Introduction
Kenya is a developing country, and in spite of the associated challenges, the Kenyan Government is focused on improving the transport infrastructure. The government plans to enhance the road transport infrastructure and the railway infrastructure to address international standards. However, such issues as the high poverty level in Kenya and the low level of education do not contribute to the development of the transport infrastructure in the country.
The Kenyan Government reported that in 2014, 49.1% of the Kenyan population lived below the poverty line, and the country is the sixth one in the world according to the extreme poverty index (Kenya’s infrastructure investment potential 2015).
In addition, 7.8 million Kenyans are illiterate, and 38.5% of people among them are the youths (Estache & Rus 2013). Thus, limited financial and skilled human resources are available for developing the transport infrastructure (Rietveld & Bruinsma 2014). This report aims to compare economic and social factors associated with the development of the road transport infrastructure and the railway infrastructure in Kenya in order to provide recommendations regarding the alternative that should be selected by the Kenyan Government for the further development.
Background
The current transport system in Kenya is not developed effectively because of the economic challenges, high poverty rates, high levels of illiteracy, and the lack of funding. Currently, the focus is on road transport, railways, ports, and air transport (Stough 2012). However, the Standard Gauge Railway transport infrastructure is rather outdated. The existing road transport infrastructure is not developed, roads are narrow, and the traffic congestion is observed. For 2013, Kenya’s GDP was $1,245.51 (Bias 2013). For the population of 44 million people, the GDP is not high, causing economic instability (Bias 2013).
Kenya has developed ties with the African, Western, and Asian countries. This factor influences the investment and funds’ distribution in the country. The Kenyan Government launched two Standard Gauge Railway projects that would cost $4.5 billion. Referring to the Kenyan GDP, the success of these projects will influence the country’s transport infrastructure and economy (Bias 2013; Kenya’s infrastructure investment potential 2015). Still, the Kenyan current transport infrastructure is less developed comparing to middle-income African countries (Estache & Rus 2013).
Options
The Standard Gauge Railway
To improve the rail transport infrastructure, the Kenyan Government is focused on promoting the Standard Gauge Railway that will connect Mombasa and Nairobi in Kenya. The goal is to connect Rwanda, Kenya, South Sudan, and Uganda, as well as to decrease the travel time and address the passengers’ demands. The project implementation was started in 2013, and it is planned to be completed in 2017 (Transport infrastructure before development 2015).
Road Transport Infrastructure
The Kenyan Government also participates in building the Lagos-Mombasa highway and the LAPSET corridor that will connect Addis Ababa, Juba, and Lamu (Figure 1). The goal of the project is to connect the African economic centres in different countries with the help of the modernised road network (Kenya’s infrastructure investment potential 2015). In order to achieve the goal of enhancing the road infrastructure, the Kenyan Government will consider economic, social, political, cultural factors and the project’s overall costs.
Requirements
Economic Requirements
It is important that the road transport infrastructure should fulfil the economic requirements in Kenya. The reason is that Kenya has a small economic growth with a GDP of $1,245.51 (Estache & Rus 2013). If the Kenyan Government decides to continue focusing on the roads’ development as the priority, the country’s economy can fail to support the project, and the Government will be forced to seek loans from international financial institutions and developed nations.
This situation will lead Kenya to increasing the foreign debt. However, road transport is economically advantageous because the Kenyan regions are connected by roads, and the facilities and vehicles are available.
Rail transport is not well developed in Kenya; thus, railway projects are not economically viable for the country. Kenya requires the complex approach to developing rail transport in the country, but the economic requirement is mostly associated with the quick development of roads. The investment in the road infrastructure can address the economic needs of Kenya more quickly (Kenya: infrastructure, power, and communications 2016). The reason is that road transport will serve the majority of Kenyans and organisations, creating connections and contributing to economic development.
Social Requirements
The means of transport should fulfil the social requirements in Kenya. It is important for the Kenyan Government to invest in those transport methods that can be beneficial for the citizens since the resources spent on the infrastructure construction are received from taxes paid by citizens (African Union Conference of Ministers of Transport 2014). The social requirements include the necessity of connecting the remote regions of the country in order to provide all citizens with an opportunity to reach the economic centres of the country. The developed transport systems are also necessary to guarantee the access to the healthcare facilities and other social services.
Cultural, Political, and Cost Issues
In Kenya, several cultural practices and beliefs are facilitated with references to the transport systems’ development. Thus, the Standard Gauge Railway transport is perceived as having a negative impact on the society because of the high construction costs. Similarly, the political aspects of Kenya also influence the development of the road transport infrastructure, as compared to the Standard Gauge Railway project (Cárcamo-Díaz & Goddard 2013).
Thus, the Kenyan Government should choose to develop the transport infrastructure that is culturally and politically supported (Allen Consulting Group 2013). The total cost of constructing the road transport infrastructure is small compared to the total cost of constructing the Standard Gauge Railway infrastructure. The choice depends on the availability of financial resources. It is necessary to avoid the increases of foreign debts and development of the financial crisis in the country (Transport infrastructure before development 2015).
Comparison
Economic Factors
The development of the Standard Gauge Railway project requires spending $3.8 billion, 10% of the necessary sum should be provided by the Kenyan Government when other expenses are covered by the investment (Transport infrastructure before development 2015). On the contrary, the construction of the Lagos-Mombasa highway and the LAPSET corridor costs $100 million that is 2% of Kenya’s GDP. Therefore, the road transport project is more cost-efficient for the country (Kenya’s infrastructure investment potential 2015).
Furthermore, the use of roads in the country is potentially higher than the demand for the Standard Gauge Railway while referring to the needs of businesses and different organisations. Currently, the Rift Valley Railway and the Kenya Railway Corporation serve the needs of passengers and businesses, and economists state that their services address the needs of customers (Bias 2013). As a result, the Kenyan Government will gain benefits while developing the roads transport system rather than the Standard Gauge Railway because of the predictions for returned investments and spent resources.
Social Factors
The development of the Standard Gauge Railway project can cause the unequal distribution of citizens in the country, leading to social issues because workers participating in the project need to change locations depending on the project’s progress. The project development also disrupts the normal functioning of transport in regions, affects citizens, and influences the life of the pastoralist community in Kenya (Bias 2013).
In its turn, the development of the road transport system in Kenya leads to overcoming such social issues as the unemployment because of the creation of job positions and investments. Furthermore, the development of the roads leads to enhancing the social interaction, trade, and communication between the country’s region while leading to the exchange of ideas, information, and technologies (Stough 2012). While comparing the transport methods, it is possible to state that the investment in the development of roads is advantageous because the Kenyan Government will address the problem associated with the fact that miles of modern roads in the country suffer from the traffic congestion that affects the country’s social and economic growth.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Kenyan Government should consider the social, economic, cultural, and cost issues, as well as political concerns when deciding regarding the transport infrastructure to develop. The country’s GDP, economic growth, poverty, and educational levels are important factors that will determine the success of developing the chosen transport system. The careful analysis of the most feasible and friendly transport modes is completed to predict the returns on investment and the economic growth for Kenya.
Recommendations
The method recommended for Kenya is the development of road transport infrastructure since it is economically feasible and socially friendly. The costs of constructing the roads transport system are affordable to Kenya, and the project will benefit to the Kenyan population. On the contrary, the development of the Standard Gauge Railway transport infrastructure will benefit only a small portion of citizens, but it will require the huge percentage of the Kenyan budget.
Reference List
African Union Conference of Ministers of Transport 2014, Investment in transport infrastructure – 1985-1995, OECD Publishing, Cairo.
Allen Consulting Group 2013, Land transport infrastructure: maximising the contribution to economic growth, Allen Consulting Group Publishing, Melbourne.
Bias, R 2013, Kenya has big plans for ports, power, rail and roads. Web.
Cárcamo-Díaz, R & Goddard, J 2013, Coordination of public expenditure in transport infrastructure: analysis and policy perspectives for Latin America, United Nations, Santiago.
Estache, A & Rus, G 2013, Privatization and regulation of transport infrastructure: guidelines for policymakers and regulators, World Bank, Washington.
Kenya: infrastructure, power, and communications. 2016. Web.
Kenya’s infrastructure investment potential. 2015. Web.
Rietveld, P & Bruinsma, F 2014, Is transport infrastructure effective?: transport infrastructure and accessibility, Springer, Berlin.
Stough, R 2012, A set of guidelines: for socio-economic cost benefit analysis of transport infrastructure project appraisal, United Nations, New York.
Transport infrastructure before development. 2015. Web.