Shocks, Reforms, and Infrastructure Investment in Turkish Rail Freight: Interrupted Time Series and Bayesian Counterfactual Evidence, 2000–2024
This study utilizes interrupted time series and Bayesian counterfactual analyses of Turkish rail freight data from 2000 to 2024 to reveal that high-speed rail openings and liberalization reforms failed to increase traffic, while the sector unexpectedly grew during the pandemic but suffered a severe, disaster-driven contraction following the 2023 earthquakes, challenging infrastructure-led optimism and highlighting the need for resilient network planning.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
Railways sit at a crossroads of modern transport policy. Governments often pour money into building tracks and trains, hoping that freight will naturally shift from roads to rails. The promise is twofold: to reduce carbon emissions and to relieve the congestion that plagues major highways. Yet, in many middle-income nations, the share of goods moving by rail has been shrinking for decades, even as public investment grows. This creates a difficult question for planners: when a country builds better rail infrastructure or changes its laws to encourage private companies, does freight actually follow? And when a massive shock hits the economy—like a pandemic or a natural disaster—does the rail network hold its ground, or does it crumble? Understanding the answer is not just an academic exercise; it determines whether policymakers can trust their plans to move the world's goods by train.
A new study of Turkey's railway system over the last twenty-five years offers a clear, if sobering, look at this reality. Researchers gathered a continuous record of how much freight moved on Turkish rails from the year 2000 to 2024, stitching together data from different government agencies to create a single, unbroken timeline. They then used this record to test four major moments in the country's history: the opening of the first high-speed passenger line in 2009, a major liberalization of the rail market in 2013 that allowed private companies to compete, the global pandemic in 2020, and the devastating earthquakes that struck the region in February 2023. By comparing what actually happened to what statistical models predicted should have happened, the team could isolate the true effect of each event.
The results challenge the optimism that often surrounds big infrastructure projects. When the first high-speed train began running in 2009, the expectation was that it would free up capacity on older tracks, allowing more freight to move. The data showed the opposite: there was no increase in freight traffic following the opening. Similarly, when the government passed laws in 2013 to open the market to private operators and built a new tunnel under the Bosphorus, freight volumes did not rise as hoped. In fact, the data suggests a slight decline in traffic around the time of these reforms. The study indicates that while the physical capacity of the network grew, the demand for rail freight did not keep pace, largely because road freight continued to grow at a much faster rate, more than doubling its volume over the same period.
The story changes dramatically when looking at how the system handled crises. During the pandemic, while passenger travel collapsed and other transport sectors struggled, Turkish rail freight did not shrink. Instead, the volume of goods moved by train stayed above the expected path, rising slightly even as the broader economy faced uncertainty. This suggests that the rail network was resilient enough to keep essential goods flowing when other options were restricted. However, the system faced a far more severe test in 2023. The earthquakes that struck the country caused the sharpest drop in rail freight in a quarter of a century. The study estimates that traffic fell by nearly 16 percent and stayed depressed for over two years. This was not just a temporary dip; the loss of volume was massive, equivalent to losing a third of a typical year's worth of national rail freight.
The damage was not spread evenly. In the regions closest to the earthquake's center, freight volumes plummeted by nearly 44 percent, and heavy industrial goods like steel and construction materials saw their flows collapse. Yet, one type of cargo bucked the trend: cement shipments rose by 50 percent. This spike reflects the immediate need to rebuild, as cement is essential for reconstruction, while other goods simply stopped moving. The study also found that the decline was not limited to the earthquake zone; even areas far from the damage saw a drop in traffic, suggesting that the economic shock of the disaster rippled through the entire network.
Perhaps the most significant lesson from this research is about the limits of data when trying to pinpoint causes. The researchers found that it is nearly impossible to separate the influence of specific economic factors—like GDP growth, industrial output, or trade volumes—because they all move together so closely. When the economy grows, all these numbers rise together, making it hard to say which one specifically drives rail traffic. What the data can clearly show, however, is how the system reacts to distinct, sudden events. The study concludes that while infrastructure investment and legal reforms are necessary, they do not automatically guarantee a shift of freight to the rails. Instead, the success of such plans depends on the actual demand for rail services and the ability of the network to withstand the physical and economic shocks that inevitably occur. For Turkey, and for other nations with similar ambitions, the path forward requires planning for resilience and realistic expectations, rather than assuming that new tracks will automatically fill with cargo.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.