Key Details
The OECD report, Measuring Connectivity across the India-Middle East-Europe Corridor uses a 40-plus-indicator scoreboard to assess infrastructure, trade procedures and transport performance. It measures the corridor’s building blocks — not trade already moving along a completed route.
Shipping strength: India’s Liner Shipping Connectivity Index score was 397.5 in Q1 2026, the highest among the countries compared in the report.
Port pressure: Kandla, Mumbai and Mundra used around 80% of their container-handling capacity on average, leaving less room for substantial traffic growth without expansion.
Rail gap: India and Europe have extensive domestic rail networks, but continuous cross-border rail links through the Middle East remain incomplete. Jordan is a particularly important missing connection.
Customs gap: India’s overall OECD trade facilitation score reached 1.60 out of 2 in 2024. Its score for co-operation among domestic border agencies was 1.91, against 1.18 for co-operation across borders.
Strong National Networks Do Not Yet Add Up to One Corridor
Launched during India’s 2023 G20 presidency, the India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) envisages shipping from India to the Gulf, onward land transport through the Middle East and connections to European markets. The OECD finds that its maritime gateways provide a strong starting point. Yet cargo cannot move efficiently from end to end simply because each region has capable ports or domestic railways.
The most consequential physical gap is the missing cross-border railway through the Middle East. Different track gauges, limited port-to-rail links and investment plans shaped by separate national priorities further complicate the proposed ship-to-rail route. Roads offer a practical alternative while rail links develop, but border procedures can still slow freight movement.
India’s Port Growth and Customs Progress Face Different Tests
India’s western ports are important gateways for IMEC, but the OECD finds capacity pressure at Kandla, Mumbai and Mundra. Expanding existing facilities and developing Vadhavan Port could help accommodate future demand; connections from ports to production centres and freight routes matter as well.
India has also substantially improved its own border processes. Its overall trade facilitation score rose from 0.97 in 2012 to 1.60 in 2024, supported by digital customs systems and better domestic agency co-operation. The weaker cross-border score shows the next challenge: getting national systems to exchange documents and information, recognise trusted traders and co-ordinate checks across the route.
Resilience Calls for More Than One Fixed Route
Geopolitical disruptions have strengthened the case for developing IMEC as a network of alternative gateways and routes, rather than relying on its original linear configuration. The OECD considers how additional ports and countries could increase capacity and reduce dependence on maritime chokepoints.
IMEC also envisages electricity, clean-hydrogen and digital connections. The OECD has developed indicators for these dimensions, but has not yet applied them in a comprehensive corridor-wide assessment. The report’s firmest evidence concerns transport infrastructure and trade facilitation.
Policy Relevance
Port investment and domestic customs reform are necessary but insufficient if the connecting railway and border systems elsewhere remain fragmented. This makes co-operation with corridor partners an operational trade priority, not just a diplomatic one.
Some improvements need not wait for major construction. Electronic exchange of trade documents, compatible data requirements and co-operation between customs agencies could make existing routes more predictable. The measure of progress will be whether traders experience more reliable end-to-end movement, rather than improvements reported separately by each country.
Follow the Full Report Here: OECD, Measuring Connectivity across the India-Middle East-Europe Corridor