Can new transport authority tackle siloed planning gaps?

The Integrated Transport and Logistics Authority, or ITLA, is intended to replace fragmented transport planning with a coordinated national approach. It will bring major transport modes into one planning framework. This matters because separate plans can produce overlapping projects, weak connections and infrastructure that does not match actual travel demand.

ITLA must prepare a National Transport Master Plan covering at least 10 years. It will test ministries’ annual and shorter-term sector plans against that plan. It will also appraise central infrastructure projects costing ₹500 crore or more, monitor implementation and assess impacts after completion.

Its success is not guaranteed by its mandate alone. Experts say ITLA needs real authority, adequate resources, independence and reliable data. Without the power to influence or stop unsuitable projects, it could remain a reviewing body with limited practical impact. Its work with state and local agencies also remains important.

ITLA’s formal role is broad. It will examine central infrastructure projects costing ₹500 crore or more and test them against the National Transport Master Plan. The authority is therefore meant to look beyond individual ministries and assess how projects fit within a wider transport network.

The ₹500 crore threshold is a cost cutoff, not a count of projects or a separate funding pot. Projects at or above that value fall within ITLA’s appraisal role under the arrangement described. ITLA will also monitor approved projects while they are being implemented and assess their effects after completion.

This gives the authority several points of influence: planning, appraisal, implementation monitoring and post-completion assessment. However, the article says its practical impact will depend on its powers. Without authority to halt funding or veto projects, appraisal may not change final decisions.

India’s transport planning is often organised by sector. Roads, railways, waterways, ports, aviation and urban mobility can be planned through separate departmental networks. Officials told the article that departments may focus on increasing their own networks without adequately considering investments made by others.

The result is a coordination gap. A railway line, highway or waterway may appear justified within its own sector plan, while links to other modes are overlooked. First- and last-mile connections are especially vulnerable. A freight terminal or station may be built without enough road access for goods or passengers.

The article describes this as a system of silos, with ministries competing for resources rather than assessing which option best serves users. ITLA is intended to test sector plans against one national master plan. Its ability to coordinate state and local agencies will also affect whether the gap narrows.

Experts say ITLA needs more than a broad coordination mandate. Jagan Shah argued that it should have veto power: the ability to review projects and, where necessary, reject them. Without that power, the authority could identify conflicts with the national plan but still be unable to alter decisions.

The mechanism would work through project appraisal. ITLA could compare a proposed project with the 10-year master plan, assess its connections and likely impact, and then stop or challenge it if necessary. Shah also warned that ITLA needs adequate resources and independence. Its relationship with state and local bodies would need careful handling because their responsibilities may overlap.

The article cites the UK’s National Infrastructure Commission as an example of an independent body that can publicly challenge government decisions. ITLA’s influence will therefore depend on its formal powers and its ability to operate credibly across ministries and levels of government.

When a transport facility lacks reliable first- and last-mile links, the wider network may not work as intended. Passengers can struggle to reach a station, while goods may face delays or extra handling before reaching a freight terminal. The facility exists, but its usefulness is limited by missing connections.

The article gives a direct example: a freight terminal or railway station may be built without adequate roads to bring goods or passengers to it. It also describes Khajuraho Airport, which ranked joint top in a customer satisfaction survey with a score of 4.98 out of 5, even though scheduled commercial flights stopped on July 1 before the results were released.

These examples show why building infrastructure alone is not enough. ITLA is expected to consider complete journeys, network connections and actual demand. Better coordination could reduce overlapping or poorly connected projects, but only if the authority can influence investment decisions.

ITLA is expected to build a National Transport Data Repository. It would bring together information from GST Network e-way bills, FASTag, VAHAN, global positioning systems and urban traffic management systems. Combining these sources could give planners a fuller picture of how people and goods move.

The government says the repository will support freight-flow and origin-destination analysis. Such analysis can show where journeys begin and end, which routes carry goods, where traffic builds up and how different modes connect. ITLA could use that evidence when comparing projects and deciding whether roads, railways, waterways or other modes fit particular routes.

Data quality will determine the result. Jagan Shah said the repository must be updated regularly and governed transparently. If information is incomplete or available only to selected users, it could create uncompetitive markets. The article also identifies modelling and artificial-intelligence tools as possible aids to investment decisions.

Transport infrastructure is valuable only when it helps people and goods complete useful journeys. Building more roads, railways or airports in isolation can produce overlapping facilities, weak connections or projects that do not match demand. A journey-based approach asks how users actually travel and how goods move across the whole network.

The article contrasts sectoral expansion with this wider test. A railway line, highway or waterway may look justified within its own ministry, yet fail to connect with other modes. Investment should instead consider geography, the type of goods, journey requirements, cost and efficiency. First- and last-mile access must be part of the decision.

Khajuraho Airport illustrates the mismatch: it received a 4.98 survey score, but scheduled commercial flights stopped on July 1. ITLA could use integrated data, modelling and artificial intelligence to compare options. Its success will depend on applying that evidence to real investment decisions.