Remo Kirss: The state must invest in all connections
In infrastructure debates, the focus tends to return again and again to how much a particular road or rail section costs. For some reason, the question of how much more expensive it becomes not to invest in them is not treated with sufficient seriousness, writes Remo Kirss.
I dare say that Estonia has made an important and strategic choice: alongside the construction of Rail Baltic, road construction has not been put on hold. In the 2026 state budget, more than half a billion euros will be directed to road construction, local rail construction, and maintenance, with an additional €435.7 million for Rail Baltic.
The total volume of the 2026–2029 national road maintenance plan exceeds one billion euros, including investments to bring main roads up to a new standard, reconstruction works, building dust‑free surfaces on gravel roads, and rebuilding dangerous traffic locations.
Taken together, these are not merely construction projects — they reflect the implementation of strategic regional, economic, and security policy.
From the logistics sector's perspective, the quality of the road network is a direct cost factor. Poor‑condition roads mean higher time and fuel consumption, as well as greater ongoing maintenance and repair costs for rolling stock, which can also result in less predictable service quality.
If a service must be provided via pothole‑filled or hard‑to‑navigate side roads, this ultimately shows up in the price of the service. On modern, well‑maintained roads and streets designed with freight transport in mind, serving a company's doorstep becomes more cost‑effective and smoother.
Estonia's strength is regional diversity
It is good that Tallinn does not equal Estonia. High‑quality and fast connections — whether by road or rail — play a very large role. The more of them there are, the more people dare to live farther from their workplace.
When residences spread out more evenly, businesses also find opportunities to operate outside Tallinn, which in turn allows service prices to be distributed more evenly across the country. In the end, no one should have to pay extra to live outside the capital or compromise on their quality of life.
If we look, for example, at our southern neighbors, 45.6 percent of Latvia's population lives in the greater Riga region, and 31.9 percent reside in Riga itself. Unlike Estonia, Latvia has not developed a Tallinn–Tartu‑style dual‑center logic, where the second city carries significant nationwide pull and is internationally connected. In Latvia's public debate, the backlog of local road repairs and years‑long funding shortages are sharply felt. Estonians traveling south who leave the main highways for secondary roads likely feel this difference under their wheels.
Estonia is not perfect either. The analysis of national road funding needs showed that to maintain good road conditions, we would need even more money — on average about €218 million per year. The Transport Administration's analysis of road maintenance funding and workloads also notes that annual funding needs for roads are growing faster than the volume of investments planned in the budget.
Current investments therefore must not remain a one‑time effort. Infrastructure needs a predictable rhythm independent of governments and politics, not occasional large concessions. Artificially boosting demand and creating peak periods in the construction sector for materials and labor ultimately means higher construction prices.
Allowing long truck combinations raises safety questions
Equally important is what kind of roads we build. A 2+1 solution may be a reasonable interim step on certain sections, but on Estonia's main corridors — Tallinn–Pärnu–Ikla and Tallinn–Tartu–Luhamaa — it does not replace the need for full 2+2 roads. This is especially true since June 1, when Estonia allowed, under special permits, 25.25‑meter‑long and up to 60‑ton European Modular System (EMS) truck combinations on the roads.
This change improves freight efficiency, but it also adds a new type of load and safety dimension to the roads — overtaking safety. According to the Transport Administration, EMS trucks will operate on specific routes, mainly Tallinn–Narva, the Tallinn ring road, and the Tallinn–Pärnu and Tallinn–Tartu corridors.
Although 2+2 roads are a comfort issue in everyday traffic, that is certainly not the only reason we should modernize our roads. The most important factors are safety, economic development, supply‑chain reliability, environmental impact, and of course defense capability. If a long truck carries the same amount of cargo with fewer trips, this creates measurable benefit only if the road network supports it safely.
In developing and planning infrastructure, the state should cooperate more with the private sector. The transport and logistics sector has excellent data on which times, directions, and regions freight flows move. This does not mean companies should dictate where the state builds roads, but such input would help avoid situations where multiple construction projects simultaneously close the main arteries of a region or where temporary detours overload local roads.
Construction‑period inconveniences are inevitable, and therefore it is important that they are managed smartly and thoughtfully. Most transport companies tolerate temporary inconvenience if the long‑term result is a better, safer, and more reliable road network. Poorly timed construction, however, is simply the result of inadequate planning.
Demand must not be the only criterion for investment
The logic of traffic and mobility also applies to energy infrastructure. Data centers, industry, and electrifying transport need capacity before investment arrives in Estonia. The International Energy Agency forecasts that global data‑center electricity consumption will double by 2030 to around 945 TWh. Unfortunately, the planning horizon for energy infrastructure tends to be longer than the investment decision cycle in the technology sector.
In Estonia, we face a chicken‑and‑egg problem. Do we wait until a major investor signs a contract and only then start building the grid, or do we create the prerequisites earlier so that the investor has a reason to consider Estonia at all?
Accelerating grid connections for electricity producers and large consumers and making costs more predictable is necessary, but not sufficient. Infrastructure investment decisions should not depend solely on demand — rather, infrastructure that is one step ahead of demand creates demand itself and stimulates the economy.
High‑speed rail, main roads, and the electricity grid are not separate topics. All are crucial fields for Estonia's future economy, and the core of the debate lies in whether we build them proactively or fix bottlenecks after the fact.
The most important task of the Estonian government — regardless of the election cycle — is to ensure that life does not concentrate only around the capital. For that, goods, people, energy, and information must move quickly and reliably across the entire country.
--
Editor: Kaupo Meiel, Argo Ideon
