한재무부의재정위험관리프로그램구축촉진을계획하고있다. 또한재무부산하의위험관리전담반을통해중앙정부차원에서위험분석과정책결정을수행한다면위험관리능력이제고되고, 관련역량강화가용이하다. 재정위험관리프로그램은 PPP 사업의부채로인한재정위험수준과위험측정법및기대가치추정등에대한정책을제시해야한다. 한국에서도 BTO 사업의경우별도의한도액을제한하는재정규율은존재하지않는다. 그러나 2000년도이후민간투자사업에대한재정지원이본격적으로제공되면서민간투자사업이현재의재정부담을미래로전가하는것이라는비판이있어민간투자사업에대한재정규율의필요성이제기되고있다. BTL 방식의경우정부또는지방자치단체가사용료등을지급하므로무분별한사업의추진시예산의부담및재정지출의경직성을초래할가능성이있다. 따라서 BTL 사업의총한도액, 대상시설별한도액과예비한도액을다음회계연도예산안과함께국회에제출하여사전의결을받도록하고있는점은필리핀에좋은시사점을제공할수있다. 필리핀에서는다년간예산편성이허용되지않는등의예산절차상취약점을개선해야한다는점을인식하고있으며, 우발채무에대한예비비를법제화하는대안을모색하고있다. 사업시행자들의사업위험감독을개선하기위해중앙전담조직에재무, 법무, 운영에대한자료의제출등제도를구축하려하고있다. 위험관리체계의출발점은사업설계와구조의개선이라고할수있다. 이는적격성조사와위험평가및감독관리기능을향상시킬수있으며, 투자조정위원회가보다명확한지침을제공하려노력하고있다. 협약승인에대한책임은분명하게기술되어있으나협약관리측면에서우발채무를유발할수있는상황에대한감독등의책임소재가불분명한상황이다. 주무관청과개별사업차원에서의협약관리역량또한개선되어야한다. 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 105

민간제안방식추진 필리핀은 2010년전까지사업개발및추진에있어민간제안사업방식의역할이컸으며, 사업의약 30% 가민간제안사업을통해추진되었다. 그러나민간제안사업의효과와민자적격성에대해서는엇갈린평가가나온다. 민간제안사업은민간사업자가주무관청의사업준비부담을대신하고있지만, 여전히주무관청들은민간사업자와의협상진행을위해신속한기술 및재무분석을위한재원의확보가필요한실정이다. 또한민간제안사업은신기술을포함하는경우에추진하는것으로되어있으나대부분의사업제안에는신기술이수반되지않았고, 경쟁입찰을통한비용절감은분명하게드러나지않고있다. 협상도상당히지연되어거래비용의증가를야기했다. 또한 60일간의입찰기간은주요사회기반시설사업에서신뢰할만한경쟁을보장하기에는다소짧은기간이다. 한국의경우최근민간제안을확대하는추세이다. 상대적으로규모가크지않고안정적인임대수익을창출할수있는소규모민자사업을활성화하고지역및중소건설사와재무적투자자의참여를확대하기위한방안으로 2016년 3월 BTL 사업의민간제안을법으로허용한바있다. 민간제안사업의효과성이공공과민간모두에게나타나기위해서는무엇보다사업의민자적격성 (Value-for-money) 에대한검토기관의면밀한검토가요구될것이다. 사업데이터보고 취합및관리강화 필리핀의 PPP센터는민간투자협약데이터베이스를구축하기위해주무관청의보고시스템을운영하도록개선하려하고있다. 이데이터베이스는재정위험관리프로그램과협약관리에대한지침을마련하는데유용한정보를제공할것이다. 한국의 2015년민간투자기본계획에서는기획재정부장관이민간투자사업의집행현황파악등을위해주무관청및사업시행자에게해당사업에대한관련자료를요청할수있으며, 주무관청은민간투자사업의효율적이고체계적인관리를위하여추진단계별주요사업내용을기획재정부, 주무부처, 공공투자관리센터에문서로제출하도록규정되어있다. 주무관청은시설사업기본단계, 협약체결단계, 실시계획승인단계, 공사단계, 운영개시단계, 재무모델변경단계, 운영단계별로매년 2회정기적으로제출 106 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

하여야한다. 이에공공투자관리센터의장이주무관청이제출해야하는추진단계별주요사업내용서식을작성하여제공하고, 동서식에따라주무관청이제출한추진단계별주요사항을취합하여민간투자사업의종합적인관리를위해데이터베이스를구축 관리하도록되어있는규정은필리핀에좋은사례가될수있을것이다. 사업시행을위한역량강화지속 PPP센터는주무관청, 특히민간투자사업을담당하는지방정부조직의역량을지속적으로강화하려는노력을하고있다. 이를위해지역학교및교육기관과제휴를통해교육서비스의네트워크를확대하고있다. 한국의 KDI 공공투자관리센터에서는재정민자사업을담당하는지자체국장급공무원, 담당공무원및민간기업담당자, 공공기관담당자를대상으로제도, 지침, 분석방법론, 협상및평가기법, 재무모델의이해, 재원조달의이해등의 5차례이상교육을시행하고있다. 필리핀의 PPP센터는입찰서류양식이나계약서예시및재무모델등을마련하고있으며참고자료집이나교육자료를보유하고있긴하나각지방정부사업맞춤형자료를지속적으로개발할필요성이있다. 역량강화와관련해투자조정위원회는주무관청과감독기관에위험평가및관리에대한집중교육이필요하다. 지방정부를위한사업개발기금필요 PPP센터가운영하는사업개발및관리기금 (PDMF) 은주무관청들이유용하게활용하고있기는하지만아직까지는사업준비금과자문비용등을부담할수있는해외기업참여의대규모사회기반시설사업에만활용되고있다. 따라서지방정부의사업개발및관리기금 (PDMF) 활용이제한되어있지않음에도지방정부 PPP 사업은규모가작아기금을활용하기어려운실정이다. 따라서지방정부의요구를충족하기위해 PPP센터는지방정부사업규모에맞는사업개발및관리기금 (PDMF) 설치를고려할필요가있다. 제 3 장필리핀의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 107

제 4 장 인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 제 1 절인도네시아의경제현황및투자전망 인도네시아국가계획 조코위도도대통령과유숩칼라부통령의인도네시아신정부부 (2014~19 년 ) 는정치, 교육, 식량, 농촌, 환경, 법집행, 사회기반시설, 에너지, 경제, 사회, 문화및거버넌스등다양한부문들을발전시키기위해 나와찌따 (Nawa Cita) 라는국가계획을수립했다. 나와찌따는산스크리트어로 나와 는 9 를 찌따 는 목표 또는 목적 을의미한다. 이계획은수실로밤방유도요노전대통령 (2004~14 년 ) 이 2011년에수립한 인도네시아중장기경제개발기본계획 (Master Plan for the Acceleration and Expansion of Indonesia s Economic Development, MP3EI) 의후속계획이다. 조코위도도대통령은인도네시아의주요문제들을다음과같이제시하고이문제를해결하기위한 9대국정우선과제들을선정했다. 첫째, 인도네시아정부는국가주권에대한잠재적인위협을감지하고시민안정보장및인권보호를위한강력한법집행을도모하는데실패했으며이는곧공공기관에대한대중의불신으로이어졌다. 둘째, 지속적으로상승하는빈곤율과복지불평등, 지역간불균형발전, 천연자원과잉개발로인한환경파괴와식량, 에너지, 금융및기술에대한높은의존도등경제환경이취약하며셋째, 계속되는종파갈등으로인해국민간연대와상호협력정신역시쇠락하고있다. 108 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

위에서언급한주요문제를해결하기위해인도네시아신정부는다음과같이 9대우선과제를선정했다. 첫째, 국익에기반을둔자유롭고적극적인외교정책을통해국가신뢰도를제고하고, 해양국가로서의국가정체성을강화하여모든국민을보호하고그들의안보를보장하는국가의의무를재개한다. 둘째, 투명하고효과적이며, 민주적이고신뢰할수있는거버넌스에입각한정부를구축한다. 셋째, 단일국가라는틀안에서농촌지역과주변지역의개발을도모한다. 넷째, 부정부패척결및신뢰할수있는법집행을통해국가의권한을강화한다. 다섯째, 교육의질을높이고 12년무상의무교육및 스마트인도네시아 프로그램을통해교육서비스제공한다. 또한 건강한인도네시아 및 번영하는인도네시아 프로그램을통해사회복지및의료서비스를개선하고국민들의삶의질을제고하며, 2019년까지토지개혁과국민들의토지소유를독려하기위해주택단지를확충한다. 여섯째, 해외시장에서국민들의생산성과경쟁력을향상시켜다른아시아국가들과동등한경쟁력을확보한다. 일곱째, 전략적인경제부문들을국내경제로이전하여경제적독립을이루기위해관개망을확충한다. 여덟째, 국민교육과정을재편성하여국민성의변화를도모한다. 아홉째, 다양성속의통일성 정신과사회개혁을강화한다. 위에서열거한 나와찌따 (Nawa Cita) 의 9대우선과제중세번째, 여섯번째, 일곱번째과제는민간투자사업과관련이있다고볼수있다. 세번째과제는주민들의복지향상을위해마을의공공서비스를개선하고, 마을법을시행하며자치구역을신설함으로써달성된다. 여섯번째과제를달성하기위해 2,000km 도로건설, 10개신규공항및 10개항만개발, 근로자주거시설과함께 10개산업단지신설, 5,000개의전통시장육성, 15일이내에투자절차및사업승인을완료하기위한원스톱서비스제공, 개발및사회기반시설은행설립, 지역내과학기술단지, 학교및직업학교설립등이요구된다. 일곱번째과제를달성하기위해 300만헥타르의논을관리하고자바섬외지역에서 100만헥타르의논을형성하고, 농민과영세기업을위한은행을설립하며, 농지전용을종식시키고, 국내에너지원탐사를통해에너지수입을줄이며가스관을확충하고석탄및가스는전력생산을위한용도로우선사용하며외국인투자자에국영은행매각을제한하며농업및산업연구를확대할것이다. 이러한과제를해결하기위한도로, 공공주택및농업기반시설개발은민간투자사업을통해추진될것이다. 11 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 109

거시경제동향 2013년 12월세계은행은 성장둔화 ; 높은위험 이란제목의인도네시아경제에관한분기보고서를발간했다. 12 동보고서에서는인도네시아의취약한거시경제현황을잘보여주고있다. 본보고서에따르면, 인도네시아정부는원자재가격의지속적인하락과취약한대외금융여건으로인한국제수지압박의대응책으로긴축통화정책등다수의정책을시행했으나이는오히려실질가치절하와투자지출및생산성증가의약화를초래한것으로나타났다. 이와동시에세계경제환경변화로미국의통화정책등주요정책변화가수반될것으로예측되어인도네시아의대외금융포지션에대한압력이가중될전망이다. 국가경제가직면한위험에대해인도네시아정부는긴축통화정책, 환율조정, 수입압박및수출증진을위한진보적인개혁을단행하고, 외국인직접투자등의자본투자유입을촉진하기위한거시경제정책들을개선하려노력하고있다. 정책시행의신뢰성을제고할경우해외자금조달여건악화로인한인도네시아국제수지의취약성을감소시키고, 외국인투자활성화를통한투자의선순환을구축하며, 중기적으로는생산성증가를달성할수있을것으로기대하고있다. 2014년에들어서면서선진국의경기회복과함께세계경제여건의향상에따라중국등개발도상국의성장이뒷받침되어인도네시아수출수요가점진적으로확대될전망이다. 이러한추세가계속된다면석탄, 천연가스, 야자유 (Crude Palm Oil: CPO) 등의세계원자재가격이안정화되어국제수지감소의주원인이었던인도네시아환율하락은둔화될것으로예상된다. 전정권의환율조정및통화정책은거시경제를안정화시켰으며, 인도네시아루피아의평가절하는수출을증대시켜무역약화로인한충격을완화시켰다. 그러나이러한정책시행으로인해서외채가증가해정부와민간의부담이가중되게되었다. 통화정책과환율조정정책은단기적으로거시경제에중요한역할을한다. 정부재정적자가전체 GDP의 1.7% 로감소할것이라는전망과함께 2014년예산은비확대기조를유지했다. 2014년예산은특별개혁안이나대대적인지출을포함하고있지않으 11 http://www.establishmentpost.com/jokowis-nine-priorities-agenda-nawa-cita/ 12 World Bank, Indonesia Economic Quarterly, Slower growth; high risks, 2013. 110 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

나, 전기료조정계획을반영하여 2013년대비전력보조금이 29% 삭감되었다. 2013 년 6월루피아약세로상쇄된보조금연료가격의급등에따라 2014년에할당된연료보조금은 2013년수정예산 (APBN-P) 보다 11조달러가증가한 2,110억달러에달하며예산의큰부분을차지했다. 2015년예산에대한의회의반대가있기는했으나, 현정부의연료보조금감축및에너지사용료조정을위한과감한정책실행에힘입어대폭확대편성되었다. 낮은원자재가격의지속적인여파, 대외금융여건악화, 높은실질이자율과루피아가치하락에따라인도네시아은행은 GDP 성장률이 2013년 5.6% 에서 2014년 표 인도네시아경제동향 년 항목 년 년 년 년 년 성장률 예산적자 대비공공부채 정부총소요자금 단위 조루피아 시나리오 성장률 예산적자 대비공공부채 정부총소요자금 단위 조루피아 시나리오 성장률 예산적자 대비공공부채 정부총소요자금 단위 조루피아 시나리오 성장률 예산적자 대비공공부채 정부총소요자금 단위 조루피아 자료 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 111

5.3% 로둔화될것으로전망하였으나이러한전망은불확실성요인을내포하고있다. 특히환율정책, 보조금및연료가격정책과같은다른국가들의경제정책에따라영향을받기때문이다. 경제난과성장둔화를초래할수있는갑작스런대외수지조정을방지하기위해서는적절한대외금융여건이뒷받침될필요가있다. 사회기반시설투자정책및전망 2015년국가개발계획부 (National Development Planning/National Development Planning Agency: BAPPENAS) 는 2015년부터 2019년까지인도네시아전역의사회기반시설에대한투자에 4,796조 2천억루피아 ( 약 3,996억 7천만달러 ) 가필요할것으로추정했다. 즉, 2014년 GDP가약 8,223억 2천만달러인것을감안하면매년 737억 8천8백만달러의투자가이루어져야하며 2015년에는 GDP의약 8.9% 규모의투자가필요하다. 그러나사회기반시설에배정된국가예산은 GDP의 2~3% 에불과하여사회기반시설개발을위해 GDP의 5~6% 규모에달하는투자가더필요하다. 취약한사회기반시설은인도네시아내기업활동의주요장애물로여겨지고있다. 인도네시아정부는장기적으로 1인당소득이매년성장할전망이고 2010년부터 2014년까지 2,140억달러의투자가필요한점을감안해 2015년부터 2019년까지사회기반시설에필요한투자금액이 4,796조 2천억루피아또는약 3,996억 7천만달러에이를것으로추정했다. < 표 4-2> 는 2015년에서 2019년까지도로, 철도, 해상수송, 항공, 육상운송, 도시교통, 전기, 에너지 ( 석유, 가스 ), 통신기술및정보과학, 수자원, 정수및폐기물, 주거시설등 12개부문에서필요한투자규모를보여주고있다. 2015년부터 2019년은장기개발계획 (Long Term Development Plan) 을잇는 3번째국가중기개발계획 (National Medium Term Development Plan: RPJMN) 이시행되는기간으로써, 다양한부문의발전, 천연자원과인적자원의경쟁력을바탕으로경제력강화및과학기술발전에중점을두고있다. 본개발계획에서는 2015~19 년향후 5년간사회기반시설에 5,519조루피아 ( 또는 4,245억달러, $1=13,000 루피아 ) 를투자하는것을목계획하고있다. 112 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

표 인도네시아사회기반시설부문별필요투자규모 년 단위 조루피아 부문 중앙정부 지방정부 공기업 민간 합계 도로 철도 해상수송 항공 육상운송 등 도시교통 전기 에너지 석유 가스 통신기술및정보과학 수자원 정수및폐기물 주거시설 합계 비율 자료 년 월 2015년예산법 (APBN) 에서 GDP 대비 2.21% 수준의재정적자는 2014년수정예산의 2.40% 수준의적자보다낮다. 이는인도네시아정부와국회가새정부의비전과목표를달성하기위해재정여력을확대하고자하는열의가반영된것이다. 또한 2014년에입법된마을법 (Village law) 제6호이행의일환으로, 2015년예산에는최초로마을기금 (Village Fund) 에대한예산이배정되어있다. 본예산은지역사회복지개선에기여할것이며, 인도네시아정부는이를통해보다균등한경제성장달성을위한노력을강화할것으로예상된다. 새정부는국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 를통해최빈개발도상국인인도네시아의높은성장을촉진하기위해사회기반시설확충과에너지공급에집중적인투자의필요성을규명했다. 취임직후부터현대통령은사회기반시설개발을정권의최우선과제로삼는다는비전을제시해왔고정부보조금과에너지가격을합리적으로조정하고, 석유, 가스, 광물자원등의천연자원부문을개혁하여정부지출과세입의구조적인조정을단행하겠다는의지를표명하고있다. 또한현정부는인도네시아의국경지역, 마을, 오지에거주하는주민들의삶의질 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 113

을개선하기위한정책을시행하고있다. 신규창출된 ( 연료보조금감축등 ) 재원의재분배를통해인도네시아각지의사회기반시설을개발하기위해지방정부기금, 직접투자와신설 마을기금 이운용된다. 인도네시아정부는향후 5년간사회기반시설부문지출을 5% 이상확대하기위해노력하고있다. 그림 기금유형별사회기반시설부문지출 중앙정부예산 지방정부예산 공기업 민간부문 단위 조루피아 자료 중장기경제적사회기반시설전략 배경조사 년 가장중요한목표는 35,000MW 의발전시설을건설하고교통부문을발전시키는것이다. 이를위해 IPP(Independent Power Plant) 비중을현재 16%(7.7GW) 에서 2019년까지 32%(26GW) 높여야하며민간부문으로부터 435조루피아 ( 또는 335억달러 ) 를조달해야하며, 전력공기업인인도네시아전력공사 PT PLN(Perusahaan Listrik Negara) 은정부출자와금융부문으로부터재원을조달해야한다. 다음 [ 그림 4-2] 는교통부문에필요한투자규모를보여준다. 조코위대통령은임기중사회기반시설을확충하여경제부문의성장을도모하고, 그에따른부를지역과사회구성원들에배분하는데주력하겠다고발표했다. 에너지와식량기반시설을확보하고물류비용을감축함으로써현정부는전세계경기침체속에서도경제발전을지속하는것을목표로하고있다. 그는연료보조금을삭감하고에너지비용을조정하며사회기반시설투자를위한재정범위를확대하고, 사회빈곤층과취약계층에보조금을직접지원하겠다는정책결 114 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

그림 교통부문의필요투자규모 자료 정을내렸다. 인도네시아정부는발전소, 유료도로및항만건설등사업성이있는사업에대한대규모투자금을조달하기위해 PPP 사업을추진하거나, 공기업을투자기관으로활용하는계획을가지고있다. 국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 의자료에따르면민간에의한투자는기간에따라다소변동이있음을보여주고있다. 대대적으로규제가완화되고가장투자우호적인통신부문이민자사업의가장큰비중을차지하고있고, 에너지부문이그뒤를따르고있다. 정부는에너지부문의발전소, 석유및가스생산 / 정제시설에대한대규모투자를위해에너지공사 (PLN) 와석유가스공사 (PERTAMINA) 를운영하고있다. 에너지손실로인해지정발전소와주요전력망간전력연결문제가대두되고있다. 민간부문의참여는일종의 주기 적인흐름을보이는데, 이러한주기는국가의정치경제상황이나외국인직접투자, 투자제한업종목록등사회기반시설에대한민간투자를활성화하거나저해하는정책환경등여러요인의영향을받는다. 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 115

그림 인도네시아인프라부문에대한민간 기업참여증가 단위 백만달러 자료 자카르타세계은행 국가개발계획부 / 일본국제협력기구 (Bappenas/JICA) 의 2013년보고서에 13 따르면, 인도네시아의사회기반시설부문예산이전체예산의 7% 수준을차지하고있어정부예산이아닌다른곳에서투자금을조달할필요성을나타내고있다. 동보고서의분석에따르면 7% 의성장률을달성하기위해서는 2010년부터 2014년까지총 1,923조루피아 ( 약 1,618억달러 ) 의투자가필요하며, 중앙정부예산으로는필요투자금액의 29.1% 만이조달가능할것으로보여약 668조루피아규모의민간투자가필요한것으로나타났다. 인도네시아정부는공기업을경제발전의주요요소로활용하여 [ 그림 4-4] 와같은방법으로불충분한재원을조달할계획을가지고있다. 인도네시아정부의중장기개발계획에필요한투자를확보하기위해서는다양한부문에서의재원조달이필요하다. 필요한전체투자규모중에서 40.1% 는중앙정부예산으로, 9.9% 는지방정부예산으로조달될예정이며나머지 50% 의투자는 PPP제도를통해공기업과민간부문에의해확보될계획이다. [ 그림 4-5] 는 2015~19 년사회기반시설에필요한투자재원을나타내고있다. 정부가정부자체예산및공기업예산을관리하는한편 30% 의투자금액은민간자본으로조달되어야한다. 13 BAPPENAS/JICA, Medium Term Economic Infrastructure Strategy: Background Study for RPJMN 2015-2019, Jakarta, 2013. 116 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

그림 재원부족분및자금조달원 자료 중장기경제적사회기반시설전략 배경조사 그림 재원조달부문별사회기반시설에필요한투자금액 년 단위 억루피아 자료 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 117

제 2 절민간투자법률및제도 민간투자제도의규범체계 가 사회기반시설건설및운영에관한민관협력대통령령 인도네시아민간투자사업의정의, 정부및민간의역할, 추진및관리방안은대통령령에서규정하고있다. 인도네시아 PPP에관한최초의일반규정은 1998년 사회기반시설건설및운영에관한민관협력대통령령 (Keputusan Presiden) 제7호이다. 14 이후본규정은 사회기반시설제공을위한민관협력에관한 2005년대통령령 (Peraturan Presiden) 제67호 15 로대체되었고, 동규정은 2010년대통령령제13호, 2011 년대통령령제56호, 2013년대통령령제66호로세차례개정되었다. 그후 2015년 3 월 20일대통령령제38호가민간투자제도와관련된모든법령을대체하게되었다. 2015년제38호대통령령제1조제6항에따르면민간투자사업또는 KPBUS (Kerjasama Pemerintah dan Badan Usaha Swasta) 을부처장관, 지방정부대표, 공기업등에의해결정된내용에기초한공익을위한사회기반시설의마련에있어서정부와민간간협력이며, 이는당사자간위험배분을통하여민간자본을부분적으로혹은전부활용하는것으로정의하고있다. 또한인도네시아의민간투자사업에서는 운영권양여 (concession) 라는용어를주목할필요가있다. 항만에관한 2009년대통령령제61호에서는 운영권양여 를항만관리당국이항만운영기업에일정기간동안일정대가로서비스를제공할수있는권한을부여하는것이라고명시하고있다. 운영권양여란기존시설을일정기간동안일정대가로운영하는권한을기업에양여하는것으로운영권양여허가로도알려져있는데, 이는장관 / 기관장 / 지방정부대표가 2010년대통령령제13호에의해공개입찰을통해일반기 14 동대통령령은 PPP 를 KPBUS(Kerjasama Pemerintah dan Badan Usaha Swasta) 로명명하고있으나, 관련 PPP 나 KPBUS 에대한정의는없다. 15 PPP 나 KPS 에유사한 협력사업 과 PPP 나 KPS 운영권 에대한정의를명시하고있다. 협력사업은장관 / 기관대표 / 지방기업대표가조달을통해제휴협정을맺거나운영권양여로수행되는사회기반시설제공사업을의미한다. 운영권은장관 / 기관대표 / 지방기업대표가경매를통해사회기반시설을제공할수있는허가를의미한다. 이규정으로부터인도네시아에서는운영권이 PPP 와다르고, 운영권이 PPP 하에양여되는허가의일부라는점을알수있다. 118 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

업에운영권을양여하는것이다. 많은국가에서 PPP 사업의한방식으로활용되는 PFI(Project Finance Initiative) 도있는데, 인도네시아에는 PFI 를관장하는법령은없다. 민간투자제도의변천 가 세대 년 인도네시아의 1세대민간투자제도의특징은개별법에의거한유료도로와전력 (IPP) 시장의개방이다. Kerjasama Pemerintah dan Swast(KPS, 2014년종료 ) 와 Kerjasama Pemerintah dan Badan Usaha(KPBU, 2015년개시 ) 로명명되는민간투자제도는유료도로건설등사회기반시설을확충하기위해 1990년초시행되었다. 인도네시아정부는 1978년부터추진된유료도로건설확충을위해서 PPP제도아래에서금융약정을체결하기시작했다. 공기업과협력하여교통기반시설의개발을가속화하려는정부의목표달성을위해민간부문이참여하기시작했다. 이과정에서 2005년공공사업부규정제295 호 (No.295/PRT/M/200) 에의해인도네시아유료도로관리국 (Indonesia Toll Roads Authority: BPJT) 이설립되기전까지공기업인 PT Jasa Marga 가유료도로사업의감독및운영기관의역할을수행했다. PPP제도아래도로건설사업분야에서민간부문의참여를증진시키기위해인도네시아정부는 1980년 도로에관한법령 제13호를제정하여법적기반을마련했다. 동법에의거하여유료도로는 1989년부터민간부문이관리하기시작했고, 이후민간부문의유료도로운영참여가점차증가했다. 1998년까지는도로 (1980년법령제13호 ), 전기 (1985 년법령제15호 ), 상수도시설 (1974년법제11호 ), 철도 (1992년법령제13호 ) 의네부문만이개방되었고 1999년에통신부문 (1999년법제35호 ) 이개방되었다. 나 세대 년 인도네시아정부의 PPP 에관한최초의일반규정은 1998 년 사회기반시설건설및운 영에관한민관협력에관한대통령령제 7 호 (Presidential Decree No. 7/1998, Keputusan Presiden) 이다. 16 이후인도네시아정부는민간투자사업관리를제고하기위하여 1998 16 동대통령령은 PPP 를 KPBUS(Kerjasama Pemerintah dan Badan Usaha Swasta) 로명명하고있으나, 관련 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 119

년대통령령제7호를대체하는 사회기반시설제공을위한민관협력에관한 2005 년대통령령제67 호 (Presidential Regulation No. 67/2005 on Cooperation between the Government and the Provision of Infrastructure Business Entities, Peraturan Presiden) 17 를발표하고민간투자사업의공정성, 투명성, 경쟁성, 책임성등을강조하는주요원칙을도입하였다. 다 세대 년 사회기반시설제공을위한민관협력에관한 2005년대통령령제67호 (Presidential Regulation on No. 67/2005 on Cooperation between the Government and the Provision of Infrastructure Business Entities, Peraturan Presiden) 는 2010년대통령령제13호, 2011년대통령령제56호, 2013년대통령령제66호를통해세차례개정되었으며개정된규정에서는민간투자사업대상시설, 정부지원과관련된재무부및관련정부기관의역할, 민간투자자의역할에대해서제시하고있다. 상기대통령령의재개정후, 3차례의사회기반시설정상회의 (Infrastructure Summit) 가개최되어 PPP 사업목록을발표했다. 18 많은국가들은국가의우선순위와성공가능성에따라일부 PPP 사업을지정해 PPP 프로그램을추진한다. 2005년에개최된제1차사회기반시설정상회의에서 91건의사업목록이도출되었다. 2006년에 2차사회기반시설정상회의에서잠재사업이 101개로확대되었고, 10개의시범사업이신규로선정되었다. 2010년에 3차사회기반시설정상회의가개최되어잠재사업이 72건, 우선순위사업이 27건, 입찰준비완료사업 1건으로전체 PPP 사업계획이조정되었다. 그러나 2011 년 4월에개최된제4차사회기반시설정상회의에서동사업목록이축소되어 5건의시범사업과 11건의기타사업으로계획이수정되었다. 19 그럼에도 2011년 6월발표된 PPP 나 KPBUS 에대한정의는없다. 17 본규정에서는 PPP 나 KPS 에유사한 협력사업 과 PPP 나 KPS 운영권 에대한정의를명시하고있다. 협력사업은장관 / 기관대표 / 지방기업대표가조달을통해제휴협정을맺거나운영권양여로수행되는사회기반시설제공사업을의미한다. 운영권은장관 / 기관대표 / 지방기업대표가경매를통해사회기반시설을제공할수있는허가를의미한다. 이규정으로부터인도네시아에서는운영권이 PPP 와다르고, 운영권이 PPP 하에양여되는허가의일부라는점을알수있다. 18 인도네시아에서는 2009 년이후 Bappenas 가 PPP 사업목록을등재한 PPP 북을발간하였다. 2009 년이전사업목록은따로문서로남아있지않다. 19 사업목록이축소된이유는미비한사업준비 ( 토지 ) 와불충분한기술서류등미비한사업준비로투자자의관심을끌지못했기때문이다. 120 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

2011년국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 의 PPP 사업목록에는 45건의잠재사업, 21건의우선순위사업과 13건의착수준비를마친사업이포함되었다. 또한중부자바발전소사업 (2006년사회기반시설정상회의에서발표되고 2011년 10월 6일체결된 10개의모델사업중하나 ) 이발주되었다. 이사업은 2005년대통령령제67호, 2010년대통령령제13호, 2011년대통령령제56호에서명시된절차를통과한유일한사업이다. 인도네시아국가개발기획부 / 국가개발기획청이수립한 2012년, 2013년 PPP 사업목록에는 2012년 58건, 2013년 27건의사업이수록되었다. 표 인도네시아 법률연혁 년대통령령제 호사회기반시설건설및운영을위한협력에관한대통령령 년대통령령제 호사회기반시설제공을위한민관협력에관한대통령령 년대통령령제 호 년대통령령제 호 년대통령령제 호 사회기반시설제공을위한민관협력에관한 년대통령령제 호개정안 사회기반시설제공을위한민관협력에관한 년대통령령제 호 차개정안 사회기반시설제공을위한민관협력에관한 년대통령령제 호 차개정안 년제 호대통령령사회기반시설제공을위한민관협력에관한대통령령 라 세대 년 인도네시아민간투자사업 4세대는 2015년대통령령제38호의제정으로부터시작된다. 2015년 3월 20일대통령령제38호는이전의민간투자사업과관련된모든규정들을대체하게되었다. 동규정은이전규정의미비점을보완하고, 20 개방성과투명성을보장하는공공사업수행에관한목표를설정했으며, 21 민간제안사업과정부지원강 20 최신법규는이전법령의미비점을개선한것이다. 1998 년대통령령은 PPP/KPS/KPBU 에대해정의하지않고, GCA, 민간제안사업, 투자수익등을명시하지않았기에 2005 년대통령령 67 호가인도네시아 PPP 관련규정의초석이었다고할수있으며, 법규개정을통해 PPP 제도하에수행될수있는사회기반시설부문이규정되기시작하였다. 2005 년대통령령 67 호가협력사업과운영권허가에대한정의만내리고있는반면, 2015 년대통령령제 38 호는 PPP/KPS/KPBU 에대한분명한정의를명시하고있다. 21 홈페이지와 PPP 사업목록을통해일반시민들이투명하게공개된우선순위사업들에대한정보를얻을수있다. 그러나모든 PPP 사업이 Bappenas PPP 사업목록에등재되는것이아니며, 대규모사업만등재되어있다. 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 121

화를위한제도를마련했다. PPP 관련주요규정외에도각주무부처는사회기반시설사업에직간접적으로참여하는민간기업들에보다자세한정보를제공하기위해관련규정을제정했다. 22 또한대통령령제38호에서는민간투자사업의활성화를위해민간투자사업범위확대및다양한인센티브를제공하는등의내용을포함하고있다. 2015년제38호대통령령에서는번들링사업에대해주무관청이 MOU를체결하고주관기관을선정할수있으며, 국가및지방정부소유기업들도부문별규정에따라주무관청의역할을수행할수있다고규정하고있다. 또한동령에서는도로, 에너지, 폐기물, 전기, 항만및해상운송, 통신, 석유및가스, 공항, 철도및상수도시설등민간투자사업으로추진가능한총 19개의대상시설을규정하고있다. 인도네시아민간투자사업에서는주무관청이사업자금의일부를조달할수있도록하고있으며, 정부지원사항으로는사업이행자금 (Viability Gap Funding) 제공및재무부의승인에따른세제혜택지원등이있다. 기본적으로토지수용은주무관청의의무이나사업이재무적으로타당할경우민간사업자가토지수용비의일부혹은전체를상환할수있도록하고있다. 대통령령제38호에서는또한특정요건이충족될경우민간제안사업을허용하도록하고있으며, 사업준비비용의전체혹은일부는최종낙찰자에게부과될수있음을명시하고있다. 민간투자사업사업자는입찰혹은수의계약을통해서지정될수있으며금융약정체결기간은최대 12개월이나최대 6개월연장이가능하다. 이밖에 2015년제38호대통령령조항들은다음과같다. 사회기반시설제공을위한정부와민간기업의협력에관한 년대통령령제 호 제 조인도네시아 사업의목표와목적을정의하고 민간재원조달을통한사회기반시설 제공에지속적인재원조달의필요성을규정하며 양질의사회기반시설서비스를효과적 효율 적 맞춤형으로적기에제공한다 또한올바른사업원칙에기반하여사회기반시설제공에민 간기업의참여를독려하고 사용한공익서비스에대한사용자지불원칙적용을장려한다 사 용자의지불능력을고려해야하는특별한경우에는정부지급금을통하여민간투자 자의투자수익을보장한다 22 각사회기반시설부문별규정이주 PPP 규정과상이하기때문에, 주 PPP 규정이규율하지않는부문별기반시설에대한정보는부재하다. 122 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

제 조인도네시아 사업과관련하여파트너십 편의 경쟁 위험관리 사회기반시설관리및효과적이고효율적인서비스제공을위한원칙을규정한다 제 조 사업을통해추진가능한사회기반시설부문들을규정하고있다 경제사회적인프라로구성되며다음의 개부문이그대상이다 교통기반시설 도로기반시설 수자원및관개시설 식수공급시설 중앙폐수관 리시설 지역폐수관리시설 폐기물처리시설 통신및정보과학시설 전기기반시설 석유 가스 에너지기반시설 에너지절약시설 도시기반시설 교육시설 체육시설 구역내기반시설 관광시설 의료시설 교정시설 공공주택 시설 제 조장관 기관장 지방정부대표가부문별규정에따른 사업수행시주무관청의역할을규정한다 제 조공기업이부문별규정에따른 사업수행시주무관청의역할을수행한다 제 조공기업이주무관청의역할을수행할경우사업시행자와협약을통해 를추진한다 제 조인도네시아법규에따라사업시행자투자수익은사용자의사용료 정부지급금 혹은관련법령에따른방식으로지급한다 제 조특정요건충족시 민간제안사업이추진될수있다 제 조정부는필요시 사업을지원할수있다 제 조상기 조에서언급된정부지원의형식과절차는재무부장관이정한다 제 조정부는 사업에보증이가능하다 제 조정부보증은사회기반시설보증 공기업 을통해재무부장관이담당한다 제 조장관 기관장 지방정부대표는각조직내에 전담팀을설립한다 마 민간투자제도의변화 지방분권화의영향 2002년이전까지인도네시아의의사결정은대체로중앙집중적으로이루어졌으나, 2002년에국가재정법이통과된이후지방분권화가상당히진전되었다. 2008년제정된법령제14호의투명성제고법에의거하여매년예산법이제정되었다. 이후민주적의사결정권한이지방정부로상당히분산되었다. 그러나정부재원조달은여전히중앙집중식으로이루어지고있다. 지방정부는세입분배공식에따라국가세입의공평한배분을받으나지방정부들만의독자적인세제기반은없다. 2010년이후지방정부들이재산세를징수하기시작했다. 지방정부차원에서아직까지대규모투자지출이이루어지고있지않으나, 총지출의최소 20% 가량이투자로이어져야한다는의견이제 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 123

시되고있다. 추후논의될예정이나원칙적으로지방정부가 PPP 사업을추진시중앙정부의규정을따를의무는없다. 그러나지방정부가민간투자사업에대한보증이나재정지원을받고자할경우에는중앙정부의규정을준수해야한다. 인도네시아에는 490개의지방정부가있으며, 각지방정부는수자원공기업 (PDAMs) 과지역은행공기업을보유하고있다. 대부분의수자원공기업은 1997년아시아외환위기이후발생한심각한재정문제로인해중앙정부에채무를지고있는상태이다. 이들지방정부공기업은중앙정부에부채를상환하지않으면중앙정부로부터자금을지원받을수없기때문에자금조달에제한을받고있다. 2002년국가재정법이통과된이후진전된지방분권화의일환으로, 일부의사결정권한이국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 에서재무부로이양되었다. 또한의사결정권한이지방정부로분산되었는데이는각지방정부하지역개발기획청 (Regional Planning Agencies: Bappedas) 이국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 에 1차로보고하지않고해당지방정부에먼저보고되었음을의미한다. 지방정부사업에관련해서지역개발기획청 (Bappedas) 의역할은대체로 PPP 사업의활성화로제한된다. 이에따라지역개발기획청 (Bappedas) 은민간투자사업목록 (PPP Book) 에등재할사업을결정한다. 2000년대초개혁이이루어지기전까지중앙정부가아닌지방정부가수행한대부분의사업들은공기업이나민간기업과수의계약을통해추진된다. 인도네시아정부는개혁의일환으로사업입찰절차와원칙을개선하고자 2005년대통령령제67호의제정을통해경쟁입찰제도를도입했다. 동규정은주무관청의자격요건과민간참여기업의역할등을규정하고있다. 또한동규정은조달절차시특정사업에대한재정지원및보증제공과관련한재무부의책임도명시하고있다. 민간투자사업추진방식 인도네시아의사업방식은대부분 BOT(Build-Operate-Transfer), BOO(Build-Own- Operate) 방식으로추진되고있다. 이외에도 DBO(Design-Build-Operate), DBL(Design- Build-Lease), Reverse BOO=BBO(Build-Buy-Operate) 등의방식이있다. 124 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

민간투자추진가능대상시설 대통령령제 5 조에서는 PPP 사업을통해추진가능한사회기반시설부문들을다음 과같이규정하고있다. 사회기반시설제공을위한정부와민간기업의협력에관한 년대통령령제 호 제 조 사업을통해추진가능한사회기반시설부문들을규정하고있다 경제사회적인프라로구성되며다음의 개부문이그대상이다 교통기반시설 도로기반시설 수자원및관개시설 식수공급시설 중앙폐수관 리시설 지역폐수관리시설 폐기물처리시설 통신및정보과학시설 전기기반시설 석유 가스 에너지기반시설 에너지절약시설 도시기반시설 교육시설 체육시설 구역내기반시설 관광시설 의료시설 교정시설 공공주택 시설 제 3 절민간투자사업의추진절차. 정부고시사업 정부고시사업의대상사업선정에서사업자지정, 감독까지의 PPP 운영과정및절차와관련된내용은국가개발기획부 (Ministry of National Development Planning, Bappenas) 장관 / 국가개발기획청 (Ministry of National Development Planning Agency, Bappenas) 청장의사회기반시설제공을위한민관협력이행에관한 2012년지침제3 호에제시되어있으며사업계획, 사업준비, 사업추진및협약관리의 4가지단계로구분된다. 23 23 각단계나전체단계를시행하고종료하는데소요되는기간을규정하고있지않으나보통사업기획에서사업처리단계까지약 2~3 년이소요된다. 가장빨리추진된사업은기획에서처리까지 1 년밖에소요되지않은연구소의료시설건설프로젝트이고, 가장오래걸린사업은 2005~10 년까지진행된 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 125

그림 정부고시사업추진절차 단계 단계 단계 단계 사업계획사업준비사업추진운영관리 Ÿ Ÿ 대상사업선정우선순위결정 Ÿ 사업계획서작성 Ÿ Ÿ 사전타당성조사입찰및협약체결 Ÿ Ÿ 협약관리운영계획수립 결과물 Ÿ Ÿ 우선순위리스트사업개요 Ÿ 사업계획서 Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ 사전타당성조사보고서협약서정부보증약정서 Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ 금융약정서 계약서 계약서운영보고서 정부지원및보증요구정부지원및보증요구승인 정부지원금지급보증서및손해배상청구서평가 자료 가 민간투자사업사업계획단계 인도네시아정부는사업의중요성에따라 (i) 잠재사업, (ii) 유망 ( 우선추진 ) 사업, (iii) 입찰예정사업으로구분하여 PPP Book 에등재하여발표하고있다. 잠재사업은향후재원조달과중장기경제개발계획추진현황을감안하여탄력적으로추진하고자하는사업이고, 우선추진사업은다른사업보다우선적으로추진하고자하는사업이다. 추진하고자하는사업을 PPP Book 에등재하기위해서장관, 기관장, 지방정부는사업계획단계별로아래서류들과함께민간투자사업사업계획서를국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 에제출해야한다. 잠재사업유먕 우선추진 사업입찰예정사업 Ÿ 사전타당성조사 Ÿ 사전타당성조사요약보고서 자료 Ÿ 사업준비문서 Ÿ 사업준비문서요약본 Ÿ 사전타당성조사보고서 Ÿ 사전타당성조사요약보고서 Ÿ 정부지원승인서 필요시 정부보증서 Palikanci 유료도로사업이었다. 이사업이오랜시간이걸린이유는토지수용에만 2 년이소요되었기때문이다. 126 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

그림 민간투자 사업추진절차 중장기계획 ê 부처및기관별전략계획 ê ê 잠재사업 ê 우선추진사업 ê 입찰예정사업 ê 연간정부실행계획 ê 부처및기관별연간실행계획 예산 ê 민간투자사업추진 민간투자사업추진계획 Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ 자료 민간투자사업선정기준 정부및지역중장기 사회기반시설관련상위계획과의일치성지역공간계획과의일치성사회기반시설과지역간의연계성비용회수가능성 사전타당성조사 우선순위혹은민간제안사업포함여부법적 기술및위험분담확인민간투자사업방식규정여부정부지원사항규정 입찰서류완료여부 관리팀설립및조달준비조달스케줄규정 필요시 정부지원승인 대상사업선정정부정책과목표, 한정된자원과사업준비정도에따라민간투자자를유치할수있는사업을선정한다. 대상사업은특정사업이정치적 경제적가치가있고지속가능할것이라는확신을심어주는것이중요하다. 민간투자 (PPP) 대상사업은주무관청에의해선정되며선정기준은인도네시아개발계획및프로그램과의부합여부와기술적 경제적타당성을확보했는지여부이다. 또한대상사업선정과정에서주무관청은사업이국가중장기개발계획과부합되는지확인해야하며, 현행법규를준수하는지여부에대해서도확인해야한다. 마지막으로주무관청은민간투자사업에대한적격성 (VfM) 분석을수행한다. 인도네시아에서는적격성 (VfM) 분석을공식적인규정에 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 127

따라수행하지는않으나효과적인위험관리를필요로하는투자가치, 민간부문의 PPP 수행에따른비용효과, 기술적타당성, 민간부문에대한유인책존재여부에대 한정성적인평가를수행한다. 사업우선순위결정대상사업선정후, 주무관청은사업의우선순위를정한다. 우선순위를결정하기위해다기준분석 (Multi Criteria Analysis: MCA) 이사용된다. 다기준분석 (MCA) 은다음의평가기준을적용한다. - 사업목적의명확성 - 사업시행을위한주요자원에대한접근성과장애요인 - 사업결과의명확성 - 사회및 환경적영향의통제가능성 - 지속가능한수요 - 원활한토지수용및이주대책의용이성 - 정부의지원능력수준 - 제도적측면의준비성 - 정부의전략적우선순위나중장기개발계획에의포함여부중앙정부의민간투자사업의경우부처 / 기관대표혹은공기업대표가부문별민간투자사업우선순위계획을발표한후, 각기관의장관 / 대표에게 PPP 사업목록을제출한다. 각기관별 PPP 전담팀이사업목록을평가한뒤, 장관 / 기관대표에우선순위프로젝트목록을권고하면각기관장은국가개발부 (Ministry of National Development Planning: BAPPENAS) 장관에게최종 PPP 사업목록을제출한다. 그후국가개발부 (BAPPENAS) 장관의평가를거친후각부처별 PPP 우선순위사업목록이수립된다. 지방정부 PPP 사업의경우에는민간투자사업을담당하는지방정부부서에서 PPP 우선순위사업을선정하고시장에게목록을제출하면, 시장이이를국가개발기획부장관및관계부처장관에제출한다. 128 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

나 사업준비단계 이단계에서는추진하고자하는사업이민간투자사업으로추진가능한지, 사회적 경제적으로타당한지를검토하는단계로서다음의두단계로구분할수있다. 사업계획분석 사업계획분석은사업과관련된법률, 기술및비용, 재무등여러분야에대한타 당성을분석하는단계로서분야별주요분석내용은다음과같다. 1 법률평가 - 법률적평가는법률적, 제도적분석으로규제분석과제도분석을모두포함함. 2 기술평가 - ( 필요시 ) 단기, 중기및장기수요예측, 시나리오및민감도조사 - 비용추정을위해기초기술조사등의예비설계 - 기술요건, 비용및토지소유권등을고려한부지 / 토지준비 - 사업성과범위및요구수준 3 적격성조사 - 사업의편익분석과정성평가를포함하며비용- 편익분석은다음의방식을이용함. PPP 사업과재정사업의비용비교 경제적편익은재정적비용 (Financial Prices) 을해당되는경제적요소로환산하여각각의투입과성과에대한경제적비용으로환산 사업의편익이사회와국가에미치는영향평가및측정 경제및사회할인율을적용한 EIRR(Economic Internal Rate of Return) 과 ENV (Expected Net Value) 방식을활용하여경제적타당성조사실시 사업시행가능성대비사업추진의불확실성에따른영향을평가하기위한민감성분석 4 타당성조사 시장위험분석 - 서비스수준및잠재적수요를분석하고, PPP 사업및사업요건에대한투자자 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 129

들과금융기관의관심을측정하며시장위험을줄일수있는방안을마련해야하며주요분석내용은다음과같음. 서비스수준결정 실질수요조사 수요증가요인과민감도를반영한시나리오로예측 PPP 사업의위험요인에대한잠재투자자의대응평가, 필요한정부지원및보증의최소수준평가 PPP 에할당가능한대출규모파악을위해국내외금융기관의대응평가 시장위험을줄일수있는전략결정 5 타당성조사 - 재무성분석 - PPP 사업의재무적투자수익률분석 (financial internal rate of return: FIRR) - 자본비용의경쟁력을평가하기위해가중평균자본비용 (weighted average cost of capital: WACC) - 당해연도에만기가도래하는채무 ( 원금및이자 ) 를상환할수있는현금보유액을계산하기위해부채상환비율 (Debt Service Coverage Ratio: DSCR) 계산 - 자기자본이익률분석 - 사업현금흐름에위험완화비용이포함되어있도록함. - 사업현금흐름에수입, 운영비, 세금, 자본지출의반영여부확인 - 환율리스크관련재무성분석시나리오 - 정부재정지원및정부보증의유형및금액판단 6 타당성조사위험요인분석 - PPP 사업시행과관련된위험을명확히식별하고평가해야하며, 가장최소의비용으로위험에대응할수있는당사자에게위험이배분되어야함. 샨티 (Shanties) 이용가능성 과실송금 ( 이익의송금 ) 사회기반시설건설및운영 사회기반시설의사업성 원자재공급 법률 130 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

PPP 사업통과권한 - 사회기반시설유형에기초한위험분담및정부재정지원 정부보증으로부터발생할수있는비용 - 정부혹은사업시행자에의해평가된위험에기초하여위험완화결정 7 타당성조사 ( 사용요금구조분석 ) - 사용요금구조분석은다음의요건을충족해야함. 요금정책결정, 조정체계, 변수조정변수일기준검토, 요금조정체계및기업에대한요금지불방식결정 PPP 사업기간동안요금검토와조정에관한절차및책임결정 최초제안자의사업계획서에대한지적재산권로열티지급액결정 - 다음의경우, 기업과주무관청간협약조건에이익공유에관한내용을포함해야함. PPP 사업의가치상승 PPP 사업개발조기종료 PPP 사업의수익이특정최대치를상회하여, 추가이익공유체계마련이가능한경우 8 타당성조사 ( 환경 사회영향평가 ) - PPP 사업의환경평가 - 사회환경성분석 - 토지취득및이주대책계획 9 협력방식평가 - PPP 사업은위험배분, 재무및자산관리책임에대한내용을포함해야하며, 각각의계획에대한평가를통해서가장적절한추진방식을선택해야함. 10 정부재정지원및보증제공필요성평가 - 정부재정지원의목적은 PPP 사업재무성의타당성을제고하기위한것이며정부재정지원은재정적지원또는인허가, 토지취득, 건설지원혹은기타지원등비재정적인형태로제공됨. 한편, 정부보증 (Government Guarantee) 은사업시행자의위험을줄이기위한목적으로제공함. 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 131

11 조달계획초안 - 조달계획초안은민간투자사업자의조달계획, 조달문서, 시행단계및차순위협상대상자목록을포함해야함. 12 PPP 협약서초안 - 본초안은 PPP 시행에관한민관협력을규정하는다양한요건을담고있음. 사업준비조사주무관청은사업추진을위해토지이용가능성과관련서류등사업준비를위한업무를수행한다. 주무관청은민간투자사업과관련된이해당사자들의승인, 정부지원및보증신청, 민간투자사업관리팀의구성및운영, 예산설계, 부지및토지수용을위한일정계획, 이주대책계획, 환경준수및법적문제해결등을준비해야한다. 사업준비단계시정부지원사항사업준비단계시, 정부지원사항으로는환경관련지원활동, 토지수용관련지원활동, 정부보증관련지원활동의크게세가지가있다. 환경관련지원활동으로는사업계획발표및일반시민들과의협의를진행하며, 토지수용과관련해서는토지수용계획및이주대책계획을수립하고예산을확보한다. 마지막으로주무관청은 PPP 사업에대한정부보증요건을충족하기위해인도네시아사회기반시설보증기금 (IIGF) 과협의하며, IIGF에보증을요청하기위한소개장과심사서를작성하고제출한다. 또한주무관청은 PPP 사업추진을위해 IIGF가요구하는사항을보증한다. 다 사업추진단계 사전적격성조사종료 최종사업계획개요 주무관청은최종사전적격성조사를수행후공개입찰을위한사전적격성조사보고서를작성한다. 사전적격성조사보고서에는 PPP 관련이해당사자의승인, 사전타당성조사최종결과, 시장의견, 요금구조, 토지수용관련예산확보가능성, 정부지원및보증이행체계및재원조달구조등에대한내용이포함되어야한다. 사전적격성조사보고서작성이완료된후, 주무관청은시장의관심을조사하여 PPP 사업 132 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

의잠재투자자목록을작성한다. 입찰및조달 1 입찰계획입찰절차, PPP 사업범위, 관련법규및사업의기술적, 재정적측면을이해하고충분한지식을보유한전문가들로조달위원회 (Procurement Committee) 를구성한다. 조달위원회는조달일정과조달통보방식을정한다. 이단계에서주무관청은시장조사 (Interests Assessment Market, Market Sounding) 를실시한다. 이는 PPP 사업에관한잠재투자가들의의견을취합하여반영하기위해실시된다. 주무관청은투자자들의투자를유치할수있는사업을준비해야한다. 조달위원회는자가추정가격 (Self- Estimated Price), 입찰참가자격사전심사서류및조달관련서류를제시한다. 2 조달과정 입찰자격사전심사입찰자격사전심사는우선조달계획을공지한뒤, 입찰후보자는조달위원회에입찰의향서와사전심사서류등을제출한다. 조달위원회는제출된사전심사서류를평가, 적격업체를선정하여사전심사결과를승인및발표한다. 사전심사탈락업체가이의를제기할경우에는관련사항을조사하고재평가를실시한다. 실행계획이단계에서는참가자리스트, 제안요청서전달, 입찰관련서류등의초안을마련한다. 조달설명회이단계에서조달위원회는조달방식, 입찰서류제출절차, 필수첨부서류, 입찰서류공개절차, 평가방식, 제안을거절할수있는사안, 협약조건, 제안서평가와관련된사항, 절차, 기간및입찰보증발급가능한당사자와같은사항에대해서설명회를개최한다. 입찰제안서제출입찰제안서는행정, 기술서류를동봉한봉투와재무관련서류를동봉한서류를하나의봉투에담아동시에조달위원회에제출한다. 입찰서류공개 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 133

이과정에서증인단의수에주의를기울여야하는데, 최소두명의입찰참가자중한사람을증인으로세워야한다. 만약이보다적은수의증인단이구성된다면입찰서류공개는연기되거나조달위원회외의추가증인을지정해야한다. 조달위원회는서류의완성도와관련해입찰자들앞에서서류를검토하고보여준후낭독한다. 입찰서류에문제가없으면위원회와입찰참가자중두대표가서류에서명한후조달위원회가작성한제안서검토회의록 (Minutes of Proposal Evaluation: BAPP) 에위원회와두증인이낭독후서명한다. 제안평가입찰관련규정에따라평가가진행된다. 조달결과회의록작성조달위원회는위원장과조달위원회위원전체혹은최소 3분의 2가서명한 BAPP의평가결과에따라결정을내린다. 최종낙찰자선정조달위원회는평가결과에따라최종낙찰자를선정한다. 동위원회는최종낙찰자를명시한보고서를작성하여주무관청에제출한다. 주무관청이위원회의제안에동의하지않는경우, 주무관청과조달위원회가동사안에대해논의를거친후반대의견과동의의견을포함한회의록을작성하고, 주무관청과조달위원회가서명한다. 단독입찰자가사전심사를통과하거나, 입찰제안서를제출하고기술적요건을충족한경우단독입찰자를최종낙찰자로선정한다. 그후장관 / 기관장 / 시장의요청에따라단독입찰자와협상을진행한다. 장관 / 기관장 / 시장이협상결과에동의할경우, 조달위원회는단독입찰자를최종낙찰자로공표한다. 입찰자의이의제기최종낙찰자공표에이의가있는입찰자는서면증빙서류와함께이의를제출할수있다. 주무관청은이의에대한조사결과를발표하고, 합리적인조치를취한다. 낙찰자확정서발급주무관청은이의제기가없거나이의제기가사실과다른것으로판명되는것을조건으로최종낙찰자를 PPP 사업시행자로선정하는서한을발급한다. 협약체결준비 134 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

낙찰자는 PPP 협약을체결할법인을설립해야하고 PPP 협약은주무관청과해 당법인간체결하며, 그협약은협약에명시된선행조건이충족되는경우에 비로소효력이발생된다. 라 운영관리단계 협약관리는사업기간동안실시협약이법규를준수하는지여부를확인하는것으로 건설이전과정, 건설, 운영및 PPP 협정종료까지동협정의이행여부를관리한다. 공사이전과정공사이전과정에서 PPP 협약관리는협약체결부터금융약정체결시점까지이루어진다. 이단계에서는협약내명시된사전요구조건 ( 조건부전례 ) 충족여부, 재원조달, 환경영향평가와관련사항을관리한다. 공사착공부터 PPP 사업의운영전까지의협약을관리한다. 이단계에서는신규사회기반시설설계, 제공서비스에관한설명, 기존시설과신규시설통합, 기업의 PPP 협약준수실패혹은불능으로인한문제를공개할권한, 공사일정연기혹은변동, 공사설계변형, 작업준비도 / 운영, 공사기술계획과의부합여부, 자산및계획, 노동관련사안및주무관청이부담하는위험등에관한사항들을관리한다. 운영운영기간동안 PPP 협약이행관리는사업이운영되기시작한시점부터협약만료까지이루어진다. 이단계에서는 PPP 협약에따른서비스수준을준수하는지의여부를관리한다. 협약종료 PPP 협약종료이후의이전방식은옵션이전혹은자산이전의형태로추진될수있으며소유권이전은 PPP 협약종료후, 협약기간동안건설되거나운영 관리되어온모든자산을주무관청에이전하는것을의미한다. 소유권이전의경우다음단계 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 135

에따라서진행된다. 1 자산가치평가 (Asset Valuation) - PPP 협약에포함된모든사회기반시설구성요소 / 시스템자산의가치평가는각구성요소의상태 / 기술적성능및남은수명에따라이뤄짐. 2 대가지급 (Payment of Compensation) - 주무관청은 PPP 협약에명시된가치에따라기업에대가를지급 3 사업이전 (Project Transfer) - 당사자들이자산가치평가서에동의하고서명하면, 사업시행법인에서주무관청으로사업이공식적으로이전됨.. 민간제안사업 인도네시아에서는정부고시사업이외에민간제안사업이허용되고있으며, 민간제안사업의경우에도기본적으로경쟁입찰방식으로추진되나경쟁입찰단계전민간사업자가정부로부터사업최초제안자 (initiator) 로평가 승인을받는추가적인절차를거친다. 공개경쟁입찰에서는사업최초제안자에제공되는인센티브나혜택이다르다. 아래에서는민간제안사업의각단계별추진절차를보여주고있다. 민간제안서를누구에게, 어디에제출해야되는지와어떠한내용을포함해야하는지가민간제안사업의추진절차를파악하는데있어서중요한내용이다. 가 민간제안에대한주무관청의승인 단계이단계는사업준비를위해최초제안자가주무관청의승인을얻는절차로서다음네단계로진행된다. 1 최초제안자의사업계획서, 사업시행자자격요건관련서류및의향서제출 2 주무관청의사업계획서평가 3 주무관청의최초제안자자격요건평가 136 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

4 주무관청은사업추진여부에대한최종결정 단계 1 최초제안자는적격성조사실시및완료후조사보고서를주무관청에제출한다. 2 주무관청은적격성조사보고서를평가한다. 3 주무관청은 PPP 사업을승인하거나반려한다. 단계최초제안자로지정되기위해주무관청의승인을얻는절차로서다음다섯단계로진행된다. 1 최초제안자는적격성조사를완료후, 사전자격요건을충족한다. 2 최초제안자는환경문제완화방안, 환경허가취득및사업예정지역위치를명시한다. 3 주무관청의적격성조사보고서와사전자격요건서류평가 4 주무관청의사업추진여부결정 5 최초제안자에대한보상제공및형식 - 입찰평가에서우대점수 ( 최대 10%) 부여 - 1순위입찰자의제안에부합하는수정제안을 30일내에할수있는권리부여 - 장관, 기관장, 지방정부대표혹은사업시행자에게지적재산권을포함한사업계획서매각가능최초제안자가우대점수를받거나, 수정제안권리를확보할경우적격성조사보고서및기타서류에대한소유권은장관 / 기관장 / 지역대표에게양도된다. 최초제안자가사업계획서를매각할경우최초제안자의입찰참여는금지된다. 민간제안사업과정부고시사업의입찰절차는유사하며, 사실상거의동일하다. 단하나의차이점은최종낙찰자선정단계인데, 민간제안사업에서는최초제안자가우대점수를받거나수정제안할권리를부여받는다는점에서만차이가있을뿐이다. 다음그림은민간제안사업의각단계별추진절차를보여주고있다. 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 137

그림 민간제안사업추진절차 최초제안자승인단계 입찰단계 단계 Ÿ 조달위원회구성 Ÿ 입찰서류준비 주무관청 단계 Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ 사전타당성조사보고서제출사전타당성조사보고서평가타당성조사수행여부승인 사업자주무관청주무관청 단계 단계 Ÿ 민간기업조달공표 Ÿ 입찰의향서제출 Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ 입찰공고 서류제출 심사및결과발표 주무관청사업자 주무관청사업자주무관청 단계 Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ 타당성조사보고서 입찰서류 협약서준비사업자 단계 서류준비타당성조사보고서평가 평가최초제안자승인 자료 단계주무관청주무관청주무관청주무관청 단계 Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ 본입찰공고제안서제출 제안서평가우선협상대상자지정최종낙찰자선정 Ÿ 이의제기 Ÿ 사업자지정 단계 Ÿ 협약체결 주무관청사업자 주무관청주무관청주무관청 민간투자사업주관부처 제 4 절민간투자사업관련기관 24 가 사회기반시설개발촉진위원회 인도네시아정부는 2005 년대통령령제 42 호에의거하여인프라부문에있어서민 간투자사업방식을본격적으로도입하기위해 사회기반시설촉진위원회 (The Policy Committee for the Acceleration of Infrastructure Provision: KKPPI) 를설치하였다. 이 24 한국개발연구원, 민간투자사업의중장기추진방향및정책과제, 2010. 12. 대외경제정책연구원, 인도네시아공공민간협력제도의구조와정책적시사점, 2013. 10. Bappenas, 2015 PPP Book, 2015. 5. 138 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

후 KKPPI 는 2014년대통령령제75호에의거하여 사회기반시설개발촉진위원회 (The Committee of Infrastructure Priorities Development Acceleration: KPPIP) 로명칭을바꾸었으며, 이기관은사업조직화에있어부처간조율뿐만아니라사회기반시설개발에영향을미치는정책조율에서도중추적인역할을수행한다. KPPIP의주요임무는다음과같다. 첫째, 사회기반시설우선과제개발을위한전략및정책을구축한다. 둘째, 사회기반시설우선과제개발을위한전략및정책을감독관리한다. 셋째, 사회기반시설우선과제개발과관련한제도및장치의역량강화를촉진한다. 이러한임무를수행하기위해사회기반시설우선과제개발과관련된기능과임무를수행하는타부처, 기관, 지방정부, 기업및다른이해당사자들과협력한다. 또한개별전문가, 기관및기업을고용하여자문위원단을구성할수있다. 인도네시아중장기경제개발기본계획인 MP3EI(The Master plan for Acceleration and Expansion of Indonesia s Economic Development) 를달성하기위해필요한사업만을 PPP 프로젝트로고려한다. KKPPI(The Policy Committee for the Acceleration of Infrastructure Provision: KKPPI) 는 MP3EI를바탕으로 PPP 프로젝트의우선순위를정하고, 다양한프로젝트의추진을조정한다. 원칙적으로 KKPPI 에서높은우선순위를부여한프로젝트가반드시실행가능한것으로보장되지않지만, 정부기관과민간부문은높은순위를부여한프로젝트를실행가능한것으로이해하는경우가많다. 그러나사회기반시설개발촉진위원회는민간투자사업최상위의사결정위원회로서민간투자사업준비와이행을지원하는데효과적이고적극적인리더역할을위한강력한리더십을발휘하지못하고있다는비판을받고있다. 현재인도네시아정부는일반적인사회기반시설프로그램과특히 PPP 사회기반시설프로그램을강화하기위해강력한정치적인리더십과함께효과적인조율구조를수립해야할필요성을인식하고있다. 이에국가개발계획부 (Bappenas), 재무부와경제조정부는 KKPPI 를민간투자사업의최상위기관으로지정할계획을수립하고있다. 나 재무부 인도네시아의민간투자사업개발의핵심적인역할은재무부와국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 가담당한다. 재무부산하에는 2015 년에신설된정부지원및사회기반시 설금융지원관리국 (Directorate of Government Support and Infrastructure Finance 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 139

Management) 이있으며, 이부서가국가적인수준의민간투자제도를전담하고있다. 인도네시아민간투자사업에대한정부재정지원및보증제공은재무부가주로담당하고있다. 2005년대통령령제67호 (Perpres. No. 67. 2005) 와 2010년대통령령제13 호 (Perpres. No. 13. 2010), 2011년대통령령제56호 (Perpres. No. 56. 2011) 에따라재무부는 PPP 사업승인과정에서중추적인역할을수행한다. 재무부는정부재정지원및보증과관련된정책을입안하고산하의위험관리반 (Risk Management Unit: RMU) 이관련된업무를집행하면서사업심사를담당한다. RMU의보증관련업무는민간투자사업에대해정부보증제공을담당하는재무부산하의공기업인인도네시아사회기반시설보증기금 (Indonesia Infrastructure Guarantee Fund: PT PII/IIGF) 의지원을받는다. RMU와 PT PII/IIGF 는인도네시아공공민간협력제도를규율하는기본적인법규인 2005년대통령령제67호, 2010년대통령령제13호, 2011년대통령령제56호에따라임무를수행한다. 다 국가개발계획부 인도네시아국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 는인도네시아의중 장기개발계획과정부개발정책에있어서중점과제수립등의업무를총괄하는기관이다. BAPPENAS 는인도네시아장기개발계획중단계별개발계획으로제1차중기계획 2005~2009 (Medium Term Development Plan 2005~2009: MTDP 2005~2009) 에서 PPP 방식의인프라사업을도입하였고, 제2차중기계획인 MTDP 2010~2014 에서인프라확충을중점과제의하나로설정하고, 2010~2014 PPP Book에서 100개의 PPP 프로젝트를발표하여추진하고있다. BAPPENAS 는 PPP 사업관리및역량강화, 홍보등인도네시아의 PPP 프로그램을관리하는업무를전담하고있다. 주무부처및기관에서는다양한사업들중어떠한사업을 PPP 사업으로추진할지 BAPPENAS 와협의하여결정한다. 140 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

민간투자사업지원기관 가 국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 산하민간투자개발국 (Directorate for PPP Development) 아래에는중앙정부민간투자담당부서 (PPP Central Unit: P3CU) 가설치되어있다. PC3U의임무는정책일관성도모, 품질관리및투명성제고, 사업추진기준을마련하고사업의법규준수여부를감시하는것이다. 또한 PC3U는필요한투자규모에비해한정된재원을감안하여사업의파급효과와사업준비정도등을고려하여사업의우선순위를정한다. 또다른임무로는 PPP 사업선정, 준비및시행에있어관련부처와지방정부를지원하는것이다. 주무관청이수행한사업타당성을검토하며사업에필요한정부지원사항을재무부와함께협의하며 PPP 사업현황보고서를발표하고관련정보를배포한다. 또한 PPP 사업지침및매뉴얼을제작하고전담부처의역량강화를지원한다. 현재 PC3U는예산배분결정권과함께 PPP 사업을전담하는중앙독립기관의역할을수행하고있다. 나 인도네시아사회기반시설보증기금 인도네시아민간투자사업지원기관으로는사회기반시설지원을위해인도네시아정부가설립한두개의공기업이있다. 하나는재무부가설립한공기업인인도네시아사회기반시설보증기금 (Indonesia Infrastructure Guarantee Fund, IIGF/PT PII) 이다. 인도네시아사회기반시설보증기금은재무부가직접감독하며 PPP 계획에따라사회기반시설사업을보증할의무가있다. 25 인도네시아사회기반시설보증기금 (IIGF) 은 PPP 사업의경제적타당성을저해하는정부리스크에대해지원및보증을제공하는기관이다. 26 인도네시아보증기금이보증하는대상에는인 허가지연, 법규변경, 세금조정실패, 시설이나네트워크의통합및실패등으로인한주무관청의협약상재정적의무를보증한다. 인도네시아사회기반시설보증기금 (IIGF) 은민간투자사업에대한보증 25 모든 PPP 사업에보증이적용되지않으며, 정치적위험이큰사업만이 IIGF 지원을필요로한다. 26 IIGF는 PPP 사업에서의주무관청에부과된다양한재정적의무를보증한다. http://www.iigf.co.id/en 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 141

제공, 민간투자사업의수익성제고, 보증제공을통한일관성, 투명성제고, 정부의우발채무발생을방지하고자설립되었다. 인도네시아사회기반시설보증기금 (IIGF) 은 PPP 사업이승인되기전, 사업제안에대한검토를수행한뒤보증을제공하며각사업은 IIGF의보증을받기위해서다음의기준을충족해야한다. 인도네시아사회기반시설보증기금 (IIGF) 의보증제공기준은 PPP 법령 (2015년대통령령 38호및기타관련법령 ) 과의부합여부, 투명하고경쟁적인입찰절차를통해체결된 PPP 협약의존재여부, 기술, 경제, 금융, 환경적타당성및공익성확보여부, PPP 협약내구속력있는조정조항포함여부의총 4가지로결정된다. 이러한보증제공기준은정부와인도네시아보증기금의정책에맞는사업을선정하여보증제공에따른위험이과도하지않도록신중한재정정책을유지하기위해서이다. IIGF 는 PPP 사업에있어서주무관청에부과된다양한재정적의무에대한보증을제공하며, IIGF의보증을제공받는민간투자사업자는보증수수료를지불해야한다. 수수료구조는일회성수수료 ( 사업비기준 ) 와순환수수료 ( 최대보증기준 ) 로구성되어있다. 보증수수료는또한사업의위험도와보증범위및기간에따라다르나, 일반적으로일회성수수료인경우 1% 이며, 순환수수료의경우 0.5~1.0% 이다. 다 인프라투자공사 인도네시아인프라투자공사 (Sarana Multi Infrastructure: PT SMI) 는 2009년 2월 26 일인도네시아정부가사회기반시설개발촉진을목적으로설립한공기업이다. 인도네시아인프라투자공사 (PT SMI) 는인도네시아의인프라금융에주안점을둔금융기관이며, 2009년 10월 12일날짜로재무장관령 396/KMK. 010/2009 호에따라사업허가를획득했다. 27 인도네시아인프라투자공사 (PT SMI) 는인도네시아사회기반시설개발에서 1) 인도네시아사회기반시설개발의촉매제역할수행, 2) 사업자금지원을위한대체자금지원, 3) 민간투자사업활성화및지원, 4) 제3자와의협력을통해 PPP 규모, 역량, 효과제고등의 4가지전략적인역할을수행한다. 인도네시아인프라투자공사 (PT SMI) 는사회기반시설자본조달기구 (PT Indonesia Infrastructure Finance) 라는자회사를두고있다. 사회기반시설파이낸싱기업과관련한재무장관령 100/PMK. 010/2009 호에 27 http://www.ptsmi.co.id/content/frequently-asked-question 142 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

의거, 다음부문의사회기반시설개발에자금을지원한다. 28 바다, 강, 호수, 공항, 철도, 기차역등을포함하는교통사회기반시설 유료도로, 교량등의도로사회기반시설 수로등의관개사회기반시설 취수장, 전달망, 공급망, 음용수처리시설등의음용수사회기반시설 폐수처리, 관거, 폐기물수집시설등의폐수처리시설 통신네트워크등과같은전기통신사회기반시설 발전소, 배전 송전등과같은전력공급사회기반시설 석유및가스공급등의석유가스사회기반시설 이외에장관의승인을받은기타사회기반시설사업 2013년에서 2014년까지인도네시아인프라투자공사 (PT SMI) 는 8조 1,000억루피아 (6억 2,300만달러에상응 /1달러 =13,000 루피아 ) 이상의투자자금을다양한사회기반시설사업에제공했다. 이에대한목록은다음 < 표 4-4> 와같다. 표 사회기반시설분야투자규모 기준 단위 억 분야 년 년 비율 비율 투자비 전력 석유및가스 도로 교통 통신 수자원 관개시설 소계 28 본보고서작성당시 (2015. 8) PT SMI 가 20 조 3 천억루피아 (16 억달러 ) 에달하는정부의자본지원을받을것이라는내용이발표되었다 ( 자본지원금의 90% 가해체된정부투자센터 (PIP) 의자산양도로이루어져있음 ). 이는인프라부문에서 PT SMI 의서비스적용범위를확대할수있게한다. 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 143

표 의계속 분야 년 년비율 비율 운영비 전력 석유및가스 도로 교통 통신 수자원 관개시설 소계 합계 주 년규모대비 년규모대비 자료 연차보고서 민간투자사업기타관련기관 가 감독기관 사회기반시설에관한제도제정및시행이부문별로다른양상을보이기에일관된정책을시행하는것이매우중요하다. 현재인도네시아정부는규제정책의일관성을개선하기위해노력중이다. 유료도로부문에서는감독기관인 BPJT를설립했고, 다운스트림석유가스감독기관인 BPH Migas와통신감독기관인 BRTI를설립했다. 이들감독기관은예산, 인력, 기능및표준운영등을담당한다. 단기적으로국제적으로승인된정책을도입하여각주무부처의기능을통합하고각부처의역량을강화하며보다투명한환경을조성하고정책에이해당사자들의참여를독려하며비용회수가가능한수준으로요금을책정하는업무를담당한다. 나 지방정부 인도네시아에서지방정부들도 PPP 사업에참여할수있다. 지방정부의 PPP 사업을 144 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

관장하는법규들은 2007년 8월 22일승인된 지역협력을위한이행절차관련정부규정제50호 와 2009년 5월 22일에승인된 지역협력절차에관한기술적지침과관련된내무부장관규정제22호 이다. 지방정부차원의 PPP 사업은인도네시아보증기금 (Indonesia Infrastructure Guarantee Fund, IIGF/PT PII) 이보증하며 PPP 사업에대한보증과청구를시행하고관리할의무를지닌다. 지역협력을위한이행절차관련 년정부규정제 호 제 조주지사 통치자 시장 제 자등의지역간협력의당사자를정의한다 제 항 지역간협력이협력약정서에명기될것을명시한다 제 항 지역간협력절차가다음을통해이행될수있도록명시한다 가 지역대표 혹은한측이타지역대표에게특정한대상에대해지역간협력계획을제안하거나제공할수있다 나 협력약정서는최소한다음을포함한다 협력의주체 협력대상 협력범위 당사자의권리와의무 협력기간 협력의종료 불가항력 분쟁해결다 협력약정서초안준비에있어지역대표는관련기관 지역내관련작업반을포함시키고전문가와장관 부처가아닌정부기관대표의의견이나제안을구한다 라 지역대표는협력초안의완성을위해위임장을발행할수있다 마 가 나 다 라고명시된기술적인지침에대한추가조항은장관령에따른다 제 항 협력약정을지역작업반이이행할수있도록명시한다 제 5 절민간투자사업수행실적 민간투자사업추진실적 인도네시아의 PPP 계획및추진을담당하는국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 는 2009년부터 PPP Book 을매년발간하여민간투자사업현황을정리하고있다. 이하는 2009년부터 2015년까지국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 에서검토하여 PPP Book에등재한인도네시아민간투자사업현황이다. 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 145

2015년 PPP Book에등재된민간투자사업수는총 38건으로, 이전 2013년 27건보다증가되었다. 이는각주무부처와지방정부가새롭게제출한사업계획서에따른것으로서 2014년에국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 는주무부처및지방정부로부터총 25개의신규민간투자사업계획서를받아국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 규정 3/12와 6/12에의거하여사업계획서를검토하였다. 검토과정에서총 20건의사업계획서만이통과되어 2015년 PPP Book에등재되었다. 표 년 민간투자사업현황 입찰예정사업 우선순위사업 건 건 건 건 건 건 건 건 건 건 건 건 잠재사업 건 건 건 건 건 건 소계 건 건 건 건 건 건 입찰완료사업 건 건 건 건 건 합계 건 건 건 건 건 건 자료 사업현황 2013년 PPP Book에서발췌한인도네시아의잠재및유망 PPP 사업목록을상세하게살펴보면다음과같다. 잠재사업은총 13개, 우선순위사업총 12개로총 25개의가능성이있는사업들중정부지급금을지급받는사업은 13개, 수익임대형혼합요금체계사업은 9개로계획되어있다. 146 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

표 민간투자사업리스트 년 기준 사업명 우선순위사업 사업규모 억달러 수익형 정부지급금 수익형임대형혼합 임대 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 147

표 의계속 사업명 잠재사업 자료 사업규모 억달러 수익형 정부지급금 수익형임대형혼합 임대 < 표 4-8> 에서는 2015 년기준사업자가지정된사업목록을제시하고있다. 총 22 개 의완료사업중유료도로사업이 11 건, 수자원및환경시설이 3 건, 전력사업이 3 건 이다. 148 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

표 사업주체에따른민간투자사업현황 년기준 입찰예정사업 우선순위사업 잠재사업 사업구분 사업주체사업건수사업규모 억달러 중앙정부 지방정부 중앙정부 지방정부 중앙정부 지방정부 총합계 표 사업자가지정된민간투자사업현황 년 기준 사업명 사업유형 전력 수자원및환경시설 철도 운송 수자원및환경시설 유료도로 유료도로 유료도로 유료도로 유료도로 유료도로 유료도로 항구 유료도로 수자원및환경시설 유료도로 전력 전력 수자원및환경시설 지역개발 수자원및환경시설 유료도로 유료도로 자료 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 149

제 6 절민간투자사업의재정지원 재정지원 가 정부지원제도 정부의재정지원제도는 PPP 사업개발에중요한요소이다. 타국가와마찬가지로인도네시아정부는 PPP 사업을위한재정지원기반을제도화했다. 인도네시아정부는재무부산하에 (1) 재무적으로타당한 PPP 사업에정부보증이나신용보증을제공하고 (2) 민간투자협력제도홍보및대출, 지분투자, 준지분펀드방식으로재원조달을지원하며촉진제역할을수행하는인도네시아인프라투자공사 (Sarana Multi Infrastructure: PT SMI) 29 를설립하고 PT SMI 산하에사회기반시설금융조달기구 (Indonesia Infrastructure Finance: IIF) 를두고있다. 인도네시아인프라투자공사 (PT SMI) 는토지수용을위한사전자금을지원하는정부투자센터 (PIP, 현재해체 ) 의자산을인수했다. 인도네시아재무부는 PPP 사업에대한정부지원 ( 재정지원 / 보증 ) 과관련된다양한제도를마련하고있다. 여러제도들중다음 5가지의규정이중요한관련내용이다. 2010 년대통령령제78 호 : 사회기반시설보증기관을통한민간기업에대한정부보증 2015 년대통령령제30호 : 토지취득을위한재원조달과정완화규정 - 민간사업자가토지취득후, 정부로부터비용보상 2015 년대통령령제38호 : 정부지급금 (Availability Payment) 규정 2010 년재무부규정 (PMK) 제260 호 : 정부보증요청및제공규정 2012 년재무부규정제223 호 : 사업이행자금규정다른국가에서처럼인도네시아에도 PPP 사업을위한특별금융지원을위한규정이있다. 기본적으로인도네시아민간투자사업에서총투자비는이용자의사용료를통해회수된다. 전기와일부수자원부문에서는에너지공사 (PLN) 와지역 PDAM이서비스구매자 (off-taker) 이다. 전자의경우투자자가수요및건설위험을모두부담하고, 후 29 공기업으로인프라재원조달을위해설립된비은행재무기관이며, 2009 년 2 월토지수용을위한사전자금을지원하는정부투자센터 (PIP, 현재해체 ) 의자산을인수하여설립되었다. 150 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

자의경우는정부가서비스구매자이기에투자자들의수요에대한위험을완화시켜준다. 정부지급금에관한현행 2015년대통령령제38호는전기와수자원부문외다른사회기반시설부문에서도정부에수요위험을이전할수있는길을열어놓고있다. 민간투자사업자가시설사용료의형태로투자비를회수할경우주무관청이사회기반시설운영개시에대한요금을책정한다. 초기의사용료와조정된바에따른일정기간동안의투자비용, 운영비용및수익을포함한투자수익을충당한다. 주무관청의고려에따라초기책정된사용료와이후조정된금액으로민간투자사업자가전체투자비용을회수하지못하는경우, 이용자들의지불능력을토대로사용료가책정될수도있다. 정부지급금과관련되어기업의투자수익위원회가서비스에대한시설이용가능성지급분으로비용을회수할경우, 주무관청은협약에명시된운영기간동안제공서비스에대한시설이용지급분을위한정부지급금을배분하며이를위해서 ( 가 ) 총투자비, ( 나 ) 운영비, ( 다 ) 수익률등을고려한다. 한편, 인도네시아정부는막대한규모의건설비를지원하기위해사업이행자금 (Viability Gap Fund) 을제공한다. 재무부는건설기간중발생하는비용인건설비, 장비비와설치비및건설이자의 50% 까지의사업이행자금을제공하고있다. 이를위해 2014년 1억 2천만달러 (USD) 의예산을확정하였다. 그러나입찰과정에서가장작은 VGF 금액을요청하는민간제안서가협상대상자로지정된다. 나 토지매입관련지원 1996년이후인도네시아유료도로사업을위해필요한토지를매입하는책임은민간으로이전되었다. 이로인해민간투자 (PPP) 유료도로사업은토지비의추정과이주에대한사회적영향분석이제외된상태로계획되었으며, 토지가격도제대로평가되지않아토지취득문제는협상지연, 토지관련자에대한불평등한보상, 땅투기등의문제를초래했다. 이에대한대책으로정부는민간토지취득에대한재정적지원을제공하게되었고, 공공과민간의토지취득에대한법규를명확하게되었다. 토지매입과관련된규제로는 1993년공용토지매입에관한대통령령 No. 55/1993 이제정되었으나그효용성이매우낮았다. 동법령은 2005년대통령령 No. 36/2005 로개정되었고, 2006년에는토지매입에대한구조를개선하기위한법령 No. 65/2006 으로개정되었다. 이후공용 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 151

토지매입을촉진하기위해국가토지청 (National Land Agency) 은 No. 3/2007을발표하였다. 2010년정부정책의가장중요한부분은토지취득과관련한정부지원이다. 국가토지청은민간투자사업의토지취득과정을더욱빠르고공정하게만들기위한법안을만들어정부가공공이용을위한토지보상권을가지며토지소유자들에게정당한보상을제공하는내용을규정하였다. 또한토지매입펀드를통해민간투자사업의토지취득재원을마련하였다. 한편, 2008년정부는정부예산으로토지펀드 (Land Acquisition Revolving Fund: LARF) 를설립하였다. LARF는실시협약상토지매입금액의 10% 를초과할경우초과금액을기금에서지급하는구조로운영된다. 또한정부는 6조루피아규모의토지펀드를설립하여 2010년 3.8조루피아와 2011년 2.2조루피아에이르는토지매입재원을조성하였으며, 국가토지청은부지매입을가속화하기위한실천전략을수립하였다. 정부는입찰전토지를제공하기위한노력을하고있으며, 재무성이확보되는사업은대출을제공하고재무성이부족한사업의경우일정수준의재정지원을통해토지매입을지원하고있다. 다 기금및펀드를통한지원 정부는사업의준비를지원하기위하여사업개발기금 (Project Development Facility: PDF) 을조성하였다. PDF는세계은행, 아시아개발은행, 호주정부, 일본정부의지원으로 PPP Unit이사업수행이나금융협약체결등을지원하기위한기금이다. 인프라사업은투자규모가크기때문에장기부채를통한재원조달이요구되나, 인도네사아의국내자본시장을통해서는장기재원조달이어려운실정이다. 정부는이러한상황을고려하여 PT IIFF(Indonesia Infrastructure Financing Facility) 를설립하였다. PT IIFF는인도네시아인프라투자공사 (Sarana Multi Infrastructure: PT SMI) 의자회사로서민간기업이며, 다자간개발은행이제공한재원을통해 2010년 1월에설립되었다. 장기재원으로민간투자 (PPP) 인프라사업의장기대출, 지분참여, 신용보강 ( 우발성재정지원, 비정치적위험의보증 ) 을위해필요한재원을조달한다. 152 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

그림 인도네시아 구성 인도네시아정부 재무부 지원성채무 달러 지원성채무 달러 인도네시아정부출자 루피 대출 인도네시아정부 소유 출자 루피아 출자 달러 출자 달러 보조금 후순위대출 후순위 인프라펀드 자본시장 출자 사업 자료 인도네시아 민간투자사업과 연계방안 한국개발연구원 에서재인용 인도네시아정부는민간투자사업의추진에있어외국투자가들이사업수행의선결요건으로요구하는정부보증문제를해결하고인프라금융을촉진하기위해 2009년 12월 30일에국영기업의형태로인도네시아재무부 (MOF) 산하에 IIGF(Indonesia Infrastructure Guarantee Fund) 를설립하였다. IIGF의설립목적은보증과관련된투명하고체계적인평가와청구체계를구축함으로써인도네시아인프라사업의신뢰성을높이고, 민간투자사업에보증을제공함으로써사업이원활히진행될수있도록지원하며, 보증에대한정부책임을보호하기위함이다. IIGF는정부보증을대신하여보다많은민간투자자들이인도네시아민간투자사업의위험부담을줄여투자할수있게하고전체사업비용을줄이는데도기여할수있을것으로예상된다. IIGF는인도네시아정부로부터 1조루피아의자금을지원받았으며, 발전, 수자원관리, 유료도로, 철도, 교량건설, 항만등주요인프라건설사업에대해사업개발단계에서운영단계에이르기까지전과정에대한위험관리를수행하도록하고있다. 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 153

인도네시아예산편성 가 개요 인도네시아정부는국가재정에관한신규법안 (2003년법령제17호 ) 을통과시켰다. 이는식민지시대이후인도네시아가최초로재정법안을현대화한것이다. 이전의국가예산편성과정은 1920년대 Indische Compatbiliteit Wet(ICW) 라불리는네덜란드의제도를기반으로했다. 2003년개혁을통해국고에관한 2004년법령제1호, 국가계획에관한 2004년법령제25호, 지방정부거버넌스에관한 2004년법령제32 호, 재정균형에관한 2004년법령제33호, 국정감사에관한 2004년법령제15호등예산관련여러법안이제정되었다. 인도네시아는지방분권화가이루어진단일국가이다. 현재지방정부별로 529개의다른예산이편성되어있고각지역의지방의회 (DRPD) 의승인을받아야한다. 또한단일국가라는특성에따라지방정부예산도집행전중앙정부 ( 구체적으로내무부, Ministry of Home Affairs) 의승인을받아야한다. 중앙정부및지방정부의예산계획에서부터국회의승인을받는데까지는 1년이란기간이소요된다. 국가예산의경우, 예산편성과정은예산기획연도초 30 개발계획에관한국가차원의협의로시작된다. 그후정부는예산초안, 정책, 업무계획을작성하여 5월국회에제출한다. 6월국회예산위원회 (Banggar) 는예산편성전담반을구성하기위해정부관료와간담회를갖는다. 또한 11개의국회분과위원회는그들이감독하는부처 / 기관의대표와만나논의를한다. 7월, 국회예산위원회는사전논의의보고서를작성하고예산편성에대한논의를계속한다. 8월 6일대통령은의회앞에서예산에관한담화를발표하고, 정부재무제표, 국가예산초안, 각중앙부처 / 기관별업무계획및예산계획을상정한다. 국가예산은 10월국회본회의에서법으로채택된다. 구체적인예산편성은대통령령과각부처 / 기관별로준비된 예산집행체크리스트 에명시된다. 이후예산집행은 1월 1일시작된다. 인도네시아예산법은연중예산수정과정을명시하고있다. 예산수정과정은일반예산편성과정과동일하며수정예산채택으로종료된다. 지방정부의예산형성및채택에대한지침은 지방정부재정운용에관한지침 에관한 2006년내무부규정제 30 인도네시아의회계연도는 1 월 1 일에시작하여 12 월 31 일에종료된다. 154 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

13 호와이와관련된여러부처칙령에명시되어있다. 지방정부의예산편성과정은 국가예산편성과정과동일하다. 다음 < 표 4-9> 는지방정부예산편성에주요한서류 와각예산편성과정의단계별일정에관한구체적인정보를담고있다. 표 지방정부예산주요문서 계획단계논의단계집행단계책임단계 지방정부업무계획 지방정부전담조직 부서업무계획 기초예산정책 임시예산우선순위 재원조달수준 지방정부전담조직 부서업무계획 및예산 예산채택을위한지방정부규정 의구체적인개요에대한지방정부대표 규정 각 별예산집행체크리스트 수정예산채택을위한지방정부규정 의구체적인개요에대한지방정부대표 규정 분기예산집행보고서 집행책임을위한지방정부규정 지방정부거버넌스시행보고서에관한정보 지방정부거버넌스시행보고서 지방정부책임보고서 표 예산기획연도일정표 월 월 월 월 주간 주 주 주 주 예산정책초안작성 예산정책채택 지역의회에예산정책제출 지역의회에예산한도제출 예산한도논의 예산정책논의 지방정부전담조직 예산및업무계획 작성 예산한도채택 월부처예산편성지방정부예산초안편성 월 월 지방정부에예산초안제출 예산초안논의 예산초안논의 월예산채택주정부및내무부의채택예산평가 자료 국가사무국 인도네시아예산투명성포럼 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 155

나 예산편성과정 인도네시아는예산절차를통해재정을관리하고있다. 예산절차를관장하는법은국가예산법 (APBN) 으로매년제정된다. 최신예산법은 2015년국가세입및비용예산에관한 2014년법령제27호를개정한 2015년법령제3호이다. 국가예산기획및준비단계는다음과같다. 예비준비단계본단계에서는정부가국가예산초안을마련하고, 예산기본추정, 추정세입및비용, 우선순위선정등의업무를진행한다. 또한각위원회가파트너 ( 부처 / 기관 ) 와회의를개최한다. 정부예산의초안을완성함으로써이단계는마무리된다. 국가예산편성 논의및결정단계이단계는대통령의국가예산초안을설명하는시정연설로시작된다. 그후재무부장관과예산위원회, 하원예산위원회와관련기관간의논의가이루어지고논의의결과로단위예산이포함된국가예산법안이마련된다. 단위예산은각부처 / 기관, 부문, 프로그램, 사업 / 활동등에예산을편성하는서류이다. 이후부처 / 기관은업무계획과예산안을재무부 (Ministy of Finance) 와국가개발계획부 (Bappenas) 에제출한다. 제출된계획과예산안은예산집행목록에포함되고재무부와국가개발계획부는예산승인과정이전인 10월에서 12월사이예산집행목록에대한검토를완료한다. 국가예산집행지침은대통령령형태의지침으로제시되며, 예산을배정받기위해서각부처와기관은재무부의지역사무소에예산지급요청서를제출해야한다. 국가예산감독 국가예산집행감독은정부대내외의감독기관이수행한다. < 표 4-11> 은 2014 년예 산집행과정의예시이다. 156 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

표 년예산편성과정예시 예산초안작성 예산한도작성 예비심사 예산한도장관령 국가예산계획서연설 예산안본회의 수정예산안본회의 년국가예산법발효 예산집행지침발표 예산지급요청서제출 예산집행 년 월 월 년 월 일 년 월 일 월 일 년 월 일 년 월 일 년 월 월 년 월 일 년 월 일 년 월 년 월 년 월 월 인도네시아중앙정부와국회는인도네시아지방정부를고려하여 2015년국가예산법을논의하고합의하였으나, PPP 사업은국가예산법 (APBN) 과지방정부예산 (APBD) 에반영되지않는다. 이는 PPP 제도와관련된예산절차의거시경제적정책이부재함을의미한다. 사업이행자금 (VGF) 이나토지취득을위한지원금은예산에반영되어있으나 PPP 사업에참여하는민간기업에대한정부지급금규모는예산에편성되어있지않다. 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 157

제 7 절인도네시아제도의시사점및개선방안 인도네시아 PPP 제도는 1998년에도입한이후상당한진전을이루어왔다. 인도네시아정부는좋은거버넌스원칙을준수하고투명한절차와제도개선을통해주무관청의정책시행이나권한오용을방지하도록노력을기울여왔다. 그러나향후필요한사회기반시설및현정부의역량을감안하여다음과같은개선방안을도출하고자한다. 사업을위한거시경제정책의부재 인도네시아재무부 (Ministry of Finance, Kementerian Keuangan) 는사회기반시설 PPP 규모와정부예산및 GDP와의관계를반영한구체적인정책을보유하고있지않다. 이전정권 (2014~2019 MP3EI 개발계획 ) 은민간부문에서 60% 가넘는투자를조달하는것을목표로했으나, 결과는기대에미치지못하였다. 사회기반시설투자를활용해실질경제성장을최대 9% 로올리고자한비현실적인방안이오히려시장의불신을초래하였다. 8% 의차입능력도대개단기차입 ( 최대 5년 ) 의형태이며, 대부분이가계소비 ( 예-소비자대출 ) 로흡수되기때문에현재인도네시아의차입능력또한상당히제한적이다. 인도네시아중앙은행은인도네시아관할구역안의거래를모두루피아로이루어지도록규정하고있어 31 해외투자자들에게는환율리스크에노출될수있다. 재무부나금융당국등의재정통화정책담당은이러한문제를해결하기위해공조할필요성이있다. 정부역시사업추진에대한명확한정책메시지를전달할필요가있다. 여러국가들이 PPP 사업을지원하기위해예산상한과추계예산 (indicative budget)/ 확정예산 (definitive budget) 에관련된구체적인정책을보유하고있다. 인도네시아에서예산처리는사안별로다루어지고있으며, 예산정책차원에서논의되지않는다. 정부는재정정책에대해만족할만한수준의합의를도출하기위해하향식, 상향식접근법을모두활용할필요가있다. 31 민간발전사업 (PPP) 과항만사업의경우예외이다. 158 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

정부예산편성과정에 사업계획단계통합의필요성 현재인도네시아정부의예산편성과정에서 PPP 사업은배제되어있다. 그러나 PPP 사업추진을위해정부가부담하는위험과책임이증가함에따라국가개발기획부 / 국가개발기획청등관련부처에서는공기업이추진한사회기반시설프로젝트와 PPP 제도아래에서추진된사업들을통합하여계획및관리할필요성이있다. 공기업과 PPP 사업에서발생하는위험과불확실성이상대적으로높기때문에장기적인관점에서의계획이필요하다. 또한매년정부예산으로추진되는사업과달리 PPP 사업의경우많은준비기간이소요된다. 가장낮은가격이입찰되는재정사업은민자적격성 (value-for money) 원칙과생애주기비용 (life cycle costing) 원칙을적용하는 PPP 사업과상충된다. 이에국가개발기획부와재무부는재원조달의두방식의차이점을이해할필요가있으며, 이들을단일예산편성과정으로통합할필요성이있다. 우선적으로 PPP 사업에임시예산을편성하는것이한방안이될것이며, 추후통합예산체계의도입을통해보다정확하고통합적으로예산을관리할필요가있다. 지방정부의 사업활성화필요 대규모의 PPP 사업은정부가공기업에위탁하여수행함에따라, 민간부문은중간규모의사업 ( 예 : 4억달러이하규모 ) 에서사업기회를모색하고있다. 중소규모의 PPP 사업을활성화함으로써해외투자자들이인도네시아 PPP 사업에참여할기회를주어야한다. 또한인도네시아정부는국내투자자들과금융기관들에게신뢰감을제공하고보다많은성공사례를만들필요가있다. 이러한중소규모사업에는지방정부의수자원, 폐기물시설사업과소규모항만및터미널시설등교통사업등이있다. IIGF는수자원분야의 PPP 사업을추진하기위해많은지방정부와긴밀히협력하고있다. PPP 사업 3세대 (2015년대통령령제38호제정전까지 ) 까지 PPP 사업이주로중앙정부차원에서논의되었으며, 지방정부가민간부문과의협력약정을체결할수있도록한 2007년정부규정제50호는여전히제한적으로적용되고있다. 그러나지역의사회기반시설확충을위해주무관청이 PPP 사업을설계및시행해야할필요가있으며, 현명한의사결정을위해중앙정부에만국한되지않은 PPP 사업에대한역량강화가이루어져야할것이다. 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 159

재무부산하 센터의역할강화 최근인도네시아재무부 (Ministry of Finance, Kementerian Keuangan) 에설립된인프라금융이사회 (Directorate of Government Support and Infrastructure Finance Management) 는 PPP 사업추진을위한정부기관간의매개역할을수행할예정이다. 국가개발계획청 (Bappenas) 의조직개편으로인해사회기반시설개발담당부서가없는상태에서, 재무부내의 PPP센터는인도네시아 PPP 사업성공에있어서매우중요한기관이될전망이다. PPP센터는필리핀모델과유사한형태가될수있으며, 주무관청및민간제안자가민간투자제도에대해비슷한이해력을가질수있도록공식적인 PPP제도가이드라인과매뉴얼을작성하고배포하는업무를담당할것으로보인다. 사회기반시설개발촉진위원회 (The Committee of Infrastructure Priorities Development Acceleration: KPPIP) 는 PPP 우선사업리스트선정및주무관청의사업제안준비를지원하는정부간플랫폼의역할을수행해야만한다. 인도네시아 PPP 시장홍보, 시장조사및로드쇼는 KPPIP 와투자위원회가공동으로추진해야하며, KPPIP 는해외전문지식을활용하면서재무부와함께국내전문지식을개발하여 PPP 사업의모든이해당사자들을참여시킬수있는국가의역량을개선하는것을목표로하고있다. 토지수용을위한정부의재원조달유연성제고 2015년대통령령제30호는정부의자금이불충분할경우민간부문이토지수용에필요한자금을우선조달할수있도록규정하고있다. 동규정은 PPP 제도아래에서시행되는사회기반시설개발프로젝트의토지수용을위한운영지침의 3차개정안으로동규정제117A 조의주요내용은다음과같다. (1) 공익을위한토지수용을위한자금은 PPP협약하에토지를필요로하는민간기업이조달할수있고, 이들은정부기관, 지방정부대리인의역할을수행한다. (2) 상기 (1) 항에따라기업이조달하는토지수용자금은토지수용절차가완료된후국가예산을활용하여정부기관, 지방정부가조달한다. (3) 상기 (2) 항에서언급되는비용은투자대비수익률에반영될수있다. 상기조항은기술적인측면과개념적인측면에서다음과같은두가지문제가존 160 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

재한다. 첫째, 도덕적해이를방지하기위해구체적인토지수용비용회수방식이명시되어야한다. 정부가지급하는비용구성항목들은투명하게목록화되어야한다. 둘째, 개념적인측면에서, 동규정은토지수용이정부의의무이자 PPP 사업에서정부가담당해야하는부분이라고명시하는 2012년토지수용법제2호와상충한다. 민간부문이지출하는토지수용비를상환하는것이사용자들의사용료로부담된다면정부가아닌사용자들이수용비를지불하는주체가될것이다. 모든투자자들이토지수용을위한정부예산편성과정이엄격하고장기적인절차라는것을알고있으나, 토지수용에민간자금을활용한다는것이도덕적해이를불러올수있고개념적으로도맞지않다는의견이있다. 이를해결하기위해정부가투자비항목을작성하고, 실질토지수용비와수용가능토지수용비의가치평가를철저하게하여정부의토지수용의무에대한오해를불식시키도록제117A 조 (3) 항을제거하는방안에대해서고려할필요가있다. 재정투자사업과 사업의조달과정통합 재정투자사업 (Traditional Investment Project: TIP) 은 2010년대통령령제54호의 4차개정안인 2015년대통령령제4호에근거하여추진된다. 재정사업은정부조달감독을담당하는정부기관인정부조달정책기관 (Government Procurement Policy Institute: LKPP) 이시행하고 LKPP는조달담당자들을교육하고자격증을발급한다. 한편, 2015년대통령령제38호에따라정부재정사업과민간투자사업은다른조달절차를거치도록규정되어있다. 이에대한해결책으로정부조달정책기관 (LKPP) 이 PPP 사업의조달을감독하는역할도수행하도록권한을강화하는것이다. 이를통해효과적으로조달과정을감독할수있을것이다. 또한 LKPP가재정사업조달담당자들을교육하는것처럼 PPP 담당자들을위한교육센터허가권을부여하는방안에대해서도고려할필요가있다. 실시협약 재협상및분쟁조정해결방안필요 협약미체결로인해 PPP 사업추진이난항을겪기도한다. 협약이체결되지못했 다는것은정부와민간사업자들이예측하지못한위험에노출될수있음을의미한다. 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 161

위험이발생하는이유는당사자들이위험을식별하고위험완화조치를마련하지못하거나, 사업계획및건설단계에서고려되지않은위험이발생하기때문이다. 이에따라서 PPP 협약은운영기간동안의위험을구체적으로명시해야하고적절한위험배분및완화방안내용또한제시해야한다. 또한앞에서언급한바와같이정부가재정사업과 PPP 사업의조달절차를통합하기로한다면, 정부조달청 (LKPP) 이실시협약의재협상과분쟁해결을담당하는전담기관으로최적의후보가될것으로예상된다. 인도네시아사회기반시설은행설립 인프라투자공사 (State Owned Company for Infrastructure Finance: PT SMI) 는최근상당규모의정부자금과정부투자센터 (Government Investment Center: GIC) 의자산을양도받았다. 앞으로 PT SMI가인도네시아사회기반시설에대한자금을조달하는역할을수행할것으로기대된다. 현재 SMI는상당부분의재원을은행대출로조달하고있기때문에 SMI가자본혹은대출에투자할지가큰관심이다. 사업기간위험을부담하는 SMI는재무부의엄격한규정으로인해사업에제한적으로참여하고있다. 이에사회기반시설사업에대한대출을제공하기위해기관투자자들로부터자금을조달할금융기관을설립하는것이대안으로보인다. SMI나다른 AAA등급의금융기관과함께협력하는금융모델을구축하면사업시행의성공을높일수있다. 2015년대통령령제38호에규정된정부지급금제도는여전히보완될부분이있으며, 특히이러한제도를어떻게운용하고 IIGF가채무상환을위한정부이행보장역할을수행하는데대한운영지침이필요하다. 공기업의역할재조명 현정권은사회기반시설의개발을공기업 (State Owned Companies: SOE) 에많이의존하고있다. 운영기관들에장기적인인프라자산에투자할것을요청할뿐만아니라이들공기업도그들의사업을다변화할것을독려하고있다. 최근공기업부장관은중국의국가개발개혁위원회 (National Development and Reform Commission: NDRC) 와양해각서를체결하여중국기업들이 G2G 또는 B2B 방식으로인도네시아시장에투 162 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

자확대를도모하고있다. 예를들어공항철도사업의경우당초일반적인 PPP 사업으로추진할예정이었으나, 공기업이단독으로사업을추진하는 PPP 사업으로사업추진방식을변경하였다. 이밖에도공기업이직접항만, 공항, 고속철도등의프로젝트를수행하도록하거나공기업과해외기업이협력하는방안등인도네시아정부는사회기반시설시장에서공기업을가장잘활용할방안을모색해야할것이다. 사업관련정보공개 인도네시아의 PPP 제도에서조달과정과실시협약의정보가아직공개되고있지않다. 호주와같은다른국가들은이미 PPP 협약을발표하고있으나, 아직까지인도네시아에서는그러한문서가사적재산으로간주되고있다. 또한인도네시아정부가노력을기울여야할다른문제는 PPP 사업의성공사례와실패사례를문서로기록하는것이다. IIGF가문서로기록을남기고있기는하나, 정부차원에서 1세대부터 5세대에이르는 PPP 사업경험을축적할제도를마련해야할필요가있다. 네트워크구축및 정책수립 사회기반시설에대한투자수요가증가함에따라서인도네시아정부는원활한정책수행을위해서모든지원책을동원할필요가있다. 인도네시아사회기반시설이니셔티브 (Indonesia Infrastructure Initiative: IndII) 는최근사회기반시설을위한다자간협력센터구축을위한조사를완료했다 (Duffield, 2015). 응답자대다수가다자간협력센터와같은독립기관이설립되면지속적으로지원하겠다는약속을하며긍정적인응답을한것으로나타났다. 또한 IIGF의경우에는주요대학교들과 MOU를체결하여 PPP에관한연구및교육프로그램을개발하는계획을가지고있다. 또한 PPP 사업의추진및시행을위해전문가및자문인력풀을형성하는것이중요하다. PPP 전문가양성은국제 PPP 전문가들의세계적수준을따라잡을수있는중요한첫단계가될것이다. 제 4 장인도네시아의민간투자사업 (PPP) 제도 163

그림 인도네시아사회기반시설개발기관 의주요기능 자료 164 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

제 5 장 민간투자제도비교분석 제 1 절한국, 인도네시아, 필리핀민간투자제도분석 인도네시아및필리핀은한국과더불어동남아시아국가중에서민간투자제도및규제환경의개선을통하여민간투자사업을적극적으로활용하고있다. 특히경제위기이후경제구조개혁및금융부문구조조정을추진하면서재원부족으로인프라에대한충분한투자가이루어지지못하였다. 이러한인프라부족과심각한재정적자를해결하기위하여정부의재정부담을늘리지않으면서인프라를구축할목적으로민간투자사업을추진하고있다. 양국정부모두인프라확충방법으로민간투자방식을적극적으로추진하고있으며, 특히교통, 에너지, 통신에대한투자가절실한상태이다. 교통분야는차량수가급증하고있지만, 도로와교량에대한투자가이를따르지못하여물자수송에큰차질을빚고있다. 에너지분야도경제성장에따라전력수요가급증하고있으나전력공급이부족할뿐만아니라송전도비효율적인상황이다. 필리핀은 BOT법에, 인도네시아는대통령령에민간투자사업에대한추진방식, 추진절차, 정부지원방식을규정하고있다. 이두국가도민간투자사업을통한경제발전을목표로정부의강력한추진의지가뒷받침되어민간부문의적극적인참여를유도하고있다. 우리나라와마찬가지로해외선진국의제도를벤치마크하여각국가별특성에맞추어독자적인방식으로제도를운용하여민간투자사업을활성화하려노력하고있다. 한국과필리핀그리고인도네시아의민간투자규범체계, 민간투자추진방식, 추 제 5 장민간투자제도비교분석 165

진가능대상시설, 사업추진절차, 민간투자사업관련기관및역할, 정부지원사항을 비교한내용은다음과같다. 민간투자규범체계 각나라마다민간투자 (PPP) 를받아들이는방식은고유한법체계에따라독자적으로운용되고있다. 특히정부가전통적인조달구조로사회기반시설을조달하는방식이아니라, 민간과계약을체결하여민간이자금을조달하고건설, 운영하는구조라는것이다. 3개국모두민간투자사업의정의, 추진절차및관리방안등에대해법률또는대통령령으로규정하고있다. 필리핀이 1990년에 BOT법을, 한국이 1994년에민자유치촉진법을, 인도네시아가 1998년사회기반시설건설및운영에관한민관협력에관한대통령령을제정하면서민간투자사업의제도가정비되었다. 한국의민간투자제도를규율하는규범체계는법률로서 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법 ( 이하 민간투자법 ), 대통령령으로서민간투자법시행령그리고기획재정부공고로서민간투자사업기본계획 ( 이하 기본계획 ) 으로구성된다. 또한민간투자사업의추진절차에서의세부지침과요령은공공투자관리센터의세부요령으로제정된다. 필리핀의민간투자제도를규율하는규범체계는 BOT법 으로알려진필리핀법 7718호및규정 (BOT Law s Implementing Rules and Regulations: IRR) 과공기업의합작투자가이드라인행정명령 423호 (Charters of Government Owned and Controlled Corporations), 지방정부법령으로구성된다. 인도네시아의민간투자제도를규율하는규범체계는대통령령에서민간투자사업의정의, 정부및민간의역할, 추진및관리방안등을규정하고있다. 민간투자추진방식 한국의민간투자법은민간투자사업의추진방식에대해서예시적열거의방식을취 하고있다. 민간투자법제 4 조제 1 호는 BTO( 수익형 ), 제 2 호는 BTL( 임대형 ), 제 3 호는 BOT, 제 4 호는 BOO 형사업방식을특정하여열거하면서도, 제 5 호와제 6 호에서는기 166 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

타의방식이가능하도록포괄적인허용규정을둠으로써추진방식이다양화될수있는유연성을확보하고있다. 필리핀의 BOT법은총 9가지종류로규정하고있으나, 이외에대통령의승인에의해변형된방식도가능하다. 사업추진방식은 BOT(Build-Operate-Transfer), BT(Build- Transfer), BOO(Build-Own-Operate), BLT(Build-Lease-Transfer), BTO(Build-Transfer-Operate), CAO(Contract-Add-Operate), DOT(Develop-Operate-Transfer), ROT(Rehabilitate-Operate- Transfer), ROO(Rehabilitate-Own-Operate) 이렇게총 9가지종류로규정되고있다. 인도네시아대통령령에서는사업방식에대한구체적인언급은없다. 그러나선행연구에분석된결과, 인도네시아의사업방식은대부분 BOT(Build-Operate-Transfer), BOO(Build-Own-Operate) 방식으로추진되고있다. 이외에도 DBO(Design-Build- Operate), DBL(Design-Build-Lease), Reverse BOO=BBO(Build-Buy-Operate) 등의방식이있다. 추진가능대상시설 한국의민간투자법은민간투자의대상이되는 사회기반시설 ( 사업 ) 의범위 를한정적으로열거하고있다. 한정적열거방식을채택한이유는민간투자법의적용범위를명확히함으로써예측가능성과법적안정성을확보할수있기때문이다. 세부적으로분류해보면도로, 철도, 항만, 공항, 수자원, 정보통신, 에너지, 환경, 유통, 문화체육관광, 교육, 국방, 주택, 산업단지, 복지, 산림등 16개분야에 62개세부시설을추진할수있다. 필리핀의 BOT법상추진가능한대상시설은 BOT법에서규정하고있으며예시적으로열거하고있다. 일반적으로민간이재원조달 운영하는사업으로전력, 고속도로, 항만, 공항, 운하, 댐, 수자원공급, 관개, 통신, 철도, 교통시스템, 간척, 산업단지, 주택, 공공청사, 관광시설, 시장, 도축장, 정보통신, 교육및보건시설, 쓰레기, 배수, 준설등이있으나, 이에한정되지않는다. 인도네시아대통령령제5조에서는 PPP 사업을통해추진가능한사회기반시설부문들을한정적으로열거하고있다. 교통기반시설, 도로기반시설, 수자원및관개시설, 식수공급시설, 중앙폐수관리시설, 지역폐수관리시설, 폐기물처리시설, 통신및정보과학시설, 전기기반시설, 석유 가스 에너지기반시설, 에너지절약시설, 도시기 제 5 장민간투자제도비교분석 167

반시설, 교육시설, 체육시설, 단지기반시설, 관광시설, 의료시설, 교정시설, 공공주택 시설등경제사회적사회기반시설로구성되며 19 개시설로구성되어있다. 사업추진절차 한국, 필리핀, 인도네시아모두민간제안사업과정부고시사업으로구분하여사업을추진하고있으며큰틀에서고시사업에서의사업추진절차는유사하게운영되고있다. 다만, 한국은정부고시사업의경우총사업비 500억원이상이면서국고 300억원이상인사업인경우기획재정부가사업선정을하고 KDI 공공투자관리센터에서예비타당성조사를시행하고있으며, 2015년민간투자기본계획이변경되어재정사업으로추진중인사업의민자적격성판단근거가신설되었다. 2015년민간투자기본계획의개정으로재정사업과민간투자사업의연계강화및정부고시사업의활성화를위해필수민자검토대상시설에해당하는사업에대해서는예비타당성조사단계에서민자적격성판단을수행한후민간투자사업전환여부를결정하게되어있어인도네시아와필리핀과는차별성을가지고있다. 필리핀의경우민간제안사업으로추진하기위해서는다음세가지요건을충족하여야한다. 첫째, 주무관청이정한신개념또는신기술을수반하거나우선순위사업목록에등재되어있지않는사업이어야하며둘째, 정부의직접보증, 보조금, 지분투자가필요하지않는사업이어야한다. 셋째, 주무관청이 3주연속신문공고를통해제3자제안을공개적으로요청할경우에만가능하다. 필리핀에서는제3자에게 60 일동안의제안서준비기간이주어진다. 제3자제안이없는경우최초제안자가즉시사업의최종낙찰자가된다. 그러나한국과는달리제3자가제시한가격제안이최초제안자의제안보다나은경우, 최초제안자는제3자의제안결과를통보받은날로부터 30일이내에수정가격제안서를제출할수있다. 만약최초제안자가해당기간동안수정가격제안서를제출하지못하는경우에는, 제3자가최종낙찰자로선정된다. 인도네시아도민간제안사업으로사업을추진하기위해서는다음의세가지요건을충족해야만한다. 첫째, 관련부문상위종합계획과부합해야하며, 둘째, 경제적, 재무적타당성이확보되어야하며, 셋째, 사회기반시설제공을위한사업을추진할충분한여력이확보되는지여부이다. 한국의민간제안제도와다른점은최초제안자가 10% 의우대점수를받거나, 입찰평가에따라 1순위입찰자의제안에부합하는수정제 168 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

안을다시할수있는권리를확보하거나, 주무관청에사업낙찰자로부터최초제안자 의지적재산권을구입하여보상받을수있는세가지방식중하나의혜택을받을수 있다는점이다. 민간투자사업관련기관및역할 한국은기획재정부 ( 한국 ), 필리핀은경제개발청 (NEDA) 및재무부, 인도네시아는사회기반시설개발촉진위원회 (KKPPI), 재무부가민간투자제도를소관하고민간투자사업관련한예산편성도담당하고있다한국에서의주무관청은당해사회기반시설사업의업무를관장하는행정기관의장을말하며, 각중앙부처의장및지방자치단체의장이해당된다. 사업계획수립, 타당성조사, 중장기계획부합여부및사업의우선순위등을고려하여민간투자사업을선정할수있으며, 실시계획승인및운영등민간투자사업의전반적인사항을관리한다. 인도네시아에서는한국과다르게공기업도주무관청의역할을수행할수있다. 대통령령제8조에서는공기업도부문별규정에따른민간투자사업수행시주무관청의역할을수행할수있으며, 제9조에서는공기업이주무관청의역할을수행할경우사업시행자와협약을통해추진할수있도록규정되어있는점이독특한점이다. 한국, 인도네시아, 필리핀모두민간투자사업관련지원기관을두어 PPP 프로그램, 프로젝트개발, 타당성조사, 사업개발기금관리, 사업평가및감독, PPP 매뉴얼작성, DB 구축, 연차보고서작성등의업무를수행토록하고있다. 필리핀에서는 2010년경제개발청 (NEDA) 산하에기존의 BOT센터를 PPP센터로확대개편하여운영하고있다. PPP센터는필리핀의모든민간투자사업조정및감독권을갖고있고, 사업이행에관한민간투자의참여활동을장려하고있다. PPP센터의기본업무는필리핀정부의인프라개발계획에따라민간투자사업을추진하고, 효과적이고지속적인사업을구현하기위해지원하는데있다. 또한정부정책지침을작성하고, 투명성과일관성을갖고신속하게사업준비를할수있도록정부를지원하며, 주무관청및지방정부에대한기술지원, 사업개발및관리기금 (Project Development and Management Fund: PDMF) 을통한금융지원, 교육및홍보, 마케팅등을제공하고있다. 인도네시아에서는국가개발계획부 (BAPPENAS) 산하에 PPP Unit(P3CU) 을설립하 제 5 장민간투자제도비교분석 169

여운용하고있다. PPP Unit(P3CU) 은민간투자사업수행을촉진하고, 사업관리, 정책수립및분석에있어중추적인역할을하고있다. 또한조달규정의표준화및입찰문서검토, 정부재정지원에따른프로젝트검토, 잠재적투자자와의대화촉진, 다양한이해관계자와의커뮤니케이션전략개발및실행, 그리고 PPP Book 개선등의업무를수행하고있다. 인도네시아에서다른민간투자사업지원기관으로는사회기반시설지원을위해인도네시아정부가설립한두개의공기업이있다. 재무부가설립한공기업인인도네시아사회기반시설보증기금 (Indonesia Infrastructure Guarantee Fund: IIGF/PT PII) 과인프라투자공사 (Sarana Multi Infrastructure: PT SMI) 이다. 인도네시아사회기반시설보증기금은재무부가직접감독하며 PPP계획에따라사회기반시설사업을보증할의무가있다. 32 인도네시아보증기금은민간투자사업의정부위험에대해지원및보증을제공하는기관이다. 인프라투자공사 (PT SMI) 는인도네시아민간투자사업에서 1) 인도네시아민간투자사업개발의투자촉진역할수행, 2) 사업자금지원을위한대체자금지원, 3) 민간투자활성화및지원, 4) 제3자와의협력을통해 PPP 규모, 역량, 효과제고등의 4가지전략적인역할을수행한다. 정부지원 필리핀은재정지원과관련하여 BOT법에나타난정부의재정지원및보장은매우다양하지만크게보조금및비용분담, 조세혜택, 환율변동에대한신용보강등으로구분할수있다. 민간제안사업역시관련법규에따라여러가지형태의정부지원을받을수는있지만직접보증, 보조금및지분출자의형태로는지원받을수없으며, 정부자산 ( 부지등 ) 에대한사용권매각또는임대는직접적인보조금이나지분출자로간주되지않는다. 필리핀에서는투자규모가크고민간부문에서자금조달이어려운사업의경우정부원조 (Government Appropriations: GA) 나공적개발원조 (Official Development Assistance: ODA) 를통해총사업비의 50% 를초과하지않는한도내에서자금조달이가능하도록규정하고있다. 이는사회기반시설의개발과관련한자본비용과운영비용의일부를부담하는형태라고볼수있으며, 관련인프라의공급, 부지사용권제공, 사업시행자가지급하여야할금액의감면또는지급연기, 그리고프로 32 모든 PPP 사업에보증이적용되지않으며수요중심접근법을취하고있다. 정치적위험이큰사업만이 IIGF 지원을필요로한다. 170 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

젝트에대한지분출자및일부자금조달등의형태로제공하고있다. 또한사업비가 10억페소이상으로투자유치위원회 (Board of Investment: BOI) 에등록된프로젝트와 10억페소이하의규모이지만 BOI의투자우선순위계획 (Investment Priorities Plan: IPP) 에포함된경우에는종합투자법 (Omnibus Investment Code: OIC) 규정에따라세제혜택이제공된다. 또한기존의각종법령과지방정부법에따라조세면제또는감면등의추가적인혜택을제공할수있으며, 국내자본재에대해서는조세를면제하기도한다. 인도네시아정부는민간투자재원조달촉진을위해인프라투자기구 (Indonesia Infrastructure Financing Facility) 및인프라보증기금 (Indonesia Infrastructure Guarantee Fund) 을설립하였다. 또한인도네시아정부는 2006년인프라프로젝트에있어서투자리스크를정부가분담할수있도록하는위험관리지침을재무부장관령 No.38/2006 으로공포하였다. 이에따라정부가부담하는위험은정치적위험, 사업위험, 수요위험의세가지로분류되는데, 정치위험은자산수용, 정책변경, 외환규제, 자금이체규제등민간기업의관리범위를벗어난정책변경에의해손해를입는경우를규정하고있다. 사업위험은정부가담당하는용지매입이지연될경우및사전에합의된사항이외의사태가발생하였을경우운영권을연장해주고, 지가가상승할경우정부가차액을부담하는내용을담고있으며, 수요리스크는사업초기합의시에산정한수요가실제수요에미치지못할경우이를보상해줄수있도록규정하고있다. 이하세부적인한국, 인도네시아, 필리핀의민간투자제도의비교자료는다음의 < 표 5-1> 과같다. 제 5 장민간투자제도비교분석 171

표 한국 필리핀 인도네시아의민간투자제도비교 한국필리핀인도네시아 민간투자 규범체계 민간투자법민간투자법시행령민간투자기본계획 법공기업합작투자명령지방정부법령 행정 건설운영민관협력대통령령 민간투자규정 변천과정 사업추진방식 민자유치촉진법 민간투자법 민간투자법 기타 법 법 대통령령 대통령령 대통령령 등 민간투자대상시설 도로 철도 항만 환경등 개시설 전력 고속도로 항만 공항 운하 댐 수자원 관개 철도 산업단지 주택 공공청사 관광시설 시장 정보통신 폐기물등이에한정하지않음 도로및교통수자원 상하수도통신및정보기술전력석유및천연가스도시기반시설교육시설 체육시설관광시설 의료시설 교정시설 공공주택등 개시설 정부고시사업추진절차 예비타당성조사 타당성분석 검토 대상사업지정 고시 타당성조사 대상사업승인 입찰 대상사업선정 잠재 우선 착수예정 타당성조사 위험평가 정부지원검토 입찰 172 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

표 의계속 민간제안사업 추진절차 한국필리핀인도네시아 민간제안서제출 검토 제 자제안공고 민간제안서제출 평가 대상사업승인 제 자제안공고 단계최초제안 사업계획서제출 주무관청검토 자격평가 추진여부결정 단계예타보고서제출 주무관청평가 사업승인 단계최초제안자지정 우대점수부여 공고 기획재정부재정관리국 경제개발청 재무부금융지원관리국 중앙정부담당조직 민간투자심의위원회분쟁조정위원회 국가개발계획부 제도개발국 민간투자사업지원기관정부지원 민간투자기본계획수립지원 시설사업기본계획수립지원 사업계획검토평가협상지원 민간제안검토 외국인투자활성화 교육프로그램개발 제도개선및연구 신용보증기금 대출및채권보증건설보조금투자위험분담방안해지시지급금세제혜택산업기반신용보증기금의보증 센터 프로그램 프로젝트개발 타당성조사 사업개발기금관리 사업평가및감독 매뉴얼작성 구축 연차보고서작성 민간제안사업 정부고시사업보조금비용분담세제혜택신용보강을위한보증 프로그램 프로젝트개발 타당성조사 사업평가및감독 매뉴얼작성 재무부산하 각종보증 인프라투자공사 사업자금지원 정부보증민간토지선매입후보상 제 5 장민간투자제도비교분석 173

참고문헌 1. 국내문헌국회예산정책처, 국가재정법이해와실제, 2012. 5., 2015년도임대형민간투자사업 (BTL) 한도액안평가, 2014. 10., 2015년도임대형민간투자사업 (BTL) 한도액안평가, 2014. 10. 기획재정부 한국개발연구원, 2013 민간투자사업종합평가, 2013. 1. 기획재정부, 민간투자사업 (BTO BTL) 회계처리지침, 2011. 12., 민간투자사업활성화방안, 2013. 7., 2015년도예산안편성및기금운용계획안작성지침, 2014. 4., 2015~2019 국가재정운용계획, SOC( 교통 ) 분야보고서, 2015. 11. 김강수, 김혜영, 이동훈, 한국의민간투자법, 2015. 5. 공공투자관리센터내부자료대외경제정책연구원, 인도네시아공공민간협력제도의구조와정책적시사점, 2013. 10. 한국개발연구원, 민간투자사업의중장기추진방향및정책과제, 2010. 12., BTO 민간제안사업적격성조사 ( 제안서검토 ) 수행및우대점수산정을위한세부요령연구 ( 안 ), 2007. 1., 2012 경제협력국가와의경제발전경험공유사업 : 인도네시아, 2013., G20 차원의민관협력사업 (PPP) 공조방안연구, 2014. 1., 2012 경제발전경험모듈화사업, 한국의민간투자사업 ; 제도적정비및정책성과로부터의교훈, 2013., 동남아민간투자사업진출환경연구, 베트남인도네시아를중심으로, 2008. 2., 대규모재정사업이효율적관리방안, 2013. 2., 개도국인프라사업에있어개발원조와 PPP의연계방안에관한연구, 2009. 2. Fujitsu Research Institute, PPP Case Study in the Asean Region, 2013. 3. Korea Development Institute World Bank, Improving the Public Expenditure Management System: Public Private Partnerships and Program Review, 2005. 12. Ministry of Strategy and Finance(Korea), The Budget Ststem of Korea, 2014. 3. 2. 외국문헌및자료 A. Ng, Martin Loosemore, Risk allocation in the private provision of public infrastructure, University of New South Wale, 2006. 174 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Agustiyanti, PPP (Public-Private Partnerships) in Indonesia: Opportunities from the Economic Master plan, presented in June 2012. Asian Development Bank, Inreasing Competitiveness for Inclusive Growth Program, Chapter on Sector Assessment (Summary): Public Private Partnerships in Infrastructure, 2013. Philippines: Critical Development Constraints, 2007. 12. BAPPENAS, 2010~2014 PPP Book, 2010., 2015 PPP Book, 2015. 5., Public-Private Partnership Infrastructure Projects Plan in Indonesia, Jakarta, 2012., Public-Private Partnership Infrastructure Projects Plan in Indonesia, Jakarta, 2013. BAPPENAS/JICA, Medium Term Economic Infrastructure Strategy: Background Study for RPJMN 2015-2019, Jakarta, 2013. Development Budget Coordination Committee, Fiscal Risks Report, 2013. Duffield, Colin, A New Multi Partner Indonesia Centre for Infrastructure: Commitment Survey Finding, IndII, Jakarta, 2015. IIGF Institute, Kompendium Rekomendasi Kebijakan Infrastruktur: Kajian Studi Kasus Indonesia Infrastructure Roundtable 2013-2014, Kerjasama antara Universitas Indonesia, Institut Teknologi Bandung, dan Universitas Gajah Mada, Jakarta, 2014. Jakarta World Bank, 2010. 5. Marques, R.; Berg, S. Risks, contracts and private sector participation in infrastructure, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 137, No. 11, 2011. Ministry of Finance Republic of Indonesia, Budget in Brief APBN 2015 National Secretariat, Indonesia Forum for Budget Transparency OECD, OECD Reviews of Regulatory Reform Indonesia Public-Private Partnership Governance: Policy, Process, and Structure, September 2013., Public-Private Partnership Infrastructure Projects Plan in Indonesia 2012 published by Ministry of National Development Planning/National Development Planning Agency, Jakarta, 2012., Public-Private Partnership Infrastructure Projects Plan in Indonesia 2013 published by Ministry of National Development Planning/National Development Planning Agency, Jakarta, 2013. Parikesit, Danang, Purwo Santoso, Harya Setyaka, and Restu Novitarini, Indonesian Local Government Perspectives On Public Private Partnership and the Needs of Capacity Building, PUSTRAL UGM for AIGRP Funded Project, ANU, 2008. Philippines Office of the President, State of the National Address Technical Report, 2013. 참고문헌 175

PT SMI, 2014 Annual Report, 2014. Scott Barrett, Creating Incentives for Cooperation: Strategic Choices, Providing Global Public Goods: Managing Globalization: Managing Globalization, UN, 2003132 De Bettignies, J.-E. and Ross, T. W., The Economics of Public-Private Partnerships, Canadian Public Policy, 2004. Sherif Mohamed and Andreas Wibowo, Risk allocation in public-private-partnered water supply projects, Crawford School of Economics and Government, ANU College of Asia and the Pacific, The Australian National University, 2008. Strategic Asia for the UK Foreign Commonwealth Office, PPP (Public-Private Partnerships) in Indonesia: Opportunities from the Economic Masterplan, presented in June 2012,2012. World Bank, INDONESIA ECONOMIC QUARTERLY, Slower growth; high risks, 2013., Philippine Economic Update, August 2014. World Bank and Public Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility, Private Participation in Infrastructure Database. World Economic Forum. 3. 참고법령 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법 사회기반시설에대한민간투자법시행령 국가재정법 국가를당사자로하는계약에관한법률 PERATURAN MENTERI KEUANGAN REPUBLIK INDONESIA. NOMOR. 38/PMK. PERATURAN PRESIDEN REPUBLIK INDONESIA. NOMOR. 13. TAHUN 2005. PERATURAN PRESIDEN REPUBLIK INDONESIA. NOMOR. 13. TAHUN 2010. PERATURAN PRESIDEN REPUBLIK INDONESIA. NOMOR. 36. TAHUN 2005. PERATURAN PRESIDEN REPUBLIK INDONESIA. NOMOR. 56. TAHUN 2011. PERATURAN PRESIDEN REPUBLIK INDONESIA. NOMOR. 67. TAHUN 2005. PERATURAN PRESIDEN REPUBLIK INDONESIA. NOMOR. 71. TAHUN 2012. IPERATURAN PRESIDEN REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR. 38. TAHUN 2015. Republic Act No. 6957, An Act Authorizing the Financing, Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Infrastructure Projects by the Private Sector, and other purposes, July 1990 Republic Act No. 7718 (Philippine BOT Law) and its Implementing Ruiles and Regulations Republic Act No. 8974, An Act to Facilitate the Acquisition of Right-of-Way, Site or Location for 176 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

National Government Infrastructure Projects and for other purposes Republic Act No. 8975, An Act to Ensure the Expeditious Implementation and Completion of Government Infrastructure Projects by Prohibiting Lower Courts from Issuing Temporary Restraining Orders, Preliminary Injunction or Preliminary Mandatory Injunctions, Providing Penalties for Violations Thereof and for other purposes, 2012. 4. 웹자료 http://www.antaranews.com/en/news http://www.establishmentpost.com/jokowis-nine-priorities-agenda-nawa-cita http://www.eib.org/epec/resources/publications/role_and_use_of_advisers_en.pdf http://www.ptsmi.co.id/content/frequently-asked-questions/ http://www.fiskal.depkeu.go.id/webbkf/kolom/detailkolom.asp?newsid=n119258959 http://repository.ugm.ac.id/97161/1/alokasi%20risiko%20dalam%20proyek%20kps.pdf http://www.iigf.co.id http://www.establishmentpost.com/jokowis-nine-priorities-agenda-nawa-cita / https://www.case.hks.harvard.edu http://www.worldbank.org 참고문헌 177

부 록 Chapter Ⅰ. Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines Chapter 2. Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia

Chapter 1 Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines Alma Porciuncula 필리핀 PPP 컨설턴트 1. Macroeconomic Situation Over the past five years the Philippines has shown robust economic performance. The macroeconomic fundamentals are impressive; it has sustained its growth momentum from 6-7% making it the fastest growing among the ASEAN C-6 economies from 2012 to 2014. However, its biggest challenge is to make growth more inclusive and to steadily and systematically eradicate poverty. Among other things, the country has to upgrade and expand its physical infrastructure in order to enhance the mobility of factors of production and improve the access of people to opportunities, markets, and social services. The high rate of economic growth and the accompanying improvements in the government s fiscal position in recent years help in achieving developmental objectives. The target is to improve public spending in infrastructure up to 5% of GDP by 2016. From 1.74% in 2010, public spending on infrastructure slightly dipped to 1.41% in 2011 (along with other government spending items) and then steadily climbed in the succeeding years. Nevertheless, the 2.01% achievement in 2014 is still a long way from the 5% of GDP target (Figure 1). One of the binding constraints in sustaining a high level of growth is the state of the infrastructure facilities and services. The poor quality of infrastructure in the country is affecting its competitiveness as businesses find it costly to mobilize inputs to production, connect to the logistics chain, and link up with global and regional production networks. In the WEF Global Competitiveness Report 2012, the Philippines overall infrastructure quality ranks below Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 181

and Indonesia; and only slightly better than Vietnam. [Figure 1] Public Spending on Infrastructure as % of GDP, 2010-2014 Source: Department of Budget and Management. [Figure 2] Overall Quality of Infrastructure in Selected ASEAN Countries, 2010-2012 Source: World Economic Forum. 182 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

The Philippine Development Plan (PDP) 2011-2016, citing the result of research on critical development constraints, 1 reiterated that both the quantity and the quality of the country's infrastructure is a critical constraint to economic growth. The PDP 2011-2016 formulated several objectives in infrastructure development; among these is to attract investments in infrastructure through the following strategies: ⅰ) improve the institutional and regulatory environment of the infrastructure sector; and ⅱ) encourage PPPs. In this regard, the overall strategy of the Philippine Government is to aggressively increase public sector investments in infrastructure, as well as mobilize private sector funding through public private partnership arrangements. As shown in Figure 1 above, public investments on infrastructure is showing signs of recovery and complementing the growth of public investments, PPP investments have also increased tremendously from 2008 to date. See Table 1. The challenge now is for government to sustain the momentum of PPP investments to achieve its goal of accelerated infrastructure development. <Table 1> PPP Contracts Closed as Percentage of GDP Year PPP Contracts, by Year of Closing (PhP Billion) PPPs Closed (as % of GDP) 2003.054 0.0012% 2008 1.23 0.0159% 2012 18 0.1703% 2013 19 0.1645% 2014 90 0.7124% 2015 2.5 (as of March 2015) TBD Note: There were no PPP projects closed from 2004 to 2007 and from 2009-2011. Source: Department of Budget and Management, PPP Center. Gross domestic product (GDP) has been growing at an annual average of 5.1% since 2000 (Figure 3). In 2014, GDP grew at 6.1%, a continuation of the high growth in the recent years. 1 See Asian Development Bank. 2007. Philippines: Critical Development Constraints. December 2007. Manila: ADB. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 183

[Figure 3] Real GDP Growth, 2000-2014 Source: Philippine Statistical Authority. Much of this growth is supported by consistent positive growth in household consumption, which is the largest component of GDP (Figure 4). Other components of GDP performed variably and have been subject to fluctuating global and regional trends, such as net exports and investments, and changing fiscal position, such as government expenditures (Table 2). [Figure 4] Demand-side Components of GDP, 2014 Source: Philippine Statistical Authority. 184 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

<Table 2> Growth Rates of GDP Components, 2001-2014 Household final consumption Government consumption 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 4% 5% 5% 6% 4% 4% 5% 4% 2% 3% 6% 7% 6% 5% -2% -4% 4% 2% 2% 11% 7% 0% 11% 4% 2% 15% 8% 2% Investments or 24% 16% 0% -2% 3% -15% 0% 23% -9% 32% 3% -5% 30% 1% Capital formation Net Exports (Exports less Imports) 215% 51% -7% -33% -14% -107% 955% -80% 17% -94% -3,078 % -182%-430%-121% Source: Philippine Statistical Authority. The Philippines largest trading partner is the ASEAN region as a whole (Figure 5). Its major individual country trading partners are Japan, China, and the US. It also has some trade with EU countries. Considering that its trade within the ASEAN region is the largest, it benefits from the ongoing liberalization and promotion of greater economic integration in the region, especially the activities related to the envisioned ASEAN Economic Community by 2015. This also helps dampen the effects of global economic growth slowdown originating from advanced economies, like the US recession after the 2008 financial crisis and the ongoing deflation-induced slowdown in some European countries. [Figure 5] Philippines Trading Partners, First Semesters 2013 and 2014 Source: Philippine Statistical Authority. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 185

Government revenues have stayed within the 13% to 17% range from 2000 to 2013 (Figure 6). The current administration did not pass any new taxes but managed to increase revenues, as shown by the uptick beginning 2010. This happened through a combination of improvements in tax collection efforts, a program of running after tax evaders, and the implementation of reforms at the customs collection agency. [Figure 6] Revenues as Percentage of GDP, 2000-2013 Source: Department of Finance. Public spending in the past had been constrained by the need to service debt, which according to law has to have automatic appropriation every year. The need to automatically service debt limited the fiscal space of the government for public spending, including infrastructure spending. Recently, however, good fiscal management has enabled the government to reduce its external debt. From a high of 74.45% of GDP in 2004, the government was able to reduce its total debt to 49.2% of GDP in 2013 (Figure 7). It achieved this through a combination of improved revenue generation effort, prepayment of external debt to take advantage of global low interest rates, and rebalancing the debt mix by borrowing more from the liquid domestic market and reducing reliance on the external market. The wider fiscal space is now enabling the government to focus on boosting public spending, such as infrastructure investments. 186 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

[Figure 7] Outstanding Debt of the National Government, as Percent of GDP, 2000-2013 Source: Department of Finance. As previously discussed and shown by Figure 1 above, there is still wide gap to be closed when it comes to public infrastructure spending because the 2014 achievement of 2.01% public infrastructure expenditure-to-gdp ratio is still a long way from the target 5% of GDP. Nevertheless, the revitalization of the PPP program is acting as a complement, and proving to be an important one as shown by the figures in Table 2 above, to the government spending on infrastructure. Going forward, it is projected that the weaker global economy will dampen the growth of the Philippines, but still the prospects remain positive. The country has the means to sustain high growth in the near-term, as it is still benefitting from low and stable inflation, healthy current account surplus, a falling debt burden and sound monetary and fiscal policies. It has a dynamic private sector (e.g. business process outsourcing, real estate, finance, and some manufacturing sectors) that is seizing domestic and global opportunities. If the growing fiscal space can be used for high impact infrastructure projects, to enable the country to maintain a 6.5 percent growth rate in the near-term, economic growth will be more inclusive. Sustaining high growth and making it more inclusive can help the government achieve its 18 to 20 percent poverty reduction targets. In the long-term, if growth is sustained at 6 percent per year, per capita income can double within 1 decade, grow 5 times in 2 decades, and reach 11 times in 3 decades. This means that if the growth elasticity of poverty remains high, poverty can be eradicated within a single generation. Achieving this requires a commitment to implement much needed structural reforms. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 187

<Table 3> Growth and Inflation Projections 2014 2015 2016 Philippine GDP growth 6.1 6.5 6.5 Philippine CPI inflation 4.1 3.0 3.5 Global growth 2.6 3.0 3.3 Source: World Bank, Philippine Economic Update, January 2015. With private consumption growth steady at around 5 to 6 percent, GDP growth of around 6.5 percent hinges primarily on the ability of the government to spend the budget as planned. Government expenditure accounted for 10.19% of GDP in 2014. Government should be steadfast in its commitment to fully utilize the budget; particularly reaching the 5% of the GDP target for infrastructure spending by 2016 as well as keep on track the PPP investment program (see current contracts and the pipeline of PPP projects in Annex 1). The country has an investment gap of around 6.8 percent of GDP, 2.5 percent of GDP for infrastructure and 4.3 percent of GDP for social services. 2 Worsening port and road congestion, and possible power shortages in 2015 exemplify the need to urgently raise investments. More investments in infrastructure can help the country become more competitive, and in the process revive key export sectors. To this end, the government is improving the budgeting system by addressing spending and procurement bottlenecks, while also drafting a new organic budget law, which would clarify, streamline, and harmonize the various pieces of legislation and executive orders. It is also facilitating the implementation of approved PPP projects, focusing on those delayed due to reasons within the executive government s control such a s procurement issues or right of way acquisition. Fortunately, there are positive market conditions that support the implementation of PPP projects, such as availability of domestic financing and a prevailing low interest rate regime. 2. History of PPPs in the Philippines Public-private partnership has always been one of the cornerstone strategies in Philippine infrastructure development. The Program had its beginnings with private sector participation in power projects in the late 1980 s to the mid 1990 s as a response to the severe power shortage. Through executive fiat, then President of the 2 World Bank. 2014. Philippine Economic Update, August 2014. 188 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Philippines issued Executive Order 215 in 1987 to govern private sector investments in electric generating plants. However this had limited utility as it had to be within the ambit of legislated public procurement guidelines. This legal basis for PPPs was later on strengthened with the passage of Republic Act 6957 in July 1990. 3 This law encompassed other infrastructure sectors and laid the foundation for the build operate transfer and build transfer arrangements. Republic Act 6957 was later on amended by Republic Act 7718 in May 1994 to among others expand the PPP modalities, improve transparency and flexibility of the procurement by allowing negotiated contracts, and provide incentives for PPP projects. RA 7718 and its Implementing Rules and Regulations established a clear and conducive policy framework for private sector entrepreneurial initiatives. The early start of the power sector, as well as a fairly standardized and well-defined risk allocation, explains why power projects account for about 70% of the number of PPP projects reaching financial closure from 1990-2014, and 46% in terms of the value of investments. 4 Furthermore, the sector benefitted from a comprehensive restructuring with the passage of the Electric Power Reform Act in 2001 (EPIRA). Among the major reforms is the unbundling of generation, transmission and distribution components of the service. Power generation was fully privatized (hence power generation projects implemented post 2001 were no longer governed by the BOT Law, rather by EPIRA); transmission was initially public but with an eventual plan to privatize; and distribution continued to be undertaken through private electric cooperatives. The PPP deal flow was prolific from 1990 to 2000; with investments peaking at 15.5% of the GDP in 1997. 5 From the early 1990s PPP projects in the transportation, water supply and information technology were also implemented by national government agencies. Furthermore, subnational entities, particularly; some local government units got interested in the PPP scheme for revenue generating projects such as public markets and transportation terminals. Several factors contributed to the active implementation of the PPP program during the 1990 decade, notably: Strong support from the political leadership; the greatest advocate and salesman was no less than the President of the Republic With the new legal framework, clear policy and implementation guidelines 3 Republic Act 6957, An Act Authorizing the Financing, Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Infrastructure Projects by the Private Sector, and other purposes, July 1990. 4 World Bank and Public Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility, Private Participation in Infrastructure Database. This includes pure private investments for power generation projects implemented using the EPIRA law. 5 Asian Development Bank, Increasing Competitiveness for Inclusive Growth Program, Chapter on Sector Assessment (Summary): Public Private Partnerships in Infrastructure, 2013 Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 189

Establishment of the BOT Center, a unit under the Office of the President that provided technical assistance for project development, capacity building of implementing agencies, marketing and promotion of projects, as well as coordination of policy reforms that required inter-agency consensus. Strong private sector interest as evidenced by the predominance of unsolicited proposals Good macroeconomic performance With the change in administration of the presidency by the end of the decade, the PPP Program did not perform well, except for power generation projects which are now fully privatized. Governance issues plagued the implementation of some projects and black marks were incurred with the failure of high profile projects such as the Manila International Airport Terminal 3 (see discussion in Box 1, Examples of Distressed Projects). This was also the time when the country experienced political turmoil leading to the impeachment of then incumbent president; doubts cast on the legitimacy of the mandate of the next president considering allegations of election fraud; and the pervasive perception of corruption in the highest echelons of the government. Hence few projects, outside of the energy sector were implemented from 2001 to 2010. The current president (2010 to 2016 term of office) won on a platform of anti-corruption and poverty reduction. His administration s development plan is anchored on inclusive growth goal enabled by strong economic performance and social equity. 6 Among its core strategies to achieve sustainable growth, is to improve the state of the infrastructure facilities and services, not only to meet lagging supply but to also to catalyze the development of other productive sectors. Toward this end, the government has adopted a two pronged-approach: significantly increase public investments and leverage government resources with private sector investments through PPP arrangements. Government was circumspect in identifying the critical reforms to stimulate the program. Learning from past experience and heeding constructive criticisms and inputs from stakeholders, the foundations for institutionalizing the PPP program were laid: The incumbent President issued clear policy statements on the use of PPP as a development strategy and enjoined implementing agencies to rationalize PPP investments in their overall investment program. Government amended the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the legal bases for PPP arrangements (BOT Law and JV Guidelines for government corporations) to strengthen the integrity of the bidding guidelines and 6 The Philippine Development Plan, follow a six-year cycle coinciding with the term of the president. 190 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

accountability of implementing agencies, streamline the approval process and improve the monitoring and evaluation of projects Government revamped the PPP Center and its capacity strengthened to perform the following functions: oversight on policy implementation, capacity building of implementing agencies, including preparation of knowledge products and standard, program monitoring and evaluation. PPP Center established the Project Development and Monitoring Fund (PDMF), a revolving fund that implementing agencies can access to prepare bankable projects and avail of advisory services, to facilitate the deal flow of solicited projects. The reforms to improve the enabling environment for PPPs are works in progress. There is currently a pending bill to amend the BOT Law to, among others, include joint ventures among the PPP modalities, improve the challenge for unsolicited proposals, institutionalize the Project Development and Monitoring Facility, separate the regulatory and proprietary functions of government owned and controlled corporations to address conflict of interest, and create a list of Projects of National Significance that will insulate them from ordinances of local government units, local fees and taxes. In parallel, there are on-going initiatives on capacity building of national government agencies and local governments to implement PPP projects, as well as expand the PDMF to include a component tailor-fitted for local government projects. On project appraisal, value for money analysis has recently been made part of the due-diligence, but government is still building the information for public sector comparators. The most critical initiative is the establishment of a Fiscal Risk Management Program currently being developed by the Department of Finance. The Fiscal Risk Management Program will address management of the exposure of the government on PPPs; including contingent liabilities (see discussion in Section 5). 2.1. Snapshot of the Portfolio of PPP Projects A snapshot of the PPP projects that have been concluded and turned over to the government, at operating stage and at contracts signed and under construction stage from 1990 to 2015 7 is presented in Table 4. Projects under procurement are summarized in Table 5. See list of projects in Annex 1. 7 These projects include: management, lease contracts, concessions, greenfield BOT project among others. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 191

<Table 4> Status of PPP Projects in the Philippines, 1990-2015 Sectors Concluded and Turned Over Number of Projects At operation stage Contract signed/ Notice of Award Total Concluded and Turned Over Value of Projects At operation stage (US$ million) Contract signed/ Notice of Award Total (US$ million) Power 28 10 38 3,582 5,119 8,701 Transport 10 6 16 2,654 4,391 7,045 Information Technology 3 3 6 1.92 150 152 Water Supply 5 5 7,839 7,839 Property Development 1 8 9 4 450 454 Health 1 1 2 1 125 126 Education 1 1 2 295 397 692 Total 33 38 7 72 3,883 16,610 1,396 25,009 Source: PPP Center of the Philippines and 2015 Budget of Expenditures and Sources of Financing, Department of Budget and Management. Except for the education projects (school buildings for primary and secondary students) all projects are revenue generating. Majority were designed to recover the cost of the project from user fees, hence for most projects, the national government s obligations were contingent or hedged by cost-based end user fees. For example, power generation and bulk water supply projects have minimum off take provisions, but mostly the payments therefor are recovered from the end user fees. However, albeit a handful, there are high value projects with minimum revenue guarantees that cannot be recovered from user fees, notably an urban rail project and a multipurpose dam project. These projects are among the examples of distressed projects discussed in Box 1 below. About a third of these projects (particularly those implemented from 1994 to 2012) were unsolicited proposals, most of which were not challenged hence awarded to the original proponent. Some of the reasons cited for the lack of interest to challenge are: perceived bias of the implementing agency in favor of the original proponent and the short time frame to prepare a comparative proposal 60 days as prescribed by law. Most distressed projects came from negotiated proposals, i.e., from unsolicited proposals and from a lone bid. Four of about 19 contracts from unsolicited 192 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

proposals were terminated, one major project (i.e. Manila International Airport Terminal 3) and three small infrastructure projects of local government units. As will be seen from examples presented in Box 1, the major reasons for the projects failure are poor due diligence on the part of the implementing agency to determine appropriate project design and structure, lopsidedness of the risk allocation in favor of the proponent and in one exceptional case, irregularity in the novation of the contract from the version originally approved by the approving body. Box 1. Examples of Distressed Projects Casecnan Multi-purpose Dam Project (1994; BOT; unsolicited proposal) Despite achieving its objectives for the most part, the Casecnan Multipurpose Dam Project resulted in significant negative outcomes for the government. These are: Major construction delays due to poor design High levels of water fees for NIA which are not recoverable from user fees The construction delays were due to the proponent, CE Casecnan s failure to anticipate the conditions at the project site because of inadequate geophysical studies. Consequently the need to re-design the equipment and partially modify its construction approach arose. Since the Swiss challenge did not generate competitive proposals there was no way of knowing if the original proponent s equipment and construction methodology offered the best value. Moreover, the government implementing agency- National Irrigation Authority (NIA) did not have the capacity to evaluate the design. NIA undertook a minimum offtake for the irrigation water at an agreed fee that was intended to be passed on to the end user fees. However political and social acceptability pressure compelled NIA to set the end user tariffs at levels inadequate to pay for the minimum offtake value. As a result, NIA is forced to subsidize the water fees paid to CE Casecnan. Since its corporate revenues are insufficient, it requested for national government bailout, estimated at $1 billion over the life of the contract. Given that the irrigation component of the Project required a Government subsidy, a BOT contractual arrangement procured through the unsolicited proposal route may not have been the most optimal structure for this Project. Rather than using private funds for the Project s irrigation component, the Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 193

Government could have used upfront direct financing of the irrigation component. This would have decreased the Project s costs since the cost of public funds is considerably lower than that of private funds. NIA did not have the capability to evaluate the new technology and gauge the reasonableness of the cost. For complex projects involving new technology and requiring large amounts of capital investment, it is a good policy to subject the project to a competitive tender to obtain the best possible arrangement for the Government, both financially and technically. Source : Castalia Report on the Review of Selected ODA and PPP Projects under the Partnership for Economic Governance Reform Project (2009). Manila International Airport Terminal (1995; BOT, unsolicited proposal) The contract for NAIA Terminal 3 8 was awarded to the challenger, which offered much higher lease payments to the government. The contract was however declared null and void by the Supreme Court because of the following reasons: Challenger was deemed not a qualified bidder because it did not satisfy the minimum financial requirement. Proof of required net worth included the entire net worth of a private bank, one of the consortium members. The SC ruled that the Bank s entire net worth should not have been accepted because banks are prohibited to invest more than 15% of their net worth in a single enterprise. The concession agreement offered from public bidding differed from the one signed and executed, on critical provisions a) modification on the public utility revenues and non-public utility revenues that may be collected by the challenger; and b) assumption by the Government of the liabilities of the challenger in the event of the latter s default. These changes violated the condition of the government approving body on regulation of public utilities and the provision of the BOT law against direct government guarantees for unsolicited proposals. The international equity investor was found to violate the Anti-Dummy Law as its investments in consortium members exceeded 60% or more than the investment of the Filipino consortium members. Under the Constitution (and as restated in the BOT Law) public utilities have to be owned by Filipinos or if a corporation at least 60% owned by Filipinos 194 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

The Philippine court ruled a buyout price to the Filipino consortium member amounting to US$176 million. The foreign consortium member is demanding a US$400 million. The case is still under arbitration with the International Center for Settlement Investment Dispute (ICSID). Source: Supreme Court Ruling. Manila Metro Rail Transit Line 3 (1995; BLT, lone bid) The Metro Rail Transit (MRT) Line 3 which is under a Build-Lease- Transfer (BLT) agreement. A private consortium built the facility and is leasing it to the government under a 25-year contract, and the government, in turn, is operating the facility through its transportation department. The project was initially successful in meeting its objectives of reducing traffic along a major thoroughfare in Manila, establishing the foundation for an integrated mass transit system, and introducing private participation in the rail sector. However, it faltered in the longer term due to poor transaction design - with government bearing a disproportionate level of risk. The Government was also negatively affected by unanticipated political intervention to suppress fares to below costrecovery levels, requiring a subsidy that was not planned for. The government has kept the tariff low and because the project revenues are not enough, subsidies have to be regularly provided to ensure that lease obligations are paid on time. Maintenance costs have also increased as the trains have been operating beyond capacity. It costs the government Php60 to ferry a single passenger from end to end at MRT-3. This is PhP45 higher than Php15 maximum ticket price. The difference is shouldered by the government as a subsidy, which amounts to about Php7 billion to Php9 billion pesos every year (about US$204 million). 9 To help mitigate the revenue risk, the transportation department is currently introducing a gradual increase in fares and has also contracted the manufacturing of additional rolling stocks to augment the carrying capacity of the trains. The relatively small risk borne by the private proponent means it has few incentives to invest in the ongoing growth of the MRT-3, to maximize ridership, or to make costs efficient. Since 2009 MRT-3 has operated at maximum capacity which adversely affects quality of service. Given the high cost of subsidy (about $3.3 billion has been paid out by the government), the government opted to buy out the project in 2015 (estimated buy out cost is $1.26 billion). Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 195

The main weakness of this case is generally related to the structure of the PPP. Functions and risks were not allocated optimally. A thorough analysis and independent review of the key risk ridership was not done. The project could have also benefited from a more thorough marketing and consultation with potential private proponents. Source: Castalia Report on Review of Selected ODA and PPP Projects, under the PEGR Project (2009) and updates from the President s 2013 State of the Nation Address 2.2. Pipeline of Projects Currently, there are 19 projects with a total value of about US$ 14 billion under procurement. The high influx of projects for procurement in 2015 is brought about by the response of implementing agencies to the call of the President for accelerated infrastructure development, and the prevailing appetite of domestic conglomerates to invest in public infrastructure projects, as these support their other businesses. The PDMF has also been instrumental in project development, as well as in transaction facilitation. <Table 5> PPP Projects under Procurement, 2015 Sectors Number of Projects Value of Projects (US$M) Transport 13 11,219 Information Technology 2 42 Water Supply 2 960 Others (Prison Facility and Gas Pipeline) 2 1,352 Total 20 13,574 Source: PPP Center of the Philippines. The sectoral composition of the PPP projects at operation stage, as seen in Figures 8 and 9, shows a diversified PPP portfolio. PPP projects are spread across many infrastructure sectors. In terms of cost, the portfolio shows heavy investments in the three major infrastructure sectors water, power and transport which by 8 Updates on arbitration proceedings still to be included here. 9 2013 State of the Nation Address Technical Report. Office of the President 196 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

their nature really require huge project costs. Given that PPPs are spread across different sectors, the correlation of risks among projects is reduced. The risks are diversified and the likelihood that an event which might adversely affect one project (or one sector) will also affect another project in another sector becomes lower. [Figure 8] 2015 Sectoral Composition of the On-going Philippine PPP Program Based on Cost [Figure 9] Sectoral Composition of the On-going Philippine PPP Program Based on Number Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 197

However, this diversification will be weakened once the recently awarded projects and under procurement are realized. Of the 26 projects awarded and for procurement, with an estimated value of US$ 18 billion, 86% accounts for transportation projects. About half of the investments for the sector are for rail projects and about a third for toll roads. Given the experience of MRT 3, government has gotten more careful and thoughtful of the risk allocation. For one, the urban rail projects are no longer provided minimum revenue guarantees, rather, viability gap funding using capital subsidies or cost share is used for projects whose costs cannot be recovered entirely from tariffs. Other projects are also structured to include collateral business, such as one toll road/dike project packaged with a land reclamation component. A related discussion on risk management is provided in Section 5. 3. Legal Framework for PPPs 3.1. Legal Bases for PPPs The Philippines has three legal bases for implementing PPP projects, listed below. Box 2 gives the highlights of these legal bases. Republic Act 7718 more commonly known as the BOT Law ; Executive Order 423 that provided Joint Venture Guidelines for government owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs); and Republic Act 7160 or the Local Government Code (LGC) that is an alternative legal basis to Local Government Units (LGUs). The PPP Program is underpinned by robust and well-defined legal bases, especially the BOT Law, a general law applicable to all government entities. The Philippine BOT Law has been recognized by other countries as landmark legislation. Among the features cited are its policy framework that supports a risk-reward ratio conducive for private investments, its wide range of modalities for structuring contracts and clear implementation guidelines, which includes transparency measures for procurement and contracting. The BOT Law and its implementing rules and regulations serve as the principal regulatory instrument with regard to PPP contract implementation, oversight and transparency. The long history of PPP attests the general adequacy of the BOT Law. Most of the issues that arose out of PPP project implementation were not so much due to the weaknesses of the law, rather on its enforcement and the quality of project development. 198 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Also, some of its strengths such as transparency measures are deemed restrictive and cumbersome by subnational entities. Local government units invoke their autonomy to determine the contracting arrangement deemed most advantageous for them. Thus they opt to use another legal basis, the Local Government Code, to avoid national government oversight as well as competitive procurement requirements. The local government units are able to take advantage of the loopholes in the Local Government Code to enter into negotiated joint ventures and confine the approval of the project and contract to the local legislative body only. Because there are no explicit guidelines, the process and requirements are not standardized, and the transparency of the transaction and integrity of the contracting process is not always ensured. As such the quality of deals and probity of the contracting process between national government agencies and local government units is highly disparate. Hence investor confidence on projects of local governments is still low. This is one area that government should work on to realize opportunities to develop much needed local projects. Local government constituents can benefit from additional resources leveraged, better quality and efficient provision of basic services brought by PPP arrangements. Box 2. Highlights of PPP legal bases BOT Law The BOT Law is a general law that can be used by national and subnational government agencies for PPP contracts. The Law declares the policy of the State to recognize the private sector as the main engine for national growth and development, and to provide the enabling environment and incentives to mobilize its resources for financing construction, operation and maintenance of infrastructure and development projects traditionally undertaken by government. The Law and its Implementing Rules and Regulations provide a comprehensive list of eligible projects and a menu of allowable PPP modalities. It defines the government approving authorities for national and subnational projects and the guidelines for the approval of these projects and contracts. It recognizes the risk-reward principles for entrepreneurial investments, hence allow full cost recovery and market-based returns through user fees or through government support, or a combination thereof. It espouses competitive bidding as the norm and outlines the procurement requirements and process, but it also includes provisions for negotiated contracts, in cases of a lone complying bidder or of an unsolicited proposal. The latter is allowed for projects that involve a new concept or technology; its development will not require any government cost Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 199

share or undertaking; and subject to a solicitation of comparative proposals, although, the unsolicited proponent is given the right to match the challenger s offer within a thirty-day period. For solicited projects, depending on the economic and financial returns of the project, the government can provide equity, subsidy or credit enhancement and performance undertaking, provided the total government undertaking will not exceed 50% of the project cost. All PPP contracts prosecuted under the BOT Law shall have a validity of no more than 50 years. Joint Venture Guidelines for Government Corporations The JV Guidelines are specific to joint investment activities of government corporations and private entities, involving a community or pooling of interests. Each party is accorded the right to direct and govern the policies in connection therewith with the intention to share both profits and, risks and losses subject to agreement by the parties. A JV may be a Contractual JV or a Corporate JV (JV Company). Either party may transfer the ownership to the other under competitive market conditions. The procurement and contracting guidelines of JV follow the principles of competition and accountability of the BOT Law. Competitive bidding is the default mode, but unsolicited proposals are allowed subject to a comparative challenge. The only difference to the BOT Law is the absence of the right to match for the unsolicited proponent. Government exposure for JVs is also limited to 50% of the project cost. Governing boards of corporations have the authority to approve contracts up to PhP150 million government exposure; beyond which the approval of a higher level national oversight body is required. Local Government Code The Local Government Code is primarily intended to govern the devolution of powers to local government units; to empower them to be autonomous political subdivisions that are accountable to their constituents for the delivery of basic services, fiscal management and overall public administration. Part of the measures to enable LGUs leverage additional resources was a provision allowing them to enter into joint venture arrangements. Specifically, Article 66 of the Law, states, LGUs may enter into joint ventures and such cooperative arrangements with people s organizations, NGOs or the private sector, to engage in the delivery of certain basic services, capability-building and livelihood 200 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

projects; develop local enterprises designed to improve productivity and income, diversify agriculture; spur rural industrialization; promote ecological balance; and enhance the social and economic well-being of the people. Since the transitory provisions of the BOT Law did not explicitly amend the Local Government Code, LGUs continue to use the latter as the legal basis for their projects; the main reason being, the avoidance of the requirement of the BOT Law to get approval of LGU projects from a national oversight body. 10 However, it is less transparent than the BOT Law in the sense that it has no clear guidelines on procurement and risk allocation. Other laws impinge on the implementation of PPPs. Some laws complement and support PPP implementation such as those that provide additional incentives (e.g. renewable energy projects) or facilitate implementation of projects (e.g. laws easing ROW acquisition, insulation from temporary restraining orders or injunctions, and requirement for alternative dispute resolution). 11 Others, however, pose challenges. The particularly challenging ones are: 1. Mandates of implementing agencies- some implementing agencies have inherent conflict of interests in their mandates, as they perform proprietary and regulatory functions. Problems have arisen in ensuring objective enforcement of regulations. The issue has been addressed generally by resorting to regulation by contract, but has not been fool proof. In the water sector, a long term resolution is underway, via a proposed legislation to create an independent economic regulator. Until the separation of powers is legislated, the option is to continue regulation by contract and for an oversight body of the national government (particularly the Investment Coordination Committee, see Table 6) to set the parameters for rate adjustment. 2. Laws on economic regulations of public utilities in different sectors- Specific laws require the grant of franchise and regulation of tariffs for public utilities. The BOT Law provides that once a contract is executed, a 10 The BOT Law requires LGU PPP projects above PhP200 million to be approved by the Investment Coordination Committee, a cabinet level oversight committee for PPPs as well as major public investments of the national government. 11 Republic Act No. 8974 entitled An Act to Facilitate the Acquisition of Right-of-Way, Site or Location for National Government Infrastructure Projects and for Other Purposes ; Republic Act No. 8975, entitled An Act to Ensure the Expeditious Implementation and Completion of Government Infrastructure Projects by Prohibiting Lower Courts from Issuing Temporary Restraining Orders, Preliminary Injunctions or Preliminary Mandatory Injunctions, Providing Penalties for Violations Thereof and for Other Purposes; Executive Order 78, 2012. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 201

presumption arises that the public interest will be served by the implementation of the project, and immediately upon application by the proponent, the regulator shall automatically grant the franchise to operate the facility and collect the fees stipulated under the contract. There have been instances in the past when the regulator did not agree to an automatic grant of franchise but to subject the proponent to its internal review, requirements and approval process. The implementing agencies have dealt with this issue by closely coordinating with regulator. Regulatory requirements are provided for in the bid terms of reference and a representative from the regulator is invited in the Bid and Award Committees. 3. Law on government audit- The Commission on Audit (COA) is an independent constitutional body. Its primary function is to examine, audit and settle all account and expenditures of the funds and properties of the Philippine government. It was also given the power to define the scope, techniques and methods of its auditing and examination procedures. It also may prevent and disallow irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant or unconscionable expenditures, or uses of government funds and properties. It can file cases with the Ombudsman or judicial courts to enforce or punish any irregularity. COA is also empowered to: ⅰ. examine books and documents filed by individuals and corporations with, and which are in the custody of, government offices in connection with government revenue collection operations; ⅱ. exercise visitorial authority over non-government entities subsidized by the government, those required to pay levies or have government shares, those which have received counterpart funds from the government or are partly funded by donations through the government. This authority, however, shall pertain only to the audit of these funds or subsidies coming from or through the government. 12 ⅲ. examine and audit the books, records and accounts of public utilities in connection with the fixing of rates of every nature, or in relation to the proceedings of the proper regulatory agencies, for purposes of determining franchise taxes. 13 COA s exercise of these functions has been viewed as too encompassing and restrictive to private operations. This is aggravated by lack of guidelines on the treatment of PPPs, makes it difficult for the proponent to plan. Issues with COA 12 Administrative Code, Title I-B, Chapter 4, Section 14(1). 13 Administrative Code, Title I-B, Chapter 4, Section 22. 202 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

on specific projects have been dealt with on a case to case basis. Presently, PPP Center is leading the discussion with COA to set guidelines for PPPs. 3.2. Limits on the use of PPPs At the project level the PPP legal bases set explicit limitations in contracting PPPs. Government contribution to projects should not be more than 50% of the project cost, thereby giving private sector equal or greater stake. Contracts will be valid up to 50 years only. Most executed contracts, however, have much less government share mostly right of way only and the range of contract period generally 25 to 30 years only. Private sector is allowed to originate project concepts and to submit unsolicited proposals; however they are not entitled to any form of government support, including performance undertakings. This means that costs of unsolicited projects should be recovered purely from commercial operations. For projects classified as public utilities, such as a toll road or water supply service, the proponent has to be a Filipino or if a corporation at least 60% owned by Filipinos. At the macro level, there are still no explicit policies, legislated or by executive fiat, that set a cap on the level of government exposure be it contingent or direct liabilities for PPPs. This policy is still being crafted as part of the formulation of the government s Fiscal Risk Management Program being prepared by the Department of Finance. However for direct obligations, the implied cap would be the budget appropriation limitations of the implementing agency. As of this writing, there is no available consolidated data on direct payouts for PPPs from calls on contingent liabilities. However, magnitude wise, it is fair to assume the level of payouts for distressed projects presented in Box 1, amounting to about US$ 6.32 billion for buyouts or subsidies over the project lives. The annual budgeting process is anchored in part by the public debt management system, covered under the Administrative Code of the Philippines. The Code requires the Government to establish specific levels of debt, in relation to macro-economic targets of growth, employment levels, and price level change, consistent with domestic and foreign debt levels, domestic credit, and balance of payments objectives for a given budget period. 14 The budget call to implementing agencies sets the parameters for budget preparation, including ceiling of the agency budget. While PPP Projects may be financed partly from government resources, provided they are solicited and economically viable, the resource allocation therefor is constrained by the 14 Administrative Code, Book VI, Chapter 2, Section 4. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 203

implementing agency s budget envelope. Contingent liabilities on the other hand, are not capped directly or indirectly. However, the government is cognizant of the potential fiscal risks of the growing contingent liabilities from PPP contracts, and has tasked the Department of Finance to establish the Fiscal Risk Management Program for PPPs. The Program is still being developed and will include, among others, guidelines on the overall ceiling on government undertakings for PPPs and an accounting and provisioning system for contingent liabilities. 4. Institutional Arrangement of PPPs 4.1. The PPP Center In 2010, the President, issued Executive Order No 8, which reorganised and renamed the BOT Center to the PPP Center of the Philippines, and lodged it with the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), the central planning agency of the government. The Executive Order vests the following functions to the PPP Center: Conduct project facilitation and assistance to the government implementing agencies, in addressing impediments or bottlenecks in the implementation of PPP programs and projects; Provide advisory services, technical assistance, trainings and capacity development to agencies in PPP project preparation and development; Recommend plans, policies and implementation guidelines related to PPP in consultation with appropriate oversight committees, implementing agencies and the private sectors; Manage and administer a revolving fund to be known as the Project Development and Monitoring Facility (PDMF) for the preparation of business cases, pre-feasibility and feasibility studies and tender documents of PPP programs and projects; Monitor and facilitate the implementation of the priority PPP programs and projects of the agencies; Establish and manage a central database system of PPP Program and Projects; Recommend improvements to timelines in processing PPP programs and project proposals, and monitor compliance of all agencies; and Prepare reports on the implementation of the PPP programs and projects of the government for submission to the President at the end of each year. 204 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

As part of its function, the PPP Center publishes guidelines and manuals for LGUs and national government agencies (NGAs), along with other documents and presentations that provide information on the definition of PPP and how to implement a PPP project. The PPP Center also publishes lists of PPP projects being implemented as well as opportunities for future PPP projects. 15 Executive Order No.8 was later amended by EO 136, which strengthened policy making for PPPs, empowered further PPP Center leadership and gave PPPC the additional role as repository of PPP information. In particular EO 136 established the PPP Governing Board, an apex policymaking body for all PPP-related matters, under the chairmanship of the Secretary for Socio-Economic Planning. It upgraded to the rank of undersecretary the head of the PPP Center and it required all government agencies, including LGUs, to submit reports to the PPP Center on all projects undertaken through PPP. The PPP Center will serve as the repository of PPP contracts, and should be able to collect and analyze important project data under its own monitoring and evaluation team. The PPP Center has performed remarkably well since its reorganization. It has served as the prime mover for the PPP program by facilitating project development through the PDMF, performing expedient appraisal of projects, as well as orienting and providing guidance to interested private sector developers understand the government requirements and approval process, procurement and contracting guidelines. The PPP Center has been instrumental in the successful award and contract signing/implementation of 6 projects, with a value of US$ 1,005 million developed from 2010 to date. As a testament to its good performance, the PPP Center bagged the Gold Award for Best Central Government PPP Promoter in the 2014 Partnership Awards sponsored by the UK Partnerships Forum. The Center has a multi-disciplinary team of economists, finance, public administration, engineers and lawyers- mostly young and highly motivated staff. In the early days (2011-2013), the staff was complemented by consultants, who were tasked to build in house capacity, conduct policy studies and prepare knowledge products designed to help implementing agencies with the implementation of PPP projects. 16 The PPPC team has demonstrated capacity in training and advising PPP Units of implementing agencies in the project development process; operation of the PDMF for project preparation and project appraisal. PPPC is responsible for the technical, institutional and financial analysis of projects. However, among its functions, it has to strengthen its program monitoring and evaluation, and data basing of PPP contracts. The enforcement guidelines for this role have yet to be 15 See www.ppp.gov.ph 16 Ibid. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 205

prepared. Another constraint of the PPP Center is its limited reach; it has no regional offices, hence not accessible by local government units. Its resources are also starting to be spread thinly, given the growing demand for its services. It has to leverage its resources by training other service providers, who can, in turn, train and provide advice to especially local government units, who are dispersed nationwide. In this regard, PPP Center has recently entered into partnerships with some academic institutions for this purpose. It is early days yet to see if the initiative is successful, but the initiative is certainly a step in the right direction. 4.2. Key Institutions for the PPP Program Key institutions that play a major role in the PPP program include: Implementing agencies that sponsor the development of the project- These consist of national government line agencies, and sub-nationals particularly local government units and government owned and controlled corporations. Most of the national infrastructure agencies, such as the Department of Public Works and Highways, Department of Transportation and Communications, Department of Education, Department of Health, Department of Agriculture have their respective PPP Units, which serve as the focal points for formulation of internal policy guidelines, coordination of project development from preparation to procurement and award, and contract monitoring. Usually the agencies PPP units report to or are headed by high level officials of the agency, such as a department s undersecretary. Hence they have access to decision makers for policy setting, resource allocation and contractual structuring. PPP Units of agencies liaise with the PPP Center for technical assistance, access to the PDMF, and reporting of their respective PPP programs, as well as submission of PPP contracts. Oversight and gateway agencies, such as government agencies or inter-agency committees that are responsible for planning, policy formulation, budget allocation and project appraisal and approval, and contract approval; Note that there is an independent oversight body, the Investment Coordination Committee, in charge of approving major infrastructure projects, including PPPs Resource programming agency that prepares the annual budget for the government; and Regulatory agencies that deal with economic (tariff and performance), safety and environment regulations The Table below summarizes the roles of these government agencies. 206 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

<Table 59> Key Agencies Involved in the PPP Program Government Agencies Implementing agencies or IAs Departments refer to the primary units of the executive branch of the Government of the Philippines (GPH), as defined in the Administrative Code of the Philippines (1987), to help with the functional distribution of the work of the President. Departments are headed by Secretaries and shall have jurisdiction over bureaus, offices, regulatory agencies and government owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) assigned to it by law. GOCCs in the Philippines are corporations owned and controlled by the executive branch created by special charter or law in the interest of the common good and subject to the test of commercial sustainability. Local Government Units are territorial and political subdivisions of the State. They are decentralized and autonomous entities whose functions, powers and authorities are vested by the Local Government Code. The Chief Executive and the Legislative Councils are elected every 3 years, but the staffs are career officers. Government Oversight and Gateway Agencies National Economic and Development Authority a Constitutional body that is tasked with the formulation of the strategic socio-economic development plan for the country and the coordination of the prioritization of the accompanying investment program, funded from the public and private resources through PPP arrangements. It serves as the technical secretariat to the NEDA Board, the highest policy-making body of the government, and is chaired by the President of the Republic. The NEDA Board has standing committees that focus on key policy areas, and the following perform roles related to the PPP Program: Investment Coordination Committee (ICC) - evaluates the fiscal, monetary and balance of Brief Description of PPP Role An IA is any unit of Government of Philippines with the mandate and authority to identify, select, prioritize, prepare, tender, negotiate and execute a PPP project agreement with a private entity. This can be a Department, a GOCC or an LGU. For projects that do not require national government undertakings, the approval of the contract rests with the head of the IA provided there is prior review of the Office of the Solicitor General for line agencies and LGUs; and the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel for GOCCs. Generally, the agency budget shoulders any cost contribution toward the preparation of the project for approval and tender. In addition, the implementing agency is responsible for project monitoring and evaluation. Some IAs also have economic regulatory functions, such as, setting and approval of performance standards and tariffs. Examples of such IAs are Philippine Port Authority, Light Rail Transit Authority, Philippine National Railways, Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System and Local Government Units. Because of this conflict of interest in their mandates, regulations of PPP projects are covered in contractual provisions. Chairs the inter-agency committee that formulated and later amended the implementing rules and regulations of the BOT Law. Led the preparation of the joint venture guidelines for government owned and controlled corporations. Evaluates and validates feasibility studies, prepares project evaluation report, and recommend approval to the ICC of major projects funded by public resources. NEDA is also mandated to evaluate and monitor projects funded from official development assistance (ODA) vis-à-vis the parameters or conditions of approval, feasibility indicators and implementation issues that can feed to policy formulation. For PPP projects, the NEDA staff reviews the economic analysis of projects that contributes to a Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 207

Government Agencies payment implications of major national projects; relatedly it issues guidelines on project appraisal, and prescribes the social discount rate that is the benchmark for the project s economic internal rate of return. Development Budget Coordinating Committee (DBCC)-recommends annual government expenditure program and the ceiling of government spending for economic and social development, national defense, general government and debt service. (See also Box 1) Infrastructure Committee (InfraCom) - advices the Board and the President on infrastructure policies consistent with national development goals and objectives and coordinates preparation of infrastructure program(s), strategic investment program and coordinate plans of government infrastructure agencies. Department of Finance Brief Description of PPP Role holistic appraisal report that is submitted to ICC for the approval of the PPP project. Based on the BOT Law, ICC and the NEDA Board are mandated to approve PPP projects (See Table 7 outlining the approval requirements and the thresholds/conditions that necessitate ICC and/or NEDA Board approval). ICC is also mandated to approve joint venture projects of government owned and controlled corporations, with government exposure above PhP150 million. In this regard, it also sets the guidelines for PPP project appraisal and risk allocation. Approves government undertakings, direct and contingent, approves PPP contracts requiring government undertakings, including access to ODA loans, sovereign guarantees Department of Budget and Management Prepares the national expenditure plan for approval of Congress into a General Appropriations Act. It determines the aggregate budget and allocation across government entities in close consultation among planning and fiscal agencies of the government. Governance Commission for GOCCs (GCG) Monitors performance of GOCCs In a JV arrangement, if a JV company is formed between a GOCC and a private company, GCG reviews and recommends to the President, approval or disapproval of the proposed JV Company. Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) Serves as the legal counsel of national government agencies and local government units OSG review/ no objection of the PPP contract is required prior to the approval thereof by the Head of Agency. Office of the Government Corporate Counsel (OGCC) Serves as the legal counsel for government owned and controlled corporations. OGCC review/ no objection of the PPP contract is required prior to the approval therof by the respective Boards of the GOCCs. 208 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Regulatory Agencies Government Agencies Economic Regulatory Agencies: Power - Energy Regulatory Commission Roads - Toll Regulatory Board (TRB) Ports - Philippine Port Authority (PPA) Airports - Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines Rail - Light Rail Transit Authority and Philippine National Railways Water - Local Water Utilities Administration LWUA for water districts; and National Water Resources Board for private water service providers Other Regulatory Agencies: NWRB: Water resource/allocation DOH: Water quality Administrative Code Environment Management Bureau (EMB): environment protection Commission on Audit is a constitutional government auditing body. It prescribes the government accounting and audit standards Brief Description of PPP Role Performs economic regulation, i.e., issuance of licenses to operate, setting performance standards for service delivery and tariff setting and adjustment Regulatory agencies are consulted prior to the approval of the project. Any regulatory requirements are disclosed in the bid terms of reference. Once a contract is executed by the Project Proponent and the Implementing agency, the Regulator shall automatically grant in favor of the Project Proponent a Franchise to operate the facility and collect the tolls, fees, rentals, and other charges stipulated under the contract. NWRB is mandated with water resource allocation; issues water permits for extraction and use. DOH determines the Philippine National Standard for Drinking Water and monitors compliance of water utilities. EMB issues environment compliance certificates for projects; issues environment protection standards and guidelines based on specific laws, for example: Presidential Decree 1586 - requirement of infrastructure projects to prepare Environment Impact Assessment Republic Act 8749 Clean Air Act Republic Act 9003 - Ecological Solid Waste Management Act Republic Act 9275 - Clean Water Act Based on the BOT Law COA shall audit all revenues, share and/or receipts pertaining to or accruing to the Implementing agency derived from any project proposed under the Act and these Revised IRR, including expenditures or use of funds and property, owned or held in trust by, or pertaining to the Government, shall be subject to examination audit by the Commission on Audit (COA), including (ⅰ) ensuring that such revenues, share and/or receipts are fully and properly accounted for and remitted to the Implementing agency, and (ⅱ) determining if the mandated return on rate base is complied with, in the case of negotiated contracts and Public Utility Projects which are natural monopolies. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 209

Government Agencies Local Government Bodies LGU Legislative Councils Local Development Councils Brief Description of PPP Role However, all revenues and receipts pertaining to or accruing to the Project Proponent shall be treated as private funds including interest or yield thereon, which may be remitted directly to the Project Proponent, as may be stipulated in the contract. Approve projects, investment program, budget, financing and tariffs of LGU projects Approves LGU PPP Projects based on cut-off cost levels: Municipal Development Council with cost up to PhP20 million Provincial Development Council- above PhP20 million up to PhP50 million Regional Development Council- above PhP50 million up to PhP200 million 4.3. PPP Project Development and Approval The PPP project development framework is one of the strong suits of the program. As will be seen from the discussion below the project prioritization is rationalized by the economic goals of the national development plan and investment decisions are grounded by sound analysis from feasibility studies to appraisal and implemented through procurement and award process that are clearly defined and time bound. The appraisal is done by an objective government oversight body, the Investment Coordination Committee (see Table 6), which has thorough duediligence guidelines (i.e., ICC Project Evaluation Guidelines) for validating project viability, but still lacks depth in value for money and risk analysis. There are two tracks in PPP project development, one is initiated by government implementing agencies and the other is initiated by the private sector through unsolicited proposals. The competitive bidding is the preferred mode and recently enabled by a project development facility. It is more transparent and has a predictable time line. Before 2010, the unsolicited mode played a significant part in project development. As previously mentioned, about 30% of awarded contracts were through unsolicited proposals. They had mixed reviews in terms of effectiveness and value for money. Unsolicited proponents took out the burden of preparing projects from the IAs, however even with that, the agencies had to scrounge for 210 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

resources to do quick technical and financial analyses to have meaningful negotiations with the private proponents. Most proposals did not really offer new technology and cost efficiency was either elicited in the competitive challenge or was not established since the government agencies did not use value analysis. The negotiations were also protracted, adding to the transaction cost. Moreover the challenge period of 60 days is rather short for major infrastructure projects, to even attract credible competition. Fortunately, the propensity for implementing agencies to rely on unsolicited proposals is reversing. Most projects over the past 5 years have been done through competitive bidding. Responsibility for contract approval is clearly delineated; but the same cannot be said for contract management, especially the monitoring of events that could trigger calls on contingent liabilities. Moreover the capacity for contract management at the implementing agency level and at the program level has to be improved. The sections below present the highlights of the process. A. Solicited Mode The PPP project development initiated by the government implementing agency can be grouped in three stages: Stage 1: Project Identification and Prioritization The PPP project development is guided by the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) and sectoral master plans. The projects should support the objectives of the Plan, and are screened using multi-criteria analysis to determine if suitable for PPP implementation. Identified projects are then included in the Comprehensive and Integrated Infrastructure Program ( CIIP ), which accompanies the PDP. The PDP and the CIIP are approved by the NEDA Board and are reviewed and updated annually. The implementing agency then proceeds with the preparation of priority projects, starting with business cases or pre-feasibility analyses. Projects that turn out to be viable, proceed to detailed feasibility studies. Agencies can opt to apply for funding from the PDMF or request budget appropriation for such studies. The results of the feasibility study will determine the type and level of government support. For projects requiring viability gap funding, the implementing agency will include the amount required in its Annual Expenditure Plan, for consideration in the budget appropriation. Although there are no multi-year appropriations, major infrastructure agencies are required to submit a 3-year rolling plan to the Department of Budget and Management to inform the Department of core investments that need to be prioritized. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 211

Stage 2: Project Approval Prior to the inclusion of the project in the agency s budget request, internal approvals are required, particularly the head of the national government agency (e.g. Department Secretary), Board of Directors of government corporations and Local Legislative Councils for Local Government Units. The next step will be to get the approval of the designated government oversight body, summarized below: <Table 7> PPP Project Approving Bodies and Thresholds Implementing Agencies Approving Body Approval Thresholds National government agencies: line departments government owned and controlled corporations Local Government Units: Provincial City Municipal Investment Coordinating Committee of the NEDA Board NEDA Board (upon recommendation of ICC) Municipal Development Council Provincial Development Council City Development Council Regional Development Council Investment Coordinating Committee Up to PhP300 million ($6.8 M) Above PhP300 million; and all negotiated projects (e.g. unsolicited proposals) Up to PhP20 million Above PhP20, up to PhP50 million Up to PhP50 million Above PhP50 million up to PhP200 million Above PhP200 million The ICC has a composite technical working group consisting of representatives from NEDA, DOF and PPP Center that does the project appraisal based on formally constituted guidelines. NEDA appraises the project in terms of its alignment and contribution to the Philippine Development Plan (PDP). In so doing, NEDA will undertake the assessment of the socio-economic aspects of the project through an economic costbenefit analysis and ensures compliance with existing laws, rules and regulations. PPPC is responsible for the project s value for money analysis and financial analysis, particularly, commercial viability and soundness of financing structuring. It thus validates the appropriateness of the viability gap fund. DOF appraises the risk structure and allocation of the project s fiscal requirements and government undertakings, the project s financial internal rate of return (FIRR) and its impact on fiscal sustainability through assessment of government s direct, contingent, and opportunity costs. The approval of oversight bodies is a pre-requisite to budget approval of any government support required and project tender. 212 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Stage 3: Project Procurement and Contract Award Competitive bidding is the default mode. However, the law allows negotiated contracts for unsolicited proposals (discussed in the next section), or for a lone complying bid. In the case of the latter, the negotiation will be limited to the financial proposal only. The head of agency is authorized to sign the contract, subject to the review of the mandated counsel of the agency (Office of the Solicitor General for national government agencies and LGUs and the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel for government corporations). However for projects that require national government direct and contingent liability, the contract has to be approved by the Department of Finance. Figure 10 shows the procurement process flow for solicited proposals. [Figure 10] PPP Procurement Process Options for Solicited Proposals Source: PPP Center of the Philippines. PPP Manual for National Government Agencies. 료 Table 자료 8 summarizes : 필리핀 PPP the 센터 process,. 정부기관을 requirements 위한 PPP and 매뉴얼 timeline for PPP project development using the solicited mode. 10. 고시달방식 <Table 8> Process Flow and Timelines of PPP Project Development kdfjlkasj Activities Project identification (in-house) Timeline No specific time frame. It will depend on how the agency manages the project identification and prioritization process. Operating Instruments and Application Usually based on sector master plans Business case development 2-3 months Pre-feasibility assessment Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 213

(in-house) Activities Feasibility Study (for major infrastructure projects agencies commission the preparation of the FS using internal funds or the Project Development Monitoring Fund of the PPP Center) Project approval Internal approvals (e.g., Head of Agency for line agencies, Local Legislative Councils for LGUs and Boards of Directors for GOCCs) Investment Coordination Committee NEDA Board (for projects costing more than PhP300 million and for all negotiated projects) Tender Process (based on the BOT Law IRR; timelines are indicated in the IRR for guidance of the IA) Procurement is managed by the Bid and Award Committee of the implementing agency. The IA can choose to adopt a pre-qualification or post qualification process. In the first option, the Request for Proposal is issued after pre-qualifying bidders; in the second the RFP is issued immediately and the bidders are required to submit three envelopes: i) qualification documents, ii) technical proposal and iii) financial proposal Timeline Operating Instruments and Application 4-6 months More in depth feasibility assessment with either a preliminary design or clear definition of the minimum performance standards and specifications. It also defines the contractual arrangement and includes the preparation of the draft PPP contract Timeline varies: between 1 to 2 months From submission of complete documents, maximum of 30 days Advertisement: once every week for 3 consecutive weeks in newspapers of general circulation Preparation of PQ requirements: within 15 days from last date of publication of the notice for PQ and tender Prequalification by IA: 20 days; 5 days to inform pre-qualified bidders Issuance of Request for Proposal: immediately after all pre-qualified bidders are informed Pre-bid conference: for projects costing up to PhP300M, pre-bid conference should be conducted at least 30 days before deadline of bid submission; for projects Scope and depth of appraisal analysis also vary. Local legislative councils for example have the least capacity in applying scientific and systematic appraisal. ICC uses clearly defined, and rational guidelines for project appraisal following standard academically sound analytical framework (main reference is the NEDA Handbook on Project Appraisal) Procurement Plan consisting of (ⅰ) a detailed narrative of other pertinent information developed during the pre-feasibility phase; and (ⅱ) a detailed schedule of (a) the major steps in the competitive tendering process to be carried out by the Implementing Agency; (b) the estimated date the Implementing Agency is expected to have completed those steps; (c) approvals required to process the PPP Project; and (d) a timeline graphic showing (a) (c) above. Documents used: PQ documents Bid Terms of Reference consisting of Instructions to Bidders, Minimum Design and 214 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Activities Approval and Execution of the Contract (based on the BOT Law IRR) Notice to Commence Timeline costing more than PjhP300M, 60 days Bid preparation period: determined by the IA Bid evaluation: Technical evaluation- within 20 days from date technical envelope is opened Financial evaluation- within 15 days from the date the technical evaluation is completed Recommendation of award: 3 days from completion of financial evaluation Decision to award: 3 days from submission of PBAC recommendation Notice of Award: proponent is required to submit within 20 days pertinent documents, e.g. performance security, proof of financing Upon receipt of these documents IA will inform the proponent within 5 days if it has complied with the requirements for contract award. Contract signing- within 5 days from confirmation that proponent is compliant for award; within 5 days from signing IA is required to give a copy of the signed contract to the approving body and PPP Center. IA determines reasonable time to comply with conditions precedent to the contract, e.g. financial closure Operating Instruments and Application Performance Standards, Draft Contract, Bid Forms, Forms of bid and performance securities, timelines and milestones, other documents as may be required by the implementing agency Applies bid evaluation criteria, and scoring system Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 215

B. Unsolicited Mode Any Implementing agency may accept Unsolicited Proposals on a negotiated basis provided that all the following conditions are met: a. The project involves a new concept or technology as determined by the Implementing agency and/or is not part of the List of Priority Projects. National priority projects refer to the Comprehensive and Integrated Infrastructure Program and local priority projects refer to the Provincial, City or Municipal Development Investment Programs (PDIPs). Projects that are part of the priority list are required to be procured through a competitive bidding process. b. No Direct Government Guarantee, subsidy or equity is required. Government guarantee refers to guarantees to assume responsibility for the repayment of debt directly incurred by the Project Proponent in implementing the project in case of a loan default. c. The implementing agency concerned invites by publication, for three (3) consecutive weeks, in a newspaper of general circulation, comparative or competitive proposals. Challengers are given sixty (60) working days to submit a comparative proposal. If no comparative or competitive proposal or no complying bid is received by the implementing agency, the original proponent shall immediately be awarded the contract. In the event that a challenger submits a price proposal better than that submitted by the original proponent, the latter shall have the right to match such price proposal within thirty (30) working days from receipt of notification of the result of the comparative or competitive bid. Should the original proponent fail to match the price proposal of the challenger within the specified period, the contract shall be awarded to the challenger. Figure 11 shows the process flows for unsolicited proposals, and Table 9 summarizes the process, requirements and timeline. 216 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

[Figure 11] Outline of the PPP Process for Unsolicited Proposals Source: PPP Center of the Philippines. PPP Manual for National Government Agencies. <Table 9> Process Flow and Timeline for Unsolicited Proposals Activities Submission of a complete proposal- the starting point of this process is the submission by the private proponent of a complete proposal to the head of the implementing agency (IA) concerned. Acknowledgement of receipt of proposal by Implementing Agency Evaluation of the proposal and issuance of Original Proponent status (Original proponent status imply that no other similar proposals will be entertained; and proponent given the right to match complying comparative proposals) Timeline Within 7 days from receipt of the proposal Within 30 days from receipt of the proposal (within this time inform ICC and PPPC of receipt of proposal) Operating Instruments and Application A complete proposal consists of: a. Cover letter that indicates intent and basic information on the project b. Company profile c. Feasibility study including assumptions and draft contract Letter from the Head of Agency to the Private Proponent Consistency of the project s output or service with sector targets Project appraisal guidelines, including appropriateness of proposed contractual arrangement Qualification of proponent Determine reasonable rate of return for project proponent Submission for ICC approval Endorse to ICC within 5 days Letter of Head of Agency to ICC, Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 217

Activities Timeline from acceptance of the unsolicited proposal Operating Instruments and Application submission of ICC Project Evaluation Forms and copy of the proposal, draft contract and economic analysis and financial analysis models Project approval (ICC/NEDA Board) Negotiation IA informs private proponent of the mechanics for negotiation Period of negotiation Solicitation of Comparative Proposal (managed by PBAC using the same principles and transparency measures as in a competitive tender) Evaluation of Comparative Proposals (adopts three stage evaluation: qualification, technical proposal and financial proposal Maximum of 30 days Project appraisal guidelines Risk allocation analysis If negotiation is successful the IA Within 7 days from project and private proponent sign a approval certification that has an 80 days agreement has been reached. It will also indicate when to commence the solicitation of comparative proposals. The IA shall within 7 days from conclusion of the negotiation submit a report to ICC of the results of the negotiation. Advertisement- within 7 days Documents used: from signing the certificate of PQ documents successful negotiation; publish Bid Terms of Reference for once a week for 3 consisting of Instructions to consecutive weeks in newspaper Bidders, Minimum Design and of general circulation Performance Standards, Draft Issuance of bid documents- IA Contract, Bid Forms, Forms of will determine bid and performance Pre-bid conference- within 30 securities, timelines and days from issuance of tender milestones, other documents documents as may be required by the Bid preparation and submission- implementing agency 60 days from issuance of tender documents Applies bid evaluation criteria, and scoring system Qualification and Technical Qualification requirements and evaluation- within 20 days from bid evaluation criteria date technical envelope is opened Financial evaluation- within 15 218 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Activities Right to Match- in the event a comparative proposal is more superior Approval and Execution of Contract Notice to Commence Timeline days from the date the technical evaluation is completed 30 working days to submit a revised bid that matches the comparative proposal Contract signing- within 5 days from confirmation that proponent is compliant for award; within 5 days from signing IA is required to give a copy of the signed contract to the approving body and PPP Center. IA determines reasonable time to comply with conditions precedent to the contract, e.g. financial closure Operating Instruments and Application Comparison of the bids (based on prescribed bid parameter) Signed PPP agreement Issuance of notice to commence C. Procurement and Award The BOT Law defines the procurement process for PPPs, which is distinct from another law regulating public procurement. Several agencies are involved in ensuring the process is complied with, in particular, PPP Center, the Investment Coordination Committee and the Commission on Audit. There are three stages in evaluating proposals: qualification of bidder, compliance of the technical proposal to the minimum performance standards and specifications and responsiveness of the financial bid to the prescribed bid parameter. Bidders are required to submit in three separate envelopes qualification documents, technical proposal and financial proposal. The evaluation will also be done in stages. Only qualified bidders technical proposal will be evaluated; and only bidders with complying technical proposals will be included in the financial evaluation. Qualification To qualify, a prospective Project Proponent must comply with legal and technical and financial capability requirements: ⅰ. Legal- For projects that require a public utility franchise the operator must be a Filipino or, if a corporation, must be owned up to at least sixty Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 219

percent (60%) by Filipinos. Civil works contractors must be duly accredited by the Philippine Constructors Accreditation Board. ⅱ. Experience or Track Record - The prospective Project Proponent must possess adequate experience in terms of the project scope. This experience will be based on the collective experience of member firms in a consortium. ⅲ. Financial Capability - The prospective Project Proponent must have adequate capability to sustain the financing requirements for the detailed engineering design, construction and/or operation and maintenance phases of the project, as the case may be. This capability is measured in terms of proof of the ability to provide equity (net worth or set-aside deposit) and to raise debt financing (letter testimonial from a domestic universal/commercial bank or an international bank with a subsidiary/branch in the Philippines or any international bank recognized by the Central Bank of the Philippines). Evaluation of Technical Proposal The basis of the technical evaluation will be compliance to the minimum design and performance standards/specifications, including appropriate environmental standards, which shall refer more to the desired quantity and quality of the outputs of the facility. These parameters are explicitly defined in the bid terms of reference as well as the evaluation criteria. The evaluators would verify if the proposed technical approach or methodology will be able to meet or comply with the minimum performance standards. The evaluation at this stage is pass or fail depending on compliance to the minimum requirements. Only bidders who pass the technical evaluation are qualified to proceed to the evaluation of financial proposals. Evaluation of Financial Proposal Any one or more of the following criteria may be used in the evaluation of the financial component of the bid for determining the most advantageous bid for the Government: ⅰ Lowest proposed fee at the start of project operation, if a pre-agreed parametric tariff adjustment formula is prescribed in the bid document; ⅱ Lowest present value of government subsidy to be provided for the period covered by the contract; ⅲ. Highest present value of proposed payments to Government; or ⅳ. Any other appropriate financial bid parameter as may be approved by the Approving Body. The contract modality determines how the proponent is repaid. For projects 220 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

undertaken through build-operate-transfer or build-operate-own and related variants, the private proponent is authorized collect reasonable fees for a fixed term. In the case of BOT, such term shall in no case exceed 50 years. However, for BOO, the Project Proponent, upon renewal of its franchise or contract with the implementing agency may be allowed to continue collecting fees. For projects undertaken through build-transfer-operate, build lease or build lease transfer the private proponent may be repaid through amortizations from the implementing agency or in the case of build-transfer-operate modality the proponent may also be allowed to directly collect fees for a fixed term. Where applicable, the proponent may likewise be repaid in the form of non-monetary payments, such as, grant of commercial development rights or percentage share of reclaimed land. Furthermore, fees may be subject to adjustment during the life of the contract, based on a pre-determined formula prescribed in the bid terms of reference and the approved contract. For example, in a toll road project, initial toll rates are determined based on the financial bid, and are reflected in the toll concession agreement. Adjustments on the toll rates are required to be in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Toll Rate Implementation issued by the Toll Regulatory Board (such rules and regulations were disclosed in the bid terms of reference and referenced in the concession agreement). The Concessionaire is allowed to adjust the toll once every two years, in accordance with a formula indicated in the toll concession agreement. The adjustments take into consideration consumer price indices within the adjustment period. Extraordinary adjustments are likewise allowed in case of Force Majeure and/or Variations (as defined in the toll concession agreement). Concessionaire is allowed to apply with the Toll Regulatory Board for extraordinary adjustment, subject to verification by the implementing agency of the materiality, bases and justifications for the application for extraordinary adjustment. For projects that merit government support, particularly economically viable but financially unviable projects, allowable instruments for financial support include the following: Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 221

<Table 10> Allowable Instruments for Government Support to PPP Projects Instruments Description Accounted with Direct contribution Shadow tolls Concessional loans Minimum revenue guarantee Usually in the form of cost share or assignment or usufruct of public assets; or subordinated equity Tolls paid by government in lieu of user fees Access to ODA loans is through an on-lending arrangement with a government financial institution, i.e. a GFI borrows from the donor backed by a sovereign guarantee, and then the GFI re-lends to the private proponent. The government charges, the GFI foreign exchange risk cover (3-4%) and guarantee fee (1%) which is passed on by the GFI to the borrower, along with its spread. Given the prevailing low interest rate regime, most ODA pass on rates are about the same as the market rate (sometimes even higher) but their main advantage is the long tenor (15-20 years, compared to the 10-12 from commercial sources) Minimum guaranteed revenues from the project to cover a pre-agreed level e.g. debt servicing or debt servicing plus return on investment Budget of implementing agency in case of cost sharing (which can come from an ODA loan) Budget of implementing agency Direct obligation of private proponents cannot be covered by sovereign guarantees GFI takes on credit risk of private proponent, for which it requires the usual credit security, hard collateral or assignment of revenues and contract rights. Contingent liabilities are not yet accounted for D. Contract Management and Monitoring The implementing agency is principally responsible for contract management. There are wide disparities in the contract management capacity of implementing agencies, which in some cases resulted to implementing agencies caught unprepared for calls on contingent liabilities or non-compliance with project s key performance indicators. Fortunately, hiring of independent consultants who serve as objective monitors and validators of contract milestones at pre-operation has been adopted as a de-facto standard provision of PPP contracts of national government agencies. They may also be on called upon to give independent opinions during operation stage to resolve any disagreements or disputes between the implementing agency 222 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

and the private proponent, or triggers for undertakings or calls for performance security. Notwithstanding the services of independent consultants, it is still important for implementing agencies to build capacity on contract management. PPP Center has issued guidelines and tools on contract management and has included the preparation of contract management plans for projects assisted through the Project Development and Monitoring Fund. 5. Dealing with Risks in PPPs 5.1. Program Risks At the macroeconomic level, fiscal risks arising from the PPP program are being analyzed by the Development Budget Coordinating Committee (DBCC) of the NEDA Board (see Box 3 for a description of the DBCC) and released in an annual report called Fiscal Risks Statement. The annual Fiscal Risks Statement (the first of which was issued in 2010) includes assessments not only of fiscal risks arising from PPPs but also those implied by other events or activities, for example, uncertainty in the global economy, management of the government corporate sector, performance of local government units, and exposure to natural disasters and calamities. The Fiscal Risks Statement issues assessments only and not the amount of the estimated contingent liability. The 2013 Fiscal Risks Statement released the following evaluation: Estimates suggest that fiscal risks from legacy contingent liabilities are manageable and will not significantly affect fiscal sustainability. Contingent liabilities from legacy projects primarily consist of subsidies covering shortfalls in approved tariffs from contractual agreements and buyout provisions, which are mitigated by the fact that most have already been operating for a number of years. Furthermore, some contingent obligations are already covered by national government advances to concerned agencies. 17 The 2014 Fiscal Risks Statement (the latest) placed more emphasis on the following themes: uncertainty in the growth of the global economy, risks and actions relating to natural disasters. Nevertheless, it articulated the provisioning for contingent liabilities for PPPs as a 17 Development Budget Coordination Committee (2013), Fiscal Risks Report 2013. The term legacy projects is not defined, but based on context, it can be taken to mean as all projects in the program which are in the contract implementation stage. It is used in contrast with pipeline projects which are projects under different stages of approval or development. NG means national government. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 223

Box 3. The Development Budget Coordinating Committee The Development Budget Coordinating Committee (DBCC) is composed of the following agencies: Department of Budget and Management (DBM), DOF, NEDA and Office of the President. DBM acts as the Committee Secretariat. The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP, the central bank of the country) is a resource institution that was invited to attend DBCC meetings to ensure close coordination on monetary measures and policies. At present, the DBCC performs the following functions: Recommend for Presidential approval the level of the annual government expenditure program and the ceiling of government spending for economic and social development, national defense, general government and debt service; Recommend to the President the proper allocation of expenditures for each development activity between current operating expenditures and capital outlay; Recommend to the President the amount set to be allocated for capital outlay under each development activity for various capital or infrastructure projects; Assess the reliability of revenue estimates; Recommend appropriate tax or other revenue measures and the extent and type of the borrowings; and Conduct periodic review and general examination of costs, accomplish- ments and performance standards applied in undertaking development projects. In practice, the DBCC can intervene in the practice of PPP implementation if the operational PPP projects need to be supported by the government budget. Since the DBCC sets the budget ceiling for government agencies, it provides guidance on what level of support will be provided to an operational PPP project. mitigation strategy and explained that the government is addressing this through a contingent liability provision under the Unprogrammed Fund portion of the national budget. Starting 2014, a Php20 billion (about US$ 454) budget for contingent liabilities in PPPs has been included under the "Unprogrammed Fund" of the General Appropriations Act (GAA), the law authorizing the budget. Since the amount of contingent liabilities arising out of the PPP portfolio has not been disclosed by the government, it is not clear up to what percentage of the total contingent liabilities is covered by the Php20 billion-fund. The Php20 billion appropriation was included in the Unprogrammed Fund of the GAA to give the executive branch of 224 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

government the authority to pay any valid claim without much disruption on the assessments of the budget performance vis-a-vis spending targets since Unprogrammed Fund items will have an effect only when actual payments are made. The existing official project appraisal manual of the ICC does not yet contain specific evaluation methods for assessing contingent liabilities. Nevertheless, project evaluators have been taught in capacity building exercises how to recognize possible sources of contingent liabilities and how to come up with estimates. However, since there is no official standard on contingent liability valuation, it is hard to aggregate what the project evaluators produce. In fact, no official report has come up which attempted to check whether each project in the portfolio has a contingent liability estimation or aggregated the individual estimates, if present. This problem has been recognized and measures have been undertaken/identified to address it. For one, the terms of references for project preparation include an assessment of contingent liabilities. Projects prepared through the PDMF, which employ high-caliber firms, benefit from in depth analysis of contingent liabilities. Many of the major projects were prepared through the PDMF. Furthermore, the government has commissioned a study to update the ICC appraisal guidelines to include assessment of contingent liabilities. Although the figures on contingent liabilities and guarantees are not publicly released, the costs of the individual projects and the aggregate cost of the portfolio of Philippine PPPs are being published as part of the budget documents. If we are to look only at the maximum loss valuation method rather than the expected loss valuation method for contingent liabilities and if we are to consider buyout or termination payments, theoretically, the maximum loss in a worst-case scenario (i.e., all projects needing early termination or early buyout) would be the estimated exposure of the government for the PPP program. Annex 1 shows the total estimated cost of the on-going PPP portfolio at US$16.61 billion, constituting about 5% of the 2014 Philippine GDP. Admittedly, however, if the PPP program is successful, contingent liabilities will certainly increase both on a nominal and expected value basis. Thus a lot rests on the Fiscal Risk Management Program that is being prepared by the Department of Finance. The increasing volume of PPP projects on critical services such as transportation and water supply, make it imperative for government to ensure that it has the capacity to honor its obligations, lest a basic service will be disrupted. Unlike ODA loans that are assured of payment because of a law automatically appropriating a portion of the budget for debt service, obligations in PPP contracts are not explicitly covered thereby. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 225

5.2. Project Risks and Risk Allocation At the project level of national government agencies, there are institutionalized processes and measures to somehow help ensure that the project risks are identified, measured, allocated rationally and mitigated. However as the PPP program grows, there is a need to strengthen these measures to prevent adverse impact of the PPP liabilities on the fiscal position of the government. The priority list of PPP projects are anchored on the goals and strategies of the Philippine Development Plan and sector master plans Due diligence is observed in preparing projects to ensure they are, foremost, economically viable. Recently the government has also required value for money analysis in appraising PPP projects. The government requires a formal analysis of fiscal risks. At the project level, the implementing agency applies for clearance from the ICC (part of project approval). One of the requirements is the filling up of a project evaluation form dealing with government undertaking and contingent liabilities. ICC started using this form in 2012, and it has been used to require the proponent to detail the cost-sharing in two parts: (i) on the different types of government undertaking and (ii) on the contingent liability implied by the project. The portion on government undertaking is more descriptive as it enumerates the different possible types of government undertaking, namely, right of way, resettlement, tariff subsidy, national taxes or duties or charges, local taxes or fees or charges, and government supported enhancements. The portion on contingent liability, on the other hand, is less descriptive as the form only mentions the Department of Finance (DOF) as the agency in charge of this. Risk allocation is guided by the Generic Preferred Risk Allocation Matrix (GPRAM) adopted by the Investment Coordination Committee in 2012. The GPRAM guides proponent agencies, project evaluators, and oversight agencies. The GPRAM enumerates the commonly encountered risks in PPPs, with these types of risks identified as rows in the matrix, and describes in the columns the corresponding risk definition, preferred risk allocation, rationale for the risk allocation, possible mitigation strategies, and the allocation instrument. In the current portfolio of Philippine PPP projects, the following are the risks assumed by government in various PPP projects: 18 18 The information therein is based on what has been gathered by the author and is in no way comprehensive. 226 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

<Table 11> Risk Allocation Instruments in On-going PPP Projects Objective/Instrument Direct Cost Contingent Current Use Ensure Revenue Contractual Certainty Standard Contingent Liabilities Relief and Compensation from uninsurable natural force Yes Most projects majeure Compensation for Political force majeure Yes Most projects Early termination buyout due to fault of government Most projects Project Specific Performance Undertakings Take or Pay Arrangements Yes Power projects, bulk water supply projects Leases, capacity payments Yes School buildings Lower Implementation Costs Right of way provision Yes Most toll road projects, rail and power generation projects Minimize Operational Uncertainties Minimum Revenue Guarantee Manila Rail Transit 3 VGF, Other Operational Manila Orthopedic Hospital, Yes Subsidies Casecnan Multipurpose Dam Guarantee on the application Metro-Manila Water Concession, of the agreed parametric rate Yes Most toll road projects adjustment formula Mobilization of Capital Government Equity Yes Joint Ventures of Government Owned and Controlled Corporations Among these risks the most burdensome to the government are the minimum revenue guarantee and operating subsidies. Hence, for future projects, government is veering towards explicit and upfront capital subsidies or cost share. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 227

6. Budget Process and PPPs The budget process is inextricably linked to PPP implementation. Direct obligations of the government such as provision of right of way or ancillary infrastructure like access roads, cost share or equity should be programmed in the agencies budgets. This will also include anticipated payouts from contingent liabilities, such as those for MRT3 and Casecnan. For unexpected calls, the budget includes a lump sum appropriation where payments can be drawn from. Budget appropriations are legislated on an annual basis; hence for projects requiring multi-year appropriation, the implementing agencies secure Multi-year Obligational Authority (MYOA) from the Department of Budget and Management. This allows the agency to enter into contracts for the full project cost. The MYOA includes the annual project cost breakdown and obligates the implementing agency to include in its annual budget proposal the annual payments of the agency until the completion of the project. The schedule of the budget cycle is shown in Annex 2. Budget proposals from the implementing agencies are required around the end of April and finalization of the national budget by end of July. Essentially agencies have around nine months to prepare projects for inclusion in the budget request, or estimate any contingent liabilities that will become direct obligations. In essence, there are two ways funds for PPP projects are programmed: ⅰ. Agency appropriations- the agency can request for right of way acquisition, viability gap funding or upfront cost share, or expected payments arising from government guarantees. These will form part of the budget envelope of the implementing agency; ⅱ. Lump sum unallocated funds- these can be used for unexpected calls on contingent liabilities that need to be settled within the year. The DBM also included a lump-sum, unallocated fund that can be used for projects that were identified post approval of the annual budget, and would need appropriation cover. 7. Conclusions and Recommendations The PPP Program in the Philippines benefit from strong institutional framework, as well as a long history of PPP projects that provide valuable lessons learned. However, there are still gaps in the intent and practice, which is mostly due to poor governance, capacity constraints, or weak systems for enforcement. In this 228 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

regard, key areas of concern that should be addressed are: Institutionalize sound risk management- Expedite the establishment of the Fiscal Risk Management Program with the Department of Finance, including the setting up of a dedicated risk management unit. Risk management will be enhanced by centralizing analysis and decision making within a unit in the DOF, where capacity can be more easily developed. The Program should set policies on the levels of fiscal risks assumed from PPP obligations, and how these are measured, how expected values are estimated, accounted and provisioned for. In particular, it should set limits on either the gross, net or expected value of guarantees. There is a corollary need to look at the weaknesses of the budget process, particularly since multi-year appropriations are not allowed. An alternative is to establish by legislation a true reserve fund for contingent liabilities. Proponents should be required to submit current financial, legal and operating data to the centralized unit to improve the monitoring of project risks. The system for risk management should begin with the better designed and structured projects. It will help to deepen the value for money analysis and the risk assessment and management. The Investment Coordination Committee should pass more defined guidelines in this regard. Improve reporting and collection and management of PPP project data- Require PPP Center to operationalize the reporting system for implementing agencies to complete the database of PPP contracts. This data base will provide useful information for the preparation of Fiscal Risk Management Program guidelines as well as contract management guidelines. Enhance the enabling environment for PPPs- Support the amendment of the BOT Law to among others effect the following reforms: - encompass joint venture arrangements of subnational units, to standardize guidelines and to ensure transparency of the contracting process; - facilitate the implementation of critical national projects by insulating them from additional requirements from local government units, such as imposition of local taxes, cumbersome process for getting business permits and the like - improve the transparency and integrity of the challenge for unsolicited proposals; in particular increase the challenge period from 60 to 120 days - institutionalize the Project Development and Monitoring Facility, and - separate the regulatory and commercial functions of government owned and controlled corporations to address conflict of interest in PPP contracting Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 229

Sustained capacity building for PPP implementation- PPP Center should continue to build the capacity of implementing agencies, especially local government units in PPP project development. In this regard, they should expand network of training service providers by partnering with academic and other training institutions with regional or local presence. Relatedly, PPP Center should continue to develop user friendly materials that can ease the pre-investment work, such as templates for bidding, model contracts and financial models. There is already a corpus of reference materials and knowledge products with PPP Center but they need to be continually improved and tailor fitted for local government projects. Still related to capacity building, the ICC should initiate intensive training at the implementing and at oversight agency levels on risk assessment and management. Project development fund for LGUs The PDMF administered by the PPP Center has proven to be a boon for implementing agencies, but currently it is designed for big ticket infrastructure projects that can absorb the project preparation and advisory cost of the holders of the indefinite quantity contracts mostly international firms that have internationally benchmarked rates. Hence, while LGUs are not precluded from tapping the PDMF, it is not efficient for them to tap this resource given the lower cost of LGU PPP projects. To fit the needs of LGUs, PPP Center should consider setting up a component of the PDMF tailor fitted to the profile of LGU projects. Enabling sector reforms- Support sector reforms that will improve the economic regulatory regime. For example in the water sector there is a proposal to establish a central and independent regulatory commission to cover all water service providers to address issues related to unregulated entities (LGU-run systems), multiple regulatory bodies with varying guidelines, and rationalize regulations to compel expansion of coverage and improve quality of service. 230 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Reference NEDA, Philippine Development Plan 2010-2016 Mid-term Update. World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report, 2012. Department of Budget and Management of the Philippines, General Appropriations, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015. Department of Budget and Management of the Philippines. 2015 Budget of Expenditures and Sources of Financing. Development Budget Coordination Committee (2013) Fiscal Risks Report 2013. World Bank. Philippine Economic Update, January 2015. Republic Act 6957 as amended by Republic Act 778, An Act An Act Authorizing the Financing, Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Infrastructure Projects by the Private Sector, and other purposes. World Bank and Public Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility, Private Participation in Infrastructure Database. Asian Development Bank, Increasing Competitiveness for Inclusive Growth Program, Chapter on Sector Assessment (Summary): Public Private Partnerships in Infrastructure, 2013. Administrative Code of the Philippines. PPP Center of the Philippines. PPP Manual for National Government Agencies. PPP Center website for list of projects, www.ppp.gov.ph Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 231

Annex Annex 1. List of PPP Projects: On-going, Awarded and for Procurement Table A.1 shows the number and estimated value of on-going PPP projects. National government agencies implemented 13 projects and sub-nationals, government owned and controlled corporations did 18 and local government units did seven (7) projects. <Table A.1> Estimated Cost of Ongoing Philippine PPP Projects, 2015 Project Title PPP Mode Estimated Cost (in US$ Million) Implementing Agency 1 Power Sector Bakun A/B and C Hydro Power Plant BOT 83.00 GOCC 2 Benguet Province Mini Hydro BOT 22.00 GOCC 3 Bohol Provincial Electric System BOT 5.00 GOCC 4 Caliraya-Botocan-Kalayaan Power Plant Projects BROT 450.00 GOCC 5 General Santos Diesel Power Plant BOT 60.00 GOCC 6 Ilijan Natural Gas Combined Cycle Power Plant BOT 960.00 GOCC 7 Mindanao Coal-Fired Thermal Power Plant BOT 310.00 GOCC 8 Pagbilao Coal-Fired Power Plant BOT 888.00 GOCC 9 San Roque Multi-purpose Project BOT 1,141.00 GOCC 10 Sual Coal-Fired Thermal Power Plant BOT 1,200.00 GOCC Subtotal 5,119.00 Transport Sector 1 Light Rail Transit Line No. 3 (MRT 3) BLT 655.00 GOCC 2 Manila-Cavite Toll Expressway BOT 131.00 NGA 3 Manila North Luzon Tollway BOT 370.00 NGA 4 Metro Manila Skyway BOT 419.00 NGA 5 Redevelopment of the Port of Irene BOT 84.00 GOCC 6 South Luzon Tollway Extension JV 478.00 NGA 7 Southern Tagalog Arterial Road (STAR) BOT 53.00 NGA 8 Daang Hari-SLEX Link Road Project BTO 43.50 NGA 9 NAIA Expressway Project BTO 378.54 NGA 232 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Project Title PPP Mode Estimated Cost (in US$ Million) Implementing Agency 10 Automatic Fare Collection System BTO/ BOO Subtotal 2,653.99 Information Technology Sector 41.95 GOCC 1 Civil Registry System BTO 65.00 NGA 2 Land Titling Computerization Project BOO 82.00 NGA 3 Alien Certificate of Registration (ACR) Smart Card Project BOT 2.80 NGA Subtotal 149.80 Water Sector 1 MWSS Privatization BOT 7,000.00 GOCC 2 Bohol Water Supply System (LGU) BOT 14.40 LGU 3 Casecnan Multi-Purpose Irrigation and Power Project BOT 650.00 NGA 4 Clark Water Supply & Sewerage BOT 55.00 GOCC 5 Subic Water & Sewerage BOT 120.00 GOCC Subtotal 7,839.40 Property Development Sector 1 Bocaue Public Market BOT 1.20 LGU 2 Carmen Public Market BOT 2.36 LGU 3 Cogon Public Market BOT 4.00 LGU 4 Dapitan Public Market BOT 1.30 LGU 5 Mandaluyong Marketplace BOT 23.00 LGU 6 Pabahay sa Riles BT 400.00 GOCC 7 Samal Island Resort Estate Development BOO 15.00 GOCC 8 Slaughter House BOT 3.00 LGU Subtotal 449.86 Health Sector 1 NKTI-Hemodialysis Center Project BOT 1.00 NGA Education Sector 1 PPP for School Infrastructure Project Phase I and 2 BLT/BT 450 NGA Total Cost of Operational Projects 16,663.45 Note: GOCC- government owned and controlled corporation; NGA- national government agency; LGU- Local Government Unit; BOT- Build Operate Transfer; BOO- Build Operate Own; BROT- Build/Rehabilitate Operate and Transfer; BLT- Build Lease Transfer; BT- Build Transfer; BTO- Build Transfer Operate; JV- Joint Venture Source: 2015 Budget of Expenditures and Sources of Financing, DBM. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 233

In addition, there are three more projects whose contracts have been signed and poised for implementation, namely: <Table A.2> Estimated Cost of Projects with Signed Contracts or Notice of Award, 2015 Transport Sector Project Title PPP Mode Estimated Cost Implementing (in US$ Million) Agency 1 Mass Rail Transit 7 BOT 1236.00 GOCC 2 Tarlac LaUnion Expressway Project BOT 35.00 NGA 3 Mactan Cebu International Airport Terminal Building BOT 389.33 GOCC 4 Cavite Line 1 Extension Project BTO 1442.00 GOCC 5 Southwest Integrated Transport System BTO 55.6 GOCC 6 Cavite Laguna Expressway BTO 1233.6 NGA Subtotal 4391 Health Sector 1 Modernization of the Philippine Orthopaedic Center BOT 125.00 NGA Total Cost of signed contracts for implementation 4516.00 Table A.3 shows the firm pipeline of projects, or those approved and going through the procurement process. <Table A.3> Pipeline of PPP Projects, 2015 Transport Sector Project Title PPP Mode Estimated Cost (in US$ Million) Implementing Agency 1 Integrated Transport System (South Terminal) BTO 89.00 GOCC 2 Operation and Maintenance of LRT 2 TBD No capex GOCC 3 Laguna Lakeshore Expressway Dike BTO/BT 2734.00 NGA 4 New Bohol Airport O&M and Development Project OAT 52.00 NGA 5 Laguindingan Airport O&M and Development Project OAT 326.00 NGA 6 Davao Airport O&M and Development Project OAT 904.00 NGA 7 Iloilo Airport O&M and Development Project OAT 677.00 NGA 8 Puerto Princesa Airport O&M and Development Project OAT 129.40 NGA 9 Davao Sasa Port Modernization Project BTO 423.00 GOCC 234 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Project Title PPP Mode Estimated Cost (in US$ Million) Note: TBD- to be decided; OAT- Operate Add Transfer, BTM- Build Transfer Maintain Implementing Agency 10 NLex/SLex Connector Road BOT 515 NGA 11 North South Railway Project BOT 3802 GOCC 12 LRT Line 6 Project BOT 1425.40 GOCC 13 C5 Modern Bus Transit Project TBD 142.54 NGA Sub-total 11219.34 Water Sector 1 Bulacan Bulk Water Supply Project BOT 543.00 GOCC 2 New Centennial Water Source (Kaliwa Dam) Project BT 417.00 GOCC Sub-total 960.00 IT Sector 1 Civil Registry System Information Technology BTO 35.41 GOCC 2 Road Transport Information Technology Project TBD 6.68 NGA Sub-total 42.09 Others 1 Regional Prison Facility BTM 1117.60 NGA 2 Batangas Manila Gas Pipeline BTO 234.52 NGA Sub-total 1352.12 TOTAL 13573.55 Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 235

Annex 2. Budget Calendar for FY 2016 ACTIVITY (for FY 2016 National Budget) DATE (2015) 1. Issuance of Budget Call Jan. 28 2. Budget Forum a. DBM Officials and Staff b. National Government Agencies c. Corporate Budget Forum Feb. 10 Feb. 11-17 Feb. 18 3. DBM Regional Office/ Agency Regional Office Budget Forum Feb. 12 4. Consultations of Agencies On-going Programs and Projects with: a. Regional Development Councils b. Civil Society Organizations c. Other Stakeholders under the bottom-up budgeting 5. Submission of Budget Form No. 201 - Past Year s Actual Obligation and Current Year Appropriation Jan-Feb 6. Formulation of Forward Estimates (Hard Budget Ceiling) Jan-Feb 7. Technical Budget Hearings with Agencies Feb 9-27 8. DBM Budget Review Mar 2-6 9. Sending of Confirmation Letters to Agencies Mar 9-10 10. Presentation to the President and the Cabinet and approval of the FY 2016 Hard Budget Ceiling of Departments/Agencies and Special Purpose Fund Feb Mar 17-19 11. Issuance of Ceiling and Budget Priorities Framework Mar 20 12. Budget Forum a. National Government Agencies I. Batch 1 ii. Batch 2 b. Corporate Budget Forum 13. Regional Development Council (RDC) Consultation/Dialogue with Selected Agency Central Offices Note: RDCs are organized for each of the administrative regions of the Philippines and consists of representatives from the regional offices of NEDA, line departments, local government units, private sector and civil society organizations 14. Deadline of Submission (thru OSBPS) of FY 2016 Budget Proposals (New Spending Proposals and Hard Budget Ceiling) Mar 23 Mar 13 Mar 25 March 26 to April 1 April 27 15. Technical Budget Hearing on New Spending Proposal May 4-22 16. DBM Budget Review June 1-22 17. Sending of confirmation letter to agencies of the total budget levels June 15-16 18. Presentation to the President and the Cabinet and approval of the FY 2016 Proposed Budget Levels of Department/Agency/Special Purpose Funds June 22 236 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

ACTIVITY (for FY 2016 National Budget) DATE (2015) 19. Finalization of National Expenditure Program (NEP), Budget of Expenditures and Sources of Financing (BESF) Tables, Staffing Summary, Budget Message Source: Department of Budget and Management. June 24 to July 3 20. Printing of 2015 Budget Documents July 6-22 21. Submission of FY 2016 Budget Documents to the President July 23 22. Submission of the President s Budget to Congress July 28 Note: Congress approval of budget is expected in December 2015. If the budget is not approved, then the past year s budget will be re-enacted. Chapter 1_Public-Private Partnership in the Philippines 237

Chapter Ⅱ Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia Danang Parikesit 인도네시아가자마다 (Gadjah Mada) 대학교수 1. Introduction: Infrastructure Challenges for Indonesia 1.1. National Plan of Indonesia Indonesia has a national plan in the framework of delevoping many aspects of life such as politic, education, food, rural areas, environment, law enforcement, infrastructure, energy, economic,social and culture, and good governance. The current national plan in the new administration of President Joko Widodo, and his Vice President, Jusuf Kalla (2014-2019) islabelled as Nawa Cita. Nawa Cita is derived from Sanscrit, which nawa means 9 (nine) and cita means goal or purpose. This plan ends the previous national plan on the President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (2004-2014), dubbed Master Plan for the Acceleration and Expansion of Indonesia s Economic Development (MP3EI) established in 2011. This Nawa Cita consists of nine priorities agenda. Those priorities are stipulated because Joko Widodo has identified some major problems in Indonesia, which are: (1) Threats to the authority of the state. The country has lost its capability to impose its authority and failed to ensure the safety of all citizens, detect future therats to its sovereignty, protect human rights and uphold a strong law enforcement, leading to the people s distrust towards public institutions; (2) Weaknesses in the pillars of the economy: this is shown by the continued high rate of poverty, welfare inequality, development gap between regions, environmental destruction as a result of over-exploitation on the country s natural resources, as well as a high dependency on food, energy, finance and technology, and (3) Intolerance and crisis of national character: the weakening in Indonesia s national 238 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

character as a nation of high-spirited fighters as a result of the spread of sectarian conflict which reduces the spirit of solidarity and mutual cooperation. 1 Because of those three major problems that existing in thisworld s fourth-most populous country, the couple of the new President decide to make the priorities list. Those nine priorities agenda in Nawa Cita are, first, to renew the state s obligation to protect all people and provide security to all citizens through the free and active foreign policy, national security and the development of reliable national defence based on integrated national interets and strengthening identity as a maritime nation. Second, the presence of the government through a clean, efffective, democratic, and reliable governance. Third, to build Indonesia from its periphery; to strengthening the rural areas within the framework of a unitary state of Indonesia. Fourth, to reject a weak state by reforming the system through corruption-free dignified, and reliable law enforcement. Fifth, to improve the quality of life of Indonesia citizens by improving the quality of education and training through Smart Indonesia program with 12 years of compulsory and free education, increasing Indonesia s social welfare and health through the Healthy Indonesia and Prosperous Indonesia programs, to encourage land reform and land ownership for the people in Indonesia by 2019, develop more villages of row houses. Sixth, to improve people s productivity and competitiveness in the international market so that Indonesian can move forward and stand up with other Asian nations. Seventh, to achieve economic independence by moving the strategic sectors to domestic economy, expand the irrigation network. Eighth, to revolutionise the nation s character through a policy of restructuring the national education curriculum. Ninth, to strengthen the spirit of unity in diversity and social reform of Indonesia. 2 The third, sixth, and seventh agendas are concerning to the PPP programs. The third is implemented by improve public services in villages, subdistricts and districts, implementation of village law, structuring of new autonomous regions for the welfare of the people. The sixth is implemented by contruct 2,000 kilometers of roads, develop 10 new airports and 10 seaports, construct 10 industrial estates along with housing for workers, build 5,000 traditional markets, provide one-stop services for the processing of investments and business licenses with completion target of 15 days, set up development and infrastructure bank, build regional science and techno parks, academies, and vocational schools. Then the seventh is implemented to cover 3 million hectares of rice fields, open 1 million hectares of 1 http://www.establishmentpost.com/jokowis-nine-priorities-agenda-nawa-cita/ accessed on May 4th, 2015 6.25 pm, GMT +7 2 http://www.establishmentpost.com/jokowis-nine-priorities-agenda-nawa-cita/ accessed on May 4th, 2015 6.25 pm, GMT +7 Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 239

rice paddies outside Java, build a bank for farmers and small businesses, end the conversion of agricultural land, cut energy imports by promoting exploration at home, construct more gas pipelines, prioritise the use of coal and gas to fuel electricity, achieve a financial inclusion ratio target of 50 percent, target a tax ratio of 16 percent, restrict the sale of national bank to foreign investors, increase research in agriculture and industry. Building the infrastructure of roads, public housing, agricultural, etc will implemented through PPP scheme. 1.2. Macroeconomic Developments In December 2013, the World Bank published the Indonesia Economic Quarterly (December 2013) entitled "Slower growth; high risks" which examines the economic situation of Indonesia before entering 2014. The report findings are still relevant today, and illustrate the vulnerability of macroeconomic condition of Indonesia. The adjustments Indonesian economy is still going to continue weakening commodity prices and external financing conditions more stringent, and the balance of payments pressures. A number of policies have been implemented, especially through tighter monetary policy, which resulted in real depreciation amount large enough and investment spending and the growth of production (output) has been weakened. These developments generally support the sustainability of macroeconomic stability, including helping to lower the current account deficit, although its effects continue, will add uncertainty to the domestic economy. At the same time, the international environment is also shifting, with global growth expected to rise, bringing potential policy changes, especially the United States monetary policy, which could increase pressure on Indonesia's external financing position. In line with the slowing rate of growth, and risks faced by the national economy, there is a great need for Indonesia to further enhance the progress of policies that focus on the macro as tighter monetary policy, exchange rate adjustment and import pressure, the reforms more progressive to encourage exports and to support the inflow of capital investment, particularly foreign direct investment/fdi. Progress in the implementation of a credible such efforts can help limit the vulnerability of Indonesia's balance of payments to the global financing conditions more stringent, or more volatile, and can help support a strong investment cycle, including foreign investment, and production growth in the medium term. The political dynamics after the election year can play an important role development, but it also adds to the importance of clear communication and coordination on comprehensive reform, both in the formulation and implementation 240 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

stages, and error prevention policy making. This will support the confidence of domestic and foreign investors to Indonesia's growth prospects, and the inflow of foreign financing. Entering 2014, the baseline projections (baseline) is the continued strengthening of global economic conditions, with the improvement in high-income countries, which support the growth of developing economies, notably including China, and encourage the continuation of a moderate increase in demand for Indonesian exports. 3 If it continues, began stabilizing world commodity prices such as coal, natural gas and palm oil (CPO) will help slow the decline in the exchange rate of Indonesian trade that has driven most of the decline in the balance of payments. However, the condition of "baseline" with a slight improvement in growth in the world, along with the possibility of tightening the liquidity condition of the world, and a more structured downward pressure on prices from supply-side factors, will not reflect the huge increase in commodity prices for 2014. In general, exchange rate adjustment and monetary policy implemented in the previous administration to bring a positive influence to the stability of the macro economy, the depreciation of the Rupiah act as "shock absorbers" for weakening trade by encouraging the export receipts and reduce demand for imports. However, the adjustments were to cost, and can carry risks, especially by applying pressure to the government and private sector balance sheets through increased value amount of foreign debt (especially if there is a difference between acceptance and exchange expenses) and eroding acceptance because of higher costs of debt repayment and costs import. Monetary policy and exchange rate adjustments carry the load for the short-term macro adjustment. Budget 2014, maintaining an attitude of non-expansive, with a projected decrease in the fiscal deficit amounted to 1.7% of overall GDP. Budget 2014 does not have a reception reform plan or any major expenditure, although there is a decrease in electricity subsidy allocation by 29% compared to the year 2013, reflecting plans to continue rising for tariff adjustments that are still ongoing. With the positive impact of subsidized fuel price hike in June 2013 offset by the weakening rupiah, the planned allocation for fuel subsidies remain significant in 2014 amounted to USD 211 billion (or 2% of GDP), an increase of USD 11 trillion over the APBN-P 2013. Budget 2015, although not without resistance from the parliament, is expanded significantly due to the bold move of the current government to reduce the fuel subsidy and adjust the energy tariff. The challenge today however, is the procurement speed and capacity of the administration. 4 3 As the global statistics show, this assumption is proven inaccurate with global economy is slowing down, pushed by the price of commodities and oil, and the US unemployment rate. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 241

With the continued impact of lower commodity prices, tighter external financing conditions, higher real interest rates in the country, and the depreciation of the rupiah, Bank Indonesia projected that GDP growth will slow to 5.3% in 2014 to a "base case", from 5.6% in 2013. However, the projections also contain considerable uncertainty factors and risks are skewed to the lower domestic growth. In particular, the baseline projections (baseline) depends on the adequacy of the support of external financing conditions to avoid external balance adjustment more abrupt, which will cause economic disruption and slow growth. Such a decline can be triggered by the development of the international market, or, more specifically, because of economic developments and policies in the country, such as depreciation and subsidy/fuel prices. Weakening economic growth will have implications on poverty reduction. Models poverty World Bank projects that the poverty level in March 2014 will reach 11.0 to 11.1%, indicating a slowdown in the pace of poverty reduction taken place and demonstrates that the Government's poverty rate target for 2014 of 8-10% is unlikely to be achieved. Figure 1 shows us that from 2010 until 2014, Indonesia GDP growth is increasing, budget deficit is decreasing, public debt to ratio is decreasing, and GoI gross financing needed is increasing. This condition supports Indonesia to develop infrastructure. Ministry of National Development Planning/National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS)(2015) estimated that the need of investment in infrastructure nationally in Indonesia during 2015-2019 reached 4,796.2 trillion IDR or around 399.67 billion USD. It means the need of investment each year is around 73.788 billion USD while the GDP in 2014 is about 822.32 billion USD. So, the need of investment in 2015 is around 8.9% of GDP. On the other side, the state budget allocated for infrastructure is just 2 3% of GDP. In conclusion, the infrastructure gap in Indonesia is 5 6% of GDP. The need of investment from 2015-2019 will be explained in figure 3. 4 At the time of writing, the government spending is less than 10% (in June 2015), exposing a possible political inquiry for government capacity to absorb the budget in the year 2015. Even if the budget can be absorbed, there will be an issue of the quality of spending made, especially in regards with infrastructure quality. 242 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

[Figure 1] Economic Conditions in Indonesia from 2010 to 2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 GDP growth (%) 3.5 4.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Budget deficit (% GDP) -1.6-1.4-1.1-0.9-0.8 Public debt to GDP ratio (%) 32.9 32.2 30.8 29.3 27.8 Gol gross financing needed (IDR trillion) 221 223 216 218 248 Scenario 2: Business as usual 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 GDP growth (%) 5.4 6.0 6.2 6.2 6.2 Budget deficit (% GDP) -1.6-1.4-1.1-0.9-0.8 Public debt to GDP ratio (%) 31.9 30.8 29.2 27.6 26.0 Gol gross financing needed (IDR trillion) 224 228 223 226 258 Scenario 3: Big push 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 GDP growth (%) 5.6 6.4 6.8 7.0 7.2 Budget deficit (% GDP) -2.6-2.4-2.1-1.9-1.9 Public debt to GDP ratio (%) 32.8 32.4 31.5 30.4 29.2 Gol gross financing needed (IDR trillion) 284 298 304 324 375 Scenario 4: Bigger push 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 GDP growth (%) 5.6 6.5 7.1 7.4 7.6 Budget deficit (% GDP) -2.6-2.6-2.6-2.6-2.6 Public debt to GDP ratio (%) 32.8 32.6 32.1 31.5 30.9 Gol gross financing needed (IDR trillion) Source: World Bank Jakarta, May 2010. 284 307 343 388 463 [Figure 2] Constraints for Doing Business in Indonesia, 2007 and 2011 Source: IndII, http://www.indii.co.id:8080/contents.php?id_contents=60&id_ref_menu=151 Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 243

From the business point of views, infrastructure is also seen as the major impediment for their growth. World Bank survey (as reported by the Indonesia Infrastructure Initiative, IndII) showed a consistent result of the year 2001 and 2007. 1.3. Infrastructure Challenges and Opportunities The Government of Indonesia estimated that investment needs for infrastructure within 2015-2019 reached 4,796.2 trillion IDR or around 399.67 billion USD because of the increasing of income per capita every year in a long term while the investment needs within 2010-2014 reached 214 billion USD. It means that strong economic growth is projected, thus requires more development of basic infrastructure. The previous administration relied upon the economic acceleration framework labelled as the MP3EI or the acceleration and expansion of Indonesia s economic development, aiming at 12% nominal growth. 5 During that period, the government is seeking an economic transformation using six development corridors throughout Indonesia. There are three main steps to strengthen the economic acceleration, first, controlling the deficit to be within safe limits, through optimization of income while maintaining the investment climate and maintaining environmental conservation, as well as improving the quality of expenditure and improving the expenditure structure, second, controlling the ratio of government debt to PDB (GDP) through controlling financing from debts within safe limits and control, as well as directing the use of debt to productive activities, third, controlling the fiscal risk to be within the limits of tolerance, among others, by controlling the ratio of debt to revenue in the country, controlling the debt service ratio, and maintaining the composition of the debt within measurable safe limits and guarantees. 6 Figure 3 gives us information that the investment need in 2015 until 2019 consists of 12 sectors: roads, railways, sea transportation, aviation, land transportation, urban transportation, electricity, energy (oil and gas), communication technology and informatics, water resources, clean water and waste, and housing. Each sector will need budget from state/local, SOE, and/or private. 5 Nominal growth means real growth plus inflation. 6 Budget in Brief APBN 2015 Republic Indonesia, General Directorate of Budget Ministry of Finance Republic of Indonesia. 244 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

[Figure 3] Details of Indonesia Infrastructure Investment Need Based on Sectors (2015-2019) Sector State Budget Local Budget (unit: IDR Trillion) SOE Private Total Roads 268 200.0 65.0 200 733 Railways 93-11.0 122 226 Sea Transportation 260-238.2 93 591.2 Aviation 64 5.0 50.0 25 144 Land Transportation (including ASDP) 37-10.0-47 Urban Transportation 61 15.0 5.0 5 86 Electricity 4 120-445.0 435 1,000 Energy (oil and gas) 4.3-151.5 351.5 507.3 Communication Technology and Informatics 15 15.3 27.0 223 280.3 Water Resources 196 68.0 7.0 179.9 450.9 Clean Water and Waste 131 198.0 44.0 30 403 Housing 184 44.0 12.5 87 327.5 TOTAL 1,433.3 545.3 1,066.2 1,751.4 4,796.2 Percentage 29.88% 11.37% 22.23% 36.52% 100% Source: Ministry of National Development Planning/BAPPENAS, June 2015 The period of 2015-2019 is the Third RPJMN (National Medium Term Development Plan) after the Long Term Development Plan, 7 focusing on strengthening overall development in various fields with an emphasis on achieving economic competitiveness on the basis of competitiveness of natural and human resources as well as the development of science and technology. In 2015 Budget Law or APBN, the deficit of 2.21% toward GDP (Gross Domestic Product) is lower than the 2014 revised budget, which was 2.40% toward GDP. This indicates the desire of the Government and the House of Representatives to provide a broader fiscal space to accommodate the visions and missions of the new government. 2015 APBN is also the first to include the allocation of Village Fund as a form of implementation of Law No. 6 of 2014 on Village. Village Fund Allocation is expected to have an impact on improving the welfare of the community, especially in strengthening the efforts to encourage more 7 Law No. 17/2007 stipulates a long-term (25 years) development plan of Indonesia. This law gives guidance to elected Presidents and their administration to develop and to implement 5-years medium-term development plan, which is in the forms of Presidential Regulation. The medium term development plan is then broken down into an annual budget plan called APBN. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 245

equitable economic growth. 8 The new administration through Bappenas identifies that in order to stimulate development for the high-growth and least-developed economy of the country, the government should invest heavily with infrastructure and providing enough energy supply. Right after the President is taking power, he continuously and consistently expresses his vision that infrastructure should be his top priority 9 besides making a structural adjustment on the expenditure and revenue structure, including rationalizing the subsidy and energy price, as well as continue a reform in the natural resource sector, notably oil, gas and mineral resources. He also continue his campaign for improving the condition of people at the Indonesian border, villages and remote areas. Reallocation of financial resources coming from the new fiscal window (due to the reduced fuel subsidy) is used to develop infrastructure in those regional, both using decentralized funds, direct investment and the newly established village funds to be allocated to each village in Indonesia. The government is putting its commitment to increase its infrastructure spending by more than 5% in the next 5 years. [Figure 4] Infrastructure Spending by Source of Fund, APBN (National Budget), APBD (Sub National Budget), SOE and Private Sector Source : Bappenas/JICA - Medium Term Economic Infrastructure Strategy: Background Study for RPJMN 2015 2019, 2013) 8 Muhammad Chatib Basri in Budget in Brief APBN 2015 Republic Indonesia, General Directorate of Budget Ministry of Finance Republic of Indonesia 9 http://www.antaranews.com/en/news/96567/jokowi-leads-cabinet-meeting-focuses-on-infrastructuredevelopment 246 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Large investment, commercially feasible projects such as power plant, toll roads, ports continue to seek financial resources from private sector, either through PPP scheme or utilizing SOE as investment vehicle. Bappenas data demonstrates that theres is an up-and-down of investment in the privately funded projects. The telecom sector, which is relatively fully deregulated and the most investmentfriendly sector, remain the highest proportion of privately funded project, followed by the energy sector where the government is still using PLN and PERTAMINA (the Indonesian energy company, previously oil and gas company) to invest heavily on power plant and oil and gas production/refinery facility. The electricity connection from designated powerplant and the main gridline is still the issue due to the loss of energy. Private participation seems to follow a cyclic pattern which is governed by various factors, notably the political economy of the country and policy environment that promotes or hampers the private sector investment for infrastructure, i.e. foreign direct investment and negative investment list. [Figure 5] Increasing of Private/Business Entities Participation in Infrastructure in Indonesia (unit: USD Million) Source: World Bank Jakarta, June 2015. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 247

The Mid-Term review from the Bappenas/JICA (2013) indicated that the budget window for infrastructure is merely 7% of the existing budget, 10 leaving a huge demand for investment coming from elsewhere. The analysis shows us that there was 7% growth target requires: Rp 1.923,7 trillion (about USD 161.8 billion) of investments during 2010-2014 and Central Government budget can only cover 29.1% of total investment need. This means there is big opportunity for private investment through PPP(Rp 668,34 trillion or 34.7%) The study team estimates that, with the government s plan to utilize SOE as the main driver for economic development, the method to reallocate the funding gap will be as determined as Figure 6 shows. [Figure 6] Financing Gap and the Possible Sources of Funding Source: Bappenas/JICA - Medium Term Economic Infrastructure Strategy: Background Study for RPJMN 2015 2019, 2013. 10 The study team (Tusk Advisory et al., 2013) utilized a method to obtain the available budget for economic infrastructure by deducting the total revenue from tax, oil/gas and other revenues by debt servicing, mandatory and emergency spending such as salary for government officials, and social infrastructures. 248 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

2. Evolution of Indonesia s PPP Framework 2.1. Evolution of PPP Regulations Until today, Indonesia s PPP regulations can be divided into three stages of development. 1st generation of PPP (up to 1998) First generation of Indonesian PPP is characterized by the market opening of two sectors, namely toll road and power (IPP) sectors. PPPs or Kerjasama Pemerintah dan Swasta (KPS, until 2014) or Kerjasama Pemerintah dan Badan Usaha (KPBU, since 2015) were initially introduced in the early 1990s for the development in infrastructure projects, especially for toll roads. Due to the increased need for the government to expand a toll road project which had started in 1978, the government began to opt for a financial arrangement under a PPP scheme. Under this scheme, business sector involvement was used to fulfil government targets to accelerate the development of transport infrastructure through partnerships with a state-owned enterprise, PT Jasa Marga has been assigned as the regulator and was the operator until being replaced later in 2005 by a buffer body named the Indonesia Toll Roads Authority (BPJT) regulated by Ministry of Public Works Regulation No. 295/PRT/M/2005. As a legal foundation for private sector participation as well as to attract private sector interest in the construction of roads through PPPs, the government enacted Law No. 13 of 1980 concerning Road. Following this, toll roads began to be managed by the private sector from 1989 form with point private sector participation in toll road operations began to grow, although at a slow pace. 11 There are only four sectors known until 1998: Road (Law No. 13 of 1980), Electricity (Law No. 15 of 1985), Drinking Water (Law No. 11 of 1974), and Railway (Law No. 13 of 1992). Then followed by Telecommunication in 1999 (Law No. 36 of 1999). 2nd Generation PPP (1998 2004) The first general PPP regulation applied to all sectors is the Presidential Decree (In Indonesia: Keputusan Presiden) No. 7 of 1998 concerning Cooperation Between Government and Private Business Entities In The Development and or Management of Infrastructure then replaced by Presidential Regulation (In Indonesia: Peraturan 11 Strategic Asia for the UK Foreign Commonwealth Office, PPP (Public-Private Partnerships) in Indonesia: Opportunities from the Economic Master plan, presented in June 2012, p.48. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 249

Presiden) No. 67 of 2005 concerning Cooperation Between Government and Business Entities In The Provision of Infrastructure, then this regulation has been amendment three times by Presidential Regulation No. 13 of 2010, Presidential Regulation No. 56 of 2011, and Presidential Regulation No. 66 of 2013. Then Presidential Regulation No. 38 of 2015 replaced all on March 20, 2015 with condition the matters that this regulation is not regulate still appoint to the previous regulation. The regulation addresses loopholes in previous regulations, 12 sets the agenda for open and transparent public priority projects to be implemented; 13 created the mechanism for proposing unsolicited projects and increasing government support. Apart from the main regulations related to PPPs, each line ministry has also published a number of relevant government regulations in order to provide more detailed information 14 to private business entities working on and outside of infrastructure projects. 3rd Generation PPP (2005 2015) Then many organs supporting PPP established in 2005-2010, those are Committee of Infrastructure Priorities Development Acceleration (KPPIP), The State Owned Enterprise named PT SMI, Indonesia Infrastructure Guarantee Fund (IIGF / PT PII). 15 Besides the organs, there are also some new regulations which amendment their prior regulations. The tasks of Committee of Infrastructure Priorities Development Acceleration (KPPIP) are, first, stipulating strategies and policies to accelerate Infrastructure Priorities Development. The second is monitoring and controlling the implementation of the strategies and policies in order to accelerate infrastructure priorities development. The third is facilitating capacity improvement for apparatus and institutions that are related to the infrastructure priorities development. In executing 12 The latest regulation always make improvement to the previous regulation. We can say that PR 67 of 2005 was the milestone to the PPP Regulation in Indonesia because in the Presidential Decree 7 of 1998 there were not stipulated the definition of PPP/KPS/KPBU, the GCA was still unknown, there have not unsolicited project yet, the investment returns are not stipulated, and the infrastructure sectors or kind of infrastructure that can be implemented through PPP scheme are increasing in each amendment of the regulation. And the PR 38 of 2015 give the clear definition of PPP/KPS/KPBU while PR 67 of 2005 just give the definition of cooperation project and concession permit. 13 Open and transparent public priority projects through website of bappenas and the publication of PPP book concerning the PPP projects that can be accessed by the society. But not all PPP Projects registered in this Bappenas PPP Book. Projects that registered are projects in large-scale. 14 Information concerning each sectors infrastructure which are not stipulated in the main PPP regulation because sector regulations are apart from the main PPP regulation. 15 The tasks of PT SMI and PT PII/IIGF will be explained later in the subtitle parties in the ppp implementation. 250 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

its tasks, KPPIP involves ministries, institutions, local governments, enterprises, and other parties which functions and tasks relate to infrastructure priorities development acceleration. In addition, KPPIP can also recruit individual expert, institution, and/or enterprise and create consultant panel. 16 There is no transparency law and/or fiscal responsibility law in Indonesia. The financial condition of the project known by parties in project. Concerning the limit, there is no limit in the use of PPPs 17 by the government like in other countries. <Table 1> The Evolution of PPP Legal Framework in Indonesia No 1 2 3 4 5 6 The Presidential Decree No. 7 of 1998 The Presidential Regulation No. 67 of 2005 The Presidential Regulation No. 13 of 2010 The Presidential Regulation No. 56 of 2011 The Presidential Regulation No. 66 of 2013 The Presidential Regulation No. 38 of 2015 Milestone of PPP Legal Framework in Indonesia Cooperation Between Government and Private Business Entities In The Development and or Management of Infrastructure (in Indonesia: KPBUS) Cooperation Between Government and Business Entities In The Provision of Infrastructure (in Indonesia: KPS) The amendment on The Presidential Regulation No. 67 of 2005 concerning Cooperation between Government and Business Entities In The Provision of Infrastructure (in Indonesia: KPS) The second amendment on The Presidential Regulation No. 67 of 2005 concerning Cooperation Between Government and Business Entities In The Provision of Infrastructure (in Indonesia: KPS) The third amendment on The Presidential Regulation No. 67 of 2005 concerning Cooperation Between Government and Business Entities In The Provision of Infrastructure (in Indonesia: KPS) Cooperation Between Government and Business Entities In The Provision of Infrastructure (in Indonesia: KPBU) 4th Generation of PPP (from 2015) The latest generation of Indonesian PPP is marked with the enactment of Presidential regulation No. 38/2015 as depicted in the above table. The expansion of scope in the PPP projects and various new incentives provided to attract project developers, mediators and government contracting agencies are expected to give a thrust to the increase of projects financed through PPP scheme. Table 2 below highlights the features of the most recent regulations regarding PPP. 16 http://www.kemenkeu.go.id/en/berita/accelerating-infrastructure-priorities-president-establishes-kppip 17 Limit in nominal and also percent of GDP Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 251

<Table 2> Features of the Presidential Regulation No. 38 of 2015 No. Aspects Presidential Regulation 38/2015 1 Government Contracting Agencies 2 Types of Infrastructure - For the multi-sector project (bundling project), GCAs sign a MoU about the GCAs and choose one coordinating GCA. - State/Regional Owned Enterprised could be GCA as long as regulated in the sectoral regulation. - Adding economic and social infrastructure, such as energy conservation, art and sport facilities, regional infrastructure, urban infrastructure, tourism objects, hospital, school. 3 Hybrid Financing - GCA can finance some part of the project construction. 4 5 Criteria of Unsolicited Project Project Preparation Budget by GCA - Technically integrated to the master plan of the relevant sector - Economically and financially feasible - The private sector is financially capable to provide the infrastructure - GCA provides the budget for project planning, preparation, transaction, and management. 6 Land Acquisition - Land acquisition is an obligation of the GCA as regulated - If the project financially feasible, the private sector could repay part or all of the land acquisition cost (Presidential Regulation No. 30 of 2015 concerning Amendment to Presidential Regulation No. 71 of 2012 on Organizing Land Procurement for the Public Interest allows investors to pre finance land acquisition, which will be recovered by the GCA) 7 Success Fee Mechanism 8 Government Support 9 Transaction Process 10 Financial Close 11 Return of Investment 12 PPP Node - All of part of project preparation cost could be imposed to the winning bidder, which includes: feasibility study, transaction process, and success fee for the privates that prepare the project. - Viability Gap Funding - Tax Incentive support, to be approved by the MoF - The provision of the business entities could be done by tendering process or direct appointment - The maximum time of the financial close is 12 months and can be extended for maximum 6 months - User Charges - Availability Payment - Ministry, Institutional Head and Regional Head appointed an unit in its institution to be PPP Node - PPP Node s duties are preparing the regulation, synchronization, coordination, monitoring, and evaluating the development of PPP project. Source: Socialization of PR 38/2015 by IIGF in Sampoema Strategic Jakarta, March 2015. 252 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

In summary, there are considerable changes in the infrastructure laws and regulations throughout 35 years of Indonesia s infrastructure development, as shown in the following table. <Table 3> Indonesia s Infrastructure Laws and Revision No Sector Old Regulation New Regulation 1 Road Act No.13/1980 Act No.28/2004 2 3 Toll Road Guidelines for Procurement Concession of Toll Road Govt. Regulation (GR) No. 15/2005 - GR No.44/2009 and GR No.43/2013 Regulation of Minister of Public Works No. 13 of 2010 4 Energy/Geothermal - Act No.27/2003 5 Geothermal Business Activities - GR No.59/2007 6 Waste - Act No. 18/2008 6 Domestic Waste - GR No.81/2012 7 Guidelines for Waste Management - Regulation of Home Affairs Minister No. 33/2010 8 Electricity Act No.15/1985 Act No.30/2009 9 Electric Power Supply Business Activities - GR No.14/2012 10 Oil and Gas - Act No.22/2001 11 12 Downstream Oil and Natural Gas Business Activities Upstream Oil and Natural Gas Business Activities GR No.36/2004 GR No.35/2004 GR No.30/2009 GR No.55/2009 13 Telecommunications Act No.36/1999 Act No.52/2000 14 Telecommunications Operation - GR No.52/2000 15 Airport - Act No.1/2009 16 Airport Construction and Environment Preservation - GR No.40/2012 17 Railway Act No.13/1992 Act No.23/2007 18 Railway Provision - GR No.56/2009 19 Drinking-Water Act No.11/1974 Act No.7/2004 20 Development of Drinking-water Supply System - GR No.16/2005 21 22 Guidelines of Cooperation Development of Drinking-water Supply System Sea Transport and Port - Act No.21/1992 Regulation of Minister of Public Works No. 12/2010 Act No.17/2008, GR No. 61/2009 Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 253

1.2. The Changing Scene for PPPs in Indonesia: Impacts of decentralization Prior to 2002 the policy decision making in Indonesia was largely centralized. However since 2002 the country experienced a significant degree of decentralization following the passing of the State Finance Law of 2002. Budget Law is enacted annually which is also in compliance with transparency law stipulated in the Law No. 14/2008 18. This process largely entailed the decentralization of democratic authority and decision making. Government finance still remains largely centralized though. Provinces and local authorities receive an equitable share of national revenue based on a formula for the division of revenue, but local authorities do not really possess a tax base of their own. Since 2010 local authorities can raise property taxes. On local government level there has so far not been much investment expenditure happening, but there are proposals currently that at least 20% of their expenditure should be investment. As discussed further below it is important to note that sub-national government is not obliged to follow central government rules for PPPs. This is only the case if guarantees or fiscal support is sought. 19 There are 490 local governments in Indonesia, each with its own water SOE (PDAMs) and regional bank SOE. Most of the water SOEs are still indebted to the central government, following the serious financial troubles into which these SOEs ran following the Asian financial crisis of 1997. These SOEs are not allowed to borrow money unless they repay their debts to central government, which consequently limits such activity. 20 As part of the decentralization that occurred since 2002, and in particular in terms of the State Finance Law of 2002, some decision-making power shifted from Bappenas (The National Planning Agency) to the Ministry of Finance (MoF). In addition, decision-making power also shifted to local authorities, which means that the various Bappedas (Regional Planning Agencies) operating on lower tiers of government do not any longer primarily report to Bappenas, but to their respective local authorities. On local authority level Bappenas role is largely limited to undertaking the promotion of PPP. This is done on its road trips to the various local authorities, followed by an invitation to local authorities and central 18 The Law No 14/2008 on public information disclosure allows the public to acquire information from government agencies. The Law also requires the government to appoint public information officials responsible for providing information requested by the public. 19 OECD Reviews of Regulatory Reform Indonesia Public-Private Partnership Governance: Policy, Process, and Structure, p.13. 20 Ibid. 254 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

government ministries to place possible future projects on Bappenas PPP Book containing potential PPP projects. 21 Before the reform process started in the early 2000s most projects that were not undertaken by the central, provincial or local government themselves were awarded through direct appointment to either SOEs or private firms. 22 As part of the reform process the Indonesian government wanted to improve the process and principles through which projects are awarded. This includes the introduction and use of competitive bidding. As a result Bappenas developed and government introduced Presidential Regulation 67 of 2005. This regulation was improved and augmented further by the introduction of Presidential Regulations 13 of 2010 and 56 of 2011. These regulations regulate what the eligible contracting agencies are and the role of potential private participants. In addition, regulations set out the responsibilities of the Ministry of Finance with respect to the granting of fiscal support and guarantees to specific projects in the procurement process. 23 Since the introduction of the reform and above mentioned Presidential Regulations three Infrastructure Summits were held, the product of which has been a list 24 of possible PPP projects. Many countries seek to kick start a PPP program by nominating a few (a handful) PPP projects based on both national priorities and their chances of success. On the experience of the first handful of projects a more generic approach to PPPs can be developed and rolled out in at national and sub-national level. The first Infrastructure Summit was held in 2005 and resulted in a list of 91 projects. The list increased to 101 potential projects and 10 model projects (these 10 model projects as priority project) as part of the second Infrastructure Summit in 2006. By the time of the third Infrastructure Summit in 2010 there were 72 potential PPP projects, 27 priority projects (priority is formerly name, currently name is prospective projects. The difference between the potential and priority/propective projects will be explained later in the subtitle PPP Project Selection Categories), and one ready for offer. However, this rather long list was subsequently shortened 25 substantially so that by the fourth Infrastructure Summit held in April 2011 there were 5 showcase projects and 11 other projects. 21 Ibid. 22 In the past, some of toll road projects for example, were awarded to private companies using presidential decree, without tenders. This practice has caused various governance issues with the government of Indonesia at that time, and in fact it led to a political turmoil in 1997-1998 23 Ibid. 24 Indonesia made list of PPP Projects in PPP Book published by Bappenas since 2009. The previous projects (before 2009) are not documentated/listed. The list projects within 2009-2015 is in annex. 25 The project list was shortened because the government realized the previous list did not attract investor s interest due to the poor preparation, both in project readiness (i.e. land) and technical documentations Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 255

Nevertheless, by June 2011 the Bappenas PPP Book 2011 stood at 79 projects of which 45 were potential projects, 21 priority projects, and 13 were ready to offer. In addition, contract award went to one project, the Central Java Power Plant (originally part of the10 model projects identified in the 2006 Infrastructure Summit and signed on 6 October 2011), meaning that this project is the only project to date to have passed through the project creation cycle specified in terms of the Presidential Regulation 67 of 2005, 13 of 2010, and 56 of 2011. 26 PPP cycle and its figure process will be explained later in the subtitle Process and procedures for PPP (solicited and unsolicited projects). The latest PPP Book established by the Ministry of National Development Planning/National Development Planning Agency is the projects in 2012 and 2013 which total 58 projects in 2012 and 27 projects in 2013. Then in 2015, there is the latest Presidential Regulation concerning PPPs: PR No. 38 of 2015. 3. The Current PPP Legal Framework 3.1. The Definition of PPPs in Indonesia Regulations The first general PPP regulation (not in sector regulation) was Presidential Decree (In Indonesia: Keputusan Presiden) No. 7 of 1988 27 concerning Cooperation Between Government and Private Companies In The Development and or Management of Infrastructure, then replaced by Presidential Regulation (In Indonesia: Peraturan Presiden) No. 67 of 2005 28 concerning Cooperation Between Government and Business Entities In The Provision of Infrastructure, then this regulation has been amendment three times by Presidential Regulation No. 13 of 2010, Presidential Regulation No. 56 of 2011, and Presidential Regulation No. 66 of 2013. Then Presidential Regulation No. 38 of 2015 replaced them all. Presidential Regulation No.38 of 2015 stipulated the definition of PPP or KPBU 26 Ibid. 27 Its Presidential Decree mentioned PPP as KPBUS (Kerjasama Pemerintah dan Badan Usaha Swasta) but there was no definition at all concerning PPP or KPBUS in this regulation. That is why we mention regarding the loopholes from this previous regulation. 28 Its Presidential Regulation mentioned PPP as KPS (Kerjasama Pemerintah dan Swasta) but there is still no definition of PPP or KPS. There is a definition similarly to PPP or KPS, Cooperation Project and related to PPP or KPS Concession Permit. Cooperation Project is the Provision of Infrastructure Projects undertaken through the Partnership Agreement or the provision of Concession Permit between the Minister / Head of Institution / Regional Head of the Business Entity established through public tender. Concession Permit is a permit for the Provision of Infrastructure provided by the Minister / Head of Institution / Regional Head of the Business Entity is set through the auction. From this regulation, we know concession in Indonesia is not the same with PPP, concession is a part of PPP in form of permit. 256 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

(Kerjasama Pemerintah dan Badan Usaha), it is Cooperation Between Government and Business Entities In The Provision of Infrastructure for public interest based on the specification that has been determined before by the Minister/Head of the Institute/Head of the Region/the State Owned Enterprises/the Region Owned Enterprises, which partially or entirely use the resource of the Business Entity by considering risk allocation between the parties. (Article 1 paragraph (6)) Discussions on the PPP definition have made another term comes up, that is concession. In Presidential Regulation No. 61 of 2009 concerning Port Concession is right-giving by the port organizer to the Port Business Entity to implement activities of providing and/or services for a certain period of time and certain compensation so in conclusion Concession is the right-giving to the Business Entity to implement activities of providing and/or services for a certain period of time and certain compensation. 29 Concession is also known as Concession Permit, it is a permit for the Provision of Infrastructure provided by the Minister / Head of Institution / Regional Head to the Business Entity determined through public bidding (Presidential Regulation No.13 of 2010 concerning Amendment to the Presidential Regulation No. 67 of 2005 concerning Cooperation Between Government and Business Entities In The Provision of Infrastructure). There is also PFI(Project Finance Initiative), another type of PPP known in many countries, but in Indonesia there is no regulation regulate concerning PFI Type. Until 2015, there are 10 fields of regulation concerning PPPs in Indonesia. Those are toll road, energy, waste, electricity, port and sea transport, telecommunications, oil and gas, airport, railway, and drinking water. This box 1 describes the latest Presidential Regulation in Indonesia regarding PPP. It shows us matters that stipulated in its PR. 29 The duration of the compensation is not expressly mentioned in the regulation. It depends on the sector and PPP contract proposed by the Concessionaire. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 257

BOX 1. HIGHLIGHTED ARTICLES OF THE INDONESIAN PPP REGULATION PRESIDENTIAL REGULATION NO. 38 OF 2015 CONCERNING COOPERATION BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESS ENTITIES IN THE PROVISION OF INFRASTRUCTURE Article 3 define the object and purpose of PPPs in Indonesia including suffice the funding needs continuously in the Provision of Infrastructure through the mobilization of private funds; embody the Provision of Infrastructure with quality, effective, efficient, right on target, and punctual; create an investment climate that encourages participation of Business Entities in the Provision of Infrastructure based on right business principles, encourage the use of the principle of user pays service that they received, or in certain cases considering the user s ability to pay; and/or provide the certainty of investment returns of Business Entities in the Provision of Infrastructure through the mechanism of routine payment by the Government to the Business Entities. Article 4 establishes the principles of PPPs in Indonesia, including Partnership, Expediency, Compete, Risk Control and Management, Effective, and Efficient in the Provision of Infrastructure Article 5 stipulates the sector of infrastructures that allowed implemented through PPP. Those are 19 infrastructures consist of economic infrastructure and social infrastructure, includes: a. Transportation infrastructure, b. Road infrastructure, c, Water resource and irrigation infrastructure, d. Drinking water infrastructure, e. Central wastewater management system infrastructure, f. Local wastewater management system infrastructure, g. Waste management system infrastructure, h. Telecommunications and informatics infrastructure, i. Electricity infrastructure, j. Oil and gas and energy infrastructure, k. Energy conversion infrastructure, l. Urban facilities infrastructure, m. Education facilities infrastructure, n. Sports facilities and infrastructure, o. District infrastructure, p. Tourism infrastructure, q. Health infrastructure, r. Correctional Institution Infrastructure, s. Public housing infrastructure Article 6 stipulates that the Minister/Head of the Institute/Head of the Region acted as PJPK / CA (Contracting Agency) in the implementation of PPPs considering the sectoral regulations. Article 8 stipulates that the State Owned Enterprises acted as PJPK / CA (Contracting Agency) in the implementation of PPPs considering the sectoral regulations. Article 9 stipulates that in case State Owned Enterprises acted as PJPK / CA (Contracting Agency), PPPs are implemented through an agreement with the Implementer Business Entity 258 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Article 11 stipulates that in Indonesia regulation in case of the return on investment implementer of business entities sourced from user fees in form of tariff, availability payment, and/or other as it is adjusted to the regulation or act. Article 14 stipulates that unsolicited project of PPP by Business Entities allowed with some criterias. Article 15 stipulates that the Government can give support to the PPPs Article 16 stipulates that form and procedures of support as mention in article 15 stipulated by the Minister of Finance Article 17 stipulates that the Government can give guarantee to the PPPs Article 18 stipulates that Government Guarantee given by the Minister of Finance through the Infrastructure Guarantee (State Owned Enterprise) Article 44 stipulates that the Minister/Head of the Institute/Head of the Region will appoint specialized unit in Ministry/Institution/Region as the PPP Node 3.2. Jurisdictions of PPPs in Indonesia There are 3 (three) types of PPPs known in the worldwide, PPPs, Concessions, and PFI (Project Finance Initiative), whereas Indonesia does not make differences among those types. Those are regulated in the Presidential Regulation No. 38 of 2015 concerning Cooperation Between Government and Business Entities In The Provision of Infrastructure which replaced Presidential Regulation No. 67 of 2005 that has 3 amendments: Presidential Regulation No. 13 of 2010, Presidential Regulation No. 56 of 2011, Presidential Regulation No. 66 of 2013 and for procedures are in Regulation of the State Minister of National Development Planning/Head of National Development Planning Agency No. 3 of 2012 on General Guidelines of Implementation of Cooperation Between the Government and Business Entities in Provision of Infrastructure. As we know, PPPs were born because the government need help from the private sector or it can be said that PPPs come from the government, but as time goes by, it can be also come from the private sector. It is named PPP unsolicited projects. The private sector can request to the Minister/Head of Region/Head of Institute. Indonesia regulation allows unsolicited projects by the private sector with some criteria. Those criteria are 30 : a. Technically integrated with the master plan of the sector concerned; 30 Indonesia, Peraturan Presiden tentang Kerjasama Pemerintah dengan Badan Usaha dalam Penyediaan Infrastruktur (Presidential Regulation concerning Cooperation Between Government and Business Entities In The Provision of Infrastructure), Perpres no 38 of 2015, LN no 62 of 2015, Article 14 paragraph (3). Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 259

b. Economically and financially feasible; and c. Entities that filed the initiative has sufficient financial capacity to fund the implementation of Infrastructure Provision. Than the proponent Business Entity shall prepare a feasibility study on the proposed of PPP and the proponent Business Entity can be given alternative compensation 31 : a. Provision of additional value of 10%. b. Granting the right to make an offer by Enterprise initiator to the best bidder (the right to match), according to the results of the assessment in the tender process; orc. Purchase PPP initiatives, among others, intellectual property rights attached to them by the Minister/Head of the Institute/Head of the Region or by the winner of bidding. The alternative compensation must be included in the agreement of the Minister/Head of Region/Head of Agency. Further information, especially regarding the process of unsolicited project will be explained later in the subtitle Processes and procedures of PPP (solicited and unsolicited project). The list of unsolicited project is in annex. 3.3. Procurement Regulation Public Procurement Regulation is Presidential Regulation No. 70 of 2012 concerning Amendment to the Presidential Regulation No. 54 of 2010 concerning Government Goods/Services Procurement. This public procurement regulation does not regulate provision for the implementation of PPP or any specific type of PPP. On the other side as we know based on the prior data above, PPP Regulation is Presidential Regulation No. 38 of 2015 concerning Cooperation Between Government and Business Entities In The Provision of Infrastructure that replace Presidential Regulation No. 67 of 2005 concerning Cooperation Between Government and Business Entities In The Provision of Infrastructure that has 3 amendments: Presidential Regulation No. 13 of 2010, Presidential Regulation No. 56 of 2011, and Presidential Regulation No. 66 of 2013. In conclusion, Indonesia does not regulate relationship between the public procurement regulation and the PPP regulation. 31 Ibid., Article 14 paragraph (4) and (5). 260 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

3.4. Processes and Procedures for PPPs (Solicited and Unsolicited Projects) A. Solicited Projects For solicited proposals, the PPP project cycle consists of four phases, namely planning, project preparation, transaction, and contract management. 32 The legal basis of Processes and procedures for PPPs, form identification to award and oversight is the Regulation of The State Minister of National Development Planning/ Head of National Development Planning Agency No. 3 of 2012 on General Guidelines of Implementation of Cooperation Between The Government and Business Entities in Provision of Infrastructure. Figure 7 below shows the interrelation between the four phases of the projects cycle. From the figure, the PPP Process is defined as follows. 1. PPP Project Screening This phase is divided into two parts: a. Identification and Selection of PPP Project The purpose of this phase is to identified the project which can attract private sectors partners, in according to government policies and objectives as well as limited resources and readiness of the project. The selection phase is important for investor to convince them that a particular project has politics and economics value which make it not easy to be stopped, diverted or thoroughly amended. The identification and selection phase is conducted by the Government Contracting Agency (GCA or in Indonesia is called PJPK), which in the implementation using specific approach and criteria: - First approach is the requirement analysis approach. This approach is used to ensure the Project is included in the government s development plans and programs, and to ensure this project has technical and economic foundation as well as the support from the stakeholders. - Second approach is the compliance criteria. In identifying and selecting projects, it needs to ensure the project s compliance with the national/local medium-term development plan, and infrastructure strategic plan as well as project location with spatial layout plan. Besides it 32 Government of Indonesia does not regulate how long it takes to implement or finish each phase or how long all phases in total, because each project and sector has different difficulties, usually it takes 2-3 years from the planning phase until the transaction phase. The fastest project is in the provision of health facilities for laboratorium, it only takes 1 year from the planning until the transaction and the longest project is the provision of Toll Road Palikanci, it takes 10 years (from 2005 until 2015) because of its land acquisition process took more than 2 years. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 261

should also ensure the cross sector linkages and the compliance with current regulations. - Third, Value for money qualitative criteria. The basic concept of this approach is to compare the benefit from PPP Project and Non PPP Project. In detail, the value for money qualitative criteria is as follows: (value for money in Indonesia is not conducted formally in regulation. There is no quantitative form of value for money) 1) The investments value that require effective risk management 2) The private sector has an advantage in the PPP Project implementation 3) Technology and other aspects related to the sector is table and adaptive to changes, and 4) The existence of attractive incentives for private sector. [Figure 7] Phases of PPPs in Indonesia 262 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

b. Determination of Project Priority After the identification and selection phase, the GCA will conduct the project prioritization. The methods used in the determination of project prioritization is Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA). MCA includes the following criteria: - Clarity of description of the Cooperation Project 33 - Barriers to gain access to the main resources for the implementation of Cooperation Project - Clarity of the result of the Cooperation Projects inputs - Social and environmental impacts that are able to be managed and controlled - The potential for sustainable demand - The potential of ease in land acquisition and resettlement - The level of government s ability to provide government support - Institutional aspects readiness; 34 - PPP project is included in government strategic priorities and planning For PPP in central government level, Ministerial/ Institution leader or President Director of State Owned Enterprise (SOE) 35 will issued a sub-sector PPP Prioritization Planning, and submit the list to the minister/head of the institution through PPP node. PPP node then evaluate and propose the priority recommendation to minister/ head of institution to make a determination and submit it to minister of development planning. Minister of development planning then evaluate and establish a list of PPP Priority plan for each ministerial sector in PPP plan list. At the moment, there is no relationship between PPP timetable and TIP timetable. For local PPP Projects, Head of SKPD authorized to PPP, choose the priority for PPP Plan that is under the SKPD (local government s department) authority then submit itu to the district Mayor. The Mayor then determines the local PPP s priority list and submit it to the minister of development planning and related ministry. The evaluation of local and central PPP Project list will be stipulated by Minister of Development Planning in the National PPP Project List. c. Supporting Activities during the PPP Project Planning 1. Environment Related Activities In case consultant assistance is needed, GCA prepare terms of reference for the consultant procurements. Consultant will be in charge of preparing 33 The Project that will determined as the project priority must have a clear description that will understood easily so there won t any parties misinterpreted it. 34 Institutional aspects that related to the sector of the project that will be implemented through PPP 35 The port project Kalibaru is executed by PT Pelindo II/IPC and then tender out the sub-concession agreement with the private sector. All IPP projects are having contracts with PT PLN. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 263

Enviromental Impact Assesment (AMDAL) documents and filling UKL-UPL form 2. Land Acquisition Issues GCA will conduct studies of land acquisition which consist of: Location estimation and area of land acquisition for PPP Initial estimation of the costs to acquire the land needed and screening about whether or not the resettlement plan is needed in accordance with the law. Preparation of plan and schedule to implement the program of land acquisition and resettlement 3. Government Endorsement or Guarantees GCA will conduct studies related to the needs of government endorsement or guarantees which consist of: Early identification of government endorsement necessity and the documents needed for approval, and early identification for government guarantee necessity and documents needed to obtain approval. 2. Project Preparation Phase This phase is intended to ensure GCA availability to implement PPP, risk allocation from PPP to Business entity is studied carefully and the project gives benefits to society. The project preparation phase will be divided to 2 steps which are: a. Outline Business Case This assesment will be divided into several parts: 1. Legal Assesment Legal and institutional assesment includes: Regulations analysis Institutional analysis 2. Technical assesment Technical assesment will consist of: Demand forecast, including specific request survey (if required) which are arranged in the short, medium and long term, accompanied with scenario and sensitivity test Preliminary design including implementation of basic techinal survey, for the cost estimation as the main criteria Preparation of the site/land with considering the compliance with RUTR, technical requirements, cost and land ownership. The scope and specification of project output. 3. Feasibility Study Socio Economic Cost Benefit Analysis (SECBA) 264 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

The scope of this study covers Project Rationale, benefits of the project, as well as a quantitative assessment based on existing guidelines. SECBA is undertaken by using approaches such as: Comparison of costs between the PPP and Non PPP Project Determination of economic benefits is done by changing the financial prices into economic prices for each input and output by the corresponding economic factor conversion Assessment / measurement of the impact of the project's benefits to society and the state economic feasibility assessment parameter conducted through the EIRR and ENPV approach using a economic or social discount rate; and sensitivity analysis, to assess the effect of uncertainty of implementation of PPP toward the project viability level. 4. Feasibility Study Market Risk This study was conducted to determine consumer expectations (service level, the potential demand and rates) and to gauge the interest of investors and financial institutions on PPP together with the conditions and requirements as well as to prepare a strategy to reduce market risk. Market Analysis carried out by the followings. Determination of the level of service expected Real needs survey Determination of demand growth source and level with various scenarios Assessment of potential investors for PPP Assessment of potential investor s response against the risk of the project as well as the minimum level of support from the government and / or government guarantees required Assessment of national and international financial institutions response to determine the volume of credit that can be allocated in PPP Determination of the choice of strategies to reduce the risk of market 5. Feasibility Study - Financial Analysis Financial analysis aims to determine the financial feasibility of the project Financial analysis is done by: Determine the level of financial internal rate of return (FIRR) on PPP Determine the level of capital costs (weighted average cost of Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 265

capital -WACC) by calculating the weighted average capital to assess whether the capital cost competitive; Determine the debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) to calculate the amount of cash available to pay obligations (principal and interest) that will mature in the current year; Determine the amount of return on equity; Ensure that project cash flows have included the cost of risk mitigation; Ensure project cash flows has been adjusted to the level of income, operating costs, taxes depreciation, and capital expenditures; Presenting various scenarios of financial analysis in dollars or foreign currency whose value is equivalent to dollars Determine the types and amount of government endorsement and / or government guarantees 6. Feasibility Study Risk Analysis Any risk of the implementation of PPP should be identified, assessed and allocate it to the party which is able to cope the risk with the lowest cost. Risk analysis is done by: Identifying risk towards: 1. Shanties availability 2. Repatriation of profits 3. Construction and operation of infrastructure 4. The commercial feasibility of infrastructure 5. Supply of raw materials 6. Legislation 7.The right to passage of PPP Determine the allocation of risk based on the type of infrastructure and costs that may arise from government endorsement and / or government guarantees Determine the risk mitigation based on the amount of risk assumed by the government or business entities 7. Feasibility Study Tariff Structure Analysis Tariff Structure Analysis is done by fulfilling the following conditions: Any risk of the implementation of PPP should be identified, assessed and allocate it to the party best able to cope with the lowest cost. Risk analysis is done by: Review the determination of tariff policy, the adjustment mechanism, the benchmark for producing an adjustment to the 266 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

parameters used; Determining the structure of the tariff adjustment mechanism and determination of tariff payments for business entities Determine the procedures and responsibilities for the review and adjustment of tariffs during the term of the PPP Determine the amount of royalty payments, if any IPR Determine the terms of the contract and revenue sharing agreement between enterprises and GCA in the event: a. increase in the value of PPP b. PPP Development finish earlier then expected c. Returns PPP exceeds the specified maximum level, so it is possible to implement the additional sharing mechanism 8. Environmental and Social Assesment Environmental and social assesment, including: The environmental assessment for PPP that needs AMDAL or UKL-UPK Social Analysis Plan for land acquisition and resettlement plan 9. Assessment of the form of cooperation Forms of PPP should reflect the allocation of risk, responsible for financial and asset management cooperation. In addition a comparison of each alternative form of partnership should be made, as well as recommendations on the choice of the form/most appropriate partnership schemes (or against some of the best alternative). 10. Assessment of the necessity for Government endorsement/guarantee The provision of government endorsement aimed at improving the financial feasibility of the PPP. Endorsement is provided in the form of fiscal contributions and/or non-fiscal, such as licensing, land acquisition, construction partial support, and/other supports. Not all activities in the field of infrastructure service through PPP schemes provide a reasonable rate of return (cost recovery or financially viable). To improve the financial viability, it is necessary for government intervention in the form of the provision of government support. While the giving of government guarantees aims to reduce the risk of business entities in the implementation of a similar PPP. 11. Procurement Plan Draft The draft includes the business entity procurement plan, procurement documents, the implementation phase as well as a list of potential candidates. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 267

12. PPP Provisions Draft This draft contains various requirements which will regulates the partnership between government and business entity in PPP implementation. b. Preparation of Readiness Study Readiness Study is conducted by GCA, especially on the land availability (clean and clear status), the availability of the supporting documents. Readiness Study shall be conducted by following: 1. Approval of the stake holders pertaining to the concept of the Cooperation Project 2. Application to obtain principle agreement of the Government Support and/or Government Security, when necessary 3. Cooperation Project Management Team has been formed, legalized, and functioning in accordance with the roles and responsibilities already determined 4. Preparation of the design budget and schedule of implementation of site/land readiness, resettlement, environmental compliance as well as settlement of legal issues. Ministry of Finance will review after the preparation phase finish. Unit in the Ministry of Finance that is responsible for reviewing the PPP projects, monitoring and evaluation the PPP portfolio is Directorate Government s Support and Infrastructure Financing Management as a part of Directorate General of Financing and Risk Management Ministry of Finance. There is no National System of Investment Projects. The budget cycle will explained later on other section. c. Supporting Activities during PPP Preparation 1. Activities related to the environment Conduct EIA/AMDAL mechanism which includes: a. The announcement about the planned activities and conduct consultations with the public on the environment b. Start and finish preparing the EIA document or UKL-UPL 2. Activities related to the land acquisition: a. GCA conduct the land acquisition planning and resettlement b. GCA then finalize the document and start the process to obtain approval of the budget and PPP implementation schedule 3. Activities related to government guarantee: a. GCA consult with Bupi to obtain an initial indication of assurance requirements for a PPP b. GCA then prepare and submit a letter of introduction and screening form to 268 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

request a government guarantee to Bupi c. GCA ensure that BUPI published conformation to proceed PPP 3. Transaction Phase This phase is divided to: a. Completion of the Prefeasibility Study (final business case) GCA reviews the final pre-feasibility study and prepares the procurement plan draft to complete the pre-feasibility study documents which will be used as a basis to prepare the public tender document. This phase is carried out by completing the pre-feasibility study component consisting of: - Approval of the project stakeholders regarding PPP - Updates and confirmation of pre-feasibility study - Confirm PPP readiness - Confirmation of market interest - Determination of the tariff structure - Confirmation of the availability of the budget for land acquisition - Determination of the mechanism of implementation of government support and / or government guarantees and financing structure. GCA then holds market interest exploration to obtain input and determines the interest of potential investors in the PPP and create a list of potential investors. b. Business Entity Procurement Business entity procurement is divided into two steps: 1) Business entity Procurement Planning In the Planning Stage, GCA will form a Procurement Committee who understand, and has acquire sufficient knowledge in procurement procedures, the scope of PPP, contract laws and the regulations of the relevant sector infrastructures, technical aspects and financial aspects. The committee then arrange a schedule of procurement and procurement notices concept. In this phase GCA also implements Interests Assessment Market (Market Sounding). This market sounding is conducted to obtain input and determine the interest of potential investors for the PPP project offered. It is important for GCA to pack a project that will be offered in order to attract investors to invest. In this stage the Procurement Committee prepare Self-Estimated Price (HPS), the Prequalification Document and Document Procurement. 2) Business entity procurement implementation This phase consists of: Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 269

a. Pre-qualification The procedure for the implementation this phase: Announcement of business entities procurement Registration of prospective bidders by the procurement committee Prospective bidders submit interested-statement documents as a condition to take the pre-qualification documents Prospective bidders submit pre-qualification documents to the procurement committee Evaluation and clarification of the pre-qualification document Establishment of a list of candidates who pass the pre-qualification Approval and announcement of the results of pre-qualification Candidates who passed take Bidding Documents Disclaimer/objection from candidates who do not pass, followed by research and re-evaluation if the objection is proven to be true. b. Offering Implementation This phase consist of drafting a list of participants, the invitation delivery, and tender document retrieval. c. Procurement Explanation/Briefing In this steps, committee will explain the followings: the procurement methods, procedures for submission of bid documents, the documents that must be attached, the procedures for opening the tender document, methods of evaluation, issues that can decline an offer, the concept of the agreement, the terms and procedure offer s evaluation and the quantity, period, and the party who can issue a bidding guarantee, d. Submission of the Proposal Method of submitting the tender documents has two lid methods, the first lid contains administrative and technical documents, and second lid contains financial documents, then both lids is included in one cover lids then submitted simultaneously to the procurement committee. Documents submitted directly to the procurement committee in place, date and time specified in the public tender document e. Bidding Documents Opening This procedure should pay attention to the number of witnesses which is at least one representative from at least two participants of the tender. If less than this amount the opening can be delayed or continued by pointing out additional witnesses outside the procurement committee. The Committee shall examine, show and read in front of the bidders regarding the completeness of the documents, and then if the bidding documents is completed, the bidding document will be 270 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

signed by the committee and two representatives from the tender participant. The committee then makes Minutes of Proposal Examination (BAPP), which was read and signed by the committee and 2 witnesses. f. Evaluation of Offers Evaluation is undertaken in accordance with the provisions in the Bidding Documents g. Establishment of the Minutes of Procurement Results Procurement committee will make conclusions from the results of the evaluation set forth in Minutes of Proposal Evaluation (BAHP) signed by the chairman and all the members of the procurement committee or at least two-thirds of the members of the procurement committee. h. Tender winner stipulation Procurement Committee sets the prospective winner of the tender based on the results of the evaluation. The committee makes and delivers to GCA tthe report in order to stipulate the tender winner. In case GCA does not agree with the suggestion from the committee, then GCA will discuss the issue with the Procurement Committee to make decisions and puts it in the minutes that consist objection and agreement, to be signed by GCA and Procurement Committee (This decision is final). I. Stipulation of a Single Bidder The committee set a single bidder as the winner if there is only one tenderer who has followed the pre-qualification and / or submit bid documents and meet the technical requirements. The committee then carry out negotiations with the sole bidder after receiving an order from the Minister / Head of the Institution / Mayor. In the event the Minister / Head of Institution / Mayor approves the negotiation results, procurement committee may set a single bidder as a winner. j. Objection from bidder(s) The Bidders who objected to the stipulation of the winning bidder or bidders are given an opportunity to submit an objection in writing with evidence. GCA then announces the results of a study from the objection and takes a reasonable action. k. Winner Stipulation Letter Issuance GCA will issue a winner stipulation letter regarding the winning bidders as the PPP executor, in condition there is no objection or the objection can be proven to be untrue. l. PPP Agreement Signing Preparation This procedure will be done in two steps: Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 271

a. Business Entity establishment Process Winning bidders must establish a business entity which will sign the PPP agreement b. PPP Agreement Signing Process PPP agreement signed by GCA and business entities, and will be effective after preliminary requirements stipulated in the agreement has been obtained by all parties. 4. Contract Management Contract management activites include monitoring the concession/contract to comply with the regulation during the period of validity. Management activities consist of the management of the implementation of this agreement during the execution of preconstruction, construction, commercial operations, and the termination of the PPP agreement a. Pre-Construction Management of the implementation of the PPP agreement during the preconstruction is conducted since the signing of a PPP agreement to financial close. The things that need to be monitored at this stage is the fulfillment of preliminary requirements (conditional precedent) by enterprises in the agreement and financing and monitoring of the process of preparing Term of Reference for EIA (KAANDAL) and EIA. b. Construction Management implementation during construction is conducted since the start of construction until the PPP project is operating commercially. At this stage, the implementation management is undertaken towards new infrastructures design or explanation on the services provided, combining of new facilities with existing facilities; footprint access and rights to disclose problems related to the failure and inability of business entity to meet the PPP agreement; delays or changes in the construction schedule; construction design variations; job readiness / operations; conformity with the technical planning of the construction; property and planning; as well as issues regarding labor and the risk borne by GCA. c. Commercial Operation At the time of commercial operation, management of the implementation of PPP agreements is conducted since the project began to operate commercially until the expiration of the PPP agreement. At this stage, it is necessary to monitor the performance of services or service standards in accordance with the PPP agreement. d. PPP agreement ends 272 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

The transfer of assets back to GCA is one thing to consider in managing the implementation of the PPP agreement upon termination of the PPP agreement. The transfer of assets is done if the forms of PPP using the transfer option/transfer of assets. Transfer of ownership is the process of transferring all assets built and/or maintained during the period of cooperation to GCA when the PPP agreement expires. The following are the stages in transfer of ownership: Asset Valuation. Valuation of assets of all infrastructure components/systems that are included in the PPP agreement is based on the conditions/technical performance and the remaining age of each component. Payment of Compensation. Compensation to be paid by GCA to business entities is in accordance with the values listed in PPP agreement Project Transfer. Official Project Transfer from business entity to GCA after asset valuation report was agreed and signed by both parties. B. Unsolicited Projects Unsolicited Proposals is a little bit different with a general PPP project mechanism. Unsolicited proposal have an additional phase, which is a approval for business entities as initiator before the tender phase. Unsolicited proposals for PPP is conducted into two stages. The first stage is a usual step in most cases and takes place from the time the proponent presents the project to the government until all internal assessments and approvals are finished and the project is ready to be publicly tendered. The second stage involves a competitive tender process; approaches tend to differ in incentives or benefits to the original proponent of the project. Picture 7 below shows detailed steps for each stage of the management process for a private business entity initiating an unsolicited infrastructure proposal. The principle in designing the procedure for unsolicited proposals is that the proponents should know precisely where and to whom to submit their proposals, what information is required, and the steps and time frame for decisions to be made. a. Approval from GCA for Project Concept from initiator (Step 1) Process to get GCA Approval for initiator to prepare PPP Project This step is divided into 4 stages: Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 273

1. Initiator submit the intent letter to propose PPP Project concept suggestion, completed with project concept documents and qualifications of initiator documents. 2. GCA evaluate the Project concept document 3. GCA evaluate the initiator qualification 4. GCA make decisions (Step 2) Process to get GCA Approval for initiator to continue the completion of the PPP feasibility study and the fulfillment at the requirements for business entity to join the tender, this step consist of three activities: 1. Initiator proceeds with the implementation and completion of the prefeasibility study and submit the pre-feasibility documents to GCA 2. GCA evaluates and assesses the pre-feasibility study 3. GCA approves or rejects the PPP proposal [Figure 8] Steps of PPPs Unsolicited Projects by the Private Sector in Indonesia 274 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

(Step 3) Process to obtain approval from GCA for Initiator to be stipulated as initiator. This step is divided into 5 activities: 1. Initiator completes the pre-feasibility study and pre-qualification requirement fulfillment. 2. Initiator obtains SKKL or UKL-UPL (environmental problem mitigation actions) and environmental permit and location stipulation 3. GCA evaluates and assesses the feasibility study documents and pre-qualification requirements fulfillment documents 4. GCA establishes the decisions 5. GCA sets a compensation for initiator. The compensation is provided in the form of: Giving additional point (maximum 10%) to initiator tender pint which will be explicitly stated in tender documents Granting initiator the right to match, according to the tender results no later than 30 days from the enactment of the best offer in the tender Minister/Head of institution/ district head or tender winner will purchase PPP proposal including IPR. In case the initiator get additional point or right to match, than the ownership of all feasibility study and other documents will be transferred to Minister/Head of institution/district head. In case the project proposal is bought then the initiator is prohibited to join the tender. b. Tender Mechanism for Unsolicited proposals The tender mechanism for unsolicited proposals and solicited ones is similar or practically the same. The only different is in the tender winner enactment stage, the initiator will receive compensation in the form of additional points or right to match. 4. Stakeholders and Categories of PPP 4.1. The PPP Unit The institution in charge of coordinating Indonesia s PPP program are the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of National Development Planning/National Development Planning Agency (Bappenas). Under the Ministry of Finance there is a newly established (in 2015) and a dedicated PPP unit at the national level, named Directorate of Government Support and Infrastructure Finance Management, Ministry of Finance. 36 At the Ministry of National Development Planning/National Development Planning Agency (Bappenas) there is a PPP unit named Directorate Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 275

for PPP Development (PKPS). The different implementing agencies in infrastructure sectors liaise with Bappenas to decide which projects should be procured as PPPs. The Ministry of Finance makes recommendations about fiscal support for projects. Indonesia s infrastructure is rigorously demarcated by sector, each one having its sector law. Thus, coordination is essential for infrastructure development to be effective. By the very fact of its name, KKPPI (The Policy Committee for the Acceleration of Infrastructure Provision) has been assigned the task of ensuring effectiveness. KKPPI was later transformed into different name KPPIP (the Committee of Infrastructure Priorities Development Acceleration) which plays a key role in providing inter-ministerial coordination and quality control in the structuring of projects as well as coordinating policies that affect infrastructure development. However, as the top decision-making committee for PPP in Indonesia, KPPIP is yet to play a strong leadership, to ensure an effective and active leader in supporting PPP project preparation and implementation. 37 Nevertheless, the government realizes the need to create an effective coordination framework with strong political leadership to reinforce its infrastructure program in general and that of PPPs in particular. At the initiative of Bappenas, the Ministry of Finance and the Coordinating Ministry of Economic Affairs a revitalization scheme of KPPIP is being developed and designed to be the champion institution at the top. 4.2. Parties in PPPs Implementation The parties in the implementation of PPPs in Indonesia are GCA (Government Contracting Agency, or PJPK Penanggung Jawab Proyek Kerjasama) and the Business Entities (in addition: Supporting Institutions). Government Contracting Agency (GCA) is the government s representative or partner in the public private partnership (PPP). It can be ministry or the Minister, government institution or Head of the Institute, local government or Head of the Region or Mayor, or stateowned enterprise, which is responsible for providing infrastructure in accordance with the law. Regarding the supporting institutions, there are two SOEs that Government 36 This is a recent change in the Ministry of Finance. The similar unit was actually placed under the Fiscal Policy Agency at the MoF, named a Centre for Fiscal Risk Management. 37 Ministry of National Development Planning / National Development Agency, Book of PPP, 2013, p VIII, information on KPPIP can be obtained from KPPIP. The establishment of KPPIP is based on the Presidential Regulation Number 75 of 2014 concerning the Acceleration of Infrastructure Priorities Development dated July 17, 2014 276 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Indonesia established to help the provision of infrastructure. First one is the Indonesia Infrastructure Guarantee Fundor IIGF, which is a state owned enterprise that is established by the Ministry of Finance. As one of the fiscal tools of the government, IIGF is under a direct supervision of the Ministry of Finance and has a mandate to provide guarantee for infrastructure projects under Public Private Partnership (PPP) scheme. IIGF is part of the government s efforts to accelerate infrastructure development in Indonesia, by providing contingency support/guarantee for the risks caused by the government s action or inaction, which deters the economic feasibilities of the PPP project. 38 Basically, guarantee can be provided for the financial obligations of GCA, triggered by the risk events allocated to GCA in the PPP agreement, so long as the financial obligation can be quantified or there is a compensation formula stated in the PPP agreement. Some examples of the financial obligations that can be covered by Infrastructure Guarantee are the one caused by the delay in obtaining permit/license, change in regulation, absence of tariff adjustment and failure in integrating the network/facilities. 39 IIGF reviews the PPP Projects before their approval. IIGF will provide a guarantee after the following considerations have been met by the proposed PPP project: IIGF is satisfied that the Eligibility Criteria as mentioned below have been met with respect to the proposed PPP project Any criteria that has not been met have been waived in writing by IIGF Eligibility Criteria that each PPP project proposed to receive a guarantee from IIGF must meet the following: Criteria 1: The project must be a PPP project, which complies with PPP Regulation (Presidential Regulation No. 38 of 2015 and/or any other applicable regulations); Criteria 2: The project must be procured by the GCA under a PPP in which the contract is awarded through a transparent and competitive tender process; Criteria 3: The project must be technically, economically, financially, and environmentally viable, as well as socially desirable; Criteria 4: The PPP Agreement shall have suitable provisions for binding arbitration The Eligibility Criteria are applied in order to: Select projects that fit with GOI and IIGF s policy Ensure that the risks assumed by IIGF by providing guarantee coverage to 38 IIGF, Frequently Asked Questions of IIGF 39 Ibid. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 277

these project are not excessive Support GOI in maintaining prudent fiscal policies In short, the purpose in establishing IIGF are as follow: 40 To provide guarantee for infrastructure projects under public-private partnership (PPP) scheme. 41 To improve credit worthiness, particularly the bankability of PPP-based infrastructure projects. To improve good governance, consistency, and transparency in guarantee provision. To minimize the possibility of sudden shock to the State Budget and to ring-fence the government s contingent liability. The second institution is PT SMI (Sarana Multi Infrastructure: State Owned Enterprise on PPP Facilities). PT SMI is a SOE which was established by the Government of the Republic of Indonesia (GoI) on February 26th, 2009 with an objective to accelerate infrastructure development in Indonesia. PT SMI is also as a Non-Bank Financial Institution which focuses on Indonesia s infrastructures financing, PT SMI had obtained a business license as stipulated in Minister of Finance Decree No.396/KMK.010/2009 dated 12 October 2009. 42 PT SMI has four strategic roles in leveraging Indonesia s infrastructure development. Those are 1) A catalyst in acceleration of the infrastructure development in Indonesia 2) Provide alternative source of fund to financing project 3) Promote and Support Public Private Partnerships (PPP) 4) Increase the size, capacity and its effectiveness through the partnerships with third parties. 43 PT SMI has a subsidiary company named PT Indonesia Infrastructure Finance. Based on Minister of Finance Regulation Number 100/PMK.010/2009 regarding Infrastructure Financing Companies, PT SMI original eligibility is to finance infrastructure development in following sectors: 44 Transportation infrastructures, including: sea, river, lake, airports, railways and train stations; 40 Ibid. 41 The guarantee does not apply to all PPP projects. It is a demand driven approach. Only projects with a high exposure of political risks require IIGF support. In fact this condition makes IIGF difficult to operate, without a clear and mandatory guarantee IIGF has to educate prospective GCA to understand the needs for a government guarantee on PPP projects 42 http://www.ptsmi.co.id 43 Ibid. 44 Ibid. At the time of this writing, PT SMI is announced to receive a capital injection of the government amounted IDR 20.3 trillion (USD 1.6 Billion), of which 90% of them is a transfer of asset transfer from the dismantled National Government Investment Center (Pusat Investasi Pemerintah, PIP). This would allow SMI to expand the scope of its services to cover a wider infrastructure sector. 278 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Road infrastructures, including toll roads and toll bridges; Irrigation infrastructures, including waterway; Drinking water infrastructures, including raw water intake building, transmission networks, distribution networks, and drinking water treatment facilities. Waste water infrastructure, including waste water treatment, collection networks, main networks, and waste collection facilities. Telecommunication infrastructure, including telecommunication networks; Electricity infrastructure, including power plants, electricity transmission and distribution. Oil and gas infrastructure, including processing, storage, transportation, transmission, and oil & gas distribution. Other infrastructure projects which are not included in items but has approval from the Minister. Between 2013 and 2014, PT SMI has provided more than IDR 8,100 Billion (equivalent to USD 623 Million, 1 USD = IDR 13,000) investment financing for various infrastructure projects. The list is shown below. <Table 4> Financing Commitments of PT SMI as of 31 December 2014, by Sector Source: PT SMI Annual Report 2014. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 279

BOX 2. HIGHLIGHTED ARTICLES OF THE INDONESIAN PPP REGULATION AT THE SUBNATIONAL LEVEL GOVERNMENT REGULATION NO. 50 OF 2007 REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURE FOR REGIONAL COOPERATION Article 3 define the subjects who can be the parties in the regional cooperation: the Governor, the Regent, the Mayor, and third party. Article 5 stipulate that the Regional Cooperation written on the Cooperation Agreement Article 7 stipulate the procedures of the Regional Cooperation can implemented through: a. Head of the Region or one of the parties can initiate or offer plan of regional cooperation to the head of other region about a specific object b. Draft of the cooperation agreement contains at least: 1. The subject of cooperation 2. The object of cooperation 3. The scope of cooperation 4. The rights and obligations of the parties 5. The period of cooperation 6. The termination of cooperation 7. Circumtances forces and 8. Dispute resolution c. Head of the region in preparing the draft of cooperation agreements involve the related institutional/other related work unit in the region and can ask for opinions and suggestions from the experts, the Minister / Head of Non-Departmental Government Institution d. Head of the Region can issue a Power of Attorney for the completion of the draft of cooperation. e. Further provisions on technical guidelines as referred to a, b, and c regulated by the ministrial regulation. Article 8 stipulate that the implementation of the cooperation agreement can be implemented by the regional work unit 4.3. PPPs at the Sub-national Level In Indonesia, sub-national entities can enter into PPPs. Those laws/regulations guiding the use of PPPs at the sub-national level are Government Regulation No. 50 of 2007 regarding Implementation Procedure for Regional Cooperation, approved on August 22, 2007 and Regulation of The Minister of Home Affairs No. 22 of 2009 regarding Technical Guidelines on Procedure for Regional Cooperation, approved on May 22, 2009. PPP Project at the sub-national level will be guaranteed by IIGF. Based on prevailing regulations, IIGF is mandated to process, and monitor guarantees as well as claims through a single window to future eligible PPP Projects in Indonesia. 280 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

4.4. PPP Project Selection Categories The list of Public Private Partnership in Indonesia consists of three categories: (i) Potential Projects; (ii) Prospective Projects (formerly known as priority projects); and (iii) Ready for Offer Projects. The PPP Book is prepared and published every year in accordance with the process of the Government s Work Plan. In order to be registered in the PPP Book, the Minister, Head of Institution, or Head of Local Government/Mayor/Governor must submit their project proposal to Bappenas along with a statement about the Ministry/Institution or local government working unit that will responsible for planning, preparation, and transaction of the proposed PPP project. The PPP project proposal should be accompanied by supporting documentations that differs between planning stages, as shown in Figure 9 and 10 below. [Figure 9] Planning Stages of PPP Project in Indonesia Potential Project Prospective Project Read for Offer Project Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 281

[Figure 10] Planning Document of PPP in Infrastructure Provision 282 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

5. The Regulatory and Fiscal Framework of PPPs 5.1. Fiscal Risks, Project Risk, and Risk Allocation Technically, the PPP is a cooperation scheme in which the government normally transfer risks to the private sector with the promise of financial compensation for the risk transferred to the private sector (Wibowo and Mohamed, 2008). Many infrastructure projects intervened by complex risk (Ng and Loosemore, 2006) which has the potential negatively impact the effectiveness of PPP projects. Therefore, the effectiveness of the implementation of PPP is very dependent on the allocation and better risk management among the public (government) and private investors (Murphy, 2008). In Indonesia, the risks are allocated to the party who most able to control the risks in order to ensure efficiency and effectiveness in the provision of infrastructure. The party who most able to control the risks is usually the GCA or the GCA appoint the supporting agency because the GCA or its supporting agency is the party who really know the conditions, for example: in roads sector, the party who most able to control the risks is BPJT or if project held in the subnational level, the GCA might be the Head of Region or Regional Government. The allocation of risk must be agreed upon by the parties and written into a cooperation agreement. 45 In practice, when the project is guaranteed by IIGF, the company will undertake a thorough assessment on the risk allocation and assist GCA to allocate risks according to each party s capacity. However, the allocation of risk often can not be translated into a good text cooperation agreement practically (World Bank, 2012). Marques and Berg (2011) said that the allocation of risk is one of the major constraints in the design of the PPP agreement and is the main cause of failure of private sector participation in PPP projects. One form of the lack of proper risk allocation is the imposition of excessive risk to a particular party or loading a risk to the party which actually can not control it well.if the government allocates risk to those who are not able to control the risk, then the chances are that the investor will inflate the cost of the project to compensate for the severity of the risk, or even out of the project (Barrett, 2003). On the contrary, if most of the risks remain in the government, the PPP scheme advantages in maintaining the quality of infrastructure and public services will be reduced because of the risk actually act as an incentive for the private sector to maintain the quality of the project (Bettignies and Ross, 2004). 46 45 Repository UGM, Alokasi Risiko dalam Proyek KPS. Some projects however, still exposed to residual risks. 46 Ibid. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 283

BOX 3. Study Case: Giwangan Terminal, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. 47 In 2002, the government of Yogyakarta city intends to build a terminal in the area Giwangan to develop the economy of the southern part of the city Yogayakarta and to organize traffic in the South region. The city government opened an opportunity for the private sector to build a terminal in the Bus type A, PT Perwita Karya ( Perwita ) won the tender. In 2006, Perwita complaint because the presence of illegal terminals around Giwangan disrupt the commercial operation of the terminal. In addition, the newly renovated terminal Jombor DI Yogyakarta Provincial government evolved into a more crowded terminal than of Giwangan because of its strategic location. The rise of low-cost airlines tickets and sluggish local economy as a result of the massive earthquake that occurred in 2006 was also lead to changes in passenger behavior and lead to lonely bus passengers in the terminal. Because Perwita continue to lose money as a result of his behavior was not a commercial area in the terminal, Perwita and the municipality agreed to terminate the contract. The process of transfer of assets covered disputes asset appraisal method. Perwita sued the city government to obtain compensation for the cost of investment and win. The government of Yogyakarta appealed. The project is a classic example on the inappropriate risk allocation among parties. Risk is not a primary focus in the PPP agreement Giwangan, seen from the assumption that the private sector is expected to assume all risks arising during the construction and management of the terminal. In fact, there are many factors that affect the performance of the management of the terminal and are beyond the control of the private sector, for example, the error of macro transportation system design and enforcement of traffic rules is weak. The construction of a terminal in the southern area deserted suburban certainly not attractive to private investors. BOX 4. Study Case: Power Plant, Central Java, Indonesia 48 PPP Project of Power plant in Central Java is the first large-scale PPP projects Showcase which its investment value is more than 30 trillion IDR, as well as the first PPP project implemented by Presidential Decree No. 67 Year 2005 on Cooperation Government With Business Entities in the Provision of Infrastructure. In 2006, The government has set a power plant project in Central Java as one of the PPP model projects. In addition, the project is also one of the projects which are incorporated in the Master Plan for the Acceleration and Expansion of Economic Development (MP3EI) and also PPP showcase models that have been proposed by the Government in 2010. 47 The project has been documented as Harvard Kennedy School case study. See https://www.case.hks.harvard.edu/casetitle.asp?caseno=1979.0. The IIGF Institute also use the case study to demonstrate the importance of risks allocation against a project success (www.iigf.com). 284 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

BOX 4. continued 48 The signing of the project document have proved that the PPP scheme based on the process which are open, competitive, transparent and accountable can be implemented in Indonesia. This success also shows that if the process of procurement of PPP projects implemented in accordance with the principles that have been determined, it can be obtained better quality, more reliable and more efficient infrastructure services so that it can provide good impact for the country, especially for the budget. Looking ahead, the Government will be more encourage the role of supporting institutions such as PT Sarana Multi Infrastruktur and Indonesia Infrastructure Guarantee Fund to support and oversee the process procurement of PPP projects so that this success could soon be developed in the sector and another project. The project received the government guarantee by using the shared guarantee scheme between the Government and the Indonesia Infrastructure Guarantee Fund that obtain a mandate based on Presidential Decree No. 78 of 2010 concerning Guarantee of Infrastructure in Government Cooperation Project with Business Entity which is done through Infrastructure Guarantee Agency. Guarantee for Central Java Power Plant PPP Project cover specified financial obligations of the PLN in the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA), that included PLN's financial obligations related to the purchase of electricity monthly from Independent Power Producer (IPP). Provision of Government Guarantees for Central Java Power Plant Project is a step forward in the process of infrastructure development in Indonesia because there is new guarantee scheme more transparent and accountable through PT PII as one of the Government's fiscal policy instrument. J-Power Consortium, Ithocu and Adaro are the winner of the bidding in Central Java Power Plant Project 2x1000 MW on June 17, 2011 which subsequently has established PT Bhimasena Power Indonesia as the entity implementing the project. PPP scheme which will be implemented in this project is a Build-Own- Operate-Transfer (BOOT) with concession period of 25 years. The project is expected to begin commercial operation (Commercial Operation Date / COD) at the end of 2016. While the technology used is ultra-supercritical, which has level of efficiency and carbon emissions better than coal plants that PLN is currently owned so it is environmentally friendly power plant. In addition, Central Java Power Plant will utilize low-calorie coal supply nationwide. This matter will help PLN reduce the cost of goods production (BPP/Biaya Pokok Produksi) and reduce government subsidies to PLN. In addition, this project will open employment opportunities to minimum of 5,000 locals and give opportunities for participation to the local component in the production process, and this will further encourage the development of the national economy. 48 Coordinating Ministry of Economic Affairs Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 285

As shown in the example, the frequency of the occurrence probability of risk is measured and the degree of their impact. The probability of the frequency of the least risk passengers enter the terminal due to the shadow terminal high enough. It is not true if the government is not able to estimate it. The government needs to align its policy with the spirit of public service and to have a risk analysis established in the contract. Awareness, mindset, and the capacity of stakeholders also need to be built to improve the quality of the procurement process / project execution. [Figure 11] Steps to Handle Project Risk 5.2. Fiscal Support to PPP Projects and the Role of Government Agencies The Minister of Finance established some recent incentives concerning the Government support (fiscal and/or guarantee) for PPP. Among others, there are four important regulations as follows: Presidential Regulation No. 78/2010 regarding the provision of government guarantees for PPP infrastructure projects through IIGF Presidential Regulation No. 30/2015 on the provision of land for infrastructure. This regulation relaxes the source of funds to purchase land. To give more flexibility and speedier process of land acquisition, private sector may purchase the land and then reimbursed by the government Presidential Regulation No. 38/2015 which highlights Availability Payment as an alternative financing mechanism in developing infrastructure projects under the Public Private Partnership model. The Ministry of Finance Regulation (acronym in Indonesia: PMK) No. 260 of 2010 regarding the procedure for requesting and providing such guarantee, The Ministry of Finance Regulation, PMK No. 223 of 2012 regarding the Viability Gap Fund. Those 5 (five) regulations are expected to compliment each other and give a push for more private sector investment in infrastructure. Institutionally, Bappenas PPP unit stands in the Directorate for PPP Development (PKPS) at the Deputy of Infrastructure, and a PPP unit under the 286 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

Directorate General for Debt Management will spearhead the promotion of PPP. As the execution of PPP project planning, preparation and transaction has been devolved to the respective line ministries and contracting agencies, the Government has recognized the need to establish a Central PPP Unit (PC3U) to be responsible for ensuring policy consistency, quality control and transparency, establishing standards and principle that all transactions must follow, and monitoring the execution for compliance. Given the remarkable investment needs and the limited capital resources, the unit will prioritize PPP projects according to their development impact and their readiness toward implementation. Other tasks include: assisting line ministries and local governments in identifying, preparing, and implementing PPP projects; reviewing project evaluation carried out by the PPP nodes; assessing requests for Government support to PPP projects; coordinating such support with MoF, publishing status reports on PPP projects and disseminating relevant information; preparing guidelines and manuals for PPP projects; and building capacity in the PPP nodes. The P3CU is currently being developed and it is envisaged as an independent, centralized organization dedicated to PPPs with access to fiscal budget allocation decisions. This dedicated unit will be placed under a high-level political leadership and decision making institution that has the authority to: (1) coordinate across planning and fiscal agencies; (2) decide on cross-ministerial conflict resolution; and (3) drive legislative improvements. 49 The homogeneity of regulatory arrangements and practices in infrastructure sector is another important cross-cutting issue, with wide variations found from sector to sector. Nevertheless, progress has been made towards a more consistent regulatory framework. The Government has established regulatory bodies although not yet fully independent for toll roads (BPJT), the downstream end of the oil and gas sector (BPH Migas), and telecommunications (BRTI). These bodies are already operational in terms of budgeting, staffing, functions, and standard operations. Various short-term recommendations to move towards the introduction of internationally recognized regulatory practices have been identified. These include consolidating the existing regulatory functions under each line ministry, building the line ministries capacity in regulatory procedures, creating a more transparent regulatory environment, encouraging stakeholder participation in regulatory matters, and allowing tariffs to reach cost recovery levels. 49 At the time of writing, an institutional change in Bappenas is taken place where infrastructure is mainstreamed into regional development context. This means that Bappenas will no longer have a separate deputy on infrastructure. This change is stipulated in Presidential Regulation No. 65/2015 and 66/2015. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 287

5.3. Law of Budgetary Process The law guiding the budgetary process is the Law of State Budget (APBN). The Law of State Budget is issued annually. The latest of the State Budget Law is Law No. 3 of 2015 concerning Amendment of Law No. 27 of 2014 regarding the budget of state income and expenses for 2015.Stages in the planning and preparation of the state budget can be explained as follows. 50 First, a preliminary stage. This stage begins with the preparation of the draft state budget by the government, among others, include the determination of the basic assumptions of the state budget, estimated revenues and expenditures, priorities and budget preparation exercise. At this stage also held a commission meeting between the respective commissions with its partners (ministries/technical institutions). This stage ends with the process of finalizing the preparation of the draft budget by the government. Second, the filing stage, discussions, and determination of the state budget. Stages starting with the president's speech as an introduction to the Draft State Budget and Financial Memorandum. Then there will be a discussion between the finance minister and the House Budget Committee, and between commissions with departments/agencies related technical. The results of this discussion is the Law on State Budget, in which includes the budget unit as an integral part of the law. Unit budget is a document that sets the budget allocation for each department/agency, sector, sub-sector, program and project/activity. To finance the general duty of government and development, department/agency filed a Work Plan and Budget of the Ministry/Agency to the Ministry of Finance and Bappenas to be discussed later Budget Implementation List and verified before payment process. This process must be completed from October to December. In the implementation of the state budget in the form of a presidential decree made instructions (Presidential Decree) as the Budget Implementation Guidelines. In carrying out the payment, the head office / project leader in each ministry and agency submits a Request for Payment to the Regional Office of the State Treasury. Third, the state budget oversight. Oversight of the implementation of the state budget is implemented by supervisors 50 http://www.fiskal.depkeu.go.id/webbkf/kolom/detailkolom.asp?newsid=n119258959 288 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

both external and internal government. Below the example of a budgetary process in 2014. [Figure 12] Budgetary Process, Example for FY. 2014/2015 Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 289

The government together with the House of Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia has discussed and agreed on 2015 APBN by taking into account the consideration of Regional Representative Council of the Republic of Indonesia. However, in both APBN and APBD (local government budget), the PPP program has not been integrated as part of the permanent/annual budgetary system. This has been the indication of the absence of macroeconomic policy in the budget process when it comes to PPP scheme. There is a budget process for some form of government support such as VGF, land fund (for toll road sector), but not for periodical payment to the private partner in a PPP project. 5.4. The Budgetary Process and PPPs There is no specific budgeting process of PPP because it is incorporated in the regular budgeting process of line ministry. Several articles in Indonesia s Constitution bear directly on the character of Indonesia s State budget: State sovereignty is invested in the people and is exercised in accordance with law (Article 1:2 of Constitution 1945); the President exercises the power of the State (Article 4:1); the House of Representatives (DPR) is vested with lawmaking authority: comprising power to legislate, approve budgets and conduct oversight of government (Article 20:1 and Article 20A); the State budget (APBN for short) is to be determined annually by law and implemented in an open and accountable manner in order to maximize public welfare (Article 23). In 2003 as part of its program of reform post-soeharto and as a sign of its intention to restore the original purposes of State budgeting the Indonesian government passed a new law (Law No 17/2003) on State Finances. This was the first time since the colonial era that Indonesia had modernized its financial legislation: previously, its budgetary processes had been based on the Dutch system called Indische Compatbiliteit Wet (ICW for short) dating from the 1920 s. The reform process saw the enactment of several other budget-related laws: Law No. 1/2004 on the State Treasury, Law No. 25/2004 on State Planning, Law No. 32/2004 on Regional Governance, Law No. 33/2004 on Fiscal Balance and Law No. 15/2004 on State Audit. Indonesia is a unitary state with a decentralized system of regional government. The national budget (APBN) is the preserve of the central government and the DPR. Budgets at the sub-national or local government level are called APBDs: there are currently 529 separate APBDs produced by local governments and approved by elected local consultative assemblies (known as DPRDs) in each region; consistent with the unitary nature of the Indonesian State, APBDs also require central government (specifically the Ministry of Home Affairs) approval 290 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

before implementation. It takes almost a year to plan, draft, discuss and adopt a budget at both the national and local level. In the case of APBNs (State budgets), the process begins with national-level community consultations on development planning (known as Musrembangnas) held early in the budget planning year (in Indonesia, fiscal years run from 1 January to 31 December). Government then draws up its budget assumptions, policies and work plans and submits these to the DPR in May. In June, the DPR s Budget Committee (known as Banggar) meets with government officials to form a number of budget working groups; the ensuing discussions involve all eleven of the DPR s sectoral committees or commissions (Komisi I-XI) who meet with representatives of ministries/agencies they oversight. By July Banggar finalizes its report of these preliminary discussions and continues discussion of the budget outline. On 16 August the President delivers his budgetary discourse before Parliament, at the same time tabling the government financial statement, the draft APBN and proposed work and budget plans for each central government ministry/agency (known as RKA K/L). The APBN is adopted into law by a plenary session of the DPR in October. Detailed implementation of the budget is then spelt out in Presidential decrees and budget implementation check lists (called DIPAs) prepared for each ministry/agency. The budget begins to be implemented on 1 January. Indonesian budget law provides for a mid-year budget revision process. Budget revision processes mirror the normal budgetary process and end with the adoption of the revised budget (known as APBN-P). Guidelines for the formulation and adoption of local government budgets are laid down in Minister of Home Affairs regulation No. 13/2006 concerning Guidelines for Management of Local Finances and various ministerial edicts since then. Processes at the local level mirror those used for State budgets. The following tables provide details of key local government budget documentation and the timetable set for various stages of the budgetary process. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 291

<Table 5> Key Local Government Budgetary Documentation Planning Phase o Local government work plans (RKPD) o Work plans of local government work units/departments (SKPDs) Discussion Phase o Basic Budget Policies (KUA) and provisional budget priorities and funding levels (PPAS) o Budget and work plans of each local SKPDs Implementation Phase o Local regulation adopting local budget (APBD) o Local head of government (HoG) regulation outlining details of APBD o Budget implementation checklist (DPA) for each local SKPD o Local government regulation adopting revised local budget (APBD-P) o Local HoG regulation providing details of APBD-P Acountability Phase o Report on first semester budget outcomes o Local regulation on accountability of APBD implementation o Information on report on implementation of local governance (ILPPD) o Reports on implementation of local governance (LPPD) o Local government accountability report (LKPJ) <Table 6> Schedule of Activities Carried out during Budget Planning Year Month June July August Week I II III IV Preparation of draft general budget policy Adoption of budget policy Budget policy submitted to local parliament Budget ceiling submitted to local parliament Discussion of budget policy Discussion onbudge ceiling Adoption of budget ceiling Preparation of Budget & Work Plans of local government work units September Compilation of department budget Compilation of draft local budget October November December Draft budget submitted to local government Adoption of budget Discussion of draft budget Discussion of draft budget Source: National Secretariat Indonesia Forum for Budget Transparency. Evaluation of adopted budget by provincial government and the Ministry of Home Affairs 292 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

6. Operational Procedures: Pre-contractual Development and Contract Management 6.1. Financial Support Platform and Contractual Structure Financial support institutional is an important thing to develop the PPP projects. Indonesia has institutional financial support platform for PPPs. The government of Indonesia has established two financial institutions under Ministry of Finance: (1) The IIGF (Indonesia Infrastructure Guarantee Fund) or PT PII which provides government guarantees or credit enhancements only to PPP projects that are financially feasible; (2) PT SMI (Sarana Multi Infrastruktur) which acts as facilitator and catalyst for infrastructure development in Indonesia, including the promotion of public private partnership schemes and funding activities in various infrastructure-related sectors in the form of debt, equity, and mezzanine financing. In addition, PT SMI established its subsidiary company PT Indonesia Infrastructure Finance (IIF). 51 PT SMI recently received assets of the Center for Government Investment (PIP, now dismantled) which was a public service agency (BLU) that provides pre-financing arrangements for land acquisition. As other countries give special fiscal treatment for their PPPs, Indonesia has regulations concerning special fiscal treatment. 52 Basically, in the Indonesian PPP context, the source of cost recovery of the investment will come from the user fee. In the case of electricity and in some limited case water, the government through PLN (electricity company) and local water company (known as PDAM) are the off takers. While in the first example, the investor takes both the demand and construction risks, the later case gives a comfort to investors for having government as the off-taker, hence relieving investors from the demand risks. The current Presidential Regulation No. 38/2015 on availability payment is paving the way for infrastructure sector other than electricity and water to enjoy the shift of demand risks to the government. In case of the return on investment committee of business entities sourced from payment by users in the form of tariffs, PJPK/CA (Contracting Agency) determine 51 PT Indonesia Infrastructure Finance (IIF) was established on January 15, 2010 as a result of an initiative by the Government of Indonesia. IIF was structured as a private non-bank financial institution in the form of a cooperation with World Bank, Asian Development Bank (ADB) and other international multilateral agencies under regulation (PMK) No. 100/PMK.010/2009 dated May 27, 2009 with a focus on investing in commercially feasible infrastructure projects in Indonesia and to encourage private sector engagement in the country s infrastructure development. See www.iif.co.id 52 The latest PPP regulation, Presidential Regulation No. 38/2015 provides incentives and financial support to develop projects but it will be regulated later through the regulation of Ministry of Finance and at the time of writing, this regulation has not established yet. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 293

the tariffs for providing the beginning of infrastructure. Tariff in the beginning and its adjustment set to ensure the return on investment which includes the closure of capital cost and operational cost and profit in certain period of time. Based on the consideration of the GCA, if tariff in the beginning and its adjustment has not been able determined to return the entire investment of business entities committee, the tariff can be determined based on the ability of users. 53 For the availability payment, in case of the return on investment committee of business entities sourced from the payment of the availability of services, GCA allocated fund payment of the availability of services for providing infrastructure implemented by committee of business entities during the period time stipulated in Cooperation Agreement. Allocation fund payment of the availability of services implemented by taking into account: (a) capital fee. (b) operational fee and (c) profit of committee of the business entities. 54 6.2. Renegotiation and Disputes Renegotiation can be mentioned as one of alternative dispute resolutions through the consensus. It would be better for every PPP agreements if there s a clause which clearly describe the parties are possible to request for the negotiation of PPP Agreements and the list of occasion which can be decided as a basis of requesting the renegotiation. Thus, in the future, one of the parties who will get the disadvantages of the changing occasion or the fault of risk estimation, the party above is able to use the party s rights to request the renegotiation s proposal and the other party has to pay for attention to that suggestion which is a legal of a renegotiation request as it has been agreed. 55 The issue is related to the exemption of barriers to deliver renegotiation proposal to the negotiating table. It may be that the parties to a concession infrastructure projects have to feel comfortable with the risk allocation stipulated in the concession agreement. Therefore, they will feel suspicious of the proposal to renegotiate the allocation of risk and tend to be cold towards renegotiation offer. This is where the main points of the proposed policy, each party shall be entitled to propose renegotiation and to be heard. As such, the parties can at least get a chance to voice their interests. 53 Indonesia, Peraturan Presiden tentang Kerjasama Pemerintah dengan Badan Usaha dalam Penyediaan Infrastruktur, Perpres nomor 38 tahun 2015, LN nomor 62 Tahun 2015, Pasal 12. 54 Indonesia, Peraturan Presiden tentang Kerjasama Pemerintah dengan Badan Usaha dalam Penyediaan Infrastruktur, Perpres nomor 38 tahun 2015, LN nomor 62 Tahun 2015, Pasal 13. 55 Repository UGM, Alokasi Risiko dalam Proyek KPS 294 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

BOX 5. Incomplete Contract in PPP Project The classic example of incomplete contract for PPP Project in Indonesia is the story of 24 toll road segments of the Trans-Java toll road network. All of the projects stops because of unclear responsibility of each party in the land acquisition. The contract cannot be terminated because of this compliance issue. Another example of incomplete contract is the case of Kanci Pejagan Toll road. The project owned by (at that time) Bakrie Toll is among the first to operate in the Trans Java toll road network. As a pioneer, this toll road segment is located in the middle of the network, and thus suffered from the inability to exploit the network economies. The second problem hit the toll road when the government built a flyover at the national road parallel to the road segment, causing almost 50% traffic diverted to the road of the newly constructed infrastructure. The third financial disaster struck the company when the provincial road that connects to the toll road was damaged by the landslide. The Public Works department of the provincial government needed to wait until the budget was approved before reconstruction was undertaken. Bakrie Toll was not able to renegotiate this condition because the contract simply wont allow this risk to be borne by the government. If the parties do not have the right to renegotiate the validity of the proposal to be heard, then the party who feel that their interests have been disturbed by a developmental state will feel forced. A sense of compulsion can be followed by denial of responsibility, conflict, and finally ending with the dispute. As revealed Ng & Loosemore (2006), risk sharing can lead to chaotic intricately supervision responsibilities and responsibility to control risk. As an example the case of the Bus project, Yogyakarta example of engagement with the private sector must eventually quits decades before the end of the concession period. Neither the government, the private sector, as well as taxpayers lose money as a result. So it can be concluded that the renegotiation and successful renegotiation will have a financial impact that distanced the government, private sector, and taxpayers lose in Indonesia. Ministry of National Development Planning said that from 2009 until 2014, there are 42 projects have been renegotiated. The projects that have been renegotiated usually are the projects in already tendered. After the renegotiation, the GCA will decide if it is necessary to hold an auction or bidding once more. Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 295

7. Conclusion and Way forward to Further Improve Indonesia s PPP Framework for Infrastructure Development 7.1. Encouraging Private Participation in Infrastructure: State-of-the Art for Indonesia The working paper has extensively discussed about the laws and regulations enacted by the Indonesian government on the implementation framework of PPP in infrastructure, and how it evolves since its inception following the Presidential Regulation No. 7/1998 on the Cooperation between Government and Private Business Entities. The regulation is then replaced by the Presidential Regulation No. 67/2005 on the Cooperation between Government and Private Business Entities in the Provision of Infrastructure. The later regulation, drafted by the inter-ministerial committee on infrastructure was regarded as the beginning of government policy mainstream efforts of PPP in infrastructure. The user charge principles however, were fist introduced in the road sector by transforming the Aid-funded Jagorawi Highway into Jagorawi Toll Road in 1978. The toll system was very successful which than lead into the establishment of PT Jasa Marga (later becoming a public company), the Indonesia s first toll road authority. After the Law No. 38/2004 on Roads, PT. Jasa Marga remains as a toll road company, and the government contracting-agency is transferred from the Ministry of Public Works to the Toll Road Development Agency. So far, there is no investment in the public ports and airports, mostly due to the large risks associated with the policy changes within governments and stringent government regulations despite the recent Presidential Regulation No. 39/2014, allowing 100% foreign ownership of ports and airports. On the other hand, ports for special purposes, i.e. serving industrial area, have been an interest of private investors. Some of Indonesian special purpose ports and port terminals have been successfully constructed and operated. Other sectors such as telecommunication, private participation in the ownership and operation of telecom infrastructure and services was even more successful through the speed up process of ending a duopoly system of Telkom and Indosat, both of the are State Owned Companies. Later, Indosat went to IPO. The public and institutional investors now own most of the Indosat s shares. In the power sector, the Indonesian government opened the power generation sector by introducing a scheme of IPP (Independent Power Producer), which follows the international best practice, including the small and medium size (renewable) power plant using FIT (Feed In Tariff) system. In water sector, the progress of private participation made a history when the 296 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

RWE Thames Water and Suez-Lyonnaise entered into Indonesian market by investing in Jakarta. The contract between the investors and the Jakarta Provincial government was legally challenged several times. The issue of government responsibility to top up commercial tariff without a proper mechanism in reviewing the production costs is the center of the dispute. The recent decision of the Constitutional Court Justice to revoke the Law No. 7/2004 of the Water Resource (and the reenactment of Law No. 11/1974 on Irrigation) has put investment on water treatment and waste distribution facilities on hold. Private sector investment in liquid and solid waste were still limited, mainly due to the size of investment, production risks, and a weak financing frameworks, especially on government guarantees and off-taking responsibility of the local government. 7.2. The Plan for 5 Years of Infrastructure Development The current administration is aiming at IDR 5,519 Trillion of budget for infrastructure (or equivalent to USD 424.5 Bio, 1 USD = IDR 13,000) in the next five years (2015-2019). The most ambitious is for the power generation sector of 35,000 MW and the transportation sector. This would require the current IPP portion of 16% (7.7 GW) to be significantly increased to reach 32% (26 GW) by 2019, requiring investment needs of IDR 435 Trillion (or USD 33,5 Bio) from the private sector. On top of that, the existing Electricity SOE PT. PLN should raise their funds from both the government capital injection and the financial sector. For the transportation sector, the figure below illustrates the scale of the investment. [Figure 13] The Demand for Transportation Sector Source: Bappenas, 2014, www.bappenas.go.id Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 297

The President Jokowi has made a clear statement that during his term in the administration, the country has made a great leap toward modern infrastructure system, allowing the economic sector to grow and wealth is distributed geographically and among demographic categories. By securing the energy, food infrastructure and lowering logistics costs, the government is aiming at sustaining development amidst the possible global recession hits the economy. He has made an unpopular decision to reduce the fuel subsidy, adjust the price of energy and at the same time freeing some fiscal space for infrastructure investment and direct subsidies to the poor and disadvantages. 7.3. PPP in the Current Indonesia s Medium Term Development Plan The huge investment required by government s plan means that the administration seeks financial support from various sources. Around 40.1% of the budget comes from the national government and 9.9% of it will be provided by sub national governments (mainly for decentralized infrastructure such as urban transport infrastructure, water, and waste treatment facilities). Using the current decentralized budget law, the national government remains in control of allocation of national financial resources to be allotted to sub national government. This will leave a half of the investment to be met by both State Owned Enterprise and private sector through PPP Scheme. The figure below illustrates the source of investment for infrastructure by 2015 2019. [Figure 14] Infrastructure Investment Needs, by Source of Funding Source: Bappenas, 2014, www.bappenas.go.id 298 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구

It is very clear that while the government will possibly have in control of its own budget and SOE budget, more than 30% of investment should be sought from the private sector. The newly established inter-ministerial committee on infrastructure development (abbreviated KPPIP in Indonesian language) has pushed for a relaxed requirement for PPP market entry and procurement while at the same time focusing on project preparation and creating a progressive incentive system. The Indonesian government has also set a time-bound law on land acquisition for infrastructure development through Law No. 2/2012. The existing Viability Gap Funding (VGF) scheme allowing a sub commercial project to be procured using PPP framework is already put in place, and the on-going-preparation of availability payment (or in some other literature is known as performance based annuity scheme, PBAS) is soon to be introduced by the government. 7.4. The Way forward in Improving Indonesian PPP Framework Indonesian PPP framework has been progressed quite significantly since its was introduced in 1998. At the same time, the Indonesian government is also committed to the principle of good governance, and hence all procedures and mechanisms should be bulletproof to avoid misconduct and misappropriation of authority, especially from the government contracting agencies. Learning from the case study, there are scopes for improvement in implementing PPP projects in Indonesia. Given the size of investment required, and the existing government capacities to procure infrastructure projects, the study identifies the following actions to be taken. 1. The Absence of Macroeconomic Policy for PPP Boundary of the Use of PPP The Ministry of Finance has currently no explicit policy on the scale of PPP on infrastructure in relation with both government budget and GDP (Gross Domestic Product). In the previous administration (2014-2019 MP3EI development plan), when the government was aiming at more than 60% investment using private funding, the result was disappointing. Unrealistic approach to achieve up to 9% real economic growth using infrastructure investment creates market distrust on how the government will reach such an investment target. The current domestic borrowing capacity is also currently suppressed with only 8% national banking capacity to provide loan, mostly short term (tenor up to 5 years) and mainly absorbed by the household consumption sector, i.e. consumer loan. The structure of PPP deal that are mostly generating revenue using local currency (except for large scale IPP, and to a certain extent port charges 56 ). Chapter 2_Public-Private Partnership in the Indonesia 299

[Figure 15] Percentage of PPP Projects to Country Infrastructure Investment Source: Bappenas/JICA, 2013, Medium Term Economic Infrastructure Strategy: Background Study for RPJMN 2015 2019) The financial authority, i.e. Ministry of Finance and the Financial Service Authority (OJK: Otoritas Jasa Keuangan) for fiscal and monetary policies should work together on this particular issues. The government should send a right signal to the market in order to have a clear policy message on development. Different countries have their specific policy on the cap, or budget ceiling as well as a indicative/definitive budget line to support PPP Projects. In Indonesia, budget treatment is considered in a case-by-case approach, and little provision is made at the upper level (budgetary policy). The government may use both top down or bottom up approach to arrive at a certain consensus on the level of comfort in term of fiscal policy. 2. The Need to Incorporate PPP Planning Process into a Government Budgetary Process So far, budgetary process is leaving PPP projects out of conversations. The regular budget process consider only national and sub national government revenue and expenditure side. With the greater risks and responsibilities given to the government to promote PPP projects, the government, i.e. Ministry of National 56 The regulation of the Central Bank regulates that the transaction made within jurisdiction of Indonesia should be IDR denominated. However, there are several exceptions made, including in port charges and payment to IPP. At the time of writing, this regulation will be enforced, exposing currency risks to investors utilizing international financing sources. 300 한국과필리핀, 인도네시아민간투자사업비교연구