Resear ch On the Evolution Pr ocess of U.S. Container Por t System

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Resear ch On the Evolution Pr ocess of U.S. Container Por t System"

Shona Day
5 years ago
Views:

1 DOI: /j.cnki.jjdl Vol.32 No ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY Feb 璠 F552.7 A (2012) Resear ch On the Evolution Pr ocess of U.S. Container Por t System YANG Jing - lei 1,LUO Mei - feng 2,WU Xiao - fan 1 (1. Department of Logistics Management, Nankai University,Tianjin ,China; 2. Department of Logistics and Maritime Studies,Hung Hom Kowloon,Hong Kong,China) Abstract: The U.S. container port system evolution process from 1970 to 2009 can be divided into four phases by its concentration degree,which is presented by Hirshmann-Herfindahl Index (HHI). Annual number,throughput and spatial change of U.S. container ports are also considered in the research. The four stages are:quick deconcentration phase ( ),mild deconcentrating phase ( ),regularly concentrating phases ( ) and the second deconcentration phase( ). The evolution of U.S. container port system has shown periodicity during and a container port network with multiplied load centers has formed along the American coastline since This analysis also proves that there are more than one load centers in certain regions of the port network. Key words: container port system;concentration degree;evolution phases;united States TEU [5] 1957 [1] GDP 60.15% GDP 3 [2] [6] TEU [3] [4] ; E- mail jingleiyang@163.com

2 2 95 Notteboom HHI [7] [8] [16] [9] 1998 Wang JJ [17] 1999 Jacques M [10-12] 1.1 Yiping LE [19] Hayuth [20-21] [1] HHI Notteboom load center Yiping LE Hayuth CR4 CR8 [13] 1992 Kuby HHI Hayuth 1981 CR Notteboom 1995 HHI [14] Hayuth [18] 2010 CR4 CR8 HHI HHI 1995 Holye HHI [15] 1997

96 32 n Σ Σ 2 =10 000 n HHI =10 000 Σ X 2 i i=1 X ΣS i 1 i=1 X X i i S i i 3 1970 2009 1970 2 1970 1940 3.1 1970 2009 general cargo 1950 1970 2009 1 2 1957 1967 1957 1970 1 Tab.

3 96 32 n Σ Σ 2 = n HHI = Σ X 2 i i=1 X ΣS i 1 i=1 X X i i S i i general cargo Tab.1 1 The operation time of main container ports in early U.S. New York Los Angeles Fig.1 Number of container ports in U.S. from 1970 to 2009 Oakland Seattle Huston Long Beach Jacksonville Baltimore Portland Hampton Roads Tacoma Boston Hayuth [18] Fig.2 Annual throughput of U.S. container ports from 1970 to % 5 TEU [1]

2 97 [22-23] 1970 50 TEU 2 1970 2006 1995 1981 2008 256 284 TEU 2009 13.1% 1970 1995 3.

4 2 97 [22-23] TEU TEU % TEU TEU TEU TEU 600 TEU mapinfo HHI Fig.3 Layout of U.S. container ports in 1970 Fig.4 Layout of U.S. container ports in Fig.5 Layout of U.S. container ports in 2006 Fig.6 Layout of U.S. container ports in 2009

5 HHI Fig.7 Herfindahl- hirschman index of U.S. container ports HHI from 1970 to 2009 HHI Hayuth % % HHI Tab.2 The layout of new container ports in U.S. from 1970 to Savannah 1972 San Diego 1973 San Francisco 1979 San Juan 1981 Richmond Port Everglades 1982 Apra 1983 Tampa 1984 Wilmington Richmond VA 1985 Portsmouth Vancouver WA 1986 Manatee 1987 Canaveral Chester (Units) 1988 Gulfport 1990 Freeport 1991 Portland(ME) Lake Charles 1993 Brunswick Corpus Christi Beaumont 1994 Fort Pierce % % HHI % HHI HHI 6.07% 1995 Hayuth FTC HHI <HHI HHI>1 800

6 / Hayuth / / HHI % / / 1.8 TEU 1995 / / / / 1980 /

7 New Phase in Port Development[J]. Maritime Policy and Mana- HHI gement ( 3) [11] Meifeng Luo Liming Liu pacity expansion[j]. Transportation Research Part B [12] tainer port system[j]. The Professional Geographer [14] Kuby M. the U.S. General Cargo Port System Fei Gao. Post-entry container port ca- 2012(46) [J]. 27(2) [13] Hayuth Y. Rationalization and deconcentration of the U.S. con (40) Reid N. Technological change and the concentration of Geography (3) [J]. Economic [15] Hoyle B. S. Charlier J. Inter - port Competition in Developing Countries[J]. Journal of Transport Geography (2) [1] Hayuth Y. Containerization and the Load Center Concept[J]. Economic Geography (2) [16] Notteboom T. E. Concentration and load centre development in the European container port system[j]. Journal of Transportation [2]. [M]. Geography (2) [17] Wang J J. A container load center with a developing hinterland a [3] [M]. case study of Hong Kong[J]. Journal of Transport Geography (6) [4] [M]. [18] Marcadon Jacques. Containerisation in the ports of Northern and Western Europe [J]. GeoJournal [5] [J]. [19] Yiping LE Hitoshi IEDA. Evolution Dynamics of Container Port 2011(1) 36. Systems with a Geo-Economic Concentration Index A Comparison [6] of Japan China and Korea [J]. Asian Transport Studies. [J]. 2003(4) (1) [7] Bird J.H. The Major Seaports of the United Kingdom[M]. London Hutchinson [20]. [J] (3) [8] Weigend G.. The Problem of Hinterland and Foreland as Illustrated by the Port of Hamburg[J]. Economic Geography (1) [21] [22]. [J] (6) Baird A. J. Trends in port privatization[j]. Ports and Harbours [9] Robinson R. Modelling the Port As All Operational System [J]. Economic Geography (1) [23] 2001(1) Talley W. K. Port Economics[M]. London Routledge [10] Notteboom T. Rodrigue J. P. Port Regionalization Towards a

TOTAL DOMESTIC TRADE RANK TOTAL FOREIGN TRADE

TOTAL DOMESTIC TRADE RANK TOTAL FOREIGN TRADE U.S. PORT RANKING BY CARGO VOLUME 2016 Short Tons FOREIGN TRADE TOTAL TRADE TOTAL DOMESTIC TRADE RANK IMPORTS EXPORTS TOTAL FOREIGN TRADE RANK RANK RANK RANK PORT/STATE TONS PORT/STATE TONS PORT/STATE