container shipping

101
The Asia Pacific The Asia Pacific The Asia Pacific The Asia Pacific Sea Cargo System Sea Cargo System Sea Cargo System Sea Cargo System Research Paper No: TLI-AP/01/02 Team members: National University of Singapore Assoc. Prof. Roland Yap Hock Chuan (Group Coordinator) Asst. Prof. Chew Ek Peng Asst. Prof. Lee Loo Hay Ms. Puvaneswari Manikam Georgia Institute of Technology Asst. Prof. Anton Kleywegt Assoc. Prof. Paul Griffin THE LOGISTICS INSTITUTE - ASIA PACIFIC A partnership between the National University of Singapore and Georgia Institute of Technology for research and education in global logistics and operations The Logistics Institute - Asia Pacific National University of Singapore 10 Kent Ridge Crescent, Singapore 119260 Tel: (65) 874 8984 Fax: (65) 775 3391 Website: www.eng.nus.edu.sg/tliap

Upload: odavzhuchenko

Post on 28-Nov-2014

50 views

Category:

Documents


6 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: container shipping

The Asia Pacif The Asia Pacif The Asia Pacif The Asia Pacif Sea Cargo Syst Sea Cargo Syst Sea Cargo Syst Sea Cargo Syst

Research Paper No: TLI-AP/01/02

Team members:

National University of Singapore Assoc. Prof. Roland Yap Hock Chuan (G

Asst. Prof. Chew Ek Peng Asst. Prof. Lee Loo Hay

Ms. Puvaneswari Manikam Georgia Institute of Technology Asst. Prof. Anton Kleywegt Assoc. Prof. Paul Griffin

THE LOGISTICS INSTITUTE - ASIA PACIFIC

icicicic emememem

roup Coordinator)

A partnership between the National University of Singapore and Georgia Institute of Technology for research and education in global logistics and operations

T h e L o g i s t i c s I n s t i t u t e - A s i a P a c i f i c N a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t y o f S i n g a p o r e 1 0 K e n t R i d g e C r e s c e n t , S i n g a p o r e 1 1 9 2 6 0 Tel : (65) 874 8984 Fax: (65) 775 3391W e b s i t e : w w w . e n g . n u s . e d u . s g / t l i a p

Page 2: container shipping

Abstract This report gives an overview of sea cargo focusing on Singapore, interactions within Asia-Pacific and other regions. The focus of the report is to survey the industry, processes and important issues facing the sea cargo industry. We begin with an overview of the top 10 ports and major carriers. This is followed by a study of trade flows, volumes and trends with emphasis on container traffic in Singapore Port. A comparative study with Hong Kong Port and Port of Long Beach is also presented. Next is a survey of the major shipping lines and developments in the container shipping industry. This is followed by the processes involved with importing and exporting sea cargo with details of the process flow in Singapore for containers. We then give an overview of developments in sea cargo technologies focusing on the use of Information Technology by ports and carriers. Next, important current issues facing the shipping industry is discussed. Finally, we conclude with some potential research projects to address the challenges described in the previous section.

Page 3: container shipping

Table of Contents Page 1. Introduction……………………………………………………………….. 1

1.1 A Definition of Sea Cargo…………...……………………………...1 1.2 The Importance of Sea Cargo………………….………………..…. 1

1.2.1 The Importance of Sea Cargo to Singapore……………...… 1 1.3 Major Sea Routes in Asia-Pacific…...…………………………..…. 1 1.4 The Position of Asian Ports in Global Ranking……………………. 2 1.5 Major Carriers………………………………………………………3 1.6 Sea Cargo Volumes and Trends……………………………. …..…. 3 1.7 Some Remarks about Statistics…………………………………..… 6 1.8 Organisation of Report…………………………………………...… 6

References…………………………………………………………...7 2. Flow and Trade Volumes……………………………………………….... 8

2.1 Sea Cargo (Containerised) Flow and Trade Volumes by Region…………………………………………...……. 8

2.2 World Port Sea Cargo (Containerised) Flow and Trade Volumes…………………………………………..…….. 9 2.2.1 World’s Major Ports by Total Cargo

Throughput (metric ton)………………………………..…... 9 2.2.2 World’sTop10 Container Ports by

Container Throughput(TEU)………………………….…… 10 2.2.3 Some World Port’s Comparison: Hong Kong

Port, Port of Long Beach and Singapore Port…………….... 12 2.3 Global Sea Cargo Transhipment………………………………..….. 15 2.4 Singapore Port Sea Cargo (Containerised) Flow

and Trade Volumes……………………………………………..….. 16 2.4.1 Singapore Port Yearly based Statistics…………………...... 16

2.4.1.1 Total Container Throughput (1987-1999)………………………………………... 16

2.4.1.2 Total Container Throughput by Type (Loaded or Empty) (1990-1997)…………….…….. 17

2.4.1.3 Total Cargo by Type (1987 - 1999)…………...…... 18 2.4.1.4 Inward and Outward Containerised Cargo

by Country (1989-1997)…………….………...…... 21 2.4.2 Singapore Port Monthly based Statistics……………...…… 24

2.4.2.1 Total Container Throughput (Jan`95-Dec`97)..………………………………….. 24

2.4.2.2 Total Cargo by Type (Jan`95-Dec`97)..………………………………….. 26

2.4.2.3 Inward and Outward Containerised Cargo by Country (Jan`96-Dec`97)…………………….... 28

2.5 Singapore as a Global Marine Hub….……………………………... 32 References……………………………………………………………33

Page 4: container shipping

3. Major Sea Cargo Players…………………………………………...….… 34 3.1 Introduction to Ocean Carriers………………………………….….. 34 3.2 Conference Lines and Non-Conference Lines…………………...… 34 3.3 Asian Carriers……………………………………………...…….… 34 3.4 Mergers and Acquisitions………………………………...………... 35 3.5 Carrier Statistics…………………………………………...…….…. 36

References…………..……………………………………………….38 4. Sea Cargo Export and Import Processes...…………………………..…..39

4.1 Sea Cargo Export Process………………………………………..…39 4.2 Sea Cargo Import Process……………………………………..…… 42

References……………………………………..…………………… 44 5. Sea Cargo Technologies…………………………………………………... 45

5.1 Importance of IT in Sea Cargo System…………………………...... 45 5.2 IT Systems in Ports….………………………………………………45

5.2.1 Port of Rotterdam…………………………………………... 46 5.2.1.1 Cargo Card……………………………………...…. 46 5.2.1.2 EDI-LAND………….…………………………...…47 5.2.1.3 PROTECT………………………………………..... 47 5.2.1.4 ELO……………………………………………...… 47 5.2.1.5 BICS……………………………………………...... 47 5.2.1.6 RODOS……………………………………………. 47 5.2.1.7 MISTER……………………………………...……. 48 5.2.1.8 Port on the Internet……………………………….... 48

5.2.2 Hong Kong Port………………………………………...….. 48 5.2.3 Singapore Port………………………………………...……. 49

5.2.3.1 CITOS……………………………………...……… 49 5.2.3.2 CICOS…….………………………………...……... 50 5.2.3.3 Gate System…….………………………………..…50 5.2.3.4 PortNet………………………………………..….…51 5.2.3.5 TradeNet…………………………………….……...52 5.2.3.6 BoxNet……………………………………...………52 5.2.3.7 CEDEX……….……………………………..………52 5.2.3.8 EZShip………………………………………...……52 5.2.3.9 SlotMax…………………………………………..... 52 5.2.3.10 BoXchange……………………………………..…. 53 5.2.3.11 GEMS………………………….……………...……53

5.3 Use of IT in Shipping Lines.….…………………………………..…53 5.3.1 E-Booking………………………………………………...…54 5.3.2 Cargo Tracking………………………………………...……54 5.3.3 Vessel Sailing Schedule………...…………………………..55 5.3.4 Bill of Lading……………………………………...……….. 55 5.3.5 Notices and Reports………………………………..………. 55 5.3.6 Tariff Rate Request……………………………..………….. 56 5.3.7 Finance…………………………………………..…………. 56 5.3.8 Other Services……………………………..……………….. 56

5.4 Online Information Services…………………………………...……57

Page 5: container shipping

5.4.1 Interbox……………………………………….…...………...57 5.4.2 Trade Compass………………………………………...…… 57 5.4.3 Other Online Information Services………………………….58

5.5 Electronic Documentation Management…………………………… 59 5.5.1 Bolero………………………………………………………. 59 5.5.2 TradeCard………………………………………………..….60 5.5.3 E-Transport…………………………………………………60

5.6 Global Positioning System…………………………………………. 61 5.7 Electronic Container Seal..………………………………………….61

Reference…………..……………………..……………..…………..62 6. Sea Cargo Issues………………………………………….……………….. 63

6.1 Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998 (OSRA)……………………...63 6.2 Container Imbalance on US Trade…………………………………. 64 6.3 Shortage of Container Chassis in US Ports………………… ……....65 6.4 Equipment Imbalance Surcharges (EIS)………………………..…..66 6.5 Megaships…………………………………………………………..66

References……………………….....……………………………….67 7. Proposed Research Projects………………………………………....……68 7.1 Contract Planning and Load Allocation for Ocean Carriers.……….68 7.2 Empty Container Allocation and Distribution Planning..………......68

References…………..…………………………………………...….69 Appendix 1-Profiles of the Top 10 World Ports. …………..………...……. i Appendix 2-Profiles of the Selected Major Carriers..…………………...…. v Appendix 3-Singapore Examples of Importation, Exportation and

Transhipment Processes…………….…………………………ix Glossary……………………………………………………………………..xxi References..…………………………………………………………………xxvi

Page 6: container shipping

1

1. Introduction Water is said to be the cheapest, safest and cleanest transportation mode and the ocean is the water highway to the world. The oceans occupy 70% of the earth and the Pacific Ocean occupies 50% of the world’s ocean surface. Ports in Asia-Pacific are gateways to domestic and international trade, connecting the region as well as intra-region to the world. Asia’s history has been shaped by its ports on the seacoasts and rivers. 1.1 A Definition of Sea Cargo Cargo is merchandise conveyed on a ship other than mail or other property, carried under the terms of international postal convention or baggage [1]. Therefore sea cargo can be defined as anything travelling by sea other than mail, persons and personal baggage. 1.2 The Importance of Sea Cargo There are more than 2,000 ports around the world. A ship loaded with one metric ton of goods sails farther and causes less air pollution on one gallon of fuel than an airplane with the same tonnage flies, or a truck drives, or a train travels [2]. Container shipping is much cheaper than airfreight. Present airfreight rates are about ten times or more the rates of sea cargo transportation. Compared to other modes of transportations, ships and barges are save and have the fewest accidental spills or collisions. The Review of Maritime Transport 2000 reported that the world container port traffic grew 6.7% within a year; from 154.6 million in 1997 to 165.0 million in 1998. Note that this figure depicts continued growth despite the financial crisis experienced in parts of the Far East and South East Asia. The Drewry Shipping Consultants also forecasted that some additional quay length of 100 to 200 km and 900 to 1,200 new quay cranes would be required to handle the increasing amount of container movements, especially in Western Europe, Far East and South East Asia by the year of 2005. 1.2.1 The Importance of Sea Cargo to Singapore One out of every 10 people in Singapore is said to be dependent in some way on Singapore Port. The PSA Corporation generated a net profit of S$838.4 million in 2000, an 11.7% increase from S$ 750.3 million in 1999 [4]. Singapore Port ranked second among the ports of the world in both terms of TEU and metric tons handled. Compared to the top 10 container ports in the world, Singapore Port has a dominant position with approximately 22.3% from the total container throughput handled. As an Asian transshipment hub, Singapore has built a large regional feeder trade to carry Intra-Regional cargo. 1.3 Major Sea Routes in Asia-Pacific Many countries in Asia-Pacific have an export-dominated economy and are thus more dependent on the passage of goods across the seas than other parts of the world. In Asia-Pacific there are basically two major sea routes of communication, one passing through the

Page 7: container shipping

2

South China Sea to the Indian Ocean and the Middle East; the other passing through the East China Sea and the Sea of Japan to the Pacific Ocean and the Pacific coast of the US and Canada. Four out of the seven world’s major sea routes (the Eurasia, North Pacific, South Pacific and the Cape of Good Hope routes) are connected to the Asia-Pacific. The remaining three are the North Atlantic, South Atlantic and the North American-South American routes. In terms of ship movement, the seas in Asia-Pacific are among the busiest in the world. 1.4 The Position of Asian Ports in Global Ranking Table 1.1 depicts total throughput in metric tons of the top 10 worlds’ major ports in 1999. Table 1.2 shows the worlds’ major container ports (top 10) ranked by TEUs. Half of the top 10 ports in Table 1.2 are located in Asia. The remaining three ports are from Europe and two from North America. Although Port Kelang is 15th ranked and thus not in the table, it should be pointed out since its rate of growth is high, as much as 40.1% in 1999 and it may soon join the top 10. Singapore Port has captured second placing in both the tables. Profiles of the top 10 container ports (ranked based on TEU) are given in Appendix 1.

Rank (1999)

Port Total Throughput 1999 (in million metric tons)

1 Port of Rotterdam, Netherlands 303.4 2 Singapore Port, Singapore 251.9 3 Shanghai Port, China 187.0 4 Hong Kong Port, Hong Kong* 168.8 5 Nagoya Port, Japan 133.2 6 Yokohama Port, Japan 117.8 7 Port of Antwerp, Belgium 115.7 8 Pusan Port, Korea 107.7 9 Marseilles Port, France 90.3 10 Port of Hamburg, Germany 81.0

Table 1.1: Total cargo throughput in metric tons of the worlds’ major ports (top 10)[5] * Including rivertrade

Rank (1999)

Port Container Throughput 1999 (in `000 TEU)

1 Hong Kong Port, Hong Kong* 16,211 2 Singapore Port, Singapore 15,945 3 Kaohsiung Port, Taiwan 6,985 4 Pusan Port, Korea 6,440 5 Port of Rotterdam, Netherlands 6,343 6 Port of Long Beach, US 4,408 7 Shanghai Port, China 4,216 8 Port of Hamburg, Germany 3,738 9 Port of Antwerp, Belgium 3,614 10 Port of Los Angeles, US 3,510

Table 1.2: Container throughput in TEU of the worlds’ major container ports (top 10)[5] * Including rivertrade

Page 8: container shipping

3

1.5 Major Carriers Container shipping was introduced in Europe in the late 1960s. The construction of the ‘first generation cargo vessel’, which was capable of carrying 700 TEU at a speed of 20 knots, was the first step in the container vessel development. Today’s mega container vessels, called the ‘megaships’ have a cargo capacity of about 6,600 TEU and travel at speeds of 24 knots. Ocean carriers are the agents of sea transportation. They supply their services on a worldwide basis, offering a global transport solution to a global shipper with global shipping needs. Below are the top 10 container carriers ranked by total slot capacity at the beginning of 2000. The total slot capacity of 2,521,447 TEU at the beginning of 2000 represents an increase of 11% over the 1999 figure of 2,270,411 TEU. Profiles of these major carriers are given in Appendix 2.

Rank

Carriers Number of vessels Slot capacity (TEU)

1 Maersk Sealand 244 599,601 2 Evergreen/Uniglory/LT 139 327,813 3 P&O Nedlloyd 114 277,582 4 Hanjin/DSR-Senator 83 258,025 5 MSC 122 233,751 6 Cosco 114 201,263 7 NOL/APL 70 191,284 8 NYK/TSK 67 154,344 9 CMA-CGM/ANL 61 138,956 10 CP Ships Group 68 138,828

Table 1.3: Top 20 container carriers ranked by total slot capacity at the beginning of 2000[6]

1.6 Sea Cargo Volumes and Trends In general, shipping fleet of a carrier include tankers, bulk carriers, general cargo ships, container ships and specialised vessels. Table 1.4 shows a summary of the world merchant fleet for 1996-1998. Figure 1.1 indicates the percentage share by different sectors of the world fleet for the year 1998. (million gross tons (mgt))

Sector 1996 1997 Growth (%)

1998 Growth (%)

% of fleet

Tanker 146.4 147.2 0.5 151.6 3.0 28 Bulk 150.6 155.3 3.1 153.3 -1.3 29 General cargo 86.2 86.3 0.1 87.3 1.2 16 Container 43.1 48.9 13.5 53.4 9.2 10 Other 81.6 84.4 3.4 88.8 5.2 17 Total 507.9 522.2 2.79 534.4 2.34 100

Table 1.4: World merchant fleet for 1996-1998[7]

Page 9: container shipping

4

World Merchant Fleet 1998

Tanker28%

Bulk29%

General cargo16%

Container10%

Other17%

Figure 1.1: Percentage share of world merchant fleet1998 The world merchant fleet grew slower in 1998 than in 1997, but the percentage increase remained above 2%. We can see that the tanker and bulk cargo are the two dominant sectors constituting more than half of the total fleet. Of all the sectors, the containership is seen to expand at the fastest pace. This sector grew by 13.5% in 1997 and 9.2% in 1998. Table 1.5 gives the world container trade growth and world container output. The world container output rose 25% in 2000 to a record of 1.8 million.

Year World Container Trade Growth (%)

World Container Output (`000 TEU)

1996 7.0 1,285 1997 10.6 1,450 1998 5.0 1,475 1999 9.2 1,485 2000* 10.3 1,850 2001* 7.4 +

2002* 8.2 +

Table 1.5: World container trade growth and world container output [8][9] *forecast figure for world container trade growth + data not available The world’s top 10 container ports produced container throughput of 60.23 million TEU in 1997, 65.38 million TEU in 1998 and 71.41 million TEU in 1999. It is remarkable that an improvement of 8.55% and 9.22% was still noted in 1998 and 1999 respectively, in spite of the economy turmoil in Asia. The improvement also portrays a rapid acceleration in world container port demand. World container trade by route in 1994 is presented in Table 1.6. There are three major routes, namely East-West, North-South and Intra-Regional. The flows in all three routes are not in balance. Traditionally, the East-West route dominated the world container trade. However, the fastest growing rate of Intra-Regional trade, which was mainly boosted by the increasing trade within Asia, has now outstripped the two other trades. The Intra-Regional flow accounted to 12.5 million TEU in 1994.

Page 10: container shipping

5

(‘000 TEU) East-West Eastbound Westbound Total

Trans-Pacific 4,200 3,270 7,470 Trans-Atlantic 1,365 1,665 3,030 Europe-Far East 2,290 2,605 4,895 Europe-Mid East 575 70 645 N.America-Mid East 160 45 205 Far East-Mid East 65 190 255 8,655 7,845 16,500

North-South Southbound Northbound Total Europe-L.America 625 525 1,150 Europe-S.Asia 200 275 475 Europe-Africa 575 375 950 Europe-Australasia 250 150 400 N.America-L.America 1,150 850 2,000 N.America-S.Asia 90 160 250 N.America-Africa 60 40 100 N.America-Australasia 180 95 275 Far East-L.America 500 225 725 Far East-S.Asia 200 225 425 Far East-Africa 275 150 425 Far East-Australasia 400 475 875 4,505 3,545 8,050

Intra-Regional Asia 6,725 Europe 4,250 N.America 1,250 Other 300 Total 12,525

Table 1.6: World container trade by route, 1994[10] Among the Intra-Regional routes (Table 1.6), Asia has the most active container trade. Asian interests is also said to be controlling some 40% of the world’s ocean going tonnage. It has built robust network services from short moves between hub ports and neighbouring countries to long distance routes. The Intra-Asia container port market is booming as well with goods moving directly to meet customer demands. Of all the Intra-Asia regions, the East and South-East Asia economies have controlled the world container trade growth since the mid-1980s. Gustaaf de Monie of the Policy Research Corporation in Antwerp included South East Asia, besides Western exit of Mediterranean, the Caribbean and the West Coast of America as the potential mega-hubs. Generally there are three container trades on major Asian routes; Trans-Pacific (the most dominant trade route for Asia), Asia-Europe and Inter-Asia (Table 1.7). The three major routes experienced continuous growth from 21.1 million TEU in 1996 to 25.9 million TEU in 1999. The total trade is expected to increase by 7.4%, reaching 27.8 million TEU in 2000. Another significant trend in Table 1.7 is the drop in container trade in Inter-Asia route in the year 1998. The negative growth of 5.8% was a direct reflection of economic crisis in Asia. In 1999, the container trade in this route returned to continued growth.

Page 11: container shipping

6

(`000 TEU) Route Direction 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000*

Trans-Pacific Eastbound 4,959 5,723 6,845 7,610 8,237 Westbound 4,333 4,463 3,839 4,016 4,368 Total

(% change) 9,292 (8.8)

10,187 (9.6)

10,684 (4.9)

11,626 (8.8)

12,605 (8.4)

Asia-Europe Eastbound 2,565 2,798 3,342 3,533 3,860 Westbound 2,008 2,187 2,026 2,544 2,713 Total

(% change) 4,573 (9.5)

4,984 (9.0)

5,368 (7.7)

6,077 (13.2)

6,573 (8.4)

Inter-Asia Total (% change)

7,228 (3.3)

7,767 (7.9)

7,343 (-5.8)

8,150 (11.0)

8,590 (5.4)

3 major routes total (% change)

21,093 (7.0)

22,967 (8.9)

23,395 (1.9)

25,853 (10.5)

27,768 (7.4)

Table 1.7: Container trade on major Asian routes (loaded container only) 1996-2000[11] * estimates Another significant trend in sea cargo industry is the increase in container imbalance. This is a direct reflection of the trade imbalance between Asia and Europe to US. As a result, ports around the world are estimated to have handled about 40 million TEU of non-revenue generating empty containers in 1999[11]. Refer to Section 6.2 for more information and statistics.

1.7 Some Remarks about Statistics Much of the statistics and relevant data for this report are gleaned from various sources as stated in the reference at the end of every chapter and at the end of this report. In section 2.4, the data presented is mainly from Singapore Port Statistics and MPA (Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore) sources. In this report, we have slightly different time frames in various sections due to the availability of information. 1.8 Organisation of Report The primary purpose of this report is to understand the present sea cargo process and the relevant issues, with an emphasis on the containerised cargo. This survey focuses on Singapore Port, interactions in the Asia-Pacific and the other regions. This report is organised as followed. Section 1 gives an introduction and overview of the sea cargo system. It also gives an overview of the top 10 ports and major carriers. Section 2 of this report reveals the flow and trade volume and the major sea cargo players within Asia-Pacific with emphasis on Singapore Port. General information and statistics on major ocean carriers are given in Section 3, while section 4 identifies the processes in sea cargo exportation and importation. Since Information Technology is becoming a critical component of the logistics of sea cargo, Section 5 focuses on this. We conclude with some important sea cargo issues and a preview of some proposed research projects.

Page 12: container shipping

7

References: [1] Dictionary of Shipping International Business Trade Terms and Abbreviations [2] http://www.aapa-ports.org [3] World Container Terminals; Global Growth and Private Profit, Drewry Shipping Consultants Ltd, April 1998 [4] http://thestar.com.my/news/story [5] http://www.portmanagement.com [6] Container Management, November/December 2000 [7] http://www.itis.org.tw/eng/rep0015.html [8] Lloyd’s List Maritime Asia, November 200 [9] Containerisation International, February 2001 [10] Niko Wijnolst and Frans Waals, “Shipping Industry Structure”, Delft University Press, 1999 [11] Ports and Habors, December 2000

Page 13: container shipping

8

2. Flow and Trade Volumes 2.1 Sea Cargo (Containerised) Flow and Trade Volumes by Region Container development in the Asia-Pacific region is more dramatic compared to other regions in the world. Figure 2.1 shows the robust growth of Asia-Pacific in container traffic compared to the rest of the world. Recent trends show that about half of the world’s container traffic is handled at ports within this region.

World Container Traffic

0102030405060708090

100

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Year

Wor

ld C

onta

iner

Tra

ffic

(m

illio

n TE

U)

Asia-Pacific Rest of the world

Figure 2.1: Growth of world container traffic[1] Table 2.1 and Figure 2.2 indicate the container world traffic for different regions in 1996. Asia, notably Northern Asia is the pre-eminent region in the world container throughput. This region alone constituted about 44.3% of the total traffic. The regional member, China Port Region and South-East Asia is said to have substantial potential for further container penetration. Europe, with quarter of container traffic, holds the second place ahead of North America. Africa accounts to a relatively negligible proportion of 1.6% of the world container traffic in 1996.

Region Regional share (%) North America 15.4 Central & South America 5.1 Europe 25.1 Africa 1.6 Middle East 6.3 Northern Asia 29.6 Southern Asia 14.7 Australia/ New Zealand 2.2

Table 2.1: Regional share of world traffic for containers in 1996[2]

Page 14: container shipping

9

Regional Share of World Traffic for Containers in 1996

25.1%15.4%

14.7%

6.3%

5.1%

2.2% 1.6%

29.6%

Northern AsiaEuropeNorth AmericaSouthern AsiaMiddle EastCentral & South AmericaAustralia/ New ZealandAfrica

Figure 2.2: Regional share of world traffic for containers in 1996 2.2 World Port Sea Cargo (Containerised) Flow and Trade Volumes Traditionally, the function of ports is simply the interface between land and sea transport. Now however, the world ports play a major role in overall performance of the global logistics chain. As such, the efficiency of ports is highly important. The world’s top 10 container ports can be ranked in two different ways; the top 10 container ports based on total throughput in metric tons and the top 10 container ports based on container throughput in TEU. 2.2.1 World’s Major Ports by Total Cargo Throughput (metric ton) Table 1.1 (chapter 1) lists world’s major ports (top 10) according to the total throughput in million metric tons based on the 1999 ranking. Table 2.2 gives the total throughputs of these ports for four years (1996-1999). (million metric tons)

Port 1996 1997 1998 1999 Port of Rotterdam, Netherlands 292.1 310.9 314.4 303.4 Singapore Port, Singapore 242.5 252.8 241.1 251.9 Shanghai Port, China 164.0 164.0 163.9 187.0 Hong Kong Port, Hong Kong* 157.3 169.2 167.2 168.8 Nagoya Port, Japan 118.3 120.1 133.9 133.2 Yokohama Port, Japan 102.4 114.5 115.2 117.8 Port of Antwerp, Belgium 106.5 111.9 119.8 115.7 Pusan Port, Korea 97.6 106.6 96.4 107.7 Marseilles Port, France 90.7 94.3 93.4 90.3 Port of Hamburg, Germany 71.1 76.7 75.8 81.0

Table 2.2: World major port’s total throughput in million metric tons for 1996-1999[3]

* Including rivertrade

Page 15: container shipping

10

Figure 2.3: World major port’s total cargo throughput in metric tons (top 10) for 1996-1999

Figure 2.4: World major port’s total cargo throughput in metric tons (top 10) for 1996-1999 In terms of total throughput, Port of Rotterdam has captured the top position for all four years studied. Singapore Port follows in the second position. Nagoya, Pusan, Marseilles and Hamburg Port had retained its position of fifth, eight, ninth and tenth respectively for all years recorded. A close competition between Shanghai and Hong Kong Port for third rank and, Yokohama and Antwerp Port for sixth rank can be seen in Figure 2.4. 2.2.2 World’s Top 10 Container Ports by Container Throughput (TEU) Table 1.2 (chapter 1) lists world’s major container ports (top 10) according to container throughput in `000 TEU based on the 1999 ranking. Below are the ports container throughputs in `000 TEU (top 10) for the years 1996-1999.

Total Cargo Throughput (metric tons) vs Year

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1996 1997 1998 1999

Year

Tota

l Car

go T

hrou

ghou

t (m

illio

n m

atric

tons

)Port of RotterdamSingapore PortShanghai PortHong Kong PortNagoya PortYokohama PortPort of AntwerpPusan PortMarseilles PortPort of Hamburg

Total Cargo Throughput (metric tons) vs Year

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1996 1997 1998 1999

Year

Tota

l Car

go T

hrou

ghou

t (m

illio

n m

atric

tons

)

Port of Rotterdam

Singapore Port

Shanghai Port

Hong Kong Port

Nagoya Port

Yokohama

Port of Antwerp

Pusan Port

Marseilles

Port of Hamburg

Page 16: container shipping

11

(`000 TEU) Port 1996 1997 1998 1999 Hong Kong Port, Hong Kong* 13,280 14,386 14,852 16,211 Singapore Port, Singapore 12,950 14,136 15,137 15,945 Kaohsiung Port, Taiwan 5,063 5,693 6,271 6,985 Pusan Port, Korea 4,684 5,233 5,753 6,440 Port of Rotterdam, Netherlands 4,971 5,495 6,012 6,343 Port of Long Beach, USA 3,067 3,505 4,098 4,408 Shanghai Port, China 1,970 2,520 3,066 4,216 Port of Hamburg, Germany 3,054 3,337 3,547 3,738 Port of Antwerp, Belgium 2,654 2,969 3,266 3,614 Port of Los Angeles, USA 2,698 2,960 3,378 3,510

Table 2.3: World major port’s container throughput in `000 TEU (top 10) for 1996-1999[3]

* Including rivertrade

Figure 2.5: World major port’s container throughput in `000 TEU (top 10) for 1996-1999

Figure 2.6: World major port’s container throughput in `000 TEU (top 10) for 1996-1999

Container Throughput (TEU) vs Year

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

1996 1997 1998 1999

Year

Con

tain

er T

hrou

ghpu

t (TE

U)

Hong Kong PortSingapore PortKaohsiung PortPusan PortPort of RotterdamPort of Long BeachShanghai PortPort of HamburgPort of AntwerpPort of Los Angeles

Container Throughput (TEU) vs Year

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

1996 1997 1998 1999Year

Con

tain

er T

hrou

ghpu

t (`0

00 T

EU)

Hong Kong PortSingapore PortKaohsiung PortPusan PortPort of RotterdamPort of Long BeachShanghai PortPort of HamburgPort of AntwerpPort of Los Angeles

Page 17: container shipping

12

While Hong Kong Port may have only captured the fourth place in the total throughput in 1999, in terms of container throughput in TEU, it has taken the top and second top port in all four years studied. From Figure 2.5 and 2.6, it is also very apparent that Hong Kong Port and Singapore Port are by far the two leading container ports in the world. The two Asian container ports are way above all the other major ports in the world in container handling volumes, with the closest Kaoshiung Port handling less than 8 million TEU. Both ports compete closely for the top spot but Hong Kong Port has always been a little ahead of Singapore Port, except for in 1998. One explanation is that perhaps the regional crisis in 1998 had more effect on Hong Kong Port than Singapore Port. However, the historical and projected trends suggest further rise in future. We highlight Shanghai Port, which seems to be growing swiftly, as its growth was 37.5% in 1999. Due to its sudden growth, it moved to 7th placing in 1999, after being the last ranked port for the past three years. Kaoshiung Port, Pusan Port and Port of Rotterdam compete very closely since 1996, and in 1999 Kaoshiung Port captured the third placing, overtaking the other two. During the four years period, all the ports have experienced growth in container throughput. It is notable that some of the top 10 ranked ports by total throughput (metric ton), such as the two Japanese ports (Nagoya and Yokohama) and Marseilles Port did not manage to secure a place is the top 10 world container ports (in TEU) list. Similarly, ports as Kaoshiung, Long Beach and Los Angeles, which appeared in Table 2.3 are not listed in Table 2.2. When comparing Table 2.2 with Table 2.3 we see that Rotterdam, which had the top place in total throughput by metric tons, is only ranked fifth in terms of container throughput in 1999. This is because most of the cargo handled in Rotterdam are bulk cargo, especially crude oil, rather than containerised cargo. For instance, in 1999 only 21% of the port’s total cargo throughput was containerised cargo, whereas Singapore handled 54% of containerised cargo in the same time period. 2.2.3 Some World Port’s Comparison: Hong Kong Port, Port of Long Beach and

Singapore Port We now compare three of the leading ports in the Asia-Pacific region. In 1999, Hong Kong Port was among the busiest port in the world. It is the leading container port for the Mainland of China and is a major hub port for intra-Asia trade. The port handled a total of 14.9 million TEU in 1998, followed by an increase of some 9.2% in the following year. Since 1995, the Port of Long Beach has been the busiest port in the United States. Ranked the sixth busiest in the world, the port handled 4.4 million TEU in 1999, an increase of 7.6% from the previous year. Combined, the Port of Long Beach and Los Angeles represent the third busiest container port complex in the world. Table 2.4 and 2.5 indicate the container throughput by type (empty or loaded) for a period of 24 months (Jan 1998-Dec 1999) for Hong Kong Port and the Port of Long Beach (please refer to Table 2.15 for Singapore Port’s container throughput (Jan 1995-Dec 1997)). These two leading ports in Asia and North America are then compared with Singapore Port.

Page 18: container shipping

13

HONG KONG PORT

(`000 TEU)

PORT OF LONG BEACH

(`000 TEU)

Month Loaded Empty Total Month Loaded Empty Total Jan`98 928 220 1,148 Jan`98 217 71 288 Feb`98 712 211 923 Feb`98 209 67 276 Mar`98 1,027 245 1,272 Mar`98 256 77 333 Apr`98 1,005 235 1,240 Apr`98 260 77 337 May`98 1,006 247 1,253 May`98 248 84 332 June`98 943 236 1,179 June`98 266 89 355 July`98 989 285 1,274 July`98 280 99 379 Aug`98 1,015 288 1,303 Aug`98 273 100 373 Sept`98 1,029 301 1,330 Sept`98 272 100 372 Oct`98 1,001 297 1,298 Oct`98 258 90 348 Nov`98 926 277 1,203 Nov`98 277 91 368 Dec`98 908 252 1,160 Dec`98 254 83 337 Jan`99 958 243 1,201 Jan`99 247 72 319 Feb`99 720 191 911 Feb`99 252 72 324 Mar`99 973 234 1,207 Mar`99 261 87 348 Apr`99 1,017 253 1,270 Apr`99 259 81 340 May`99 1,145 274 1,419 May`99 293 101 394 June`99 1,097 317 1,414 June`99 273 101 374 July`99 1,152 294 1,446 July`99 262 85 347 Aug`99 1,204 340 1,544 Aug`99 295 104 399 Sept`99 1,142 342 1,484 Sept`99 301 101 402 Oct`99 1,165 349 1,514 Oct`99 289 108 397 Nov`99 1,098 294 1,392 Nov`99 301 97 398 Dec`99 1,131 280 1,411 Dec`99 272 93 365 Table 2.4: Container throughput by type in Table 2.5: Container throughput by Hong Kong Port (Jan`98-Dec`99)[4] type in the Port of Long Beach

(Jan`98-Dec`99) [5]

Figure 2.7, 2.8 and 2.9 depict the container throughput in Hong Kong, Long Beach Port and Singapore Port, respectively for different time period. Figure 2.8 will be reproduced in section 2.4.2.1. In 1999, Hong Kong Port container throughput was 3.7 times more than the Port of Long Beach. Observing all three graphs, a similar trend can be seen. All three ports had marked a dip in every February and got to its peak in August, September and October of every year. Port of Long Beach shows slightly more proportion of empty containers (average of 25% and fluctuates between 24% to 26% throughout), compared to the Hong Kong Port (average of 21% and fluctuates between 19% to 23% throughout). Singapore Port in the other hand is noted to have a smaller proportion (but still significant) of empty containers compared to the two other ports (average of 12% and fluctuates between 10% to 15% throughout). Generally the container throughput patterns for all three ports are quite similar. This is because they all serve the same region of Asia-Pacific.

Page 19: container shipping

14

Figure 2.7: Container throughput by type in Hong Kong Port (Jan`98 – Dec`99)

Figure 2.8: Container throughput by type in Port of Long Beach (Jan`98 – Dec`99)

Figure 2.9: Container throughput by type in Singapore Port (Jan`95 – Dec`97)

Container Throughput in Hongkong Port (by type) vs Month

-200400600800

1,0001,2001,4001,6001,800

Jan`

98

Feb`

98

Mar

`98

Apr`9

8

May

`98

June

`98

July

`98

Aug`

98

Sept

`98

Oct

`98

Nov

`98

Dec

`98

Jan`

99

Feb`

99

Mar

`99

Apr`9

9

May

`99

June

`99

July

`99

Aug`

99

Sept

`99

Oct

`99

Nov

`99

Dec

`99

Month

Con

tain

er T

hrou

ghpu

t (in

`000

TEU

) EmptyLoaded

Container Throughput in the Port of Long Beach (by type) vs Month

-50

100150200250300350400450

Jan`

98

Feb`

98

Mar

`98

Apr`9

8

May

`98

June

`98

July

`98

Aug`

98

Sept

`98

Oct

`98

Nov

`98

Dec

`98

Jan`

99

Feb`

99

Mar

`99

Apr`9

9

May

`99

June

`99

July

`99

Aug`

99

Sept

`99

Oct

`99

Nov

`99

Dec

`99

Month

Con

tain

er T

hrou

ghpu

t (in

`000

TEU

) EmptyLoaded

Total Container Throughput vs Month

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

Jan

`95

Mar

`95

May

`95

July

`95

Sep

`95

Nov

`95

Jan

`96

Mar

`96

May

`96

July

`96

Sep

`96

Nov

`96

Jan

`97

Mar

`97

May

`97

July

`97

Sep

`97

Nov

`97

Month

Tota

l Con

tain

er T

hrou

ghpu

t (in

`000

TEU

)

EmptyLoaded

Page 20: container shipping

15

2.3 Global Sea Cargo Transshipment Transshipment of containers impacts on ports by generating additional throughput at the point where the transshipment occurs. Thus it may require additional vessels to cover the moves. Transshipment further leads to new opportunities for all parties involved in container shipping. It is estimated that around one quarter of the global container port throughput is generated from transshipment.

Region/Port 1994 throughput (million TEU)

Transshipment (%)

Asia/Mid-East Singapore 10.40 75 Hong Kong 11.10 25 Kaohsiung 5.20 40 Dubai Colombo Pusan Fujairah

1.88 0.95 3.50 0.72

50 80 20 80

Kobe/Osaka 3.29 15 Tokyo/Yokohama Khor Fakkan

4.11 0.48

10 80

Northern Europe Rotterdam 4.54 35 Hamburg 2.72 25 Antwerp 2.20 25 Bremerhaven Felixstowe

1.50 1.75

25 15

Le Havre

0.87 15

Mediterranean Algeciras

1.00

90

Damietta Table Marsaxlokk Limassol

0.53 0.38 0.27

90 90 90

Barcelona Piraeus La Spezia

0.54 0.52 0.82

33 30 12

Other

Kingston Durban Miami/Pt.Evergl

0.44 0.72 0.87

75 30 25

Table 2.6: Selected transshipment ports[6]

Page 21: container shipping

16

Table 2.6 shows selected transshipment ports in 1994. From the table, we can notice that most of the ports with high transshipment incidence are located on the East-West lanes. For instance, over 70% of the throughput volume of Singapore, Khor Fakkhan, Fujairah, Colombo, Algeciras, Damietta, Limassol and Marsaxlokk are generated from their transshipment traffic. Some recent statistics gives Singapore Port as handled some 70% of transshipment cargo in the first six months of 2000. We note that some Mediterranean ports depend almost exclusively on transshipments. As larger and faster ships, ‘megaships’, are introduced, the percentage of global transshipment will increase further. Asia, notably South East Asia is again promising a tremendous growth in the next five years and expected to remain as the leading transshipment region in the world. 2.4 Singapore Port Sea Cargo (Containerised) Flow and Trade Volumes Singapore has become the centre for shipping in Asia-Pacific region, in particular for South East Asia. Singapore is said to have developed into a model port for modern shipping. Singapore’s role as a transshipment hub for the Asia trade seems unassailable, in line with the Asian countries which are now becoming increasingly inter-dependent, exchanging raw materials, components and finished goods. Although its main focus is container shipping, the port also can accommodate all types of vessels. We now look in depth at Singapore Port statistics on total container throughput, total cargo handled by type and inward and outward containerised cargo by country on yearly and monthly basis. The information is based on data published by Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) and from Singapore Port Statistics. 2.4.1 Singapore Port Yearly based Statistics

2.4.1.1 Total Container Throughput (1987 - 1999)

No. Year Total container throughput (`000 TEU)

Annual growth (%)

1 1987 2,634.4 2 1988 3,375.1 28.12 3 1989 4,364.0 29.30 4 1990 5,223.5 19.70 5 1991 6,354.0 21.64 6 1992 7,555.8 18.91 7 1993 9,047.0 19.74 8 1994 10,400.3 14.76 9 1995 11,846.0 13.90 10 1996 12,944.5 9.27 11 1997 14,135.9 9.20 12 1998 15,135.6 7.07 13 1999 15,944.8 5.35

Table 2.7: Total container throughput (1987-1999)[7]

Page 22: container shipping

17

Total Container Throughput vs Year

y = 1,180x + 891

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Year

Tota

l Con

tain

er T

hrou

ghpu

t (`0

00 T

EU)

Figure 2.10: Total container throughput (1987-1999)

The volume of container throughput in Singapore Port is observed to be increasing for the past 13 years. Figure 2.10 resembles an annual growth rate of 1,180,000 TEU. From the linear regression model (y = 1,180x + 891), total container throughput of 17,411,000 TEU for the year of 2000 can be forecasted. The correlation coefficient of the regression line is 0.997. From Table 2.7, we can notice that the percentage of annual growth is gradually becoming smaller since 1993. We can further observe this trend from the curve in Figure 2.10. 2.4.1.2 Total Container Throughput by Type (Loaded or Empty) (1990 - 1997) No Year Total container

throughput (`000 TEU)

Annual growth

(%)

Empty container

(`000 TEU)

Annual growth

(%)

Loaded container

(`000 TEU)

Annual growth

(%)

Proportion by loaded

container(%) 1 1990 5,223.5 700.1 4,523.4 86.60 2 1991 6,354.0 21.64 857.2 22.44 5,496.8 21.52 86.51 3 1992 7,555.8 18.91 1,056.9 23.30 6,498.9 18.23 86.01 4 1993 9,047.0 19.74 1,280.9 21.19 7,766.1 19.50 85.84 5 1994 10,400.3 14.96 1,301.9 1.64 9,098.4 17.16 87.48 6 1995 11,846.0 13.90 1,353.3 3.95 10,492.7 15.32 88.58 7 1996 12,944.5 9.27 1,546.4 14.27 11,398.1 8.63 88.05 8 1997 14,135.7 9.20 1,774.8 14.77 12,360.9 8.45 87.44

Table 2.8: Total container throughput by type (loaded or empty), percentage of growth and proportion (1990-1997) [7]

Page 23: container shipping

Figure 2.11: Total container throughput by type (loaded or empty) (1990-1997)

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

Tota

l Con

tain

er T

hrou

ghpu

t(in

`000

TEU

)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997

Year

Total Container Throughput vs Year

EmptyLoaded

Figure 2.12: Loaded and Empty container throug

Total container throughput, both empty and lopast eight years. The loaded container usu86%-89% of the total throughput. Overall, thhas remained approximately constant with container throughput against time are plotted s 2.4.1.3 Total Cargo by Type (1987 - 1999) Cargo can be classified into either general cacontainerised and conventional cargo, whilecargo. A breakdown of total cargo is presente

Loaded Container Throughput vs Year

y = 1162.9x + 3221.4

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Year

Load

ed C

onta

iner

Th

roug

hput

(`00

0 TE

U)

21.52%

8.45%

8.63%

15.32%

17.16%19.50%

18.23%

18

hput (1990-1997)

aded containers have been increasing for the ally occupies the major proportion of about e percentage of loaded and empty containers

a ratio of 7:1. The loaded and the empty eparately in Figure 2.12.

rgo or bulk cargo. General cargo consists of bulk cargo refers to oil and other types of d in Table 2.9, Figure 2.13 and 2.14.

Empty Container Throughput vs Year

y = 141.42x + 597.56

700

900

1100

1300

1500

1700

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Year

Empt

y C

onta

iner

Th

roug

hput

(`00

0 TE

U)

23.30%

14.47%

14.27%

3.95%1.65%

21.19%

22.44%

Page 24: container shipping

19

(`000 tonnes) General Cargo Bulk Cargo

Year Total cargo handled

Annual growth (%)

Containerised Conventional Oil Others

1987 129,458.4 38,419.4 13,438.9 73,597.4 4,002.7 1988 154,738.7 19.5 51,255.6 15,684.1 83,501.5 4,297.5 1989 174,297.8 12.6 65,190.2 18,245.5 84,420.1 6,441.9 1990 187,789.3 7.7 76,630.6 17,757.1 86,905.5 6,496.1 1991 206,428.9 9.9 90,680.6 17,503.3 91,514.8 6,730.2 1992 238,445.9 15.5 108,954.0 16,763.3 105,444.3 7,284.4 1993 273,723.1 14.8 127,074.6 15,568.4 123,477.3 7,602.7 1994 290,074.7 6.0 142,240.3 15,006.8 124,079.9 8,747.8 1995 305,484.0 5.3 154,500.1 15,244.8 126,375.0 9,364.1 1996 314,164.0 2.8 160,278.8 14,804.5 129,877.7 9,203.1 1997 327,506.7 4.2 170,140.1 15,418.6 129,786.6 12,161.3 1998 312,322.1 -4.6 160,317.9 12,650.4 127,168.0 12,185.8 1999 325,902.2 4.4 176,568.6 11,984.8 124,385.7 12,963.1 Table 2.9: Total cargo by type and annual growth (1987-1999) [7][8]

Total Cargo by Type vs Year

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

200,000

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Year

Tota

l Car

go (i

n `0

00 to

nnes

)

Containerised

Oil

Conventional

Others

Figure 2.13: Total cargo by type (1987-1999)

Page 25: container shipping

20

Total Cargo by Type vs Year

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999Year

Tota

l Car

go (i

n `0

00 T

ons)

Others

Conventional

Oil

Containerised

Figure 2.14: Total cargo by type (1987-1999)

For the first eleven years, the growth rate of all cargo types has been positive. In 1998, there was a drop of 4.6% in the annual growth due to the regional crisis. However it rebounded to 4.4% in the following year. The steepest growth was in the year of 1992 and 1993 (Table 2.9). Singapore Port was at its busiest in 1997, where the port handled a volume of 327 million tonnes. Figure 2.14 shows that containerised cargo had increased at much faster rate than oil cargo. The following table indicates ranked proportion by all types of cargo handled in Singapore Port.

Year Proportion of containerised cargo

(%)

Proportion of oil cargo

(%)

Proportion of conventional

cargo (%)

Proportion of other cargo

(%) 1987 29.68 56.85 10.38 3.09 1988 33.12 53.96 10.14 2.78 1989 37.40 48.43 10.47 3.70 1990 40.81 46.28 9.46 3.46 1991 43.93 44.33 8.48 3.26 1992 45.69 44.22 7.03 3.05 1993 46.42 45.11 5.69 2.78 1994 49.04 42.78 5.17 3.02 1995 50.58 41.37 4.99 3.07 1996 51.02 41.34 4.71 2.93 1997 51.95 39.63 4.71 3.71 1998 51.33 40.72 4.05 3.90 1999 54.18 37.68 3.68 3.98

Table 2.10: Ranked proportion of all types of cargo handled in Singapore Port (1987-1999) From Table 2.10, it is obvious that the predominant cargo types handled in Singapore is containerised and oil cargo. While oil cargo had a larger percentage than containerised cargo from 1987 to 1991, in subsequent years, containerised cargo overtook oil cargo. This

Page 26: container shipping

21

is demonstrated by the statistics which gives an average proportion of 49.97% and 36.99% for oil and containerised cargo respectively from 1987 to 1991 and, 41.61% and 50.23% from 1992 till end of survey. The share of conventional cargo is also seen to be continuously decreasing throughout the study. Containerised cargo on the other hand has increased steadily over years. The ‘other cargo’ percentage is reasonably constant (fluctuates between 2.78 to 3.98%). There was a negative growth in all types of cargo in 1998, except for the ‘others’ categorised cargo due to the economic slowdown in Asia. Generally for the period of 1987-1999, containerised and oil cargo contributed the most to the statistics. 2.4.1.4 Inward and Outward Containerised Cargo by Country (1989-1997) Total containerised cargo in Singapore Port can be further divided into two: inward containerised and outward containerised cargo. Table 2.11 and 2.12 show the statistics, and Figure 2.15 and 2.16 are two different graphs plotted from inward and outward containerised cargo. Dotted lines in Figure 2.15 refer to outward cargo. Figure 2.16 is a stacked area graph.

(`000 tonnes) Country Year South East

Asia North

East Asia South Asia

West Asia

Europe America Oceania Africa

1989 10,872.7 8,558.7 1,793.8 746.2 5,551.0 2,389.7 1,156.4 382.2 1990 12,648.2 11,249.7 1,729.8 840.9 6,899.2 2,562.1 1,098.4 454.3 1991 15,130.0 12,376.9 2,425.9 1,126.0 7,435.7 3,024.7 2,021.7 639.3 1992 20,417.8 13,838.8 3,619.4 1,068.0 8,537.7 3,863.3 2,712.9 711.9 1993 24,275.0 15,979.9 4,055.7 1,452.0 11,318.7 3,674.7 2,629.6 875.0 1994 27,253.2 17,066.0 4,756.7 1,271.4 12,791.6 4,413.3 2,885.1 973.5 1995 30,271.4 17,207.9 5,286.5 1,351.1 13,532.0 5,660.0 3,139.4 1,473.8 1996 31,023.2 18,160.6 5,567.1 1,250.6 12,953.8 6,074.5 3,305.9 1,441.9 1997 32,946.4 19,122.4 6,139.1 1,473.2 11,170.4 5,334.3 4,165.2 1,213.3 Table 2.11: Inward containerised cargo by country (1989-1997) [7]

(`000 tonnes)

Country Year South East

Asia North

East Asia South Asia

West Asia

Europe America Oceania Africa

1989 9,925.3 7,574.0 2,282.7 1,878.4 5,923.5 3,382.9 1,546.9 655.6 1990 12,420.6 7,962.8 2,668.9 1,983.3 7,728.7 3,669.8 1,413.2 945.9 1991 13,751.8 9,558.1 3,035.1 3,086.9 8,585.6 4,068.5 1,735.6 1,250.0 1992 16,677.5 10,394.7 3,856.1 3,868.0 10,050.0 5,172.8 2,227.5 1,552.6 1993 19,783.5 12,257.8 4,884.9 4,106.1 11,219.6 5,267.3 2,654.8 2,126.3 1994 23,406.0 13,956.0 5,638.7 4,120.8 12,024.9 6,183.1 3,073.1 1,956.0 1995 26,655.3 14,924.2 5,578.8 4,130.8 12,436.5 6,537.4 3,188.1 2,581.7 1996 28,367.3 14,853.4 6,361.8 4,509.2 13,094.8 6,752.1 3,557.2 2,505.1 1997 28,518.0 15,826.6 7,489.6 4,485.3 15,192.2 7,131.5 4,524.3 2,737.2 Table 2.12: Outward containerised cargo by country (1989-1997) [7]

Page 27: container shipping

22

Inward/Outward Containerized Cargo(by country) vs Year

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997Year

Inw

ard/

Out

war

d C

onta

iner

ized

Car

go (i

n `0

00 to

nnes

)

South East Asia

South East Asia*

North East Asia

North East Asia*

Europe

Europe*

South Asia

South Asia*

America

America*

West Asia

West Asia*

Ocenia

Ocenia*

Africa

Africa*

Figure 2.15: Inward/Outward containerised cargo by country (1989-1997) *Outward containerised cargo

Figure 2.16: Inward/Outward containerised cargo by country (1989-1997)-stacked area

Inward Containerized Cargo

-

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997

Con

tane

rized

Car

go (`

000

tonn

es)

Outward Containerized Cargo

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997

Africa

Ocenia

West Asia

America

South Asia

Europe

North East Asia

South East Asia

Page 28: container shipping

23

Figure 2.15 indicates a tremendous increase from South East Asia in inward and outward cargo into/from Singapore Port from 1992 to 1997. It is apparent that South East Asia, North East Asia and Europe are the three prominent regions dealing with Singapore Port. In 1997, inward cargo from these three regions constituted 40%, 23% and 8% while their outward cargo accounted to 33%, 18% and 9% respectively of total tonnes handled in Singapore Port. Europe’s inward contribution however, is seen as declining in the last two years of study. America and South Asia contributed much smaller portion, while Oceania, West Asia and Africa presented a negligible share. The total inward and outward cargo has increased by 2.6 and 2.5 times, respectively between 1989 and 1997. From Figure 2.16, it is noted that all regions had developed their containerised cargo gradually from 1989 to 1991, but a rapid growth in the inward volume is marked from 1991 to 1995 as shown by the steep gradient in the graph. Generally a similar pattern of growth is seen in both inward and outward containerised cargo by all regions in the period of nine years. Even the ranking by country according to total volume for both inward and outward containerised cargo was the same in the year 1997. We now examine the difference between the inward and outward of all regions involved. (`000 tonnes) Country

Year South East Asia

North East Asia

South Asia

West Asia Europe America Oceania Africa

1989 (947.4) (984.7) 488.9 1,132.2 372.5 993.2 390.5 273.4 1990 (227.6) (3,286.9) 939.1 1,142.4 829.5 1,107.7 314.8 491.6 1991 (1,378.2) (2,818.8) 609.2 1,960.9 1,149.9 1,043.8 (286.1) 610.7 1992 (3,740.3) (3,444.1) 236.7 2,800.0 1,512.3 1,309.5 (485.4) 840.7 1993 (4,491.5) (3,722.1) 829.2 2,654.1 (99.1) 1,592.6 25.2 1,251.3 1994 (3,847.2) (3,110.0) 882.0 2,849.4 (766.7) 1,769.8 188.0 982.5 1995 (3,616.1) (2,283.7) 292.3 2,779.7 (1,095.5) 877.4 48.7 1,107.9 1996 (2,655.9) (3,307.2) 794.7 3,258.6 141.0 677.6 251.3 1,063.2 1997 (4,428.4) (3,295.8) 1,350.5 3,012.1 4,021.8 1,797.2 359.1 1,523.9

Table 2.13: Difference (Total Outward – Total Inward) 1989–1997

Figure 2.17: Difference (Outward - Inward) for all regions (1989-1997)

D if f e r e n c e ( O u t w a r d - I n w a r d ) v s Y e a r

( 5 ,0 0 0 )

( 4 ,0 0 0 )

( 3 ,0 0 0 )

( 2 ,0 0 0 )

( 1 ,0 0 0 )

0

1 ,0 0 0

2 ,0 0 0

3 ,0 0 0

4 ,0 0 0

5 ,0 0 0

1 9 8 9 1 9 9 0 1 9 9 1 1 9 9 2 1 9 9 3 1 9 9 4 1 9 9 5 1 9 9 6 1 9 9 7

Y e a r

Dife

renc

e (O

utw

ard

- Inw

ard)

(`000

tonn

es)

S o u th E a s t A s ia

N o r th E a s t A s ia

E u r o p e

S o u th A s ia

A m e r ic a

W e s t A s ia

O c e a n ia

A f r ic a

Page 29: container shipping

24

(`000 tonnes) Year Total

Outward Total

Inward Difference

(Total Outward –Total Inward) 1989 33,169.30 31,450.7 1,718.60 1990 38,793.2 37,482.6 1,310.60 1991 45,071.6 44,180.2 891.40 1992 53,799.2 54,769.8 (970.60) 1993 62,300.3 64,260.6 (1,960.30) 1994 70,358.6 71,410.8 (1,052.20) 1995 76,032.8 77,922.1 (1,889.30) 1996 80,000.9 79,777.6 223.30 1997 85,904.7 81,564.3 4,340.4 Total 545,430.60 542,818.7 2,611.9

Table 2.14: Difference (Total Outward – Total Inward) 1989-1997

Figure 2.17 breaks down the difference in great detail by regions. South East Asia and North East Asia reflects more inward flows, while South Asia, West Asia, America and Africa reflects more outward flows for all years recorded. Compared to all regions, Oceania is seen to have balanced its inward and outward, while West Asia is noticed to have increased outward flow over the years. Europe, in the other hand changed its trend from 1993, where it started to concentrate in more inward containerised cargo than outward. Then again from 1996 onwards the earlier trend was repeated. It is also noted that Europe had radically increased its outward and decreased its inward, causing the biggest difference in 1997 compared to all other regions. Generally the outward cargo handled in Singapore Port is greater than inward by 2.6 million tonnes during this period of study, except for the year 1992 to 1995, the inward outnumbered the outward (Table 2.14).

2.4.2 Singapore Port Monthly based Statistics 2.4.2.1 Total Container Throughput (Jan`95 - Dec`97)

(`000 TEU) Month Total Container

Throughput Empty Loaded

Jan `95 946.4 108.2 838.2 Feb `95 867.4 109.9 757.6 Mar `95 969.5 108.6 860.9 Apr `95 960.1 97.2 863.0 May `95 988.3 108.6 879.7 June `95 973.0 110.8 862.2 July `95 1,037.4 113.8 923.6 Aug `95 1046.5 113.5 933.1 Sep `95 977.5 112.4 865.1 Oct `95 1,047.9 123.0 924.9 Nov `95 986.9 122.8 864.1 Dec `95 1,030.0 120.0 910.0

Table 2.15(a): Total container throughput (Jan`95- Dec`95)

Page 30: container shipping

25

(`000 TEU) Month Total Container

Throughput Empty Loaded

Jan `96 1,047.7 120.4 927.2 Feb `96 958.4 118.0 840.4 Mar `96 1,021.5 121.6 900.0 Apr `96 1,041.0 121.7 919.2 May `96 1,093.3 133.5 959.8 June `96 1,073.7 124.7 949.1 July `96 1,143.9 136.1 1,007.8 Aug `96 1,128.5 134.5 994.0 Sep `96 1,085.7 130.4 955.3 Oct `96 1,137.7 137.6 1,000.1 Nov `96 1,098.7 141.4 957.4 Dec `96 1,114.1 126.5 987.6 Jan `97 1,105.2 135.9 969.3 Feb `97 963.3 132.4 830.9 Mar `97 1,187.1 140.8 1,046.3 Apr `97 1,139.6 124.0 1,015.6 May `97 1,180.4 131.0 1,049.4 June `97 1,183.7 142.3 1,041.4 July `97 1,250.6 142.7 1,107.9 Aug `97 1,235.5 148.1 1,087.4 Sep `97 1,207.0 147.4 1,059.6 Oct `97 1,272.0 175.2 1,096.8 Nov `97 1,198.9 177.9 1,198.9 Dec `97 1,212.4 177.1 1,212.4

Table 2.15(b): Total container throughput (Jan`96- Dec`97) [7]

Figure 2.18: Total container throughput by type (Jan`95 - Dec`97)

Total Container Throughput vs Month

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

Jan

`95

Mar

`95

May

`95

July

`95

Sep

`95

Nov

`95

Jan

`96

Mar

`96

May

`96

July

`96

Sep

`96

Nov

`96

Jan

`97

Mar

`97

May

`97

July

`97

Sep

`97

Nov

`97

Month

Tota

l Con

tain

er T

hrou

ghpu

t(in

`000

TEU

)

EmptyLoaded

Page 31: container shipping

26

The seasonal trend in total container throughput can be seen in the monthly data from 1995 to 1997. It is observed that the volume of container throughput fluctuates between 0.87 to 1.27 million TEU. The empty containers are noticed to be rising as the total volume of containers increased throughout the 36 months recorded. However, the proportion of empty containers is pretty constant at the percentage of 11.41% in 1995, 11.95% in 1996 and 12.56% in 1997. We can also see a seasonal trend that the containers are at a low in every February and at peak in October. 2.4.2.2 Total Cargo by Type (Jan`95 - Dec`97)

(`000 tonnes)

General Cargo Bulk Cargo Year Total Cargo

Handled Containerised Conventional Oil Others

Jan `95 24,871.1 12,405.5 1,160.2 10,530.7 774.6 Feb `95 22,954.8 11,260.5 1,014.7 10,065.8 614 Mar `95 25,394.0 12957.6 1,218.9 10,517.3 700.3 Apr `95 25,076.7 12,832.5 1,308.7 10,233.8 701.6 May `95 25,824.3 12,975.3 1,399.9 10,652.9 796.2 June `95 25,318.3 12,819.6 1,311.7 10,369.0 818 July `95 25,975.9 13,186.9 1,335.1 10,685.4 768.5 Aug `95 27,226.2 13,518.8 1,374.1 11,342.4 990.9 Sep `95 25,154.0 12,616.8 1,305.3 10,388.4 843.5 Oct `95 26,111.1 13,527.3 1,329.9 10,436.7 817.1 Nov `95 25,243.8 12,737.9 1,218.1 10,587.9 700 Dec `95 26,350.0 13,700.0 1,300.0 10,500.0 850 Jan `96 25,808.4 13,121.2 1,183.1 10,682.4 821.6 Feb `96 23,739.6 11,883.3 996.2 10,166.6 693.5 Mar `96 26,446.1 13,127.3 1,241.0 11,270.0 808 Apr `96 26,493.3 13,249.9 1,251.3 11,210.9 781.2 May `96 26,302.3 13,176.8 1,193.6 11,254.4 677.5 June `96 26,356.6 13,227.3 1,290.4 11,005.8 833.1 July `96 27,257.2 14,110.0 1,289.1 11,023.5 834.5 Aug `96 26,035.3 13,691.3 1,225.7 10,338.8 779.5 Sep `96 26,650.7 13,520.4 1,165.1 11,150.0 820 Oct `96 26,048.1 13,941.4 1,326.7 10,072.2 707.9 Nov `96 25,827.1 13,402.8 1,313.9 10,417.3 693 Dec `96 26,747.0 13,827.0 1,328.4 10,837.3 754.3 Jan `97 25,750.6 13,428.9 1,305.7 10,010.9 1,005.0 Feb `97 23,303.6 11,616.1 1,149.9 9,830.1 707.6 Mar `97 27,960.5 14,563.3 1,283.7 11,109.1 1,004.4 Apr `97 28,391.1 14,160.0 1,329.8 11,826.8 1,074.5 May `97 30,382.9 14,673.7 1,247.8 13,520.9 940.5 June `97 28,220.2 14,548.9 1,184.7 11,414.6 1,071.9

Table 2.16(a): Total cargo by type (Jan`95-June`97)

Page 32: container shipping

27

(`000 tonnes) General Cargo Bulk Cargo

Year Total Cargo Handled

Containerised Conventional Oil Others

July `97 28,400.1 14,791.2 1,388.6 11,143.5 1,076.9 Aug `97 26,756.7 14,677.7 1,289.6 9,770.5 1,018.8 Sep `97 27,697.2 14,480.6 1,335.0 10,830.5 1,051.1 Oct `97 27,912.7 14,993.6 1,316.5 10,365.1 1,237.5 Nov `97 25,827.5 13,995.8 1,326.2 9,467.0 1,038.5 Dec `97 26,885.1 14,210.2 1,261.1 10,478.9 934.8

Table 2.16(b): Total cargo by type (July`97-Dec`97) [7]

Figure 2.19: Total cargo handled by type (Jan`95 - Dec`97) Similar to the total container throughput, the total cargo handled in Singapore Port also fluctuates from 22.95 to 30.38 million tonnes. Monthly average growth rates of containerised and conventional cargo are generally more compared to oil and other cargo. Again, a drop in all types of cargo is indicated in February of all three years studied. Total cargo handled exceeded 30 million tonnes for the first time in May 1997, the drastic increase in oil cargo mainly contributed to this figure. Both the containerised and oil cargo dominate the major proportion of the total cargo (51.2% and 40.7% each) while conventional and other cargo occupy the rest.

Total Cargo Handled (by type) vs Month

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

Jan

`95

Mar

`95

May

`95

July

`95

Sep

`95

Nov

`95

Jan

`96

Mar

`96

May

`96

July

`96

Sep

`96

Nov

`96

Jan

`97

Mar

`97

May

`97

July

`97

Sep

`97

Nov

`97

Month

Tota

l Car

go H

andl

ed

(in `0

00 to

nnes

)

OthersConventionalOil Containerised

Page 33: container shipping

28

2.4.2.3 Inward and Outward Containerised Cargo by Country (Jan`96 - Dec`97) (`000 tonnes)

Country Year South

East Asia North

East Asia South Asia

West Asia

Europe America Oceania Africa

Jan `96 2,309.0 1,534.5 495.7 112.9 1,067.6 566.5 255.1 103.1 Feb `96 2,237.4 1,510.5 425.5 95.9 998.5 397.5 256.8 94.9 Mar `96 2,516.6 1,350.2 509.0 100.0 1,126.6 509.4 269.0 108.4 Apr `96 2,575.4 1,491.3 538.1 112.2 1,171.7 455.8 269.7 104.1 May `96 2,549.3 1,439.7 417.2 90.9 1,080.5 565.6 277.7 131.1 June `96 2,579.9 1,539.1 421.3 103.9 1,044.8 463.3 270.1 133.3 July `96 2,812.7 1,527.6 493.3 104.2 1,198.1 465.7 305.4 116.0 Aug `96 2,529.5 1,540.7 510.9 113.0 1,090.5 552.7 286.0 118.1 Sep `96 2,711.9 1,583.2 416.8 93.5 996.4 476.3 274.8 161.0 Oct `96 2,783.1 1,552.2 408.9 106.3 1,089.7 580.0 264.7 128.2 Nov `96 2,582.3 1,562.1 455.8 113.6 1,006.2 513.1 287.5 127.0 Dec `96 2,836.0 1,529.4 474.5 104.1 1,083.3 528.9 288.1 116.6 Jan `97 2,542.8 1,541.6 511.0 137.0 1,087.1 509.9 270.9 107.2 Feb `97 2,274.2 1,343.3 436.3 111.6 921.4 388.2 256.2 79.7 Mar `97 2,947.3 1,595.5 483.8 132.1 1,131.1 475.8 323.3 134.6 Apr `97 2,777.7 1,570.8 504.0 134.3 1,152.4 467.3 345.9 94.6 May `97 2,849.5 1,623.3 504.5 129.6 1,201.8 473.4 379.0 113.0 June `97 2,876.9 1,612.5 504.2 118.3 1,154.2 446.7 388.7 98.3 July `97 2,634.1 1,643.0 571.4 137.9 1,369.8 479.0 368.5 110.6 Aug `97 2,696.5 1,767.0 515.9 119.1 1,224.7 403.2 361.3 104.5 Sep `97 2,829.5 1,593.0 574.9 117.3 1,065.2 411.3 362.8 94.0 Oct `97 2,819.6 1,699.4 518.2 116.4 1,221.0 443.2 373.5 107.6 Nov `97 2,695.7 1,558.8 480.6 108 1,133.8 425.1 355.8 74.1 Dec `97 3,002.0 1,574.2 534.3 111.4 1,061.1 411.2 379.4 95.1

Table 2.17: Inward containerised cargo by country (Jan`96-Dec`97) [7]

(`000 tonnes) Country

Year South East Asia

North East Asia

South Asia

West Asia

Europe America Oceania Africa

Jan `96 2,467.5 1,197.7 547.0 376.3 1,036.6 575.0 232.6 205.9 Feb `96 1,992.5 1,012.5 449.3 389.5 1,085.6 469.7 240.8 189.6 Mar `96 2,412.5 1,387.2 423.8 352.0 1,094.2 477.8 252.0 193.0 Apr `96 2,313.0 1,250.8 512.5 368.1 1,092.5 489.5 255.1 204.9 May `96 2,362.1 1,221.7 524.8 364.6 1,063.6 553.4 287.2 188.2 June `96 2,352.5 1,262.2 502.7 360.2 1,103.1 555.9 290.6 189.9 July `96 2,484.8 1,271.2 535.2 387.6 1,148.7 655.9 331.6 206.3 Aug `96 2,379.4 1,239.5 561.7 368.1 1,132.7 635.1 343.4 230.7 Sep `96 2,308.5 1,202.0 581.5 373.3 1,098.6 648.1 322.7 220.5 Oct `96 2,434.0 1,270.6 593.7 404.0 1,077.0 624.7 368.9 244.6 Nov `96 2,395.5 1,237.9 571.0 381.6 1,055.9 523.3 346.4 229.7 Dec `96 2,465.0 1,299.9 558.7 383.7 1,106.2 547.4 288.8 201.9

Table 2.18(a): Outward containerised cargo by country (Jan`96-Dec`96)

Page 34: container shipping

29

(`000 tonnes) Country

Year South East Asia

North East Asia

South Asia

West Asia

Europe America Oceania Africa

Jan `97 2,453.8 1,200.2 531.4 333.8 1,145.8 567.1 305.2 191.3 Feb `97 1,924.5 1,076.2 491.3 291.9 1,074.3 470.8 267.1 179.8 Mar `97 2,573.4 1,427.8 598.2 373.5 1,238.3 543.5 342.9 233.3 Apr `97 2,484.4 1,316.5 639.5 380.7 1,136.5 590.3 329.1 223.0 May `97 2,612.3 1,332.8 629.9 373.6 1,271.9 580.1 375.8 212.2 June `97 2,533.4 1,341.7 603.5 364.6 1,265.6 614.8 383.9 234.4 July `97 2,557.0 1,368.0 621.2 397.0 1,213.1 687.5 388.8 233.8 Aug `97 2,442.5 1,348.9 634.4 400.8 1,353.3 629.7 433.8 231.7 Sep `97 2,343.2 1,343.8 690.5 373.1 1,338.0 640.5 443.6 246.5 Oct `97 2,392.8 1,388.9 686.1 403.6 1,446.2 637.8 447.9 282.1 Nov `97 2,141.9 1,395.8 655.5 345.2 1,341.7 567.6 445.8 262.3 Dec `97 2,057.0 1,284.2 708.0 447.5 1,367.7 603.6 360.6 206.7

Table 2.18(b): Outward containerised cargo by country (Jan`97-Dec`97) [7]

Inward/Outward Containerized Cargo (by country) vs Year

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Jan

`96

Feb

`96

Mar

`96

Apr `

96

May

`96

June

`96

July

`96

Aug

`96

Sep

`96

Oct

`96

Nov

`96

Dec

`96

Jan

`97

Feb

`97

Mar

`97

Apr `

97

May

`97

June

`97

July

`97

Aug

`97

Sep

`97

Oct

`97

Nov

`97

Dec

`97

Year

Con

tain

eriz

ed C

argo

(in

`000

tonn

es)

South East AsiaSouth East Asia*North East AsiaNorth East Asia*EuropeEurope*South Asia South Asia* AmericaAmerica*West AsiaWest Asia*OceniaOcenia*AfricaAfrica*

Figure 2.20: Inward/Outward containerised cargo by country (Jan `96-Dec`97) *Outward containerised cargo

Page 35: container shipping

30

Figure 2.21: Inward/Outward containerised cargo by country (Jan`96-Dec`97)-stacked area We now look at the monthly inward and outward container flow by region for 1996 and 1997. Observing Figure 2.20 and 2.21 of the inward and outward containerised cargo, we see the dip in February of every year. Singapore Port handled an all-time low of 5.8 million tonnes of both inward and outward cargo in February 1997. This dip is very obvious in South East Asia and North East Asia, the two prominent regions in containerised cargo. The total cargo however rose drastically over 20% in the following month, reaching 7.2 and 7.3 million tonnes of inward and outward cargo. Inwards from West Asia and Africa were fairly constant throughout this duration while inwards from the other regions were more unpredictable as the figures were fluctuating through the period studied. Generally the monthly growth pattern for inward and outward containerised cargo is quite identical. The difference between the outward and inward by regions for 24 months is presented in the tables and graph below.

(`000 tonnes) Difference by Country (Outward – Inward)

Month South East Asia

North East Asia

South Asia

West Asia

Europe America Oceania Africa

Jan `96 158.5 (336.8) 51.3 263.4 (31.0) 8.5 (22.5) 102.8 Feb `96 (244.9) (498.0) 23.8 293.6 87.1 72.2 (16) 94.7 Mar `96 (104.1) 37.0 (85.2) 252.0 (32.4) (31.6) (17) 84.6 Apr `96 (262.4) (240.5) (25.6) 255.9 (79.2) 33.7 (14.6) 100.8 May `96 (187.2) (218.0) 107.6 273.7 (16.9) (12.2) 9.5 57.1 June `96 (227.4) (276.9) 81.4 256.3 58.3 92.6 20.5 56.6 July `96 (327.9) (256.4) 41.9 283.4 (49.4) 190.2 26.2 90.3 Aug `96 (150.1) (301.2) 50.8 255.1 42.2 82.4 57.4 112.6 Sep `96 (403.4) (381.2) 164.7 279.8 102.2 171.8 47.9 59.5 Oct `96 (349.1) (281.6) 184.8 297.7 (12.7) 44.7 104.2 116.4 Nov `96 (186.8) (324.2) 115.2 268.0 49.7 10.2 58.9 102.7 Dec `96 (371.0) (229.5) 84.2 279.6 22.9 18.5 0.7 85.3

Table 2.19(a): Difference (Outward – Inward) for all regions (Jan`96 – Dec`96)

Outward Containerised Cargo

Jan

`96

Mar

`96

May

`96

July

`96

Sep

`96

Nov

`96

Jan

`97

Mar

`97

May

`97

July

`97

Sep

`97

Nov

`97

MonthSouth East Asia North East AsiaEurope AmericaSouth Asia West AsiaOcenia Africa

Inward Containerised Cargo

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

Jan

`96

Mar

`96

May

`96

July

`96

Sep

`96

Nov

`96

Jan

`97

Mar

`97

May

`97

July

`97

Sep

`97

Nov

`97

Con

tain

eris

ed C

argo

(in

`000

tonn

es)

Page 36: container shipping

31

(`000 tonnes) Difference by Country (Outward – Inward)

Month South East Asia

North East Asia

South Asia

West Asia

Europe America Oceania Africa

Jan `97 (89.0) (341.4) 20.4 196.8 58.7 57.2 34.3 84.1 Feb `97 (349.7) (267.1) 55.0 180.3 152.9 82.6 10.9 100.1 Mar `97 (373.9) (167.7) 114.4 241.4 107.2 67.7 19.6 98.7 Apr `97 (293.30) (254.30) 135.50 246.40 (15.90) 123.00 (16.80) 128.40 May `97 (237.20) (290.50) 125.40 244.00 70.10 106.70 (3.20) 99.20 June `97 (343.50) (270.80) 99.30 246.30 111.40 168.10 (4.80) 136.10 July `97 (77.10) (275.00) 49.80 259.10 (156.70) 208.50 20.30 123.20 Aug `97 (254.00) (418.10) 118.50 281.70 128.60 226.50 72.50 127.20 Sep `97 (486.30) (249.20) 115.60 255.80 272.80 229.20 80.80 152.50 Oct `97 (426.80) (310.50) 167.90 287.20 225.20 194.60 74.40 174.50 Nov `97 (553.80) (163.00) 174.90 237.20 207.90 142.50 90.00 188.20 Dec `97 (945.00) (290.00) 173.70 336.10 306.60 192.40 (18.80) 111.60 Table 2.19(b): Difference (Outward – Inward) for all regions (Jan`97 – Dec`97) [7] (`000 tonnes)

Month Total Outward Total Inward Difference (Total Outward -Total Inward)

Jan `96 6,638.6 6,444.4 194.2 Feb `96 5,829.5 6,017.0 (187.5) Mar `96 6,592.5 6,489.2 103.3 Apr `96 6,486.4 6,718.3 (231.9) May `96 6,565.6 6,552.0 13.6 June `96 6,617.1 6,555.7 61.4 July `96 7,021.3 7,023.0 (1.7) Aug `96 6,890.6 6,741.4 149.2 Sep `96 6,755.2 6,713.9 41.3 Oct `96 7,017.5 6,913.1 104.4 Nov `96 6,741.3 6,647.6 93.7 Dec `96 6,851.6 6,960.9 (109.3) Jan `97 6,728.6 6,707.5 21.1 Feb `97 5,775.9 5,810.9 (35.0) Mar `97 7,330.9 7,223.5 107.4 Apr `97 7,100.0 7,047.0 53.0 May `97 7,388.6 7,274.1 114.5 June `97 7,341.9 7,199.8 142.1 July `97 7,466.4 7,314.3 152.1 Aug `97 7,475.1 7,192.2 282.9 Sept `97 7,419.2 7,048.0 371.2 Oct `97 7,685.4 7,298.9 386.5 Nov `97 7,155.8 6,831.9 323.9 Dec `97 7,035.3 7,168.7 (133.4) Total 165,910.3 163,893.3 2,017.0

Table 2.20: Difference (Total Outward – Total Inward) Jan`96 – Dec`97

Page 37: container shipping

32

Difference (Outward - Inward) vs Month

(1,000)

(800)

(600)

(400)

(200)

0

200

400

Jan

`96

Mar

`96

May

`96

July

`96

Sep

`96

Nov

`96

Jan

`97

Mar

`97

May

`97

July

`97

Sep

`97

Nov

`97

Month

Diff

eren

ce (O

utw

ard

- Inw

ard)

(`0

00 to

nnes

)

South East Asia

North East Asia

Europe

South Asia

America

West Asia

Oceania

Africa

Figure 2.22: Difference (Outward – Inward) for all regions (Jan`96 – Dec`97) Generally there is more outward containerised cargo compared to inward containerised cargo (both the years recorded higher outward cargo). Similar to the annual report, statistics by country shows that all regions, except South East Asia and North East Asia reveal greater outward compared with the inward in all 24 months on record. South East Asia had also marked a very significant increase of inward than outward in the last month of study. West Asia’s and Africa’s outward again shows greater outward compared to inward. America’s figure in early months is unpredictable as it fluctuates outward-inward, but it is apparent that the trend is more outward from the month of June `96 onwards. Other regions seem to have more outward containerised cargo than inward. Basically, the difference in monthly outward-inward containerised cargo is similar to that in the annual statistics. 2.5 Singapore as a Global Marine Hub Located at the crossroads of international trading in sea routes in the Asia-Pacific, Singapore is strategically positioned to participate in as a transshipment hub for South East

Page 38: container shipping

33

Asia and contribute to its growth process. Singapore is also an active feeder shipping spot in Asia, with a network service ranging from short to long routes. Today, Singapore Port offers full range of service, including fuel, pilotage and towage, cargo, vessel repairs, warehousing, banking, insurance, communications, entertainment, training and education in port operation and management, logistics and distribution management and other transport studies. Singapore now has become the global marine hub and the seventh largest ship registry in the world. References: [1]

Ports and Habors, December 2000 [2]

Ports and Habors, September 2000 [3] http://www.portmanagement.com [4] http://www.info.gov.hk [5] http://www.polb.com [6]

Niko Wijnolst and Frans Waals, “Shipping Industry Structure”, Delft University Press, 1999 [7] Singapore Port Statistics [8]

http://www.mpa.com.sg

Page 39: container shipping

34

3. Major Sea Cargo Players The shippers, carriers, freight forwarders, forwarder and third party logistics providers and information technology service providers are the core participants in the sea cargo industry. The physical flow of sea cargo is governed by the port and custom authorities. (Some important terms in sea cargo handling are listed in Glossary). In this report, we will mainly focus on carriers. 3.1 Introduction to Ocean Carriers Since the introduction of the modern container shipping in the 1960s, ocean carriers have offered a global transport solution to shippers on a worldwide basis. Moreover, container shipping is relatively cheaper than airfreight. The amount of goods carried in container vessels by carriers have been continuously increasing with a fairly positive growth is expected in future years. Table 1.3 gives the top 20 container carriers ranked by total slot capacity at the beginning of 2000. Ocean carriers are always very alert in the needs and requirements of shippers. Some of the needs are high frequency, low cost, one-stop shopping or integrated door-to-door transport solutions, guaranteed and fast transit times, added value services, quality assurance and electric cargo tracking and control. The carriers’ responses to these needs and requirements have resulted in the deployment of increasingly large ships to obtain economies on scale, the creation of wider consortia or alliance and a series of mergers and acquisitions. 3.2 Conference Lines and Non-Conference Lines There are two types of ocean carriers (liner) services; the conference and non-conference lines. A conference line is a group of two or more shipping lines entering into an agreement to adopt the use of a common freight rate structure (normally established for a year) and a regular scheduled service on specific routes. It is formed to decrease direct competition between their members and to protect them from outside competition. Members however are free to compete by traffic and by the quality of the service. Non-conference lines are independent operators who are not contractually bound into a conference agreement and they operate with their own rating structure and schedules. A conference line gives stable rates independent of volume of freight. With non-conference lines, rates have a competitive structure and are liable to be adjusted to suit economic conditions. In 1998, there was about 49% share held by conference lines and remaining 51% held by the non-conference lines in the Pacific market share. NOL-APL held approximately 10% of east and west bound, which made it to be the biggest conference operator. Evergreen with 11.5% and Hanjin* with 9.8% share appear to be the two most active non-conference carriers in the Pacific region [1]. 3.3 Asian Carriers Asian lines play key roles in the three major routes described in Section 1.6. They carry around 70% of Europe-Asia trade, over 80% of the containerised United States-Asia trade * Hanjin is currently a member of United Alliance.

Page 40: container shipping

35

and 90% of the intra-Asia trade [2]. The service level offered by these carriers is on the par to companies from Europe and North America and the growth has been mainly based on trade growth in Asia. It is also predicted that more consolidation mergers will occur particularly in the Asian region. 3.4 Mergers and Acquisitions Mergers and acquisitions are the current trends in today’s container shipping industry. Due to this trend, the number of containers operated by the top 20 carriers increased from 32% in 1981 to 64% in 1997[2]. Unsatisfactory return of capital is identified to be the root cause of mergers trend in the mid-1990s. Besides cutting the operating costs and reducing port time, merger liners can increase market share and dominance and thereby increase profitability, maintain price competitiveness and use assets more effectively. They can offer more frequent and more extensive transport services to locations around the world at the lowest possible cost, and at the same time reduce trade imbalances. For example, Maersk Line acquired Sealand in 1999 to form a company controlling some 9.2% of the world container fleet[3]. In other words, mergers result in fewer, bigger and stronger carriers. Below are the mergers and take-overs since 1995[4]: 1995 CP Ships purchased Cast Safmarine merged with CMBT

1996 CMA bought Compagnie Generale Maritime

1997 P&O Containers merged with Nedlloyd Lines Hanjin bought share in DSR-Senator NOL purchased APL CP Ships bought Lykes and Contship

1998 CP Ships purchased Iravan and ANZDL, formed merger with TMM P&O Nedlloyd bought Blue Star CMA purchased Australian National Line(ANL) Hapag Lloyd taken over by Preussag Evergreen purchased Lloyd Triestino Hamburg-Sud bought Alianca Safmarine bought out CMB

1999 P&O Nedlloyd bought Tasman Express Line Maersk bought Safmarine CSAV bought majority stake in Libra Navegacao A.P.Møller/Maersk Group acquired Sea-Land Services, the international liner business

of CSX

Page 41: container shipping

36

3.5 Carrier Statistics In 1999, the average size of container ships in the Trans-Atlantic, Trans-Pacific and Asia-Europe trade was 3,3036 TEU, 3,210 TEU and 3,862 TEU respectively. By the year 2002, it is expected that container ships in excess of 7,000 TEU and beyond will come into operation on Asian routes[3]. Table 3.1 shows the summary of services of major carrier alliances and megacarriers. The Trans-Pacific route indicates an imbalanced trade between the west and east coast. This is very apparent within the New World Alliance group. In terms of weekly sailing, ship numbers and capacity, the major player for Asia-Europe trade is the Grand Alliance. In the Trans-Atlantics trade, Maersk Sealand is the top and vibrant carrier. Generally there are more sailings in the Asia-Europe route compared to Trans-Atlantic.

Numbers of sailings per week-sort by ships Alliance group

Participating lines Trans-

Pacific Asia-

Europe Trans-Atlantic

Slot capacity (Numbers of

ships)

Grand Alliance

P&O Nedlloyd NYK

Hapag-Lloyd OOCL

West coast 6 East coast 2

7

2

645,748 TEU

(278)

Maersk Sealand

West coast 5 East coast 3

4 6 544,558 TEU (228)

New World Alliance

APL-NOL MOL

Hyundai

West coast 9 East coast 1

4

1

447,358 TEU

(178)

United Alliance

Hanjin DSR-Senator Cho Yang*

UASC

West coast 8 East coast 2

5

2

342,566 TEU

(152)

Cosco/K-Line/Yangming

West coast 7 East coast 1

4 3 380,689 TEU (207)

Evergreen

West coast 5 East coast 2

3 1 311,951 TEU (132)

Table 3.1: Summary of services of major carrier alliances and megacarriers[3] Table 3.2 and Figure 3.1 show the total import and export of the top 25 carriers for 1997 and 1998. We glance through some carriers introduced in the rank 20 and above in Table 3.2. Seaboard Marine, a wholly owned subsidiary of Seaboard Corporation provides direct, regular service between the United States and the Caribbean Basin, Central and South America. Dole Fresh Fruit Co. is a large carrier of fresh fruit and vegetables, takes delivery of the reefer containership in the world. As one of the largest carriers to Central America, Great White Fleet Ltd. offers both dry and refrigerated containerised cargo for shipping. Sud Americana de Vapores (Compañía Sudamericana de Vapores, CSAV), a South American Steamship Company, founded in 1872 is among the oldest shipping companies in the world. CSAV is a Chilean publicly

* The United Alliance has recently dropped Cho Yang from its liner group.

Page 42: container shipping

37

traded shipping company that operates general cargo, bulk cargo, containerised cargo, fresh and frozen products and vehicles.

1998 1997

Rank Carriers Imports (TEU)

Exports (TEU)

Total (TEU)

Imports (TEU)

Exports (TEU)

Total (TEU)

Annual growth(%)

1(1) Sea-Land Service 784,692 592,195 1,376,887 729,046 626,080 1,355,126 1.6 2(2) Evergreen Line 745,394 552,749 1,298,143 638,167 606,567 1,244,734 4.3 3(3) Maersk Line 621,150 443,766 1,064,916 617,802 463,648 1,081,450 -1.5 4(4) Hanjin Shipping Co. 577,282 325,023 902,305 461,361 366,230 827,591 9.0

5 APL/NOL 650,720 244,799 895,518 6(8) Cosco 457,065 200,466 657,531 266,489 247,109 513,599 28.0 7(5) Hyundai Merchant Marine 400,087 237,016 637,103 375,930 300,843 676,772 -5.9

8(15) P&O Nedlloyd 307,195 244,635 551,830 165,024 148,456 313,480 76.0 9(10) NYK 329,928 197,098 527,027 281,609 188,785 470,394 12.0 10(9) YML 327,051 198,371 525,422 286,580 204,776 491,356 6.9 11(7) OOCL 310,178 188,049 498,227 282,362 236,411 518,773 -4.0

12(11) K'-Line 293,475 187,431 480,906 261,869 204,747 466,616 3.1 13(12) MOL 249,737 185,307 435,045 242,074 187,792 429,866 1.2 14(14) Hapag Lloyd 232,942 173,365 406,307 174,003 139,646 313,649 29.5 15(17) DSR Senator Line 224,866 145,233 370,100 152,849 155,153 308,001 20.2

16(13) Crowley American Transport 145,725 223,539 369,264 134,047 208,520 342,567 7.8

17(16) Zim Container Line 122,233 143,505 265,738 170,033 140,993 311,026 -14.6 18(18) MSC 163,665 155,125 318,791 143,165 142,226 285,391 11.7 19(20) Cho Yang Line 176,037 109,506 285,543 119,203 95,760 214,963 32.8 20(21) Dole Fresh Fruit Co. 151,900 60,453 212,352 152,097 61,069 213,166 -0.4 21(22) Lykes Lines 88,152 97,918 186,070 105,806 103,049 208,855 -10.9 22(23) Seaboard Marine Ltd. 41,530 124,409 165,938 49,317 123,198 172,515 -3.8 23(25) Great White Fleet Ltd. 92,395 51,678 144,073 85,385 40,122 125,507 14.8 24(24) Sud Americana de Vapores 57,771 60,034 117,804 59,645 75,787 135,432 -13.0

25 Colombus Line 56,432 58,459 114,891 (6) APL 439,825 216,359 656,185

(19) NOL 175,170 93,754 268,923 Table 3.2: Imports and exports of the top 25 carriers-1997/1998[5] * ranking in brackets are for 1997

From table 3.2, we can see that the same carriers captured the top four positions in 1998, as the year before. Sea-Land Service, Evergreen Line and Maersk Line are the top three, whose throughput surpassed 1 million TEU. Maersk Line managed to maintain its 3rd position, despite a drop of 1.5% in its total TEUs handled. P&O Nedlloyd, which sat in 15th place in 1997, experienced a dramatic growth of 76%, reaching the 8th place in 1998. More astonishing, however is the impressive growth experienced by NOL, which went up from 19th position to 5th position in 1998 after the merge with APL. In the other hand, Cho Yang Line was ranked 19th in 1998, move up only one notch from the previous year, though it indicated a significant improvement of 32.8% within a year. Generally 39% of the carriers listed above have improved their ranking, while 30% of them have maintained their positions in these two years.

Page 43: container shipping

38

Top 25 Carriers based on Total Imports and Exports-1997/1998

0 400,000 800,000 1,200,000 1,600,000

Sea-Land Service

Evergreen Line

Maersk Line

Hanjin Shipping Co.

APL/NOL

Cosco

Hyundai Merchant Marine

P&O Nedlloyd

NYK

YML

OOCL

K'-Line

MOL

Hapag Lloyd

DSR Senator Line

Crowley American Transport

Zim Container Line

MSC

Cho Yang Line

Dole Fresh Fruit Co.

Lykes Lines

Seaboard Marine Ltd.

Great White Fleet Ltd.

Sud Americana de Vapores

Colombus Line

APL

NOL

Car

rier

s

Total (Import+Export) (TEU)

Total for1997Total for1998

Figure 3.1: Imports and exports of the top 25 carriers-1997/1998

References: [1] http://www.seanet.co.uk [2] http://www.eclac.cl/publicaciones/ [3] Ports and Harbors, December 2000 [4] The Future of Container Shipping Industry, Cargo Systems, IIR Publications Ltd, 1999 [5] http://www.manufacturing.net/magazine/logistic/

Page 44: container shipping

39

4. Sea Cargo Import and Export Processes A pictorial representation of a generic process for sea cargo is displayed in Figure 4.1. We will simply call this the sea cargo system. The terms used are listed in the Glossary.

Shipper

FreightForwarder

PortOperations Carrier Port

Operations

ExportSea Cargo

ImportSea Cargo

FreightForwarder

Consignee DepotOperations

DepotOperations

(goods)

(goods)

(containers)

(containers)

Figure 4.1: The sea cargo system While many of the steps are generic, we also describe some of the necessary processes in Singapore. We divide our discussion in Singapore containerised sea cargo system into two sections; the export process and the import process. Most of the transactions involved in both the processes are accomplished electronically, using PortNet, TradeNet, BoxNet and CEDEX. Please refer to section 5.2.3.4 to 5.2.3.7 for information on these IT services. 4.1 Sea Cargo Export Process Figure 4.2 summarises the export process flow of sea cargo (containerised). These are as follows: Step 1-17 The shipper begins the sea cargo export process by sending shipment instructions containing destination, consignee details, products, quantities, warehouse and delivery dates to the Freight Forwarder (hereafter will be referred as Forwarder). The primary step by Forwarder is to contact the carrier to book shipment. The carrier considers all booking details such as destination port, units (number of containers, size, type of containers) and delivery dates in the process of booking and finally confirms the shipment to the Forwarder by providing the booking number, vessel details and charges. After that, the Forwarder prepares and send the shipper preliminary shipment documentation with booking details and confirmation, noting shipment handling, charges, destination port and carrier. The Forwarder then co-ordinates with Warehouse Operations regarding shipment details (products, quantities, vessel sailing schedule and delivery times) and co-ordinates with Land Transport Operations on transportation instructions.

Page 45: container shipping

40

INFORMATION FLOW

Shpr's instruction to FF

FF books shipment with Cr

FF confirms shipment to Shpr

LTO requests for emptycontainers from Cr

FF co-ordinates with WO and LTO

DO updates Cr

LTO arranges pick up and deliverytimes (TT booking) with PO

LTO exchanges receipt forempty container with WO

Cr gives container pick updetails to LTO and DO

LTO exchanges EIR with DO

WO hands packing list to FF and LTO

WO sends inventory update to Shpr

FF sends preliminary shipment docu-mentation (House Bill of Lading) to Cr

FF receives shipment documentation(Ocean Bill of Lading) from Cr

Permit approval

Permit application

FF forwards shipment documentationto Destination FF and Shpr

PO issues receipt for container delivery

Planning for loading

PO gives location and directions to truck

PHYSICAL FLOW

Truck goes to pick up empty containers from Depot

Arrival of truck at Depot

Containers packed at Warehouse

Truck with packed containers goes to Port

Arrival of truck with stuffed containers at port

Storage/stack up of container

Truck goes to the yard export location

Vessel arrivalLoad container

Truck picks up empty containersfrom Depot and goes to Warehouse

Arrival of truck with empty containers atWarehouse

PortOperations

DepotOperations

WarehouseOperations

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

KEY

Shpr: Shipper; Cr: Career; FF: Freight Forwarder; LTO: Land Transport Operations;DO: Depot Operations; WO: Warehouse Operations; PO: Port Operations

Figure 4.2: Exportation process flow of sea cargo (containerised)[1]

Page 46: container shipping

41

Next, the Land Transport Operations calls for empty containers from the carrier. Approving the request, the carrier gives the container pick up details including the information of the relevant Depot Operators, yard location and container type to the Land Transport Operations. The carrier also sends the Depot Operations a release order of empty containers to the Land Transport Operations. Soon after the authorization, the Land Transport arrange pick up and delivery times by sending Loading Appointment Request to Port Operations in Singapore. This is accomplished electronically through the PortNet. The Port Operations replies to confirm container delivery times at port by sending Loading Appointment Details (covering time window and loading area), again by PortNet. At this point, the Land Transport Operations sends their truck to pick up empty containers from Depot. Here, it exchanges EIR (Equipment Interchange Report) with Depot Operations, and the empty containers are released, where by the truck carries them to the Warehouse. Upon completing its task, the Depot Operations finally updates the carrier on container status (container out) through BoxNet/CEDEX. Reaching the Warehouse, the Land Transport Operations exchanges receipt for empty containers with Warehouse Operations. When the Warehouse Operations receives the empty container, it can begin packing. The Warehouse Operations hands shipment documentation (packing list) to both Land Transport Operations and Forwarder and latter sends an inventory update to shipper. The truck with the packed containers, now moves to the port and delivers the container. In return it receives a receipt for container delivery, issued by Port Operations via PortNet. (Further Port Operations activities will be discussed in Step 18-20.) Meanwhile, the Land Transport Operations sends the container delivery receipt (mentioned just before) to the Forwarder to confirm delivery to Port. As soon as the Forwarder receives the container delivery receipt, it prepares and sends the Carrier preliminary shipment documentation called the House Bill of Lading. The Carrier finalises all the shipment documentations and sends the Forwarder, the Ocean Bill of Lading and packing list. In Singapore, the Forwarder also deals with TDB (Trade Development Board) and CED (Custom & Excise Department) to obtain permit approval via TradeNet. In order to apply for a permit, the Forwarder needs to forward clear details on shipper, destination, products, quantities, prices and total value. Upon the approval the TDB and CED issue a permit with permit number and status of approval. At the same time, the Forwarder also obtains cargo release from these government agencies and it finalizes all shipment documentations. Finally, the Forwarder provides the destination Forwarder with the Bill of Lading, cargo manifest and packing list. It also sends the shipper Bill of Lading, packing list, invoice and other certificates and permits. Step 18-20 As described before, when the stuffed containers arrive the port, the Port Operations issues Land Transport Operations a receipt for container delivery via PortNet. The truck then goes to the yard export location for storage after receiving the instructions and location

Page 47: container shipping

42

from the Port Operations. Finally when the vessel arrives, the containers are loaded according to loading sequences as planned by Port Operations. 4.2 Sea Cargo Import Process Figure 4.3 resembles the import process flow of sea cargo (containerised). We now describe the documentation and physical flow of the import process until the product reaches the consignee. Step 1-4 Pre-notification on cargo arrival is sent to the destination port via telex from the origin port. Special containers, namely the reefers are identified for storage location ahead of time. The Port Operations also plans for discharge of cargo. DG (Dangerous Goods) such as explosive, poison and chemical products are given additional attention, as these cargo have to be directly delivered. After the carrier confirms arrival of vessel at the port, the containers are ready to be retrieved by the Port Operations. The containerised cargo are brought to the yard for storage. The locations of containers are then recorded. In PSA, containers are arranged in slots by staking them up on top another. Step 5-18 The Forwarder is the next major player in this stage of sea cargo system. Upon receiving the vessel arrival schedule from Port Operations, the Forwarder confirms ETA (Estimated Arrival Time) of the inbound shipment through PortNet. After pre-alerting consignee on the shipment arrival time at warehouse, the Forwarder co-ordinates with its Land Transport Operations on transport requirement and its Warehouse Operations on storage requirement. At this point of time, the Forwarder receives shipment details, consisting of various kinds of charges (port charges, import duties, and clearance charges from the carrier). In Singapore, the Forwarder works out for a permit through TradeNet. The permit application includes information of vessel name, voyage, ETA, shipping line, invoice value, products and HS (Harmonised System) code. A permit is later issued upon the approval by CED and TDB, also via TradeNet. It also obtains cargo clearance from these government agencies. As the carrier confirms vessel arrival at the port by vessel schedule (this includes the berth number and arrival time) to Forwarder by PortNet, it releases the container to the Port Operations. Keeping the containers under its custody in the terminal, the Port Operations releases them to Forwarder through PortNet. The documentation on container release consist particulars of containers, entities handling freight and Land Transport Operations. Shortly after receiving container clearance from Port Operations and the Delivery Order (information covers shipper details, consignee details, charges, notes on shipment handling, origin and destination port, carrier name) from carrier, the Forwarder hands shipment documentations of import permit, packing list and invoice to Land Transport Operations. Land Transportation Operations then arranges for pick-up time with Port Operations.

Page 48: container shipping

43

INFORMATION FLOW PHYSICAL FLOW

PO receives pre-noticication oncontainer arrival from origin port

PO plans for discharge

PO retrieves container Arrival of vessel

Storage/stack up of containers

Tow containers to yard

Off load containers

PO updates storage location

1

2

3

4

FF receives pre-notification on vessel arrival from PO

FF pre-alerts consignee

Permit approval

Permit application

FF receives shipment details for release from Cr

FF co-ordinates with LTO and WO

Goods stored

PO releases containers to LTO

FF hands shipment documentation to LTO

FF receives Delivery Order from Cr

LTO exchanges shipping documentation from PO

LTO exchanges shipping documentation to WO Arrival of loaded containers at Warehouse

QA inspection and exceptions recorded

Goods delivery

5

6

7

8

9

10

17

16

12

13

15

14

11

DO raises EIR to LTO Arrival of empty containers at Depot

Container repaired/cleaned

DO sends repair estimates to Cr

DO obtains approval for container repair/cleaning

18

19

20

21

DO updates Cr

PortOperations

WarehouseOperations

DepotOperations

Empty containerssent to Depot

Off load containers

22

KEY

Cr: Career; FF: Freight Forwarder; LTO: Land Transport Operations;DO: Depot Operations; WO: Warehouse Operations; PO: Port Operations

Figure 4.3: Importation process flow of sea cargo (containerised)[2]

Page 49: container shipping

44

As soon as the truck arrives at the port gate, it awaits for direction from the port to collect the containers. After confirmation from the Port Operations, the Land Transport Operations matches the containers based on truck number and container location given to them. The Land Transport Operations also has to exchange shipment documentation with the Port Operations before it can release the containers to them. Now that the truck is loaded with stuffed containers, it moves towards the warehouse. An exchange of shipment documentation from Land Transport Operations to the Warehouse Operations takes place before the truck can off load the containers in the Warehouse. This shipment documentation covers container particulars, shipper details, and notes on shipment handling, products, quantities and packing units. At the Warehouse, quality assurance inspection and exception on received goods are performed by Warehouse Operators, together with the Forwarders. Description, quantity and quality exceptions of incorrect and damaged goods are recorded. These goods are now stored, waiting to be delivered or sent directly to the consignee. Step 18-21 The truck delivers empty containers to Depot. The Depot Operations raises an EIR, which contains information on container particulars and status to Land Transport Operations. When there is any damage, the Depot Operations sends repair estimates to the concern carrier, stating description of damages and cost estimates via CEDEX. Upon obtaining repair approval, again through CEDEX, the containers are repaired and cleaned within the approved cost. The Depot Operations finally updates the carrier on the status of available and damaged containers via CEDEX or BOXNET. As Asia-Pacific region is a proficient exporter, the movement of containers in this region is imbalanced. Asia-Pacific region deals with lots of empty containers as well. Appendix 3 provides the information and physical flow for importation, exportation, transshipment and empty container movement in PSA. References: [1] Industry data Model (Export Sea), Logistic Information System (LIS) Project [2] Industry data Model (Import Sea), Logistic Information System (LIS) Project

Page 50: container shipping

45

5. Sea Cargo Technologies Studies revealed that only 20% of the goods moving cost are spent on the actual transportation. The remainder is spent on physical interfaces and soft services. These outlays are mainly for information management and transaction cost. Experts believe that unless these key cost categories are reduced, the shipping industry will not become more profitable. In addition, the logistics operating system should lay more emphasise on user involvement and closer customer interfacing to ensure a greater efficiency. More sophisticated use of technology in sea cargo system is the solution to accomplish these needs. Information Technology (IT) offers instant access to information that can be immediately used to handle the port and shipping industry management and integrates a much user involvement in the system. 5.1 Importance of IT in Sea Cargo System Basically IT plays a key role in all major sea cargo players, namely the port operators, shipping lines, freight forwarders, shippers and consignees. The most palpable benefit here is the cost reduction; both transaction and documentation cost reduction for all parties. The potential total saving by the effective use of e-logistics technology is large and can result in total cost reductions of 33-50%. By replacing paper, phone, fax, and basic computerised transactional with their inherent time delays, it leads to a reduction in the expensive administrative and marketing overheads. This not only streamlines operations, but also eliminates errors and provides seamless and more accurate information to all key players and the public. All parties will be able to track the progress and condition of the containers whereabouts at any time, anywhere. This boosts user involvement and assures their efficient integration into the decision chain in logistics management. 5.2 IT Systems in Ports Effective application of IT enables a port to achieve superior. Real cost savings, fast, secure and much reliable services using the Internet are available to automate the procedures involved. Especially to the shippers, receivers and other companies using the port, it allows free flow information about their containers at any time. ‘Port Community System’ is a computer system incorporating an entire port and all the companies involved. With this system, information about the containers in the port is made more accessible to all related players. It often includes routing of EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) messages between organizations in the port. For example, notifications to customs and information on container details on a ship, container location, vessel arrival and departure times are all exchanged among the parties. We will now focus on some IT developments in major ports with a brief case study of the Port of Rotterdam, Hong Kong Port and Singapore Port.

Page 51: container shipping

46

5.2.1 Port of Rotterdam Traditionally all vessels calling on the Port of Rotterdam are required to register with the Rotterdam Port Management, reporting on each vessel arrival and departure, and also dangerous substances they may be carrying. These reports, which totalled to some 220,000 a year was once transacted via post, courier, telephone, fax or telex, but nowadays it is all sent electronically. Port of Rotterdam has developed and still developing an advanced IT system for the entire port. Port CommunITy Rotterdam or better known as PCR is a joint/private venture by companies using the port. This organization encourages the introduction of IT system for the entire port by generating ideas of IT systems, evaluating, implementing and promoting them. For example, electronic reporting in this port guarantees efficient and faultless transaction of vessel’s movement, dangerous substances and the specification of harbour dues. There are also other electronic systems available in Port of Rotterdam to facilitate all key players involved in the port operations. 5.2.1.1 Cargo Card Cargo Card is a unique method of ‘driver electronic identification’ introduced by the PCR, essentially to increase efficiency of terminal, depots and transporters. This is a biometric based recognition system, where the driver is identified using a combination of a smart card and a reading of the driver’s left hand. Various information, such as biometric data of the driver’s left hand and information of the driver and his company are stored in the smart card. Besides that, it also contains information stored temporarily, like the route and driver task details. It is designed such that mistakes when typing driving licence or passport number is impossible as the cargo card automatically displays on screen the data of both trucking company and driver. The following is how a Cargo Card basically works. Before the truck arrives at the terminal or depot gate, the information about a truck’s cargo and destination is transmitted to terminal or port system by EDI. When the truck reaches the entrance, the driver uses his Cargo Card to identify himself. The Cargo Card automatically matches the information which has arrived earlier via EDI. Upon the positive identification (the driver’s hand characteristics match that stored in the smart card), the system checks the cargo details. If it matches perfectly and everything is in order, he is allowed to take the container into the terminal and given an assigned container location. Similarly when the driver wants to retrieve a container, a final Cargo Card check is carried out at the terminal exit. Here he confirms his status and places his digital ‘signature’ via a scan of his left hand and can leave the port. The Cargo Card is an authentication and verification system that ensures the container has been through all the required stages, such as terminal reporting, inspections, customs, loading or unloading and sign out. Over 4,000 drivers are already using the card. The use of an electronic gateway system allows the forwarders to optimise their truck usage and operating timetables.

Page 52: container shipping

47

5.2.1.2 EDI-LAND The local business community, together with PCR is currently working on EDI-LAND (Electronic Data Interchange LAND-side), a project to streamline data exchange on import and export of containers between various players in the logistics chain. Using EDI-LAND, data is sent electronically on a timely basis (Just In Time). As this system enables companies to receive documents in electronic form and process them immediately, the container handling procedures are started only when the container and the corresponding papers have actually arrived. Uniform Electronic Data Interchange improves efficiency and reduces the risk of mistakes, thus resulting in faster and more accurate transfer of information. 5.2.1.3. PROTECT PROTECT is a system acknowledged by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) as the worldwide electronic standard for the declaration of dangerous goods. Shipping companies, which load and unload dangerous goods in more than one port can declare their dangerous goods to Rotterdam Port Management with a single message through this system. 5.2.1.4 ELO ELO (Elektronisch Loket Overheden or Electronic Authorities Counter) is another system developed, mainly to avoid information overlaps. With this technology, companies only need to offer the necessary information once at a single central point. The authorities involved will then automatically receive the relevant information from the central point. ELO simplifies carriers in the Port of Rotterdam the declaration processes to the various authorities. 5.2.1.5 BICS BICS (Inland Shipping Information and Communication System) is a closed system, which is an initiative by the Ministry of Transport. The information is monitored by Department of Public Works. BICS is used to track the vessel movement through inland waterways in the Netherlands. Inland shippers can pass on information on their vessels electronically to all traffic posts on their way through the Netherlands. In contrast to the maritime phone and IVS90, which were traditionally used for this purpose, registration of information via BICS is far more efficient. By means of BICS, shipper sends the relevant information by computer, once and the information is passed from one traffic post to another, automatically without trouble. Survey reports and figures of the cargo transported by river are also sent monthly to the Central Bureau of Statistics. 5.2.1.6 RODOS The Rotterdam Douane Systeem (RODOS) is an electronic communication exchange system between customs and ship brokers, stevedores, forwarders, shipping agents,

Page 53: container shipping

48

terminal agents and others relevant key players in sea cargo system. With RODOS, paper works are eliminated, human errors can be reduced and at the same time streamlines the operation and reduces transaction costs. 5.2.1.7 MISTER MISTER is an IT consulting project, sponsored by Rotterdam for small and medium-sized business. In the MISTER program, the external consultant reviews the port companies’ communications technology and recommends enhancement possibilities. Port of Rotterdam is now preparing for a new generation Internet through “Virtual-Port’ project. Within this project, PCR and other companies will be able to serve the sea cargo players better by providing a more reliable, secure and faster transaction with larger capacity. The new Internet also offers the possibility to participate in exchange of EDI messages with relative low investments compared to the traditional networks. 5.2.1.8 Port on the Internet The Rotterdam Port Management, together with PCR and Rotterdam Port Promotion Council has involved in a project called ‘Port on the Internet’ with the objective of stimulating electronic commerce and at the same time, introduce as many port businesses as possible to Internet. AGV (Automated Guided Vehicle), a driverless container moving truck is in use at the ECT terminal and the Delta Sea-Land terminal, Rotterdam. This technology is being developed further. The Port of Rotterdam is also investigating and developing other promising and challenging projects such as Bar-coding systems and VRMO project. VRMO (Vereniging van Rotterdamse Machinale Overslagbedrijve) project is a feasibility study by the Rotterdam Mechanised Transshipment companies, in collaboration with PCR to improve EDI processes between parties in the dry bulk chain. 5.2.2 Hong Kong Port Vessel pre-notification to enter Hong Kong Port is done through telex or fax, 24 hours before the intended entry. The VHF (Very High Frequency) channel is used 4 hours before, to confirm notification before entering Hong Kong water. Agents or masters of any vessels calling at Hong Kong and carrying dangerous goods should furnish the Director of Marine with a dangerous good manifest, not less than 48 hours before the vessel’s arrival (Section 4 of the Dangerous Goods (Shipping) Regulation). This task is made easy with Hong Kong Port’s DGIS (Dangerous Good Information System), an Internet-based system for submitting information about dangerous cargo being transported through the port. Companies can submit their dangerous good manifests, containing such information as general description, packaging number, quantity, position stowed on the vessel to the port authorities over the Internet. The captured manifest information (in DGIS) will be scrutinized and acknowledged within the next

Page 54: container shipping

49

working day of submission via fax. With DGIS, Hong Kong Port Authorities are always aware of dangerous goods in their water. The Hong Kong International Terminal (HIT) uses BEA TUXEDO software to operate the terminal, which is written in three layers; Bottom Layer (Oracle Database) stores information about containers and containers movements, Middle Layer (BEA TUXEDO software itself) handles transaction control, messaging generation, security, backup and recovery, performs yard/vessel planning, controls and maintains record of all transactions; Top Layer (communication system) links to the terminal gate, radio, data communications within the terminal, EDI and voice communication with modem access to remote and depot offices. The system has expedited the rate of load and discharging of vessels by 25%, increased peak crane rates by 30% and reduced the trucking turn around time by 20%. Recently, the HKHO (Hong Kong Hydrographic Office) is initiating ENC (Electronic Nautical Chart). It is an interactive digital version of paper charts. The standard of functionality and capability of the ENC conforms to the specification of the international organizations. 5.2.3 Singapore Port Singapore Port is linked to more than 400 shipping lines, 700 ports and 140 countries. Having one of the most comprehensive use of IT application, Singapore Port is able to efficiently serve 60 container vessels and 45,000 TEU per day with 80% transshipment. The Singapore Port IT system is also certified ISO 9001. Among the IT systems being offered by the port are CITOS, Gate System, PortNet, TradeNet, BoxNet and CICOS. 5.2.3.1 CITOS Computer Integrated Terminal Operations System (CITOS) is a container terminal managing system. CITOS integrates all container operations through planning vessel, berth and ship operations, command and control, administration, gate and customer interface system, equipment and manpower. As PSA operates in land-scarce environment, berth and yard allocation, the vessel pre-arrival planning and container reshuffling is important to integrate and co-ordinate all real-time activities at the terminal. Just before the vessel arrivals, the ship stowage module plans out the optimum discharge and loading sequences to ensure ship stability and correct loading. The deployment of quay cranes, yard cranes and container trucks are optimised. Two hours of job data is provided to quay cranes upon the vessel arrival and the yard space is allocated according to container destination and characteristics. For example, the last to extract containers are stacked at bottom-most from a 9-high stack of containers. For the task of taking containers away from the berth, the Prime Mover Deployment System allocates the best-suited prime movers (terminal tractors). In addition, the prime movers incorporate GPS (Global Positioning System) to report on their positions. Gantry cranes and straddle carriers are allotted to various storage yard blocks by a Yard Crane Deployment System to ensure the containers are lifted off without any delay. An

Page 55: container shipping

50

Automatic Position Indication System monitors the yard, updating the database of container location every time a container is stocked and removed. CITOS is a flexible system. Berthing and operations arrangements can be adjusted due to customer amendments or even if they arrive at the port out of schedule. Through CITOS, PSA is able to marshal its resources without effecting its normal operations. Such ‘catch up’ service during critical circumstances is an aid for carriers to catch up on time lost and keep the schedule on time. CITOS’s prediction of possible delays and congestion over the next two hours, and the 24 hours continuous monitoring of operations using closed circuit television, radio and computer systems enables any breakdown or congestions to be cleared up very quickly. Thus it reduces time lost and keeps the customer service uninterrupted. This real-time and paperless system not only streamlines operational process, but also improves productivity per crane. In 1997, CITOS-I, a suite comprising operation and planning system was introduced to support and facilitate the overseas container terminal operations. CITOS saves manpower and at the same time performs higher asset utilisation. With the implementation of CITOS, PSA experienced an important increase in operation efficiency and cost reductions which has won several national and international level awards. 5.2.3.2 CICOS Computer Integrated Conventional Operations System (CICOS) integrates ship planning and godown operations at Pasir Panjang Wharves, PSA’s main terminal for conventional and non-containerised cargo. Similar to the CITOS system, it handles berth and yard planning. A central computer controlled gate system has also been integrated to this system to facilitate conventional operations. Terminal staffs can supervise the operation through CCTV network, voice telecommunication network, planning systems, hand-held terminal and self-service terminals from a central room and they will be alerted on any operational anomalies, which will be displayed at the room. 5.2.3.3 Gate System The ‘Flow-Through’ Gate System (FTGS), a high-tech fully-automated and hassle-free gate system in PSA is an advanced integral module in CITOS that interfaces with the hauliers entering the PSA Terminal. It allows speed gate clearance, where trucks can pass through PSA’s checkpoint within 25 seconds since 1998, compared to 5 minutes in 1988. Besides eliminating congestion during peak hours, the system has increased the gate capacity by more than 50%. The Gate System is capable of handling over 8,000 container trucks daily, with a peak intensity of 700 trucks per hour. About 85% of the containers are processed within 30 seconds of arrival. It helps the freight forwarders and hauliers to maximize their round trips to the port and increase their revenue per truck. The FTGS uses Container Number Recognition System (CNRS) at the terminal gates to expedite the container flow into the port. The system automatically reads the identification number on the side of the container and it is compared against the number submitted in the shipper’s declaration to the port authorities, which is already received via EDI. The FTGS

Page 56: container shipping

51

also applies Radio Frequency (RF) Technology through transponders tagged to the freight forwarder’s truck. RF contactless cards are used to perform authorization or identification check of drivers’ passes. Containers are allowed to enter only if all details match perfectly. A Wireless Paging Facility is developed to relay information such as notification of the assigned location for depositing and collecting containers to freight forwarders on the move. Containers and truck weight will be captured by the auto-activation of the weigh bridge. As CNRS can detect and rectify errors in declaration, if any, this method assures greater security for containers. 5.2.3.4 PortNet The Electronic Communication System or PortNet is a paperless communication and information network between shipping lines, freight forwarders, shippers and government agencies. The system facilitates end-to-end workflow which includes online booking for resources, e-fulfillment of port services, facilitation of billing processes and linkage to trade and government agencies. The auto-task scheduler for hauliers is carried out via an Application Service Provider (ASP) model. The system also provides communication channels among various parties in the shipping and port authority, including fright forwarder, hauliers, shippers and shipping lines. As PortNet has been moved to a Windows environment and referred as PortNet-On-windows since 1999, it enables a more user-friendly communication through Internet and e-mail and a closer customer or user involvement. Facilities like vessel inquiries, pilotage ordering, tugboat services and downloading of billing information are available at PortNet. Carriers’ tasks of vessel arrival confirmation, cargo declarations submission, planning and manifests, sailing/berthing schedule inspection and container status monitoring are made easy via this system. They can even release containers to the port operations by PortNet. Shipping Line Throughput Analysis Report (STAR) is a feature of PortNet designed for the shippers. STAR provides information of overall port performance and cost, such as vessel throughput, port and cargo expenses, transshipment and terminal performance and dwell-time reports. This enables shippers to monitor the activities and allows the shipping line to take appropriate measures to cut cost area, thus improving their performance. A financial transaction system called Financial Electronics Data Interchange (FEDI) is used for billing and payment. Companies can use this window-based application to simplify all their financial transactions. FASTCONNECT is another beneficial system developed under PortNet for shipping lines. Within FASTCONNECT, the amount of documentation needed is trimmed, especially to arrange for container transshipment between two different carriers. It can be done within two hours. There are some 1,500 companies, including shipping agents, hauliers, freight forwarders and shippers subscribing PortNet and the system manages more than 10 million electronic transaction each month. It charges only S$2.69 processing fee, as opposed to S$12 for the hardcopy application.

Page 57: container shipping

52

5.2.3.5 TradeNet TradeNet is integrated with PortNet. As a TradeNet customer, one will require a communication software to be linked to PortNet. It is an EDI system under the Singapore Trade Development Board, used in application to all relevant government agencies. Trade documents such as permit application, declaration papers, and cargo clearance can be submitted simultaneously to Customs, Excise Department or other relevant agencies for processing. The electronic system thus expedites the import and export processes. As an added value network to TradeNet, a data management system called TradeNet Plus will be implemented in 2001. Besides eliminating complex paper documentation and reduce data re-keying, TradeNet Plus will further expedite message interchange to facilitate import and export process with all government agencies. It will also facilitate cargo movements for billings and payments. 5.2.3.6 BoxNet PSA has implemented BoxNet mainly to improve the co-ordination of activities between the port terminals and hauliers. Within the system, hauliers can retrieve information of estimated berthing times and completion of discharge of vessels. Export schedules and export bookings can be sent and retrieved using EDI with BoxNet. This information provides inputs to their own resource scheduling system, which electronically schedules, plans and allocates prime movers, chassis and drivers. As the system offers efficient allocation of haulier’s job, every haulier trip into and out of container terminal is filled with container, avoiding wasted trips. BoxNet also provides easier tracking of truck movements to streamline haulier’s activities with the port operators. 5.2.3.7 CEDEX Some of the data elements used in transaction relating to freight containers are container damage, component, repair and location. PSA Depot System uses the Container Equipment Data Exchange (CEDEX) codes to represent this information. 5.2.3.8 EZShip EZShip is an Internet based system facilitating the transshipment processes of the shipping lines. Within the system, shipping lines can complement their in-house IT system and it enables seamless integration between their font and back-room operations in Singapore and regional offices. It is designed to make transshipment operations more efficient, producing higher productivity, lower cost with greater transparency for shippers. 5.2.3.9 SlotMax SlotMax is a highly automated and user-friendly system created for shipping lines to trade empty vessels and to maximize the utilization of ships. To address the huge structural imbalances of containers movement worldwide, SlotMax is designed in a way that it

Page 58: container shipping

53

matches the surplus vessel spaces available with the need for vessel spaces to carry either empty container for re-positioning or laden containers. The neutral Internet exchange system gives the power to shipping lines to decide on their preferred list to exchange slots with. This information is electronically integrated with PortNet to perform an optimised ship planning solution. 5.2.3.10 BoXchange BoXchange is another neutral Internet system designed to match supply and demand of empty containers among the shipping lines. Shipping lines, container owners or container leasing companies who are facing empty container shortage or wants to exchange empty containers can depend on this customer-sensitive and user-friendly exchange system to manage their empty containers. Similar to SlotMax, BoXchange allows the user to choose their preferred list of exchange. 5.2.3.11 GEMS Shipping line’s can monitor and keep record on information of their worldwide empty container stock at container terminals, on-dock depots, external depots, inland depots and off shore sites using the Global Equipment Management or better known as GEMS. GEMS is an Internet-based e-solution linked to PortNet and BoXchange, which works to help shipping lines manage their empty container inventory or stock. To address empty container imbalances, GEMS can determine the empty surpluses and deficits for a particular shipping line and automatically send the information to BoXchange, which assists in the exchange of empty containers. Besides facilitating the fulfillment of empty container maintenance and repair services to all PSA linked container terminals or any depot that uses the application, GEMS also keeps and updates a registry of shipping line’s static and dynamic empty containers information. 5.3 Use of IT in Shipping Lines Shipping Industry has started utilising Internet B2B Exchanges, a marketplace where many buyer and sellers post buy and sell bids to make trades at dynamically determined market prices. Both shipping lines and shippers are moving towards e-commerce in all dealings. Besides expediting business procedures without errors, e-commerce reduces transactional inefficiencies, cuts cost of operation such as retrieving information about shipment, making bookings and handling documentation, simultaneously grows revenues. With e-commerce, shipping lines can handle routine enquiries and booking without involving their sales representatives. All documents can be received electronically, captured and processed directly into the IT system seamlessly. Apart from that, the IT system also facilitates the shipping lines by providing weather routing, and managing their fuel, water, ballast, ship stability management electronically. The shippers too benefit from the e-commerce application. They can access any shipment information electronically 24 hours a day without depending on other parties.

Page 59: container shipping

54

Here are some e-commerce services offered by the selected container carriers as in Table 1.3. Among the common online services offered by carriers are Vessel Tracking, Vessel Schedules, Online Booking and Shipment Tracking. As the carriers provide a secured site, most of these services require user identification and password. Hence, users or customers have to register online before they could access their sites to retrieve up-to-minute business information. 5.3.1 E-Booking The E-booking or online booking request is made available 24 hours a day. This booking channel allows shipper to request for a fresh booking and save any unlimited number of favourite booking. Within the e-booking, shipper has to select the cargo from the commodity list provided, specify the size and type of container, and enter port of receipt or delivery on the latest departure and arrival date. Previous bookings can also be referred and reused when needed. Booking status viewing is also available. Maersk-Sealand, Hanjin, APL and Hyundai are among the carriers offering such service. Maersk-Sealand uses digital certificate (an electronic authentication system) to prove one’s identity and enable access to protected area to make booking online faster and safer. The shipper suggests the most appropriate vessel sailing from global schedule system displayed on screen and finally save all information. The shipper’s request will then be transmitted to the local Maersk-Sealand office, where confirmation of requirement together with the booking reference number will be sent back to the shipper. 5.3.2 Cargo Tracking Some carriers have the facilities for online Cargo Tracking. Customers can track the routing and status of their cargo by entering Booking Reference Number, Bill of Lading or Container Number. Information such as current location, status and route of shipment, details on local time of arrival and departure from the final port and container list for the shipment can be obtained through the system. Besides providing status of the active shipment from origin to destination, APL’s HomePort has an additional feature that alerts on exceptions when the shipment has been at certain statuses such as at the origin, load port, discharge port and destination longer than the specified time period. Its system also allows diversion request to change the shipment destination. The Personal Trace list can be activated if the shipper wants to save a special list of Bill of Lading or Container Number for tracing purpose. MOL’s online Navi-Gator system for Cargo Tracking is currently available for Trans-Pacific, Trans-Atlantic and America services. A P&O Nedloyd’s vessel whereabouts can be tracked by selecting a vessel name from the list in their Vessel Tracking system. All vessels owned, operated, chartered or even vessels on which P&O Nedloyd has slot charters are listed for tracking purpose at any time. It depicts route image and information on current status, recent and next port of call of the indicated vessel. CMA-CGM updates data on cargo routings twice a day via ‘Electronic Container Tracking’ module in Agent Information Management System (AIMS CMA-CGM Software) to help customers obtain status of a shipment. Hyundai offers Inter-Ports Vessel Monitoring. This system enables the customer to first view the specific route selected from the dropdown box. Customers can further check on vessel’s sailing status and schedules from the routes required. Long terms schedule for each port can also be viewed.

Page 60: container shipping

55

5.3.3 Vessel Sailing Schedule Similar to Cargo Tracking, Vessel Sailing Schedule is available online in all carrier Internet services. Vessel Sailing Schedule displays timetable indicating vessels departure, arrival and transit times at the relevant ports together with the date and time scheduled. This online service enables the customer to search for their real time container shipment voyages. Customers can check the schedule by selecting the appropriate Continent, Port of loading and destination, Region or Calling Port with specific date range. The required input detail varies upon carriers. For Hanjin, Calling Port is more appropriate to use when searching for multi port schedules or inbound schedule. Maersk-Sealand’s Transport Routing searches for the earliest departure or latest arrival based on date, country and port of load and discharge as required by customer. In the case of feasible schedule that matches their requirements, the transport routing can then be viewed by selecting one or more of the listed container types. APL offers schedules for all its trade lanes and routes, including Intra Asia routes. Its Quick Routes helps customers to save any number of favourite port pairs for easy access. MOL also provides sailing schedules, which can be accessed through Interactive Schedules, Printable Schedules and Spreadsheet Schedules. 5.3.4 Bill of Lading Online Bill of Lading contains proof copies, which can be checked prior to issuance of the original Bill of Lading. It minimizes re-processing, reduce paper flow and eliminate telefaxing and therefore reducing cost and processing hour between carriers and shippers when changes occur. Maersk-Sealand, Hanjin, APL, NYK, MOL and Hyundai handle such service electronically. APL controls its entire Bill of Lading process through Home Port. This service facilitates them to submit, review, revise and print their Bill of Ladings within 30 minutes of release online. 5.3.5 Notices and Reports Maersk-Sealand, Hanjin and some other carriers send online Arrival Notice to their customers. Transit report and estimated arrival date for shipment with cargo information can be retrieved from Hanjin’s online service. While NYK enables its customers to review Shipment Summaries, cut-off and availability information of NYK ships in some selected cities electronically, MOL also provides Incoming Shipment Reports for North America imports. Besides terminal information and cut-offs, Hyundai has The Equipment Specification, which gives a detailed online specification (weight, cargo, width, height, length, cubic) of all containers available at Hyundai, such as the dry freight container, refrigerated container, open top container, garment container and many more. APL’s Quick Report can transform shipment data into useful information reports. It can generate automatic reports and allows shippers to select standard reports, create custom, modify report for example filter, sort and rearrange columns. Shippers can decide on report delivery via print out, download or even schedule to send by e-mails whenever (daily, weekly or monthly) as required.

Page 61: container shipping

56

5.3.6 Tariff Rate Request Following the deregulation imposed on 1st May 1999 (please refer Sea Cargo Issues), carriers now provide information on tariff rates, tariff rules and tariff list for all trade lanes to and from United States. Details of trade lane origin, destination, commodity, container type and size, shipping date, rate basis and other relevant fields are needed to view the updated tariff details. Shippers and consignees can also search for Essential Terms in trade lanes to and from United States by keying in Service Contract Number. APL’s customers can further request for any international trade lane through its International Rate Quote via e-mail. 5.3.7 Finance Some of the carriers proffer online services for financial management. Maersk-Sealand, for instance uses e-statement, an online service for access to all outstanding freight and charge details. Sorted in columns of Bill of Lading, shipper reference, first vessel and receipt, it states total outstanding amount. Customers can click on any of this column to view the full break down of the detailed amount outstanding. They too can check on the specific rates of exchange applicable to their shipment and invoices by submitting their Bill of Lading number electronically. By doing the same thing, Hyundai customers can find for detention and demurrage charges for inbound and outbound shipment. APL has a special finance channel to manage both payable and receivable payment. Statement of Account, the payable feature displays the charge details by Bill of Lading or invoice in both USD and local currency, and the status of the invoices is monitored via Supplier Invoice, the APL’s online receivable feature. 5.3.8 Other Services In early 1999, APL introduced a container Internet service called Home Port. Besides the Home Port services discussed above (Shipments, Quick Report, Bills of Lading, Booking, Schedules, Rates and Tariff and Finance), the one-page customisable web portal keeps its customers well informed about the current shipping news and new services offered by them via Industry News channel. To assist its costumers well with shipping or technical questions while conducting a transaction in Home Port, it also provides 24 hours online Instant Help through real-time dial-text message. APL now offers chat facility with its customer support representative to assist its customer. Cosco America provides some electronic automated system to facilitate the US Customs in its export and import processes. Among the automated systems are, Custom Automated Clearinghouse (ACS)- a simple electronic payment option that allows participants to pay Custom fees, duties and taxes; Automated Manifest System (AMS)- a cargo inventory control and release notification system that expedites cargo flow and entry processing and also provides customers with electronic authorization to move cargo prior to vessel arrival; Automated Broker Interface (ABI)- a voluntary programme available to brokers, importers, carriers, port authorities and independent service centres, that enables qualified customers to file required import data electronically with Customs and Automated Export System (AES)- an electronic network that permits US Customs to file the Shipper’s Export

Page 62: container shipping

57

Declaration (SED) and the ocean manifest information directly. These automated systems accelerate the export and import processes within Cosco and the US Customs. Hyundai customers can observe the selected service pairs of train schedule in DST (Double Stack Train) Schedule and view Hyundai Interposal Hubs, which indicate the East, West and North Bound routes via Intermodal System Map. Hyundai too offers a very comprehensive Dangerous Goods and Special Cargo Regulation, and information on Asia local road weight limitation. 5.4 Online Information Services There are a number of information services available to streamline sea cargo activities. Interbox, Trade Compass, Compare Data, Greybox and Greyslot, Freightgate, Ocean Wide Marine Network, Sealink Information Technologies, Synchronet and E-Transport Rates are among them. 5.4.1 Interbox Launched in April 1999 by International Asset System, Interbox works based on client-server format using Oracle 8 Database. It is a neutral and cost-effective e-trading system that enables container owners, operators and transport service providers to search and transmit surplus and deficit containers. Carriers sell unsold slots at reduced rates for repositioning empty containers while maximizing their vessel slot capacity. The system helps the registered members to reduce container fleet management costs and improve asset utilization. After a successful login, users type in their requirements. ‘Search and Post’ for instance needs the user to indicate the location, possible destination for dropping off the containers, range of acceptable dates, container type and condition. They should indicate type of transaction (interchange, one way, lease or empty move) before they could search for boxes needed or offered by others. The ‘empty move’ is now replaced with SlotXchange, an online marketplace for vessel slot capacity. Container owners and operators who wish to move empty containers can search and post their need here, even at last minute. To get the best price for repositioning via Interbox, users interested in supplying and picking up containers can negotiate on the financial incentive. Other online transaction such as billing of the containers, sending invoices to the lessee and collecting the money can also be done through Interbox. 5.4.2 Trade Compass Trade Compass is an international commerce providing various services and information to traders. Encompassing sea cargo, it offers online sailing schedules, cargo tracking, rate matching, ocean transit analyzer and denied parties screening engine. Users can select any appropriate trade lanes from five options (to/from North America, European Union, Asia & Australia, South America & Caribbean or Africa) to view up to date vessel departure and arrival information. Trade Compass Ocean Cargo Tracking

Page 63: container shipping

58

traces the latest status of a shipment sailing with APL and OOCL. In order to retrieve this information, users have to aptly enter the Bill of Lading and submit online. RateMatch, is a feature in Trade Compass that enables the shippers to compare the shipment rates between different carriers before deciding on the best bid. The online tariff information service has three exclusive options to search tariff rates; Commodity Keyword, Individual Rate (TRI) or Trade Lane. Different inputs are needed to access each option. Trade Compass uses XML (eXtended Mark-up Language) format in operating tariff information to develop and expedite a complex tariff search system. Transport buyers can determine the best routing with the most appropriate carrier and service for their container shipment via the subscription of Ocean Transit Analyzer. They can retrieve the fastest transit-times, arrange for just-in-time delivery schedules and retrieve details of carrier space sharing activity. Using the Ocean Transit Analyzer, user can compare different carrier’s prompt schedule reliability by checking their on-time performance before booking a service. Dealing with illegal foreign business parties will lead to serious criminal penalties by the US Government. Denied Parties Screening Engine (DPSE) is therefore a latest feature included in Trade Compass for ‘U.S. persons’ to screen against the list of foreign companies and individual denied parties. ‘U.S. persons’ may include overseas companies owned or controlled by a U.S. person and in some instances, agents of U.S. companies. By entering specific words such as name, company name or country, the DPSE system searches a unified database containing the name and identifies them, if any. 5.4.3 Other Online Information Services One way to address the container imbalance is by providing ocean carriers access to information about each other’s empty containers. Similar to Interbox, CargoExchange.Net and Greybox and Greyslot function based on this concept. The CargExchange.Net unites buyers and sellers of containerised cargo space to optimise asset utilization. Greybox and Greyslot facilitate shipping lines to match each other’s container requirement using information received via telephone, fax, Internet or EDI and alert customers by e-mail of potential matches. By moving empty containers this way, the container repositioning cost is reduced. Established in 1996, SynchroNet is another Norwegian company, serving similarly as a broker or agent between carriers to address the container imbalances. It receives updated information of container supply and demand weekly and monthly, and uses a complex program to match them. Using the carrier’s secured locations on SynchroNet’s Internet, carriers view the matches and make their own arrangements for the container repositioning. The SynchroNet is paid some transaction fee by both parties for successful matches. SynchroNet has further introduced AsiaMax Service to help short-sea operators and major trade lane carriers in the Pacific Rim reduce container management cost and introduced US Overland Service to help international carriers cheaply shift boxes from inland USA. The Electronic Shipping Guide (ESG) is designed to improve the delivery of schedule and contact information. The DOS, Windows and Web-based developed and weekly updated system covers all trade lanes to and from North America, Asia and Australia, and Europe,

Page 64: container shipping

59

including intra-Europe voyages. ESG allows the user to directly compare and evaluate voyages by date, carrier, departure and arrival port before a shipment booking. As this schedule service is sponsored by shipping lines, all details of their locations, agencies and phone numbers are also available here. Shippers auction off a single shipping request to many service providers. Service providers place their bids for the selected and profitable request. If both the requirement and offer meets and the shipper accepts the bid, the trade is confirmed. This is how GoCargo, a secured bidding system works. Besides slashing negotiation cost for shippers, GoCargo increases service provider’s sale and maximizes their asset utilization. Similar to GoCargo, CargoNet also identifies shipping opportunity between the shippers and towers. By advertising their needs to ship a cargo or fill up an empty slot, both the parties can engage in business and increase sales while expanding their network services. Key details of shipment to be shipped and towed including the registered user’s contact number is submitted in the record for business dealing. Enterprise Ocean Shipping Software (ITABS++) is developed by Interlink Transport Technologies, mainly to support the carriers within the shipping industry. This software can assist them in overall ocean shipping procedures such as shipment booking, import and export processes, terminal operation, electronic container reservation, intermodal, documentations, freighting, credit and collections, equipment control and even in sales and marketing. 5.5 Electronic Documentation Management 5.5.1 Bolero Bolero is a neutral messaging system that allows importers, exporters, banks, customs, freight forwarders, shipping lines and shippers to communicate electronically to handle e-commerce for international trade and ocean shipping. As Bolero carries legal status in all electronic document exchanges and transactions, it serves users with high certainty. Trade documents sent via Core Messaging Platform (CMP) are secured using digital signatures and encryption. The Bolero Rulebook is a contract that binds and ensures all users to agree upon Bolero’s common rules and services. With the legal rules in Rulebook, users can transact electronic Bill of Landing (Bolero Bill of Lading) with poise. There are a lot more features in Bolero. BoleroXML is introduced to create a simple method to enable the trading partners exchange data and document over the Internet without bilateral data interchange agreement. With the ability to distinguish original document with the forwarded document, this paperless document exchange system assures users on document originality. Its unique messaging protocol guarantees deliveries of all transmitted messages and documents. Senders will receive warning from Bolero if a document is not received by its counter-party. Message transmission, accuracy and retention are all guaranteed by Bolero.

Page 65: container shipping

60

Among the initial service offered by Bolero is the Bolero Bill of Lading. To further underpin the Bolero Bill of Lading, an application called the Title Registry was introduced for recording and transferring the rights and obligations contained in a Bolero Bill of Lading. Besides preventing unauthorized amendments, it also helps in internal Bill of Lading auditing. The Title Registry together with Bolero Bill of Lading provides a complete functional equivalent to the faultless paper Bill of Lading. Basically the port and terminal operators can use Bolero to communicate on bookings, invoices, vessel manifest and berth control, while the logistics operator can use the system for communication in freight bookings and confirmation, invoices and custom clearance. Apart from Bill of Lading, carriers can expedite communication on vessel bayplans, container arrival notice, transshipment container list, container lease requirement, freight invoices, sublease and interchange arrangements and custom documents via Bolero. It leads to a faster turn round of vessels, improves dwell times and increases internal systems efficiencies and customer service. Importers and exporters benefit from the accelerated logistics processing and reductions in operation cost. Custom agencies too can use this system to handle custom clearance, capture of duty and quota control. Communication in letters of credit, claims and risk intermediation product will be made easy for banks and other financial institution using this system. Generally, Bolero offers a faster and more transparent service to the key players in a sea cargo team. 5.5.2 TradeCard Owned by the Full Service Trade System Ltd. in Bermuda, TradeCard is an online service using XML document model. TradeCard is used in international trade and document transaction. Exporter, importer and freight forwarder have real-time access to the information they need to keep transaction on schedule. Shipping line activities is currently not incorporated in the system. TradeCard is available for transactions between Hong Kong, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Canada and US. This trading network will be expanded to Japan, Western Europe, China and Latin America in 2001. Using TradeCard, buyers and sellers can seamlessly create, digitally approve and amend Purchase Orders. Users can issue payment, create and send Invoice and Packing List, receive Payment Notification and Assurance of Payment securely. Negotiation of contract terms, approval of discrepancies and compliance monitoring are possible using the B2B marketplace integrated system. It further offers access to inspection services and cargo insurance, all electronically. As the documents are exchanged between parties, the system makes thorough checks and detects fraud, if any, in transactions. 5.5.3 E-Transport Two useful features in E-Transport are FreightView and FreightLink. These features help putting together, communicating and managing the documentation involved in container shipping. FeightLink is a system, works rather similar to FreightView, that manages shipment information among trading partners. Similar to other electronic document managements, these systems allow carriers, shippers and intermediaries to electronically create, amend, transmit and even detect exceptions in

Page 66: container shipping

61

booking request, booking confirmation, purchase order, shipping order, service contract, Bill of Lading, bank documents, delivery notice and payment documents. As this is a flexible software, user can change the underlying rules of the system if any there are any changes in their existing business process. For example, FreighLink will automatically route respective information to appropriate departments. Online negotiation between carriers and shippers to create service contracts and file tariffs with the carrier’s database and government agencies can also be handled using this system. 5.6 Global Positioning System Started in 1973, the Global Positioning System (GPS) is a satellite-based radionavigation combined with mapping software system developed and deployed by the United States Department of Defence. It can be used by land, sea and airborne operators on or near Earth, 24 hours a day, to determine their three dimensional position, direction, velocity, altitude and time in all weather. In ocean shipping, GPS is being very useful in navigation and real-time tracking system to provide customers with accurate details on cargo status and location. This technology allows improved positioning to track aboard vessels and land transportation such as trailers, freight wagons and similar platforms, thus enabling them to monitor the status of their freight containers at any particular moment. Besides determining vertical location (distance from the ellipsoid) of vessel, GPS can be used to measure and predict vessel SAS (Squat And Settlement), which are the two important balancing components in determining under keel (vessel bottom) clearance. Being able to trace when component shipment will arrive and where they are within the factory ground, the manufacturer can better operate the ‘Just In Time’ assembly philosophy. The accuracy of GPS has recently been improved. During the implementation of SA (Selective Availability), the built-in degradation of GPS signals, civilian receivers were made less accurate than military units. But when the SA was officially turned-off on 1st May 1999, the GPS accuracy for civilian users was improved from within 100m to within 20m. The accuracy was further developed to within 10m with DGPS (Differential GPS), a regular GPS with an additional correction signal. There is also an advanced navigation systems for civilian, which is even more accurate. WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System) is a satellite system that transmits differential GPS correction data to all specially equipped GPS receivers. It reports a position of 2.5m within the coverage area. 5.7 Electronic Container Seal Though the traditional container seal offers reliable protection, the Electronic Container Seal (ECS) is a new development which has many advantages for shippers, freight forwarders, port, railroad and warehouse operators. It is mainly because the reusable electronic container seal can record the exact time, date and duration of every opening and closing of the load seal. ECS is an active wireless battery-powered transmitter system that uses Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) for communications between the container seals and the readers.

Page 67: container shipping

62

Some ECS uses locks and keys containing electronic ID chips with unique individual coding while the others use electronic security cards. With this feature, the control system can easily identify who gains access and when, even while the cargo is in transit. The system also has the ability to read several container seals from the central location. The ECS increases security of a cargo besides eliminating physical checking of the container. It speeds up clearance of containers by Customs, thus expediting all operations. Reference: [1] Containerisation International, November 2000

Page 68: container shipping

63

6. Sea Cargo Issues 6.1 Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998 (OSRA) The Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998 or OSRA is a new US legislation designed to amend the Shipping Act of 1984. OSRA was signed into law by President Clinton on October 14, 1998 and went on effect on May 1 1999. The key purpose of OSRA is to promote the growth and development of US exports through competitive and efficient ocean transportation by placing a great reliance on the marketplace. It deregulates the international ocean shipping business. Among the revamped structures of OSRA are: Confidential contracts: No more ‘open rates’. Prior to OSRA, shippers and carriers are now allowed to negotiate and reach service contracts in which rates, discounts, charges, inland service points, service commitments, liquidated damages and other pricing terms will be confidential. Certain terms, unrelated to pricing, such as commodities, port pairs, contract duration minimum volume commitments will still be available to the general public via the Internet. Carriers no longer will be required to provide similarly situated shippers with ‘me too’ contract terms. In addition, OSRA permits contract among combinations of multiple shippers and carriers in associations and conferences and other groupings. The major benefit is that shippers will be able to keep details of their service contracts with carriers, secret from competitors. As shippers will not be able to compare rates with other similar shippers as a strategy to negotiate contract terms, shippers are more likely to enter global relationship with carriers. Tariff Filling with FMC eliminated: Carriers need not file tariffs with the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC). Instead, they must publish their tariff information via the Internet or other media in an FMC-approved format. OSRA require the FMC to continue enforcing tariff rates. NVOCC/Freight Forwarders: Under the Shipping Act of 1984, only freight forwarders and not NVOCCs (refer to Glossary) must be licensed by the FMC. Under the new law, both freight forwarders and NVOCCs are lumped into one definition called the ‘Ocean Transport Intermediaries (OTI) and it requires every OTI to be licensed by FMC and have a bond or other proof of financial security on file with the FMC. In the past, NVOCCs could participate in contracts as the contract shipper or as members of shippers association. But now OSRA prohibits NVOCCs from offering and participating in service contracts with shippers. NVOCCs will still be able to offer time/volume arrangements, but the rates must be published in the NVOCCs’ tariffs. To skirt such restriction, NVOCCs form shippers associations, which are permitted to enter into confidential service contracts with carriers. Some large NVOCCs are already taking this step. Discrimination prohibited: Ocean carriers can differentiate more between customers but they are prohibited from discriminating against middleman, such as NVOCCs and shippers associations.

Page 69: container shipping

64

There are still some pieces of legislation which are not amended. For example, ocean carriers conference retain their antitrust immunity and they must continue to file their agreements with FMC. Besides that, the FMC also retains authority to monitor carrier’s activities and investigate possible anti-competitive actions. As a result of OSRA, shippers and carriers are now paying closer attention in analysing rates and transportation costs. The introduction of OSRA has undoubtedly changed the nature of the US shipping trend. Though there are some parties for or against the reform act, the new law is sure to have big impact on every link in the sea cargo chain. 6.2 Container Imbalance on US Trade During the currency crisis in Asia, the export and import ratio was unbalance; more goods were exported than imported. Consequently, the Trans-Pacific trade between Asia and North America became busier one way (Asia to US) than the opposite direction. Though the Asia economy recovers, but the ratio of container imbalance still remains substantial. Similarly, there were more outbound containers from Europe to US than inbounds. As the consequence, the US container terminals are overflowing with empty containers! The imbalance in container flows had resulted in a container repositioning problem which burdens the carriers, shippers and container leasing companies with enormous cost. Below is a monthly statistics of container cargo movement in a Trans-Pacific trade.

ASIA US US ASIA

Month 1998 1999 Growth 2000 Growth 1998 1999 Growth 2000 Growth

Jan 387,614 432,652 11.6% 511,501 18.2% 223,566 223,805 0.1% 253,107 13.1%

Feb 356,593 450,735 26.4% 501,880 11.3% 219,242 236,366 7.8% 262,072 10.9%

Mar 425,186 454,780 7.0% 508,534 11.8% 254,376 258,267 1.5% 280,650 8.7%

Apr 430,780 490,080 13.8% 548,819 12.0% 234,146 245,883 5.0% 258,159 5.0%

May 437,258 531,896 21.6% 592,213 11.3% 233,036 240,082 3.0% 273,306 13.8%

Jun 477,290 528,569 10.7% 597,510 13.0% 232,575 243,573 4.7% 261,858 7.5%

Jul 502,403 533,662 6.2% 642,940 20.5% 214,235 226,369 5.7% 250,122 10.5%

Aug 506,214 560,014 10.6% 666,765 19.1% 208,560 223,828 7.3% 269,732 20.5%

Sep 510,389 542,798 6.3% 640,373 18.0% 214,073 235,797 10.1% 257,709 9.3%

Oct 520,233 562,576 8.1% -100.0% 235,642 264,030 12.0% -100.0%

Nov 501,928 560,631 11.7% -100.0% 240,468 257,964 7.3% -100.0%

Dec 440,985 490,885 11.3% -100.0% 251,453 262,798 4.5% -100.0%

Jan/Jun 2,514,721 2,888,712 14.9% 3,260,457 12.9% 1,396,941 1,447,976 3.7% 1,589,152 9.7%

Jan/Sep 4,033,727 4,525,186 12.2% 5,210,535 15.1% 2,033,809 2,133,970 4.9% 2,366,715 10.9% Jan/Dec 5,496,873 6,139,278 11.7% 5,210,535 -15.1% 2,761,372 2,918,762 5.7% 2,366,715 -18.9%

Jan/Mar 1,169,393 1,338,167 14.4% 1,521,915 13.7% 697,184 718,438 3.0% 795,829 10.8%

Apr/Jun 1,345,328 1,550,545 15.3% 1,738,542 12.1% 699,757 729,538 4.3% 793,323 8.7%

Jul/Sep 1,519,006 1,636,474 7.7% 1,950,078 19.2% 636,868 685,994 7.7% 777,563 13.3%

Oct/Dec 1,463,146 1,614,092 10.3% 0 -100.0% 727,563 784,792 7.9% 0 -100.0% Table 6.1: Monthly container cargo movements in TEU (Asia/US Trade)-Jan 1998-Sep 2000[1]

Page 70: container shipping

65

Month 1998 1999 2000

Jan 57.7% 51.7% 49.5% Feb 61.5% 52.4% 52.2% Mar 59.8% 56.8% 55.2% Apr 54.4% 50.2% 47.0% May 53.3% 45.1% 46.1% Jun 48.7% 46.1% 43.8% Jul 42.6% 42.4% 38.9%

Aug 41.2% 40.0% 40.5% Sep 41.9% 43.4% 40.2% Oct 45.3% 46.9% #DIV/0! Nov 47.9% 46.0% #DIV/0! Dec 57.0% 53.5% #DIV/0!

Jan/Jun 55.6% 50.1% 48.7% Jan/Sep 50.4% 47.2% 45.4% Jan/Dec 50.2% 47.5% 45.4% Jan/Mar 59.6% 53.7% 52.3% Apr/Jun 52.0% 47.1% 45.6% Jul/Sep 41.9% 41.9% 39.9% Oct/Dec 49.7% 48.6% #DIV/0!

Table6.2: Imbalance ratio between West Bound and East Bound (WB/EB) in Asia/US Trade [1]

The statistics above indicates that the Asia-US container flows are more imbalanced in recent years. The average container ratio (E/B:WB) in 1998 and 1999 is 20:10 and 21:10, respectively. This imbalance ratio has widened further to 25:10 in the third quarter of 2000. Repositioning empty containers back to Asia can incur substantial cost, for example it cost around US$300 to US$500 per container, but sometimes the cost can also run up to US$800. In past years, the Trans-Pacific carriers have lost an estimated $30 million per week, repositioning empty containers from the U.S. to Asia. One identified way to address this issue is by the utilization of IT based systems, such as Interbox, CargoExchange.Net, Greybox and Greyslot and other similar softwares as discussed in chapter 5. 6.3 Shortage of Container Chassis in US Ports Chassis is a heavy metal frame with one set of wheels in front and two sets in the rear, used to move containers from place to place. A container locked into a chassis is attached to a truck or yard tractor for local or long-distance transportation. When the US container terminal receives a vast number of containers from Asia, there can be a situation of insufficient chassis to move them all immediately off the docks. The

Page 71: container shipping

66

critical shortage of container chassis slows down container removal from the terminal and caused congestion in inland storage sites. One solution is to buy more chassis. Another alternative is by imposing ‘free time’, - the time containers can be left at a port before fees (demurrage) are charged. For example, any containers that exceed seven days for imports and ten days for exports (including Saturday, Sunday and holidays) in port will carry demurrage charge of US$19 per day for a 20-foot container and US$40 per day for a 40-foot container. The fees will further be increased to US$37 and US$79 per day, respectively after another five days. 6.4 Equipment Imbalance Surcharge (EIS) In order to offset the cost of repositioning the empty boxes within the US trade, carriers are assessing surcharges, also known as Equipment/Container Imbalance Surcharges (EIS) with different rates for various trades. The surcharge rate for exports moving from Europe (Continent/UK/Ireland/ Denmark/ Finland/ Norway/Sweden) to US is US$250 per container, effective from 15 September 1999. Effective from 1 October 1999, a surcharge of US$150 per 20-foot container and US$225 per 40-foot container will be assessed by shipping lines serving US/South African trade. With effect on 26 December 1999, the US/Australasia trade route’s surcharge will be US$200 per 20-foot container and US$350 per 40-foot container. A peak season surcharge of US$150 per 20-foot container and US$300 per 40-foot container will also be implemented for US/Asia trade during the June to November period. These rates however vary within the carriers. 6.5 Megaships In recent years, container vessels have increased in size from 3,900 TEU containers to more than 5,000 TEUs. Such vessels (with a capacity of greater than 5,000–6,000 TEUs) are much larger than the Post Panamax class of ships and commonly referred as Megaships. Generally, mega-shippers prefer megaships as they can use single carriers to provide services to all main trades. Furthermore, larger container carrying capacity vessels will provide a lower cost-per-unit of shipment. Below is a list of Maersk Sealand’s megaships. Vessel Name TEU Built Vessel Name TEU Built Regina Maersk 6,000 1996 Clifford Maersk 6,600 1999 Karen Maersk 6,000 1996 Skagen Maersk 6,600 1999 Kate Maersk 6,000 1996 Sofie Maersk 6,600 1999 Knud Maersk 6,000 1996 Soroe Maersk 6,600 1999 Katrine Maersk 6,000 1997 Svend Maersk 6,600 1999 Kirsten Maersk 6,000 1997 A.P.MØller 6,600 2000 Sovereign Maersk 6,600 1998 Caroline Maersk 6,600 2000 Sally Maersk 6,600 1998 Carsten Maersk 6,600 2000 Svendborg Maersk 6,600 1998 Table 6.3: Maersk Sealand’s Megaships [2]

Page 72: container shipping

67

Maersk Sealand’s first megaship was built in 1996. Maersk Sealand’s megaships can achieve the optimum speed of 24.6 knots, with the length of 318.2m, width of 42.8m and draft of 14.5m. They are all built in Denmark. All megaships built in 1998 onwards have an increased capacity of 6,600 TEU with a greater length of 347m. OOCL, whose largest ship now is the 5,700 TEU S class will be ready with two new megaships of 7,200 TEU by end 2003. Currently, the Samsung Heavy Industries Co., a Korea shipbuilder claims that it has the ability to build an 8,800 TEU megaships with length of 330m, height of 26.8m and draft of 13m. Megaships with capacity of carrying 12,000 TEU are also expected to be in operation on major trade lanes by the year 2011. As megaships generally have deeper draft of 12-13.8m (40-46 feet) when fully loaded, it would require megaports with at least 50 feet berth depths to physically accommodate them. Megaport also needs other facets to handle the larger amount of containers loaded and discharged by megaships. It includes suitable terminal facilities, expanded terminal infrastructure (more cranes and container storage yards, stronger wharves, rail and railways access) and a superb information system to faultlessly expedite port operations. Unfortunately not all port can accommodate megaships. In US for example, only top 5 of the 15 ports, namely Long Beach, Baltimore, Tacoma, Hampton Roads and Seattle, and those on the west coast have adequate channel depths. Analysts from marine consulting firm forecast that megaships will handle up to one-third of all container ship tonnage by the year 2010. To capture this trade, many ports will have to deepen and widen their existing channels. References: [1] http://www.mol.jp/JE3/e3/hokube/hokube.html [2] http://www.maersksealand.com

Page 73: container shipping

68

7. Proposed Research Projects 7.1 Contract Planning and Load Allocation for Ocean Carriers With the advent of the Ocean Reform Shipping Act (OSRA) 1998, carriers are given the freedom to negotiate and to set prices in individual service contract with shippers. Usually such contracts are negotiated once a year, that is one or two months before the trade’s peak season starts. One TLI-AP related project is looking at the issue of contract planning and load allocation. The main parameter in a contract is price-setting. The price charged in a contract for transporting a container depends on the origin-destination pair, the time of the year and the classification of the goods in the container (this factor is usually not considered within intra-Asia transportation). In order to structure these prices, some important aspects, such as the price structure of competitors, the behaviour of customer demand, the availability of transportation capacities (capacities of voyages, domestics transports-truck, rail and barge transportation), and the availability and flow balance of equipment (container and truck chassis) have to be considered. Thus to optimise contract planning requires a model which can determine the target commodity mix and corresponding price levels and pricing periods. When shippers request cargo bookings, ocean carriers have to make decisions on how to manage the bookings. Such operational decisions, called load allocation, need to be organised in a way that sustains good customer relations which maintains operational efficiency. Before confirming a shipment dispatch with the shipper, carriers have to consider their capacity on the voyage, booked loads and its origin-destination pairs, future booking requests, relative importance of different shippers and urgency of their loads and also other alternatives for obtaining additional capacity, which includes buying capacity from other carriers. The increased competitiveness environment post OSRA has increased the urgency for developing, optimizing and managing contracts at both the strategic and operational level. One important research direction is focused at developing decision support system to facilitate carriers to make decision on contract planning and load allocation. Models for a planning tool can be developed for carrier to plan their coming year contract price structure, target mix of origin-destination flows and cargo classes. Once the best match is obtained, carriers’ profitability can be maximized. 7.2 Empty Container Allocation and Distribution Planning As discussed in the Sea Cargo Issues, container imbalance is a core problem faced by the carriers. While ports in some regions, for example the Far East are experiencing empty container deficits, the US ports, particularly brimming with surplus containers. The imbalance in supply and demand of empty containers in ports at different regions requires proper allocation and distribution planning of empty containers. Moreover, there is a significant impact on operations for carriers to manage the empty container movements as the key component of their total operating cost (TOC) is associated with repositioning empty containers around its many ports.

Page 74: container shipping

69

Some planning decisions, such as leasing-in (lease containers from a leasing company), off-leasing (return containers to a leasing company), positioning-in (bring in containers from other ports) and positioning-out (move containers out to other ports) are ways of addressing the container imbalance. Among the identified operational constraints in the planning process are, the vessel space limitation to carry empty containers to the demand port, off-leasing limitation by leasing companies and leasing-in uncertainty (container unavailable or insufficient from the leasing companies). Deviation of projected demand compared to the actual requirement due to the demand changes requested by the customers further adds the difficulty to the planning process. Some existing work is Shen and Khoong (95) [1], which looks at a large scale planning problem for empty container distribution and Lai, Kokim Lam and Chan (95)[2] which looks at a simulation model to identify container planning policies. This work has only focused on empty containers that are transported from the Middle East to ports in the Far East. Potential research issues are to look at other ports and to get better models for the allocation and repositioning of empty containers. More advanced forecasting techniques, perhaps using data mining, will also be important component of more sophisticated planning models.

References:

[1] W.S.Shen and C.M.Khoong, A DSS for empty container distribution planning, Desicion Support Systems, 15:(1), 75-82 (1995)

[2] K.K.Lai, Kokim Lam and W.K.Chan, Shipping container logistics and allocation,

Journal of the Operational Research Society, 46:(6), 687-697 (1995)

Page 75: container shipping

i

Appendix 1 – Profile of the Top 10 World Ports

Hong Kong Port, Hong Kong Hong Kong’s traditional advantages for shipping are due to its strategic location in relation to China and its natural deep sea water harbour. Hong Kong was thus founded as a port for China trade some 160 years ago and has flourished as an entrepot since then. The Port of Hong Kong has become the busiest container port in the world in recent years. Whilst a significant proportion of Hong Kong’s traffic is transshipment (27.06% in 1997), the majority of its cargo is that moving directly to or from Mainland China. Hong Kong owns significant shipowners in the international shipping sector. They control approximately 6%(in terms of tonnage) of the merchant ships in the world, ranking fifth after Greece, Japan, Norway and the US. Facilities as ship management, brokerage, finance, insurance, arbitration, legal, naval architecture and ship surveying services are provided by 1,000 shipping related companies operating in Hong Kong. On an average day some 1,300 ocean-going vessels and river trade craft enter or leave the port, with more than 200 ocean-going ships are working in the port and about 10,000 harbour craft are busy providing services to the port activities.

Source: http://www.info.gov.hk & Short Sea Container Market Singapore Port, Singapore

Singapore’s strategic location at the crossroads of major shipping routes makes it the major port of call for over 320 shipping lines from more than 738 ports worldwide. As it provides global connectivity to ports world wide, coupled with sailing frequencies, Singapore Port or better known as PSA Corp (Port of Singapore Authority Corporation) is an ideal hub for transshipment of containers. Shipping lines can therefore maximize slot utilization on their mother vessels through the choice of feeders to various trade routes. Singapore FastConnect Transshipment System offers shipping lines efficient transshipment connections in Singapore. Their customers are also offered rebates for enabling faster connections for increased operational efficiency. PSA Corp handles 2,000 containers per vessel routinely, and turns vessels around in less than 12 hours.

Source: http://www.mpa.gov.sg & Short Sea Container Market Port of Kaohsiung, Taiwan

The International Port of Kaoshiung is the largest port in Taiwan. It is situated in the south western coast of Taiwan, and is the pivot point at the intersection between Taiwan Strait and Bashi Strait. It features a broad area, vast interland, clement weather and a long developed sand bar forming a natural breakwater for the

Page 76: container shipping

ii

harbour. The Port of Kaoshiung’s network extends to all major ports of the world. Its annual handling capacity is about 98 million tons, accounting two-thirds of Taiwan’s import and export tonnage. With a total loading and unloading volume of 328 million in 1998, and a significant container throughput of 6,271,053 TEU, made the port the third largest port in the world in the same year.

Source: http://www.khb.gov.tw Port of Pusan, Korea

The Pusan Port has a 120 years long history. Located in the southern part of the Korea Peninsula, the port is a principle gateway linking the Pacific Ocean to the continent of Asia. The port of Pusan consists of the North Port, South Port, Gamcun Harbour and Tadaepo Harbour. With a fine, natural deep harbour experiencing only minor tidal changes and a location that connects Asia and North and South America, the Port of Pusan plays a vital role as the hub of seaborne transportation throughout the Northeast Asia region. Source: http://www.kca.or.kr

Port of Rotterdam, Netherlands The first port activities in the Port of Rotterdam began around 1328 with the construction of Oude Haven. Before that Rotterdam was still a fishing port situated on the river Rotte. Imports and exports of products soon drew attention to the small town and links were formed with ports in England and Portugal. And today Rotterdam is the capital city of European container transport. The Port of Rotterdam handled containers totalling to some 6.3 million TEU in 1997, more than any other European port, Port of Rotterdam occupied the fifth place on the list of the top 10 world container ports. Some 70% of the containers handled in Rotterdam are destined for European regions outside Netherlands. From this port, containers are then forwarded to the other European countries by coastal shipping, barge, truck and train. The Rotterdam Municipal Port Management expects a throughput of around 11.3 million TEU by the year 2020. Source: http://www.containershipping.com Port of Long Beach, US

Long Beach was the first port in Southern Colifornia with docksides rail facilities, which allows cargo to be transferred directly between ship and train. The Port of Long Beach has been the busiest container port in the U.S since 1995. It is also ranked the sixth busiest in the world. This port, combined with the Port of Los Angeles represent the third busiest container port complex in the world. In 1999, the value of cargo through the port was nearly US$89 billion and container totalling 4,408,480 TEUs were handled here. Container throughput and volume of all forms of cargo have increased by more than 175% and 50%, respectively since 1990.

Page 77: container shipping

iii

Some 50% of the cargo passing through the port is moving to or from the southwest region of the US, which is moving to and from the LA region. The remaining 50% of the cargo passing through the port is moving to or from markets east of the Rocky Mountains and the Gulf and East coasts of the US. With a ready consumer market for import trade and an established agricultural, manufacturing and transportation base for export trade, the port has direct access to 17 million Southern Colifornia residents. Source: http://www.polb.com Port of Shanghai, China

Shanghai is the largest port in China. It is located on the Huangpu River at the month of the Changjiang River. Some 99% of Shangai’s foreign-trade goods are handled by its port; its annual cargo throughput ranks first in China. It has established trade relationship with about 160 countries and regions throughout the world and is served by 20 international shipping lines. The Changjiang River links the port to inland provinces and its central coastal position gives access to all Chinese ports, north and south. Shanghai Container Terminals (SCT), a joint venture set up by Shanghai Port Authority and Hutchison Whampoa Ltd, owns and operates all container facilities in Shanghai. Besides cargo handling facilities, ship repair, drydocks and other repair facilities are also available in the port. The port also provides five floating cranes with maximum capacity of 2,500 tons. http://www.info.gov.hk Port of Hamburg, Germany

Being the largest container port in Germany and the second largest in Europe, Hamburg handles a quarter of all container shipment through the main ports of the northern European seaboard. In 1999, Hamburg’s container throughput reached a record of 3.7 million TEU, confirming its position as the top ten container port in the world. Approximately 50% of all the containers handled at Hamburg are bound for or received from ports of Asia. This reflects the importance of Asia as a trading partner to Hamburg. Hamburg’s position as a river-port on the Elbe enables vessels to be loaded and discharged right in the heart of Hamburg region’s main freight centre and this saves on transport cost. With a project to deepen the Elbe is going ahead, Hamburg will be able to receive vessels of 6,000 TEU and even larger.

Source: http://www.hafen-hamburg.de Port of Antwerp, Belgium

Antwerp is an important crossroad in the European motorway network. Located in the second largest city in Belgium, Antwerp has the most central location (among the ports of that range) with respect to the main production and consumption areas

Page 78: container shipping

iv

in the hinterland. Its central position is boosted by an extensive network of communication routes with some significant areas making it the deal distribution point for European market. In Antwerp, general cargo handling goes beyond container handling. It is the terminus of twelve international rail-cargo lines and 20% of Antwerp’s maritime traffic comes in or goes out by rail. A total of 960 km of tracks of the quays are connected to the port railway system. Every year some 15,9000 ships call at the port, flying the flags of 100 different nations. The port also offers 300 regular liner services to over 800 overseas destinations. An information processing system called APICS (Antwerp Port Information and Control System) was developed especially to plan shipping arrivals and departures and control vessel traffic in the port itself. The main objective of APICS is to increase Antwerp’s efficiency in organising the nautical operations.

Source: http://www.portofantwerp.be Port of Los Angeles, US

The Port of Los Angeles, an independent, self-supporting department of the City of Los Angeles, Colifornia was founded in 1907 and it’s the second busiest port in US. The port is often referred to as the Los Angeles Harbour Department. It is one of the premier US gateway for international trade and commerce. About 29 facilities for handling all types of cargo are available. This is inclusive of six state-of-art container terminals. The port is now completing its Pier 300/4000 Implementation Program, with an anticipated doubling of cargo expected. The port has 29 major cargo terminals and is continually upgrading and improving its facilities.

Source: http://www.portoflosangeles.org

Page 79: container shipping

v

Appendix 2– Profile of the Selected Major Carriers Maersk Sealand

Maersk Sealand has a service network spans of six continents and more than 325 offices around the globe. Based in Denmark, Maersk Sealand has subsidiary organizations located in more than 100 countries to ensure a consistent service in all the geographic areas where they do business. Their country organization reports to the head offices in Europe, North and South America, Asia, Middle East and Australasia and Africa. The Maersk/Sealand operates more than 250 vessels with a total capacity of around 600,000 TEU. In 1999, Maersk Line acquired the international container business of Sea-Land Service Inc. and changed its name to Maersk Sealand. Source: http://www.maersksealand.com

Evergreen/Uniglory

The Evergreen Marine Corporation (Taiwan) Ltd, and together with its other affiliates including Evergreen International SA, Panama and Uniglory Marine Corporation, Taiwan formed a container shipping group in 1968. Including vessels on order, the Evergreen/Uniglory fleet will stand at 134 ships totalling over 360,000 TEU by the end of 2001. The main routes operated by Evergreen link North America, Asia and Europe. It operates ships of around 4,200 TEU for the eastbound and westbound weekly sailings and employs 5,364 TEU vessels for its three Trans-Pacific services. Evergreen has recently extended its services in to the North-South trades, South Africa and Australia. Source: http://www.evergreen-marine.com.tw P&O Nedlloyd

In December 1996, Anglo-Dutch liner operator, the P&O Nedlloyd Container Line limited, was formed as a 50:50 joint venture of P&O and Royal Nedlloyd. It has two head offices; in Rotterdam and in London. P&O Nedlloyd is now one of the largest container carriers worldwide, with routes connecting all parts of the globe and a yearly turnover of around US$4 billion. It has over 70 trade lanes and provides connections to more than 250 main ports serving 120 countries worldwide. P&O Nedlloyd also has a fleet of 130 owned and chartered vessels, and a container fleet numbering some 635,000 owned and leased TEU. Among the strengths of P&O Nedlloyd are its well developed feeder lines and extensive inland transport capabilities. Their services are supported by a combination of the latest technology and with a ready-made network of local offices. Source: http://www.ponl.com

Page 80: container shipping

vi

Hanjin/DSR-Senator Established in 1977 under the name of Hanjin Container Lines (HJCL) as a member of Hanjin Group, Hanjin Shipping Co. Ltd. (HJS) is one of the youngest global carriers in the shipping industry. The South Korea’s Hanjin is a transportation provider with more than 200,000 containers of all types and sizes with three terminals in Long Beach, New York and Seattle. Intermodal service is available throughout the North America continent from all these exclusive terminals. In 1999, Hanjin acquired 80% interest in DSR Senator Lines. Hanjin’s global bulk operations consist of three main service areas, namely, liner, tramper and specialized services. At present, HJS holds a comparative percentage ratio of 75% container to 25% bulk. It is now actively seeking to optimise the balance between container and bulk operations. Source: http://www.hanjin.com MSC

Founded in 1970, Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC), S.A. of Geneva, Switzerland is a privately owned shipping line. MSC serves 5 continents and calls at 174 ports through 81 main direct and 55 combined weekly liner services. It controls over 300 inland depots worldwide with 350 local offices. MSC operates a container fleet of 420,000 TEU containers which include 20 foot and 40 foot drybox units, reefers, open-tops, flat racks, collapsible and high cube containers. MSC has its own private facilities for the refurbishing, repairing and maintenance of its own container fleet. In some countries, it operates local transport companies dedicated to the collection and delivery of MSC shipments. Source: http://www.mscgva.ch Cosco

Chinese national carrier, China Ocean Shipping (Group), Cosco is a large conglomerate taking international shipping as its core business. Cosco Group owns many firms and offices in many parts of China, such as Guangzhou, Shanghai, Qingdao, Tianjin and Dalian, and the group has successfully established its representative offices in 38 different countries. Founded 1997 in Shanghai China, Cosco Container Lines Co. Ltd, which is known as COSCON is a key company specialized in container transport under Cosco Group. Its business scope ranges from international and domestic container transport by sea, space booking, ship’s chartering, shipping agencies, ship’s trade, ship’s stores, spare parts, provision and bunkers, on-land enterprises, telecommunication service, labour leasing service, warehousing and multi modal transport. The biggest ocean shipping company in Shenzen and a joint venture of Cosco, Shenzen Ocean Shipping Co. Ltd, owns seven ocean going vessels, with a tonnage of 283,000 and the total assets of 390,000,000 yuan and operates six chartered vessels. Another Cosco Group,

Page 81: container shipping

vii

Xiamen Ocean Shipping Company (COSCOXIAMEN) owns 17 various types of ships, including bulk carrier, general cargo ship, LPG carrier, totalling 350,000dwt. Source: http://www.cosco.com NOL/APL

Founded in 1968, Neptune Orient Lines Ltd (NOL) is one of the five largest shipping companies worldwide. Being the largest shipping company listed on the Stock Exchange Market in Singapore with a market capitalization of S$2.05 billion (as of August 2000), the NOL operates a network of container transportation services on major international trade routes. NOL’s container transportation division merged with the American President Line (APL) in November 1997 to represent a significant force in terms of global container terminal development. Some 77% of its turnover of US$4,276 million in 1999 was contributed by container shipping. Besides covering container transshipment in the trans-Pacific, Asia-Europe, Mediterranean, Latin America, intra-Asia and Australia markets, APL/NOL also provides supply chain management services for international shippers through its subsidiary, APL Logistics. It also provides worldwide chartering services in the liquid and dry bulk trades. Source: http://www.nol.com.sg

Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha

Established in 1885 in Japan, Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha (NYK Line) has led the Japanese shipping industry consistently in volume handled and destinations served through liner services. NYK Lines operates a liner fleet of about 100 vessels, including more than 70 containerships. Apart from operating the world’s largest fleet of car carriers, they too operate some 35 crude oil tankers, including 31 very large crude carriers (VLCCs). They operate 3 of over 100,000 dwt, 1 of over 70,000 dwt, and 5 of over 40,000dwt totalling 9 carriers for Clean Petroleum Products (CPP), mainly naphtha for petrochemical feedstocks and other fuels such as gasoline, gas oil, jet fuel and kerosine and also methanol. Their strength in liner services is in their breakage-free cargo handling. Source: http://www.nyk.com CMA CGM/ANL

The CMA CGM (Compagnie Générale Maritime – Compagnie Maritime d’Affrétement) group was created in 1996 with the worldwide unification of CMA and CGM agencies taking place in 1997. In December 1998, CMA CGM acquired regular container lines activity of the Australian national company, ANL. Together, the CMA CGM/ANL offers shipping services to all worldwide destinations, including Europe, Mediterranean, North Africa, Pacific Islands, North America, Asia. It operates a fleet of more than 80 vessels, a quarter of which are company

Page 82: container shipping

viii

owned, to make a global network of more than 220 agencies present in 120 countries. It’s turnover accounted to US$1.4 billion and it transported some 1.35 million TEU in 1999. It has 23 deep-sea services and 14 regional relay services for operating feeder vessels form a worldwide network of interconnecting services. CMA CGM/ANL operates a container fleet of 220,000 TEU of all types; dry container, high cubes, porthole reefers, self-powered reefers.

Source: http://www.cma-cgm.com CP Ships Group

CP Ships started as a cargo specialist in 1886. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of Canadian Pacific that provides international ocean and inland transportation for containerised cargo. Its six shipping lines (Canada Maritime, CAST, Lykes Lines, Contship Containerlines, TMM lines and Australia-New Zealand Direct Line) offer world-wide network of regional services. Their combined fleet of 80 ships transports about 2 million containers per year. CP Ships also included Americans Ships, CP Ships Logistics and Montreal Gateway Terminal to provide better container shipping services. The American Ships specializes in Americas-based container shipping services, CP Ships Logistics helps the individual CP Ships lines achieve greater efficiencies, increase cost saving and build more competitive service products through operational synergy, while the Montreal Gateway is dedicated to the operations of Canada Maritime, Cast and their service partners.

Source: http://www.cp.ca

Page 83: container shipping

ix

Appendix 3-Singapore Examples of Importation, Exportation and Transhipment Processes Importation of Laden Containers in Singapore

1. Job Order

2. InHouse System Update

10. Update InHouse System

3. InHouse System

* Container delivery application* Vessel ETA

* Container details

9. Return Documents

5. Pregating

4. Generate Schedule

11. First Leg Closed

Information Flow Physical Flow

6. Job Instruction

* Container number* Origin, Destination* Time Windows

* Customs * EIR out7. Container Collection (PSA)

* LTO delivery note to client8. Container Delivery (Warehouse)

PortNet

Importation of Laden Containers

12. Storing order

13. InHouse System* Container available time

14. Generate Schedule

20. Job Closed

19. Update InHouse System 18. Return Documents

16. Container Collection (Warehouse)

17. Container Delivery (Yard)

15. Job Instruction

* Depot handling charges* Equipment interchange report

* Container number* Origin, Destination* Time Windows

Page 84: container shipping

x

Procedure: P1 Job Order: receive documents and job instruction by fax. P1.1 Instructions and documents received either from:

a) Clients directly b) LTO’s freight services department c) LTO’s documentation unit

P1.2 Documents include: a) Import permit b) Shipping documents: Bill of lading, Invoice, Packing List c) Delivery order (optional) d) Storing order (optional) e) Client’s instruction letter

P1.3 Information provided: a) Consignee’s name b) Vessel name, voyage number and ETA c) Container number(s), size and type d) Cargo weight e) Unstuffing location f) Customer reference number (optional) g) Special instructions, if any

P2 InHouse System Update. Create job profile and enter data. P3 InHouse System. InHouse System will automatically download and update the

container details including vessel ETA, type of cargo, length and weight of container, origin and destination location, time windows for delivery and complete the container delivery application. All these transactions are done through the connection between LTO’s network and PSA PortNet.

P4 Generate Schedule. Upon the availability of the job details, the status of the job will be set to ‘ready’ for scheduling.

P5 Pregating. Pregating is needed before the truck could go to PSA port to collect the container.

P6 Job Instruction. The controller will inform the driver on where to collect and deliver the container together with the container number and time windows.

P7 Container Collection from PSA. When the truck goes out of PSA, it needs to go through custom and collect an ‘EIR OUT’ which prints the out-gate time.

P8 Container Delivery to Warehouse. The driver asks the warehouse manager to sign the LTO’s delivery note.

P9 Return Documents. Driver will return the ‘EIR OUT’ to LTO. P10 Update InHouse System. Upon the job completion, the InHouse system must be

updated. P11 First Leg Closed. The first leg of importation of laden container is closed. P12 Storing Order. After the container unstuffing in warehouse is done, the customer

will notify LTO and give the order of returning empty containers to yard. P13 InHouse System. InHouse System will be updated on the empty container available

time. P14 Generate Schedule. The returning job is set to ‘ready’ for scheduling. P15 Job Instruction. The controller will inform the driver, on where to collect and

deliver the containers together with the container number and time windows. P16 Container Collection from Warehouse.

Page 85: container shipping

xi

P17 Container Delivery to Yard. Driver needs to pay the depot handling charge and obtain the equipment interchange report, which is issued by the yard. The depot handling charges is billable to customer.

P18 Return Documents. Driver will return receipt of depot handling charge and equipment interchange report to LTO.

P19 Update InHouse System. Upon the job completion, the InHouse system must be updated.

P20 Job Closed. The second leg of importation of laden container is closed. Constraints: C1 Normal Cargo:

• There are three days free-storage time. COD + 72hrs ≥ EIR OUT, where COD means Complete of Discharge of cargo.

• EIR OUT = EIR IN + HandlingTime, Handling time ≈ 30 mins. • Earlier pickup of container will get rebate.

C2 Class 2 Cargo (recommended for storage): • There are 24 hours free-storage time. COD + 24hrs ≥ EIR OUT • EIR OUT = EIR IN + HandlingTime, Handling time ≈ 30 mins.

C3 Class 2 Cargo (not recommended for storage): • Direct Delivery. Arrival time of truck at PSA ≤ ETA, where ETA means Estimated

Arrival Time for vessel. The truck must wait at PSA before the discharge of container.

• Handling time is variable. The vessel instructor will estimate on how long the truck will be waiting at PSA to pick up the container, depending on the location of container in the vessel. Handling time varies from 30 mins to several hours.

• Two choices for the truck when waiting a) to wait at PSA itself b) to go for another job, then come back later

C4 Special Containers (over-height, over-weight, over length): • Process same as Direct Delivery

C5 Warehouse Stuffing Bay Problem: • Some customer’s warehouse provide with only one or two container bays. As they

do not supply trucks, the LTO has to provide its own trucks to move the laden/empty containers to or away from the bays. Hence it is not recommended to send more containers than the number of bays in warehouse at the same time. In order to over come such problem in warehouse, the LTO at present, sends its trucks one after another. The newest in coming truck will move away the completed container from the bay, before placing them. For the final completed container, LTO sends a truck to move it away.

C6 Storing of Empty Containers: • Once the container is moved out from PSA (EIR OUT), the unstuffing of container

needs to be completed and the empty container to be returned to yard within three days. EIR OUT + 72hrs ≥ Arrival time of empty container to yard.

Page 86: container shipping

xii

Importation of Empty Containers in Singapore

1. Job Order

2. InHouse System Update

10. Update InHouse System

3. InHouse System

* Container delivery application- nominated: individual application- non-nominated: batch application

* Vessel ETA

* Container details

9. Return Documents

5. Pregating

4. Generate Schedule

11. Job Closed

Information Flow Physical Flow

6. Job Instruction

* Container number* Origin, Destination* Time Windows

* Customs * EIR out7. Container Collection (PSA)

8. Container Delivery (Yard)

PortNet

* Depot handling charges* Equipmnet interchange report

Importation of Empty Containers Procedure: P1 Job Order: receive job instructions from clients by fax

P1.1 Instructions are received from clients directly, and normally referred as Trucking Order or Authorization Slip

P1.2 Information provided: a) Client’s name b) Vessel name, voyage number and ETA c) Container number(s), size and type d) Off-loading yard location e) Customer reference number (optional)

P2 InHouse System Update. Create job profile and enter data. P3 InHouse System. InHouse System will automatically download and update the

container details including vessel ETA, type of cargo, length and weight of container, origin and destination location, time windows for delivery and complete the container delivery application. All these transactions are done through the connection between LTO’s network and PSA PortNet.

Container delivery application: Automatically done by InHouse System. a) Nominated containers: process delivery application for each container b) Non-nominated containers: process delivery application for each batch of

containers. The batch of containers displayed in PortNet is created by clients.

Page 87: container shipping

xiii

P4 Generate Schedule. Upon the availability of the job details, the status of the job will be set to ‘ready’ for scheduling.

P5 Pregating. Pregating is needed before the truck could go to PSA port to collect the container.

P6 Job Instruction. The controller will inform the driver on where to collect and deliver container together with the container number and time windows.

P7 Container Collection from PSA. When the truck goes out of PSA, it needs to go through custom and collect an ‘EIR OUT’ which prints the out-gate time.

P8 Container Delivery to Yard. Driver needs to pay the depot handling charge and obtain the equipment interchange report issued by the yard. The depot handling charge is billable to customer.

P9 Return Documents. Driver will return the ‘EIR OUT’, the receipt of depot handling charge and the equipment interchange report to LTO.

P10 Update InHouse System. Upon the job completion, the InHouse system must be updated.

P11 Job Closed. Exportation of Laden Containers in Singapore Procedure: P1 Job Order: receive documents and instructions by fax. P1.1 Documents and instructions are received either from:

a) Clients directly b) LTO’s freight services or warehouse department

P1.2 Documents received include: a) Client’s instruction letter

P1.3 Information provided: a) Shipper’s name b) Loading vessel name, voyage number and ETA c) Container size and type, and number of containers d) Delivery address of containers e) Data/time for empty positioning (optional) f) Booking reference number g) Special instruction, if any

P2 InHouse System Update. Create job profile and enter data. The shipping agent will provide the container information on where to pick up container, where to collect container seal, when to deliver to warehouse and issue the release order to LTO.

P3 InHouse System. InHouse System will automatically download and update the vessel ETA.

P4 Generate Schedule. Upon the availability of the job details, the status of the job will be set to ‘ready’ for scheduling.

P5 Job Instruction. The controller will inform the driver on where to collect and deliver the container together with the time windows.

P6 Document/Equipment Collection. The driver needs to collect the release order, container seals and labels for dangerous cargo before collecting container at yard. It is not necessary for the driver to obtain the container seal and labels from LTO, as sometimes they will be passed to yard directly.

Page 88: container shipping

xiv

1. Job Order

2. InHouse System Update

10. Update InHouse System

3. InHouse System

* Container information-which yard-where to collect container seal-release order

* Vessel ETA

9. Return Documents

4. Generate Schedule

11. First Leg Closed

Information Flow Physical Flow

5. Job Instruction* Origin, Destination* Time Windows

* Container seal, label* Depot handling charge* Equipment interchange report

7. Container Collection (Yard)

* CWT delivery note* Container seal & labels to customer

8. Container Delivery (Warehouse)

PortNet

6. Documents/Equipment (Shipping Agent)*release order *container seal *labels(DG)

Shipping Agent

12. InHouse System Update* Stuffing completion time

15. Pregating

22. Job Closed

21. Update InHouse System 20. Return Documents

17. Documents

18. Container Collection (Warehouse)

16. Job Instruction

19. Container Delivery (PSA)

* Container number* Origin, Destination* Time Windows

14. Generate Schedule

13. Export permit (Bonded Cargo)* Export permit (bonded cargo)

PortNet

Client

* Book TT* Export container record

Exportation of Laden Containers

P7 Container Collection at Yard. If the container seal and labels are present at yard,

driver will collect them from here. Driver needs to pay the depot handling charge and obtain the equipment interchange report issued by the yard. The depot handling charge is billable to customer.

P8 Container Delivery to Warehouse. The driver asks the warehouse manager to sign the LTO’s delivery note and pass the container seal and labels to warehouse.

P9 Return Documents. Driver returns the release order, the receipt of depot handling charge and the equipment interchange report to LTO.

P10 Update InHouse System. Upon the job completion, the InHouse System is updated.

Page 89: container shipping

xv

P11 First Leg Closed. The first leg of exportation of laden container is closed. P12 InHouse System Update. Client will inform LTO the stuffing completion time of

container. The container records, such as type of cargo, length and weight of container will be stored in PortNet. Before delivering the container, LTO will book TT (transtainer).

P13 Export Permit. Only Bonded Cargo, which is GST free needs export permit. P14 Generate Schedule. Upon the availability of the job details, the status of the job

will be set to ‘ready’ for scheduling. P15 Pregating. Pregating is needed before the truck could go to PSA port to collect

container. P16 Job Instruction. The controller will inform the driver where to collect and deliver

container with the container number and time window for TT. P17 Documents. Driver must collect the export permit for bonded cargo before going to

PSA. P18 Container Collection from Warehouse. P19 Container Delivery to PSA. P20 Return Documents. Driver will return document if there is any. P21 Update InHouse System. Upon the job completion, the InHouse system will be

updated. P22 Job Closed. The second leg of exportation of laden container is closed. Constraints: C1 Normal Cargo:

• Book TT • TT1 ≤ EIR IN ≤ TT2, where TT1 and TT2 defines the starting and ending time of

the TT period. The truck must go to PSA gate (EIR IN) within TT time slot. • Handling time ≈ 30 mins • Three days free-storage time before ETD (Estimated Departure Time). Later

delivery will get rebate. C2 Class 2 Cargo (recommended for storage)

• (ETD-24hrs) ≤ EIR IN ≤ ETD. Containers can be delivered to PSA one day before the departure of vessel.

• No need to book TT • Handling time ≈ 30 mins

C3 Class 2 Cargo (not recommended for storage) • No need to book TT • Direct Delivery. Arrival time of truck at PSA ≤ ETA, The truck must wait at PSA

for the mounting of container. • Handling time is variable. The vessel instructor will estimate on how long the truck

will be waiting at PSA for the mounting of container. Handling time is varies from 30 mins to several hours.

• Two choices for the truck when waiting: a) to wait at PSA itself b) dismount container at LTO’s cargo region, go for another job, then come back

later C4 Special Containers (over-height, over-weight, over length):

• Process same as Direct Delivery

Page 90: container shipping

xvi

C5 Warehouse Stuffing Bay Problem: • Some customer’s warehouse provide with only one or two container bays. As they

do not supply trucks, the LTO has to provide its own trucks to move the laden/empty containers to or away from the bays. Hence it is not recommended to send more containers than the number of bays in warehouse at the same time. In order to over come such problem in warehouse, the LTO at present, sends its trucks one after another. The newest in coming truck will move away the completed container from the bay, before placing them. For the final completed container, LTO sends a truck to move it away.

Exportation of Empty Containers in Singapore

1. Job Order

2. InHouse System Update

10. Update InHouse System

3. InHouse System

* Book TT- less than 15: individual booking- more than 15: block booking

* Vessel ETA* Export container record

9. Return Documents

5. Pregating

4. Generate Schedule

11. Job Closed

Information Flow Physical Flow

6. Job Instruction

* Container number* Origin, Destination* Time Windows

7. Container Collection (Yard)

8. Container Delivery (PSA)

* Depot handling charges* Equipmnet interchange report

PortNet

Exportation of Empty Containers Procedure: P1 Job Order: receive job instructions from clients by fax

P1.1 Instructions from clients directly P1.2 Information provided:

a) Client’s name b) Booking reference number

Page 91: container shipping

xvii

c) Number of containers, container numbers (for nominated containers only), size and type

d) Location for picking up containers e) Loading vessel name, voyage number and ETA f) Customer reference number (optional)

P2 InHouse System Update. Create job profile and enter data. P3 InHouse System. InHouse System will automatically download and update the

vessel ETA. The container record such as type of cargo, length and weight of container will be captured in PortNet. Before delivering the container, LTO must book TT. TT booking:

Nominated containers: process delivery application for each container a) Less than 15 containers: Individual booking b) Equal and More than 15 containers: Block booking (4 hours per block)

P4 Generate Schedule. Upon the availability of the job details, the status of the job will be set to ‘ready’ for scheduling.

P5 Pregating. Pregating is needed before the truck could go to PSA port to deliver the container.

P6 Job Instruction. The controller will inform the driver on where to collect and deliver container together with time window for TT.

P7 Container Collection from Yard. Driver needs to pay the depot handling charge and obtain the equipment interchange report issued by the yard. The depot handling charge is billable to customer.

P8 Container Delivery to PSA. P9 Return Documents. Driver will return document if there is any. P10 Update InHouse System. Upon the job completion, the InHouse system must be

updated. P11 Job Closed. Constraints C1 Block Booking of TT.

• One block booking takes 4 hours. Since there is no sub-division of time slots for each container, there is a chance for too many containers to go into PSA at the same time within the TT period, therefore causing congestion.

Transshipment of Containers in Singapore Procedure: P1 Job Order: receive instructions from client by fax. P1.1 Documents received include:

a) Client’s instruction b) Transshipment pink or white

(i) A pink permit is required if the container carries controlled cargo: such as food, weapon, computer

(ii) A white permit is required for non-controlled cargo c) Shipping order (optional)

Page 92: container shipping

xviii

P1.2 Information provided: a) Discharge and loading vessel name and voyage number b) ETA and ETD c) Discharge terminal d) Loading terminal

P2 InHouse System Update. Create job profile and enter data. P3 InHouse System. InHouse System will automatically download and update the

vessel ETA in port1 and vessel ETD in port2. Before delivering the container to port2, LTO must book TT.

TT booking: a) Less than 20 containers: Individual booking b) Equal and more than 20 containers: Block booking

P4 Generate Schedule. Upon the availability of the job details, the status of the job will be set to ‘ready’ for scheduling.

P5 Pregating. Pregating is needed in both ports before the truck could go to PSA port to collect and deliver the container.

P6 Job Instruction. The controller will inform the driver on where to collect and deliver container together with the container number and time windows.

P7 Documents. Driver must collect the transshipment permit. P8 Container Collection from PSA port1. There is custom endorsement on

transshipment permit at exit gate.

1. Job Order

2. InHouse System Update

10. Update InHouse System

3. InHouse System

* Book TT- less than 20: individual booking- more than 20: batch booking

* Vessel ETA, ETD

10. Return Documents

5. Pregating

4. Generate Schedule

11. Job Closed

Information Flow Physical Flow

6. Job Instruction* Container number* Origin, Destination* Time Windows

8. Container Collection (PSA: Port1)* Custom endorsement on transshipment permit (Exit)

PortNet* Transshipment permit

7. Documents

9. Container Delivery (PSA: Port2)* Custom endorsement on transshipment permit (Entrance)

Transshipment of Containers

Page 93: container shipping

xix

P9 Container Delivery at port2. There is a custom endorsement on transshipment permit at entrance gate.

P10 Return Documents. Driver will return documents if there is any. P11 Update InHouse System. Upon the job completion, the InHouse system must be

updated. P12 Job Closed. Constraints: C1 Free Storage:

• There is 9 days free-storage time in port1. C2 Delivery:

• Same as exportation C3 TT and Rebate:

• No TT, No rebate Empty Containers

1. Job Order

2. InHouse System Update

9. Update InHouse System 8. Return Documents

4. Generate Schedule

3. InHouse System

10. Job Closed

Information Flow Physical Flow

5. Job Instruction* Container number* Origin, Destination* Time Windows

6. Container Collection (Yard1)

7. Container Delivery (Yard2)

* Depot handling charges* Equipmnet interchange report

* Collecting/returning yard location

* Depot handling charges* Equipmnet interchange report

Off-Hire Container

Page 94: container shipping

xx

Procedure: P1 Job Order: receive instructions from client by fax.

P1.1 Documents are received directly from clients. P1.2 Information provided:

a) Collecting and returning yard locations b) Number of containers involved c) Container numbers d) Returning period

P2 InHouse System Update. Create job profile and enter data including collection and returning yard locations.

P3 InHouse System. The job profile will be transferred to SunRay system. P4 Generate Schedule. Upon the availability of the job details, the status of the job

will be set to ‘ready’ for scheduling. P5 Job Instruction. The controller will inform the driver on where to collect and

deliver container together with the container number and time windows. P6 Container Collection at Yard1. Driver needs to pay the depot handling charges and

obtain interchange report, issued by the yard. The depot handling charge is billable to customer.

P7 Container Delivery at Yard2 Driver needs to pay the depot handling charges and obtain interchange report, issued by the yard. The depot handling charge is billable to customer.

P8 Return Documents. Driver will return documents if there is any. P9 Update InHouse System. Upon the job completion, the InHouse system must be

updated. P10 Job Closed.

Page 95: container shipping

xxi

Glossary Asia-Pacific – The Asia-Pacific region, with approximately 57% of the world population can be divided into five sub-regions as listed in the table below. Asia-Pacific is a region of tremendous potential and some rapid growing economies. Having an annual growth rate of 7% with a total market size of 1.5 billion people in the year of 1995, the region widely acclaimed as the engine of universal economic growth. Asia-Pacific is expected to be the world’s most dynamic area in the years ahead. Region Countries in the Region Central Asia Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan South Asia Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal,

Pakistan, Sri Lanka North East Asia China, Hong Kong (Special Administrative Region of the PRC),

Japan, Korea (Democratic People’s Republic), Korea (Republic of), Macau, Mongolia, Russian Federation (east of Urals), Taiwan China

South East Asia Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos (People’s Democratic Republic), Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam

South Pacific America Samoa, Australia, Christmas Island, Cocos (Keeling) Islands, Cook Islands, Fiji, French Polynesia, Guam, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Niue, Norfolk Island, Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Pitcairn, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tokelau, Tonga, Tuvalu, U.S Outlying Islands, Vanuatu, Wallis ad Futuna Islands.

In chapter 2, the inward containerised cargo handled in Singapore Port was classified into eight main regions. The classification of these regions consists of the following countries. Region Countries in the Region South East Asia Brunei, Cambodia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand,

Vietnam and other countries in South East Asia. North East Asia China, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and other

countries in North East Asia. South Asia

Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and other countries in South Asia.

West Asia Bahrain, Cyprus, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Yemen and other countries in West Asia.

Africa Cote D’ivoire, Djibouti, Egypt, Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Nigeria, Seychelles, Tanzania, South Africa and other countries in Africa.

Page 96: container shipping

xxii

Region Countries in the Region Europe EU (Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany,

Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom) AND other European countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Malta, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovak Republic, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine and other countries in Europe).

Oceania Australia, Fiji, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea and other countries in Oceania.

America North America (Canada and USA) AND Central and South America (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Dominican Rep, Ecuador, Mexico, Netherlands Antilles, Panama, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela, and other countries in Central and South America).

Bill of Lading – The contract between carrier and shipper, which have a direct bearing on the cost of ocean transport.

Bulk cargo – Homogenous unpacked dry cargo such as grain, iron ore or coal. Oil is also categorised in bulk cargo. A cargo shipped in this way is said to be in bulk.

Cargo – A physical product that the carriers move. Cargo can be categorised into two: general cargo and bulk cargo. General cargo consists of containerised cargo and conventional cargo. Containerised cargo can be a packaged commercial product like cartons of canned tomatoes; conventional cargo like lumber or bulldozers; or bulk cargo like crude oil or grain, pumped or conveyed directly into the ship.

Carrier - A firm that offers transportation, or the movement of good, from place to place. An ocean carrier moves goods by ship.

Cellular containership - Ship which is dedicated to the carriage of shipping containers. It is fitted with cell guides, uprights which provides a framework design to accommodate standard size containers in such a way that the container are fixed and do not move.

Common carrier – A carrier that serves all shippers who tender cargo under similar terms. This in theory makes shipping services, and hence the ability to export and import, available to any company that so desires. A common carrier that moves Alpha Brand Widgets cannot refuse to carry Beta Brand Widgets as well if both tendered cargo under the similar terms. See for example:

U.S Shipping Act of 1984 – Sec 3.DEFINITIONS:

As used in this Act --(6) “common carrier” means a person holding itself out to the

general public to provide transportation by water of passengers or cargo between the United States and a foreign country for compensation that --(A) assumes responsibility for the transportation from the port or port of receipt to the port or point of destination, and (B) utilises, for all or part of that transportation, a vessel operating on the high seas or the Great lakes between a port in the United States and a port in a

Page 97: container shipping

xxiii

foreign country, except that the term does not include a common carrier engaged in ocean transportation by ferry boat, ocean tramp, or chemical parcel tanker.

Consignee – The party to whom the goods will be delivered in the country of destination. The consignee is usually the importer; a company that is receiving the goods and is responsible to pay customs duties to the government in the country of destination. Referring to its physical role in the transaction, the consignee is often referred as the receiver.

Consignors – The party that owns or controls the cargo at its origination point. Generally this is the manufacturer of the goods, or a distributor in the country of origin. The consignor is often referred to as the shipper.

Container – Metal box structure of standard design, used for carrying general cargo in unitised form.

Containerised cargo – Cargo that have been physically, conventionally and economically stowed in a container.

Contract carrier – A carrier that typically transports an entire shipload of cargo for a single shipper. The freight is negotiated privately between shipper and carrier.

Conventional cargo – Cargo not carried in containers, flats etc., but stowed in normal packages.

Custom broker - A firm or individual that has arranged the importation of the goods and clearance of the goods through customs in the country of destination. Often, a broker is influential in the choice of carrier. For that reason carriers often pay a commission to the broker to attract further business. The broker is often listed as the consignee on the Bill of Lading, not because the broker is the beneficial recipient of the cargo, but because it is more expedient for all communication from the carrier as to the arrival to be directed to the party; the party that is responsible to co-ordinate the receipt of the goods and subsequent clearance through customs.

Discharge – to remove or unload cargo from a vessel.

Feeder container ship – These are used to collect containers from such places as outlying port and river berths and then deliver them to a ocean-going container ship. Feeder container ships vary in vary in size from between 100 TEU to 2000 TEU capacity and at the lower end could even be constructed as a Rhine river barge.

Freight forwarder – A firm or individual that has arranged the transportation or performed other tasks to facilitate the shipment. The freight forwarder is an agent of the carrier because it receives compensation from the carrier, but in fact the forwarder is chosen by and acts in the interest of the shipper, as well as performing services that are directly charged to the consignor or consignee.

General cargo – Cargo consisting of good shipped unpacked or packed (containerised and conventional) for example in cartoons, crates, bags or bales, but specifically not cargo shipped in bulks, or trailers or in shipping container. A general cargo ship is one desired

Page 98: container shipping

xxiv

to carry such cargo, often having several decks because of the number of ports served and the range of products carried.

Liner operator – A common carrier that offers a regularly scheduled service on particular routes. It is the opposite of tramp operator.

Load – To move export containers from the terminal onto the vessel. Lo-Lo – Lift on/Lift off vessels. Usually cellular vessels, which are loaded or unloaded with containers by means of a gantry crane, over the ships side.

Non-Vessel-Operating Common Carrier (NVOCC) – A common carrier that neither owns nor operates its own ship(s). It has the same contractual obligation to the shipper to transport goods in exchange for the payment of freight. An NVOCC may buy the transportation service from a VOCC, another NVOCC, or a contract carrier. An NVOCC acts as a middleman in the ocean transport industry. It enjoys this position by virtue of additional services it provides the shipper, or lower freight made possible by volume purchase. See for example:

U.S Shipping Act of 1994 – Sec 3.DEFINITIONS: As used in this Act --(18) “non-vessel-operating common carrier” means a common carrier that does not provide the vessels by which the transportation is provided, and is a shipper in its relationship with an ocean common carrier.

Pricing – The means by which the market prices for international transportation (freight rates) are set.

Port – A port is a terminal and an area within which vessels load or discharge cargo whether at berth, anchorages, buoys, or the like, and shall also include the usual places where vessels wait for their turn or are ordered or obliged to wait for their turn no matter the distance from that area. If the word “PORT” is not used, but the port is (or is to be) identified by its name, this definition shall still apply. Usually it has an interface with other forms of transport and in doing so provides connecting services.

Ro-Ro – Roll on/Roll off ship designed for conveyance of cars, road haulage units and unitised cargo. A number of vessels so equipped have passenger accommodation for coaches, motorist and foot passengers.

Seaport – A terminal and an area within which ships are loaded with and/or discharged of cargo and includes the usual places where ships wait for their turn or are ordered or obliged to wait for their turn no matter the distance from that area.

Shipper – An individual or firm that desires to move goods that it owns or controls. A shipper does not own or operate ships, but it owns or controls goods it desires to be moved.

TEU – Twenty-foot equivalent unit. Technique of quantifying ISO containers i.e. 1 x 40ft = 2 TEU; 1 x 20ft = 1 TEU. The common unit used in indicating the capacity of a container vessel or terminal based on 20ft long container.

Page 99: container shipping

xxv

Traffic – The document or computer file in which a carrier or group of carriers records all of its rates. In some countries, like the USA, traffic must be filed with the government. Traffic has another meaning in the international trade. It is the rate of duty, or tax assessed on imported goods by the government.

Traffic manager – The person who negotiates pricing rates on behalf of the shipper. Tramp operator – A contract carrier that offers service on demand, sending its ship wherever there is cargo to be moved.

Transshipment – Transfer of goods from one vessel to another. This transfer may be direct or indirect or it may be necessary to discharge the goods onto the quay prior to loading them onto the second vessel, or onto a vehicle should the second vessel be loading at a different berth.

Vessel Operating Common Carrier (VOCC) – A common carrier that operates its own ship(s). A VOCC may own its ship(s), or charter/lease them, but it is the firm responsible for the physical movement of the goods. A single ship qualifies a company as a VOCC. So, if a company operates at least one ship, while it may have its primary business other activities than vessel operations, it is always referred as a VOCC.

Common Abbreviation For Ocean Carriers ANL : Australian National Line APL : American President Line COSCO : China Ocean Shipping Company HMM : Hyundai Merchant Marine 'K'-Line : Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha MSC : Mediterranean Shipping Company MOL : Mitsui OSK Line NOL : Neptune Orient Lines NYK : Nippon Yushen Kaisha OOCL : Orient Overseas Container Line TSK : Tokyo Senpaku Kaisha Ltd UASC : United Arab Shipping Company YML : Yang Ming Marine Line Source:

Dictionary of Shipping International Business Trade Terms and Abbreviations. Illustrated Dictionary of Cargo Handling.

Dictionary of Marine Technology. Singapore Port Statistics. http://www.aviation-charts.com/ofk_1htm

Page 100: container shipping

xxvi

References

1. World Container Port Markets To 2012, Ocean Shipping Consultants Ltd, 1999. 2. The Future of Container Shipping Industry, Cargo Systems, IIR Publications Ltd,

1999. 3. World Container Terminals; Global Growth and Private Profit, Drewry Shipping

Consultants Ltd, April 1998. 4. Opportunities for Container Ports, Cargo Systems, IIR Publications, 1998. 5. Short Sea Container Markets; The Feeder and Regional Trade Dynamo, Drewry

Shipping Consultants Ltd, September 1997. 6. Recent Developments in Information Technology for Container Terminals, Cargo

Systems, IIR Publications Ltd, January 1999. 7. Electronic Commerce and Container Shipping; Cargo System

containershipping.com, IIR Publications Ltd, June 1999. 8. IT in Ports, Opportunities in Information Technology, Cargo Systems, IIR

Publications Ltd, November 1998. 9. The New World of E-Logistics and Shipping, It Conference 2000. 10. Singapore Port Statistics, January 1995-December 1997. 11. Logistics Information System (LIS) Project, Industry Model, 1998. 12. PSA: http://www.psa.com.sg 13. MPA: http://www.mpa.gov.sg 14. Hong Kong Port: http://www.info.gov.hk 15. Port of Kaoshiung: http://www.khb.gov.tw 16. Port of Pusan: http://www.kca.or.kr 17. Port of Rotterdam: http://www.containershipping.com 18. Port of Long Beach: http://www.polb.com 19. Port of Hamburg: http://www.hafen-hamburg.de 20. Port of Anterwerp: http://www.portofantwerp.be 21. Port of Los Angeles: http://www.portoflosangeles.org 22. MaerskSealnd: http://www.maersksealand.com 23. P&O Nedlloyd: http://www.ponl.com 24. CMA CGM: http://www.cma-cmg.com 25. Hanjin: http://www.hanjin.com 26. NOL: http://www.nol.com.sg 27. Cosco: http://www.cosco.com 28. NYK Line: http://www.nyk.com 29. OSK Line: http://www.mol.co.jp 30. Hyundai: http://www.hmm.co.kr 31. World Ports: http://www.ports.com 32. World Cargo News: http://www.worldcargonews.com 33. UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, ECLAC:

http://www.eclac.cl 34. Logistics Online: http://www.manufacturing.net 35. Ocean Freight: http://www.aviation-charts.com 36. Port Cargo Forecasts: http://www.info.gov.hk 37. Port CommunITy Rotterdam: http://www.pcr-info.nl 38. PortNet: http://www.portnet.com 39. GPS Information: http://www.srimap.com, http://www.zdnet.com,

http://destinationcrm.com

Page 101: container shipping

xxvii

40. Cargo Protection Devices: http://www.tamper.com 41. E-Transport E-Commerce Solutions: http://www.etransport.com 42. Marine Line: http://www.line.net 43. Trade Card: http://www.tradecard.com 44. Bolero: http://www.bolero.net, http://www.boleroltd.com 45. Cargonet: http://www.cargonet.com 46. Gocargo: http://www.gocargo.com 47. Electronic Shipping Guide: http://www.shipguide.com 48. Synchronet AsiaMax: http://www.synchronetmarine.com 49. Trade Compass: http://www2.tradecompass.com 50. Tradenet: http://www.tradenet.com.sg 51. Cargoexchange: http://www.cargoexchange.net 52. Ocean Shipping Reform Act: http://www.itds.treas.gov, http://www.customs-

law.com, http://www.lawoffice.com, http://www.nusa.net, http://www.seanet.co.uk, http://www.house.gov

53. Organising Transport: http://www.mbendi.co.za 54. Press Review-Infomarine: http://www.infomarine.it 55. Container Shipping: http://www.containershipping.com