2

**Table 1: Magnitude of Land Financing: Selected Projects and Locations**

|**Location and Activity**|**Land Financing Amount**<br>**and Use of Proceeds**|**Comparative Magnitude**<br>**of Land Finance**|
|---|---|---|
|**_Cairo, Arab Rep. of_**<br>**_Egypt:_**Auction of desert<br>land at urban fringe for<br>new towns (May 2007,<br>3100 hectares). Seller was<br>national ministry.|US$3.12 billion: To be used to reimburse costs<br>of internal infrastructure, to build connecting<br>highway to Cairo Ring Road, and for general<br>central govt. budget|Proceeds from this one sale<br>equaled 117 times total urban<br>property tax collections in the<br>country; equal to approximately<br>10 percent of total national<br>government revenue.|
|**_Mumbai, India_:**Auction<br>of land in the city’s new<br>financial center (January<br>2006, November 2007,<br>total 13 hectares) by<br>Mumbai Metropolitan<br>Regional Development<br>Authority(MMRDA).|US$1.2 billion: To be used primarily to finance<br>projects in metropolitan regional transportation<br>plan. Together with revenue from other land<br>sales, is planned to finance the first phase of<br>Mumbai metro system and 23-km bridge across<br>the Mumbai harbor to the mainland.|10 times MMRDA’s total capital<br>spending in fiscal 2005; 3.5 times<br>total value of municipal bonds<br>issued by all local urban bodies<br>and local utilities in India in the<br>past decade.|
|<br>**_Hyderabad, India:_**<br>Contribution to private<br>consortium by Greater<br>Hyderabad Municipal<br>Corporation of land<br>surrounding planned<br>metro line and metro<br>stations.|According to contract agreement, (July 2008) a<br>private company was to build the entire metro<br>system in return for the land and concession<br>rights, without cost to government. Over the<br>lifetime of operation the company would return<br>an additional US$270 million (present value) to<br>government.|It appears (as of late 2009) that<br>this arrangement has fallen<br>through, victim of the decline in<br>land values and reduced demand<br>for land development. The private<br>company has been unable to raise<br>the equity and debt (total: US$2.5<br>billion) necessary to build the<br>metro. It missed payments on the<br>construction bond|
|**_Istanbul, Turkey:_**Sale of<br>old municipal bus station<br>and former government<br>administrative building<br>site (March-April, 2007).|US$1.5 billion in auction proceeds, said by<br>municipal and national governments to be<br>dedicated to capital investment budget.|.<br>Total Istanbul municipal capital<br>spending in fiscal 2005 was<br>US$994 million; municipal<br>borrowing for infrastructure<br>investment in 2005 was US$97<br>million.|
|**_Cape Town, South_**<br>**_Africa:_**sale of Victoria<br>and Albert Waterfront<br>property by Transnet, the<br>parastatal transportation<br>agency (November 2006).|US$1.0 billion, to be used to recapitalize<br>Transnet and support its investment in core<br>transportation infrastructure. Part of proceeds<br>used to finance pension obligations, which in<br>turn strengthened balance sheet and allowed<br>Transnet to borrow from market without<br>governmentguarantee or subsidy.|Sale proceeds exceeded<br>Transnet’s total capital spending<br>in fiscal 2006; equal to 17 percent<br>of five-year capital investment<br>plan prepared in 2006.|
|**_Warsaw, Poland_**Sale at<br>auction of municipal land<br>assets.|Proceeds: Actual 2007, 330 million zlotys<br>(approx: US$110 million). Budgeted 2009, 144<br>million zlotys. Budgeted as capital revenue<br>within the capital budget.|Land sales in 2007 exceeded<br>municipal borrowing by<br>20percent. Budgeted revenues<br>from land sales in 2009 were<br>70percent of budgeted borrowing<br>bycity.|
|**_China_**subnational land<br>leasing for financing<br>large-scale urban<br>infrastructure.|According to the China Index Academy, the<br>following cities led the way in land-leasing<br>contract revenues in 2009: Hangzhou (105.4<br>billion yuan), Shanghai (104.3 billion) and<br>Beijing (92.8 billion).|<br>In Beijing’s case, land leasing<br>contract value in 2009 was equal<br>to 45percent of total fiscal<br>revenue.|

Sources: First five cases modified from Peterson (2009); information for Warsaw from Kaganova (2010) and Warsaw City (2010); information for China from Xinhua (2010).