THE STANDARD GAUGE RAILWAY

This is a planned railway system linking the country to the neighboring countries of Kenya ,
Rwanda , democratic republic of Congoand south Sudan as part of the east Africa railway
master plan . The standard railway master plan. the new standard gauge railway (SGR) is
intended to replace the old, inefficient metergauge railway system. the entire 1,724
kilometersin Uganda will cost an estimated $12.8 billion.

Tanzania and Kenya have been effective in delivering the standard gauge railway than
Uganda is a smart way

Contextualization
The construction was expected to be financed by the government of Uganda, using
borrowed money from the Exim bank of China.however, the lender has been unwilling to
approve the loan until Kenyafinalizes the funding arrangement for the Naivasha Kisumu
Malabasection of its standard gaugerailway.

In January 2023, The Uganda government terminated the contract that it had signed with
Chinaharbor engineering company (CHEC) to build the KampalaMalaba section of the
Uganda SGR, on account of failure to execute for eight consecutiveyears.

In May2023, the government identified Yapi Merkezi Group from Türkiye as the new
engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractor. Funding is expected to be
sourced from European banks. Works are expected to commence in early 2024 starting with
the 273 kilometersKampala -Malabasection. the funding bank was later identified as standard
chartered plc of the United Kingdom.

In July 2023, the Ugandan and Kenyan cabinet ministers of transportation met in Mombasa .
the communique issued at the end of the two day consultations announced that going forward
,the two countries will jointly explore funding sourcing for the Naivasha – Kisumu Malaba
portion of the Kenya standard gauge railway . together the two countries are seeking at least
$6 billion in new funding for their SGR projects from financiers in Europe and middle east .

In February 2024 , both countries reaffirmed their commitments to build the Naivasha
Kisumu Malaba section in Kenya and the Malaba -Kampalasection in Uganda , starting 2024
. the Uganda government has contracted the Yapi Merkezi Group from Türkiye to build the
273 kilometers section between Malaba and Kampala at a contract price of US$2.2 billion .
work is expected to start in august 2024.
There could be several reasons for this discrepancy. Tanzania and Kenya might have had
better infrastructure, more efficient project management, stronger political will, or more
effective implementation strategies compared to Uganda. Additionally, differences in funding,
regulations, and geographic factors could also play a role in the varying levels of success.

Political Stability: Tanzania and Kenya may have had more stable political environments,
leading to smoother decision-making processes and consistent implementation of projects
like the standard gauge railway (SGR). In contrast, Uganda's political landscape might have
experienced more instability or bureaucracy, hindering project progress.

Investment Priorities: The prioritization of infrastructure projects like the SGR could have
differed among the three countries. Tanzania and Kenya might have allocated more resources
and attention to the development of their railway networks, whereas Uganda might have
focused on other infrastructure priorities.

Capacity Building: Tanzania and Kenya might have had stronger institutional capacities and
technical expertise in railway construction and management, enabling them to execute the
SGR project more efficiently. Uganda may have faced challenges related to skill shortages or
capacity gaps in implementing such large-scale infrastructure projects.

Financial Resources: The availability of financial resources and funding mechanisms could
have influenced the pace and scale of SGR development in each country. Tanzania and Kenya
might have had greater access to funding sources or stronger partnerships with international
investors or development agencies compared to Uganda.

Geographic and Environmental Factors: Differences in geography, terrain, and environmental

considerations along the SGR routes could have posed varying challenges to construction and
land acquisition processes in each country. Tanzania and Kenya may have had more favorable
conditions for railway development compared to Uganda.

Public Support and Stakeholder Engagement: The level of public support and engagement
from stakeholders, including local communities and businesses, could have impacted the
implementation of the SGR projects differently in each country. Tanzania and Kenya might
have had stronger support and cooperation from stakeholders, facilitating smoother project
execution.
By examining these additional factors, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of
why Tanzania and Kenya have been more effective in delivering the standard gauge railway
line compared to Uganda.

Alignment with National Development Plans: Tanzania and Kenya might have integrated the
standard gauge railway project more effectively into their overall national development plans
and strategies. This alignment could have ensured better coordination with other
infrastructure projects and sectors, maximizing the impact of the SGR on economic growth
and regional connectivity.

Regulatory Environment: Differences in regulatory frameworks and policies related to land

acquisition, environmental assessments, and procurement processes could have influenced
the implementation of the SGR projects. Tanzania and Kenya might have had more
conducive regulatory environments or streamlined approval processes compared to Uganda.

International Partnerships and Support: The extent and nature of international partnerships
and support for the SGR projects could have varied among the three countries. Tanzania and
Kenya might have leveraged stronger relationships with foreign governments, multilateral
organizations, or private sector entities to access technical expertise, funding, and project
management support.

Local Content and Employment Opportunities: The extent to which the SGR projects
promoted local content and provided employment opportunities for citizens could have
differed among the countries. Tanzania and Kenya might have implemented policies or
initiatives to maximize local participation in the construction and operation of the railways,
contributing to broader socio-economic benefits and stakeholder buy-in.

Project Governance and Oversight: The effectiveness of project governance structures and
oversight mechanisms could have influenced the transparency, accountability, and risk
management practices associated with the SGR projects. Tanzania and Kenya might have
established robust governance frameworks and monitoring systems to track project progress
and address challenges proactively.

Lessons Learned from Previous Projects: Tanzania and Kenya may have benefited from
lessons learned from previous railway projects or infrastructure initiatives, allowing them to
avoid common pitfalls and optimize project delivery methodologies. Conversely, Uganda
might have faced unique challenges or constraints that required different approaches and
solutions.

According to Chris Kayumba, Senior lecturer at the university of Rwanda. President

Museveni is counting on oil money has not come. the Naivasha land is like a bribe to invest
in the railway line from Mombasa, but Uganda has already started investing in the oil
pipeline to Dar es salaam and hedoesn’t think the bribe will make Museveni divert his money.
‘’

Along with its investment in the pipeline through Tanzania, Uganda has instead turned its
attention to reviving the much cheaper meter -gauge railway network to the Kenyan border
all the while dragging its feet over the SGR by saying Kenya must complete its final phase
first.

KamweOwino, CEO of the Nairobi based institute of economic affairs, a think tank, argue
Uganda has its “own interests” to consider and Kenya ‘s project which is one of the most
expensive lines in the world per kilometerat total cost of $3.8 bn is not a priority.

China’s refusal Uganda’s $2.3bn loan request a year earlier at the third China Africa
gathering in Beijing and with oil proceeds a distant reality – Museveni looks unlikely to
invest in the northern corridor anytime soon leaving Kenya out in the cold with its funding in
disarray.

Adding to Nairobi’s woes the ‘’coalition of the willing ‘’ between Rwanda ,Uganda and
Kenya that was expected to complete the northern corridor has taken another hit as Kigali and
Kampala witness a breakdown in relations.

During a meeting held between MPS on Public Accounts Committee (PAC) , officials from
the ministry of Works and SGR , who had been summoned to respond to audit queries raised
in the June 2017 auditor report on Friday , the Head of Planning at Ministry of Works ,
Richard Sendi revealed that the SGR started in January 2016 and they had earmarked to have
preliminary works on land acquisition complete by February 2017 .

However, compensation on the Project Affected Persons (PAPs) has remained a big
challenge. out of shs 524 bn compensation,cost, only shs 50.8bn has been paid so far sendi
revealed.
There could be several reasons why Kenya has been more effective in delivering the standard
gauge railway line to Uganda:

Experience and expertise: Kenya might have more experience and expertise in building
railway infrastructure compared to Uganda. Kenya's past railway projects could have
provided valuable lessons and insights that were applied to the standard gauge railway
project.

Infrastructure readiness: Kenya might have had better existing infrastructure, such as ports
and transportation networks, which facilitated the construction and transportation of materials
for the railway project.Uganda had promised to kick start the project in June 2015 , but three
years down the road ; Government is yet to complete funding negotiations with Exim Bank
China .

Government support and policies: Kenya might have had more supportive government
policies, regulations, and funding mechanisms in place, which expedited the planning and
execution of the project.

Project management and coordination: Kenya might have had better project management
practices and coordination among various stakeholders, including government agencies,
contractors, and local communities, which streamlined the construction process.

Geographical factors: Kenya's geography might have been more conducive to railway
construction, with fewer geographical obstacles or challenges compared to Uganda.

Political stability: Kenya might have experienced more political stability during the
construction period, which minimized disruptions and delays often associated with political
instability.

International partnerships: Kenya may have leveraged international partnerships and

collaborations with countries or organizations that have expertise in railway infrastructure
development. These partnerships could have provided technical assistance, funding, or access
to advanced technology.

Timely decision-making: Kenya might have had a more streamlined decision-making

process, enabling faster approval of project plans, allocation of resources, and resolution of
any issues or obstacles encountered during the construction phase.
Public-private partnerships (PPP): Kenya might have utilized effective PPP models that
encouraged private sector investment and participation in the project. PPPs can bring in
additional resources, expertise, and efficiency in project delivery.

Community engagement and stakeholder consultation: Kenya may have prioritized

community engagement and stakeholder consultation throughout the project lifecycle,
ensuring buy-in from local communities and addressing any concerns or grievances promptly.

Environmental and social considerations: Kenya may have integrated environmental and
social considerations into the project planning and implementation, adhering to international
standards and regulations. This proactive approach could have minimized environmental
impact and mitigated social conflicts.

Technology and innovation: Kenya may have adopted innovative construction techniques,
equipment, and technology solutions that enhanced efficiency and reduced construction time
and costs.

Risk management: Kenya may have implemented robust risk management strategies,
identifying potential risks early in the project and implementing mitigation measures to
prevent or minimize their impact on project timelines and budgets.

Quality assurance and control: Kenya may have implemented stringent quality assurance
and control measures throughout the construction process, ensuring that the railway
infrastructure meets international standards and specifications.

Combining these factors with those previously mentioned can provide a comprehensive
understanding of why Kenya was more effective in delivering the standard gauge railway line
to Uganda.
What lessons of good practice can Uganda draw from Kenya via the implementation of
standard gauge railway project

Uganda can draw several lessons of good practice from Kenya's implementation of the
standard gauge railway (SGR) project:

Stakeholder Engagement: Kenya's SGR project involved extensive consultation with

various stakeholders, including communities, businesses, and government agencies. Uganda
can prioritize transparent communication and engagement to address concerns and gain
support.

Project Management: Learning from Kenya's experience, Uganda can focus on effective
project management to ensure timely completion, cost control, and quality standards
adherence.

Investment in Infrastructure: Kenya's SGR project demonstrated the importance of

investing in modern transportation infrastructure to enhance connectivity, trade, and
economic growth. Uganda can prioritize similar investments to boost its infrastructure.

Environmental Sustainability: Uganda can learn from Kenya's efforts to minimize

environmental impact during the construction and operation of the SGR. Implementing
measures to mitigate environmental degradation and adhere to sustainability standards is
crucial.

Capacity Building: Kenya invested in local capacity building, including training for railway
operations and maintenance. Uganda can prioritize skill development and knowledge transfer
to ensure the long-term success and sustainability of its railway project.

Integration with Regional Networks: Kenya's SGR project aims to enhance connectivity
within the East African region. Uganda can explore opportunities for collaboration and
integration with regional transportation networks to maximize the benefits of its railway
infrastructure.

By studying Kenya's experience with the SGR project, Uganda can adopt best practices and
avoid potential pitfalls, ultimately contributing to the successful implementation of its own
railway infrastructure initiatives
Public-Private Partnerships (PPP): Kenya utilized PPP models to finance and operate
certain aspects of the SGR project. Uganda can explore similar partnerships to attract private
sector investment, share risks, and leverage expertise.

Corruption Mitigation: Uganda can learn from Kenya's efforts to combat corruption in the
procurement and execution of the SGR project. Implementing transparent procurement
processes and robust anti-corruption measures is essential to ensure accountability and
prevent wastage of resources.

Alignment with National Development Goals: Kenya's SGR project was aligned with the
country's national development goals, such as Vision 2030. Uganda can ensure that its
railway project supports broader development objectives, such as poverty reduction, job
creation, and regional integration.

Cost-Benefit Analysis: Conducting thorough cost-benefit analyses before and during the
project implementation phase can help Uganda assess the economic viability of its railway
project, allocate resources efficiently, and maximize returns on investment.

Technology Adoption: Kenya incorporated modern railway technology and systems into the
SGR project, enhancing efficiency, safety, and passenger experience. Uganda can prioritize
the adoption of innovative technologies to optimize railway operations and improve service
quality.

Maintenance and Upkeep: Uganda can learn from Kenya's approach to ongoing
maintenance and upkeep of the SGR infrastructure. Establishing comprehensive maintenance
schedules, investing in infrastructure resilience, and ensuring timely repairs and upgrades are
crucial for the long-term sustainability of the railway system.

By considering these additional lessons, Uganda can further enhance the planning, execution,
and management of its standard gauge railway project, contributing to its success and long-
term impact on the country's development.

Robust Legal and Regulatory Framework: Kenya developed and implemented a

comprehensive legal and regulatory framework to govern the SGR project, covering aspects
such as land acquisition, environmental protection, safety standards, and operational
guidelines. Uganda can emulate this approach to ensure clarity, compliance, and
accountability throughout the project lifecycle.
Community Development and Social Impact Mitigation: Kenya's SGR project included
initiatives to mitigate the social impact on affected communities, such as resettlement
assistance, livelihood restoration programs, and community development projects. Uganda
can prioritize similar measures to address the needs and concerns of communities along the
railway corridor, fostering positive socio-economic outcomes and minimizing disruptions.

Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanisms: Establishing robust monitoring and evaluation

mechanisms can enable Uganda to track progress, assess performance, and identify areas for
improvement throughout the implementation of the railway project. Regular monitoring can
help ensure adherence to project timelines, budgets, quality standards, and socio-economic
objectives.

Risk Management: Kenya's SGR project encountered various challenges and risks,
including funding constraints, land acquisition delays, and logistical hurdles. Uganda can
develop comprehensive risk management strategies to anticipate, mitigate, and respond to
potential risks, thereby safeguarding project success and minimizing adverse impacts.

Knowledge Sharing and Collaboration: Uganda can benefit from fostering knowledge
sharing and collaboration with stakeholders involved in Kenya's SGR project, including
government agencies, development partners, private sector entities, and technical experts.
Leveraging lessons learned, best practices, and technical expertise can enhance Uganda's
capacity to implement its railway project effectively.

Long-term Financing and Sustainability: Ensuring sustainable financing mechanisms for

the railway project is essential for its long-term viability and success. Uganda can explore
innovative financing options, such as long-term loans, bonds, public-private partnerships, and
revenue-generating activities, to secure funding for construction, operation, and maintenance
over the project's lifecycle.

By incorporating these additional lessons into its planning and execution strategy, Uganda
can enhance the resilience, efficiency, and socio-economic impact of its standard gauge
railway project, contributing to the country's infrastructure development and economic
growth objectives.
References

Government reports and press releases from the Kenyan and Ugandan governments regarding
the progress of the standard gauge railway project.

Reports from international organizations involved in infrastructure development, such as the

World Bank, African Development Bank, or International Monetary Fund.

Industry publications and news articles covering the standard gauge railway project and
related infrastructure developments in East Africa.

Academic research papers or case studies analyzing the implementation of railway projects in
the region, including the standard gauge railway.

Interviews or statements from key stakeholders involved in the project, including government
officials, project managers, contractors, and local communities.

By consulting these sources, you can gather comprehensive information and insights into the
factors influencing Kenya's effectiveness in delivering the standard gauge railway line to
Uganda.

By considering these additional factors, we can gain a more nuanced understanding of the
complexities involved in delivering large-scale infrastructure projects like the standard gauge
railway and the varying contexts that shape their success or challenges in different countries.