IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cir/cirpro/2023rp-28.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Plan québécois des infrastructures : comparaison interprovinciale et soutenabilité

Author

Listed:
  • Pierre-Carl Michaud
  • Louis Lévesque
  • Marcelin Joanis
  • Jonathan Brasseur
  • Quentin Winstel

Abstract

As a result of the Government of Quebec’s ambition to take a closer look at the appropriate level of investment in public infrastructure over the next few decades, this study looks at these issues from the perspective of financial sustainability and the impact on the state of infrastructure as measured by the asset maintenance deficit. The study also provides a pan-Canadian perspective on the Quebec Infrastructure Plan (PQI) by comparing Quebec’s infrastructure planning practices with those of Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia.The authors propose a public finance and debt model that takes infrastructure and its impacts on fiscal sustainability into account, allowing them to make projections under various scenarios. Their analyses lead them to conclude that planned investments are unlikely to be sufficient to support the rapidly growing asset maintenance deficit. In other words, the current dynamic of the government’s infrastructure investments is not sustainable. The model projections show that the current pace of growth in infrastructure spending poses a risk to fiscal sustainability. With respect to the asset maintenance deficit, projections also point to a problem in this area, with a rapid increase in asset maintenance deficit. The simulations show that an increase in the portion of PQI investments allocated to the resorption of the asset maintenance deficit would likely result in a significant reduction in asset maintenance deficit, but without any impact on fiscal sustainability. Issue d'une volonté du gouvernement du Québec d'approfondir la réflexion quant au niveau approprié d’investissements dans les infrastructures publiques au cours des prochaines décennies, cette étude examine ces enjeux sous deux angles : celui de la soutenabilité financière et celui de l’impact sur l’état des infrastructures tel que mesuré par le déficit de maintien d’actifs (DMA). L’étude offre aussi une perspective pancanadienne sur le Plan québécois des infrastructures (PQI) en comparant les pratiques du Québec à l’égard de la planification des infrastructures avec celles de l’Ontario, l’Alberta et la Colombie-Britannique. Les auteurs proposent un modèle de finances publiques et d’endettement qui prend en considération les infrastructures et leurs impacts sur la soutenabilité budgétaire, ce qui leur permet de faire des projections selon divers scénarios. Leurs analyses les amènent à conclure que les investissements prévus sont peu susceptibles d’être suffisants pour prendre en charge le DMA qui s’accroît rapidement. Autrement dit, la dynamique actuelle des investissements en infrastructures du gouvernement du Québec n’est pas soutenable. Les projections de leur modèle montrent que le rythme actuel de croissance des dépenses d’infrastructures pose un risque pour la soutenabilité budgétaire. En ce qui concerne le DMA, les projections révèlent aussi un problème de ce côté, avec une augmentation rapide du DMA. Les simulations montrent qu'une augmentation de la portion des investissements au PQI affectée à la résorption du DMA entraînerait en toute probabilité une forte réduction de celui-ci, mais sans aucun impact sur la soutenabilité budgétaire.

Suggested Citation

  • Pierre-Carl Michaud & Louis Lévesque & Marcelin Joanis & Jonathan Brasseur & Quentin Winstel, 2023. "Plan québécois des infrastructures : comparaison interprovinciale et soutenabilité," CIRANO Project Reports 2023rp-28, CIRANO.
  • Handle: RePEc:cir:cirpro:2023rp-28
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cirano.qc.ca/files/publications/2023RP-28.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cir:cirpro:2023rp-28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ciranca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.