When Aboitiz InfraCapital announced it was finalizing the sale of a 40% stake to BlackRock’s Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP), the headlines framed it as a milestone for foreign investment in the Philippines. On the surface, it does sound impressive: the world’s largest asset manager, with over $10 trillion under its wing, placing a major bet on Philippine infrastructure. But beneath the fanfare lies a set of questions we cannot afford to ignore.
Airports Are Not Just Businesses
Aboitiz Infra’s portfolio isn’t made up of coffee shops or call centers. It includes critical national infrastructure, most notably key airport projects that influence tourism, trade, mobility, and even national security. When a global finance powerhouse like BlackRock comes in, it is not driven by patriotism or nation-building; it is driven by returns. Its fiduciary duty is to maximize shareholder profit, not safeguard a country’s strategic assets.
That’s not necessarily wrong. Investors exist to make money. But when the assets in question are gateways to the country, the equation changes. Airports are not just revenue-generating facilities; they are part of a nation’s backbone. They are points of entry and exit, critical in disaster response, defense, and the movement of people and goods. The question is: whose priorities will take precedence when commercial goals and national interest collide?
BlackRock’s Global Playbook
BlackRock, through GIP, has aggressively acquired infrastructure assets across the globe: ports, pipelines, power plants, airports. In some markets, these deals have raised red flags over pricing policies, operational control, and the long-term balance between public access and investor profit. Once a critical facility is in the hands of a global asset manager, decision-making often aligns more with financial modeling in New York or London than with the developmental needs of the host country.
The Profit Motive vs. the Public Good
In infrastructure, profit maximization can mean higher user fees, cost-cutting on operations, or prioritizing projects with faster returns rather than those with broader social benefits. If regulatory oversight is weak, and in the Philippines it often is, there is a real risk that strategic facilities could be run with profitability as the primary metric, sidelining affordability, accessibility, and long-term resilience.
Airports are particularly sensitive. Decisions on slot allocation, route prioritization, or expansion timelines could be influenced by investor returns rather than national tourism and trade strategies. A shift in ownership dynamics could also complicate government policy directions if the investors’ commercial interests diverge from the public agenda.
Where’s the Regulatory Safeguard?
Pertinent oversight agencies must ensure that these transactions do not erode the state’s ability to control strategic assets. Safeguards must be baked into the deal: clear limitations on foreign control over operational decisions, binding commitments to reinvest profits into local infrastructure, and guarantees that critical facilities remain aligned with national priorities.
We have seen in other countries what happens when global private equity firms or asset managers tighten their grip on public utilities: escalating costs, underinvestment in low-return but high-need projects, and reduced transparency. Once control is ceded, regaining it can be politically and financially costly.
The Bigger Picture
This is not an argument against foreign investment. The Philippines needs capital, expertise, and global networks to upgrade its infrastructure. But the entrance of the world’s most powerful asset manager into our airports and transport hubs must be handled with the highest degree of caution and scrutiny.
We must remember: BlackRock is not here to wave the Philippine flag. It is here to earn a return, and it is very, very good at doing so. The challenge for our regulators and policymakers is to ensure that in its pursuit of profit, it does not quietly take the driver’s seat in decisions that should remain in Filipino hands.
If we fail to strike this balance, we might one day wake up to find that the gateways to our nation are optimized for balance sheets, not for the people they are meant to serve.