Person:
Andres, Luis A.
Author Name Variants
Fields of Specialization
Infrastructure economics
Degrees
External Links
Departments
Global Practice on Water
Externally Hosted Work
Contact Information
Last updated
January 31, 2023
Biography
Luis Andrés is Lead Economist in the Water Global Practice at the World Bank. Earlier, Dr. Andres held positions in the Sustainable Development Department for the Latin America and the Caribbean, and the South Asia Regions. His work at the World Bank involves both analytical and advisory services, with a focus on infrastructure, mainly in water and energy sectors, impact evaluations, private sector participation, regulation, and empirical microeconomics. He worked with numerous Latin American, South Asian, and East Europe governments. Before joining the World Bank, he was the Chief of Staff for the Secretary of Fiscal and Social Equity for the Government of Argentina and held other positions in the Chief of Cabinet of Ministries and the Ministry of Economy. He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from the University of Chicago and he has authored books, chapters in several books, monographs, and articles on development policy issues.
Publication Search Results
1 - 10 of 14
-
Publication
The Effects of Country Risk and Conflict on Infrastructure PPPs
(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2013-08)Through an empirical analysis of the relationship between private participation in infrastructure and country risk, the paper shows that country risk ratings are a reliable predictor of infrastructure investment levels in developing countries. The results suggest that a difference of one standard deviation in a country's sovereign risk score is associated with a 27 percent increase in the probability of having a private participation in infrastructure commitment, and a 41 percent higher level of investment in dollar terms. The predictive ability of country risk ratings exists for all sectors of infrastructure and for both greenfield and concessions. On average, energy investments exhibit a higher sensitivity to country risk than transport, telecommunications, and water investments. Concessions are more sensitive than greenfield investments to country risk, although country risk is a good predictor of investment levels for both contractual forms. Although foreign direct investment is found to be sensitive to country risk, the causal relationship is not nearly as sensitive as it is with private participation in infrastructure. Finally, an analysis of private participation in infrastructure patterns for those countries emerging from conflict reveals that conflict-affected countries typically require six to seven years to attract significant levels or forms of private investments in infrastructure from the day that the conflict is officially resolved. Private investments in sectors where assets are more difficult to secure--such as water, power distribution, or roads--are slower to appear or simply never materialize. -
Publication
Sanitation and Externalities : Evidence from Early Childhood Health in Rural India
(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2014-01)This paper estimates two sources of benefits related to sanitation infrastructure access on early childhood health: a direct benefit a household receives when moving from open to fixed-point defecation or from unimproved sanitation to improved sanitation, and an external benefit (externality) produced by the neighborhood's access to sanitation infrastructure. The paper uses a sample of children under 48 months in rural areas of India from the Third Round of District Level Household Survey 2007-08 and finds evidence of positive and significant direct benefits and concave positive external effects for both improved sanitation and fixed-point defecation. There is a 47 percent reduction in diarrhea prevalence between children living in a household without access to improved sanitation in a village without coverage of improved sanitation and children living in a household with access to improved sanitation in a village with complete coverage. One-fourth of this benefit is due to the direct benefit leaving the rest to external gains. Finally, all the benefits from eliminating open defecation come from improved sanitation and not other sanitation solutions. -
Publication
Reducing Poverty by Closing South Asia's Infrastructure Gap
(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2013-12)Despite recent rapid growth and poverty reduction, the South Asia Region (SAR) continues to suffer from a combination of insufficient economic growth, slow urbanization, and huge infrastructure gaps that together could jeopardize future progress. It is also home to the largest pool of individuals living under the poverty line of any region, coupled with some of the fastest demographic growth rates of any region. Between 1990 and 2010, the number of people living on less than US$1.25 a day in South Asia decreased by only 18 percent, while the population grew by 42 percent. If South Asia hopes to meet its development goals and not risk slowing down, or even halting, growth and poverty alleviation, it is essential to make closing its huge infrastructure gap a priority. But the challenges on this front are monumental. Many people living in SAR remain unconnected to a reliable electrical grid, a safe water supply, sanitary sewerage disposal, and sound roads and transportation networks. This region requires significant infrastructure investment (roads, rails, power, water supply, sanitation, and telecommunications) not only to ensure basic service delivery and enhance the quality of life of its growing population, but also to avoid a possible binding constraint on economic growth owing to the substantial infrastructure gap. -
Publication
Do Regulation and Institutional Design Matter for Infrastructure Sector Performance?
(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2007-10)This paper evaluates the impact of economic regulation on infrastructure sector outcomes. It tests the impact of regulation from three different angles: aligning costs with tariffs and firm profitability; reducing opportunistic renegotiation; and measuring the effects on productivity, quality of service, coverage, and prices. The analysis uses an extensive data set of about 1,000 infrastructure concessions granted in Latin America from the late 1980s to the early 2000s. The analysis finds that as the theory indicates, regulation matters. The empirical work here reported shows that in three relevant economic aspects-aligning costs and tariffs; dissuading renegotiations; and improving productivity, quality of service, coverage, and tariffs-the structure, institutions, and procedures of regulation matter. Thus, significant efforts should continue to be made to improve the structure, quality, and institutionality of regulation. Regulation matters for protecting both consumers and investors, for aligning closely financial returns and the costs of capital, and for capturing higher levels of benefits from the provision of infrastructure services by the private sector. -
Publication
Crisis in LAC : Infrastructure Investment and the Potential for Employment Generation
(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2009-05)Infrastructure investment is a central part of the stimulus plans of the Latin America and Caribbean Region (LAC) as it confronts the growing financial crisis. This paper estimates the potential effects on direct, indirect, and induced employment for different types of infrastructure projects with LAC-specific variables. The analysis finds that the direct and indirect short-term employment generation potential of infrastructure capital investment projects may be considerable-averaging around 40,000 annual jobs per US$1billion in LAC, depending upon such variables as the mix of subsectors in the investment program; the technologies deployed; local wages for skilled and unskilled labor; and the degrees of leakages to imported inputs. While these numbers do not account for substitution effect, they are built around an assumed "basket" of investments that crosses infrastructure sectors most of which are not employment-maximizing. Albeit limited in scope, rural road maintenance projects may employ 200,000 to 500,000 annualized direct jobs for every US$1billion spent. The paper also describes the potential risks to effective infrastructure investment in an environment of crisis including sorting and planning contradictions, delayed implementation and impact, affordability, and corruption. -
Publication
Crisis in LAC : Infrastructure Investment, Employment and the Expectations of Stimulus
(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2009-07)Infrastructure investment is a central part of the stimulus plans of the Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) region as it confronts the growing financial crisis. This paper estimates the potential effects on direct, indirect, and induced employment for different types of infrastructure projects with LAC-specific variables. The analysis finds that the direct and indirect short-term employment generation potential of infrastructure capital investment projects may be considerable averaging around 40,000 annual jobs per United States (U.S.) 1 billion dollars in LAC, depending upon such variables as the mix of subsectors in the investment program; the technologies deployed; local wages for skilled and unskilled labor; and the degrees of leakages to imported inputs. While these numbers do not account for substitution effect, they are built around an assumed basket of investments that crosses infrastructure sectors most of which are not employment-maximizing. Albeit limited in scope, rural road maintenance projects may employ 200,000 to 500,000 annualized direct jobs for every U.S. 1 billion dollars spent. The paper also describes the potential risks to effective infrastructure investment in an environment of crisis including sorting and planning contradictions, delayed implementation and impact, affordability, and corruption. -
Publication
Infrastructure Gap in South Asia : Inequality of Access to Infrastructure Services
(World Bank Group, Washington, DC, 2014-09)The South Asia region is home to the largest pool of individuals living under the poverty line, coupled with a fast-growing population. The importance of access to basic infrastructure services on welfare and the quality of life is clear. Yet the South Asia region's rates of access to infrastructure (sanitation, electricity, telecom, and transport) are closer to those of Sub-Saharan Africa, the one exception being water, where the South Asia region is comparable to East Asia and the pacific and Latin America and the Caribbean. The challenge of increasing access to these services across the South Asia region is compounded by the unequal distribution of existing access for households. This study improves understanding of this inequality by evaluating access across the region's physical (location), poverty, and income considerations. The paper also analyzes inequality of access across time, that is, across generations. It finds that while the regressivity of infrastructure services is clearly present in South Asia, the story that emerges is heterogeneous and complex. There is no simple explanation for these inequalities, although certainly geography matters, some household characteristics matter (like living in a rural area with a head of household who lacks education), and policy intent matters. If a poorer country or a poorer state can have better access to a given infrastructure service than in a richer country or a richer state, then there is hope that policy makers can adopt measures that will improve access in a manner in which prosperity is more widely shared. -
Publication
Infrastructure Gap in South Asia : Infrastructure Needs, Prioritization, and Financing
(World Bank Group, Washington, DC, 2014-09)If the South Asia region hopes to meet its development goals and not risk slowing down or even halting growth, poverty alleviation, and shared prosperity, it is essential to make closing its huge infrastructure gap a priority. Identifying and addressing gaps in the data on expenditure, access, and quality are crucial to ensuring that governments make efficient, practical, and effective infrastructure development choices. This study addresses this knowledge gap by focusing on the current status of infrastructure sectors and geographical disparities, real levels of investment and private sector participation, deficits and proper targets for the future, and bottlenecks to expansion. The findings show that the South Asia region needs to invest between US$1.7 trillion and US$2.5 trillion (at current prices) to close its infrastructure gap. If investments are spread evenly over the years until 2020, the region needs to invest between 6.6 and 9.9 percent of 2010 gross domestic product per year, an estimated increase of up to 3 percentage points from the 6.9 percent of gross domestic product invested in infrastructure by countries in the region in 2009. Given the enormous size of the region's infrastructure deficiencies, it will need a mix of investment in infrastructure stock and supportive reforms to close its infrastructure gap. One major challenge will be prioritizing investment needs. Another will be choosing optimal forms of service provision, including the private sector's role, and the decentralization of administrative functions and powers. -
Publication
A Methodological Framework for Prioritizing Infrastructure Investment
(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2015-10)Policy makers are often confronted with a myriad of factors in the investment decision-making process. This issue is particularly acute in infrastructure investment decisions, as these often involve significant financial resources and lock-in technologies. In regions and countries where the infrastructure access gap is large and pubic budgets severely constrained, the importance of considering the different facets of the decision-making process becomes even more relevant. This paper discusses the trade-offs policy makers confront when attempting to prioritize infrastructure investments, in particular with regard to economic growth and welfare, and proposes a methodological framework for prioritizing infrastructure projects and portfolios that holistically equates such trade-offs, among others. The analysis suggests that it is not desirable to have a single methodology, providing a single ranking of infrastructure investments, because of the complexities of infrastructure investments. Rather, a multidisciplinary approach should be taken. Decision makers will also need to account for factors that are often not easily measured. While having techniques that enable logical frameworks in the decision-making process of establishing priorities is highly desirable, they are no substitute for consensus building and political negotiations. -
Publication
A Multiple-Arm, Cluster-Randomized Impact Evaluation of the Clean India (Swachh Bharat) Mission Program in Rural Punjab, India
(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2020-05)This study reports the findings of a large-scale, multiple-arm, cluster-randomized control study carried out in rural Punjab, India, to assess the impact of a flagship sanitation program of the Government of India. The program, the Clean India Mission for Villages, was implemented between October 2014 and October 2019 and aimed to encourage the construction of toilets, eliminate the practice of open defecation, and improve the awareness and practice of good hygiene across rural India. It utilized a combination of behavioral change campaigns, centered on the community-led total sanitation approach, and financial incentives for eligible households. The study also evaluates the incremental effects of intensive hygiene awareness campaigns in selected schools and follow-up initiatives in selected communities. The study finds that the coverage of “safely managed” toilets among households without toilets increased by 6.8–10.4 percentage points across various intervention arms, compared with a control group. Open defecation was reduced by 7.3–7.8 percentage points. The program also had significant positive impacts on hygiene awareness among adults and children, although the interventions of school campaigns and intensive follow-up were of limited additional impact.