Governance of Transport Corridors in OIC Member States:
Challenges, Cases and Policy Lessons
25
 Piloting reforms in trade facilitation and logistics;
 Giving voice to landlocked countries and the private sector;
 Supporting project implementation.
Participation of local authorities and private sector
National governments can only go so far with developing a corridor. In most situations, cooperation
from local authorities is required to carry through plans. Moreover, the private sector is a valuable
partner for co-financing transport infrastructure, even to the extent that private sector parties can hold
seats in corridor governance committees. To determine who to approach for corridor governance –
various stakeholders can extract different benefits from a common transport policy. Bazaras, Palšaitis
& Šakalys (2014) highlight the benefits for the various stakeholders, summarized i
Table 2.6 Stakeholders involved with corridors and expected benefits
Stakeholder Expected benefits
Authorities, policy
makers and the society at
large
Efficient interfaces between transport networks, need – based approach to
infrastructure investments, additional transport
opportunities/alternatives, enabling limitation/ control of traffic
congestion, greening transport corridors. Increased competition, offering
cost-effectiveness (and accelerated introduction of market principles).
(Inland) shipping
companies
Higher quality of service and entering of new markets.
Existing shippers Lower transport costs, more transport opportunities/alternatives, greater
reliability and safety.
Potential (new) shippers Better access to market, opening up of new markets, more transport
opportunities/ alternatives, lower transport costs.
Railways Higher quality of service and possibility to compete with the separate
market segments.
Road haulage industry Higher quality of service, greater flexibility and reliability.
Forwarding industry Greater range of transport opportunities/alternatives, lower costs.
Intermodal transport
operators (MTO’s)
Better coordination of activities, higher quality of service, more transport
alternatives, lower costs.
Source: Bazaras, Palšaitis & Šakalys (2014).
2.2.4 Infrastructure: financing, planning and programming
This section deals with the infrastructure that is in place to ensure the actual development of the
corridor, with specific focus on financing on the one hand and planning and programming on the other
hand.
Sources of finance available to effectively ensure governance of transport corridors
Securing financing for corridor governance can be difficult as the benefits are not directly visible. This
can be problematic in the earlier stages as it takes a while for the added value of the corridor to clearly
manifest itself. In the case of self-financing, each member contributes a share to general budget of the
corridor of which the corridor management is financed. Kunaka & Carruthers (2014) describe three
other financing mechanisms for corridor management: charging a levy on crossing through a corridor,
financing by corridor champions and donor funding. The advantages and disadvantage of each
financing mechanism are described i