Opinion Training our sights on the future
As the Railway Budget is presented,indications are that the Indian Railways will have moved 900 million tonnes...
As the Railway Budget is presented,indications are that the Indian Railways (IR) will have moved 900 million tonnes (MT) 50 MT more than what had been projected in the last budget. This is good news as it shows that the economy is growing again. It also reveals IRs capability to move the additional 50 MT by working its locomotives and wagons harder. If we look back into IR statistics we will notice that IR has been getting more out of its assets. In the 60s,a diesel locomotive covered 300 km and a wagon moved approximately 1000 net tonne km every day. Today,a locomotive covers over 410 km and a wagon moves about 3500 net tonne km each day. Track utilisation has similarly risen from 2.76 net tonne km per route kilometre to nearly 10 today.
Even though IR has been getting more efficient it is not moving enough to win back market share. The market share has fallen from the high of 88 per cent to less than 30 per cent today. Why has an increase in productivity not resulted in greater market share? The answer lies in the difference between efficiency and effectiveness. While IR is getting more efficient it is not getting more effective.
The dominance of IR in movement over land has been undermined over the years,by the change in transport needs. High-value passengers moved away because of advances in automobiles and aeroplanes. IR as a traditional bulk carrier could not hold on to high-value freight because it failed to emphasise quality and timely delivery. Therefore,improving efficiency,which is doing more of the same with less effort or lower cost,has not won back market share. IR must work on its effectiveness which involves setting right goals and transforming the organisation by bringing in a fresh perspective to address strategic and long-term questions.
Issues pertaining to efficiency are internal to IR,while issues of effectiveness are centred on society at large. Infrastructure is crucial for economic growth and widely available and affordable transport services facilitate greater urban-rural linkages. This fosters grassroots entrepreneurship,strengthens local economies and improves livelihoods. The mix of rail,road and other transport has to be socially determined while keeping commercial considerations in view. Indias legacy network of railway and road structure has to be brought in line with the development needs of the 21st century. The prime minister has announced a National Transport Development Policy Committee to chalk out a multimodal strategy for the next 20 years. For the first time,transport is being studied in a holistic manner. The key question pertaining to railways will be,is rebuilding and expanding the railways to 21st century standards an appropriate objective? How might it be best achieved? Answers to these questions will determine the size of new investments.
Although the Chinese experience may not be totally relevant for India it does give some indication of the magnitude of policy,institutional and investment change needed for transforming a 19th century railway into a 21st century system. Since independence,IR has built 10,000 km of new routes,which pales before Chinas 30,000 km. Chinas massive expansion programme has made it the second largest railway network,pushing India into third place. More importantly,China has spent vast sums in modernising and upgrading the existing system. They have invested nearly $450 billion since 1990 in comparison to Indias $40 billion. They tested the fastest bullet train in the world from Wuhan to Guangzhou,at a cost of $23.5 billion,and have nearly finished the construction of a high speed rail route from Beijing to Shanghai. The 4046 km strategically important Qinghai Tibet railway line,which connects Beijing to Lhasa,has 1110 km built mostly on permafrost a technical marvel. The political,military,social and strategic significance of binding the far-western border regions of China with the east coast population centres and their economies cannot be overemphasised. In comparison,the Himalayan border lands of India remain isolated,and far from convenient rail (or even road) connections.
India has just started thinking about building a high speed rail network,and work on the dedicated freight corridors is yet to take off. One of the reasons for Indias inability to build is its lack of strategy. While IR management has intimate knowledge of how to fix short-term problems,it has proved itself incapable of freshly addressing the strategic questions. An external,independent perspective would be valuable,and the minister should consider a think tank-like body to assist policy-makers within IR and outside to make long-term decisions,based on effective global practices.
The writer is a former general manager of Indian Railways
express@expressindia.com
Share
