ABSTRACT
CMPort’s two projects in Sri Lanka are representative of the BRI narrative. They have been under the same host regulator but performed very differently. CICT has been called a “Crown Jewel” by its host, while Hambantota Port gained the notoriety of a Chinese “Debt Trap” when it was operated by the host SOE. The contrasting results demonstrate that market firms are more efficient in executing government development programs than government itself. Projects implemented on the basis of market disciplines tend to succeed; those done within government process have a high chance of failure. The same applies to investments promoted under the BRI.
