Upload
truongdan
View
218
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
PAN-ASIAN CORRIDORS &
GATEWAYS
Peter J. Rimmer AMCollege of Asia and the PacificThe Australian National University, Canberra
http://globallogistics.ning.com/groups
1. INTRODUCTION1994
Rimmer, 1997
•If India is to become manufacturing powerhouse it needs investment in transport & communications infrastructure for just-in-time delivery (JIT) & opportunities in vertically integrated supply chains (Choorikkadam, 2010)
• Status of China’s Pan-Asian platforms transformed since mid-1990s
•Due to China’s involvement in vertically integrated supply chains & large share of international trade in intermediate & unfinished goods & openness to FDI
As international economy vulnerable to shocks counter argument is need to reduce export dependence & increase reliance on regional markets (seafood, fruit & veg. textiles, motor vehicle parts & apparel)
CONTEXT • Argument US & European
markets prioritized resulting in low Pan-Asian connectivity
• Connect India & East Asia thru investment in hard & soft regional infrastructure in countries abutting Bay of Bengal as step towards economic community (i.e. integration & harmonization)
• Higher weight to regionalism than consistent with purely economic goals
• Debate leading to politically sensitive issues cutting across infrastructure, logistics chains & policy Source: ADBI, 2009: 56
INTRA-REGIONAL TRADE FLOWS IN ASIA, 2007 (as percentage of Asia’s total trade)
1B ISSUES
•How
can the emerging spatial economy be defined & efficient transnational transport networks be identified to reduce cost & time in transit & increase reliability & flexibility?
•Where
should investments in logistics infrastructure (including Special Economic Zones) be located to enhance regional cooperation and integration? Source: ADB
1C METHODOLOGY
3. Once the full systems approach (Gateways + Corridors) is adopted we can proceed to consider POLICY aimed at rebalancing development patterns to meet politically-informed priorities
2. As this approach is too narrow & unidimensional there is an explicit need to examine GATEWAYS
1. Initial attention on
CORRIDORS (i.e. linear orientation of goods, people & information)
CORRIDOR
GATEWAY
Border
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
GATEWAY
CORRIDOR
2. CORRIDORS• Importance stems from funding agencies• Offer less political approach to regional integration• 4 types of Corridors (Banomyong, 2007)1
Transport2
Multimodal (2+ modes combinations)3
Logistics (institutional framework)4
Economic (investment in less developed areas)
TRANSPORT CORRIDORS
Corridor that physically links an area or region
Following Taylor (20093 corridors explored1 Southern Maritime Corridor2 Central Air Corridor3 Northern Land Corridor
BIMSTEC’s (Bay of Bengal Initiativefor Multi Sectoral and Technical and Economic Cooperation) India-Mekong Trilateral Highway Thailand, Myanmar & India; BTILS, Transport Infrastructure Logistics Study (ADB, 2008)
Plus Tele-Space
SOUTHERN MARITIME CORRIDOR
•Dominant mode offering good connectivity•Hub & spoke system; mainline supported by regional hubs & feeders •Improving cargo handling facilities (e.g. Mumbai) & developing inland transport corridors to ports
MAJORHong KongSingaporeShanghaiShenzhenKaohsiungREGIONALQingdaoL. ChabangT. PelapasPt KlangColomboNATIONALKarachiQasimN ShevaChennaiKolkataChittagongT. PriokHCM
S Asia-Europe15-22days
S Asia-S Asia-EuropeEurope15-2215-22daysdays
S Asia-Europe15-22days
E Asia- Europe22-32days
E Asia- Europe22-32days
E Asia- Europe22-32days
KolkataChittagong+7 days
KolkataChittagong+7 days
KolkataChittagong+7 days
ASIAN PORTS
• Within two weeks sail of each other
• Should decrease to 10 days with increased volume
• Inter-port competition in India (cf. China): esp India’s Gujarat ports & Mumbai; & Chennai & Vishakhapatnam for central hinterland
• Extra port capacity (terminal US$150-200mn cf US$ 250-400mn greenfield site)
• Less successful handling congested traffic outside port
Source: Maitree, 2009
Portcompetition
4-7 days
12-25 days
CENTRAL AIR CORRIDOR
• Air freight growing importance as value of commodities traded increases but lags behind ocean transport as market limited by cost
• Few direct passenger flights between South & East Asia except for hubs: Bangkok, Hong Kong & Singapore
• Less 1% trade in volume (5% value): need to improve cargo handling facilities (esp. India)
• Greenfield airport US$4-6bn 60mn pax; pax terminal US$100-300 bn; cargo US$10-20 mn (Taylor 2009).
growing importance
Transit3-5 days
Top 25 airports shown (Mumbai 34, New Delhi 42)
NORTHERN LAND CORRIDOR •Land transport (road & rail) increasing role in bilateral trade • May facilitate trade away from coast between non-adjacent countries but requiresimprovements at remote land border crossings; link AH1-AH3 US$3bn•Unlikely to attract large share of trade flows by 2020 despite promotion of Asian Highway & Asian Railway System (missing links)•Existing trade negligible & limited growth potential, except northern India to western China•Roads within India upgraded—Golden Quadrilateral; “chicken’s neck”- India-Myanmar problemSingle land border crossing for
each country pair
AH 42
AH43
AH 1
AH3
RAIL
MUMBAI
SINGAPORE
SHANGHAI
Maritime Corridor
TELE-SPACE
• Telecommunications transcends economic space & brings business cores in South Asia & East Asia into instant contact•Spatial outcome is that city cores are stacked pancake-like on top of one another•Cores of Mumbai, Singapore, Shanghai and Tokyo are more adjacent than their physical hinterlands•Economic space involving physical movements of goods & people more continuous but differences between modes reflected in air & sea time lapse •The world is not flat and economic space is not smooth
Air Corridor
TOKYO
Source: Adapted from Dick & Rimmer, 2003
Teleport
LandCorridor
MULTIMODAL CORRIDORS • Corridor that has more than
one mode of transport that can physically link the corridor (i.e. road & rail)
•
•
•
•
Northeastern India landlocked except for congested land corridor: link Kolkota & establish Chittagong link for Bhutan & Nepal trade (BIMSTEC’s Bilateral & Regional Transport & Transit Agreements: preferential access). Japan’s inclusion?
Verbiest , 2009
Source: Ramdallah, 2007
Subramanian & Taylor
Time/Cost-Distance Methodology
Transport to border
Wait at border crossing/change transport mode
Transport to sea port
Wait at sea port
500 km 1000 km 2000 km1500 km
Day 4
Tim
e
Day 3
Day 2
Day 1
Cos
t
Distance
Destination
Point of OriginSource: Ha, 2008
• Corridor not only physically links an area or region but harmonizes corridor’s institutional framework •Aims to facilitate efficient flow & storage of freight & movement of people & related information by removing bottlenecks & developing logistics service providers (LSPs) •
•
chain; JVs with overseas firms
Industrial Corridor
Bangalore , Chennai- East Asia Corridor
ECONOMIC CORRIDORS• Economic corridor able to attract
investment & generate economic activity along lesser developed areas of the corridor
• Physical linkages & logistics facilities must be in place in the corridor as prerequisite
•
•b
Source: Asian Development Bank
3. GATEWAYS• Coastal metropolitan area with
seaports, airports & teleports with access to hinterland & hinterworld
•
•
•
Hinterworld(Source; Pain, 2007)
GATEWAY C
GATEWAY A
AIR
TELE-COM
SEA-LAND
MULTILAYERED GATEWAY
Corridor
Corridor
Corridor
Goods
Passengers
Freight
Information
GATEWAY B
1
2
3
4Gateway: multi-modal entry/exit port where goods, people & information move beyond local markets.
Paradox 1 : Inter-gateways inter dependencies intensifying (1) & global functions clustering (2)
Paradox 2: Trade flows are dematerializing with “informationization” & “virtualization” (3) & physical flow structures (gateways & corridors) more important (4)
How do we select gateways?
Paradox 3: Administrative & jurisdictional boundaries (5) do not coincide with multi-scale flows & functional business linkages (6)
5 6
RANKINGS IN WORLD TOP-50, 2008
Container Air Freight Air Pax Internet
Tokyo 24 & 29 8 & 23 4 & 31 10
Hong Kong 3,4 & 8 2,26,32 12 19
Singapore 1,18 10 19 28
Beijing 14 18 8 38
Shanghai 2 & 7 3 & 46 41 48
Kuala Lumpur 15 27 42 49
— 4 39 32
Bangkok
Mumbai
Osaka
6 gatewaysbases for global logistics operators (DHL. Fed-EX & UPS)• 5 proto-gateways: not Colombo (BTILS, 2008) but Mumbai & Bangkok
RANKINGS
BEIJING
HONG KONG
SHANGHAI
TOKYO
KUALA LUMPUR
SINGAPORE
GATEWAYProto-Gateway
DubaiMumbai
Bangkok
Osaka
Seoul
Source: Maitree, 2009
PortAirport
CORRIDOR
HINTERWORLD GATEWAY HINTERLAND
CORRIDOR
At-borderAt-border
Behind-the-border Behind-the-border
ShippingAir Lines Road
RailWater
1 2
5
43
1. Oligopoly 2. Congestion 3. Multimodal transport & congestion 4. Inter-governmental jurisdiction 5.Ownership structure (public/private)
GATEWAY, CORRIDOR HINTERLAND & HINTERWORLD
Trace forward & reverse flows (e.g. Mumbai); note at-border & behind-the-border; use for discussing issues
Source: Adapted from Zhang, 2008
•
• knowledge economy (+) & unequal spatial relationships (-)
• Corridors
promote both balanced development (+) & uneven development (-)
• Hinterworld?
• Masked appearance of new gateways (Beijing & Seoul serving emerging transnational markets & HK’s high connectivity)
• What other gateways will emerge in Pan-Asia?
Cross-border
Verbiest 2009
Harry Johnson Jrhttp://cepa.newschool.edu/het/ profiles/image/johnson.jpg
•Crucial SEZs are the gateways (new SEZ accommodate industrial & political trends (e.g. outsourcing & global integration through WTO);
Asia-Pacific not inefficient!•Use of SEZs to bolster impact of transport infrastructure in cross-border land transport infrastructure
may impose higher costs for non-agricultural & non-
resource activities •Harry G. Johnson Jr argued forcefully that distortions should be tackled at source•
•
Inefficient Inland Freight Distribution
Efficient Inland Freight Distribution
West Coast Nth AmericaAsia-Pacific
SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONES (SEZs)Source: Rodrigue, 2007
4. POLICY• Recommend door-to-door logistics
approach:
no distinction between transnational & domestic connections
• Need to emphasize coordination
among key players to achieve efficiency through logistics chain
• Check cost of removing at-border & behind-the-border obstacles
• Not all sides of benefit equally from seamless development (e.g. India bears cost of Bangladesh & Nepal road)–
not academic study
• Highest returns derived from overcoming externalities & bottlenecks in gatewaysSource: ADB & ADBI,
http://ofam.my/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/logistic_pic.jpg
LESSONS FROM CANADA
• Avoid historically competitive hinterland interpretations & focus on gateways & corridors
• Contrast between fractured politico-territorial space & inter-
gateway synergies of globalizing business networks
• Emphasize material, virtual & institutional
infrastructures
• Cross-border flows most intense where proactive trading policies
& absence of regulatory, technological & legal restraints
5. CONCLUSIONS• How to make
gateways more efficient (i.e. finance & governance)
• No ready-made spatial framework: Europe not model because restricts growth in Pentagon & reliant on internal transport infrastructures
• Tasks: mobilizations of resources; improve tax base; investigate impact of higher fossil fuel prices; & more rigorous cost-benefit analysis
Pentagon
http://www.vrom.nl/Pics/internationaal/Pentagon.jpg