十五部门和单位合力保障春运

正1月20日,在国务院联防联控机制新闻发布会上,交通运输部运输服务司副司长王绣春介绍,按国务院决策部署,春运工作专班在国务院联防联控机制下成立,交通运输部与卫生健康委等15个部门和单位共同工作,及时共享信息,会商研判春运疫情防控形势变化,统筹做好春运疫情防控工作,确保疫情不因春运扩散,保障人民群众健康安全平稳有序出行。今年春运是常态化疫情防控下的第一个春运。王绣春介绍,交通运输部和铁路、民航等单位提前梳理了临客、夜间列车、航班,以及重点水域夜间班期信息,     

交通运输部 外交部 海关总署关于做好国际航行船舶船员新冠肺炎疫情远端防控的公告(文号:2022年第14号)

公开日期:2022年01月28日为进一步做好新冠肺炎疫情防控"外防输入"工作,保障国际航行船舶船员身体健康,依据《中华人民共和国国境卫生检疫法》《中华人民共和国突发事件应对法》《中华人民共和国海上交通安全法》和国务院应对新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情联防联控机制综合组《关于进一步做好国际航行船舶船员疫情防控工作的通知》等有关规定,现就加强国际航行船舶船员新冠肺炎疫情远端防控有关事项公告如下:一、本公告适用于所有拟入境并计划在中华人民共和国境内港口进行船员换班的国际航行船舶。     

李小鹏除夕视频连线慰问舟山海事局

1月31日除夕,交通运输部部长李小鹏在部带班值守时视频连线舟山海事局,检查交通运输服务保障工作,听取了浙江海事局局长何易培、舟山海事局局长池方庆关于春运期间舟山水上交通安全监管、海港口岸疫情防控等重点工作开展情况的汇报.     

疫情当前 海事部门多措并举“解锁”复工复产

当前全国疫情防控形势积极向好的态势正在拓展,2月8日,国务院应对新冠肺炎疫情联防联控机制印发《关于切实加强疫情科学防控、有序做好企业复工复产工作的通知》,在做好疫情防控的基础上,全国各地、各行各业的复工复产正紧张有序的开展。在交通运输部“一断三不断”总体目标的指导下,部海事局印发《关于做好疫情防控期间海事监管工作的通知》《关于疫情防控期间船舶管理有关事宜的公告》等文件,各级海事部门蹄疾步稳迈进“春天里”,奋力夺取疫情防控、复工复产的双线胜利。     

信息公告

交通运输部等五部委联合发布《关于疫情防控期间针对伤病船员紧急救助处置的指导意见》4月12日,为指导疫情防控期间伤病船员紧急救助处置工作有效开展,切实履行国际公约规定的责任和义务,交通运输部、外交部、国家卫生健康委、海关总署和国家移民管理局联合发布《关于疫情防控期间针对伤病船员紧急救助处置的指导意见》(简称《指导意见》)。     

信息公告

正交通运输部印发《国内游轮常态化疫情防控工作指南(第四版)》8月4日,为落实国务院联防联控机制常态化防控要求,指导国内游轮运输企业和客运港口经营人(以下简称游轮运输相关企业)疫情防控工作,统筹做好疫情防控、安全生产和运输保障工作,交通运输部印发《国内游轮常态化疫情防控工作指南(第四版)》(以下简称《工作指南》)。     

疫情之下：中国对外贸易化挑战为机遇

正《国际卫生条例》宣布新冠肺炎疫情构成"国际公共卫生紧急事件"(PHEIC)。国内、国外均高度关注这一疫情,全球贸易和中国对外贸易均面临变局。2020年春节期间,新型冠状病毒感染肺炎疫情迅速向全国蔓延,举国上下共同抗击疫情,为避免人口大规模流动和聚集,采取了居家隔离、延长春节假期等防控措施。《国际卫生条例》宣布新冠肺炎疫情构成"国际公共卫生紧急事件"     

大型豪华邮轮的疫情防控技术及策略

为防止传染性疾病再次重创邮轮产业,从防控技术和防控策略2个方面研究邮轮疫情防控问题,保障复航邮轮的安全性,并为后疫情时代邮轮的迭代设计提出指导意见。以IMO和欧盟的邮轮复航指南为输入文件,从技术形态、总体设计、系统集成、防控策略4个方面进行研究,并结合邮轮复航案例进行分析。在多边合作机制下,建立完备的防疫正案和控疫预案,将有助于提升邮轮的疫情防控能力。     

信息公告

交通运输部印发《2021年春运期间客运场站和交通运输工具新冠肺炎疫情分区分级防控指南》1月20日,为贯彻落实国务院联防联控机制关于春运工作的统筹部署,全力做好2021年春运期间疫情防控和运输服务保障工作,交通运输部印发《2021年春运期间客运场站和交通运输工具新冠肺炎疫情分区分级防控指南》(简称《指南》)。     

盐田港建世界首个“国际卫生海港”

2月中旬,深圳市政府、深圳检验检疫局、盐田港集团公司等相关单位在深圳盐田港宣布联合启动创建"国际卫生海港"。深圳盐田港有望成为世界上第一个国际卫生海港。这对进一步改善港口卫生状况,增强防     

Impact of politics,economic events and port policies on the evolution of maritime traffic in Chinese ports

The Chinese government has been exploring various paths to find a direction that better suits China’s national conditions during the past 60 years. Meanwhile, a series of political and economic events and policy transformations have had different effects on the port industry. This article attempts to ascertain how these events and port policies have influenced Chinese port traffic through an empirical study on data covering 1952–2009. The findings suggest that foreign trade has been the prime driver of the throughput of Chinese ports. The increase in the ports’ throughput has enabled an increase in domestic demand and the urgent need for further port investment. Chinese port throughput has been subject to multiple shocks. The Great Leap Forward¹ is found to have had the largest, but only a short-term impact. China’s accession to the World Trade Organization, however, led to a longer and exclusive effect on ports, with little observed effect on the other variables. The reform of port governance is shown to have had a more lasting positive effect on port throughput than physical investment. However, these latter effects are minor, the economic and political factors remain the primary driving factors of port throughput.     

Disaster prevention and strategic investment for multiple ports in a region: cooperation or not

With the growth of maritime transportation, seaports have become critical to the world economy as linking nodes between shipping and inland transport. However, the port system is fragile under certain unconventional emergency events. This study addresses the issue of investment on disaster prevention within the port competition context. The present model discusses and compares four situations of different relationships and strategies of pre-disaster prevention between two adjacent ports. Results indicate that both ports increase the disaster prevention investment under the cooperation scenario compared with that in the case of non-cooperation wherein they are complementary ports. Meanwhile, a numerical simulation is conducted to examine the collective and individual rationality of both ports. Although cooperation strategy decreases the total risk cost of two ports, one of the two ports may profit, whereas the other may suffer losses.     

A Delphi analysis on green performance evaluation indices for ports in China

This study identified a set of applicable and practical green performance evaluation indices for Chinese ports using the Delphi technique. The research was conducted by targeting three representative Chinese ports in Eastern China: the Shanghai Port, Ningbo Port, and Qingdao Port. An effective expert panel was structured with direct stakeholders related to green performance, which was based on a sufficient consideration of the unique and the special decision-making system for Chinese ports. Twenty-one green performance indices in six dimensions (i.e. liquid pollution management, air pollution management, noise control, low carbon regulations and energy savings, marine biology preservation, and organization and management) were eventually identified through three rounds of iterations. The identified green performance indices for Chinese ports are highly consistent with the Chinese Government’s environmental policies. Compared with European ports, the green port performance indicators in China are not as comprehensive. The indicators that are strictly consistent with national macro policies and the factors that are more easily seen, heard, and felt were perceived to be more important. From an academic perspective, this study offers a new approach for system establishment and green practice criteria exploration and thus provides a significant basis for further green port studies.     

The dynamics of port reform: different contexts,similar strategies

Research into port reform in Taiwan and Australia indicates that reform was undertaken in different contexts while committed and adopting similar strategies. Reform in both countries has been consistent with paradigmatic shifts towards market orientation, and within this context, privatisation was considered the preferred option. In both Taiwan and Australia, however, governments, reluctant to relinquish control over their ports, opted for corporatisation models. This article discusses the dynamics and drivers of reform and examines the outcome of these strategies. Both countries commenced port reform with deregulation of dock labour employment and introduced enterprise-based employment replacing the labour pool system. Privatisation of stevedoring operations was introduced at the same time in Taiwan. In the second reform phase, Taiwan amalgamated the four major commercial ports under a single state-owned port company in March 2012, with the objective of reducing inter-port competition and creating a central port planning mechanism. Australian ports, on the other hand, have undergone restructuring with the implementation of corporatisation, privatisation and commercialisation strategies since 1990s. Reform strategies in both countries display some similarities, e.g. rationalisation strategies in both Taiwan and Tasmanian ports, but also display some distinct dissimilarities with the increasing move to privatisation in Australia, e.g. the sale of South Australian ports and in 2010 the sale of the port of Brisbane.     

China' maritime developments

Development of ports and shipping in China are continuing at a phenomenal pace. They are now entering a second phase in these developments. With basic capacity to handle China's growing foreign trade established. China's ports and shipping are now being ratinalized in terms of inland infrastructure and intermodal networks, optimum trade flows, foreign alliances, and physical forms or consolidation of cargo. These developments are driven by the lack of a large, deep water ocean fleet on one hand and limited water depths at many major ports. Similarly, the extension of economic development to the inland ports of China has become a priority as has the effective integration of Hong Kong and gradual opening of direct shipping across the Taiwan Straits.     

Will a national port regulator solve congestion problems in Australian ports?

Australia's ports are an integral part of the nation's economy, which relies heavily on trade. In Australia, the governance of ports is the responsibility of the governments of Australia's six states and the Northern Territory, all of which have their own legislation covering the running of the ports and the establishment of port corporations. The respective legislation governing the running of Australia's ports is not uniform, and neither are the models for port management that they create. In May 2005, the then Deputy Prime Minister and Federal Transport Minister announced that the Commonwealth planned to take control of the planning and investment decision making of Australia's ports. The reasoning behind this is said to be Australia's poor trade performance and bottlenecks in ports which hold up trade and ultimately cost money. The Federal government has sought to do this under Section 51(i) of the Australian Constitution in order to update and integrate Australia's transport system. This announcement has caused disquiet among the states that had no previous notice of the announcement and for which ports are a major source of revenue. The transfer of power to the Commonwealth may lead to the Commonwealth being able to take further powers from the states, not only in relation to the ports but in relation to other areas such as industrial relations. Industry groups claim they have been pushing for a larger role for the Commonwealth in the running of the nation's ports, but question as to what extent the Commonwealth should be involved.     

Zig Bee在港口控制系统中的应用探讨

随着无线网络技术的发展,Zig Bee成为港口控制系统未来发展的一个方向。亟需针对其在港口中的实际应用展开研究。在典型Zig Bee网络控制系统的基础上,根据港口的实际情况,提出了不同工况环境下Zig Bee网络控制系统的解决方案,为Zig Bee技术在港口中的进一步应用提供参考。     

中国港口向现代服务业转型发展的思考

目前,虽然我国港口取得了快速发展,但服务功能大多仍停留在传统的货物运输和装卸层面,物流服务功能等还未得到充分拓展,与经济社会发展的要求还有差距。基于港口向现代服务业转型的内涵,针对我国港口发展实际,从提升传统服务功能、拓展物流服务功能、加快大宗商品交易平台建设等几个方面提出我国港口向现代服务业转型发展的对策建议。     

Candian port administraion: its future structre

The administration, management and development of ports in Canada is a Federal government responsibility. This centralist control of ports has been the subject of criticism by many for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that it is not responsive enough to the affairs of the local level. This problem, along with others, has resulted in the introduction in the Canadian Parliament of proposed legislation over the past five years to alter port administration and development in Canada. The proposals culminated in the recent passage of the Canada Ports Corporation Act which, among other things, will see the abolition of the National Harbours Board. A review of the administrative structure the new Act replaces, along with a review and assessment of the Act itself and the proposed legislation which predated it, forms the basis of this paper. It will be seen that because of the new Act the centralist approach to port administration is maintained, but greater local autonomy and financial self-sufficiency will also be available to ports. However, the central administration will still have the problem of co-ordinating the development of Canadian ports, since ports will continue to be constituted under at least four different pieces of legislation.     

Candian port administraion: its future structre

The administration, management and development of ports in Canada is a Federal government responsibility. This centralist control of ports has been the subject of criticism by many for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that it is not responsive enough to the affairs of the local level. This problem, along with others, has resulted in the introduction in the Canadian Parliament of proposed legislation over the past five years to alter port administration and development in Canada. The proposals culminated in the recent passage of the Canada Ports Corporation Act which, among other things, will see the abolition of the National Harbours Board. A review of the administrative structure the new Act replaces, along with a review and assessment of the Act itself and the proposed legislation which predated it, forms the basis of this paper. It will be seen that because of the new Act the centralist approach to port administration is maintained, but greater local autonomy and financial self-sufficiency will also be available to ports. However, the central administration will still have the problem of co-ordinating the development of Canadian ports, since ports will continue to be constituted under at least four different pieces of legislation.