Improving Transnational Transport Corridors
In the OIC Member Countries: Concepts and Cases
30
transport in the large system. What infrastructure is available creates the conditions for what
modes of transport can be used. Before certain modes of transport or energy carriers can be
implemented, a reliable infrastructure is needed.
2.11. Corridor Performance Evaluation
There is some literature on corridor performance measurement, often referred to as
monitoring, observatory or diagnostics, for instance in general by (World Bank, 2010) and
more specifically on Rwanda (World Bank, 2005), the Northern Corridor (Mombasa and
inland) by Fitzmaurice and Hartmann (2013) and Hartmann (2013) and also best practices in
trade corridors by Arnold (2006) and Hartmann (2013) and also best practices in trade
corridors by Arnold (2006).
2.11.1. Performance Monitoring
A corridor is a complex structure of hard and soft infrastructure. Successful corridors require
performance monitoring and management. Hope and Cox (2015) argue that a corridor can be
considered as a single initiative, but it cannot be developed by a single project that managed as
a one-off exercise. They state that corridor management includes for instance planning,
financing, legislation, regulation, operation, monitoring and promotion. These activities need
to be coordinated as well as the provision of physical infrastructure and development of
national-level and regional-level institutions. During the lifespan of a corridor, managing
activities aimed at achieving the development stage objectives must be combined with the
coordination with indirectly responsible stakeholders needed for getting the full potential of
the corridor. Examples of such stakeholders are government departments and agencies,
investors, and local communities and businesses.
The question why to monitor corridor performance, Hope and Cox (2015) answer “that one
cannot manage that which cannot be measured”. Corridor performance measurement
facilitates the corridor management or secretariats to assess how corridor goals are fulfilled
and to identify under-performing areas to improve. Srivastava (2011) points out that
monitoring corridor performance entirely by the time, distance and cost methodology or time
surveys implicitly incorporate a narrow view of the corridor. This does not capture the
broader context of a development corridor, at least not in the higher levels of corridor
ambitions. Prioritizing certain measures at the expense of others, risks to result in an
incomplete and unbalanced appreciation of a corridor’s performance. To compare corridors
requires a benchmarking methodology taking the different types of corridor, as well as their
differing stages of development into account.
Hartmann (2013) suggests Corridor Transport Observatory (CTO) as a Corridor Performance
tool, with a set of indicators. Efforts to address specific challenges faced by landlocked
developing countries resulted in Transport Observatories and corresponding practically useful
guidelines and tools. Corridor management institutions and other corridor stakeholders can
use the Transport Observatory to diagnose bottlenecks along the transport and transit supply
chains, and to assess the performance of the corridor at different hierarchical levels.