Entre Mares y Rieles: Alternativas Interoceánicas para la Competitividad Logística de Colombia

Abstract

At the end of this essay, I confirm that my visit to the Panama Canal was a revelatory experience for understanding both the magnitude of this infrastructure and the limitations that international trade faces due to its excessive dependence on a single interoceanic route. I was able to observe how factors such as high toll costs, in some cases exceeding USD 500,000 per transit, wait times of up to 10 days during peak season, the reduction in daily transits from 38 to 24 due to water shortages during the El Niño phenomenon (2023-2024), and geopolitical tensions between China and the United States make the canal a critical, but also vulnerable, point. Given this scenario, I am convinced that the Chocó Interoceanic Railway Corridor represents a strategic alternative: in 15 years, it could move more than 3.1 million TEUs, generate exports close to USD 42 billion, and create thousands of permanent jobs, while boosting the economic development of one of Colombia's most marginalized regions. However, I also recognize that the project faces enormous challenges and that it is essential to learn from comparable experiences in Latin America. The Maya Train in Mexico, for example, had an initial budget of USD 7.4 billion, but has already exceeded USD 12 billion (a 70% cost overrun) and has accumulated more than three years of delay, largely due to environmental, social, and technical issues (Mexican Ministry of Infrastructure, 2024). Meanwhile, the Brazil-Bolivia Bioceanic Corridor, designed to connect Santos (Brazil) with Ilo (Peru), was paralyzed for more than a year due to social conflicts and a lack of prior consultation with indigenous communities (ILO, 2022), demonstrating how the absence of dialogue can jeopardize multimillion-dollar projects. These cases reinforce my conviction that the Colombian corridor must move forward with a comprehensive approach that combines environmental sustainability, social inclusion, and a realistic financial model. Therefore, I believe that future research should focus on three areas: first, a comparative analysis of environmental impacts compared to projects such as the Mayan Train and the Bioceanic Corridor, to anticipate risks and adopt best practices; second, financial feasibility studies under PPP schemes, evaluating mitigation mechanisms for cost overruns and delays; and third, research on the potential for regional integration that the corridor would have if connected to international logistics networks. I am convinced that delving deeper into these variables will not only enrich the academic debate but will also allow Colombia to consolidate its position as a resilient and reliable player in the global logistics network, reducing its dependence on the Panama Canal and transforming Chocó into a strategic territory for international trade.