2222222222

Sponsored Content by AIG

P3: 3 Benefits + 3 Risks

Public-private partnerships carry both benefits and risks.
By: | January 9, 2017 • 5 min read

AIG_SponsoredContent

The American Society of Civil Engineers issues a report every year tracking the status of the nation’s infrastructure across 15 categories, including airports, pipelines, roads, bridges and solid waste facilities. In 2013, the United States earned a D+, a mark that has been steadily declining since it received a C in the ASCE’s first report card released in 1988.

To combat its ailing infrastructure, federal and state governments will increasingly rely on partnerships with private investors to help get these big-ticket projects off the ground.

The U.S. Department of Transportation defines public-private partnerships, or P3s, as “contractual agreements formed between a public agency and a private sector entity that allow for greater private sector participation in the delivery and financing of transportation projects.”

In its whitepaper “The United States: The World’s Largest Emerging P3 Market,” global insurer AIG outlines the promise offered by these partnerships in fixing the nation’s crumbling infrastructure, but notes that they come with their own set of challenges. Below are three major benefits and three key risks to the P3 model.

As we enter into new political landscape in the U.S. with President-elect Donald Trump, the role of P3 may become increasingly important.

The Benefits

1. Filling Investment Gaps

In a time when public dollars are limited but infrastructure needs are infinite, P3s help to fill in the investment gap to make desperately needed upgrades to American infrastructure.

According to the ASCE, an estimated $1.723 trillion is needed for surface transportation, $100 billion for rail and $134 billion for aviation infrastructure. The expense is far outpacing the level of investment from the public sector.

According to a McGraw Hill Construction Dodge report, public works construction dropped 14 percent from 2011 to 2012, and was projected to drop another 6 percent from 2012 to 2013. If the shortfall in public investment isn’t made up in some way, continually aging infrastructure may lead to disasters that cost lives and compromise economic activity in the towns they service — and state governments will be liable for the damages.

Especially in challenging economic climates, P3s can ease the burden on government budgets and help critical projects come to life.

2. Increasing Efficiency

On top of filling a pressing public need, P3 projects also save time and money. Compared to public projects, they have a better track record when it comes to staying on budget and finishing on time.

According to a study conducted by Infrastructure Partnerships Australia from 2000-2007, 18 percent of traditionally procured projects ran past deadline, while only 10 percent of P3 projects were past due. When traditional projects ran late, they were delivered 26 percent later than originally expected. Overdue P3 projects, on the other hand, were completed only 13 percent later.

Forty-five percent of traditionally procured projects incurred additional expenses, compared to just 14 percent of P3 projects. When traditional projects ran over budget, they incurred 35 percent extra expenses, while over-budget P3s went over by only 12 percent.

3. Spurring Economic Growth

P3s also help to spur economic development. They offer a lucrative business opportunity for investors in a time when returns are typically low. And infrastructure projects – particularly transportation networks – enable economic growth in the communities they connect.

Take for example E-470, the 47-mile highway constructed outside Denver, Colo., to service traffic to and from the soon-to-be-opened Denver International Airport. Eight counties and cities pooled their funds in 1989 to build the road, with no federal funding whatsoever. The highway was completed four years ahead of the airport and was the first large tollway to use electronic tolling.

The road paved the way for economic development in a previously sparsely-populated area. The population along E-470’s corridor was expected to double in the years following the project’s completion. In fact, the population of Denver — and the whole state of Colorado —has risen so much that the toll road is undergoing expansion.

The ASCE’s 2013 Report Card stated, “We know that investing in infrastructure is essential to support healthy, vibrant communities. Infrastructure is also critical for long-term economic growth, increasing GDP, employment, household income and exports. The reverse is also true – without prioritizing our nation’s infrastructure needs, deteriorating conditions can become a drag on the economy.”

The Risks

1. Uneven Liability

The chief complaint of private entities that want to further P3s as viable delivery mechanisms is that the government allots an unrealistic portion of the risk to private partners. To make matters worse, most of that risk is not transferrable though traditional insurance methods.

Nailing down contractual language that is acceptable to both parties and spreads liability fairly is the primary obstacle in P3 deals.

According to AIG’s whitepaper, Administrator Victor Mendez, head of the Federal Highway Administration, has argued for more precise valuation of risk in P3 projects, so that public and private parties can place a dollar value on the amount of risk they are willing to assume and strike a fairer balance.

Insurers, for their part, will have to continually analyze the changing construction landscape and develop new products to meet the needs of the evolving P3 model. AIG, for example, recently developed a product to address contractual liability issues in P3 deals.

2. Long-Term Commitment

P3s require a long term commitment on the part of the private entity — as much as 20 to 30 years. Private investors have to be prepared not just for the construction, but also the ongoing management of the project, whether that means ensuring regular maintenance or operating tolling systems. On top of that, covering and projecting insurance costs for the operational and maintenance risk over that course of time provides another layer of complexity. Properly transitioning insurance coverage between course of construction and operational and maintenance can be challenging for some carriers.

Because it’s difficult to predict how the economic environment will change over the next several decades, private partners take on a big risk in assuming management responsibilities for that length of time. Proper due diligence, conducted by both parties, is necessary to ensure the private investor can go the distance.

3. Project Ownership

The general public has also shown concern that major pieces of infrastructure will be owned by a private company rather than the public, and therefore subject to that company’s financial viability over the long term, or to the needs of their bottom line. In other words, citizens don’t want their vital transportation networks and other facilities to be commoditized.

In reality, private investors merely help to finance and manage the project, while it remains the property of the public. Unless that message is communicated clearly, though, aversion to private sector involvement in public works projects could stall some P3 efforts.

In spite of the headwinds and slowly emerging P3 sector in the U.S., AIG stands ready to partner with stakeholder to manage the inherent risks, deliver solutions and value to our clients.

SponsoredContent
BrandStudioLogo

This article was produced by the R&I Brand Studio, a unit of the advertising department of Risk & Insurance, in collaboration with AIG. The editorial staff of Risk & Insurance had no role in its preparation.




AIG is a leading international insurance organization serving customers in more than 100 countries.

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

Cyber Resilience

No, Seriously. You Need a Comprehensive Cyber Incident Response Plan Before It’s Too Late.

Awareness of cyber risk is increasing, but some companies may be neglecting to prepare adequate response plans that could save them millions. 
By: | June 1, 2018 • 7 min read

To minimize the financial and reputational damage from a cyber attack, it is absolutely critical that businesses have a cyber incident response plan.

“Sadly, not all yet do,” said David Legassick, head of life sciences, tech and cyber, CNA Hardy.

Advertisement




In the event of a breach, a company must be able to quickly identify and contain the problem, assess the level of impact, communicate internally and externally, recover where possible any lost data or functionality needed to resume business operations and act quickly to manage potential reputational risk.

This can only be achieved with help from the right external experts and the design and practice of a well-honed internal response.

The first step a company must take, said Legassick, is to understand its cyber exposures through asset identification, classification, risk assessment and protection measures, both technological and human.

According to Raf Sanchez, international breach response manager, Beazley, cyber-response plans should be flexible and applicable to a wide range of incidents, “not just a list of consecutive steps.”

They also should bring together key stakeholders and specify end goals.

Jason J. Hogg, CEO, Aon Cyber Solutions

With bad actors becoming increasingly sophisticated and often acting in groups, attack vectors can hit companies from multiple angles simultaneously, meaning a holistic approach is essential, agreed Jason J. Hogg, CEO, Aon Cyber Solutions.

“Collaboration is key — you have to take silos down and work in a cross-functional manner.”

This means assembling a response team including individuals from IT, legal, operations, risk management, HR, finance and the board — each of whom must be well drilled in their responsibilities in the event of a breach.

“You can’t pick your players on the day of the game,” said Hogg. “Response times are critical, so speed and timing are of the essence. You should also have a very clear communication plan to keep the CEO and board of directors informed of recommended courses of action and timing expectations.”

People on the incident response team must have sufficient technical skills and access to critical third parties to be able to make decisions and move to contain incidents fast. Knowledge of the company’s data and network topology is also key, said Legassick.

“Perhaps most important of all,” he added, “is to capture in detail how, when, where and why an incident occurred so there is a feedback loop that ensures each threat makes the cyber defense stronger.”

Cyber insurance can play a key role by providing a range of experts such as forensic analysts to help manage a cyber breach quickly and effectively (as well as PR and legal help). However, the learning process should begin before a breach occurs.

Practice Makes Perfect

“Any incident response plan is only as strong as the practice that goes into it,” explained Mike Peters, vice president, IT, RIMS — who also conducts stress testing through his firm Sentinel Cyber Defense Advisors.

Advertisement




Unless companies have an ethical hacker or certified information security officer on board who can conduct sophisticated simulated attacks, Peters recommended they hire third-party experts to test their networks for weaknesses, remediate these issues and retest again for vulnerabilities that haven’t been patched or have newly appeared.

“You need to plan for every type of threat that’s out there,” he added.

Hogg agreed that bringing third parties in to conduct tests brings “fresh thinking, best practice and cross-pollination of learnings from testing plans across a multitude of industries and enterprises.”

“Collaboration is key — you have to take silos down and work in a cross-functional manner.” — Jason J. Hogg, CEO, Aon Cyber Solutions

Legassick added that companies should test their plans at least annually, updating procedures whenever there is a significant change in business activity, technology or location.

“As companies expand, cyber security is not always front of mind, but new operations and territories all expose a company to new risks.”

For smaller companies that might not have the resources or the expertise to develop an internal cyber response plan from whole cloth, some carriers offer their own cyber risk resources online.

Evan Fenaroli, an underwriting product manager with the Philadelphia Insurance Companies (PHLY), said his company hosts an eRiskHub, which gives PHLY clients a place to start looking for cyber event response answers.

That includes access to a pool of attorneys who can guide company executives in creating a plan.

“It’s something at the highest level that needs to be a priority,” Fenaroli said. For those just getting started, Fenaroli provided a checklist for consideration:

  • Purchase cyber insurance, read the policy and understand its notice requirements.
  • Work with an attorney to develop a cyber event response plan that you can customize to your business.
  • Identify stakeholders within the company who will own the plan and its execution.
  • Find outside forensics experts that the company can call in an emergency.
  • Identify a public relations expert who can be called in the case of an event that could be leaked to the press or otherwise become newsworthy.

“When all of these things fall into place, the outcome is far better in that there isn’t a panic,” said Fenaroli, who, like others, recommends the plan be tested at least annually.

Cyber’s Physical Threat

With the digital and physical worlds converging due to the rise of the Internet of Things, Hogg reminded companies: “You can’t just test in the virtual world — testing physical end-point security is critical too.”

Advertisement




How that testing is communicated to underwriters should also be a key focus, said Rich DePiero, head of cyber, North America, Swiss Re Corporate Solutions.

Don’t just report on what went well; it’s far more believable for an underwriter to hear what didn’t go well, he said.

“If I hear a client say it is perfect and then I look at some of the results of the responses to breaches last year, there is a disconnect. Help us understand what you learned and what you worked out. You want things to fail during these incident response tests, because that is how we learn,” he explained.

“Bringing in these outside firms, detailing what they learned and defining roles and responsibilities in the event of an incident is really the best practice, and we are seeing more and more companies do that.”

Support from the Board

Good cyber protection is built around a combination of process, technology, learning and people. While not every cyber incident needs to be reported to the boardroom, senior management has a key role in creating a culture of planning and risk awareness.

David Legassick, head of life sciences, tech and cyber, CNA Hardy

“Cyber is a boardroom risk. If it is not taken seriously at boardroom level, you are more than likely to suffer a network breach,” Legassick said.

However, getting board buy-in or buy-in from the C-suite is not always easy.

“C-suite executives often put off testing crisis plans as they get in the way of the day job. The irony here is obvious given how disruptive an incident can be,” said Sanchez.

“The C-suite must demonstrate its support for incident response planning and that it expects staff at all levels of the organization to play their part in recovering from serious incidents.”

“What these people need from the board is support,” said Jill Salmon, New York-based vice president, head of cyber/tech/MPL, Berkshire Hathaway Specialty Insurance.

“I don’t know that the information security folks are looking for direction from the board as much as they are looking for support from a resources standpoint and a visibility standpoint.

“They’ve got to be aware of what they need and they need to have the money to be able to build it up to that level,” she said.

Without that support, according to Legassick, failure to empower and encourage the IT team to manage cyber threats holistically through integration with the rest of the organization, particularly risk managers, becomes a common mistake.

He also warned that “blame culture” can prevent staff from escalating problems to management in a timely manner.

Collaboration and Communication

Given that cyber incident response truly is a team effort, it is therefore essential that a culture of collaboration, preparation and practice is embedded from the top down.

Advertisement




One of the biggest tripping points for companies — and an area that has done the most damage from a reputational perspective — is in how quickly and effectively the company communicates to the public in the aftermath of a cyber event.

Salmon said of all the cyber incident response plans she has seen, the companies that have impressed her most are those that have written mock press releases and rehearsed how they are going to respond to the media in the aftermath of an event.

“We have seen so many companies trip up in that regard,” she said. “There have been examples of companies taking too long and then not explaining why it took them so long. It’s like any other crisis — the way that you are communicating it to the public is really important.” &

Antony Ireland is a London-based financial journalist. He can be reached at [email protected] Dan Reynolds is editor-in-chief of Risk & Insurance. He can be reached at [email protected]