New Ministry of Infrastructure in Peru: Opportunity or mere clientelism?

The recent announcement by the Executive Power regarding the creation of a new Ministry of Infrastructure has sparked extensive debate within Peruvian society, as well as in political and economic circles. The proposal, which aims to centralize and improve the management of public infrastructure projects in the country, could represent a significant step towards modernizing public administration. However, Peru's experience in terms of state management and the challenges associated with decentralization raise serious doubts about the effectiveness of this initiative. From a theoretical perspective, the establishment of a ministry with broad and specific powers has the potential to comprehensively address the deficiencies in infrastructure that the country faces. The Executive has outlined clear objectives: to plan and manage projects, improve public services, and reduce existing gaps in critical sectors such as health and education. These intentions align with good international practices, where similar ministries have made significant progress in the coordination and execution of projects. However, the Peruvian context is complex. Weakened institutions, characterized by corruption and lack of transparency, raise questions about how this new ministry could operate. The country’s recent history is marked by the creation of entities that, rather than improving the situation, have ended up being more a refuge for clientelism than for efficiency. If the new ministry is not structured on solid bases of meritocracy and transparency, it risks becoming a "bureaucratic mastodon" that will not resolve, but rather perpetuate, existing problems. The success of this proposal will largely depend on the implementation of a rigorous selection system for the personnel that will comprise the ministry. The priority must be to have qualified professionals with experience in the sector, and not to allow politics and nepotism to play a role in the configuration of this new body. Creating clear and transparent hiring mechanisms will be essential if the aim is to prevent the ministry from becoming a refuge for friends and family of officials. Moreover, it is crucial to recognize that the creation of the Ministry of Infrastructure is not a magical solution to the management problems in the country. The lack of adequate planning and execution has led to serious deficiencies in basic infrastructure at the national level. Alarming data reveals that less than 30% of public school facilities have basic services, and more than 90% of health facilities lack adequate capabilities. This disheartening reality presents a monumental challenge that a new ministry alone will not be able to mitigate without deep structural reforms. Inefficiency in the execution of public projects is also reflected in recent figures. At the national level, the five most funded sectors have executed only 45% of their resources, with extreme cases like the municipality of San Marcos, which has managed to execute only 16% of its budget. At the same time, over 24,000 projects remain without any disbursement, highlighting a crisis in the management of public resources. Bad practices in project management are recurrent: each year, resources are allocated to more than 45,000 projects, and one third of them are new, displacing others that are left discontinued. This constant rotation of projects reveals a troubling lack of planning and continuity in execution. Institutional capacities seem insufficient to carry out projects effectively, resulting in frustration and distrust among citizens. In the last ten years, of the nearly 150,000 projects executed, only 10% have been completed. This statistic, which translates to 1% of projects finalized per year, is a clear indicator of the systemic inefficiency affecting infrastructure in the country. In light of this scenario, the question arises: can the new Ministry of Infrastructure reverse this trend and close the critical gaps facing Peru? The path to creating a ministry that truly functions as a tool for change in the country's infrastructure is long and complicated. While the idea of a "mega-ministry" may seem attractive on paper, in practice, the challenges are significant. Implementing deep reforms and cultural transformation in public management will be imperative for this initiative to not just end up as another attempt to improve the infrastructure situation in the country, but to actually achieve a positive and lasting impact on the quality of life of Peruvians. Citizens eagerly await to see if this new proposal becomes an effective solution or merely another chapter in a story that seems unending.