The Limits of Competition

America’s transportation system bears the scars of a century-old mistake. When we needed to pave the muddy roads that led to and from the railroads in the early 1900s, we had a choice: integrate the emerging highway system with our robust rail network, or let them compete. We chose competition. The result was a destructive zero-sum battle that decimated our rail infrastructure and left us with a fundamentally suboptimal transportation system.

This historical lesson reveals a crucial truth: “Preserving competition in the marketplace” is an incomplete regulatory principle in itself. Without thoughtful collaboration, pure competition can destroy the very systems we depend on.

The Collaboration Deficit

Our governing institutions were designed to manage competing factions, not foster collaboration. This creates a cascade of problems:

• Fragmented decision-making replaces coordinated planning
• Competitive debate drowns out thoughtful deliberation
• Vested interests suppress collective intelligence
• Short-term wins undermine long-term sustainability

The most powerful voices dominate, while comprehensive solutions remain out of reach. We interact through the distant mechanisms of commissions, hearings, and reports when what we need is dialogue, agreements, and coordinated action.

A New Framework for Progress

The 21st century demands a fundamental shift. We must move beyond the limiting belief that one party’s gain requires another’s loss. Instead, we need competition that promotes shared prosperity—where regions compete to contribute the most to the whole system, not to undermine one another.

Consider our ports: rather than individual facilities competing for business, we need an optimally efficient port system that serves our national interests. The same principle applies across all transportation modes, companies, and regions.

The Continental Action Plan Approach

This understanding has driven the creation of the Continental Action Plan for Sustainable Industry—a new forum that brings all stakeholders together for productive collaboration. Rather than having vested interests individually lobby government, we create space for collective intelligence to emerge.

The approach recognizes that meaningful progress requires more than money. It demands new pathways for coordinating commercial activity and public policy. It requires bridging the communication and coordination gaps that currently separate government, industry, and citizens.

Making Collaboration Work

Effective collaboration across industries, companies, agencies, and political parties requires:

• Respect for all stakeholders’ perspectives
• Inclusive processes that give voice to more than just the most powerful
• Consensus-based decision-making that builds lasting agreements
• New institutional mechanisms designed for coordination rather than competition

The Path Forward

We stand at a crossroads. Our multi-faceted natural and capital resource challenges call for new ways of interacting in business and government. The question isn’t whether we can afford to collaborate—it’s whether we can afford not to.

Can labor sit productively with management? Can businesses coordinate with the community? Can shippers collaborate with transportation providers? Can government partner with private industry while ensuring all stakeholders have input?

The answer must be yes. In our interconnected world, no one wins unless we all win. The power of collaboration must sit effectively alongside the power of competition.

Building America’s sustainable transportation future—and addressing our broader systemic challenges—requires us to redraw our battle lines. Not to eliminate competition, but to channel it toward shared prosperity and collective progress.

The intelligence exists in both the public and private sectors. The resources can be mobilized. What we need now is the institutional will to bridge our coordination gaps and work together toward solutions that serve our common future.