Argument
Private companies have dominated the United States freight transportation system for a long time. They also control passenger transportation systems, but the control is shared with the government, unlike freight transport. Through fees, tools, and taxes, government transport departments can safeguard the public best interests in the passenger transportation industry. In contrast, government departments do not have a means to directly control or foster innovation in intermodal freight transport partly because of the resistance by trackers. In their book, Konings et al. (2008) suggest that the US government should be the catalyst for innovations in intermodal transportation. This argument can be justified by looking at a historical example of how a government-supported initiative has outperformed the free market-driven industry.
Why the US Government Should Be a Catalyst for Innovations in Intermodal Transport Systems
I agree with the author that the government should act as a catalyst for intermodal transport. The government brings tremendous benefits in transport and regulates limitations posed by the free market economy. This type of economy brings a problem of lack of interconnectivity and interoperability. This challenge is evidenced in intermodal road-rail transport because different parties use different resources. Private-owned intermodal transportation systems are different because they lack a centralized control unit that regulates the designs. Transportation is an essential aspect of the lives of Americans, and the time wasted when interconnecting problems occur leads to massive losses. For effectively centralized control to be achieved in such centers, the US government needs to step in and assist in innovation, ensuring uniform standards and compatible systems are deployed everywhere.
Additionally, I agree with the writer that the government needs to step in because it is able to pass information better. Intermodal transport involves several stakeholders and components, thus requiring an intensive flow of information (Kine, Gebresenbet, Tavasszy, & Ljungberg, 2022). An institution like a government capable of reaching all should be in control. In social-technical systems, evidence shows that governments outperform privatized institutions. The state plays 13 different roles in the governance of socio-technical systems: Observer, mitigator, opportunist, facilitator, lead user, enabler of societal engagement, promoter, moderator, gatekeeper, initiator, and watchdog (Borrás & Edler, 2020). Incorporating these in the transport industry would save a lot of wasted time and hassle.
The US government has intelligence tools at its disposal, and it can do better work in observing than private individuals. It is also respected and can-do mitigation in case of intermodal transport conflict. It can be relied on to facilitate innovation in the system because of the ease of additional funding. The government also far outperforms the private industry in promoting, moderating, and initiating intermodal transportation projects. With access to security officials, no organization can beat the government in the enforcement of intermodal transport principles.
Justification
The days of the US Department of Defense (DOD) being the global leader in defense technology are over. This is despite being the most funded defense department in the world. The declining dominance is attributed to the department’s public-private partnerships to procure technological resources. On the other hand, the nuclear power production industry, which for unavoidable reasons, is left in the control of the government, continues to prosper. The state’s role in the mode of governance of the nuclear power socio-technical system is very central to its success (Borrás & Edler, 2020). It offers transformative, innovative, and responsible leadership in a conflict-filled field. One of the conditions for the development of intermodal transport is better access to intermodal logistics networks offering appropriate line and point infrastructure (Przybylska & Dohn, 2019). This can only be achieved by the government as private investors seek to maximize profit at the expense of productivity, as observed in the case of the DOD.