Bolivia

Bolivia lacks a comprehensive PPP framework and dedicated PPP institutions. Strategic Joint Investment Alliances, which involve state-owned enterprises, are permitted under Law 466 (2013) and Law 516 (2014), supplemented by Supreme Decree 3469 (2018).^1,2,3 These arrangements operate within Bolivia’s broader public investment planning system, providing some institutional discipline for PPP-like project development. At the subnational level, Santa Cruz’s Departmental Law 224 (2021) provides a separate framework for PPPs within the departmental government’s jurisdiction.⁴ However, the national framework remains incomplete in key areas, including competitive procurement, PPP-specific project appraisal, risk allocation and contract monitoring.

Bolivia’s PPP market remains inactive, with no projects reaching financial close in 2016-25. However, the government has begun exploring a broader role for private investment in infrastructure. In 2026 it opened international electricity interconnections to private and PPP participation, while proposed road initiatives have also contemplated PPP structures.^5,6 These developments remain prospective rather than evidence of an established project pipeline, but they indicate growing interest in mobilizing private capital for infrastructure after a prolonged period of limited activity.

Political support for private participation has increased markedly since the current president took office in November 2025. The administration has promoted greater private investment as part of its economic agenda, contrasting with the previous government’s preference for public-sector infrastructure provision.^7,8 The government has also announced plans for dedicated PPP legislation, with a standalone PPP bill and PPP provisions in the investment bill under consideration in the legislature.^9,10,11 However, this policy shift remains at an early stage, and a comprehensive national PPP framework had yet to be enacted as of October 2026.

Despite its low overall performance, Bolivia has some institutional foundations that could support future PPP development. PPP-like projects are integrated into the broader public investment planning system, which requires needs assessments to inform project selection. General financial auditing and reporting standards are comparatively well developed, ranking joint 12th in the region. Dispute resolution frameworks also provide for international arbitration and time limits for arbitration rulings, offering some protections despite broader shortcomings.

Bolivia faces substantial gaps across its PPP framework. Regulations and institutions ranks 25th, reflecting the absence of dedicated PPP institutions and broader PPP-specific procedures, alongside particularly weak competitive bidding arrangements. Risk management and contract monitoring ranks last in the region, with major gaps in risk allocation, contingent-liability management, contract monitoring and public reporting. Project preparation remains weak as well, particularly in environmental and social sustainability and PPP-specific appraisal processes.

Bolivia’s overall performance has changed little since the previous Infrascope. Regulations and institutions is the only category to improve meaningfully, rising from 27.1 to 28.8, driven principally by stronger high-level support for PPPs. This gain was offset by weaker financing conditions: financing fell from 30.5 to 26.2, reflecting a higher cost of capital, increased country risk and weaker financial-market conditions. Most other areas of PPP capacity remained broadly unchanged.