The G-7 is banking on this certification of high-quality and low-ESG risks to provide the assurance that private investors need to attract them into PGII public-private partnerships. A BDN certification aims to provide a globally recognized certification-akin to a “Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval”-for infrastructure projects with low ESG risks, high debt transparency, and sustainable economic returns. To attract private sector investments, the governments of the United States, Australia, and Japan are creating a quality infrastructure certification initiative called the Blue Dot Network (BDN). Yet these institutional investors have difficulty identifying “bankable” sustainable infrastructure projects with acceptable levels of risk in developing countries. Due to rapidly expanding ESG investment funds, private-sector institutional investors-such as pension and insurance funds-have literally hundreds of billions of dollars available that could be invested in sustainable, low-risk investments. G-7 governments are not in a position to compete with China’s BRI through public spending. There is a second reason that quality infrastructure is a fundamental component of PGII: Quality projects with low ESG risks are needed to attract private sector investors, which are key to PGII’s financing model. By offering quality, transparent investment opportunities, G-7 nations hope to build soft power in low- and middle-income countries. Some past BRI projects gained international attention for environmental hazards, labor violations, corruption scandals, public protests, and unsustainable debt burdens in recipient countries. The G-7 is betting that such investments will be more attractive to host-country governments than what China has been offering. Implied-and at times overtly stated-in this PGII characterization is its sharp contrast to BRI projects. In launching PGII, the G-7 leaders repeatedly stated their goal to support “quality infrastructure” projects, that is, economically viable projects with transparent disclosures and low environmental, social, and governance (ESG) risks. The tallest Millau Viaduct tower is situated near the valley floor, which gives the viaduct a structural height of 336.4 m (1,104 ft), and a deck height of 270 m (890 ft) above the valley floor. The Millau Viaduct is a cable-stayed bridge that is both tall (in structural height) and high (in deck height). The bridge's two towers, built on either rim of the gorge, are 269 m (883 ft) tall, but due to the depth of the river gorge, the deck height of the Duge Bridge is 565 m (1,854 ft). For example, (as of 1 July 2020) the Duge Bridge is the highest bridge in the world, but only the fifteenth tallest. The difference between tall and high bridges can be explained in part because some of the highest bridges are built across deep valleys or gorges. A separate list of highest bridges ranks bridges by deck height. Structural height is different from deck height, which measures the maximum vertical distance between the bridge deck (the road bed of a bridge) and the ground or water surface beneath the bridge span. The structural height of a bridge is the maximum vertical distance from the uppermost part of a bridge, such as the top of a bridge tower, to the lowermost exposed part of the bridge, where its piers, towers, or mast pylons emerge from the surface of the ground or water. This list of tallest bridges includes bridges with a structural height of at least 200 metres (660 ft). For a list of the highest bridges (ranked by deck height), see List of highest bridges.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |