U.S. Port Investment Strategies and the Corresponding Economic Impacts Stemming from the Panama Canal Expansion
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper measures the economic impacts of the U.S. port investment strategies coping with the Panama Canal expansion. Using secondary import data, negative and positive estimates of the impacts were presented in this study. Reduced port activities into the West Coast Customs Districts negatively affect transportation and warehousing industries, among other effects. Still, they have simultaneous positive effects in other states from increased imports resulting from modal shifts and changes in the entry port located in the South and East coasts. This study applied the supply-driven National Interstate Economic Model that measures all interstate trade among the U.S. states to divert foreign imports from 15 Pacific Rim countries. For this purpose, the following assumption was adopted: larger ships using the canal will lead to a redirection of seaborne trade among U.S. (and other) ports and result in secondary effects, e.g., using different freight modes and regional growth spillovers. This study also accounted for the entry point change and significant port investments for foreign trade under alternative scenarios. The choice of ports for international trade depends on decisions about how to minimize multimodal delivery costs. The total direct reduction of transportation and warehousing activities associated with foreign imports in the West Coast ports was estimated at $3.3 billion, leading to total negative effects of $5.8 billion. Total positive impacts from the shift of transportation modes with the choice of an entry port and new warehousing activities for foreign imports in the selected 12 states varied. As expected, states that involved an entry port had the most prominent benefits, but Texas, New York, and New Jersey may be benefited through all the port enhancement projects in the U.S. Also, except for Transportation and Postal, and Warehousing industries, Construction is another dominant positive affected industry of the Canal expansion in the U.S.
Abstract
This paper measures the economic impacts of the U.S. port investment strategies coping with the Panama Canal expansion. Using secondary import data, negative and positive estimates of the impacts were presented in this study. Reduced port activities into the West Coast Customs Districts negatively affect transportation and warehousing industries, among other effects. Still, they have simultaneous positive effects in other states from increased imports resulting from modal shifts and changes in the entry port located in the South and East coasts. This study applied the supply-driven National Interstate Economic Model that measures all interstate trade among the U.S. states to divert foreign imports from 15 Pacific Rim countries. For this purpose, the following assumption was adopted: larger ships using the canal will lead to a redirection of seaborne trade among U.S. (and other) ports and result in secondary effects, e.g., using different freight modes and regional growth spillovers. This study also accounted for the entry point change and significant port investments for foreign trade under alternative scenarios. The choice of ports for international trade depends on decisions about how to minimize multimodal delivery costs. The total direct reduction of transportation and warehousing activities associated with foreign imports in the West Coast ports was estimated at $3.3 billion, leading to total negative effects of $5.8 billion. Total positive impacts from the shift of transportation modes with the choice of an entry port and new warehousing activities for foreign imports in the selected 12 states varied. As expected, states that involved an entry port had the most prominent benefits, but Texas, New York, and New Jersey may be benefited through all the port enhancement projects in the U.S. Also, except for Transportation and Postal, and Warehousing industries, Construction is another dominant positive affected industry of the Canal expansion in the U.S.
참고문헌 (28)
- Ashar, A., "Revolution #4", Containerization International, 46~48 (2006)
- Supply Chain Management, "Business Logistics", pp.2004, Ballou, R. H.
- CanagaRetna, S. M., "2013 Update on the Panama Canal Expansion and Ports in the Atlantic and Gulf Coast states – An issue alert from the SLC", Southern Legislative Conference of the Council of State Governments (2013)
- "Craney Island Eastward Expansion" (2013)[URL]
- Giuliano G., "Accessibility and residential land values : Some tests with new measures", Urban Studies, 47(14), pp.3103~3130 (2010)
- Giuliano, G., "Estimating Freight Flows for Metropolitan Area Highway Networks Using Secondary Data Sources", Networks and Spatial Economics, 10(1), pp.73~91 (2010)
- Gordon, P., "Global Business and the Terrorist Threat Cheltenham", pp.341~374 (2009), Edward Elgar
- Knight, K., "The Implications of Panama Canal Expansion to U.S. Ports and Coastal Navigation Economic Analysis, Institute for Water Resources White Paper" (2008), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
- Lee, B., "Estimating the State-by-State Economic Impacts of a Foot-and-Mouth Disease Attack", International Regional Science Review, 35(1), pp.26~47 (2012)
- Medina, J., "A preliminary analysis of U.S. import volumes and regional effects associated with the Panama Canal expansion", Research in Transportation Economics, 84, pp.100969~ (2020)[DOI]
- Medina, J., "Did the Panama Canal expansion benefit small U.S. ports?", Maritime Transport Research, 2, pp.100013~ (2021)[DOI]
- Miller, K., "Impact of the Panama Canal expansion on Latin American and Caribbean ports: difference in difference (DID) method", Journal of shipping and Trade, 6, pp.8~ (2021)[DOI]
- Park, J. Y., "The Economic Impacts of Dirty-Bomb Attacks on the Los Angeles and Long Beach Ports : Applying the Supply-driven NIEMO(National Interstate Economic Model)", Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 5(1), pp.21~ (2008)
- Park, J. Y., "The Supply-Driven Input-Output Model: A Reinterpretation and Extension", presented at the 19th International Input-Output Association conference (2011)
- Park, J. Y., "The Economic Costs and Consequences of Terrorism", pp.208~234 (2007), Edward Elgar
- Park, JY., "The State-by-State Economic Impacts of the 2002 Shutdown of the Los Angeles-Long Beach Ports", Growth and Change, 39(4), pp.548~577 (2008)
- Park, JY., "Adding a Freight Network to a National Interstate Input-Output Model : a TransNIEMO Application for California", Journal of Transport Geography, 19(6), pp.1410~1422 (2011)
- Park, JY., "The Gulf Oil Spill and Economic Impacts : Extending the National Interstate Economic Model(NIEMO)to Account for Induced Impacts", Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 10(1), pp.1~14 (2013)[DOI]
- Park, JY., "A Two-Step Approach to Estimating State-to-State Commodity Trade Flows", The Annals of Regional Science, 43(4), pp.1033~1072 (2009)
- Park, C., "Panama canal expansion, U.S. trade diversion from west coast seaports and urban innovation", Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 2, pp.12~ (2016)[DOI]
- Park, C., "Widening the Panama Canal and US ports : historical and economic impact analyses", Maritime Policy & Management, 47(3), pp.419~433 (2020)[DOI]
- Richardson, H. W., "The Economic Costs and Consequences of Terrorism", pp.235~253 (2007), Edward Elgar
- Rodrigue, J. P., "Factors Impacting North American Freight Distribution in View of the Panama Canal Expansion", The Van Horne Institute (2010)
- "South Carolina Port Guide, second edition" (2012)[URL]
- "South Carolina Port Guide, Ninth edition" (2021)[URL]
- Van Hassel, E., "The impact of the expanded Panama Canal on port range choice for cargo flows from the U.S. to Europe", Maritime Policy & Management (2020)[DOI]