2nd colombian conference at · 26/04/2013 · la felisa buenaventura pto berrio santa marta buga...
Post on 15-Feb-2020
2 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 2
¡Buenas Tardes!
• WELCOME and thank you for joining us!
• Andrés Felipe Archila
– President, Colombian Association of MIT
colombianos@mit.edu
• We are delighted to receive emails!
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 3
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 4
The Future of Transportation Infrastructure in
Colombia: Envisioning a National
Transportation System
• Ralph Gakenheimer, MIT
• 1st session
– Lina María Castaño, National Planning Department of Colombia (DNP)
– Richard de Neufville, MIT
• Intermission – Coffee Break
• 2nd session
– Néstor Roa, Inter-American Development Bank (IADB)
– Juan Pablo Bocarejo, Universidad de los Andes
– Christopher Zegras, MIT
• Discussion Q&A session with all panelists
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 5
PANEL 2:
RALPH GAKENHEIMER
(MODERATOR)
Professor of Urban Planning, Emeritus, MIT
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 6
Session 1
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 7
LINA MARÍA CASTAÑO
Deputy Director, Social Sector, National Planning Department of
Colombia (DNP)
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 8
NATIONAL PROGRAM OF
URBAN TRANSPORT IN
COLOMBIA
Contents
- National Framework
– Financial Structure
– Opportunities
– Challenges
National Framework
Access to modern infrastructure and
equal opportunities remain as a
challenge for Colombia
1 = extremely underdeveloped; 7 = extensive and efficient by international standards
2.6
0 2 4 6
Venezuela
Colombia
Brasil
Argentina
Peru
Uruguay
Ecuador
Mexico
Chile
1.6
0 1 2 3
Uruguay
Venezuela
Colombia
Argentina
Brasil
Peru
Ecuador
Chile
Mexico
3.2
0 2 4 6
Venezuela
Brasil
Colombia
Peru
Argentina
Ecuador
Mexico
Uruguay
Chile
Quiality of overall infrastructure Quality of roads
Quality of railroad infrastructure Quality of port infrastructure
Source: World Economic Forum. Global Competitiveness Report 2011 - 2012
3.4
0 2 4 6
Venezuela
Peru
Argentina
Colombia
Brasil
Ecuador
Uruguay
Mexico
Chile
National Framework for Urban Transport
National Development Plan 2010 - 2014
Transport Infrastructure Housing and Kindly Cities
Guidelines and Strategic Actions
Policy and
regulation of the
Transport Services
Competitive
Infrastructure and
Regional Integration
Improvement of Accessibility
and intermodal conditions
Promotion of alternative
mechanisms of
infrastructure funding
Urban Transport and
Mobility
Articulation and Enchainment with other sectors
Urban Transport and Mobility
Policy
Integrated Mass
Transport System
Strategic Public
Transport Systems
Strategy in Small
Sizes Cities
Mobility
Master Plan
SABT
National Framework for Urban Transport
National Development Plan 2010 - 2014
•Population Over
600.000 Inhabitants
•Population between
250.000 y 600.000
Inhabitants
•Population under
250.000 Inhabitants
SITP
SITR
•Strategy to improve
transport service
bring in efficiency
and high quality
service
• Multimodal
Regional Strategy • Territorial Planning • Territorial Planning
EIGHT(8)
Mobility Master Plan In preparation: (3) Cartagena, Montería y Fusagasugá
EIGHT (8) SITM Population Over 600.000 Inhabitants
•In preparation: (1) Cúcuta
TWELVE (12) SETP Population between 250.000 y 600.000 Inhabitants
•In preparation : (5) Buenaventura, Neiva, Villavicencio,
Ibagué y Manizales
EIGHT (8)
Strategy in small sizes cities Population under 250.000 Inhabitants
(Tunja, Barrancabermeja, Quibdó, Ocaña, Riohacha,
Florencia, Yopal y Fusagasugá)
SEVEN (7) SATB (Leticia, Arauca, Saravena, Maicao, Ipiales,
San Miguel y Puerto Carreño)
FOUR (4) SITP (Bogotá, Pereira, Barranquilla y Bucaramanga)
FOUR(4) SITR (Caribe, Eje Cafetero, Cundinamarca y Antioquia)
Urban Mobility Projects Summary
New Roads Concessions Contracts
VILLAVICENCIO
CALI
BUGA
PEREIRA
SOGAMOSO
PALO DE LETRAS CAUCASIA
MONTERIA
SINCELEJO
CARMEN DE
BOLIVAR
VALLEDUPAR
BARRANQUILLA
CARTAGENA
SANTA MARTA
RIOHACHA
PARAGUACHON
SAN ROQUE
NECOCLÍ
PASTO
ZIPAQUIRA
Pamplona
Simití
Achí
San Marcos
SAN PELAYO
GIRARDOT
CUCUTA
RUMICHACA
NEIVA
VILLAVICENCIO
PUERTO GAITAN
POPAYAN
CALI
SOGAMOSO
B/MANGA
CHACHAGÛÍ
ESPINAL
ARMENIA
IBAGUE
PTO. SALGAR
Cáqueza
CALERA
Sopó
LA
PAILA
BUENAVENTURA
STDER. QUILICHAO
PTO CARRENO
YOPAL
TAME
ARAUCA
Sisga
EL SECRETO
MOCOA
CARTAGO
Planeta Rica
La Yé
Toluviejo
Cruz del Viso Carreto
Ponedera
La Paz
San Juan Buenavista
Cuestecitas
Barbosa
Aguaclara Ocaña
MANIZALES VILLET
A
MEDELLIN
BOGOTA
BARRANCAB. REMEDIOS
Pto. Arimena
El Tigre
Pto. Berrío Santa fé de Ant.
Bolombolo
La Manuela
Camilo C
Tunel de
Occidente
TUNJA
Aguachica
Granada
CENTER- SOUTH
FONADE
SOUTH WEST-
FONADE
CENTER WEST
FONADE
CARIBBEAN
FONADE
EAST RANGEFONDO ADAPTACION
ROADS TO PROSPERITY
SMALL
CONCESSIONS
Estimated Kilometers 8.170
Total Estimated Investment
(billions of dollars / Dec 2011)
24,4
Current Concessions
New Concessions
Ports concessions
BUENAVENTURA
CARTAGENA
GUAJIRA
SANTA MARTA
BARRANQUILLA
TOLU COVEÑAS
TURBO
TUMACO
SAN ANDRES
Dredging of second
access canal 19 meters.
Cartagena
2013- I
Dredging 16 meters. Buenaventura
2013-I
Source: Infrastructure National Agency - Structuring Vice-presidency
BARRANQUILLA
BARRANQUILLA´s AIRPORT
2013-II
ARMENIA
CARTAGO
NEIVA
POPAYÁN
ARMENIA, CARTAGO, NEIVA
AND POPAYÁN AIRPORTS
2013-II
Airports Concessions
Source: Infrastructure National Agency - Structuring Vice-presidency
Railroad Concessions
BOGOTÁ
Belencito
Zipaquirá La Dorada
Cabañas
La Vizcaína
Chiriguaná
Dibulla
Sta Sofía
La Tebaida
Zarzal
La Felisa
Buenaventura
Pto Berrio
Santa Marta
Buga Buenos
Aires
Granada
Ciénaga
Potosí
La Mata
Cúcuta
ESTIMATED KILOMETERS 3.450
ESTIMATED INVESTMENT
(BILLIONS US$ / DEC 2011) 6.48
Actual Concessions
Infraestructure Improvements
New Projects
Source: Infrastructure National Agency - Structuring Vice-presidency
Fluvial Projects
Magdalena´s River navigation
recovery Object
Description
Current State
Forecasted date for opening of bid process:
II Trimester of 2013
To recover Magdalena´s River navigation using PPP
schemes
•Between Puerto Salgar / La Dorada - Bocas de Ceniza.
• Term: 10 years
•Works for river canalization
• OyM activities to guarantee : 4,5 foots on Puerto
Salgar/Puerto Berrío stage; 6,0 foots on Puerto
Berrío/Barrancabermeja stage; 7 foots on
Barrancabermeja/Puente Laureano Gómez stage; and
37,5 foots until Bocas de Ceniza.
• Project will demand a total investment of 2.09 billions of
pesos (US$1,15 millions).
On Pre-qualification
Source: Cormagdalena
On feasibility studies
Estimated Investment: US$2.500 Millions
Estimated length: 20,3 km
First line prioritization
Infrastructure and implementation system design
Estimated investment: US$2.100 Millions
Estimated length: 31,1 km
Bogota and their surroundings are planning to develop a
commuting train system, integrating the city with near
towns.
On feasibility studies, preliminary information:
Length: 81.2 Km.
Phase I y II: Technical structuring by ConCol. “Empresa
Férrea Regional” Studies have been in actualization
process 2011-2012. Process opening: To be defined
Commuting Train
Bogotá Subway System
Urban mobility projects for the Bogota
– Cundinamarca´s region
CONPES document approved – 3677 (19/07/2010)
Financial Structure
Legal and Regulatory Framework -
Public Initiative PPP project -
Flowchart
+
Conceptual Idea of the Project
Feasibility Studies
Technical, Financial and Legal Structuring
Request of fiscal endorsement and approval of annual budget commitments
Opening of the PPP bidding process
Public Contract
Assessment of social and economic issues
Risk analysis – MHCP Assessment of PPP option
- NPD
Requires Public $
Does not require Public $
Priorization
Opening of the bidding process
Financial reviewed by Public development
Banks – Art 27 / 1508 First review MHCP -
then NPD
Central government investment First is reviewed by
MHCP – then respective planning department Without Central
Government Investment
PPP
Opportunities
Opportunities
Rehabilitation and Renewal of Historic Centers
Generation of New Centralities
Improve the Articulation between Mobility Master Plans and Local Master
Plans
Integration of Populations needs and land uses
Challenges
Technical Institutional Strengthening
Urban and Regional Integration through the implementation of the
mobility strategies
Challenges
Implementation of Intelligent Transportation Systems
Transportation Demand Management
Implementation of strategies of mobility in border cities
Gracias
www.dnp.gov.co
PBX: 3815000
RICHARD DE NEUFVILLE
Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and of
Engineering Systems, MIT
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 29
Using Flexibility to Increase Value
in Transportation Systems Planning
MIT Professor Richard de Neufville
Engineering Systems + Civil and Environmental Engineering
Author: Flexibility in Engineering Design MIT Press, 2011
with Prof. Stefan Scholtes, University of Cambridge UK
(about $30; ebook also available)
This is the
book
MIT Press
2011
Available
Online
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
Theme for Flexibility
Paradigm change in project evaluation, choice • From: standard Net Present Values (VPN),
ignoring risks (as done by World Bank) • To: recognizing actual uncertainties and
planning for adaptation to real situations!
Flexibility => significant increase in value
• Using a win-win approach
• Mitigates risk (downside) -- a win
• Opens opportunities (upside) – more win
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
Outline of Presentation
1. Discussion of Standard Evaluation
Procedure for Transportation projects,
Engineering Systems in general
2. Flaw of Averages
3. Concept of Alternative Paradigm
4. Example Application in Bogota
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
Standard Evaluation Procedure
for Transportation projects,
Engineering Systems in general
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
Standard Evaluation Procedure
1. Make a forecast
2. Evaluate alternatives using forecast,
finding a unique cash flow
3. Calculate Net Present Value (VPN)
or equivalent such as IRR
HOWEVER:
• Future is Uncertain, as are outcomes
THEREFORE:
• Above calculations are misleading!
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
The Flaw of Averages
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
Flaw of Averages
Named by Sam Savage (“Flaw of Averages,
Wiley, New York, 2009)
It is a pun. It integrates two concepts:
• A mistake => a “flaw”
• The concept of the “law of averages”, that
that things balance out “on average”
• Flaw consists of assuming that evaluation
based on “average” or “most likely”
conditions give correct answers NOT SO!
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
In Words
• Average of all the possible outcomes
associated with uncertain parameters,
• does not equal (except if system linear)
• the value obtained from using the
average value of the parameters
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
Practical Consequences
• Unless you work with distribution, your
evaluation gives wrong result –
• and wrong results lead to wrong ranking
and choice of design
• design from a realistic description differs – often
greatly – from design from average description
• This is because gains when things do well, do
not balance losses when things do not
(sometimes they’re more, sometimes less)
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
Concept
of
Alternative Paradigm
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
New, Flexible Approach to Design
• Recognizes Uncertainty
• Analyses Possible Outcomes of Designs
• Chooses Flexible Designs to
– Reduce, eliminate downside risks (in general,
less ambitious initial projects – less to lose)
– Maximize Upside opportunities (that can
expand or change function, when, if, and how
seems desirable given future circumstances)
Great Increases in Expected Value Routine!
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
Great increase in Expected Value
• systems with flexibility to adapt to new conditions can greatly increase expected value.
• With flexibility we can
– avoid future downside risks (by building smaller with confidence that can expand as needed)
– profit from new opportunities by appropriate actions
• Reduce initial capital expenditure (CAPEX). – Lower initial CAPEX because less complex at start
– Lower Present Values, because costs deferred many years (and maybe even avoided)
Higher returns, lower cost = A Great Formula
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
HCSC Building in Chicago
• In 2007-2009, 3000 people were coming to work
in the 30-story HCSC building in Chicago,
• … and a 27-story addition was being built right
on top of them!
• The structure was designed in 1990s with extra
steel, utilities, elevator shafts, etc. to permit
doubling of height.
• This flexibility was exploited a decade later
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
Here’s the Picture
Vertical Expansion of Health Care Service Corporation Building, Chicago.
Phase 1 (left) and Phase 2 (right) in center of image.
Source: Goettsch Partners, 2008 and Pearson and Wittels, 2008.
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
The Paradox
• 30-story building with capacity to expand – costs more than one without expansion capacity
– Yet saves money!
• Why is this?
• The fair comparison is between – 30-story expandable building and
– what HCSC would build otherwise to meet its long-term needs – such as a 40-story building
• Flexible design saves money 2 ways: – Lower initial Capital Expenditures (CAPEX)
– Deferral, possible avoidance, of expansion costs
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
Example Application:
Public Transport in Bogota
To BRT or HRT in Bogotá?
That is the Question
Application of Flexibility in Engineering Design
MIT Course ESD.71, December 2012
Andrés Felipe Archila, M.S.T. 2013
archila@mit.edu
Description, Background, and Motivation
• New transit corridor in Bogota, Colombia
• BRT or HRT for 35-km-long Avenida Boyacá
• Analysis of fixed and flexible alternatives
Andrés Archila - MIT
Technical Choice
Andrés Archila - MIT
¿El bus?
¿O el tren?
Usual Financial Analysis (as for World Bank)
Calculate NPV (=VPN) with no uncertainty
Andrés Archila - MIT
One design
Dominates
All others
[in this case,
Big buses]
Evaluation Recognizing Uncertainty
Andrés Archila - MIT
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1C
um
ula
tive
Pro
bab
ility
NPV (million $USD)
Evaluation Recognizing Uncertainty
HRT-6
BRT-2
Alternative
Choices now
Ambiguous
[Rail better when
traffic is high,
worse when
traffic is low.]
Evaluation including flexible alternative
Andrés Archila - MIT
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Cu
mu
lati
ve P
rob
abili
ty
NPV (million $USD)
Valuation including Flexible Design (start with 4 car trains, with stations for 6 cars)
HRT-6
HRT-FFlexible Alternative
provides Insurance
against downside
Risks
© 2013 Richard de Neufville
Summary
1. Standard Evaluation Procedure for
Transportation projects, Engineering
Systems in general, is FLAWED
2. It fails to recognize, deal with risks
3. Flexibility is New Alternative Paradigm
4. Helps planners deal proactively with risk:
Reduces exposure to downside;
Allows for dealing with upside
Discussion - Q&A
Coffee Break 15-20 min
Session 2 follows
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 55
NÉSTOR ROA
Chief, Transport Division, Inter-American Development Bank
(IADB)
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 56
The Transport Sector
and the IDB in
Latin America
Nestor Roa
Chief of the Transport Division
April 26th, 2013
Content
1. Latin America’s infrastructure needs
2. The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
3. IDB areas of intervention and support modalities
4. Infrastructure and Transport Sector in the IDB 4.1. Transport Sector priorities 4.2. Strategic Areas
4.3. Flagship Projects
5. Conclusions and Challenges
Content
1. Latin America’s infrastructure needs
2. The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
3. IDB areas of intervention and support modalities
4. Infrastructure and Transport Sector in the IDB 4.1. Transport Sector priorities 4.2. Strategic Areas
4.3. Flagship Projects
5. Conclusions and Challenges
Quality
Latin America
and the
Caribbean
Emerging Asia
Developed
economies
Index (1 – 7 scale)
1. Latin America’s infrastructure needs
Average
Ports
Transport
Railways
Electricity
Roads Air
transport
Index (1-7 scale)
Latin America and
the Caribbean
Emerging Asia
Developed
economies
Coverage
1. Latin America’s infrastructure needs
0 20 40 60 80 100
BarbadosUruguayJamaica
BahamasTrinidad y TobagoRep. Dominicana
VenezuelaMéxico
PanamáArgentina
GuatemalaSuriname
HaitíHonduras
El SalvadorCosta Rica
BeliceChile
EcuadorColombia
PerúNicaragua
BrasilParaguay
GuyanaBolivia
2000
2005
Percentage (%) of Paved Roads
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
ChileEl Salvador
PanamaTrinidad and Tobago
JamaicaGuatemala
UruguayHonduras
Dominican RepublicMexico
ColombiaArgentina
BrazilCosta Rica
EcuadorVenezuela
PeruNicaragua
BoliviaParaguay
Roads quality (1=underdeveloped, 7=extensive and efficient)
Road Quality
Source: Porter and Schwab (2008).
Source: IDB and WB
Coverage
1. Latin America’s infrastructure needs
Source: WB, 2013
Investment
1. Latin America’s infrastructure needs
Total Public Private
Private investments need to grow from about 1 percent of GDP to between 2.5 and 3 percent to close the infrastructure gap, which represents some 100,000 million dollars a year.
1. Latin America’s infrastructure needs
The “new” problem: Urbanization
• The “road bias” is changing… by demand
• LAC: the most urbanized region in the world (77% of pop.) -> 85% by 2030
Urban population (2000) Urban population
1. Latin America’s infrastructure needs
Content
1. Latin America’s infrastructure needs
2. The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
3. IDB areas of intervention and support modalities
4. Infrastructure and Transport Sector in the IDB 4.1. Transport sector Priorities 4.2. Strategic Areas
4.3. Flagship Projects
5. Conclusions and Challenges
2. The Inter-American Development Bank
Founded in 1959, the IDB is the oldest and largest regional development bank.
48 members: 26 borrowing members and 22 non-borrowing members.
From 1961 to the end of 2011, the IDB has approved US$207 billion in loans and guarantees.
The IDB obtains its own financial resources from its 48 member countries, borrowings on the financial markets, and trust funds that it administers, and through cofinancing ventures.
The IDB’s debt rating is AAA.
Content
1. Latin America’s infrastructure needs
2. The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
3. IDB areas of intervention and support modalities
4. Infrastructure and Transport Sector in the IDB 4.1. Transport Sector priorities 4.2. Strategic Areas
4.3. Flagship Projects
5. Conclusions and Challenges
3. IDB Areas of Intervention
3. IDB Support modalities
• Investment Loans
• Policy Based Loans
• Emergency Loans
Public Sector Loans and Guarantees (with Sovereign Guarantee)
• Private Sector Loans
• Public sub-national entities qualified for NSG
Non-Sovereign Guaranteed Loans and Guarantees
Inter-American Investment Corporation
Multilateral Investment Fund
Technical Cooperation: technical studies & project preparation
KCPs (Knowledge & Capacity Building Products)
Content
1. Latin America’s infrastructure needs
2. The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
3. IDB areas of intervention and support modalities
4. Infrastructure and Transport Sector in the IDB 4.1. Transport Sector priorities 4.2. Strategic Areas
4.3. Flagship Projects
5. Conclusions and Challenges
4. 2012: IDB US$11.6 billion in approved loans
and guarantees.
Loans by topic. 1961-2012
1,215.50 1,342.90
2193.6
1,543.60
2009 2010 2011 2012
Transport operation approvals 2009-2012 (USD$ millions)
Typical Projects
4. Transport Sector
Road expansion /rehabilitation
Public transportation (BRTs, Subways)
Ports, airports
Typical Procurement Aspects Civil works (infrastructure construction, rehabilitation, tunneling, bridges ) Buses,
rolling stock, equipment Technical consulting services
4.1. Transport Sector -Priorities 2013
Increase road safety in the region
Promote sustainable transport
Develop Freight logistic operations
Promote the integration of regional transportation
Road Safety
Freight Logistics and Trade Facilitation
Regional Environment Sustainable Transport
4.2. Strategic areas in the Transport Sector
Flagship Projects
Support to the implementation of the National Road Safety Policy – Colombia (CO-L1111)
IDB Financing: US$ 10 million
Intervention:
Supporting the implementation of the Road Safety National Policy
Supporting the creation of the Road Safety National Observatory
Norte Grande Roads Infrastructure Program – Argentina
(AR-L1133)
IDB Financing: US$300 million
Intervention:
National Road Network (RVN) and access roads of the Provincial Road Network (RVP) in the Norte Grande region (RNG).
Engineering Works (1030km)
Road Safety
Institutional Strengthening
RN 16
RP. 1
Strategic Public Transportation Systems (SPTS) –
Colombia (CO-L1091)
Estimated Cost: US$380,7 million
IDB Financing: US$300 million
CTF Financing: US$20 million
Intervention:
Development of Strategic Public Transportation Systems in four towns (Pasto, Popayan, Armenia and Santa Marta)
Quito´s Metropolitan Urban Transport System– Ecuador
(EC-L1111)
Estimated Cost: US$1.400 million
IDB Financing: US$300 million
Intervention:
Financing the construction of 22 km of track, 15 stations, rolling stock and equipment for the Metro de Quito.
San Francisco-Mocoa Alternate Road Construction Project
- Phase I – Colombia (CO-L1019)
Estimated Cost: US$150 million
IDB Financing: US$53 million
Intervention:
Improvement and construction of a 47 km by-pass
Mario Covas Rodoanel Project - Northern Section– Brasil
(BR-L1296 )
Estimated Cost: US$3.015,23 million
IDB Financing: US$1.148,63 million
Intervention:
North Section of the Mario Covas Beltway of the City of Sao Paulo
Programs to Support the National Logistics Policy –
Colombia (CO-L1090, CO-L1109)
IDB Financing: US$300 million (CO-L1090)
US$15 million (CO-L1109)
Intervention:
- Support the development and implementation of the National Logistics Policy
Panama Canal Expansion Program – Panama (PN-L1032)
Estimated Cost: US$5.250 million
IDB Financing: US$400 million
Intervention:
Construction of a third set of locks including lock complexes
Deepening of the entrances
Deepening and widening of the navigational channels
Raising Gatun Lake to its maximum operational level
Content
1. Latin America’s infrastructure needs
2. The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
3. IDB areas of intervention and support modalities
4. Infrastructure and Transport Sector in the IDB 4.1. Transport Sector priorities 4.2. Strategic Areas
4.3. Flagship Projects
5. Conclusions and Challenges
5. Conclusions & Challenges
Latin America needs to improve its transport infrastructure and direct its efforts towards integration
Improving the region’s infrastructure needs a stronger participation from both the public and private sector
Parallel and collaborative efforts from the public and private sectors are necessary in the following areas: Extension and maintenance
of road network
Performance of freight transport by road
Ports
Freight railways
Trade facilitation and border controls
Support for better logistics’ management in small and medium-size businesses
5. Conclusions & Challenges
Consistence and continuity in national policy formulation is key to enhance effective interventions
Multilaterals play an important role in adding value with knowledge sharing and project specific learned lessons
JUAN PABLO BOCAREJO
Associate Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Universidad de los Andes
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 89
The Future of Transportation Infrastructure in Colombia
SUR Grupo de Estudios En Sostenibilidad Urbana y Regional
90
Juan Pablo Bocarejo, PhD Associate Professor
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Infrastructure: The next generation
The infrastructure we need?
Environmental aspects
A good investment
Legal aspects
91
Engineering?
Key Aspects for Improvement (I)
• A network analysis
– Isolated projects
– Uncertain demand
– Functional vulnerability analysis
92
93
Key Aspects for Improvement (II)
Desconexión Total Ig = ∞
Desconexión Parcial
Scenario Impact ($COP / day) Link
1 Inf VILLAVICENCIO GRANADA
2 Inf VILLAVICENCIO PUERTO LOPEZ
3 Inf PUERTO GAITAN PUERTO LOPEZ
4 Inf PASTO IPIALES
5 Inf BUENAVENTURA BUGA
6 Inf ARAUCA TAME
7 $ 6,604,719,910 TULUA ZARZAL
8 $ 5,982,311,917 BUGA TULUA
9 $ 1,638,775,950 MEDELLIN RIOSUCIO
10 $ 1,338,384,332 MEDELLIN SANTA ROSA DE OSOS
11 $ 1,204,313,657 PUERTO BOYACÁ LA DORADA
12 $ 1,183,006,963 BOGOTA TUNJA
13 $ 999,101,987 BOGOTA IBAGUE
14 $ 978,678,816 CAUCASIA PLANETA RICA
15 $ 956,727,491 ARMENIA IBAGUE
16 $ 937,656,385 MEDELLIN PUERTO BOYACÁ
17 $ 823,159,379 BOGOTA LA DORADA
18 $ 791,224,728 NEIVA GARZON
19 $ 730,867,806 TUNJA DUITAMA
20 $ 730,335,411 CAUCASIA SANTA ROSA DE OSOS
21 $ 669,797,430 BUCARAMANGA BARRANCABERMEJA
22 $ 658,860,229 CUCUTA BUCARAMANGA
23 $ 575,830,125 ANSERMA RIOSUCIO
24 $ 528,623,427 ANSERMA CARTAGO
… … … …
Key Aspects for Improvement (III)
• Adequate design standards
– Level of service
– Design speeds
– Slopes and curves
94
Vía Bucaramanga- P. Chicamocha
Key Aspects for Improvement (IV)
• Road safety (3 E´s)
– Indicators and performance
– Incentives
– Standards
– Enforcement
95
Institutional challenges
• An homogeneous network?
• Who manages the network?
• Who enforces the network?
• Who provides maintenance?
• Information availability
• Available capacity to implement
investment 20 times higher than previous
plans
96
Closing remarks
• Need to have a network approach
• Need to develop standards and performance objectives
• Need to introduce vulnerability and redundancy analysis
• Need to prioritize road safety
• Need to strengthen institutions that will lead a long term management over the network
97
CHRISTOPHER ZEGRAS
(COMMENTS)
Ford Career Development Associate Professor of Transportation &
Urban Planning and Engineering Systems, MIT
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 98
Discussion + Q&A
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 99
Thank you for joining us!
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 100
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 101
April 26, 2013 2nd Colombian Conference at
Harvard/MIT – Panel 2 102
Tomorrow…
top related