罗德·斯威特

In under a decade， China has built a high-speed rail network totalling more than 10，000km. It eclipses1 every other country’s high-speed network and even that of the entire European Union. Not only that， to build it China spent two-thirds or less what other countries have spent.

According to a World Bank paper published in 2014， site work and right-of-way2 costs in litigious3 California are around $10m/km， or 17.6% of the total cost， while in China land acquisition and resettlement costs are below 8% of project cost.

But other reasons may be more interesting both to the developed world and to regions like Africa that are sorely in need of transformative infrastructure.

For one thing， the sheer scale of China’s rail programme and the state’s firm commitment to it unleashed the country’s technical and manufacturing capabilities. Assured of very high volumes， companies and state institutions ramped up4 capacity quickly and invested in innovative techniques.

“This，” writes Gerald Ollivier， a World Bank senior transport specialist and paper co-author， “has led to lower unit costs as a result of the development of competitive multiple local sources for construction （earthworks， bridges， tunnels， EMU5 trains etc.） that adopted mechanization in construction and manufacturing.

“Further， large volumes and the ability to amortize6 capital investment in high-cost construction equipment over a number of projects contributed to the lowering of unit costs.”

The Chinese government also has the clout7 to standardise designs—for embankments， track， viaducts， electrification， signalling and communication systems—which cuts cost and duplication of effort.

It also standardised construction techniques. China built a lot of viaducts to save scarce farmland or to leap over rivers and， even though they are expensive to build， the cost was kept down by standardising the design and manufacture of viaduct bridge beams.

Their span is standardised at either 24m or 32m and they are cast in temporary factories set up along the railway alignment8. Each beam is transported no more than 8km by a specially-designed vehicle with up to 18 axles.

It was China’s handling of tunnels， however， that most impressed the paper’s authors. They noted that the Chinese system for tunnel construction resulted in a unit cost of $10m to $15m per kilometre， a fraction of9 what it costs New Zealand （$43m）， the US （$50m）， and Australia （$60m）. The system allowed China to tunnel fast， as well， at a rate of five to 10 metres per day.

It’s little wonder， given its remarkable high-speed rail feat， that China is exporting its rail construction expertise all over the world， especially to Africa， and is even keen to help build the UK’s first significant high-speed rail network， dubbed HS2.

不到10年的時间，中国已建造了总里程超过1万公里的高速铁路网，超过了其他任何国家的高铁网络，甚至比全欧盟的都要长。不仅如此，中国建造高铁的成本相当于其他国家的三分之二，甚至还要少。

根据世界银行2014年的一份报告，在官司比较多的美国加利福尼亚州，花在场地劳务和购买路权上的开支每公里达1000万美元，相当于总开支的17.6%。而中国花在购买土地和重新安置上的费用还不到总支出的8%。

但是对于发达国家以及像非洲这样急需大力改善基础设施的地区来说，其他原因可能更值得玩味。

其中有这样一个原因：中国光是依靠铁路建设规划的规模以及致力于实施这一规划的决心，就让这个国家在技术和制造业上的潜能充分发挥了出来。相关公司和国家机构相信建设体量会非常大，因而迅速提升自身生产能力，加大对革新技术的投入。

杰拉德·奥利维尔是世界银行资深运输专家，也是上述世界银行报告的作者之一。他这样写道：“这种做法降低了单位开支，因为这样做培育了具有竞争力的各个本地工程建设部门（如土建、桥梁、隧道、电力动车组等），在建设和制造上都实现了机械化。”

“再者，工程量巨大，加上昂贵的设施用于多项建设工程，也就有了分摊资金投入的能力，单位支出也由此降低。”

中国政府还可以影响以下方面的设计标准化：路堤、轨道、高架桥、电气化、信号和通信系统，节省开支的同时又能事半功倍。

工程技术也实现了标准化。中国建造了很多高架桥梁以节省稀缺的耕地或跨越河流。尽管高架桥建造成本很高，但是由于桥梁的设计和建造都实现了标准化，费用也就降低了。

高架桥的墩距标准有24米和32米两种，都是铁路沿线临时设立的工厂浇筑的。每座桥梁的运输距离不超过8公里，运输用的车辆是专门设计的，每个车轮的车轴有18个之多。

其实，令报告作者印象最深的还是中国的隧道建设。他们注意到，中国的隧道建设体系的单位支出只有每公里1000万到1500万美元，远远低于新西兰的4300万美元、美国的5000万美元和澳大利亚的6000万美元。这种体系也使得中国能够快速开掘隧道，速度是每天5到10米。

中国拥有建设高铁的非凡成就，向全世界尤其是非洲出口其高铁技术，甚至还积极帮助建设英国首条重要的高速铁路线HS2，也就不足为怪了。

（译者单位：上海交通大学）