The Bostwash Corridor: Global and National Dimensions
32
Projecting and Planning for the Movement of Goods and Projecting and Planning for the Movement of Goods and People Into, Out of, and Within, the Northeast People Into, Out of, and Within, the Northeast Corridor, 2007 – 2025, University of Delaware, May 11 Corridor, 2007 – 2025, University of Delaware, May 11 2007 2007 The Bostwash The Bostwash Corridor: Global and Corridor: Global and National Dimensions National Dimensions Jean-Paul Rodrigue Associate Professor, Dept. of Economics & Geography, Hofstra University, New York, USA Email: [email protected] Paper available at: http://people.hofstra.edu/faculty/ Jean-paul_Rodrigue
description
The Bostwash Corridor: Global and National Dimensions. Jean-Paul Rodrigue Associate Professor, Dept. of Economics & Geography, Hofstra University, New York, USA Email: [email protected] Paper available at: http://people.hofstra.edu/faculty/Jean-paul_Rodrigue. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of The Bostwash Corridor: Global and National Dimensions
Projecting and Planning for the Movement of Goods and Projecting and Planning for the Movement of Goods and People Into, Out of, and Within, the Northeast Corridor, People Into, Out of, and Within, the Northeast Corridor, 2007 – 2025, University of Delaware, May 11 20072007 – 2025, University of Delaware, May 11 2007
The Bostwash Corridor: The Bostwash Corridor: Global and National Global and National DimensionsDimensionsJean-Paul RodrigueAssociate Professor, Dept. of Economics & Geography, Hofstra University, New York, USA
Email: [email protected] available at:http://people.hofstra.edu/faculty/Jean-paul_Rodrigue
UPS Willow Springs Distribution Center, ChicagoUPS Willow Springs Distribution Center, Chicago
Gateways and Corridors in Transportation and Regional Economics
Theories and concepts about corridorsTheories and concepts about corridorsGlobal cities and hierarchiesGlobal cities and hierarchies
Economic roles and functionsEconomic roles and functionsHinterlandsHinterlandsConnectivityConnectivity
Flows and locationsFlows and locations
Types and Functions of Freight Corridors
Type Function ExamplesShort distance (within a gateway / hub)
Modal shift, improved capacity and throughput.
Switch carrying, Alameda, “Agile Port”, Panama
Hinterland access (between a gateway and its vicinity)
Expand market area, reduce distribution costs & congestion
Rail shuttles, PIDN, Virginia Inland port
Landbridge (between gateways)
Long distance container flows, continuity of global commodity chains
North American landbridge
Circum-hemispheric (between gateways with a maritime segment)
Integrated global transport chains
Northern East-West Corridor
Elements of the Maritime / Land Interface
Port System
Foreland (Shipping Network)
Road Rail Coastal / Fluvial
Hinterland (FDC)
Corridors and Hubs
Gateways
Mar
itim
e Fr
eigh
t D
istr
ibut
ion
Inla
nd F
reig
htD
istr
ibut
ion
Traffic at the 50 Largest Container Ports, 2004
Dubai
Tacoma
Santos
Jeddah
Durban
Seattle
Salalah
Oakland
Colombo
Melbourne
Long Beach
Charleston
Nhava Sheva
Los Angeles
New York/New Jersey
KobeTokyoOsaka
BusanNingbo
Nagoya
Manila
Dalian
Yantian
Tianjin
Keelung
Yokohama
ShenzhenShanghai
Quingdao
Singapore
KaohsiungHong Kong
GuangzhouPort Kalang
Laem Chabang
Tanjung Priok
Tanjung Pelepas
LeHavre
Hamburg
Antwerp
Valencia
Rotterdam
Barcelona
Algeciras
Felixstowe
Gioia Tauro
Bremen/BremerhafenPacific Asia Europe
Traffic 2004 (TEU)Less than 2 million
2 to 4 million
4 to 7 million
7 to 10 million
More than 10 million
Three Major Pendulum Routes Serviced by OOCL, 2006
Fos
Tokyo
Genoa
Ningbo
Hamburg
Shanghai
Le Havre
KaohsiungHong Kong
Singapore
Barcelona
Rotterdam
Port Kelang
Southampton
Laem Chabang
OaklandLos Angeles
NorfolkNew York
Charleston
Atlantic Express (ATX)
European Union / Mediterranean (EUM)
South China Express (SCX)
27 Days
49 Days
39 Days
Note: Paths are approximate
Pacific Asia Europe
APM TerminalsDubai Ports WorldHutchison Port HoldingsPort of Singapore AuthorityEurogateStevedoring Services of America
Dedicated Maritime Container TerminalsMajort Port Holdings, 2007
Dr. Jean-Paul Rodrigue, Dept. of Economics & Geography, Hofstra University
Gateways and Hubs as Central and Intermediate Locations
■ Gateways & hubs• Nodes offering an accessibility to
a large system of circulation.• Obligatory (semi) points of
passage.• Convergence of transport
corridors.• Centrality and intermediacy.
■ Gateways• Favorable physical location.• Intermodal and stable in time.
■ Hubs• Transmodal and subject to
change.• Commercial decisions.• Delays vs. frequency of services.
Gateway
Intermodal
Hub
Transmodal
Hinterland Setting and Major Economic Regions
North America Western Europe East and Southeast Asia
Coastal concentrationLandbridge connections
Inland concentrationCoastal gateways
Coastal concentrationLow hinterland access
Hinterland intensity Freight Corridor hierarchy Gateway hierarchy
Gateways and Hinterland Effect
Efficient Inland Freight DistributionInefficient Inland Freight Distribution
Pacific Asia North American West Coast
SEZ
Corridor
Corridors and Regional Development
Specialization andinterdependency
Gateway
FlowsOrder
High LowHigh Low
A B C
Supply Chains, Gateways and Corridors
Global supply chains and production networksGlobal supply chains and production networksContinental integrationContinental integration
Gateway choiceGateway choice
APL Distribution Center, Shenzhen, ChinaAPL Distribution Center, Shenzhen, China
Commodity Chains and Added Value
Commodity chain
Adde
d va
lue
Low
High
Manufacturing
R&D Globalization
DistributionDesign
Branding Marketing
Sales / Service
Concept Logistics
Logistics and the Acceleration of Freight
Push Logistics
Shipment
Transshipment
Pull Logistics
Containerization
Speed barrier
Logistical threshold
The North American Landbridge
El Paso
Chicago
Kansas CIty
Minneapolis
Salt Lake City
Miami
Tacoma
Fraser
Seattle
Oakland
Houston
Halifax
Veracruz
Altamira
Savannah
PortlandMontreal
Vancouver
Baltimore
Manzanillo
Long Beach
Charleston
New Orleans
Los Angeles
Jacksonville
Hampton Roads
Wilmington (DE)
Port Everglades
New York/New Jersey
American Landbridge
Canadian Landbridge
Mexican Landbridge
Connector
Major Container Port
Major Rail Freight Distribution Center
Gateways, Corridors and Competitiveness
Emerging continental networksEmerging continental networksTrade barriersTrade barriers
Strategic partnersStrategic partnersInterregional linkagesInterregional linkages
International competitionInternational competition
APL “Australia” entering San Francisco HarborAPL “Australia” entering San Francisco Harbor
Beware of Future Expectations: The Fallacies of Linear Thinking (Projected TEU Traffic, Port of NY/NJ)
0123456789
101112
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060
Milli
on T
EUs
ImportsExportsEmpties
Are You &*%@# Out of Your Mind? Projections for Container Port Volumes, 2020
Sectors of American Imports of Asian Goods Through Maritime Container Shipping, 2004 (in TEUs)
0 300,000 600,000 900,000 1,200,000 1,500,000 1,800,000
Big box retailer
Furniture
Electronics
Appliances
Auto parts
Tires
Shoes
Toys
Electrical equipment
Machinery
Textiles
Apparel
World Container Traffic, 1980-2005, and Guesses for up to 2020
0100200300400500600700800900
1000
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Millio
n TEU
Balance of Containerized Cargo Flows along Major Trade Routes, 1995-2006 (in millions of TEUs)
-18
-16
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
01995 1996 1997 1998 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Europe/USAAsia/EuropeAsia/USA
Main North American Trade Corridors and Metropolitan Freight Centers
Miami
Boston
Dallas
Denver
Norfolk
Atlanta
Memphis
Halifax
Detroit
Toronto
Chicago
Houston
Phoenix
Seattle
Calgary
Edmonton
Winnipeg
Montreal
New York
Portland
Baltimore
Charlotte
Cleveland
St. Louis
San Diego
Vancouver
Charleston
Pittsburgh
Cincinnati
New Orleans
Kansas City
Minneapolis
Los Angeles
Philadelphia
Oklahoma Ci ty
San Francisco
Salt Lake City
Hub
Gateway
Institutional Frameworks for Governance
Political jurisdictionsPolitical jurisdictionsTransport networks and corporationsTransport networks and corporationsTrading blocs and internal free tradeTrading blocs and internal free trade
Harmonization of regulations and practicesHarmonization of regulations and practices
““Maersk Sealand” Locomotive, Landers Yard (NS), ChicagoMaersk Sealand” Locomotive, Landers Yard (NS), Chicago
NAFTA Transborder Truck Flows and Traffic at US Ports of Entry, 2002
Is 53 the Magic Number?
■ New container specifications?• Economies of scale push towards a larger container:
• Particularly for inland carriers.• Strong “legacy costs” (inertia):
• Accumulated investments in modal and intermodal infrastructure.• The North American vs. the European standard:
• ISO 40 footer: 12.027 m x 2.33 m.• NA domestic 53 footer: 16.15 m x 2.4 m.• European Intermodal Load Unit: 13.2 m x 2.4 m.• China will play a significant role in the decision.
• The bottom line is likely to be the size that can be fitted on road transport systems, so 53 could be the “magic number”.
Carrying Capacity of Containers (in cubic feet)
1,169
2,385
2,690
2,895
3,026
3,471
3,830
3,955
4,090
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500
20 feet standard container
40 feet standard container
40 feet hi-cube container
EILU Long 45
45 feet standard container
48 feet standard container
53 feet standard container
53 feet hi-cube container
53 feet truck
Translisft crane, NS Rutherford yard, PATranslisft crane, NS Rutherford yard, PA
Public and Private Investments in Gateways and Corridors
Financing corridor and gateway developmentFinancing corridor and gateway developmentCo-production and cooperationCo-production and cooperation
Bottleneck mitigationBottleneck mitigationMultimodal InfrastructureMultimodal Infrastructure
Inland portsInland portsRegulatory preferencesRegulatory preferences
Fiscal regimesFiscal regimes
Level of Congestion of the Interstate Highway System
Regina
Calgary
Memphis
Chicago
Winnipeg
St LouisKansas City
Minneapolis
Dallas / Fort Worth
Houston
Savannah
Montreal
Vancouver
Charleston
Hampton Roads
New York/New Jersey
TacomaSeattle
Oakland
Long BeachLos Angeles
Potential Location of Major Transmodal Rail Fac ilities:Maritime Gateways and Inland Hubs
Dr. Jean-Paul Rodrigue, Dept. of Economics & Geography, Hofstra University
Maritime Rail Gateway
Transmodal Rail Hub
Boston – Washington Corridor: Volume to Capacity Ratio
Port Inland Distribution Network and Freight Clusters
Circum Hemispheric Dreams
Russia
ChinaCanada
Unite
d St
ates
Kazakhstan
Mongolia
New York
Vostochny
Lianyungang
Archangel'sk
Brest
Druzhba
Zabaykalsk
Oulu
Lokot
Perm'
Astana
Harbin
Urumqi
Beijing
IrkutskLanzhou
VologdaVainikkala
Ulaanbaatar
Novosibirsk
Yekat erinburg Presnogorkovka
Halifax
MoscowSt. Petersburg
El Paso
Chicago
Kansas CItyMinneapolis
Salt Lake City Tacoma
Oakland
Houston
Savannah
Montreal
Vancouver
Long Beach
Haparanda/Tornio
New York
Rotterdam
Maritime Segment
Rail Main Trunk (Broad Gauge)
Rail Main Trunk (Standard Gauge)
Port
Gauge Change
Rail Terminal
Azimuthal Equidistant Polar Projection
Arctic Bridge
Northern Sea Route
Northwest Passage
