Improving Transnational Transport Corridors
In the OIC Member Countries: Concepts and Cases
90
When time and costs for using each link are competitive, transport services can be developed
along the corridor. Danestad (2017) and Vlassiouk (2017) witnessed a strong interest from
Swedish companies to use the TRACECA routes for moving products into the region. Akhundov
(2017) states that TRACECA works well and so do the transport services offered by ADY
Express and its partners in the TCITR. Now, TCITR puts much effort in informing the
customers about the new services along TRACECA under the umbrella of TCITR, that extends
to China in the east (Trend, 2017) and Poland in the west. The consortium is still focused on
the middle and eastern parts of TRACECA where the railways of Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and
Georgia offer a transport service jointly with the Azerbaijan Caspian Shipping Company under
a single tariff. Poland has entered TCITR and Ukraine is about to enter as is Turkey when the
rail link to Kars (TRACECA route T19) is opened. Tariffs are agreed, technology reasonable
harmonized and efforts made to shorten border controls/customs clearance. TCITR now
focuses on sales, emphasizing transport efficiency and less climate-related problems than for
the more northern routes through Russia (Akhundov, 2017).
The focus ahead is to improve the operations. TCITR has run test trains from China to Turkey
in 18 days (should have been 14 days, but there was a storm on the Caspian Sea at the time).
The commercially offered services are now extended into Turkey. It is based on containers,
which are unloaded from Russian-gauge rail wagons and transported by truck in Turkey
(Akhundov, 2017). TCITR also intends to develop value-added logistics improving usefulness
for the states beyond transit traffic.
On road there are no severe harmonization problems reported, but there is a divide between
CIS countries, Turkey/EU and Iran with some other standards. Axle load differs a bit but
common road signage is generally developed and in place. TRACECA wants to harmonize
further with the EU but as long as trucks passes within CIS countries there are no major
obstacles. Regarding road quality, there are still some problems but lots of investments are
going on in the member countries. Azerbaijan, for instance, has borrowed 2 billion USD to
improve TRACECA routes. Ismayil (2017) finds that average speeds are satisfactory along
TRACECA and the absence of major road congestion allows traffic speeds according to the road
regulations. There are intermittent problems with force majeure (avalanches, accidents etc.)
but maritime transport is more sensitive to inclement weather, mainly from November to
March. TRACECA does not inform particularly regarding road regulation in individual
countries along the corridor, IRU does it better, but they cooperate. According to Vlassiouk
(2017) (confirmed from TRACECA Secretariat interviews) is that Turkish trucking firms
dominate the carriage of the trade in the region.
Instead of technical issues, operational factors like quotas and permits are of major concern for
the road hauliers. The big problem is the Autoroad agreement, a quota system. TRACECA
wants a “TRACECA Permit System” (TRACECA, 2003a) that authorizes the international road
hauliers to perform multilateral haulages along the corridor. It is implemented in Armenia,
Georgia, Moldova, Romania, Turkey and Ukraine from 1 January 2016. TRACECA issues these
multilateral road transport permits along demand, but only in the member states where the
system is ratified.