British colonial heritage and modern railway development in Africa

British colonial heritage and modern railway development in Africa

by Gabor Gyurko,

'Few countries have ever industrialised […] in which entrepreneurs have been unable to corrupt the state, exploiting taxpayers and consumers far beyond the limits set by proper tolerance […]’

(Clive Dewey on imperial Britain’s ‘new industrial policy’)

Beyond military power and economic might, roads have shaped the outreach of empires throughout human history. Royal highways helped cement the rule of the Achaemenid dynasty over the Persian Empire. 

Roman roads aided legions of the Eternal City in their conquest of the known world. 

 

An epoch of trail network development steered the rise of Inca rule in Latin America.

It was Victorian Britain to pick up the mantle and recommence expanding the global transport infrastructure, with a more modern tool that time – railways. However, as regions and manufacturing production were part of a hierarchy, networks were constructed asymmetrically as well. Above all else, they were organized such that overseas resources would be supplied at the lowest cost for domestic British manufacturing. In Australia, they link the ‘wool-towns’ with the port of Sidney, the Northwestern coalmines with Newcastle harbor since the 1830s. They ship cotton across the British Raj of the Indian subcontinent from the mid-19^th century.

With this single purpose in mind, a plethora of private enterprises and joint ventures entered the railway construction industry to capture profits from transportation fees. In this respect, trunk lines were simply part of individual supply chains, not only not serving integration, but essentially blocking it through limiting differentiated local economic development. Spread out ownership also resulted in major technical discrepancies, which hindered network unifications once lines began overlapping. For instance, in both Australia and India three gauges were in use, none of which matched the then-evolving European standard. Furthermore, with the demise of the colonial world and production processes under realignment, newly independent states were left with assets abandoned by their owners, and the daunting task of reform.

Although a decline in the cost of trade is the most explicit consequence of transport expansion, a well-integrated network also serves as a tool of convergence, both in prices and in incomes. This makes it crucial for a country to have infrastructure in place that services domestic needs. Illustrative studies are abundant for the British Raj, with mixed results in case of prices and marginal to none for incomes. Scholars note that this failure was exacerbated in times of famine, when price inflations and trade from surplus regions helped spread hunger, instead of relieving it.

‘Colonial rule in Africa was intended to be cheap, viz. for taxpayers in Europe.’

(Gareth Austin on the motivation of colonial powers)

While political and social forces would organize over time across most major British domains, inducing more inclusive developments and improving the character of the national infrastructure greatly, such pressures were lacking in Africa at large. The geographical partition of the continent caused a deep political divide across neighboring countries. 

Power-hungry European sovereigns – especially Britain, France and Germany – utilized colonial transport networks as means of military defense against each other, and as instruments of dominance and exploitation over the African territories. Political will dictated the choice of railway over paved road construction as well, as freight was less costly and more secure via trunk lines. Furthermore, given the low density of population and economic activity of the continent and long distances between major centers, there was little room left for regional integration.

Past 50 years of independence there is little change in the transport structure of newly-formed states. Road density is still extremely low even in comparison with other developing countries. The railroad network is in similarly dire straits, with very limited new construction since the 1950s across the Sub-Saharan region. Expansions have been limited to the Southern countries, while other lines were either scrapped or abandoned over the years as they are either too dangerous or no longer viable technologically. Furthermore, as linkages between colonial conglomerates and their overseas affiliates began to realign, many lines have lost their relevance altogether.

The rule of thumb in infrastructural investments is that it creates spillovers and hence increases overall efficiency even if it is itself loss-making via the decline in transportation costs for both freight and passengers. However, calculations suggest that as markets are unsaturated, construction and maintenance of trunk lines is self-financing – yet, concessions still number in single digits. In a globalizing economy, national borders and interest become secondary to integration and the composite performance of regions. In the lack of price and income equalization, the produce of especially landlocked and ‘monocultural’ countries remains uncompetitive, while their populations suffer greatly from their inability to access global markets. Proposed developments  clearly seek to further the international unification process that is increasingly prevalent in contemporary African politics. 

Perhaps, infrastructural expansion can lead to the rise of an economically and politically more stable, and socially more equitable Africa for the 21^st century.

-------------------------------------------

Literature review:

Quote by Clive Dewey is from this article.

http://www.cscsarchive.org/dataarchive/textfiles/textfile.2008-09-14.3329631171/file

Quote by Gareth Austin is from this article.

http://poldev.revues.org/78#tocfrom1n5

An extensive review of Australian colonial railways is available via this website.

http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/ahc/publications/commission/books/linking-a-nation/chapter-4.html

A brief summary of Indian railway development is available here, with specific analysis of famines in this article.

http://www.socsci.uci.edu/~dbogart/indraileconachieve.pdf

http://www.celdf.org/downloads/NATURE%20and%20EMPIRE%20-%20LAXMAN%20SATYA%20ARTICLE.pdf

A good summary of colonial heritage in African railroads is presented here, with policy recommendations found here, and in extensive detail here.

http://www.trforum.org/forum/downloads/2007_5A_AfricaTrans_paper.pdf

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWDR2009/Resources/4231006-1225840759068/WDR09_18_GIM04web.pdf

http://www.infrastructureafrica.org/system/files/BP17%20Railways_maintxt_3.pdf

Illustrative brief on road networks in Africa is available here.

http://www.eu-africa-infrastructure-tf.net/attachments/library/aicd-background-paper-14-roads-sect-summary-en.pdf

Read More

The story of Liverpool

Beatles, Everton FC, Lusitania and River Mersey; they are all hallmarks of Liverpool and made it once famous. But the question is whether or not Liverpool connects to and fits into the world of new economic geography and if so, then how. Furthermore, can Liverpool be one of the famous textbook examples of agglomeration forces and trade like Chicago? Concerning these questions, I will do my best to show that the story of Liverpool is far more intriguing than one thinks at first and it is worth to be taught since it has strong links to theory.

Once upon a time, the place of Liverpool was a muddy, fishermen’s village, until all of a sudden King John decided to make a new borough with a new port on it to trade with Ireland. The port was a kind of agglomeration force; a couple of settlers arrived and settled down. Thus the village grew but after some time it reached a steady state and stayed unimportant compared to the nearby centre, Chester. The economy has been in a stable equilibrium for centuries with a population around 1000 people.

Then an accident happened again, the location of Liverpool became more valuable when trade evolved with the 13 British Colonies of America. To preserve this preciousness the first commercial wet port was built here, which allowed the ships to be unloaded and uploaded anytime of the day regardless of the tide. Of course, this invention attracted more and more ships, which is a good example of cumulative causation: the wet port was established in Liverpool because there were many ships as a result of trade with the colonies and more and more ships arrived to Liverpool because the wet port was there. Later, a large amount of profit was realised by the local merchants due to slave trade in the 18^th century. The slave trade line was in fact a triangle connecting Liverpool, Africa, and America. In spite of its success, the business with the colonies was suddenly terminated when the American War of Independence broke out. Interestingly, this shock – that is losing one of the most important trade partners – could have led to the end of the golden days of the city, yet, it did not happen. Liverpool also kept its major position even when the slave trade was abolished, as the trade of tobacco, cotton, sugar, and other goods easily substituted it.

Steam ships were invented in the 19^th century and eventually became common on the seas. The docks of Liverpool – since they were not deep enough – were not appropriate for these ships. In answer to this, the city quickly overcame the technological shock by establishing new ports to be able to serve steam ships. From this time on, hundreds of people travelled to North America from Ireland and Eastern Europe via Liverpool, which was at this time the second largest port in the country.

In the First World War Liverpool docks were very busy building ships, and the city itself was still very vivid. In contrast, between the two world wars, world trade declined and so did Liverpool. A few years later, in the Second World War, the location of the city became favourable again: troops, food and weapons arrived from the USA to Liverpool. Unfortunately, its importance made the city a major target of the German air force, which bombed it several times.

After the war, Liverpool never recovered. Containerisation was then the new wave in shipping and there was not any dock where these containerships could port until the 1970s so the city soon found itself on the margin. Furthermore, United Kingdom enhanced trade with the European Union, joining it in 1973, thus ports on the Southern and Eastern coast of the country benefitted, and for the first time, Liverpool was on the wrong side of the country. The companies, once located near Liverpool moved closer to the centre of the EU thus the agglomeration force in the city declined. Since that time, the economy of Liverpool reached an equilibrium again, but at a lower level, with a population of 435 000 people.

Focusing on the future: will the story be a fairytale? Certainly, nothing can be declared, but the Objective One Merseyside program of the European Union between 1994 and 2008 probably enforced the agglomeration forces of the city with its projects. Moreover, a new container dock is planned for extra huge containerships. However, it is still doubtful whether these projects can offset the handicap of being far from most of the EU members.

To give you an overview of the last centuries, here states a graph of the population of Liverpool.

Source: Liverpool Core Strategy Preferred Options 2010

All in all, location matters. What seemed to be a perfect position for centuries can become a disadvantage after all, due to some accidents of history, just as in the case of Liverpool. Some events do not even have an effect, but some affect the economy very intensively and move it to a new equilibrium. And if the agglomeration forces deteriorate, the size of the particular city will decrease. Good luck, Liverpool.

Andrea Kiss

Resources:

Lambert, T. (2012). A Brief History of Liverpool.

ScouseTimes (2011, February 13). Special Lost Dock ofLiverpool

LiverpoolCore Strategy Preferred Options 2010. (n.d.) p. 32.

Read More

Deepening the Port of Charleston

by Daniel Bunn

In 2004, the Port of Charleston took its inner harbor to a depth of 45 feet making it the deepest port in the South Atlantic. Since that time, the port has risen to become the 8th most active U.S. port as measured by the dollar value of goods handled. However, with the ever-constant forces of globalization and technological progress at work, it is now necessary for the port to be dredged to a depth of 50 feet. The simple reason for this is that bigger ships are on their way. Even the Panama Canal is being altered to accommodate larger container ships. Although a difference of 5 feet might not sound like much, this change is important for allowing some of the larger container ships into the port. Technically speaking, the economies of scale that are at work in the shipping industry are going to continue to be accommodated by the Charleston port.

The potential economic impact of this deepening project is hard to measure, so it is simplest to look at the level of activity supported by the current port and use that as a baseline to project a general expansion on this base. The 2008 Economic Impact Study completed by the South Carolina State Ports Authority found that 10.9% of state jobs are supported by port-related activity. The location of this activity is represented in the figure below taken from that report.

Just within the state, there is an obvious clustering of port-related activity in the Northwest corner particularly along Interstate Highway 85. What is interesting about this corridor is that it is becoming less and less of an independent economic region as it becomes more and more integrated with the cities of Charlotte, NC, and Atlanta, GA, both of which are very large centers of economic activity for the Southeast US. So, it’s entirely possible that even if the port did not exist, there would still be a higher level of concentrated economic activity in the Piedmont region.

Now back to the port.

If the port of Charleston supports so much activity in the Northwest corner of South Carolina, then it can be assumed that the deepening project will simply increase the amount of activity in this region and along with international trade-related activities, other intermediate functions will arise such as financing and non-tradable services. This is because a deeper port that can accommodate larger ships that bring more goods in and out of South Carolina and, in particular, the Piedmont region, will facilitate an increase of the level of economic activity as well as the amount of concentration in the Northwest part of the state. Though it is difficult to say how quickly these effects will take place (the deepening project is not due to be completed for another 10-13 years) it is certain that increased trade-related activity will appear even before the project is completed.

Some other factors to consider when determining what the impact of this project will be include the widening and deepening of the Panama Canal, the joint effort between Georgia and South Carolina to establish another port on the Savannah river in Jasper County, SC, as well as the deepening of the port in Savannah, GA. These four things, including the deepening of the port in Charleston, will surely have a large combined impact on the states of South Carolina and Georgia with the largest impact within the state of South Carolina falling in the Northwest corner as the Atlanta and Charlotte economic areas spill over into the cities of Greenville and Spartanburg.

With Paul Krugman’s economic geography model and its extensions in mind, I believe that the lower costs of trade faced by market participants in this area will probably lead to stronger forces of agglomeration with a continual increase in the size of the agglomerated area. Perhaps, as the trade costs continue to fall, the city of Charleston will expand its role as a location for facilitating trade rather than an economic center in and of itself. However, the small towns in South Carolina will probably continue to shrink as the spreading of economic activity continues to decline.

Read More