<mark>international rail freight flows easier to manage and to ensure that the high TACs of one country do</mark> not become negative externalities for other countries along the corridor.

_Source: “Railway Reform in South East Europe and Turkey: On the Right Track?” (World Bank, 2011b)_ Cross‐border rail operations are currently governed by bilateral business agreements within railways. Due to the poor operational and financial state of most of the regional railway companies, transit time on the north‐south corridor sometimes exceeded 30 days. The establishment of a Joint Operating Centre (JOC) in Maputo in 2013 to plan, manage, coordinate and monitor freight movements on the Maputo rail corridor has been remarkably successful. Developed on behalf of Transnet and Grindrod, the JOC is based on co‐location of the main operators (port and the two railway systems) to jointly manage the freight movements especially when services deviate from the contracted or agreed schedules. This includes an alignment on standard operating procedures, maintenance and safety standards amongst the three countries and an integrated cross‐border train plan for coal, magnetite, containers and fuel. The establishment of JOCs on the Maputo and north‐south corridors have reduced transit times by more than 50 percent and have therefore had a significant and positive impact on operating costs and tariffs.

# 5.4.3 Institutional coordination

Effective institutional coordination requires management and coordinated planning across port and transport authorities, municipalities and other spheres of government. For example, the alignment of planning between a port and the city where it is located ensures that they mutually reinforce rather than oppose each other, and is considered essential to resolve the port‐city mismatch (OECD, 2013). To overcome institutional coordination issues, address freight logistics challenges and ensure mutually beneficial paths for growth, some port‐cities have adopted master plans that are jointly drawn up by port authorities and local government, and established collaboration agreements between key stakeholders. The importance of such plans and agreements is they provide a set of transparent parameters for long term decision‐making in a manner that facilitates institutional coordination.

## **Box 14: The creation of a common port‐city vision in Durban, South Africa**

Historically there has been an absence of coordinated planning for the provision of infrastructure in the port‐ city of Durban, which contributed to logistical inefficiencies in the city. In the past there have been strained interactions between Transnet and the eThekwini municipality, arising from a conflict of interest around projects (OECD, 2013). In 2003, an MOU was signed between the city and port which gave rise to what is known as the Transnet and eThekwini Municipality Planning Initiative (TEMPI). The MOU established a ‘Port‐ City Forum’ whose purpose is to develop a sustainable and pro‐active planning and co‐operative framework between the National Ports Authority and the eThekwini Municipality.

Following the relocation of the Durban International Airport to the new King Shaka International Airport site, greater collaboration under the TEMPI framework resulted in eThekwini and Transnet publishing the 2050 Vision for a long term development of the Durban to Gauteng Freight Corridor. The Vision is a broad and long‐ term master plan that sets out better planning alignment between the port and city around the proposed development of a new dig‐out port at the former Durban International Airport site. The city has since formulated its Back‐of‐Port Area policy, which aims to better rationalize the urban areas directly behind the port to improve the port’s performance.

_Source: “Competitiveness of Global Port‐Cities: Synthesis Report”, OECD (2013)_ International examples indicate that these plans and agreements can address the challenges associated with encroachment, where intense urban growth places pressure on land for ports and freight nodes. Improved coordination is also likely to reduce transport costs if it ultimately alleviates congestion and leads to more efficient access to key port infrastructure. Better coordination is _32_