Conduits of Capital

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2. COMPARING AFRICAN FINANCIAL CENTRES 2.1 Overall Comparisons GFCI assigns ratings to financial centres using two main inputs: • Instrumental factors—objective city or country assessments developed by a number of reputable, global organisations; and, • Financial centres assessments—a range of financial centre assessments, on a scale of one to ten, provided by a number of international financial services professionals within the previous 24 months. This report reviews Africa and its regional peer group with the data available from GFCI 16 (September 2014). Appendix E contains a summary table of country, capital, population, GDP, and $GDP/capita, arranged both by regional location and sorted by $GDP/capita. 120 |
In GFCI 16, only three African centres featured fully with sufficient data, viz: • Casablanca—transnational specialist—wide North African connectivity; • Johannesburg—local, broad and deep—largely based on local economy and strong mining, with local regional connections; and, • Port Louis (Mauritius)—local specialist—access to India and regional trust structures, an important African investment and private equity fund domicile. A number of assessors have begun rating Nairobi, so the GFCI 16 ratings are provided for comparison, but the ratings should be used with care as they are fewer than for the other three centres and have not been critically evaluated by the GFCI methodology. Assessors are providing assessments and comments on a number of other centres, but not in sufficient quantities for comparative, quantitative analysis, e.g., Abuja / Lagos, Lusaka, Djibouti, Cairo, Tunis, Harare and Kampala. The complete GFCI is available online, but for the purpose of this analysis a peer group might help to provide more realistic comparisons, rather than pointing out that Casablanca is not like London or New York. The peer group chosen consists of the following cities: Busan, Doha, Dubai, Istanbul and Tel Aviv. The table below shows the GFCI 16 rating of the group compared with GFCI 15: Centre GFCI 16 Rank GFCI 16 Rating GFCI 15 Rank GFCI 15 Rating Change in Rank Change in Rating Casablanca 51 635 62 622 11 13 Johannesburg 38 659 50 647 12 12 Port Louis 69 608 63 621 -6 -13 Nairobi - 602 - - - - Busan 28 676 27 686 -1 -10 Doha 22 684 26 687 4 -3 Dubai 17 694 29 684 12 10 Istanbul 42 655 47 651 5 4 Tel Aviv 36 664 21 692 -15 -28 One can see that the group is fairly volatile. It is especially worth focussing on the rank volatility. Port Louis is falling in line with other ‘offshore’ centres. We will return to the rapid rise of Casablanca and Johannesburg later. Below we record the overall number of responses for the group: GFCI 16 Home Foreign Total Centre Rank Rating Number Average Number Average Number Average Casablanca 51 635 42 864 369 803 411 809 Johannesburg 38 659 1 500 207 660 208 660 Port Louis 69 608 1 1,000 215 570 216 572 Nairobi - 602 2 550 70 603 72 601 Busan 28 676 21 952 272 827 293 836 Doha 22 684 8 725 341 680 349 681 Dubai 17 694 51 835 713 712 764 721 Istanbul 42 655 15 813 223 631 238 643 Tel Aviv 36 664 5 900 187 666 192 672 Conduits of Capital – Onshore Financial Centres and Their Relevance to African Private Equity | 121
Page 1 and 2:
Conduits of Capital Onshore Financi
Page 3 and 4:
TABLE OF CONTENTS I. FOREWORD .....
Page 5 and 6:
predictable, legal systems that res
Page 7 and 8:
works and that everyone loves.” D
Page 9 and 10:
Because of the fragmented nature of
Page 11 and 12:
Industry Views: EMPEA 2015 African
Page 13 and 14:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In April 2015, FS
Page 15 and 16:
INTRODUCTION Across the emerging ma
Page 17 and 18:
As a general rule, GPs tend to foll
Page 19 and 20:
“Offshore” refers to a jurisdic
Page 21 and 22:
expressed by GPs). Over 61% of GP r
Page 23 and 24:
“The industry has found a very sa
Page 25 and 26:
INDUSTRY ATTITUDES TOWARD ONSHORE A
Page 27 and 28:
A RANKING OF ONSHORE FUND DOMICILES
Page 29 and 30:
Conduits of Capital - Onshore Finan
Page 31 and 32:
WHAT COULD MAKE ONSHORE SUB-SAHARAN
Page 33 and 34:
“Other” actions include: “rem
Page 35 and 36:
“ STAKEHOLDER VIEWS ON THE RELATI
Page 37 and 38:
APPENDIX 1 - DETAILS ON SURVEY PART
Page 39 and 40:
Expert Perspectives: Onshore Financ
Page 41 and 42:
Experts were asked to make recommen
Page 43 and 44:
Table 2 - Prerequisites for a succe
Page 45 and 46:
3. FINDINGS 3.1 Evolution and Compa
Page 47 and 48:
particular jurisdiction (communicat
Page 49 and 50:
that it is obvious: a well-function
Page 51 and 52:
• The development of an onshore f
Page 53 and 54:
amined the impact that venture capi
Page 55 and 56:
4.1. Where do Private Equity Fund M
Page 57 and 58:
in absolute terms, or relative to t
Page 59 and 60:
average. With respect to regulatory
Page 61 and 62:
For future research, it is importan
Page 63 and 64:
ENDNOTES 1 World Bank Enterprise Su
Page 65 and 66:
33 African Development Bank. Maurit
Page 67 and 68:
71 Unfortunately, the DTAAs lists b
Page 69 and 70: The financial activities carried in
Page 71 and 72: The OECD has reviewed over 100 juri
Page 73 and 74: Importance of Domestic Flows The re
Page 75 and 76: Rwanda is not included in any of th
Page 77 and 78: Other possible contenders may emerg
Page 79 and 80: APPENDIX 1: LISTING OF COUNTRIES IN
Page 81 and 82: Country / Territory Palau Listed by
Page 83 and 84: Country Mauritius Morocco 16 Nigeri
Page 85 and 86: Onshore Options for Africa-focussed
Page 87 and 88: Developing skills in these areas re
Page 89 and 90: 2.2 Policy Issues Related to Onshor
Page 91 and 92: • Good accessibility. Good commun
Page 93 and 94: 4. ROLE OF DONORS AND TECHNICAL ASS
Page 95 and 96: Thus, while some PE general partner
Page 97 and 98: management extends to monitoring co
Page 99 and 100: ANNEX 1: CATALOGUE OF FINANCIAL CEN
Page 101 and 102: Dublin Mauritius Dubai Botswana Cap
Page 103 and 104: To some extent, policymakers also n
Page 105 and 106: In administrative financial centres
Page 107 and 108: services industry. However, recent
Page 109 and 110: gains, even if it involves offshore
Page 111 and 112: ather than an onshore centre that i
Page 113 and 114: generally look to London or in some
Page 115 and 116: Onshore Options for Africa-focussed
Page 117 and 118: whether it is ‘Local,’ ‘Trans
Page 119: are suited to particular financial
Page 123 and 124: The ‘stable’ centres in the bot
Page 125 and 126: GFCI 16 Investment Management Centr
Page 127 and 128: Professional service providers tend
Page 129 and 130: Busan and Doha have been advancing
Page 131 and 132: Zambia and Zimbabwe, the report not
Page 133 and 134: Get Connected - Ease Scaling Up In
Page 135 and 136: Financial centres are added to the
Page 137 and 138: The SVM then uses the data to predi
Page 139 and 140: Instrumental Factor Country or City
Page 141 and 142: Instrumental Factor CA* BU DO DU IS
Page 143 and 144: Open Government The World Justice P
Page 145 and 146: Securitisation TheCityUK http://www
Page 147 and 148: Human Capital Instrumental Factor S
Page 149 and 150: Global City Competitiveness EIU htt
Page 151 and 152: 6.4 Appendix D - Group Respondent P
Page 153 and 154: Dubai Istanbul Conduits of Capital
Page 155 and 156: 6.5 Appendix E - Country Summary Ov
Page 157 and 158: Uganda 26.086 33,800,000 772 Kampal
Page 159 and 160: Page intentionally left blank Condu
show all

Conduits of Capital

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?