As earlier mentioned in one of the comments, the land owned by railways has been held for decades and can largely be utilized for a series of developmental projects. The development of the Mumbai-Delhi rail corridor can be duplicated across the country to link all major cities of India. Railway budgets don’t need to be appeasing the masses but are required to have great foresight. Road development should be taken up only to strengthen these rail corridors and not serve them any competition.

As the exhibit shows, rail’s share of freight will almost double from 25% to 46%, but it lacks an absolute estimation of the dynamics of the turnover of the transportation. If that turnover is rising over the next 10 years, the figure of 46% may be changed.

Undoubtedly, unless India builds world class ports to support modern logistics models for coastal freight movement, railways and road will continue to be insufficient for meeting evolving supply chain and logistics demands of India’s imports and exports growth. If planned and managed properly, these ports could spur regional growths in adjoining areas. Although Indian Railways has one of the largest network in the world, it does not have dedicated freight lines/corridors (now initiated by DFCCIL on eastern and western lines but running in to erratic funding) and associated infrastructure to support multi-modal logistics and cannot consume larger share of the transportation pie.

A lesser-known fact is that Indian Railways (IR) owns land which was acquired decades back. The profitability and operating ratio are impressive because of the cheap land. New land acquisition will be expensive and when that starts reflecting on the balance sheet, IR would look quite unattractive. There is a case for making IR much more efficient, IR should not be satisfied with past performance as that is an aberration.

Relevant points brought up here. Additionally, our road infrastructure needs a huge overhaul. Given the size and complexity of our country, all secondary transportation is done by road, and over large distances. With the pathetic state of current roadways—which reduces truck life and efficiency and increases lead times by 20 to 30%—it is very challenging. I was in Thailand this week and travelled about 500 kms of highways. I did not see a single pothole and saw excellent safety features, with systematic traffic management. We struggle to see a 100 mts without several gut-wrenching potholes, non-existant traffic management systems, and reasonably dangerous conditions, posing a threat to both goods and people.

Where is the weak, non-polluting transport in this analysis?

1970-71: Rail had 65.5% and Road had 34.5% share of the transportation market. But the role reversed in 1982-83. That year for the first time road (51.4%) surpassed Rail’s contribution (48.6%) in the transportation market. The early 80s was the time when politicization of Indian Railways had started and the government started to compromise its efficiency. If Railways become accountable to its customers, even today it’s percentage will dramatically improve.

Supply chain management (SCM) is crucial to any emerging economy. Annually, SCM cost should be 10% of the annual turnover of the organization, and should be part of the strategy and balanced score card of the organization. There is always an opportunity for rework reduction in SCM. All this can be achieved when the quality of infrastructure improves.

Another key aspect of this is the relative paucity of modern, complementary logistics-oriented property development.

Coastal shipping is one sector where India has to concentrate and build on in the near future. Given its long and almost trouble-free coastline, it is high time people invested on this mode of transport. It will go a long way in reducing the congestion on the roads as also provide a more pollution free transportation.

The development of waterways to supplement transport infrastructure in India has been neglected despite significant positive developments that could accrue from it. It is sustainable; has lesser climate damaging effects; encourages pro-active water management methods; and protects cities and their population from floods, droughts, and other volatile climate related changes.

It needs to be encouraged.

It’s true that the there is an urgent need to develop infrastructure, with the ever growing consumers, the demand is only going to go up. And, as pointed out, the rail networks need to be developed for freight transport, furthermore, it’s a safer mode of transport, the loss due to damage is less, and so is the cost. As a matter of fact, I have myself seen freight trains carrying trucks loaded with goods; it’s an excellent combination. Moreover, India’s infrastructure is at such a nascent stage that any development in road, rail or air transport will only make India a more lucrative market, however, a strong governing body with high ethical standards is required to make this vital progress a reality.

India needs to invest in railway infrastructure. A PPP programme between railways (fully owned by government) and private companies to develop logistics hubs with well-connected rail networks, DCs, privatized freight operators, and the use of the latest technology can help shift the freight from roads to rail.

Railway has enough spare land to help make this happen. This is especially important as the price of diesel goes up and the carbon footprints of supply chains gain importance.

The real problem is a lack of political will and the ability of Indian leaders to deliver on plans. Everything becomes a political issue in India. I can imagine a Minister of Railways from the deep south building a mega DC to cater to keep his constituents happy but forgetting about the costs to move products from there!

Then of course there is the structural problem at the government level—we have a Ministry of Railways, Ministry of Surface Transport, Ministry of Civil Aviation, Ministry of Shipping, Ministry of Commerce, etcetera, etcetera. No wonder many well-intended schemes evaporate doing the rounds of ministers tables.

Why can’t India have a Ministry of Logistics looking after all functions related to moving goods from point A to B.

The infrastructure woes of India will be its biggest bane in times to come unless it is grappled with in earnest with focus and with a finite and definite time frame in mind.

The planning process over the post-independence years has yielded modest results except in recent times where a lot of changes are visible as far as surface transport is concerned.

Privatisation / BOLT would be the key for all three segments, including railways.

The mainstay of logistic support needs to be built around railways and water routes as both are conducive to mass movements and cost advantages, which Indian manufacturers will need if they wish to remain afloat under the global pressures.

In the last 63+ years, typically India’s attainment post independence in rail, waterways, and road infrastructure should be considered marginal and modest in overall perspectives given the foundation the British Empire had already laid by then.

Expanding the infrastructure network on an accelerated basis is not a prerequisite but also a necessity for India.

On top of all, the quality issue of infrastructure needs special mention and focus, and India traditionally has been the dumping yard by its own people for redundant technology; be it in road building, railways or heavy duty trucks. All have taken advantages of the closed markets, hence the need to privatise that so that efficiencies are built around infrastructures to reduce the cost as well as turn around time, which is very high in India.

Sadly, it seems government are good at strategic planning and extremely poor in execution.

An excellent article. But who is listening? The Indian Railways (IR) lurches from one crisis to another. What happened to the US $6 billion that the IR was said to have built up as surplus from 2004 to 2009?

Grandiose schemes such as dedicated freight corridors are announced with foreign aid, which will never see the light of day. How is IR planning to deal with the incremental traffic until these grand schemes are completed?

In my view, the IR should expedite all gauge conversion works, and concentrate on other line capacity works such as doubling, improved signaling, and telecommunication. Above all, IR should increase the average speed of freight trains so that the speed differential between passenger carrying trains and freight trains is reduced.

IR is going ahead with electric traction in spite of the fact that most of these projects are losing money and the Comptroller and Auditor General have raised objections.

In a power-starved country like India, it is a criminal waste to electrify the railways, thereby denying power to farms and factories. Millions of highly inefficient diesel/kerosene generators are running, polluting the atmosphere, to make up for the shortage of electricity. Kerosene meant for the poor is being diverted illegally to run generators.

IR should immediately put on hold all electrification, de-electrify loss-making sections, and run more trains with diesel traction.

IR is riven by departmental wrangles. It should be immediately reorganised to enable it to meet corporate objectives instead of departmental “empire building.”

Implementation is going to be quite challenging. With existing freight corridors located right at the middle of highly congested cities, local distribution will remain as a difficult task. Existing rail and road infrastructure is designed for passenger traffic, and utilization is very high in several places. These two aspects will demand development of totally new infrastructure to meet the demand. However, the current level of population density and geographical constraints will cause a drastic increase in cost as well as significant delay in implementation. Adding to the trouble, the political landscape will delay even the formation of national logistic policy.

One sector currently totally ignored is freight movement by air, with current share of less than 1 percent. I strongly believe this will be the first area to move forward, and soon there will be a few dedicated carriers focusing on logistics alone.

Good point on port infrastructure. The port’s reach and access must extend beyond its commercial, real-estate boundaries. But the article misses a key point, one that most ports miss, and one that causes many ports to be viewed as commodity services. There are two sets of customers for the ports—logistics service providers (3PLs, warehouses, transport firms, forwarders, customs firms, etcetera) and there are the end-user customers (importers, exporters, manufacturers, retailers, etcetera). Without recognizing each of these two sets, ports spend—and waste—much capital in a flogging of “if we build it, they will come.” It is not about the container. It is not about the pallet of cargo. It is about the supply chain. It is about the customer—two of them for each port. Ports, like many logistics service providers, focus on what they do and offer, instead of on what is needed.

Traffic on waterways can do wonders for India as it has a long coastal length. However it can expose Indian ports to serious terrorist threats.

Railways are working to their yielding capacities. Creation of large capacities by government-managed railways is very difficult if not impossible. There is a need for privatisation in some ways for meaningful results. Some efforts like the creation of freight corridors from Delhi to Bombay are being made. But everything is slow. It is difficult to beat the timeframe of 10 years to handle three times the volumes.