R. Alexander ROEHRL, MIR/EPFL Lausanne NGI workshop, EPFL, 12 June 2009 Development of transnational...

R. Alexander ROEHRL, MIR/EPFL LausanneNGI workshop, EPFL, 12 June 2009

Development of transnational land transport infrastructure in Asia, 1980-2008

An application of the Finger-Kuennecke framework of co-evolution and coherence between technology and

institutions

Concept for chapter 1 of PhD thesis

R. Alexander Roehrl, Chair Management of Network Industries, Swiss Federal

Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL), Switzerland


Contents

1. Background

2. Framework

3. Application

4. Conclusion


What is transnational network infrastructure (TNI) in land transport?

• Roads, railways, tunnels, bridges, and dry ports of “international importance” primarily developed to enable the flows of people and goods across national borders.

• Includes cross-border links and certain national trunk roads and railways.

• Transnational vs. international

Key institutional feature: Overall goal of governments expressed in “Grand plans” of trans-continental infrastructure development: coordination, design standards, cross-border facilitation.


• Intergovernmental Agreement on the Asian Highway Network– Project since 1959; Agreement since 2005– 141,000 km through 32 countries


• Intergovernmental Agreement on the Trans-Asian Railway Network– Project since 1960; Agreement since 2009– 81,000 km through 28 countries– Network of dry ports defined → Asian

Integrated Transport Network

• Grand plans define boundary of techno-institutional systems under analysis.

• Complementary cross-border facilitation agreements and frameworks: examples SCO, ASEAN, GMS, ECO, bilateral.


Why? Bringing the economic miracle to the

Asian Hinterlands

AH1 India

• Doubling the world’s integrated labour force:• Due to end of cold war and Asian IPNs: from 1 to 2

billion.• Due to trans-Asian transport network: from 2 to 4

billion?

• Current Investment • US$260 billion invested in Asian roads and railways

each year, 7-10 of which for TNI. Mixed results. • China, Thailand, India invest in infrastructure in

neighboring countries• What are the “best” (but realistic) institutional approaches

on the multilateral level to develop TNI?


Adapting the Finger-Kuennecke co-evolution and

coherence framework

Institutions(formal and informal)

Technology(physical artefacts,

design rules, practises)

national

nationalunimodal

2. Interaction (“Story”, typology)

2. Coherence(scope of control)

Transnationalintermodal

Multi-actor, local to

international1. System performance (“Transnationalization”):• cross-border infrastructure capacity (Asian highway design standards etc.)• cross-border traffic flows (incl. time-cost, reliability)• TNI investments (time lags)

Physical roads and railways, LCV, container block train services, scheduled bus/truck services

Gov. institutions, infrastructure and facilitation agreements, laws, admin rules, informal and business practises

Actors

subregional

3. “Explain” (illustrative examples)

Also relative to national situation!

Transport system performance: time, cost, reliability.

Governments define…





government

private sector

Grand plans: • Asian Highway, • Trans-Asian RailwaySubregional differences, Asian-wide impact!


1. Measuring system performance (1980-2008)

a) Cross-border infrastructure capacity– Lane length with minimum design standard (e.g., Asian Highway class III) for all

segments; Share of cross-border segments with minimum standard; – Design speed times number of lanes (→ quality and availability index,

weighting different classes)– Data sources: AH/TAR database, ADB, etc.

b) Cross-border traffic flow– AADT, TEU, tonnes, vehicles (also relative to comparable national links)– Time-cost for major international “routes” (reliability where available) for major →

Traffic index (compare with design speed)– Data sources: AH/TAR database, EATL, ADB, ESCAP, UNCTAD, ASEAN, GMS,

ECO, SCO, country reports, etc. c) TNI investment

– Infrastructure investment committed (overall, per km)– for all segments compared to and cross-border segments alone; →index– Data sources: Various studies, project reports, country reports, national statistics

• Asian grand plan, and overlapping subregions (South-East, East, North and Central, SCO, South)

• Challenge: consistency/completeness of data before 1996!




2. Overall coherence

Technical scope Institutional scope 1980

Institutional scope today

Interconnection(cross-border infra capacity)

Regional and national

National with coordinated

regional inputs

Multi-level, non-hierarchical

Interoperability (cross-border traffic flows and facilitation)

Regional network Global intergovernmental

Multi-level, non-hierarchical

Investment (TNI investment, maintenance?)

National and regional network

National with regional

coordination

Project-by-project basis


3. Techno-institutional interaction and link to performance – Typical examples following grand plan

Typology? Chronology Example Performance

Typical road example

(typical, except Central Asia)

1. Physical interconnection

2. Facilitation agreements

3. Commercial bus and truck services

Direct road link project between China and India through Myanmar

Mixed. Lower traffic than expected; low quality; better interconnection; little innovation (e.g., LCV)

Typical rail example (typical North and East Asia)

1. Block-container test runs

2. Commercial services

3. Facilitation agreements, investments, maintenance agreements

4. More commercial services?

Northern Corridor of the Trans-Asian Railway which links China through Mongolia and the Russian Federation with Europe

Mixed. Quick results and failures due to late/inadequate institutional response; low traffic and quality; low investment; little innovation (e.g., double-stacked)

Typical dry port example (typical ASEAN)

1. Grand plan calling for action

2. State railway investment

3. Agreement between railway companies; commercial service

4. Network investment

Lad Krabang, Thailand, (connected by container land-bridge to Northport, Malaysia)

Initial traffic success followed by inadequate institutional and investment reponse.


Techno-institutional interaction and link to performance – Road “exceptions”


GMS road 1. One package: road development, finance, cross-border facilitation agreements, long-term maintenance agreements, scheduled bus and truck services.

Boten-Houaxay road transit project linking China and Thailand through Lao PDR

Considered as “best practise” in all respects. Led to US$ 4 bln. in additional national road investments. Lao logistics sector

Chinese bilateral road

1. Cross-border facilitation agreement packaged with road and port development


Chinese-financed road and container port in Baluchistan, Pakistan

Commercial success is questionable, but better inter-connection and investments. High quality.

North and Central Asia

1. Existing, low quality connection.

2. Investments (some)

3. Agreements (bilateral, subregional, regional)

China-Mongolia-Russia; SCO programme

Mixed. Better optimization of existing resources, but low infra progress


Techno-institutional interaction and link to performance – Railway “exceptions”


ASEAN rail landbridge

1. Test runs


3. Inadequate facilitation and maintenance response

Rail bridge Laem chabang, Thailand, to Northport, Malaysia

Initial traffic increase, but missing investment, commercial disaster

ASEAN interconnection

1. Bilateral agreements negotiated on subregional level

2. Investment committed

3. Construction (hopefully)

4. Runs (hopefully), etc.

Singapore-Kunming Rail Link (SKRL) project

Political stalemate, no investment, no traffic, no inter-connection

SCO (i.e., China and Central Asia)

1. Comprehensive negotiation

2. Chinese unilateral investments

3. Joint cross-border projects

SCO facilitation programme

Slow, but real . Initial stages. Potential for innovation. New institutions.


Techno-institutional interaction and link to performance – Dry port “exceptions”


East and North-East Asia

1. Local and national initiatives (PPP)


3. Further investment

4. Dicussions on “internationalisation”, politizisation

Most dry ports in Korea, China, Far East Russia, etc.

Commercial success, but mainly national. No significant transnational investment or interconnections

South Asia 1. Indian foreign policy

2. CONCOR partnerships with neighboring countries

3. Investment and PPP

4. Commercial operation

Birgunj, Nepal Little commercial success/traffic, but “hopes”. Additional investment

Central Asia 1. Existing intermodal facilities

2. State programmes; PPP requests;

3. Investments (hopefully)

ECO dry ports Missing investment or new inter-conection; lwo traffic; weak private sector


Conclusion• Finger-Kuennecke framework flexible and promising

approach– Key is defining “performance criteria”, “coherence” and

“interaction” for the specific context!– Dynamic view needed– Can be used to identify “best” (but realistic) institutional

approaches on the multilateral level to develop TNI.– Provides explanatory illustrations of the coherence postulate?– Replaced it with a TNI postulate… (Cost-benefit balance of TNI

development)….• MLP perspective useful (see Daniel’s work)?• Suggestions? • Thank you! • [email protected]


Thank you!

<[email protected]>


Techno-institutional network/system

prepare promote

Hierarchy of projects of projects

Private sector

Asian Highway Agreement

International organizations

Conventions and agreements on

road infrastructure

and cross-border facilitation

Companies and business associations

Bilateral donors

Financial sector

Development banks

United Nations (e.g., ESCAP)

Other regional (e.g., ASEAN)

member- ship

Road infrastructure

standards

service

Governments

member-ship

plan and invest

lobby

Financing, e.g., loans


Literature review• Co-evolution

– Technology and society (e.g., Geels, 2005)

– Technology and institutions in network industries (Finger, Kuennecke, Groenewegen, 2005, 2007, 2008)

• Network coherence along critical system functions (interconnection, interoperability, system management, investment) impacts performance

– Physical and non-physical networks (Moon and Roehrl, 2006)

• Network analysis

– Social network theory (e.g., Kadushin, 2004)

– New science of networks (e.g., Newman (2003), Watts (2004))

– Economics of networks (e.g., Economides (1996), Smith-Doerr and Powell (2003)


Institutional network (excl. facilitation agreements) of the Asian Highway in 2005


Results: Coherence in critical system functions


Changing socio-technical system

1980 2008

Road networks unconnected across national borders

trans-national networks emerging

Railway networks

Dry ports none ~ 100

Services Unimodal intermodal

Formal institutions Planned by governments and financed from public budgets, controlled by national road and rail administrations

governed by ecosystem of local, national and international, and private sector institutions

… … …

Date post:	21-Dec-2015
Category:	Documents
View:	216 times
Download:	1 times

R. Alexander ROEHRL, MIR/EPFL Lausanne NGI workshop, EPFL, 12 June 2009 Development of transnational...

Documents