Uzbekistan Logs 100,000 TEU by Rail but Dry Ports Still Don't Work as One System

By Dmitry Lebedev

Uzbekistan's transport services market grew more than fivefold in money terms since 2017 — from 36 trillion to 188.2 trillion sums — yet its 27 internationally recognised dry ports still don't operate as a single national system. That's the core finding of a study by the Agency for Strategic Development and Reforms under the President of Uzbekistan, which proposes seven reform tracks and warns that value from international freight flows may keep consolidating outside the country.

How fast is the market growing?

In H1 2026, transport services reached 85.3 trillion sums, up 43% year-on-year, ranking third in the services sector behind trade and food service. Rail container traffic hit 100,000 TEU for the first time in 2025, per EABR data cited in the report; total rail freight exceeded 107.9 million tonnes, still dominated by coal, ore and construction materials. Kazakhstan, by comparison, runs 2.2 million TEU with 8.5% containerisation.

In late 2025, a UNESCAP working group in Bangkok added 27 Uzbek logistics centres — including Navoi Cargo, Kungrad Cargo Impex, Multimodal Trans Terminal, Universal Logistics Services, Orient Logistics Centre and Termez Cargo Centre — to the international dry port network, expanding it by 15%. "Existing dry ports do not yet function as a unified national transport and logistics system," the document states.

What's at stake on the corridors?

The agency pins hopes on the Trans-Caspian route, the China–Kyrgyzstan–Uzbekistan railway, CASCA+ and TRACECA corridors, and the prospective Trans-Afghan line. Trans-Caspian volumes are forecast to grow from 4.2 million tonnes in 2025 to 5.2 million in 2026 and 11 million by 2030; container traffic from 77,000 TEU to 300,000 TEU over the same period.

How big is the warehouse gap?

Class A and B stock totals roughly 795,000 sq m against unsatisfied demand of nearly 400,000 sq m. Over 98% of Class A space is leased. Another 370,000 sq m is under construction — still not enough, the authors say. More than 75% of modern space sits in the Tashkent transport hub; most regional terminals under Uztemiryulkonteyner are Class B or C, lacking WMS automation, high racking, heavy cranes and rail sidings.

Warehouse availability is 0.02 sq m per capita — versus 0.7 in Turkey, 0.9 in Poland and 2.1 in Germany. In IBC Global's April 2026 ranking of 200 countries, Uzbekistan placed seventh with 40.2 points, between Turkey and Mexico, behind Poland (57.9), Vietnam (52.2) and the UAE (51.7), and ahead of tenth-placed Kazakhstan (34.5). Its warehouse component of 60.4 was the table's best.

Why don't the maths work for investors?

Class A rents in Tashkent run about $12 per sq m monthly; construction costs $670–700 per sq m. That yields 15–18% annually with five-to-seven-year payback — versus 8–12% for Tashkent residential and 7–9% for European and Russian warehouse assets. But commercial loan rates in national currency sit at 21–23%, above most projects' returns. Geopolitical risk score: zero penalty points.

What about rail and skills?

The trunk network grew only 12–14% in nine years, to about 4,800 km, while population rose nearly 30% and nominal GDP 2.5x. The agency estimates a need for 7,560 km — a 2,800 km deficit requiring $9–13 billion and 10–15 years. Until August 2025, Uztemiryulkargo had to use Kazakh wagons on the Tashkent–Altynkol container route. Equipment can be bought in a year; training multimodal terminal staff takes three to five.

Digitally, no unified ecosystem links railways, customs and transit-country ports, so documents can't auto-sync. No single through-tariff mechanism exists on the Trans-Caspian route, and imbalanced flows force operators to return empty containers to China at their own cost — a burden passed to Uzbek exporters. Per World Bank expert estimates cited, land and permit procedures stretch construction from six-to-nine months to two years.

What reforms are proposed?

• A free dry port regime with customs, financial and organisational benefits, moving border controls inside terminals; a dedicated law plus Customs and Tax Code amendments.
• Handing state terminals to international operators — DP World, AD Ports Group, PSA International, Duisburger Hafen AG, Lotte Global Logistics, COSCO Shipping — under PPP terms, with the IFC as independent advisor.
• A National Logistics Infrastructure Fund backed by state assets, IFI loans (AIIB, EBRD, ADB, IFC), sovereign funds and infrastructure bonds, including sukuk.
• Pilot access for private operators to locomotive traction with fixed path slots and an investment component in infrastructure tariffs.
• A national Cargo Community System integrating e-nakl.railway.uz, singlewindow.uz, E-tranzit and E-logistika, cutting document processing from days to 10–15 minutes.
• Transport cooperatives for small road carriers via amendments to the road transport law.
• Consolidated, digitised permitting for logistics construction.

The agency cites Rwanda's 25-year DP World concession at Kigali Logistics Platform ($35 million, 50,000 TEU), which cut transit time from 14 days to 3 and saved about $50 million annually; Laos's Thanaleng dry port, reducing Europe delivery times from 45 to 15 days; India's 35 multimodal parks; and Kazakhstan, where 74% of the freight wagon fleet is privately owned.

"If these barriers are not removed in the near term, a significant share of value added from consolidation, processing and distribution of international cargo flows will concentrate outside Uzbekistan," the study warns.