Geopolital and Geo-Economic Importance of the Middle Corridor: A Chompreshive Overview
https://doi.org/10.47703/ejebs.v2i67.295
Abstract
The aim of the paper is to investigate the changing importance of the Middle Corridor in geopolitical and geo-economic contexts using analytical and case study methodology. The conflict in Ukraine has disrupted the traditional trade route between Asia and Europe via Russia, leading to the emergence of alternative transport options such as the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route (TITR), also known as the Middle Corridor (MC). This study examines the evolving importance of the Middle Corridor in the geopolitical and geo-economic context and highlights its potential as an alternative trade route for China-Europe trade. However, the corridor currently operates at only 10% of the capacity of the Northern Corridor, and significant efforts are needed to increase its capacity and ensure its efficient use. Successful corridor initiatives depend on effective management, trade facilitation and cross-border cooperation to overcome geographical disparities. As a result, the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route (TITR), also known as the Middle Corridor (MC), is emerging as a promising alternative for the foreseeable future. Overall, the growing importance of the Middle Corridor and other Asian economic corridors is changing regional trade and transport dynamics, requiring comprehensive management, trade facilitation and infrastructure development.
References
1. Aggarwal, A. (2021). The Concept, Evolution, Impacts and Critical Success Factors of Regional Economic Corridors MPRA Paper No. 110706. [cited 20 March, 2023]. Available: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/110706/1/MPRA_paper_110706.pdf
2. An, H., Razzaq, A., Nawaz, A., Noman, S.M., & Khan, S.A.R. (2021). Nexus between green logistic operations and triple bottom line: evidence from infrastructure-led Chinese outward foreign direct investment in Belt and Road host countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(37), 51022-51045. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-021-12470-3
3. Badambaeva, S. Е., & Ussembay A. E. (2018). AISTP-The Development of a New Eurasian Logistics Infrastructure. Innovative Technologies in Transport: Education, Science, Practice. Almaty, Kazakh Academy of Transport and Communications.
4. Bucsky, P., & Kenderdine, T. (2020). ‘Is the Iron Silk Road Really so Important? — Rail Freight Use on China’s New Silk Road Economic Belt’. MGIMO Review of International Relations, 13 (5), 168-193. https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2020-5-74-168-193
5. CPEC (2018). China Pakistan Economic Corridor Maps [cited 20 March, 2023]. Available: https://cpec.gov.pk/maps
6. De, P., & Iyengar, K. (2014). Developing Economic Corridors in South Asia. [cited 10 March, 2023]. Available: https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/162073/developing-economic-corridors.pdf
7. Derudder, B., Liu, X., & Kunaka, C. (2018). Connectivity along overland corridors of the Belt and Road Initiative. Discussion Paper MTI Global Practice. [cited 10 March, 2023]. Available: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/pt/264651538637972468/pdf/Connectivity-Along-Overl and-Corridors-of-the-Belt-and-Road-Initiative.pdf
8. Georgian Railways (2019). Annual Report 2018. [cited 10 March, 2023]. Available: http://cdn2.grmedia.com.ge/app/uploads/2019/05/annual2018.pdf
9. Intermodal (2023). Intermodal and Logistics [cited 10 March, 2023]. Available: https://www.intermodal-logistics.ro/ceva-logistics-solutie-de-transport-multimodal-china-europa-prin-middle-corridor
10. Kenderdine, T., & Bucsky, P. (2021). Kazakhstan–China Border Delays as Rail Freight Hedge Wobbles. [cited 10 March, 2023]. Available: https://thediplomat.com2021/01/kazakhstan-china-border-delays-as-rail-freight-hedge-wobbles
11. Li, X., Sohail, S., Majeed, M. T., & Ahmad, W. (2021). Green logistics, economic growth, and environmental quality: evidence from one belt and road initiative economies. Environmental Science and Pollution Researc, 28(24), 30664-30674. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-021-12839-4
12. Lomsadze, G. (2020). Georgia Cancels Contract for Black Sea Megaport. [cited 10 March, 2023]. Available: https://eurasianet.org/georgia-cancels-contract-for-black-sea-megaport
13. Martí, L., Puertas, R., & García, L. (2014). The importance of the Logistics Performance Index in international trade. Applied Economics, 46(24), 2982-2992. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2014.916394
14. Miecznikowski, S., & Radzikowski, T. (2017). Over Capacity of Container Shipping as a Challenge to Rail Silk Road Competitiveness. Research Journal of the University of Gdańsk. Transport Economics and Logistics, 70, 121–132. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0010.5932
15. Mitsuhashi, I., Sasa, K., Zhongkui, L., Gao, H., & Kim, H.S. (2005). Future development of sea transportation corridors in Northeast Asia. Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 5, 1687-1702.
16. Nikkei Asia (2023). [cited 10 March, 2023]. Available: https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Belt-and-Road/China-s-Belt-and-Road-hits-a-speed-bump-in-Kazakhstan
17. PGlobal Global Advisory and Training Services (2011). A study of international transport corridors in OIC member countries. Materials of the International Workshop “Impact of transportation network on trade and tourism” 7-9 June 2011, Izmir, Republic of Türkiye. [cited 10 March, 2023]. Available: https://www.comcec.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/IDB-TransportCorridors-Study.pdf
18. Popa, M., & Schmidt, C. (2013). On the Rail-Based Freight Corridor between CE and SEE Regions and the Main Obstacles on Romanian Territory. Transport Problems, 8(1), 47–56.
19. PortsEurope. (2018). Volume of Cargo Transported through Baku Port in 2017 was 4.4 Million Tons. [cited 30 March, 2023]. Available: https://www.portseurope.com/volume-of-cargo-transported-through-baku-port-in-2017-was-4-4-million-tons/
20. Rakauskienė, O.G., & Petkevičiūtė-Stručko, M. (2022). Determinants of logistics’ performance: a new approach towards analysis of economic corridors and institutional quality impact. Insights into Regional Development, 4(3), 11-33. http://doi.org/10.9770/IRD.2022.4.3(1)
21. Reed, T., &Trubetskoy, S. (2018). The Belt and Road Initiative and the value of urban land. Working Paper, World Bank.
22. Rodemann, H., & Templar, S. (2014). The enablers and inhibitors of intermodal rail freight between Asia and Europe. Journal of Rail Transport Planning & Management, 4(3), 70-86, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrtpm.2014.10.001
23. Ruehl, H. (2019). The Khorgos Hype on the Belt and Road. [cited 30 March, 2023]. Available: https://thediplomat.com/2019/09/the-khorgos-hype-on-the-belt-and-road
24. UNESCAP (2003). Review of Developments in Transport in the ESCAP Region. [сited February 20, 2023]. Available: https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/publications/Review2003.pdf
25. Viking Rail (2015). Intermodal VIKING Project-Implementation of Traditional Silk Way Opportunities. [сited February 20, 2023]. Available: https://fiata.com/fileadmin/user_upload/documents/recent_views/Working_Group_UIC_FIATA/7_UIC-FIATA_Vienna_23-24_April_2015_Presentation_Ivan_Liptuga.pdf
26. Wang, M. L., Choi, C. H., Wang, M. L., & Choi, C. H. (2018). How logistics performance promote the international trade volume? A comparative analysis of developing and developed countries. International Journal of Logistics Economics and Globalisation, 7(1), 49-70. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLEG.2018.10011610
Review
For citations:
Vasa L., Barkanyi P. Geopolital and Geo-Economic Importance of the Middle Corridor: A Chompreshive Overview. Eurasian Journal of Economic and Business Studies. 2023;67(2):20–32. https://doi.org/10.47703/ejebs.v2i67.295
Views:
63
JATS XML
Email this article 