Preview

MGIMO Review of International Relations

Advanced search

Is the Iron Silk Road Really So Important? Rail Freight Use on China’s “Silk Road Economic Belt”

https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2020-5-74-168-193

Full Text:

Abstract

CR Express containerised rail transport between Europe and China is a flagship project of China’s “Belt and Road”. Yet operational and financial details of the project remain scarce. Due to poor governance and logistics transparency, the actual quantity of containers and goods transported is essentially unknowable. The authors doubt the efficacy of the CR Express intercontinental rail system and test its real and possible capacity throughputs. In the article they compare China public media statements with European Union statistics and reveal discrepancies between the number of trains supposedly departing China and the number of trains arriving in the European Union. This article provides numerous data sources and estimates on China–Europe rail freight traffic and demonstrates that the actual transported quantity of goods is probably lower than anticipated or reported. The article also analyses the political development of the CR Express rail freight system and China’s wider “Transport Power” policy. It concludes that while the political concept of the CR Express rail freight system is progressive, and the economic development of creating new cumulative causation systems is theoretically possible, that the evidence for actual economic use is underwhelming. This research helps European Union, Russian, and Central Asian policymakers better assess the viability of participating in the continued rollout of China’s CR Express intercontinental rail freight system. The authors warn that while the CR Express system has potential to be an economic good for Central Asian development it exposes the Eurasian economies to China's political and financial risk. For China the CR Express system fulfils only geopolitical and geoeconomic functions, and ultimately participation in the policy is of minimal utility to European Union economies.

About the Authors

P. Bucsky
University of Pecs
Hungary

Peter Bucsky - PhD candidate at the Doctoral School of Earth Sciences

H-7622 Pecs, Vasvari Pal utca 4



T. Kenderdine
Future Risk
Kazakhstan

Tristan Kenderdine - Research Director at Future Risk

Almaty



References

1. Besharati B., Gansakh G., Liu F.F., Zhang X.M., Xu M. 2017. The Ways to Maintain Sustainable China-Europe Block Train Operation. Business and Management Studies. 3, September. 25 p. DOI: 10.11114/bms.v3i3.2490

2. Blancas L.C., Ollivier G., Bullock R. 2015. Customer-driven Rail Intermodal Logistics: Unlocking a New Source of Value for China. China Transport Topics. 12. P. 1-10.

3. Bucsky P. 2018. China–European Union Rail Freight Traffic: Slow Growth Despite Media Spotlight. Transport Economics and Logistics. 76, P. 123-142. DOI: 10.26881/etil.2018.76.11

4. Bucsky P. 2019. The Iron Silk Road: How Important Is It? Area Development and Policy. 5 (2). P. 146-166. DOI: 10.1080/23792949.2019.1672571

5. Buscky P., Kenderdine Т. 2020. Ferghana Valley Railway Should Never Be Built. Middle East Institute, 17 March. URL: https://www.mei.edu/publications/ferghana-valley-railwayshould-never-be-built#_edn4

6. Huenemann R. 1984. The Dragon and the Iron Horse – The Economics of Railroads in China 1876-1937. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. 366 p.

7. Huenemann R. 1993. Modernizing China's Transport System' in Joint Economic Committee of the United States, China's Economic Dilemmas in the 1990s – The Problems of Reforms, Modernization, and Interdependence. New York: M. E. Sharpe. P. 455-469.

8. Huenemann R. 2001. Are China's Recent Transport Statistics Plausible? China Economic Review. 12 (4). P. 368-372.

9. Hughes N. 2002. China's Economic Challenge – Smashing the Iron Rice Bowl. New York: M.E. Sharpe. 256 p.

10. Kaldor N. 1970. The Case for Regional Policies. Scottish Journal of Political Economy. 17 (3). P. 337-348.

11. Kenderdine T. 2017a. China’s Industrial Policy, Strategic Emerging Industries, and Space Law. Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies. 2 (4). P. 325-342. DOI: 10.1002/app5.177

12. Kenderdine T. 2017b. China’s Industrial Capacity Policy is a One-Way Street. South China

13. Morning Post, June 8 2017. URL: https://www.scmp.com/business/banking-finance/article/2097524/chinas-industrial-capacity-policy-one-way-street

14. Kenderdine T. 2018a. Death of the East Asian Goose and the Rise of China’s Geoindustrial Policy. Journal of Chinese Political Science. 23. P. 437-453.

15. Kenderdine T. 2018b. Kazakh Land, China Capital ‒ Exporting China’s Project System to External Geographies. Central Asian Affairs. 5. P. 313-341.

16. Kenderdine T., Han L. 2018. International Capacity Cooperation ‒ Financing China’s Export of Industrial Overcapacity. Global Policy. 9 (1). P. 41-52. DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.12509

17. Kenderdine T., Lan P.Y. 2019. China’s Middle East Investment Policy. Eurasian Geography and Economics. 1-2. P. 557-584. DOI: 10.1080/15387216.2019.1573516

18. Lam J.S.L., Gu, Y. 2016. A Market-oriented Approach for Intermodal Network Optimisation

19. Meeting Cost, Time and Environmental Requirements. International Journal of Production Economics. 171. P. 266-274. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.09.024

20. Lippit V.D. 1966. Development of Transportation in Communist China. The China Quarterly. 27. P. 101-119.

21. Liu B., Lee S., Xiao J., Wang L., & Jiao Z. (Ed.). 2013. Contemporary Logistics in China. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 108 p.

22. Myrdal G. 1954. The Political Element in the Development of Economic Theory. Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press. 248 p.

23. O'Hara P.A. 2008. Principle of Circular and Cumulative Causation: Fusing Myrdalian and Kaldorian Growth and Development Dynamics. Journal of Economic Issues. 42 (2). P. 375-387.

24. Schumpeter J.A. 1942. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy (3rd ed., 2008). Harper Perennial Modern Thought, New York: Thomas K. McKraw. 460 p.

25. Wang C., Ducruet C. 2013. Transport Corridors and Regional Balance in China: The Case of Coal Trade and Logistics. Journal of Transport Geography. 40. P. 3-16.

26. Wang J.E., Jing Y., Wang C.J. 2017. Study on Better Organization of China-Europe Express Train. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences. 32 (4). P. 370-376.

27. Wang K., Xia W., Zhang A. 2017. Should China Further Expand its High-speed Rail Network? Consider the Low-cost Carrier Factor. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 100. P. 105-120. DOI: 10.1016/J.TRA.2017.04.010

28. Wei H., Sheng Z., Lee P. T.-W. 2017. The Role of Dry Port in Hub-and-spoke Network under Belt and Road Initiative. Maritime Policy & Management. 45 (3). P. 1-18. DOI: 10.1080/03088839.2017.1396505

29. Wu J., Nash C., Wang D. 2014. Is High Speed Rail an Appropriate Solution to China’s

30. Rail Capacity Problems? Journal of Transport Geography. 40. P. 100-111. DOI: 10.1016/J.JTRANGEO.2014.05.004

31. Zhao L., Zhao Y., Hu Q., Li H., Stoete, J. 2017. Evaluation of Consolidation Center Cargo Capacity and Loctions for China Railway Express. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review. 107. P. 58-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.tre.2017.09.007


Review

For citation:


Bucsky P., Kenderdine T. Is the Iron Silk Road Really So Important? Rail Freight Use on China’s “Silk Road Economic Belt”. MGIMO Review of International Relations. 2020;13(5):168-193. https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2020-5-74-168-193

Views: 766


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2071-8160 (Print)
ISSN 2541-9099 (Online)