Many developing countries today face the dual challenges of development and decarbonization, racing against climate change that makes the latter increasingly urgent. This dilemma brings China’s railway investments in Africa under the spotlight. Can stakeholders of these megaprojects achieve the goal of boosting host countries’ economies while mitigating the socio-environmental risks of these ventures? As one of three Chinese researchers, I attended an Africa-China relations conference in Nairobi in 2019. The discussions focused on the Chinese-financed Kenyan Standard Gauge railway (SGR), which was the country’s largest infrastructure project since its independence. I was surprised by how the academic conference escalated into a heated debate between proponents of the project’s economic benefits and those concerned with its socio-environmental risks. During one exchange, a local researcher stepped to the podium, pointed a finger at me, and exclaimed: “All Chinese should leave the country.” Chinese overseas investments—and railways, in particular—have sparked contention in the Global South. While developed economies built their transport and other infrastructure without considering environmental impacts, many developing countries must grapple today with the dual challenges of development and decarbonization in a world that increasingly prioritizes the latter. Around the world, rail infrastructure has long been a catalyst for industrialization and development. China’s overseas railway investments do offer many economic benefits for both that nation and the countries where they are built. But some Western analysts depict the China-built railway across Kenya as a project that has created both spectacle and ruin. Finding the right balance between economic transformation and socio-environmental risk mitigation is critical for Chinese railway projects and other infrastructure efforts to be more sustainable in the Global South.

China’s Trendsetting Trains

China’s overseas railway investments started in the Mao era, and they have continued today with the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Railroad Economic Belt. Thus, railway exports have become a trademark of China’s economic statecraft and diplomatic exchange. Between 2007 and 2019, China built 85 railways in Asia, Africa, Europe, North America, and South America. Its flagship projects include the Jakarta-Bandung High-Speed Rail, China-Laos Railway, and Mombasa-Nairobi Standard Gauge Railway. As China exports its railway technology, it also has become an active standard setter in railway technologies, and upgraded its position in the global supply chain. Chinese state and railway construction firms have worked to create a tighter integration of the developing world into China-oriented transportation and trade networks. Participating countries also benefit significantly from Chinese railway exports that finance critical infrastructure gaps. And these modern railways differ from colonial-era railways that largely serviced mineral exploitation, labor transport, and colony consolidation by boosting cross-country connectivity and regional integration. They also create jobs and foster local business opportunities. Amid the growing challenge posed by climate change, however, Chinese railway exports to the developing world face a conundrum. Railways are an energy-efficient technology that contribute to decarbonization goals, yet they also pose environmental risks. The Kenyan Standard Gauge Railway, a flagship BRI project, exemplifies some of the environmental dilemmas in the equation.

Economy Versus Ecology 

When developing countries seek to promote infrastructure-led development, their appetite for economic growth may not measure up to everyone else’s ecological concerns. The Kenyan SGR significantly improved the transportation of goods and passengers across the country. A further extension of the system has great potential for connecting landlocked countries in East Africa and improving regional connectivity. But by crossing a major national park, it risked the ecological health of sensitive grasslands and wildlife passages. This circumstance sparked protests from environmentalists, despite Chinese developer’s efforts to minimize the project’s environmental impact. My own interviews with Kenyan stakeholders revealed tough conflicts over development priorities. In a country struggling with growth creation and poverty, groups prioritizing the economy see an extreme environment-first narrative as an obstacle to development. Ecology-centered stakeholders view Kenya’s pristine natural environment as a core part of its national identity. In their eyes, the new railway risks harming the country’s most valued resources. Kenya’s unique pride in its natural resources makes the economy versus ecology dilemma particularly hard to overcome.

Green Or Compatible? 

When planning Kenya’s SGR, government officials aimed to build an electrified railway that could accommodate more trains and leverage Kenya’s renewable energy generation capacity. The Chinese firm implementing the project, however, insisted on combustion engines due to Kenya’s unreliable electricity supply, especially since combustion engine-driven trains were sufficient to meet local economic needs. Had an electrified rail been introduced, the railway might have run into the issues which plagued the electrified Addis Ababa-Djibouti railway. This system continues to suffer from power outages and unpredictable schedules even after seven years of operation. Although sometimes criticized as not being as technologically advanced or innovative, the choice to introduce a familiar and manageable technology in Kenya eased a technology transfer process in light of limited local capabilities. Still, the discussions about the need for an electrified railway do reemerge from time to time, highlighting a persistent clash between green and compatible priorities in identifying appropriate development pathways.

Transformative Development Versus “Transplanted” Development 

In my fieldwork across five cities and towns along the Kenyan SGR, I discovered economic booms in some communities near the railroad. Meanwhile, some towns along the Mombasa-Nairobi road were starting to lose out on economic activity. When considering cost and energy efficiency, the railway is a more favorable option for long-distance transport. Yet the road sector not only employs truck drivers (an important political force in Kenya), but also provides traffic to numerous grocery stores, eateries, pharmacies, gas stations along the roads that feed tens of thousands of families. The Kenyan government once sought to support railway transport by forcing firms to carry goods using the SGR, siphoning much of its road sector revenue to the railway. Six years into the introduction of the railway I visited Mtito Andei—a once bustling town in the midpoint of road transit between Mombasa and Nairobi. There I found that many of the houses, markets, and restaurants in the town center had emptied long ago. To truly leverage megaprojects such as railways for transformative development and inclusive growth, decisionmakers must consider the intended outcomes and unintended consequences of their decisions and carefully balance the interest between winners and losers as such project development projects redistribute benefits.

Striking a Fine Balance

As host countries seek to leverage China-exported railway to promote green development, they are confronted inevitably with the push and pull between development priorities, local capacities, and stakeholder interests. Railway projects are seen as a road to achieve green transitions, yet they must also live up to the Chinese domestic development logic of building a “road to richness.” Striking a balance calls for the governments of participating countries and Chinese developers to adopt a more inclusive approach and seek broader collaboration, keeping in mind both the urgent need for infrastructure and the pressing environmental concerns of our time.