Publicación: Tren interoceánico elevado del Chocó: ambición logística, riesgo fiscal y decisiones por etapas
Fecha
2025
Autores
Gutierrez Betancur, Juan Carlos
dc.contributor.advisor
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Universidad EAFIT
Resumen
Este documento evalúa la viabilidad del proyecto del Tren Interoceánico del Chocó en Colombia, una iniciativa gubernamental que busca conectar los océanos Pacífico y Atlántico a través de un corredor férreo de ~267 km. Mediante un análisis de ingeniería económica y economía pública, se estiman sus costos, beneficios y riesgos utilizando comparables internacionales y metodologías robustas para mitigar sesgos optimistas. La valoración incorpora la técnica de Reference Class Forecasting (RCF), aplicando incrementos prudenciales de costos (uplifts) del 44% (P50) y 66% (P80) sobre las estimaciones base. Los flujos de caja se descuentan a una tasa social del 5% real. Los hallazgos revelan tres desafíos críticos. Primero, los desembolsos de capital (CAPEX) estimados oficialmente son sustancialmente inferiores a los benchmarks internacionales, que sugieren una inversión entre $107 y $320 billones de pesos (USD 100–300 millones/km). Segundo, bajo supuestos realistas de CAPEX y costos de operación (OPEX), la relación beneficio-costo (B/C) no supera el umbral de viabilidad de 1 de forma robusta. Tercero, la presión fiscal anualizada del proyecto sobre el Presupuesto General de la Nación (PGN) se estima entre un 5% y un 8%, un nivel incompatible con el espacio fiscal disponible y que desplazaría inversiones prioritarias en sectores como salud o educación. En lugar de descartar el proyecto, se recomienda una hoja de ruta modular y condicionada. La política pública sugerida es avanzar por tramos, autorizando vigencias futuras solo tras cumplir hitos verificables: diseños de ingeniería casi cerrados (~80%), licenciamiento ambiental y predial asegurado (≥95%), y una relación B/C P50 ≥ 1 por tramo. Sin estas salvaguardas, comprometer recursos futuros a gran escala representa un riesgo fiscal imprudente.
This paper assesses the feasibility of the Chocó Interoceanic Railway project in Colombia, a government initiative aimed at connecting the Pacific and Atlantic oceans via a ~267 km rail corridor. Using an economic engineering and public economics framework, we estimate its costs, benefits, and risks through international benchmarks and robust methodologies designed to mitigate optimistic bias. The valuation incorporates Reference Class Forecasting (RCF), applying prudential cost uplifts of 44% (P50) and 66% (P80) to baseline estimates. Cash flows are discounted at a 5% real social discount rate. The findings reveal three critical challenges. First, the officially estimated capital expenditures (CAPEX) are substantially lower than international benchmarks, which suggest an investment between COP 107 and 320 trillion (USD 100–300 million/km). Second, under realistic CAPEX and operating expenditure (OPEX) assumptions, the benefit-cost (B/C) ratio does not robustly exceed the viability threshold of 1. Third, the project's annualized fiscal pressure on the National General Budget (PGN) is estimated to be between 5% and 8%, a level incompatible with the available fiscal space, which would crowd out priority investments in sectors such as health or education. Instead of dismissing the project, a modular and conditional roadmap is recommended. The suggested public policy is to advance in phased sections, authorizing future budgetary commitments (vigencias futuras) only after meeting verifiable milestones: nearly complete engineering designs (~80%), secured environmental and land permits (≥95%), and a B/C ratio of P50 ≥ 1 for each section. Without these safeguards, committing large-scale future resources represents an imprudent fiscal risk.
This paper assesses the feasibility of the Chocó Interoceanic Railway project in Colombia, a government initiative aimed at connecting the Pacific and Atlantic oceans via a ~267 km rail corridor. Using an economic engineering and public economics framework, we estimate its costs, benefits, and risks through international benchmarks and robust methodologies designed to mitigate optimistic bias. The valuation incorporates Reference Class Forecasting (RCF), applying prudential cost uplifts of 44% (P50) and 66% (P80) to baseline estimates. Cash flows are discounted at a 5% real social discount rate. The findings reveal three critical challenges. First, the officially estimated capital expenditures (CAPEX) are substantially lower than international benchmarks, which suggest an investment between COP 107 and 320 trillion (USD 100–300 million/km). Second, under realistic CAPEX and operating expenditure (OPEX) assumptions, the benefit-cost (B/C) ratio does not robustly exceed the viability threshold of 1. Third, the project's annualized fiscal pressure on the National General Budget (PGN) is estimated to be between 5% and 8%, a level incompatible with the available fiscal space, which would crowd out priority investments in sectors such as health or education. Instead of dismissing the project, a modular and conditional roadmap is recommended. The suggested public policy is to advance in phased sections, authorizing future budgetary commitments (vigencias futuras) only after meeting verifiable milestones: nearly complete engineering designs (~80%), secured environmental and land permits (≥95%), and a B/C ratio of P50 ≥ 1 for each section. Without these safeguards, committing large-scale future resources represents an imprudent fiscal risk.