2 The development rationale for CDC
The importance of private sector
development
5. The private sector is increasingly recognised
as a vital component of sustainable development and 'pro-poor'
growth.[6] In his speech
on 12 October 2010, the Secretary of State said that it was the
private sector which "promotes new jobs, new opportunities,
new markets and new prosperity."[7]
The private sector has the capacity to create employment, increase
trade, provide goods and services and generate substantial tax
revenues. These tax revenues can be used to provide basic public
services such as healthcare and education.
6. The NAO found that research demonstrated that
growth was "an essential, although not always sufficient,
precondition for poverty reduction."[8]
It is also clear that strong growth is contingent on high rates
of investment.[9] However,
there is still a considerable lack of capital available for some
sectors and regions in developing countries.[10]
Foreign direct investment (FDI) flows to Sub-Saharan Africa
remain persistently low; it receives only 5% of global FDI.[11]
Almost 50% of African companies identify a lack of finance as
a major constraint to doing business.[12]
The lack of capital is further illustrated by the fact that nearly
three-quarters of the funds in which CDC invested during 2009
and 2010 received funding from other DFIs and 36% of these funds
failed to reach their target size.[13]
7. DFID and many others consider shortages of
investment finance in developing countries an important constraint
to "private sector development, economic growth and poverty
reduction."[14]
The shortage of capital is a particular problem because developing
countries often have challenging investment conditions. International
commercial investors are also still reluctant to invest in poor
countries due to the perceived risk, difficulty and unpredictability
of the operating environments.[15]
A combination of market failures and low appetite for
risk results in a lack of access to finance for credible businesses.[16]
The types of investments that are most needed for poverty reduction,
in particular, are often too risky for mainstream private sector
operators.[17] In addition,
some countries experience other constraints to investment such
as: a lack of appropriate laws; a weak regulatory institutional
framework; and political instability and conflict.[18]
A lack of appropriate infrastructure is also a major disincentive
for investment and inhibits economic development. We will comment
further upon this subject in the infrastructure inquiry we are
currently conducting.
Development finance institutions
8. CDC is one of approximately 20 multilateral,
regional and bilateral DFIs which seek to address the shortage
of investment in developing countries. Their role is to invest
in viable companies that contribute to economic growth. They have
an important role in demonstrating that profitable investments
can be made in difficult business environments. Bilateral DFIs[19]
provide approximately 25% of total development finance, equivalent
to around 20% of total aid.[20]
9. The aims of DFIs differ. Half of European
DFIs (not including CDC) require investments to be tied to national
interests.[21] DFIs
use a variety of investment methods, including loans, equity and
guarantees. Some, but not all, provide technical assistance.
Some DFIs also aim to leverage additional capital from private
investors. CDC is unusual in being overwhelmingly focussed on
equity.
CDC
HISTORY OF CDC
10. CDC was established in 1948 as the Colonial
Development Corporation to develop the resources of Britain's
colonies. It was renamed the Commonwealth Development Corporation
in 1963, and was given authority to invest outside the Commonwealth
in 1969. In 1997 CDC became a public private partnership and two
years later was transformed from a statutory corporation to a
public limited company. CDC was substantially restructured in
2004 into a 'fund of funds' investment company. As part of the
restructuring, two separate management companies were created
out of CDC: Actis and Aureos. Actis is CDC's largest fund manager.
DFID holds 40% of the shares of Actis; the remainder are held
by Actis management.
'Fund of funds' model
Figure
1: CDC's investment model
Source: Evidence from NAO, Figure 1
11. Since 1997, CDC has specialised in providing
private equity finance. Following the 2004 restructuring, CDC
now operates through an intermediated investment model as shown
in Figure One. It makes no direct investments but instead invests
with fund managers, which in turn invest in businesses through
their funds. CDC claims that this intermediated approach has
three key benefits: mobilising third party capital; using local
fund manager's knowledge and expertise; and enabling CDC to have
a broader investment footprint. At the end of 2009, CDC invested
with 65 fund managers, in 134 funds, in 794 underlying portfolio
companies.[22] CDC
aims to have a catalytic impact and stimulate private sector investment
by illustrating that good commercial returns can be made in developing
economies. CDC's resources are less than 1% of international
private equity that goes to developing countries, so for CDC to
have a meaningful impact it must be able to influence the behaviour
of commercial investors and mobilise additional capital.[23]
12. The intermediated investment model means
that CDC does not make any individual investment decisions; all
investment decisions are made by their fund managers. Before
investing, CDC agrees the strategy of the fund, the environmental,
social and governance issues and how the fund should operate.[24]
The fund managers monitor their investments and provide them
with business expertise when appropriate. When the fund manager
sells the investment they then return the capital and the proceeds
from the sale to CDC and other investors. The NAO found that
in 2008 fund managers were "receiving an annual management
fee of around one to two per cent of the value of investments,
and a proportion of profits (usually 10 to 20 per cent) when investments
were sold, typically after 5 to 10 years".[25]
There will be a more detailed analysis of the 'fund of funds'
investment model in Chapter Three.
COMPARATIVE POSITION OF CDC
13. As shown in Annex Two, CDC is the fourth
largest bilateral DFI, but is smaller than larger multilateral
and regional DFIs. DFIs use different investment methods, shown
in Annex One. CDC currently "leads the field globally"
in equity funds amongst DFIs.[26]
CDC specialises almost entirely in equity, which is unique amongst
the bigger DFIs. The majority of the portfolio of other DFIs
(e.g. BIO, DEG, Finnfund, FMO, Proparco, SOFID)[27]
is through loans.[28]
Most DFIs do very little in guarantees. CDC has less than 50
staff, which is significantly fewer than other DFIs. Academics
from the Overseas Development Institute found that CDC's portfolio
is much more orientated towards poorer countries than other DFIs.[29]
Annex Three shows that CDC's comparative advantage lies in selecting
appropriate fund managers and using the 'fund of funds' approach.
Academic analysis has concluded that there is not a best practice
model for DFIs and instead there is value in DFIs exploiting their
comparative advantage and specialisation.[30]
DFID'S OVERSIGHT OF CDC
14. DFID has no direct involvement in CDC's operational
decisions. The absence of direct DFID involvement is a deliberate
feature of the Department's oversight of CDC. It is argued that
it is important to demonstrate CDC's commercial discipline, free
of political interference, to other investors. The NAO informed
us that this type of arms-length relationship is "standard
practice in departmental oversight of government-owned companies."[31]
15. DFID does, however, exercise influence over
CDC through the Investment Policy, Investment Code, business plan
and remuneration policy. CDC's Investment Policy is the principal
instrument through which DFID ensures that the Company invests
so as to grow viable businesses in developing countries. CDC's
Investment Policy and Remuneration Framework were last updated
in 2008.[32]
6 For discussions of pro-poor growth, see, for instance,
'World Development Report 2006: Equity and Development' (Washington:
World Bank, 2005) or DFID Pro-Poor Growth Briefing Note 1, 'What
is pro-poor growth and why do we need to know?' (DFID Policy Division
internal paper, February 2004). Back
7
Mitchell, A. 12 October 2010. Wealth Creation Speech. http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Media-Room/Speeches-and-articles/2010
NAO para 1.6
Ev w33 Back
8
Ev w33 Back
9
Ev w33 Back
10
Ev w26 Back
11
Ev 62 Back
12
Ev 62 Back
13
Q 92 Back
14
Ev w33 Back
15
Ev 60 Back
16
Market failures occur when the private sector does not allocate
sufficient resources to viable enterprises. Back
17
Ev w56 Back
18
Public Accounts Committee, Eighteenth Report of Session 2008-09,
Investing for Development: the Department for International
Development's oversight of CDC Group plc, HC 94, para 13 Back
19
Bilateral DFIs are nationally owned DFIs e.g. Proparco is the
French DFI. Back
20
Overseas Development Institute. The strengths and weaknesses
of bilateral development finance institutions (2008), pg 1 Back
21
NAO, Investing for development: the Department for International
Development's oversight of CDC Group plc, 2008, p43 Back
22
Ev 80 Back
23
NAO, Investing for development: the Department for International
Development's oversight of CDC Group plc, 2008, p40 Back
24
Q 89 Back
25
Ev w34 Back
26
Kingombe, C. et al., CDC's position in the wider DFI architecture,
2011 Back
27
DFIs listed above are from the following countries:BIO (Belgium),
DEG (Germany), Finnfund (Finland), FMO (Netherlands), Proparco
(France), SOFID (Portgual). Back
28
Kingombe, C. et al., CDC's position in the wider DFI architecture,
2011 Back
29
Kingombe, C. et al., CDC's position in the wider DFI architecture,
2011 Back
30
Kingombe, C. et al., CDC's position in the wider DFI architecture,
2011 Back
31
Ev w34 Back
32
Ev 88 Back
|