On October 6, 2026, the Union Cabinet approved the creation of the Integrated Transport & Logistics Authority (ITLA), a new institutional mechanism to improve coordination across India’s transport and logistics ecosystem. Its mandate includes preparing a long-term National Transport Master Plan, technically appraising major central government infrastructure projects costing ₹5 billion or more, monitoring implementation, assessing post-completion outcomes and developing a unified transport data repository to support evidence-based planning.

The announcement addresses a longstanding challenge in India’s infrastructure development: expanding transport capacity without adequately integrating it into an efficient network.

Over the past decade, India has significantly increased investment in physical infrastructure. Central government capital expenditure on core infrastructure, including roads, railways, ports and airports, has risen from around 0.7% of GDP in 2015-16 to a budgeted 1.8% in 2026-27. This has supported the expansion of highways, expressways, dedicated freight corridors, ports and airports.

Yet the economic benefits remain constrained by inadequate integration across transport modes. Individual networks have expanded, but seamless connections between them and supporting logistics services have not kept pace. This limits the scope to reduce logistics costs and improve freight efficiency.

The imbalance is evident in India’s freight mix. Despite rail’s cost advantage for long-distance, high-volume movements, road transport accounts for around 70% of freight. The reason lies partly in the economics of end-to-end transportation. Although rail can be cheaper over the main transport leg, businesses must also account for first- and last-mile connectivity, loading and unloading, terminal access and cargo handling. For smaller consignments, these costs can erode rail’s advantage.

Road transport offers greater flexibility, with trucks collecting goods directly from factories and delivering them to their destinations. For businesses shipping smaller or irregular volumes, this convenience can outweigh rail’s lower line-haul costs.

The challenge, therefore, is not simply to expand transport networks but to connect them into an efficient freight system. ITLA’s effectiveness will depend on whether it can bridge the gap between infrastructure creation and network integration.

From Assets to Networks
A key component of ITLA’s mandate is to prepare a National Transport Master Plan with a horizon of at least 10 years, covering roads, railways, ports and shipping, civil aviation, inland waterways, coastal shipping, urban mobility and logistics. It will also assess shorter-term sectoral plans for alignment with the long-term framework.

The significance lies in its potential to align investment decisions across transport modes.

Consider a manufacturing cluster that generates substantial freight but has limited rail access. A conventional approach might prioritise road widening to ease truck movement. A network-based assessment would examine the entire freight chain: cargo volumes and destinations, access to rail terminals, the feasibility of aggregating shipments, road connectivity and downstream distribution infrastructure.

Such an assessment could show that improving rail access, developing a logistics hub and strengthening targeted road links would deliver greater long-term value than expanding road capacity alone. Elsewhere, road-based logistics may remain the most efficient option. Integrated planning should not seek to shift every shipment to rail, but identify the most cost-effective combination of modes for different freight movements.

This matters as India’s freight demand rises. Estimates suggest domestic freight movement could increase from around 6,440 million tonnes in 2025 to 12,379 million tonnes by 2036 and 28,109 million tonnes by 2047. Without adequate attention to freight flows and intermodal connectivity, capacity expansion risks creating underutilised infrastructure in some locations while bottlenecks persist elsewhere.

Multimodal logistics parks are one area where ITLA’s planning and appraisal functions could make a difference. Assessing these facilities as components of a wider freight network would help determine whether their locations, capacities and connections match the cargo they are expected to handle.

MMLPs bring together cargo aggregation, warehousing, container handling, road access, rail connectivity and other logistics services. By providing a common platform, they can reduce the need for businesses to arrange each component independently and improve freight efficiency.

This is particularly relevant for micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs). A small manufacturer may not generate enough cargo to justify a dedicated rail movement. Aggregating shipments from multiple businesses at a logistics hub can create the volumes needed to support commercially viable rail services.

India currently has around 30 operational MMLPs, with average cargo-handling capacity of approximately 3 million tonnes per annum per park. The existing network handles around 129 million tonnes annually, equivalent to roughly 2% of total freight movement. Meeting projected demand could require 75 MMLPs by 2036 and around 215 by 2047.

But expanding the number of parks alone will not deliver the desired outcomes. Commercial viability depends on proximity to cargo-generating clusters, connectivity to major transport corridors, appropriate capacity and efficient operations. Development also requires coordination among agencies responsible for roads, railways, land and logistics services.

ITLA could help align these investments, ensuring that MMLPs function as nodes in an integrated freight network rather than standalone infrastructure assets.

ITLA is also expected to monitor major infrastructure projects and conduct post-implementation impact assessments. Its mandate includes technical appraisal of central government infrastructure projects costing ₹5 billion or more, while financial appraisal will continue through existing mechanisms. This creates an opportunity to strengthen how infrastructure performance is evaluated.

A project may be completed on time and within budget yet fall short of its economic objectives if cargo volumes remain below expectations, connecting infrastructure is delayed or users continue to rely on less efficient alternatives. Conversely, a modest investment that removes a bottleneck on a busy freight corridor could generate substantial economic benefits.

Project evaluation must therefore extend beyond expenditure and construction milestones to cover connectivity, utilisation, operational efficiency, modal shift and measurable economic outcomes. These indicators can distinguish infrastructure creation from infrastructure effectiveness and help improve future project selection. Evidence on which terminal designs, connecting links and operating arrangements deliver better results could inform subsequent investments, allowing public capital to be allocated more effectively.

Data and Delivery
ITLA’s proposed National Transport Data Repository could further strengthen logistics planning. The government has indicated that it will integrate information from sources such as GSTN e-way bills, FASTag, VAHAN, GPS-based systems and urban traffic management systems. This could support freight-flow and origin-destination analysis, infrastructure planning and impact assessment.

Such integration could help answer fundamental questions: Where does freight originate and where is it headed? Which corridors carry the highest volumes? Where do trucks face persistent delays? Which industrial clusters lack efficient rail access? Where could cargo aggregation support new rail services?

These insights could improve the location and sequencing of infrastructure investments. They could also help determine whether a proposed logistics park addresses a genuine freight bottleneck or duplicates capacity already available nearby.

Turning data integration into better decisions will require reliable data, common definitions, timely updates and clear institutional responsibilities. Ministries and agencies must use the repository to compare alternative investments, coordinate projects and measure outcomes.

ITLA must also complement existing initiatives, including PM GatiShakti and the National Logistics Policy. Its role should be to connect these frameworks more closely with project appraisal, implementation and measurable outcomes, rather than create parallel planning processes.

Integrated planning can identify the right investments, but it cannot guarantee effective delivery. Multimodal infrastructure often depends on several agencies working in tandem. An MMLP, for instance, may require land acquisition, road access, rail sidings, utilities, environmental clearances and coordination with terminal operators. If these components are delivered on different timelines, the facility may remain underutilised despite substantial investment.

ITLA’s monitoring and coordination functions could help address this fragmentation. Its impact, however, will depend on whether it can secure timely action from the agencies responsible for delivery and make implementation bottlenecks visible.

Institutional clarity will be critical. ITLA must complement, rather than duplicate, the operational responsibilities of sectoral ministries and implementing agencies. Its comparative advantage should lie in bringing a cross-sector perspective to planning, appraisal, monitoring and evaluation, not in adding another layer of approvals without improving coordination.

Its success should therefore be measured by whether it reduces avoidable delays, aligns infrastructure projects more effectively and enables assets to operate closer to their intended capacity.

India has made substantial progress in expanding its transport infrastructure. The next phase must focus on extracting greater economic value from that capacity by connecting networks, coordinating investments and using data to guide decisions.

ITLA’s real test will not be how many projects it appraises or plans it prepares, but whether it changes investment decisions, improves multimodal connectivity and lowers the cost of moving goods. The objective is to move beyond building individual transport assets towards creating a unified freight network in which each mode complements the others and infrastructure investment translates into measurable economic gains.

*Views are personal.