1. Introduction
As an important infrastructure, railway has an important impact on the change of regional space-time relationships and the integration of social and economic resources. From the global perspective and historical dimension, behind its transportation attribute, the railway contains a variety of deep connotations such as national defense, military, geographical competition and even political rule, which are not limited to the technical and physical attributes of transportation facilities [1]. In the African continent, railways are endowed with more complex attributes and characteristics. Historically, the railway construction, route layout and technical standards in Africa have a profound colonial color, and different spatial organization modes have been formed in geographical space. In 1851, Britain built the first railway in Egypt, which became the starting point of transportation facilities construction in Africa. By the beginning of the 20th century, many African countries had built railways and formed networks in some areas. At present, the railways built in Africa during the colonial period have problems such as unbalanced distribution, disordered technical standards and low level of operation and maintenance, which restrict the social and economic development. In recent years, in order to improve the backward railway construction and the shortage of transportation services, African countries have successively formulated railway network planning, including a series of major railway projects such as the African transnational railway, the North-South corridor railway, the West Africa railway and the Central Africa railway. These blueprints and new railways will gradually change the long-standing railway network pattern, layout modes and technical systems in Africa, and will change the interconnection and integration level of various countries.
However, few scholars pay attention to the geographical research of African railway networks, and the research on the past and future changes of African railway network patterns, organization models and technical systems is even less. Based on historical geography, Jean [2] made a geographical explanation of the construction of railway network in West Africa from the relationship between regional scales, power and networks. Wang [3] and Wang [4], respectively, took Mombasa-Nairobi Railway and Addis Ababa-Djibouti Railway as cases to discuss the institutional, cultural and technical differences in railway construction in Africa. The former believes that the localized management of technical standards, management mode and industrial chain will contribute to the success of China’s railway overseas construction projects and operations. The latter puts forward the evolutionary framework of railway-institution-economy-culture system, which believes that the leapfrog technology transfer will be inappropriate.
For a long time, scholars have focused on the spatial and temporal convergence effect on railway networks [5] and investigated the relationship mechanisms between railway and regional development [6]. These studies mainly describe the evolution of railway accessibility at different scales [7,8], analyze its impact mechanisms such as spatio-temporal convergence, factor flow and transportation efficiency [9,10], and evaluate the spatial effects such as travel cost reduction [11,12,13], economic connection strengthening [14,15], urban system reconstruction [16,17] and industrial structure adjustment [18]. Nevertheless, the railway network pattern and spatial organization model have not been paid enough attention, and only a few scholars have involved this topic in the correlation research. Jin [19] analyzed the evolution of the high-speed railway in East Asia and considered that its distribution pattern evolved from “North-South linearity” to “Networking”. Wang [20] discussed the development process and mode of China’s high-speed railway network, and believed that its expansion evolved from “core-core” mode to “core-network” mode, but the discussion was simple.
There is relatively little research on African Railways. The existing research focuses on the field of construction engineering, and the research on its geographical problems is only slightly involved in some books. Under the background of rapid railway construction in Africa, enterprises from China, France, Turkey and other countries have entered the African railway construction market, and Chinese enterprises have an especially high market share [21]. These countries have different railway technical standards and experience bases, and implement different technology transmission paths and market expansion modes in Africa, which has a great impact on the spatial pattern and technical connectivity of African railway networks. Therefore, it is urgent to study the evolution of its spatial pattern and construction market pattern. However, few scholars have studied the market pattern of railway construction in Africa. Only international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization, the African Union and the African Development Bank have made statistics on the results of railway construction in Africa. On the one hand, the research on construction cooperation between China and Africa on the railway is attached to the comprehensive discussion on China’s and Africa’s infrastructure construction. For example, Wang [22] explored the impact of road network improvement brought by the entry of Chinese enterprises when combing African infrastructure construction, and Zheng [23] discussed China’s railway construction market potential when analyzing African infrastructure financing. On the other hand, a few scholars introduced some railway construction cases in Africa and investigated the current situation, problems and countermeasures, such as the Tanzania–Zambia Railway [24,25], the Addis Ababa–Djibouti Railway [26], the Mombasa–Nairobi Railway [27], and the Angola Railway [28].
Overall, the existing studies pay more attention to the evolution, effect and mechanism of railway network, but lack of exploration on the network pattern or spatial organization. Besides, the existing researches on African Railways are still confined to the overall overview of railway infrastructure construction, but lack of the induction and summary of market pattern, construction mode and path strategy. This is because the existing research does not pay enough attention to the market spatial relationship between the contractor countries and the contractor enterprises and ignores the differences in technology transmission paths.
This paper takes Africa as the research object and analyzes the development process of railway network from the perspective of road network and gauge, predicts its evolution scenario and technical differences, and analyzes the differentiation pattern and organization mode of railway construction market from the national and enterprise levels. From the perspective of theoretical contribution, this paper can enrich the theories of spatial organization and market organization of railway networks. In a practical sense, this paper can provide scientific guidance for Chinese enterprises to enter the African railway construction market.
2. Study Area and Data
2.1. Study Area
The research area of this paper is the African continent. Africa includes two parts of the continent and islands, with a total of 54 countries. The transportation attribute of the railway determines that “Networking” is the key condition. The vast majority of Railways in Africa are distributed in the mainland. Except for some railways in Madagascar, railways have not been built in other island areas, and it will be difficult to connect with the mainland railways in the future. In view of this, the study area of this paper is the African continent, excluding island areas. Accordingly, 48 countries were selected, excluding Madagascar, Comoros, Mauritius, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Cape Verde and many archipelagos. The sample countries cover 29.29 million km2, accounting for 97% of the total area of Africa.
2.2. Date Sources
Railway is the research object of this paper. According to different functions, it can be divided into public transport railway, mining area forest railway, tourism railway, Park Railway and special-purpose railway. Among them, the public transport railway is a railway type oriented to social publicity and with the main function of cargo and passenger transportation. It is a railway type with universal layout and network in space. Therefore, this paper takes the public transport railway as the analysis object.
The research data mainly include current railway route data and mileage data, railway network planning data, route equity data of railway construction enterprises, and railway data of each gauge. The data of all countries are mainly from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) website, and the data of planned railways are from the official websites of China Civil Engineering Construction Corporation (CCECC) group and China Railway Construction Corporation (CRCC). The railway mileage data are calculated by ArcGIS.
This study covers both the past time period and the future time period. The construction of African Railways began in 1851 and has lasted 170 years up to now. The medium and long-term planning period of most African countries is 2050. Therefore, the research time scale covers the late 19th century to the mid-21st century, that is, 1850–2050, about 200 years.
3. Evolution of African Railway Network Pattern
3.1. Evolution Stages
The development level of African countries is low, but due to their special colonial history, their railway construction began early, even earlier than that of China. Tracing back the history of construction and development and looking forward to the future, the development of the railway network in Africa can be roughly divided into three stages with two upsurges (Figure 1). There are great differences among African countries, including not only the natural environment, geographical conditions, resource endowment and land area, but also colonial history, population, industry, nationality and culture. These differences also lead to significant differences in the railway network of various countries, including network scale and distribution density.
-
(1). The first stage
The first stage was from the mid-19th century to the mid-20th century, mainly from 1850 to 1960. At this stage, based on the needs of plundering resources and imperial expansion, European countries began to build railways on the African continent. In 1851, Britain built the first railway in Egypt, and ushered in the first construction boom in the early 20th century, which laid the foundation of the current African Railway. The suzerainty countries carried out railway construction in their respective colonies, and there was a lack of overall planning and layout among them.
Railways covered 36 countries, with a coverage rate of 75%, railway mileage of 76,600 km and railway network density of 26.16 m/km2. In terms of specific countries, South Africa had the largest railway mileage, reaching 18,800 km, accounting for 24.5%. Zaire and Sudan reached 5467 km and 4631 km, respectively. Algeria, Egypt, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Nigeria and Angola varied from 3000 km to 4000 km, and Zambia, Namibia, Tanzania and Morocco varied from 2000 km to 3000 km, while other countries had less railway mileage. The distribution density of railway network showed great differences. Djibouti was the highest, reaching 22.33 m/km2, Swaziland 19.59 m/km2, while South Africa and Tunisia had more than 10 m/km2, and Zimbabwe, Togo, Senegal, Malawi and other countries had more than 7m/km2.
This stage lasted about 110 years. The typical feature was “colonial attribute”. The spatial layout was chaotic and scattered. The main functions of the railway network were to plunder resources and import industrial products.
-
(2). The second stage
The second stage began in the mid-20th century and continued to the beginning of the new century, mainly from 1960 to 2010. At this stage, African countries became independent one after another. In order to promote economic development, resource rich countries tried to implement a series of construction plans, including railways. However, due to the constraints of political turmoil, geopolitics, natural environment, technical means, lack of funds and other factors, the construction and development of African Railways were relatively slow. Moreover, another important feature of this period is the desolation and abandonment of railways. Due to the withdrawal of the suzerain state, the downturn of economic development, the recession of international trade, the lack of operation and maintenance funds and railway technology and talents, the railway utilization rate in many countries was very low, the freight volume and transportation frequency were very low, traffic accidents occurred frequently, and even many railway sections were abandoned or buried.
According to the one-to-one comparison between historical railway data and current railway data, this paper estimates the value of mileages of abandoned railways in each country (Table 1). On the whole, the number of countries covered by railways reduced to 19, accounting for 39.6% of the total sample countries. The total railway mileage was 54,500 km and the network density was 18.6 m/km2. In terms of specific countries, South Africa had the largest railway mileage, accounting for 34.5%. Algeria, Egypt, Sudan, Mozambique and Zimbabwe varied from 3000 km to 4000 km, and Zambia, Namibia, Zaire and Morocco varied from 2000 km to 3000 km. In terms of network density, Swaziland had the highest railway distribution density, reaching 19.59 m/km2. South Africa and Tunisia were more than 10 m/km2, Zimbabwe and Malawi were more than 7 m/km2.
This stage lasted about 50 years. Its typical characteristics were “route supplement” and “route abandonment”. The total result is that the railway network has shrunk. During this period, 21,900 km of railways in African countries were deserted, abandoned or idle (Table 1), accounting for 28.6% of the original railways. Among them, Nigeria, Zaire and Angola had the largest amount, reaching 3221 km, 3183 km (including 1067mm gauge of 2720 km and 1000mm gauge of 463 km) and 3018 km, respectively; Tanzania reached 2366 km; Senegal and Cote d’Ivoire reached 1409 km and 1135 km, respectively.
-
(3). The third stage
The third stage began in the early 21st century, i.e., 2010–2050, covering more than 40 years. By the beginning of the 21st century, due to the long-term lack of construction and management, most of the historical railways in Africa were dilapidated and the freight transportation cost remained high. At the same time, benefiting from the cooperation between China and Africa, the railway construction in Africa ushered in the second upsurge.
Transnational railways in South Africa, West Africa and East Africa have successively formed integrated planning blueprints, and some railways have been completed and put into operation, such as Addis Ababa–Djibouti railway and Mombasa–Nairobi railway. Many railway construction projects have entered the construction stage, and many projects are included in the design agenda. If the plans of all countries can be implemented on schedule, the railway coverage in Africa will expand to 48 countries around 2050, and Brady, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Libya, Rwanda, Niger, Somalia, Western Sahara, Chad, Central Africa and other countries will begin to have railways. The total railway mileage will reach 230,300 km, and the railway network density will reach 78.63 m/km2. In terms of specific countries, South Africa’s railway mileage will be the highest, reaching 20,900 km, but its proportion will drop to 9.08%. Zaire, Sudan and Nigeria will vary from 10,000 km to 20,000 km, Angola, Tanzania, Algeria and Cameroon will vary from 8000 km to 10,000 km, and Mozambique, Ethiopia, Mali, Zambia, Kenya, Morocco Egypt and other countries will vary from 6000 km to 8000 km. From the point of view of network density, the density of railways in Gambia will be the highest, reaching 138.54m/km2. Djibouti, Rwanda and Burundi will be vary from 50 m/km2 to 100 m/km2, Guinea Bissau and Togo will be vary from 40 m/km2 to 50 m/km2, while Tunisia and Liberia will be vary from 30 m/km2 to 40 m/km2. It will be a new pattern of African Railway Network in the future. The typical characteristics of this stage will be “new construction” and “planning”.
3.2. Spatial Mode
The special development history, national demands and the intervention of foreign forces determine that the railway layout and network organization in Africa presents a specific spatial model, which forms an obvious contrast between historical railways and future railways. On the whole, the spatial layout of the historical railway network presents a typical “Hinterland-Port” mode, while the future railway construction presents an obvious “Overall Integration” mode (Figure 2).
-
(1). “Hinterland-Port” mode
This model attaches importance to the railway connection between the port and the hinterland, which mainly serves the export of goods. The historical railway mainly extends from the coastal gateway port to the resource rich hinterland, and the dual relationship of “Hinterland-Port” is significant. Each railway line is isolated from each other, showing a linear connection in space, and only forms a network in some areas. In general, the railway has not yet formed a unified network, and network fragmentation is common.
The extension of the railway from the port to the inland hinterland is limited, and there are few railways in the heart of the mainland. For example, Mauritania Railway, Dakar–Bamako Railway, Conakry–Kangkang Railway, Cobb Railway, Lome–Rita Railway, Douala–Ezeka railway, Douala–Nkongsamba Railway, Benguela Railway and Ethiopia–Djibouti Railway are all completely independent of other railway systems. These railways extend from coastal ports to limited inland hinterland, therefore the important inland cities such as Niamey, N’Djamena and Bangui are completely separated from the railway.
Passenger and freight flows are mainly manifested in a single flow mode of internal absorption and outward transportation. The connections among inland regions are difficult, the “outward connection” is prominent, and the interregional connection is weak. The purpose of railway service is mainly to meet the needs of colonists’ resource plundering and geographical control over Africa. This spatial pattern leads to the railway network mainly concentrated in coastal areas, while there are few railway lines in inland areas.
-
(2). “Overall Integration” mode
This model not only attaches importance to the railway connection between the port and the hinterland, but also pays attention to the interregional connection within the African continent. In the future, the connection modes of the railway network will be diversified. The railway lines will run through the African continent and crisscross. While strengthening the vertical connection between the portal port and the inland hinterland, it will strengthen the horizontal connection among the inland hinterlands, promote the connection of isolated lines to each other, and form a spatial model of overall integration.
The element flow form of this model is more diversified. The railway network will get rid of the influence of colonial factors and show the willingness of regional integration and development. The main ports and cities along the coast will form a ring, and the major cities in the inland region will become important nodes in the railway network.
4. Differentiation of Railway Construction in Africa
The basic feature of railway construction in Africa is “undertaken by other countries”, and therefore different technical standards have been disseminated. “Technology implantation” has become an obvious feature of railway construction in African countries. Through the above analysis, we can know that there are still great prospects for railway construction in Africa. However, which countries and enterprises undertake the construction of railways in Africa? What are the roles of these countries and enterprises? These problems need further analysis and investigation.
4.1. Contractor Country
In the future, the construction of African Railways will be mainly undertaken by other countries (Figure 3). Railway construction in African countries is mainly undertaken by China, France, Turkey, Portugal, South Africa and other countries. Most of them are countries outside the continent, and only South Africa is an African country. Countries outside the continent can be divided into “African cooperative countries in the new era” and “former colonial suzerain countries”. Among them, China and Turkey are African cooperative countries, and Portugal and France are former colonial suzerain countries.
China has undertaken railway construction in 27 African countries, which is the largest among all contractor countries. Among these, 22 countries were completely undertaken by China alone, and five countries were jointly undertaken by China and other countries. China’s contracted market covers 80.1% of the area of the African continent, showing an all-round expansion in space, involving northern, western, eastern, central and southern regions of Africa. Turkey has undertaken railway construction in three African countries. Among them, Tunisia is the only country that has been completely undertaken by Turkey, and Algeria and Ethiopia are jointly undertaken by Turkey and other countries. France has undertaken railway construction in five African countries, including Côte d’Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Benin, Nigeria and Morocco, which are mainly former French colonies. The natural connection between suzerain and colony is still working. In terms of space, the countries with railway construction undertaken by France are mainly concentrated in western Africa. In addition, South Africa’s railway construction is mainly undertaken by its own country; Portugal participated in the joint construction of Tanzania’s railway.
The basic strategies adopted by African countries in railway construction can be divided into two types: one is the mode of independent construction, and the other is the mode of joint construction. As shown in Figure 3, most countries have formed a model of independent construction, covering 24 countries, accounting for 50% of the sample countries. A few countries have adopted the model of joint construction by two or more countries. There are 10 countries, including Algeria, Chad, Cameroon, Tanzania and South Africa, accounting for 20.8% of the sample countries. Due to its own economic, political, planning and other factors, there are still 14 countries whose railway construction has not been clearly undertaken. These countries are potential markets for railway construction in Africa in the future.
4.2. Contractor Enterprise
The above analysis is carried out from the perspective of countries. However, enterprises are the accounting subject of interests and the executive subject of railway construction. They play a main role in the African railway construction market. Therefore, they need to be further analyzed from the perspective of enterprises. We analyzed the distribution and association of contractor enterprise of planned railways in Africa, as shown in Figure 4 and Figure 5. The main features are as follows.
There are 13 enterprises in the African railway construction market, of which seven are Chinese enterprises and the remaining six are French, Portuguese, Turkish and South African enterprises, respectively. It is obvious that Africa has formed a railway construction market dominated by Chinese enterprises. Among them, China Civil Engineering Construction Corporation (CCECC) group and China Railway Construction Corporation (CRCC) are the two largest construction enterprises, involving railway construction in 10 and 13 countries, respectively. China Railway Group Limited (CREC) and China Communications Construction Company (CCCC) involve four countries, respectively, CRRC Corporation (CRRC) and China Road and Bridge Corporation (CRBC) involve two countries, respectively, and AVIC International Holding Corporation (AVIC) participates one country’s railway construction as a cooperative enterprise. The Bolloré Group (BOL) is the third largest enterprise in the African railway construction market, involving railway construction in six countries. In addition, Yapi Merkezi (YM) of Turkey and Transnet (TFR) of South Africa participated in the railway construction of two countries, respectively, Alstom Group (ALS) of France, Ozgun Makine (OM) of Turkey and Mota-Engil Group (M-E) of Portugal participated in the railway construction of one country, respectively.
It can be seen that the construction market of some enterprises presents obvious regional characteristics. The practice of “starting in one country–expanding to neighboring countries” has become the development model of most enterprises. The construction market of CCECC is concentrated in West and Central Africa, CRCC is concentrated in East and Northeast Africa, and BOL is concentrated in West Africa.
Enterprises adopt different organizational models in the railway construction market. While OM, AVIC and CCCC mainly adopt the mode of “Cooperative Construction”, ALS adopts the mode of “Independent Construction”. Other enterprises adopt both models, but show different preferences. CREC mainly adopts the “Cooperative Construction” mode, supplemented by the “Independent Construction” mode. CRRC, YM and TFR pay equal attention to the two modes. CCECC, CRCC and BOL mainly adopts the “Independent Construction” mode, supplemented by the “Cooperative Construction” mode.
The interaction between the contractor country, the contractor enterprise and the local country promote the formation of different market models for railway construction in Africa. The composition of contractor enterprises of different railway lines in the local country has made the market modes more complex. The construction modes can be divided into three types.
-
(1). One-one Mode
Railway Construction in most African countries are undertaken by one enterprise in one country (One-one Mode). This mode is easy to unify the railway technical standards within the country, and the market entry of the contractor enterprise is exclusive. There are 24 countries have adopted this mode, accounting for 50% of the total.
-
(2). Multiple-one Mode
Railway construction of a few countries are undertaken by multiple enterprises in one country (Multiple-one Mode). This mode reflects that the market entry of the contractor country is exclusive. There are 5 countries have adopted this mode, including Ethiopia, Libya, Uganda, Kenya and Egypt. According to the specific situation, the mode can be further divided into cooperation mode and competition mode: The suburban railway in Egypt is constructed by a consortium composed of CRCC and AVIC; Kenya’s East Africa railway is jointly constructed by CCCC and CRBC; these belong to the cooperation mode. Libya’s coastal line and west line are constructed by CRCC and CCECC, respectively; Ethiopia’s Addis Ababa–Djibouti railway and Weldia–Mekele railway are constructed by CCCC and CCECC, respectively; these belong to the competition mode.
-
(3). Multiple-multiple Mode
Railway construction of a few countries are undertaken by multiple enterprises in multiple countries (Multiple-multiple Mode). There are five countries that have adopted this mode, including Algeria, Chad, Tanzania, Cameroon and South Africa. This mode can also be subdivided into competition mode and cooperation mode: Algeria’s 55km railway is constructed by a consortium composed of CCECC and OM; the Dazhi–Morogoro Central railway in Tanzania is jointly constructed by YM and M-E; these belong to the cooperation mode. CREC and BOL, respectively, undertake railway construction in Cameroon; CRCC and BOL, respectively, undertake railway construction in Chad; these belong to the competition mode.
In terms of the distribution of enterprises, the contractor enterprises form four market expansion modes: single, continuous expansion, jump expansion and comprehensive expansion (Figure 6). Different modes have different spatial expansion laws. The single mode means that the enterprise focuses on one country’s railway construction. ALS, OM, M-E, CRRC, CRBC and AVIC are such distribution mode. The continuous expansion mode mainly refers to the enterprise constructing railways in multiple countries, which are continuously distributed in space. BOL and CCCC are such distribution mode. The jump expansion mode is mainly that the market countries of the contractor enterprises are discontinuous and are not limited by geographical proximity factors. CREC, TFR and YM are such distribution mode. The comprehensive expansion mode refers to that the market countries of the contractor enterprises have both continuous distribution and jump distribution. CCECC and CRCC are such distribution mode.
5. Conclusions and Discussion
Africa is a backward region in the world. During the colonial period, some countries built some railways. In recent years, African countries have started a new round of railway planning and construction. A unified railway network covering the African continent can be formed in the middle of this century. From the middle of the 19th century to the middle of the 21st century, the railway construction and network evolution in the African continent have formed some special laws; in particular, the contractor country and the application of technology in the future have deeply affected the spatial organization mode of African railway network. In these two hundred years, the African railway network has experienced three different development stages: colonial railway expansion from 1850 to 1960, railway repair and abandonment from 1960 to 2010 and railway networking after 2010, forming two upsurges of colonial railway construction and future cooperative construction. The abnormal structure of African Railways concentrated in coastal areas has been improved, the railway connection in inland hinterland has been strengthened, the lines have developed from separation to close connection, the spatial organization of railway network has evolved from “Hinterland-Port” mode to “Overall Integration” mode, and the railway function has changed from evolved from resource plundering to self-development, which reflects the specific development history of Africa, the appeal of the states, and the influence of foreign forces. Whether in history or in the future, the basic characteristics of railway construction in Africa are undertaken by other countries. In the future, China will take the lead. When entrusting railway construction, African countries often adopt the “One-one Mode”. Due to the interaction of technology dependence and path dependence, railway construction shows the coexistence pattern of “technology implantation” and “local reservation”. In the composition of railway construction enterprises, Chinese enterprises occupy the mainstream; in particular, CCECC and CRCC are the leading enterprises of railway construction in Africa. The market entry of construction enterprises is exclusive, and the market scope presents different spatial modes of single, continuous expansion, jump expansion and comprehensive expansion.
The African continent is a typical continental island, and its railway construction and development has a typical coastal-hinterland relationship. Therefore, the research conclusion of this paper can enrich the spatial organization theory of railway construction, especially for such continental islands. Railway Construction in African continent has colonial color in history and depends on international cooperation at present. Therefore, the research conclusion of this paper can enrich the market organization theory of railway construction.
At present, African Railways are in the start-up stage of a new round of construction boom, with huge construction demand. Under the guidance of railway “Going Global”, China has carried out market expansion and project construction in African countries, and gradually occupied a leading position. However, the lagging development level of African countries, the economic form dominated by agriculture and animal husbandry, the complex international relations and ethnic groups, and the colonial imprint left over by history will continue to be risks faced by Chinese railway enterprises. These are also important obstacles to the vision of integrated construction of African railway network. Therefore, in the process of “Going Global”, Chinese enterprises and the host government should coordinate the “technology-institution-culture” composite relationship reasonably between historical railways and new railways. In addition, the contractor enterprises of various countries should maintain the relationship between healthy competition and cooperation, which will not only help to avoid risks and improve the success rate of the project, but also help to promote the integration of African railway network.
Conceptualization, Y.X. and C.W.; methodology, Y.X.; software, Y.X.; validation, Y.X.; formal analysis, Y.X.; investigation, Y.X. and C.W.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.X. and C.W.; writing—review and editing, Y.X. and C.W.; visualization, Y.X.; supervision, C.W.; funding acquisition, C.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China, grant number 42071151 and Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, grant number XDA20010101.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Mileages of abandoned railways in African countries during 1960–2010.
| Country | Mileage of Each Gauge/km | Country | Mileage of Each Gauge/km | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1435 mm | 1067 mm | 950 mm | 1000 mm | ||
| Liberia | 472 | Ethiopia | 721 | ||
| Angola | 3018 | Burkina Faso | 630 | ||
| Congo | 727 | Togo | 444 | ||
| Ghana | 888 | Djibouti | 479 | ||
| Nigeria | 3221 | Guinea | 821 | ||
| Sierra Leone | 75 | Cote d’Ivoire | 1135 | ||
| Sudan | 773 | Mali | 806 | ||
| Zambia | 505 | Senegal | 1409 | ||
| Zaire | 2720 | Tanzania | 2366 | ||
| Eritrea | 225 | Zaire | 463 | ||
References
1. Jin, F.; Wang, C.; Li, X.; Wang, J. China’s regional transport dominance: Density, proximity, and accessibility. J. Geogr. Sci.; 2010; 20, pp. 295-309. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11442-010-0295-6]
2. Debrie, J. From colonization to national territories in continental West Africa: The historical geography of a transport infrastructure network. J. Transp. Geogr.; 2010; 18, pp. 292-300. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.05.014]
3. Wang, J.; Du, F.; Wu, M.; Liu, W. Embedded technology transfer from an institution and culture nexus perspective: Experiences from the Mombasa-Nairobi Standard-Gauge Railway. J. Geogr. Sci.; 2021; 31, pp. 681-698. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11442-021-1865-5]
4. Wang, C.; Xie, Y.; Chen, P. Institutional-economic-cultural adaptability of overseas railway construction: A case study of Addis Ababa-Djibouti Railway. Acta Geogr. Sin.; 2020; 75, pp. 1170-1184.
5. Lin, G.C.S. Transportation and metropolitan development in China’s Pearl River Delta: The experience of Panyu. Habitat Int.; 1999; 23, pp. 249-270. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0197-3975(98)00049-6]
6. Linneker, B.; Spence, N. Road transport infrastructure and regional economic development: The regional development effects of the M25 London orbital motorway. J. Transp. Geogr.; 1996; 4, pp. 77-92. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0966-6923(96)00001-4]
7. Zhong, Y.; Wang, X.; Fu, Y. Regional development imbalance of the “Min-Xin Axis Belt”. Econ. Geogr.; 2018; 38, pp. 22-29.
8. Feng, C.; Feng, X.; Liu, S.J. Effects of high speed railway network on the inter-provincial accessibilities in China. Prog. Geogr.; 2013; 32, pp. 1187-1194.
9. Liu, B.; Wu, W.; Su, Q. Spatio-temporal evolution characteristics and mechanism of railway efficiency in China. Geogr. Res.; 2018; 37, pp. 512-526.
10. Chen, C.L. Reshaping Chinese space-economy through high-speed trains: Opportunities and challenges. J. Transp. Geogr.; 2012; 22, pp. 312-316. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.01.028]
11. Preston, J. High speed rail in Britain: About time or a waste of time?. J. Transp. Geogr.; 2012; 22, pp. 308-311. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.03.005]
12. Shaw, S.L.; Fang, Z.; Lu, S.; Tao, R. Impacts of high speed rail on railroad network accessibility in China. J. Transp. Geogr.; 2014; 40, pp. 112-122. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2014.03.010]
13. Jiang, H.B.; Zhang, W.Z.; Qi, Y.; Jiang, J. The land accessibility influenced by China’s high-speed rail network and travel cost. Geogr. Res.; 2015; 34, pp. 1015-1028.
14. Liwen, L.; Ming, Z. The impacts of high speed rail on regional and spatial economy abroad and the enlightenment to China. Urban Plan. Int.; 2018; 33, pp. 95-100.
15. Haibing, J.; Yi, Q.; Chuanwu, L. China’s city high-speed rail (HSR) passenger spatial linkage pattern and its influence factors. Econ. Geogr.; 2018; 38, pp. 26-33.
16. Jiao, J.; Wang, J.; Jin, F.; Wang, H. Impact of high-speed rail on inter-city network based on the passenger train network in China, 2003–2013. Acta Geogr. Sin.; 2016; 71, pp. 265-280.
17. Liu, C.; Xu, J.; Guo, Q. Spatial pattern of urban centrality on railway hub in China’s mainland. Econ. Geogr.; 2019; 39, pp. 57-66.
18. Jiang, H.; Cai, H.; Meng, X. The structural impact of high speed rail upon urban industries in China. Hum. Geogr.; 2017; 32, pp. 132-138.
19. Jin, F.; Jiao, J.; Qi, Y.; Yang, Y. Evolution and geographic effects of high-speed rail in East Asia: An accessibility approach. J. Geogr. Sci.; 2017; 27, pp. 515-532. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11442-017-1390-8]
20. Wang, J.; Jiao, J. Development process, spatial pattern and effects of high-speed rail network in China. Trop. Geogr.; 2014; 34, pp. 275-282.
21. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. China-Africa Poverty Reduction and Development Cooperation. 2017; Available online: www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/ (accessed on 1 October 2021).
22. Wang, W. Analysis of China-Africa infrastructure construction cooperation. Int. Proj. Contracting Labour Serv.; 2016; 11, pp. 51-52.
23. Zheng, Y. Prospect of infrastructure construction in Africa and analysis of Chinese factors. J. Int. Econ. Coop.; 2014; 6, pp. 71-74.
24. Shen, X. China’s Aid to Tan-Zan Railway: Its Consideration, Building Progress and Impacts; East China Normal University: Shanghai, China, 2009.
25. Hu, Z. The past, present and future of Tan-Zan railway. Railw. Econ. Res.; 2000; 2, pp. 46-47.
26. Zhang, L. Innovation of internationalized business model of enterprises from the experience of Ya-Ji Railway. Int. Proj. Contracting Labour Serv.; 2019; 3, pp. 47-50.
27. Wei, X. Study of Risk Management of Africa Area Railway EPC Project: Take Kenny Mombasa-Nairobi Railway EPC Project for Example; Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications: Beijing, China, 2013.
28. Liu, D. The Research of “Angola Model”; Shanghai Normal University: Shanghai, China, 2016.
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
索引
; Wang, Chengjin 1 1 Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China;