Goods: a mistreated vital necessity

We have goods trapped—captive—within the swarm of blockages on the rail network. This causes those that still move by road to overlook the option of using the train, because neither the necessary capacity nor the adequate service is available. And when they decide to move by road, they face a serious blockage on the country’s main artery, the AP-7 southbound, forcing them to improvise and find alternative routes where no one dares to confirm anything: neither when, nor how, nor by which path the goods will arrive. Every day, drivers, planners, logistics managers, and operators have to find impossible solutions to deal with the disorder they encounter.

We rely on a logistics network managed by highly talented people with a strong vocation, who do the impossible to keep things flowing despite facing a complex operational framework generated by decisions—or inaction—of regulators, governments, administrations, and infrastructure managers. Ideas are projected from a laboratory far removed from reality, resulting in operational daily life that is hardly acceptable.

The daily movement of goods reflects the industrial vitality of a country, the bloodstream that keeps its productive economy alive. But who cares about that? Goods are inconvenient. Goods do not speak, do not complain, have no rights, and do not vote—unlike people. Does anyone take the side of goods? They bother us when they travel by truck on the highway, and also in the city. Trucks must always be moved aside to prioritize private vehicles, yet we expect products to arrive on time and be available on store shelves when needed. How do we reconcile this contradiction?

We need a national pact to protect goods, recognizing them as assets of industrial interest even while in motion. A pact that becomes a pillar of the new sustainability—not only environmental, but also social, ethical, and resilient—so that, together with drivers, the flow of products can move continuously, and goods stop being the scapegoat where all inefficiencies and externalities generated by political systems and infrastructure managers accumulate.

We also need the creation of continuous freight corridors. It is necessary to define strategic transport axes that cross the territory and receive priority attention, with reliable operational solutions, so that in the event of any disruption the default response is never to stop them. These corridors must ensure the continuity of the flow, just as private vehicles are managed, with temporary lanes opened in the opposite direction during return operations. For example, the AP-7 could have a southbound operational lane using the uphill lane: even if traffic is slower, the flow would not stop, avoiding the chaos in information and road conditions experienced by drivers and planners. Likewise, in situations of protests or blockades on main roads, freight drivers must be able to exercise their right to circulate and not be treated as expendable, left on shoulders or parking areas until allowed to resume work. Drivers are responsible professionals who accompany goods to their destinations and suffer, together with them, this constant waste of logistical effort, translating into lost hours and high economic costs.

It is also essential that trucks move onto the train. Rail highways along strategic transport arteries are an urgent necessity to relieve road congestion and save thousands of hours of unproductive driving. Continuing to postpone this scenario is to consciously accept a deficient rail system.

Through the global association of industrial companies that contract transport (GSA), we have promoted the Global Manifesto (Bill of Cargo Rights), a document establishing the principles and guarantees that must protect goods so they can continue generating wealth in the territories they transit, without being penalized by the logistics system itself. Just as manufacturing companies that contract transport voluntarily certify ethical, sustainable, and resilient logistics practices through the Shipper of Trust Certificate (CCR), it is necessary that policymakers and managers take note that governing and managing also involves assuming commitments, accrediting them, and guaranteeing real, ethical, and verifiable operational transparency.