A limited time offer!

urgent 3h delivery guaranteed

Shanghai Port Swot

Essay Topic:

Chien-Chang CHOU Lecturer Department of International Trade Ta Hwa Institute of Technology 1, Ta Hwa Road, Chung-Lin 307, Hsin-Chu Taiwan, R. O. C.

We will write a custom essay sample on Shanghai Port Swot

or any similar topic only for you

Order Now

Fax: +886-2-2463-1903 E-mail: [email protected] hinet. net Gin-Shuh LIANG Professor Dept.

Shipping & Transportation Management National Taiwan Ocean University 2, Pei Ning Road, Keelung Taiwan, R. O. C. Fax: +886-2-2463-1903 E-mail: [email protected] notu. edu. tw Abstract: The objective of this paper is to analyze the competitiveness of major container ports in Asia Eastern region.

These major container ports include Hong Kong port, Singapore port, Pusan port, Kaohsiung port and Shanghai port. We discuss the strength, weakness, opportunity and threat of each major container port by SWOT analysis method. The findings lead to answer questions whether Taiwan government needs some new port policies, and how Kaohsiung port improves its competitiveness as well. Key Words: Containerization, Port competitiveness, SWOT analysis method 1. INTRODUCTION Containerization plays an important role in Asia’s rapid growth of international trade.With strong economic developments since the early 80’s and a shift in the global center of manufacturing to Asia, major ports in Far Eastern region have expanded rapidly. Asian container ports will increase their total annual container handling volumes from about 107 million TEUs in 2000 to between 254 million and 306 million TEUs in 2015, according to a report by Ocean Shipping Consultants.

Depending on economic growth, Asian ports are also forecast to increase their box volumes by 45 to 54 percent over the 2000-2005 period, to between 154 million and 164 million TEUs.Further volume increases of 205 million to 236 million TEUs are forecast by 2010. The demand for container ports in Far Eastern region will further increase in the future. This trend will heighten competitive pressures on these major container ports in Far Eastern region. The evolution of super post-Panamax container vessels emphasizes the demand for transshipment. As a result, a large number of major transshipment hubs are established in Far Eastern region, South East Asia, the Caribbean, the Mediterranean, and other parts of the world.The objectives of transshipment are not only to reduce the total cost of collecting and/or distributing the containers carried by a mega-mainline container vessel from and to numerous origin and destination ports, each of which only contributes a part of the mainline vessel cargo, but also to improve just-in-time delivery of cargo, reduce in transit inventory, and make the total origin-to-destination movement of containerized cargo more seamless.

In other words, the purpose is not just to reduce origin-to-destination transport and handling or transfer costs but to make the whole supply chain, including its inherent transaction, more efficient and more responsive to the increasingly strict demands of an ever-changing global market place. Container transshipment will increase its role in Asia. Transshipment is particularly important in Far Eastern region and Southeast Asia.For example, most North Chinese ports, despite facing substantial cargo growth, cannot yet handle fully laden very Ching-Wu CHU Associate Professor Dept. Shipping & Transportation Management National Taiwan Ocean University 2, Pei Ning Road, Keelung Taiwan, R. O. C.

Fax: +886-2-2463-1903 E-mail:[email protected] ntou. edu. tw Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 683 large containerships, though they are developing the capability to do so.Some papers predict an increasing significance of Korean ports as transshipment hubs for Northeast China and minor Japanese ports. In Northeast Asia, transshipment is of growing importance.

In addition, ports such as Singapore, Kaohsiung and Hong Kong compete for transshipment cargoes from Thailand, Philippines and Malaysia. The ports of Hong Kong and Kaohsiung will face increasing competition, as other facilities—notably Shanghai port in South China—are established and expanded to take a share of the regional transshipment trade.Similarly, the ports of Singapore will face increasing price competition, as other facilities—notably Tanjung Pelepas in Malaysia—are established and expanded to take a share of the regional transshipment trade. The inter ports competition is increasing and dynamic in the modern international container transshipping port industry in Far Eastern region. In order to become the major transshipment hubs in Far Eastern region, these major container ports have to understand their strength, weakness, opportunity and threat (SWOT) to survive and develop under such a competitive environment.Brian Slack (1985) thinks that the transshipment port decision-makers are influenced more by price, service considerations of land and ocean carriers than by perceived differences in the ports of entry and exit. Port infrastructures do not appear to play an important role in the routing decisions made by an important group of independent business involved in the North Atlantic container trade.

Slack uses the following 11 criteria for port selection: (a). port security, (b). size of port, (c). inland freight rates, (d). port charges, (e). uality of customs handling, (f). free time, (g).

congestion, (h). port equipment (i). number of sailings, (j). proximity of port, (k). possibility of inter-modal links. Slack’s paper used the Distribution Worldwide (1977,1978) 2000 and 5000 copies of survey results as reference, and arranged the personal interview with the shippers/forwarders who focus only on the containers movement between the American Mid-West and Southern Ontario, and Western Europe. This paper undertakes a percentile analysis and ranks the port selection factors.

Thomas B. J. 1998) found that the key successful factors of the transshipment port including: length of berthing time port, loading/discharge rate, available number of berths, quantity of containerized cargo, port facility, links of port to major consumers market, working hours of ports. Richard J. Linn and Ruby Wo (1999) discussed the impact of Taiwan-China shipment and China port development to Hong Kong container business. This study focused on (a). the liberalization of direct trade between China and Taiwan, and its impact on the overall Hong Kong transshipment business, (b).

he development and impact of nearby ports in the Southern China region including Yantian, Xiamen, and Ksohsiung ports. This paper first discussed the challenges created by the neighborhood ports and the future trend of Hong Kong. The discussion is followed by a review on the development of transshipment hub ports in the region. Carlo Canamero (2000) analyzed and described three efforts in several developing countries to improve port services that are training, technical assistance and research.

You read "Shanghai Port Swot" in category "Papers"
Such countries will keep up with the technological change in liner shipping and use IT & EDI at their operation. Ircha M. C.

(2001) determined the resources available to exploit external opportunities and defend against threats by SWOT (strength, weakness, opportunity, threat) analysis method, and considered the internal strengths and weaknesses of Canadian ports, and discussed the advantage of competition. Jn Mak (2001) focused on Malaysia port, he stated that shippers have a cost-neutral choice with regard to either using Port of Klang or Port of Singapore.This makes the indirect costs (time, frequency of sailing and efficiency) critical in the choice of port. Price is one component of transaction cost. Other elements include time taken, opportunity costs, the efficiency of supporting services and transport links. Le Dam Hanh (2001) discussed the container port development in Asia. This study looked at the development of container ports in Asia and found that (a).

the relative competitive positioning of a port may be altered in line with a confluence of dynamic environmental factors, (b). dvances in information technology (IT) are becoming significant, and (c). the demand for container ports in Asia will further increase. Tseng W. J. (2001) examined the factors which influence the competitive advantages in the port industry. This paper found that the competitive advantages of Kaohsiung port include the geographical location, lower port charges, high handling performance, excellent harbor facilities, convenient inter-modal links, and international logistics service.

Chou C. C. 2002) analyzed the container throughputs and market share of major container ports in Far Eastern region over the period 1981-2000. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 684 Wan C. F. (1996) built a time series model to forecast the transshipment container throughput of Kaohsiung port.

The variables that were used in his model are only the transshipment container throughput and the time. The Chinese Port Technology Institute (1996) formulated a model with liner analysis method to forecast the transshipment container throughput.Three stages are involved in this model. Based on the world economy data, the total world container transportation amount is forecasted in the first stage. According to the Asia area liner market share and the Asia area transshipment container market share, the total Asia area transshipment container amount is forecasted in the second stage. According to the Taiwan transshipment container market share, total Taiwan transshipment container amount is forecasted in third stage.The model seems to be reasonable but it is difficult to obtain all the world economy data, all Asia economy data, the O-D of all containers.

Wei C. H. and Yang Y. C. (1999) built a artificial neural network model to forecast the total transshipment container throughput of Kaohsiung port. The variables that were used in their study are some economic data of Taiwan area, including gross domestic product, economy growth rate, industry index of product, average national income, wholesale price index, and average gross national product.In the Hong Kong PDB 1997 Port Cargo Forecast (1997), separate inward and outward cargo forecasts were obtained by regressing cargo volume on a set of economy variables.

In the Hong Kong 2001 PDB port cargo forecast (2001), the total container throughput and total transshipment container volume were obtained by statistic analysis method associated with considering world economy growth and the competition between Hong Kong port and the major ports in Asia area. Fung K. F. (2001) built a structural vector error correction model (VECM) to forecast the total container throughput of Hong Kong port.The VECM produces much higher growth path for the Hong Kong port container throughput than the PDB does in 1997 and 2001. This paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we first introduce these major container ports’ characteristics including their location and general assessment, port facilities and future development, container throughput and economic condition.

Then we also present the market share of each major port over the 1981-2000 period. We discuss the strength, weakness, opportunity and threat of each port.Finally conclusions are given in section 3. 2. CHARACTERISTICS OF PORTS From Table 1, we note that Hong Kong, Singapore, Pusan, Kaohsiung and Shanghai are the five major competitive container ports in Far Eastern region. They are the first, second, third, forth and sixth largest container ports in the world respectively in 2000. Table 1 shows that Hong Kong’s box throughput increased 194 percent from 1991 to 2000, to 18.

1 million TEUs. During the same period, Singapore’s box throughput increased 168 percent, to 17 million TEUs.Pusan’s box throughput increased 183 percent, to 7. 6 million TEUs. Kaohsiung’s box throughput increased 90 percent, to 7. 4 million TEUs. Especially, Shanghai’s box throughput increased 875 percent, to 5.

6 million TEUs. For the purpose of analyzing the competitiveness of these five major container ports, we first introduce the characteristics of these ports as follows. 2. 1 Hong Kong Port 2. 1. 1 Location and General Assessment Hong Kong is strategically located, both in relation to China and the neighboring Asian countries.It lies at the mouth of the Pearl River Delta and is located at the center of the Asia-Pacific Rim, a region where economy is growing at a phenomenal pace.

Being the junction of two different forms of maritime transport—the large ocean-going vessels from the Pacific Ocean and the smaller, coastal and river trade craft from the Pearl River, the only modern and fully developed deep water hub between Singapore and Shanghai, Hong Kong is the focal point of all maritime trading activities in Southern China.Hong Kong is, and always has been, a free port. The trade policy of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region seeks a free, open and multilateral trading system. Ship owning and ship management is a major activity within Hong Kong and an independent shipping registry is in operation. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 685 Table 1.Container throughput at the world’s top 20 container ports (in TEU) 1991 ‘92 ‘93 ‘94 ‘95 ‘96 ‘97 ‘98 ‘99 2000 % Change Throughput Throughput 1991/2000 1 Singapore 6,354,000 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 17,040,000 168 2 Hong Kong 6,161,692 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 181,00,000 194 3 Kaohsiung 3,913,108 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 7,425,832 90 4 Rotterdam 3,765,791 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 6,300,000 67 5 Pusan 2,694,115 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 3 7,615,073 183 6 Hamberg 2,188,953 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 9 9 4,248,247 94 7 Los Angeles 2,038,363 7 7 8 9 8 9 8 8 7 4,879,429 139 8 New York 1,865,471 8 10 11 11 13 14 14 12 13 3,178,310 70 9 Yokohama 1,796,368 9 8 9 8 11 14 16 18 20 2,300,000 28 10 Tokyo 1,783,837 15 15 13 12 12 13 13 14 15 2,898,724 62 11 Long Beach 1,767,829 11 9 7 7 6 6 6 6 8 4,600,787 160 12 Antwerp 1,761,422 10 11 10 10 9 8 9 10 10 4,082,334 132 13 San Juan 1,584,038 12 14 15 15 19 16 17 20 19 2,392,749 51 14 Felixstowe 1,433,859 13 12 14 14 16 12 12 13 16 2,800,000 95 15 Bremen 1,276,948 16 16 16 17 20 17 20 19 17 2,712,420 112 16 Dubai 1,255,260 14 13 12 13 15 10 11 11 14 3,058,366 144 17 Jakarta 736,370 17 17 17 18 18 19 18 16 11 3,368,629 357 18 Port Kelang 607,626 19 19 19 19 17 18 19 15 12 3,206,428 428 19 Shanghai 576,000 18 18 18 16 10 11 10 7 6 5,613,000 875 20 Gioia Tauro 0 0 0 0 20 14 20 15 17 18 2,652,701 361 Source: Evergreen Marine Transportation Co.

Ltd. Statistics, Taipei, Taiwan. Port 2. 1. Port Facilities and Future Development Port Facilities in Hong Kong include 6,059 meters of quays at Kwai Chung and Stonecutters container terminals; 7,756 meters of quays at public cargo working areas; and 59 mooring buoys for ocean-going vessels. There are 8 container terminals at Hong Kong. The water depth of berth is about 12-14 meters.

There are 4 container Terminal Operation Companies including Modern Terminal Ltd (MTL), Hong Kong International Terminals Ltd (HIT), Sea-Land Orient Terminal (SLOT) and COSOT-HIT Terminals Ltd. Table 2. Facilities of Hong Kong port Modern Terminal Ltd H. K. International Terminals Ltd Sea-Land Orient Terminal No. 1, No. 2, No.

5, No. 8 No. , No. 6, No. 7, No. 8 –1,822m –305m 51,418 TEUs –7,146 TEUs 5 main berths 10 berths –1 feeder berth Total area 79. 06 hectares –16.

7 hectares Handing equipment 19 quayside gantry cranes 41 quay cranes 3 quayside gantry cranes 7 transfer cranes 2 harbor cranes 8 transfer cranes 66 rubber-tyred cranes 24 rail-mounted gantry cranes 11 rubber-tyred cranes 132 chassis 122 rubber-tyred cranes 12 overhead bridge cranes Terminal No. Quay length Stacking capacity Berths Source: http://www. info. gov. hk In 1998, the Hong Kong Government granted land at Tsing Yi to HIT, Modern Terminals Ltd and Asia Containers Ltd to build Container Terminal No. 9.This new terminal will be consisted of four container berths and two feeder berths with a total quay length of over 1900m, an alongside depth of 15.

5m and a terminal area of 68 hectares. It will be developed and brought on line in phased between late 2001 and 2004. Six berth container terminal is expected to have an annual capacity of 2,6 million TEUs. 2. 1. 3 Throughput and Economy In the period 1991-2000, Hong Kong’s box throughput increased 194 percent, to 18. 1 million TEUs.

During the same period, Hong Kong has been the 1st largest container port in the world. But in 1998 Singapore port was the 1st largest container port in the nd world and its box throughput was 15. 135 million TEUs.And Hong Kong port fell to the 2 largest container port in the world and its box throughput was 14. 65 million TEUs. Hong Kong’s container throughput and economy data are given in Table 3. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol.

5, October, 2003 686 Table 3. The container throughput and economy of Hong Kong (TEU, Billion HKD) Export Import GDP Growth (%) Volume Growth% Value Growth % Value Growth % 1985 2289000 8. 53 -0. 1 235. 15 6. 2 231. 42 3.

6 1986 2774000 21. 18 11. 9 276. 53 17. 6 275. 96 19. 2 1987 3457000 24.

62 13. 9 378. 03 36. 7 377. 95 36. 9 1988 4464000 29. 12 7.

9 493. 07 30. 4 498. 80 31. 9 1989 4464000 0 2. 8 570. 51 15.

7 562. 78 12. 8 1990 5100000 14. 24 2. 7 639. 87 12. 642.

53 15. 3 1991 6162000 20. 82 4. 2 765. 89 19. 7 778. 98 21.

0 1992 7972000 29. 37 5. 6 924. 90 20. 8 955. 30 22. 6 1993 9204000 15.

45 5. 6 1046. 25 9. 1 1072. 60 6. 6 1994 11050000 20. 05 5.

4 1167. 40 10. 0 1248. 10 14. 0 1995 12550000 13. 57 4. 6 1344.

00 15. 0 1491. 00 19. 0 1996 13460000 7. 25 4. 5 1397. 91 4.

0 1392. 71 3. 0 1997 14560000 8. 17 5. 0 1455. 95 4. 2 1615.

09 5. 2 1998 14650000 0. 61 -5. 3 1347. 65 -7. 4 1429. 09 -11.

5 1999 16211000 10. 65 3. 0 1349. 00 0. 1 1392. 72 -2. 5 2000 18098000 11.

64 10. 5 1572. 69 16. 6 1657. 96 19. 0 Source: Containerization International & International Container Yearbook, several issues.Taiwan economic & finance monthly, published by Bank of Taiwan, several issues.

Throughput Some 169 million tons of cargo passed through Hong Kong port in 1999. This consisted of 59 million tons of bulk (non-containerized) cargo and over 110 million tons of containerized cargo (or 16. 2 million TEUs). For the majority of the last decade, Hong Kong has been the busiest container port in the world, maintaining a narrow lead over Singapore in most years. The container traffic at Hong Kong consists of three distinct types. The largest category is direct shipment of containers carrying imports and exports to and from Hong Kong and China (mainly Guangdong).A second category is transshipment of containers for other countries and the final category is river transport, although this should be put on one side when examining traffic growth at Hong Kong’s international container facilities.

It is inland transport, in the same category as road and rail transport. The growth of Hong Kong direct traffic averaged 4. 0% in the period 1995-1999. However, over this time, the importance of transshipment has declined. This traffic contracted by an average of –0. 4%. River trade, on the other hand, has experienced strong growth, averaging 25% in the period 1995-1999.

The growth of total direct traffic at Hong Kong port and Shenzhen port has been high, averaging 7. 9% in the period 1995-1999. Total traffic growth at Hong Kong port and Shenzhen port averaged 10. 6%.The key observations on Hong Kong and Shenzhez containerized cargo throughput are given in Table 4. Hong Kong faces increasing competition from neighboring ports. In terms of basic monetary cost comparisons, Hong Kong has higher terminal handling charges (THCs) than the Shenzhen ports, and relatively high road haulage costs to and from Mainland China.

There has been some improvements in Hong Kong’s direct cost competitiveness, but Hong Kong’s THCs are still higher than the Original Receiving Charges (ORCs) at Shenzhen ports. Similarly, despite the fact that cross-boundary trucking costs have fallen considerably in recent years, the rates are still higher than those offered by South China operators.However, the difference is expected to narrow as Yantian increases its charges, reflecting its rising popularity among shipping liners. Moreover, barges can provide a cost saving for Hong Kong, especially for cargoes to and from the western Pearl River Delta (PRD). For cargo from the western PRD, barging to Hong Kong is the most cost-effective way of export. In addition Hong Kong enjoys several advantages in terms of non-monetary cost competitiveness. Hong Kong has higher port productivity.

For example, Hong Kong can manage 40 gantry crane moves per hour. It has a higher frequency of callings (over 440 per week). Hong Kong also enjoys highly developed and efficient logistics services allied to straightforward and transparent customs.This is combined with world-class banking and financial institutes and experience in international trade practices, securing timely payments and document processing. These competitive advantages ensure that buyers and sellers have considerable confidence in the port of Hong Kong. The Port and Management Board of Hong Kong (PMB) forecasts that Guangdong of South China exports which will continue to be the main engine of growth for Hong Kong port traffic. The growth rate of Guangdong’s containerized exports over the last three years has averaged 12 %.

This is Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 687 Table 4.Hong Kong port traffic by direct, transshipment and river trades, 1995-1999(1000TEU) PORT OF HONG KONG ONLY Direct Shipment of Hong Kong and China cargo Growth (%) Transshipment –at Kwai Chung –in Midstream –Tatal Growth (%) River trade Growth (%) Total, Hong Kong 1995 8,432 1996 8,600 2. 0 2,253 284 2,537 1,581 12,550 2,442 221 2,663 5. 0 2,197 39. 0 13,460 1997 9,573 11. 3 2,437 120 2,557 -4.

0 2,437 10. 9 14,567 1997 10,360 15. 5 2,437 120 2,557 -4. 0 2,437 10. 9 447 1998 9,101 -4. 9 2,320 89 2,409 -5. 8 3,072 26.

1 14,582 1999 Average Growth (%) 9,851 8. 2 2,398 101 2,499 3. 7 3,861 25. 7 16,211 4. 0 1. 6 -22. 8 -0.

4 25 6. 6 PORTS OF HONG KONG AND SHENZHEN 1995 1996 Direct Shipment of Hong 8,630 8,967 Kong and China cargo Growth (%) 3. 9 Transshipment 2,253 2,442 –at Kwai Chung –in Midstream 284 221 –Tatal 2,537 2,663 Growth (%) 5. River trade 1,581 Growth (%) Feeder/Barge traffic at Shenzhen Ports 85 Total –Hong Kong 12,550 –Shenzhen ports 283 Total Hong Kong and Shenzhen ports 12,833 Growth (%) 2,197 39. 0 221 13,460 588 14,048 9. 5 1998 1999 Average Growth (%) 10,233 11,697 -1. 2 14.

3 7. 9 2,320 89 2,409 -5. 8 3,072 26. 1 820 2,398 101 2,499 3. 7 3,861 25. 7 1,140 1. 6 -22.

8 -0. 4 25 91. 4 6. 6 80. 2 10. 6 14,567 14,582 16,211 1,145 1,952 2,986 15,712 16,534 19,197 11. 8 5.

2 16. 1 Source: Port and Management Board of Hong Kong, PMB expected to receive a boost of about 10% in the next few years. Although Hong Kong’s economy should remain buoyant, service industries will continue to replace production, and exports are expected to fall by 2% as manufacturing continue to move to lower cost bases on the Mainland China.Hong Kong’s import growth is expected to continue to outpace exports, with an associated growth of 5 % for much of 2002-2020. Transshipment traffic has tailed off slightly in recent years. The main reason for the lack of growth has been the loss of traffic previously transshipped to/from east coast China ports. Part of this traffic has diverted to direct calls at east coast ports, which have grown rapidly in recent years.

Transshipment traffic will also face competition from lower cost ports, notably Kaohsiung (Taiwan) when connections are fully liberalized. However, Hong Kong’s efficiency, service frequencies, network coverage, reliability and commercial flexibility may secure its competitiveness in the immediate future.Hong Kong maintains most of its transshipment traffic until Taiwan-Mainland China shipping links are fully liberalized, at which point some 50% of traffic will be routed via other ports. Taiwan-Mainland China traffic routed via Hong Kong only because direct trade between Taiwan and Mainland China has been prohibited since 1949. It currently accounts for 1 million TEUs or 6% of Hong Kong’s total container throughput. The Taiwan-Mainland China traffic routed via Hong Kong has remained static in recent years, because some has diverted to other routes. The eventual implementation of direct links between Mainland China and Taiwan will cause Hong Kong’s share of this trade decrease.

It is assumed that 100% of North/Central China-Taiwan cargo that was routed via Hong Kong will ship via Mainland China ports by 2010. 65% of South China-Taiwan cargo that might previously have routed via Hong Kong is also assumed to switch to other Chinese ports. Traffic growth at Yantian has been rapid in recent years. The number of calls at Yantian has also increased and the port has been expanded to 5 container berths. Hong Kong has been able to partly offset Yantian’s cost advantages by offering higher levels of service, however Yantian’s throughput is increasing rapidly. Pressure from cost-conscious consignees and shipping lines should ensure that the growth of Yantian continues, however the pace at which this occurs is a key issue.Possible impediments to Yantian’s growth include a narrowing in cost differentials between Hong Kong and Yantian as the latter’s charges increase as a result of its growing popularity among international shipping lines.

In addition, Hong Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 688 Kong’s land premium might be altered and land transport costs may fall if Chinese customs liberalise (improving the relative competitiveness of Hong Kong). Yantian’s growth will also be affected by its capacity and the speed at which new facilities are developed. Both Chiwan and Shekou also offer cost advantages over Hong Kong, but they have craft restrictions and have not experienced the same degree of expansion as Yantian. 2. 1. SWOT analysis of Hong Kong Port Strength –Hong Kong is a free port.

–Hong Kong has higher port productivity. For example, Hong Kong can manage 40 gantry crane moves per hour. –Hong Kong has a higher frequency of callings (over 440 per week). –Hong Kong has world-class banking and financial institutes and experience in international trade practices, securing timely payments and document processing. Weakness–In terms of monetary cost comparisons, Hong Kong has higher operation charges than neighboring ports such as the Shenzhen, Yantian, Shanghai in China, and Kaohsiung in Taiwan. –Transshipment traffic has tailed off slightly in recent years.Opportunity–In the next few years, the strong growth rate of Guangdong’s containerized exports will be still the main engine of growth for Hong Kong port traffic.

Threat –Transshipment traffic will also face competition from lower cost ports, notably Kaohsiung in Taiwan when Taiwan-Mainland China shipping links are fully liberalized. –Hong Kong faces increasing competition from neighboring lower cost ports such as the Shenzhen, Yantian, Shanghai in China, and Kaohsiung in Taiwan. –Hong Kong’s imports and exports are expected to fall as manufacturing continues to move to lower cost bases on the Mainland China. 2. 2 Singapore Port 2. 2. 1 Location and General Assessment Singapore is the hub port in Southeast Asia, located on the south Malaysia peninsula.

It is the strategic area of the Pacific Ocean and Indian Ocean for passing through Europe and Asia transportation. The facilities of software and hardware in this port are advanced. It is close to all the countries of Southeast Asia economic interior region, and the port is the transfer center of the region of Southeast Asia. Singapore port is also a free port with higher port productivity and a higher frequency of callings. 2. 2. 2 Port Facilities and Future Development The containers of Singapore port are mainly in the four terminals—Tanjong Pager Terminal, Keppel Terminal, Brani Terminal and Pasir Panjong We summarize the facilities in Table 5.

Table 5.Facilities of Singapore port Tanjong Pager Keppel Brani Quay length 2,307m 3,300m 2,627m Water depth 11-13. 1m 9. 6-13. 6m 14-15m Stacking capacity 16,400 TEUs 14,316 TEUs 15,000 TEUs Berthing capacity 6 main berths 5 main berths 7 main berths 2 feeder berths 8 feeder berths 2 feeder berths Total area 830,000m2 955,200m2 800,000m2 Handing equipment 29 gantry cranes 36 gantry cranes 30 gantry cranes 102 transfer cranes 117 transfer cranes 112 transfer cranes Source: http://www. psa. com.

sg Pasir Panjong 2,319m 15m 9,400 TEUs 8 main berths 650,000m2 12 gantry cranes 26 transfer cranes The PAS is developing outwardly and actively, and promoting to internationalize the business.It plans to be a global district integral company, and to provide consumers in every location a standard output technique together with its services. Many ports are invested in the PSA, such as Fuzhou, Dalian, Pipavav etc. The PSA created its own IT subsidiary company and Port-net Company in 2000. It offers e-solutions for terminal managers and operators. The IT system of the PSA tries to monitor all the containers passing through the berths and yards in time and to do all the necessary documents and clearances. Pasir Panjong Terminal was originally positioned by the PSA to be the Mega Terminal to meet the demand of container transportation in the new century.

It could ensure that Singapore is geared to take maximum advantages of growth in the Asia market. But Singapore has higher operation charges than neighboring lower cost ports. Singapore port will face increasing price competition, as other facilities—notably Tanjung Pelepas in Malaysia—are established and expanded to take a share of the regional transshipment trade. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 689 2. 2. 3 Throughput and Economy Since early 1990s, the container throughput of Singapore port grew rapidly, because Singapore port has predominantly related to the Southeast Asia trade.

And almost 80% of Singapore’s container usiness is transshipped for the developing countries in Southeast Asia region, including Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines. In the next few years, it will be still the main engine of growth for Singapore port’s transshipment traffic. In the period 1991-2000 Singapore’s box throughput increased 168 percent, to 17 million TEUs. During the same period, Singapore has been the 2nd largest container port in the world. But in 1998 Singapore port was the 1st largest container port in the world and its box throughput was 15. 135 million TEUs. Singapore port’s container throughput and major Southeast Asia country’s economy data are given in Table 6.

Table 6.Singapore’s container throughput and major Southeast Asia country’s economy (TEU) Singapore Malaysia Philippine Indonesia Thailand GDP GDP GDP GDP GDP Growth Growth Growth Growth Growth (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Volume Growth% 1985 1699000 9. 4 -1. 6 -1. 0 -4. 1 2. 4 3.

5 1986 2203000 29. 6 -1. 8 1. 2 1. 8 5. 8 4. 9 1987 2635000 19.

6 9. 4 5. 3 5. 9 4. 9 9. 4 1988 3375000 28. 0 11.

1 8. 7 6. 7 5. 6 13. 2 1989 4364000 29. 3 9. 2 8.

4 5. 6 7. 1 12. 2 1990 5224000 19. 7 8. 3 9. 8 3.

1 7. 4 10. 0 1991 6354000 21. 6 6. 7 8. 8 0. 2 6.

6 7. 9 1992 7560000 18. 9 6. 0 8. 0 0. 6 6. 3 7.

4 1993 9046000 19. 6 9. 9 8. 5 2. 3 6. 7 7. 5 1994 10400000 14.

9 10. 1 8. 7 5. 1 7. 4 8. 4 1995 11830000 13. 7 8.

8 9. 5 5. 0 8. 0 8. 5 1996 12950000 9. 4 7. 5 10.

0 6. 7. 8 6. 7 1997 14136000 9. 1 8. 4 7. 3 5.

8 4. 7 0. 4 1998 15135000 7. 0 0. 4 -7. 4 -0. 5 -13.

6 -8. 0 1999 16380000 8. 2 5. 4 6. 1 3. 2 0. 2 4.

2 2000 17040000 4. 0 9. 9 8. 3 3. 9 4. 7 4. 3 Source: Containerization International & International Container Yearbook, several issues.

Taiwan economic & finance monthly, published by Bank of Taiwan, several issues. Throughput 2. 2. 4 SWOT analysis of Singapore Port Strength –The facilities of software and hardware in this port are advanced. –It is close to all the countries of Southeast Asia economic interior region, and the port is the transshipment center of the region of Southeast Asia region. -Singapore port is a free port. –Singapore port has higher port productivity.

–Singapore port has a higher frequency of callings Weakness–In terms of monetary cost comparisons, Singapore has higher operation charges than neighboring lower cost ports. Opportunity–In the next few years, the strong growth rate of Southeast Asia countries’ containerized exports will be still the main engine of growth for Singapore port’s transshipment traffic. Threat –The port of Singapore will face increasing price competition, as other facilities—notably Tanjung Pelepas in Malaysia—are established and expanded to take a share of the regional transshipment trade. 2. 3 Pusan Port 2. 3. Location and General Assessment Pusan port is the 1st largest container port in South Korea and the 3rd largest container port in the world.

It is made up by four container terminals which are Jasungdae Container Terminal (JCT), Shinsundae Container Terminal (SCT), Gamman Container Terminal (GCT) and Uam Container Terminal (UCT). Pusan port has been the 4th largest container port in the world. In recent years Pusan port captured a significant share of North China/Japanese transshipment market. Since 2000 Pusan port with 7. 61 million TEUs is the th rd largest port, having just edged Taiwan’s 3 Kaohsiung port with 7. 42 million TEUs into the 4 largest container port.The Korea Container Terminal Authority (KCTA) is the department of South Korea government.

Their objective is effectively developing, controlling and managing container terminal, and accelerating flawless movements of container cargo, hence contributing to a sound development of national economy. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 690 2. 3. 2 Port Facilities and Future Development Pusan port’s facilities include Jasungdae Container Terminal (JCT), Shinsundae Container Terminal (SCT), Gamman Container Terminal (GCT) and Uam Container Terminal (UCT). We summarize the facilities in Table 7. Table 7.

Facilities of Pusan port Jasungdae Terminal Shinsundae Terminal Gamman Terminal Quay length 1,447m 1,200m 1,400m Water depth 12. 5m 14-15m 15m Stevedoring capacity 1,000,000TEU/year 1,280,000TEU/year 1,200,000TEU/year Berthing capacity 50,000DWTx4 50,000DWTx4 50,000DWTx4 10,000DWTx1 Total area 647,000m2 1,038,000m2 750,000m2 Railroad length 980m 925m 1032m Handing equipment 12 gantry cranes 11 gantry cranes 12 gantry cranes 31 transfer cranes 32 transfer cranes 34 straddle carriers 14 straddle carriers Source: http://www. kca. or. kr Uam Terminal 500m 11m 300,000TEU/year 50,000DWTx2 20,000DWTx1 184,000m2 —–4 gantry cranes 10 transfer cranesTo actively cope with the changing environment, Korea Container Terminal Authority since birth in 1990, has increased the port facilities and their capabilities to threefold, with the construction of Pusan port’s Gamman Terminal, Uam Terminal, and Phase first of Port Gwangyang. As the forerunner in establishing the Northeast Asia’s logistics base, KCTA is providing a number of efforts in Gamman Terminal expansion project, Phase second and third of Gwangyang and development of its hinterland, and an active participation in the construction of Pusan New Port. Gamman Container Terminal has a completion goal of 2001.

The new berths will accommodate one 50,000d/w ton and one 5,000d/w ton vessel each.Upon completion of the project, the port of Pusan will be able to accommodate sixteen 50,000d/w ton vessels and greatly increase the container handling capability. As the increased economic cooperation between South and North Korea, and restoration of the railroad system are imminent, Korea will inevitably become the starting point of Eurasian Continental Railroads. In order to develop the port of Pusan as a hub port of Northeast Asia, KCTA is actively participating in a long run development plan of Gadok as a joint investment with private companies. This project will provide the port of Pusan with additional 24 container berths that can handle 4. 6 million TEUs annually. 2.

3. Throughput and Economy In the period 1991-2000, Pusan’s box throughput increased 183 percent, to 7. 6 million TEUs. Pusan port’s container throughput and economy data are given in Table 8. Table 8. The Pusan’s container throughput and Korea’s economy Throughput (TEU, Billion USD) Export Import GNP Growth (%) Volume Growth% Value Growth % Value Growth % 1985 1172000 8. 11 7.

0 30. 3 3. 5 31. 1 1. 6 1986 1490000 27. 13 12. 9 34.

7 14. 6 31. 6 1. 4 1987 1887000 26. 64 13. 0 47. 3 36.

2 41. 0 29. 9 1988 2135000 13. 14 12. 4 60. 7 28. 4 51.

8 26. 3 1989 2257000 5. 71 6. 8 62. 4 2. 8 61. 5 18.

6 1990 2348000 4. 03 9. 0 65. 0 4. 2 69. 8 13. 4 1991 2694000 14.

73 8. 4 71. 9 10. 5 81. 5 16. 7 1992 2751000 2. 11 5.

0 76. 6 6. 6 81. 8 0. 1993 3071000 11. 63 5. 6 82.

2 7. 3 83. 8 2. 5 1994 3825000 24. 55 8. 4 96. 2 17.

0 102. 3 22. 0 1995 4503000 17. 72 8. 9 125. 0 30. 0 135.

1 32. 0 1996 4684000 4. 01 7. 1 129. 7 3. 7 150. 3 11.

3 1997 5233000 11. 72 5. 0 136. 1 5. 0 144. 6 -3. 8 1998 5752000 9.

91 -6. 7 132. 3 -2. 8 93. 2 -35. 5 1999 6500000 13. 00 10.

9 143. 6 8. 6 119. 7 28. 4 2000 7615073 17. 15 9. 3 172.

2 19. 9 160. 4 34. 0 Source: Containerization International & International Container Yearbook, several issues. Taiwan economic & finance monthly, published by Bank of Taiwan, several issues. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 691In recent years based on the strong economic growth in North China, Pusan port has become the distribution and transshipment center for the importer and exporter for North China.

Meanwhile, the domestic economic growth of Korea is strong in 1999 and 2000. In 2000, the container volume of Pusan port was greater than the volume of Kaohsiung port, and rose to the top third port in the world. In the next few years, the strong growth rate of Northeast China’s containerized exports will be still the main engine of growth for Pusan port’s transshipment traffic. But the rising domestic production cost in Korea forced manufacturers in Korea to move their operations to neighboring low-cost region such as China.And the port of Pusan port will face increasing price competition, as other facilities—lower cost ports in Northeast and North China—are established and expanded to take a share of the regional transshipment trade. 2. 3.

4 SWOT analysis of Pusan Port Strength –To actively cope with the increasing container volume, Pusan port has increased actively the port facilities. –Pusan port captured a significant share of North China/Japanese transshipment market in the last few years and became the transshipment hub for Northeast China and minor Japanese ports. Weakness–The rising domestic production cost in Korea and Japan has forced manufacturers in Korea and Japan to move their operations to neighboring low-cost region such as China.Opportunity–In the next few years, the strong growth rate of Northeast China’s containerized exports will be still the main engine of growth for Pusan port’s transshipment traffic. Threat –The port of Pusan port will face increasing price competition, as other facilities—lower cost ports in Northeast and North China—are established and expanded to take a share of the regional transshipment trade. 2. 4 Kaohsiung Port 2.

4. 1 Location and General Assessment Kaohsiung port is the 1st largest container port in Taiwan. It is situated in the southwestern coast of Taiwan, and is the pivot point at the intersection between Taiwan Strait and Bashi Strait. It boasts a spreading harbor area, expansive hinterland, and mild climate.Off the sea there is a narrow and long sandbar, forming a natural breakwater. With such unparalleled geographical conditions, Kaohsiung harbor is naturally gifted to be an all-purpose harbor. In terms of monetary cost comparisons, Kaohsiung has lower operation charges than neighboring transshipment ports such as the Singapore and Hong Kong.

Kaohsiung port has high port productivity. For example, Kaohsiung can manage 35 gantry crane moves per hour. 2. 4. 2 Port Facilities and Future Development Kaohsiung port has five container terminals including Container Terminal No. 1, Container Terminal No. 2, Container Terminal No.

3, Container Terminal No. , and Container Terminal No. 5. We summarize the facilities in Table 9. Table 9. Facilities of Kaohsiung port Terminal No. 1 Terminal No.

2 Terminal No. 3 Terminal No. 4 Terminal No. 5 Number of berth 4 4 3 8 7 Quay length 848m 1,204m 1,072m 2,533m 2,444m Water depth 10. 5m 12m 14m 14m 14-15m Storing capacity 2500 TEUs 12,000 TEUs 18,000 TEUs 35,000 TEUs 49,000 TEUs Total area 10. 5 hectare 45 hectare 48 hectare 100 hectare 90 hectare Source: http://www. khb.

gov. kw The Government of Taiwan is planning to upgrade Taiwan as the Asia-Pacific Regional Operating Center. Being a critical part of this plan, Kaohsiung port will be designated as the marine transportation hub.Augmented by continual upgrade of operating functions, optimal geographical conditions and intensive networks, the port of Kaohsiung has become a Southeast Asia distribution stronghold. IT developments are handled by Kaohsiung port in the last three years. There are EDI capabilities, and the facility to pay bills electronically. Encompassed within Kaohsiung port vision of the future is the so-called 2020 master plan, involving many different projects.

One major reason for this is that as both population and industry have grown rapidly with Kaohsiung’s boundaries, there is a pressing need to interface the needs of citizens with the commercial concerns of the port.In this way, the old port area is being re-developed, to provide increased access and more commercial cultural and Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 692 resort management. By 2006 the first phase of new port development will entail the investment of US$ 6. 3 million. The position and vision of the port of Kaohsiung is as follows. 1.

An international transporting center and pivotal harbor. 2. A manufacturing and distributing base of re-exported and value-added goods. 3. A multifunction international harbor. In the next few years Kaohsiung port will face increasing competition from neighboring lower cost ports such as the Shenzhen, Yantian, Shanghai in China.And Kaohsiuug port will face potential competition, as other facilities—the new Taipei port in North Taiwan —is established and expanded to take a share of the regional transshipment trade.

2. 4. 3 Throughput and Economy In the period 1991-2000, Kaohsiung’s box throughput increased 90 percent, to 7. 4 million TEUs. During the same period, Kaohsiung port has been the 3rd largest container port and Pusan port has been the 5th largest container port in the world. In 2000 Pusan port was the 3rd largest container port in the world and its box throughput was 7. 6 million TEUs and Kaohsiung port fell to the 4th largest container port and its box throughput was 7.

4 million TEUs.Kaohsiung port’s container throughput and economy data are given in Table 10. Since the late 1980s, the rising domestic production cost in Japan and in other newly industrialized economies (NIEs) in Asia, namely Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore, has forced manufacturers in these economies to move their operations to neighboring low-cost region such as China, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia and Philippine. However, the port facilities in these low-cost regions could not cope with such an increasing volume of exports and imports. Consequently, the manufacturers have to transship their products and materials through the elsewhere major ports in East and Southeast Asia, i. e.Kaohsiung port and Hong Kong port.

Thus, in the past few years, Kaohsiung port and Hong Kong port became the transshipment-ports for foreign investment in Southeast countries and South China. The rapid growth of the transshipment container throughput of Kaohsiung port was based on the strong economic growth in Southeast countries and South China. In 1998 the total container throughput of the Kaohsiung port was 6. 2 million TEU, in which the total transshipment container throughput was 3 million TEU. In 2000 the total container throughput of the Kaohsiung port is 7. 4 million TEU, in which the total transshipment container throughput is about 4 million TEU. Table 10.

The Kaohsiung’s container throughput and Taiwan’s economy (TEU, Billion USD) Export Import Transshipment Transship / Total GDP Growth (%) Volume Growth% Value Growth % Volume Growth % Value Growth % 2779000 11. 92 12. 74 53. 67 34. 7 34. 98 44. 7 962304 49.

85 34. 6 3083000 10. 93 7. 844 60. 66 13. 0 49. 67 42.

0 1102039 14. 52 35. 7 3383000 9. 73 8. 23 66. 30 9. 3 52.

26 5. 2 1251228 13. 53 36. 9 3495000 3. 31 5. 39 67. 21 1.

4 54. 71 4. 7 1341565 7. 21 38. 3 3913000 11. 95 7. 55 76.

17 13. 3 62. 86 14. 9 1541497 14. 90 39. 3 3961000 1. 22 7.

49 81. 47 7. 0 71. 97 14. 5 1459593 -5. 31 36. 8 4636000 17.

04 7. 01 80. 09 4. 4 77. 07 7. 0 1726074 18. 25 37.

2 4900000 5. 69 7. 11 93. 04 9. 4 85. 59 10. 8 2052341 18.

90 41. 8 5053000 3. 2 6. 42 111. 65 20. 0 103. 55 21.

3 2177254 6. 08 43. 0 5063000 0. 19 6. 10 115. 95 3. 9 102.

37 -1. 1 2083044 -4. 32 41. 1 5693000 12. 44 4. 57 122. 08 5.

3 114. 42 11. 8 2505706 20. 29 44. 0 6271000 10. 15 5. 42 110.

58 -9. 4 104. 66 -8. 5 3092382 23. 41 49. 3 6985366 11. 39 5.

86 121. 59 10. 0 110. 68 5. 8 3589128 16. 06 51. 3 7425840 6.

30 -1. 91 148. 32 22. 0 140. 01 26. 5 3965615 10. 48 53.

4 Source: Institute of Transportation, Ministry of Transportation and Communication, Taiwan Taiwan economic & finance monthly, published by Bank of Taiwan, several issues. Throughput 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000In Table 10, it is noted that the container volume of import and export cargo in Kaohsiung port grew slowly from 1990 to 2000, also the economy grew slowly in Taiwan area as well. On the other hand, the volume of transshipment container grew rapidly because the Taiwanese Government pushed Kaohsiung port to become the transshipment center of the Far Eastern region, by improving the hardware and software, the transportation system and custom clearance operation. Most of these Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 693 transshipment containers of Kaohsiung port came from Southeast countries such as Philippine, Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia.In addition, within Kaohsiung port area, Taiwanese Government established an off-shore transshipment center for transshipping container from South China through Kaohsiung port as a point of the “off-shore and no custom clearance” system in 1997. Since then, the volume of transshipment containers of the off-shore transshipment center at Kaohsiung port was increasing stably from 1997 to 2000.

In 1998 the transshipment container throughput between Kaohsiung port and South China was 200 thousand TEU and in 2000 the transshipment container throughput between Kaohsiung port and South China is about 0. 5 million TEU. On the other hand Taiwan-Mainland China traffic routed via Hong Kong only because direct trade between Taiwan and Mainland China has been prohibited since 1949.It currently accounts for 1 million TEUs. The eventual implementation of direct links between Mainland China and Taiwan will cause Kaohsiung’s share of this trade increase. 2. 4.

4 SWOT analysis of Kaohsiung Port Strength –In terms of monetary cost comparisons, Kaohsiung has lower operation charges than neighboring transshipment ports such as the Singapore and Hong Kong. –Kaohsiung port has high port productivity. For example, Kaohsiung can manage 35 gantry crane moves per hour. Weakness–Kaohsiung is not a free port. –Taiwan-Mainland China traffic routed via Hong Kong only because direct trade between Taiwan and Mainland China has been prohibited since 1949.It currently accounts for 1 million TEUs. –The rising domestic production cost in Taiwan has forced manufacturers in Taiwan to move their operations to neighboring low-cost region such as China.

Opportunity–In the next few years, the strong growth rate of Southeast Asia countries’ containerized exports will be still the main engine of growth for Kaohsiung port’s transshipment traffic. –The eventual implementation of direct links between Mainland China and Taiwan will cause Kaohsiung’s share of this trade increase. Threat –Kaohsiung port faces increasing competition from neighboring lower cost ports such as the Shenzhen, Yantian, Shanghai in China. -The port of Kaohsiuug will face potential competition, as other facilities—the new Taipei port in North Taiwan —is established and expanded to take a share of the regional transshipment trade. 2. 5 Shanghai Port 2. 5.

1 Location and General Assessment Shanghai located on the Huangpu River at the mouth of the Changjiang River, is the largest port in China. Being the center of China’s coastwise traffic, Shanghai has a highly developed economy and it has established trade relationship with about 160 countries and regions throughout the world and served 20 international shipping lines. It is not only a comprehensive and multi-propose commercial port and one of China’s main foreign trade ports, but also is on the Changjiang River traffic, and ocean shipping and being a water-rail intermodal transport juncture.The Changjiang River links the port to inland provinces and its central coastal position gives access to all Chinese ports north and south. The Beijing-Shanghai, Shanghai-Hangzhou and Zhejiang-Jiangxi railways link up with the national railway system. The highways network radiates out in all directions to inland provinces. A number of new bridges have been built to link up the various port areas.

2. 5. 2 Port Facilities and Future Development Shanghai Container Terminals (SCT), the joint venture between a division of Shanghai Port Authority and Hong Kong Hutchison Port Holdings (HPH), which only commenced operations in August 1993, handled its 10 million container in November 1999.Currently, SCT manages the facilities at Bao Shan, Jun Gong Lu (JGL) and Zhang Hua Bang (ZHB), all of which are located on the Huangpu River. The three facilities have a combined berthing line of 2. 28km, stacking capacity in excess of 60,000TEUs and a design throughput capacity of approximately 1. 7 million TEUs.

The first phrase Waigaoqiao’s (WGQ) Container Terminal total coastline measures 900m long, covers an open yard of 500,000m2 and is backed up by three berths designed for 35,000-tonne vessels. WGQ operated at 1994, the total throughput about 118,000TEUs. In 1998, the first phase of WGQ handled 608,000 TEUs at a site designed for 600,000 TEUs, while in 2000 it was widely predicated that well over 800,000TEUs would have moved through this terminal.In March 2000 the Shanghai Port Authority, Hutchison Whampoa Group, COSCO Pacific and Ahanghai Industrial Investment reached a joint venture agreement (share ratio 4:3:2:1) on the management of Phase first of the Waigaoqiao Terminal under the Shangai Pudong International Container Terminal Ltd. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 694 Table 11. Facilities of Shanghai port ZHB Number of Berth Quay length Water depth Stacking capacity Total area Railroad length Handing equipment 3 783m 12.

5m 22,000TEUs 303,036m2 980m 6 gantry cranes 20 transfer cranes Source: http://www. portshanghai. com. cn JGL 4 858m 10. 5m 23,000TEUs 307,504m2 925m 6 gantry cranes 20 transfer cranes Bao-shan 3 640m 9. 4m 15,800TEUs 218,591m2 1032m 4 gantry cranes 12 transfer cranes WGQ 7 1800m 12m –100,000m2 —–There is no doubt that Shanghai is emerging as a major container port in the Asia region. Fuelled on by China’s powerful economic growth that is forecast to expand a further 7% to 8% in next few years, the port is likely to benefit form a larger regional role, especially with the completion of the offshore center.

A deep water port for third and forth generation container ships is to be built at Shanghai. The dredging of the Changjiang River to a depth of 12. 5 meters is planned in order to accept 5,500TEUs vessels by 2020 Years. However, access to the port is restricted by its limited depth. Even with dredging, there may be difficult in accommodating 6,000TEUs ships.Ningbo which has deepwater (15m-16m) may supplement Shanghai to cater for the large container ships. Phase Second of Waigaoqiao Container Terminal commenced operation in September 1999.

The terminal is equipped with three berthing spaces designed for 35,000-tonne vessels each. It is 900m long with 1 million m2 of container yard and annual capacity is 600,000TEUs. Phase third of Waigaoqiao Container Terminal is still under construction with designed annual cargo capacity of 400,000 TEUs. The planned coastline of the terminal is 680m long and 2two berths to accommodate 35,000-tonne vessels each and a container yard of 500,000-700,000m . In addition the Shanghai Port Authority also plans to build more than 30 container berths with 6. million TEUs annual capacity in Wuhaogou in Pudong. Meanwhile there are plans to develop an integrated logistics center within in Waigaoqiao free zone area, several companies including Shanghai Industrial are involving in the discussion, with initial investment thought to be in the region of US$ 300 million.

In terms of monetary cost comparisons, Shanghai has lower operation charges than neighboring ports such as the Hong Kong and Kaohsiung. But Shanghai port has low port productivity. In the next few years Shanghai port will face increasing competition from neighboring ports such as the Shenzhen, Yantian, Hong Kong in China, and Kaohsiung in Taiwan. 2. 5. Throughput and Economy In the period 1991-2000, Shanghai’s box th throughput increased 875 percent, to 5. 6 million TEUs.

In 1991 Shanghaithport was the 18 largest container port in the world and in 2000 Shanghai port was the 6 largest container port. Shanghai port’s container throughput and China’s economy data are given in Table 12. 2. 5. 4 SWOT analysis of Shanghai Port Strength –The strong growth rate of China’s containerized exports is the main engine of growth for Shanghai port traffic and Shanghai port’s container throughput is growing at such a phenomenal rate. –In terms of monetary cost comparisons, Shanghai has lower operation charges than neighboring ports such as the Hong Kong and Kaohsiung.Weakness–The port facilities cannot cope with such an increasing volume of exports and imports.

–The water depth of port cannot accept the large container vessels. –Shanghai port has low port productivity. Opportunity–In the next few years, the strong growth rate of China’s containerized exports will be still the main engine of growth for Shanghai port traffic. And Shanghai will become a major hub port and international container shipping center. –To cope with the increasing volume of imports and exports, Shanghai port has actively constructed port facilities. Shanghai port also has actively constructed deepwater ports to accept large container vessels.Threat –Shanghai port will face increasing competition from neighboring ports such as the Shenzhen, Yantian, Hong Kong in China, and Kaohsiung in Taiwan.

Finally, the data shown in Table 13 is the container throughputs of major ports in Far Eastern region. According to Table 13, the market share of each major port can be further analyzed and are shown in Table 14 and Figure 1. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 695 Table 12. The Shanghai’s container throughput and China’s economy (TEU, Billion USD) Export Import GNP Growth (%) Volume Growth% Value Growth % Value Growth % 1991 576000 26. 31 7. 0 71.

9 15. 8 63. 7 19. 6 1992 730000 26. 73 12. 8 85. 0 18.

2 80. 6 26. 5 1993 935000 28. 08 13. 4 91. 7 8. 0 103.

9 28. 1994 1200000 28. 34 11. 8 121. 0 31. 9 115. 6 11.

2 1995 1526000 27. 16 10. 2 148. 7 22. 9 132. 0 14. 2 1996 1970000 29.

09 9. 7 151. 0 1. 5 138. 8 5. 1 1997 2520000 27. 91 8.

8 182. 7 21. 0 142. 3 2. 5 1998 3066000 21. 66 7. 8 183.

8 0. 6 140. 2 -1. 5 1999 4800000 56. 55 8. 0 249. 2 27.

8 165. 7 18. 2 2000 5613000 16. 93 7. 3 148. 32 22. 0 225.

0 35. 8 Source: Containerization International & International Container Yearbook, several issues. Taiwan economic & finance monthly, published by Bank of Taiwan, several issues. Throughput Table 13. The container throughput of major ports in Far Eastern region (TEU) Singapore Hong Kong Kaohsiung K. S. ranship Keelung Shanghai Kobe Yokohama Tokyo Pusan Total 1981 1065000 1560000 1125000 0 655000 49000 1335000 772000 695000 743000 7,999,000 1982 1116000 1660000 1194000 0 703000 66000 1261000 824000 655000 793000 8,272,000 1983 1340000 1837000 1480000 256309 943000 83000 1346000 912000 698000 898000 9,537,000 1984 1552000 2109000 1785000 535282 1234000 115000 1827000 1094000 786000 1084000 11,586,000 1985 1699000 2289000 1901000 534012 1158000 301000 1857000 1219000 848000 1172000 12,444,000 1986 2203000 2774000 2483000 642171 1587000 204000 1885000 1210000 913000 1490000 14,749,000 1987 2635000 3457000 2779000 962304 1940000 224000 1877000 1300000 1093000 1887000 17,192,000 1988 3375000 4464000 3083000 1102039 1762000 322000 2091000 1429000 1185000 2135000 19,846,000 1989 4364000 4464000 3383000 1251228 1772000 354000 2267000 1506000 1232000 2257000 21,599,000 1990 5224000 5100000 3495000 1341565 1841000 456000 2389000 1648000 1402000 2348000 23,903,000 1991 6354000 6162000 3913000 1541497 2008000 576000 2595000 1796000 1784000 2694000 27,882,000 1992 7560000 7972000 3961000 1459593 1941000 730000 2635000 1887000 1729000 2751000 31,166,000 1993 9046000 9204000 4636000 1726074 1886000 935000 2669000 2168000 1429000 3071000 35,044,000 1994 10400000 11050000 4900000 2052341 2047000 1200000 2787000 2310000 1805000 3825000 40,324,000 1995 11830000 12550000 5053000 2177254 2165000 1526000 1457000 2727000 2177000 4503000 43,988,000 1996 12950000 13460000 5063000 2083044 2109000 1970000 2229000 2334000 2299000 4684000 47,098,000 1997 14136000 14560000 5693000 2505706 1981000 2520000 1944000 2347000 2322000 5233000 50,736,000 1998 15135000 14650000 6271000 3092382 1706000 3066000 2067000 2057000 2169000 5752000 52,873,000 1999 16380000 16211000 6985366 3589128 1665622 4800000 2134000 2130000 2700000 6500000 59,505,988 2000 17040000 18098000 7425840 3965615 1954582 5613000 2250000 2300000 2898724 7615073 65,195,019 Source: Institute of Transportation, Ministry of Transportation and Communication, Taiwan.

Containerization International & International Container Yearbook, several issues. Table 14. The market share of each major port in Far Eastern region year Singapore Hong Kong Kaohsiung 1981 13. 31 19. 50 14. 06 1982 13. 49 20.

07 14. 43 1983 14. 05 19. 26 15. 52 1984 13. 40 18. 20 15.

41 1985 13. 65 18. 39 15. 28 1986 14. 94 18. 81 16. 84 1987 15.

33 20. 1 16. 16 1988 17. 01 22. 49 15. 53 1989 20. 20 20.

67 15. 66 1990 21. 85 21. 34 14. 62 1991 22. 79 22. 10 14.

03 1992 24. 26 25. 58 12. 71 1993 25. 81 26. 26 13. 23 1994 25.

79 27. 40 12. 15 1995 26. 89 28. 53 11. 49 1996 27. 50 28.

58 10. 75 1997 27. 86 28. 70 11. 22 1998 28. 40 27. 49 11.

77 1999 27. 52 27. 24 11. 74 2000 26. 14 27. 76 11. 39 Keelung Shanghai 8.

19 0. 61 8. 50 0. 80 9. 89 0. 87 10. 65 0.

99 9. 31 2. 42 10. 76 1. 38 11. 28 1. 30 8.

88 1. 62 8. 20 1. 64 7. 70 1. 91 7. 20 2.

07 6. 23 2. 34 5. 38 2. 67 5. 08 2. 98 4.

92 3. 47 4. 48 4. 18 3. 90 4. 97 3. 20 5.

75 2. 80 8. 06 3. 00 8. 61 Kobe Yokohama 16. 69 9. 65 15.

24 9. 96 14. 1 9. 56 15. 77 9. 44 14. 92 9.

80 12. 78 8. 20 10. 92 7. 56 10. 54 7. 20 10.

50 6. 97 9. 99 6. 89 9. 31 6. 44 8. 45 6.

05 7. 62 6. 19 6. 91 5. 73 3. 31 6. 20 4.

73 4. 96 3. 83 4. 63 3. 88 4. 13 3. 59 3.

77 3. 45 3. 53 (%) Tokyo 8. 69 7. 92 7. 32 6. 78 6.

81 6. 19 6. 36 5. 97 5. 70 5. 87 6. 40 5.

55 4. 08 4. 48 4. 95 4. 88 4. 58 4. 60 4.

37 4. 45 Pusan 9. 29 9. 59 9. 42 9. 36 9. 42 10.

10 10. 98 10. 76 10. 45 9. 82 9. 66 8. 83 8.

76 9. 49 10. 24 9. 95 10. 31 10. 79 10. 92 11.

68 Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 696 % 30 Singapore Hong Kong Kaohsiung Keelung 25 20 15 Shanghai Kobe 10 Yokohama 5Tokyo Pusan 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 00 0 19 Figure 1. The market share of each major port in Far Eastern region In Figure 1, some important information can be attained as follows. a. The market share of Singapore, Hong Kong and Shanghai ports increased since the past 20 years. Especially, the market share of Shanghai port increased quickly in the past few years. b.

Pusan port almost kept the same market share over past 20 years. c. The market share of the other ports in Far Eastern region decreased over past 20 years, including Kaohsiung port and Keelung port. d.The market share of Hong Kong port and Singapore port was about 33% of the total container throughput in Far Eastern region in 1981, and almost to 55% in the past few years. e. In 1999 and 2000, the market share of Kaohsiung port was 11.

74% and 11. 39%, respectively. Meanwhile, the market share of Shanghai port was 8. 06% and 8. 61%, respectively. Thus, the Shanghai port will be definitely a potential competitor to Kaohsiung port in the future. f.

In 1981, the market share of Pusan port was one-third of the market share of Kobe port, Tokyo port and Yokohama port. In 2000, the market share of Pusan port was the same as the total market share of Kobe port, Tokyo port and Yokohama port. With such a market share, Pusan port has become a transshipment center of Northeast Asia region in the past few years. 3.CONCLUSIONS In this paper we analyze the strength, weakness, opportunity and threat of major ports in Far Eastern region. We find that the Pusan port in South Korea is now the transshipment hub port for Northeast Asia area (including Northeast China). The Hong Kong port and Kaohsiung port are now the best transshipment hub port for China area (except Northeast China).

In the future the Shanghai port will be potentially the major hub port for China area. And the Hong Kong port, Kaohsiung port and Singapore port are still now the best transshipment hub ports for Southeast Asia area. The import and export containers in China is increasing rapidly based on her strong economic growth in recent years.As a result, the container throughput of Hong Kong port, Shanghai port and Pusan port grew rapidly in recent years based on the large import and export container volume in South China, North China, and Northeast China. And the market share of Hong Kong, Shanghai port increased obviously over the past 20 years. Pusan port also kept almost the same market share. Thus in terms of short-run, we suggest the Taiwanese Government should push one important policy that Taiwan-Mainland China shipping links are fully liberalized as soon as possible.

Then there will be more China’s containers to go through Kaohsiung port for transshipment, just like Hong Kong port and Pusan port. But in terms of long-run, the Taiwanese government also have to pay attention to some potential problems.For example, given the short-term “weakness” of Shanghai, Kaohsiung and other ports look at the China market as transshipment opportunity, and accordingly are modifying their port Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, October, 2003 697 investment and development policies. With the aggressive port development and national port policy in China, the “strong” factor now will likely become the “weakness” of Kaohsiung and other ports in the long-run if these ports take “transshipment” as direction for their port development policy at present. On the other hand, Hong Kong port and Singapore port are free ports but Kaohsiung port is still not a free port. Thus we suggest that Taiwan Government should push Kaohsiung port to become a free port.

And Kaohsiung port should try to reduce the transshipment cost in order to attract more transshipment containers from Southeast countries and China. Then Kaohsiung port could improve its competitiveness by maintaining higher container throughput, higher frequency of liners, lower transshipment cost and shorter operation time in port.

How to cite Shanghai Port Swot, Papers

Choose cite format:
Shanghai Port Swot. (2019, Feb 23). Retrieved October 14, 2019, from https://phdessay.com/shanghai-port-swot/.