Construction and engineering firms reposition in Brazil's new wave of concessions

The infrastructure concession cycle currently underway in Brazil is unlike any that came before. Not just because of the volume of projects up for grabs — highways, railways, sanitation, renewable energy, digital infrastructure — but because of the nature of the players competing for them. Brazil's infrastructure value chain is undergoing a full reconfiguration. Traditional construction firms are seeking new capitalization models. Private equity funds are stepping into the spotlight as strategic partners. Mid-sized engineering firms are scaling operations through consortia. And executives who move fluidly between the public and private sectors are building bridges that didn't exist before.

The central thesis is straightforward: those who understand the new map of players — and the alliances taking shape — will hold a real competitive advantage in upcoming auctions.

The GRI Institute is closely tracking this transformation. In the exclusive gatherings of the infrastructure leadership community, the recurring debates on consortium formation, capital structuring, and the strategic repositioning of construction and engineering firms confirm that this topic has shifted from tactical to strategic.

Who are the players redefining the infrastructure value chain?

Answering this question requires abandoning the monolithic view that dominated the sector for decades. Today's ecosystem is fragmented and diversified — and that is, paradoxically, its greatest strength.

On one hand, mid-sized construction and engineering firms such as Conata Engenharia and OCC Construções e Participações are filling spaces once reserved for major contractors. The crisis that hit traditional conglomerates starting in the mid-2010s created operational gaps that these companies have been filling with agility and sector-specific expertise. They don't compete on price alone; they compete on execution capability in niches — regional sanitation, complementary works in highway concessions, energy infrastructure.

On the other hand, smart capital has entered the equation with unprecedented force. Helcio Tokeshi, leading IG4 Capital, exemplifies the profile of a fund manager who bridges public management experience with private capital allocation in infrastructure assets. IG4 operates with a logic that combines institutional governance and appetite for assets requiring operational restructuring — a model that finds fertile ground in Brazil's concession landscape.

In the energy segment, Alan Zelazo, at Genco Energia, represents a generation of executives betting on the convergence of distributed generation, energy efficiency, and renewable infrastructure as a growth vector. The repositioning of traditional engineering firms toward clean energy is not a fad: it is a rational response to the project pipeline and a regulatory environment that favors renewable sources.

Sidney Angulo and Ilion Partners, in turn, illustrate how real estate capital is drawing closer to urban infrastructure. Their work in retrofit, asset revitalization, and infrastructure-focused real estate funds positions this type of player at the intersection of real estate and infrastructure — a territory gaining relevance as Brazilian cities demand the requalification of built spaces and modernization of networks.

Nader Fares, connected to LP Administradora, is involved in discussions on technology infrastructure, including data centers — a segment that has established itself as a digital infrastructure asset class, attracting both specialized builders and institutional investors.

Reinaldo Iapequino, with a career at CDHU, brings the perspective of the interface between housing infrastructure and public policy — a link frequently underestimated in the value chain, yet decisive for projects involving housing and sanitation PPPs at the metropolitan scale.

The fragmentation of the ecosystem is not a sign of weakness. It is a sign of maturity. The sector has shifted from a model dominated by a handful of conglomerates to a network of specialized firms, sector-focused funds, and executives with complementary competencies.

How are construction and engineering firms capitalizing to compete in new auctions?

The capital question is the defining factor. In previous concession cycles, major contractors financed projects with their own resources, subsidized credit from public banks, and in some cases, opaque leverage structures. That model collapsed.

What emerged in its place is a more sophisticated and diversified financing ecosystem. Incentivized infrastructure debentures have reached record issuance levels, becoming the primary debt instrument for concession projects. This mechanism allows mid-sized construction and engineering firms — without balance sheets comparable to those of the former conglomerates — to access long-term capital at competitive costs, provided the project presents predictable cash flow and a robust guarantee structure.

Simultaneously, the entry of private equity funds as equity partners — not merely as creditors — has altered consortium dynamics. Funds like IG4 Capital do more than contribute capital; they bring governance, restructuring expertise, and an institutional relationship network. This combination of patient capital and operational competence is the most valuable asset in forming the consortia competing in today's auctions.

Portfolio diversification is another visible strategy. Engineering firms that historically operated in a single segment — highways, for example — have begun structuring business arms in renewable energy, sanitation, and digital infrastructure. This diversification reduces risk concentration and broadens the opportunity landscape, especially given a concession pipeline spanning multiple sectors simultaneously.

The consortium model has also evolved. Where the logic once centered on pooling construction capacity, consortia are now assembled to integrate execution, operation, maintenance, and fundraising. The formation of alliances between construction firms, specialized operators, and investment vehicles is the dominant pattern in the most relevant competitive processes.

What changes in the infrastructure value chain with this new ecosystem?

The reconfiguration of players is driving structural changes across the value chain. Three transformations deserve attention.

First: the separation between construction and operation is no longer the norm. Increasingly, concession bid documents require — or incentivize — the same group responsible for construction to take on long-term operations. This favors integrated consortia and penalizes construction firms that operate exclusively under the EPC (Engineering, Procurement and Construction) model without operational capability.

Second: governance has become a prerequisite, not a differentiator. The presence of institutional funds, insurers, and foreign investors in concession company equity has raised the bar for compliance, transparency, and accountability. Construction firms that failed to adapt to this level of rigor have lost access to the best projects.

Third: digital infrastructure has definitively entered the radar of construction firms. Data centers, fiber optic networks, and telecommunications infrastructure are now part of the portfolio of groups that, just a few years ago, operated exclusively in traditional civil works. This convergence between physical and digital infrastructure redefines competencies and demands new technology partnerships.

The result is a more competitive, more transparent value chain that is more dependent on long-term private capital. For sector leaders, the challenge is not just winning auctions — it is building business platforms capable of operating across multiple segments with efficiency and governance.

The GRI Institute's perspective

The GRI Institute has served as a convergence point for the key decision-makers in this transforming ecosystem. At infrastructure community gatherings, construction firms, fund managers, regulators, and operators debate — in a reserved, off-the-record format — the strategic moves shaping the sector.

Analysis of search behavior among the GRI audience confirms growing interest in information about specific companies and executives in the engineering and construction sector applied to infrastructure. Names such as Conata Engenharia, OCC Construções, Ilion Partners, IG4 Capital, and Genco Energia, as well as leaders like Nader Fares, Sidney Angulo, Helcio Tokeshi, Alan Zelazo, and Reinaldo Iapequino, appear frequently in searches associated with the GRI ecosystem — evidence that the community already recognizes these players as relevant references.

The next concession cycle will not be won by those with the most machines. It will be won by those who assemble the best combination of capital, operational competence, and governance. And it is precisely at this intersection where the sector's strategic debate is focused.

For the GRI Institute, mapping and connecting these players is not merely an editorial function — it is a core part of the mission to accelerate business and strengthen Brazilian infrastructure through qualified relationships among leaders.