All this stresses the need for emphasis on project coordination in infrastructure terms, an aspect that in the past has not been embraced enough in the context of national infrastructure planning and port master planning.

In fairness, the message now seems to be sinking in in the majority of developed economies. Look for instance in Europe how significant steps are being taken to adjust and develop the road and rail systems of the new eastern European Union members to those of their western counterparts. It takes time and money but advances are now being made.

Globalisation, system changes (which have seen the scaling up of vessel sizes and box exchanges) and diverse other factors all dictate the need for the proper coordination of port and other infrastructure development. The first challenge is to cope with the available volume and beyond this it is to extend market reach.

The network of intermodal rail services from northern European ports that spreads across Europe, and similarly those that run from North American West Coast ports to the east coast of that continent, are to a large extent a function of this. Effective development and exploitation of road and rail systems, experience tells us, can make nonsense of the idea of limited port hinterlands except perhaps when you hit water again on the other side of a continent.

It is, of course, not only road and rail infrastructure to support the movement of containerised goods that has been in demand; globalisation has also placed significant pressure on infrastructure to support the movement of primary commodities such as iron ore and coal both much in demand in China, the “manufacturer for the world".

Supplying this in a viable manner in terms of both timing and return on investment can prove particularly challenging. We have already seen how certain projects are being delivered on a catch-up basis rather than in tune with the supply of new port capacity – in both Australia and South Africa instance. Financing where say a rail line has only limited other usage is one example of where this can prove difficult in terms of receiving a return on investment due to the high costs involved. Recently, for instance, capacity on the coal line to the port of Richards Bay in South Africa was raised to 78m tonnes/year at a cost of R628m ($84m) and with a further major investment to be made on new locomotives, altogether a not insignificant cost.

The idea of transport corridors especially in the developing world also raises new challenges regarding the coordination of infrastructure development. In Africa, for instance, diverse transport corridors are proposed to serve landlocked countries and generally unlock economic potential – for example the Ghana Gateway programme and the Maputo Corridor between Mozambique and South Africa. In both cases, corridors have been under development for over a decade and both have unique sets of problems attached to them with respect to achieving the coordinated development of road and rail and port infrastructure. 

The message is clear the coordinated development of port, road, rail and even inland waterway infrastructure and superstructure is a “must” in terms of rising up the planning agenda.