Projecting and Planning for the Movement of Goods and People Into, Out of, and Within, the Northeast Corridor, 2007 – 2025, University of Delaware, May The Bostwash Corridor: Global and National Dimensions Jean-Paul Rodrigue Associate Professor, Dept. of Economics & Geography, Hofstra University, New York, USA Paper available at:

UPS Willow Springs Distribution Center, Chicago Gateways and Corridors in Transportation and Regional Economics Theories and concepts about corridors Global cities and hierarchies Economic roles and functions HinterlandsConnectivity Flows and locations 

Types and Functions of Freight Corridors TypeFunctionExamples Short distance (within a gateway / hub) Modal shift, improved capacity and throughput. Switch carrying, Alameda, “Agile Port”, Panama Hinterland access (between a gateway and its vicinity) Expand market area, reduce distribution costs & congestion Rail shuttles, PIDN, Virginia Inland port Landbridge (between gateways) Long distance container flows, continuity of global commodity chains North American landbridge Circum-hemispheric (between gateways with a maritime segment) Integrated global transport chains Northern East- West Corridor

Elements of the Maritime / Land Interface Port System Foreland (Shipping Network) RoadRailCoastal / Fluvial Hinterland (FDC) Corridors and Hubs Gateways Maritime Freight Distribution Inland Freight Distribution

Traffic at the 50 Largest Container Ports, 2004

Three Major Pendulum Routes Serviced by OOCL, 2006

Gateways and Hubs as Central and Intermediate Locations ■Gateways & hubs Nodes offering an accessibility to a large system of circulation. Obligatory (semi) points of passage. Convergence of transport corridors. Centrality and intermediacy. ■Gateways Favorable physical location. Intermodal and stable in time. ■Hubs Transmodal and subject to change. Commercial decisions. Delays vs. frequency of services. Gateway Intermodal Hub Transmodal

Hinterland Setting and Major Economic Regions North AmericaWestern EuropeEast and Southeast Asia Coastal concentration Landbridge connections Inland concentration Coastal gateways Coastal concentration Low hinterland access Hinterland intensity Freight Corridor hierarchy Gateway hierarchy

Gateways and Hinterland Effect Efficient Inland Freight Distribution Inefficient Inland Freight Distribution Pacific Asia North American West Coast SEZ Corridor

Corridors and Regional Development Specialization and interdependency Gateway Flows Order HighLow HighLow A B C

Supply Chains, Gateways and Corridors Global supply chains and production networks Continental integration Gateway choice  APL Distribution Center, Shenzhen, China

Commodity Chains and Added Value Commodity chain Added value Low High Manufacturing R&D Globalization Distribution Design Branding Marketing Sales / Service Concept Logistics

Logistics and the Acceleration of Freight Push Logistics Shipment Transshipment Pull Logistics Containerization Speed barrier Logistical threshold

The North American Landbridge

Gateways, Corridors and Competitiveness Emerging continental networks Trade barriers Strategic partners Interregional linkages International competition  APL “Australia” entering San Francisco Harbor

Beware of Future Expectations: The Fallacies of Linear Thinking (Projected TEU Traffic, Port of NY/NJ)

Are You Out of Your Mind? Projections for Container Port Volumes, 2020

Sectors of American Imports of Asian Goods Through Maritime Container Shipping, 2004 (in TEUs)

World Container Traffic, , and Guesses for up to 2020

Balance of Containerized Cargo Flows along Major Trade Routes, (in millions of TEUs)

Main North American Trade Corridors and Metropolitan Freight Centers

Institutional Frameworks for Governance Political jurisdictions Transport networks and corporations Trading blocs and internal free trade Harmonization of regulations and practices  “Maersk Sealand” Locomotive, Landers Yard (NS), Chicago

NAFTA Transborder Truck Flows and Traffic at US Ports of Entry, 2002

Is 53 the Magic Number? ■New container specifications? Economies of scale push towards a larger container: Particularly for inland carriers. Strong “legacy costs” (inertia): Accumulated investments in modal and intermodal infrastructure. The North American vs. the European standard: ISO 40 footer: m x 2.33 m. NA domestic 53 footer: m x 2.4 m. European Intermodal Load Unit: 13.2 m x 2.4 m. China will play a significant role in the decision. The bottom line is likely to be the size that can be fitted on road transport systems, so 53 could be the “magic number”.

Carrying Capacity of Containers (in cubic feet)

Translisft crane, NS Rutherford yard, PA Public and Private Investments in Gateways and Corridors Financing corridor and gateway development Co-production and cooperation Bottleneck mitigation Multimodal Infrastructure Inland ports Regulatory preferences Fiscal regimes 

Level of Congestion of the Interstate Highway System

Boston – Washington Corridor: Volume to Capacity Ratio

Port Inland Distribution Network and Freight Clusters

Circum Hemispheric Dreams