tokenpocket钱包app下载网址|seaport

作者： tokenpocket钱包app下载网址

2024-03-07 21:01:18

Pixel Federation - players to players

WITH PASSWORD

WITH EMAIL LINK

Forgot Password?

SEND

Don't have a PIXEL FEDERATION Account?

Need Help?

seaport_百度百科

ort_百度百科网页新闻贴吧知道网盘图片视频地图文库资讯采购百科百度首页登录注册进入词条全站搜索帮助首页秒懂百科特色百科知识专题加入百科百科团队权威合作下载百科APP个人中心收藏查看我的收藏0有用+10seaport播报讨论上传视频英语单词seaport是一个英语单词，名词，作名词时意为“海港；港口都市”。外文名seaport词性名词目录1单词发音2短语搭配3双语例句单词发音播报编辑英[ˈsiːpɔːt]美[ˈsiːpɔːrt] [1]短语搭配播报编辑seaport bonds海港债券landlord seaport地主模式seaport market小樽海港市场busy seaport繁忙的海港seaport seaport海港seaport engineering海港工程Seaport Slit港口淤泥seaport container港口集装箱 [1]双语例句播报编辑Why on earth fly to the unknown seaport?到底为什么飞向未知的海港？The opening of an SEZ seaport will provide a valuable transport link for Chinese companies inlandlocked areas in the northeast.这个开放的经济特区海港将为处在东北部内陆的中国公司提供一条有价值的运输路线。A city of northeast China on the Yalu River opposite North Korea. It is a seaport andmanufacturing center. Population, 400, 000.丹东中国东北部一城市，位于和朝鲜相对的鸭绿江畔。它是一个海港和制造中心，人口400，000。 [1]新手上路成长任务编辑入门编辑规则本人编辑我有疑问内容质疑在线客服官方贴吧意见反馈投诉建议举报不良信息未通过词条申诉投诉侵权信息封禁查询与解封©2024 Baidu 使用百度前必读 | 百科协议 | 隐私政策 | 百度百科合作平台 | 京ICP证030173号京公网安备110000020000

SEAPORT中文(简体)翻译：剑桥词典

词典

翻译

语法

同义词词典

+Plus

剑桥词典+Plus

Shop

剑桥词典+Plus

我的主页

+Plus 帮助

退出

剑桥词典+Plus

我的主页

+Plus 帮助

退出

中文 (简体)

查找

英语-中文（简体）

seaport 在英语-中文（简体）词典中的翻译

seaportnoun [ C ] uk

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

/ˈsiː.pɔːt/ us

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

/ˈsiː.pɔːrt/

Add to word list

(a city or town with) a port that can be used by ships

海港（城市）

比较

haven (SAFE PLACE)

harbour noun UK也请参见

port (TOWN)

(seaport在剑桥英语-中文（简体）词典的翻译 © Cambridge University Press)

seaport的例句

seaport

He has managed most successfully to incorporate the points we made at the time of the discussion on the green paper on seaports.

来自 Europarl Parallel Corpus - English

Along the coast, in the seaports, there are technical schools for young people who we are hoping will train to be mates and skippers.

来自 Hansard archive

该例句来自Hansard存档。包含以下议会许可信息开放议会许可v3.0

Surat continued to be the focus of large merchant diasporas long after it ceased to be an active seaport.

来自 Cambridge English Corpus

The amendment would delay the opening date for the seaport as well as the airport, without any rational consideration of the issues.

来自 Hansard archive

该例句来自Hansard存档。包含以下议会许可信息开放议会许可v3.0

Many of them came from rural areas and seaports.

来自 Cambridge English Corpus

Ormskirk's population was about 950 in the mid-seventeenth century, rising to 2,554 in 1801, thus increasing more slowly than some of the county's seaports and industrial towns.

来自 Cambridge English Corpus

The arrangement covered education, communication, water supply and a seaport development project.

来自 Cambridge English Corpus

They were undertaken not just in the main towns or seaports, but even in the smallest towns.

来自 Cambridge English Corpus

示例中的观点不代表剑桥词典编辑、剑桥大学出版社和其许可证颁发者的观点。

seaport的翻译

中文（繁体）

海港（城市）…

查看更多内容

西班牙语

puerto marítimo, puerto de mar…

查看更多内容

葡萄牙语

porto marítimo…

查看更多内容

更多语言

法语

土耳其语

in Dutch

捷克语

丹麦语

印尼语

泰语

越南语

波兰语

in Swedish

马来语

德语

挪威语

in Ukrainian

port de mer…

查看更多内容

liman…

查看更多内容

zeehaven…

查看更多内容

námořní přístav…

查看更多内容

havn…

查看更多内容

pelabuhan pantai…

查看更多内容

เมืองท่า…

查看更多内容

hải cảng…

查看更多内容

port morski…

查看更多内容

hamnstad…

查看更多内容

bandar pelabuhan…

查看更多内容

der Seehafen…

查看更多内容

havn(eby)…

查看更多内容

морський порт, портове місто…

查看更多内容

需要一个翻译器吗？

获得快速、免费的翻译！

翻译器工具

seaport的发音是什么？

在英语词典中查看 seaport 的释义

浏览

seamstress

seamy

séance

seaplane

seaport

sear

search algorithm

search box

“每日一词”

veggie burger

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

/ˈvedʒ.i ˌbɜː.ɡər/

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

/ˈvedʒ.i ˌbɝː.ɡɚ/

a type of food similar to a hamburger but made without meat, by pressing together small pieces of vegetables, seeds, etc. into a flat, round shape

关于这个

博客

Forget doing it or forget to do it? Avoiding common mistakes with verb patterns (2)

March 06, 2024

新词

stochastic parrot

March 04, 2024

已添加至 list

回到页面顶端

内容

英语-中文（简体）例句翻译

©剑桥大学出版社与评估2024

学习

新词

帮助

纸质书出版

Word of the Year 2021

Word of the Year 2022

Word of the Year 2023

开发

词典API

双击查看

搜索Widgets

执照数据

关于

无障碍阅读

剑桥英语教学

剑桥大学出版社与评估

授权管理

Cookies与隐私保护

语料库

使用条款

京ICP备14002226号-2

©剑桥大学出版社与评估2024

剑桥词典+Plus

我的主页

+Plus 帮助

退出

词典

定义

清晰解释自然的书面和口头英语

英语

学习词典

基础英式英语

基础美式英语

翻译

点击箭头改变翻译方向。

双语词典

英语-中文（简体）

Chinese (Simplified)–English

英语-中文（繁体）

Chinese (Traditional)–English

英语-荷兰语

荷兰语-英语

英语-法语

法语-英语

英语-德语

德语-英语

英语-印尼语

印尼语-英语

英语-意大利语

意大利语-英语

英语-日语

日语-英语

英语-挪威语

挪威语-英语

英语-波兰语

波兰语-英语

英语-葡萄牙语

葡萄牙语-英语

英语-西班牙语

西班牙语-英语

English–Swedish

Swedish–English

半双语词典

英语-阿拉伯语

英语-孟加拉语

英语-加泰罗尼亚语

英语-捷克语

英语-丹麦语

English–Gujarati

英语-印地语

英语-韩语

英语-马来语

英语-马拉地语

英语-俄语

English–Tamil

English–Telugu

英语-泰语

英语-土耳其语

英语-乌克兰语

English–Urdu

英语-越南语

翻译

语法

同义词词典

Pronunciation

剑桥词典+Plus

Shop

剑桥词典+Plus

我的主页

+Plus 帮助

退出

中文 (简体)

Change

English (UK)

English (US)

Español

Русский

Português

Deutsch

Français

Italiano

中文 (简体)

正體中文 (繁體)

Polski

한국어

Türkçe

日本語

Tiếng Việt

हिंदी

தமிழ்

తెలుగు

关注我们

选择一本词典

区别辨析harbour、port、wharf、pier与seaport - 田间小站

田间小站

首页

英美文化

美国文化

英国文化

英语漫画

美国建国史话

英语文摘

双语阅读

英语短篇小说

经典台词

英语幽默

英语演讲

英文诗歌

翻译与写作

翻译研究

英语写作

口语与词汇

小词详解

熟词僻义

美国习惯用语

英语口语

词汇辨析

图说英语词汇

资源下载

好书推荐

英文读物

站内搜索

区别辨析harbour、port、wharf、pier与seaport

2024年1月22日

口语与词汇

微信关注：田间小站

harbour、port、wharf、pier与seaport这些名词都有“港、港口、码头”之意。

harbour : 一般用词，指停泊船只、装卸货物的天然或人工港口。

Our hotel room overlooked a pretty little fishing harbour.

我们从宾馆的房间可以俯瞰一个美丽的小渔港。

port : 多指人工港口，还可指有港口的市。

a naval/fishing/container port

军港／渔港／集装箱港

We had a good view of all the ships coming into/leaving port.

所有进／出港的轮船我们都看得很清楚。

wharf : 指船只停泊装卸货物的码头。

The crates were unloaded onto the wharf.

箱子卸下来，放在码头上。

pier : 专指与海岸成直角形而突出的码头，可供旅客，货物上下船或供人散步用。

The pier is a wooden structure.

这个码头是木结构建筑。

We stood on the pier and watched as they embarked.

我们站在突码头上目送他们登船。

seaport : 指港埠。

He described the smell as something between a circus and a seaport.

他形容那种气味介于马戏团和海港的味道之间。

词汇辨析

Previous好书下载 | 英国人的言行潜规则

Next英语词源 | terr-

搜索：

推荐关注最新文章

好书下载 | 拯救词汇大作战

2024年3月4日

小词详解 | culminate

2024年3月4日

区别辨析heavy与weighty

2024年3月4日

美国文化 | 美国大选历史趣事盘点四个之最①

2024年3月4日

小词详解 | pristine

2024年3月3日

热门标签CATTI真题

CATTI经验

CATTI考试大纲

GRE词汇精讲

IELTS雅思词汇精讲

TOEFL托福词汇精讲

专八词汇精讲

伍迪·艾伦单口喜剧

北京周报英语热词

双语全文

双语阅读

唯美爱情英语名言

图说英语词汇

好书推荐

小词详解

文学翻译

熟词僻义

白皮书

经典台词

美国习惯用语

美国建国史话

美国文化

翻译研究

考研词汇精讲

英国文化

英文美句五则

英文诗歌

英文读物

英语习语

英语俚语

英语写作

英语口语

英语名言

英语幽默

英语演讲

英语漫画

英语热词

英语短篇小说

英语脑筋急转弯

英语词源

词汇22000

词汇辨析

温州港_百度百科

百度百科网页新闻贴吧知道网盘图片视频地图文库资讯采购百科百度首页登录注册进入词条全站搜索帮助首页秒懂百科特色百科知识专题加入百科百科团队权威合作下载百科APP个人中心收藏查看我的收藏0有用+10温州港播报讨论上传视频中国浙江省温州市境内港口温州港（Wenzhou Port），位于浙江省温州市，地处浙江南部、东南沿海黄金海岸线中部，是中国二十五个主要港口之一和中国国家重要枢纽港。温州港北邻上海港、舟山港、南毗福州港、厦门港，东南与台湾的高雄港、基隆港隔海相望，是浙江口岸距离台湾各港口最近的港口，拥有350千米海岸线，属于长江三角洲经济区的南部、浙江省南部的温州湾、乐清湾内。 [1]温州港是一个千年之港，据《温州港史》记载，早在战国时期，温州就出现了原始港口的雏形；唐代，中国商人开辟了日本值嘉岛直达温州的航线；清代，由于长期“海禁”，温州港海上贸易受阻；1876年，《烟台条约》签订，温州被辟为通商口岸；1994年，温州港被列为中国20个主要枢纽港口之一。 [2]2017年，温州港完成货物吞吐量8925.62万吨，同比增长6.2%，其中外贸货物吞吐量完成492万吨，同比增长12.6%； [3]2018年，温州港共拥有生产性码头泊位206个、货物综合通过能力7052万吨，万吨级以上泊位21个，其中5万吨级以上泊位7个。 [4]中文名温州港外文名Wenzhou Port港口代码33000400所属地区中国浙江省温州市主营货类集装箱水域面积9170000 m²管理机构温州港务集团目录1历史沿革2区位环境▪位置境域▪气候条件▪水文特征3硬件设施4经营范围▪主营业务▪航班航线▪客货运量5交通配套6建设规划7价值意义历史沿革播报编辑温州港引航站春秋战国时期，温州就出现了原始港口的雏形。唐代以来与日本有贸易往来。南宋—元时期设立市舶司，海上贸易兴起。明清时期受“海禁”政策影响，温州港闭关。清光绪二年（1876年），《烟台条约》签订，温州港再次被迫开放；抗日战争时期温州港曾出现过畸形繁荣。 [5]1957年，温州港被中国国务院确定为中国6个对外开放港口之一。 [2]1984年，温州港被中国国务院列为中国沿海14个对外开放港口之一。 [2]1994年，温州港被中华人民共和国交通部列为中国20个主要枢纽港口。 [6]2009年11月，温州港被批准成为中国大陆63个对台直航港口之一。2014年12月31日，温州港乐清湾港区第一个深水公共码头开港运营。 [7]2022年3月，温州港首次实现海铁联运箱直航出海，为前往东南亚的客户缩短2至3天的运输时间。 [18]2022年11月，温州港核心港区深水进港航道主体工程正式开工。 [19]2023年7月，温州港核心港区深水进港航道工程已通过交工验收并投入营运。 [20]区位环境播报编辑位置境域温州港温州港地理坐标为东经120°38′50″，北纬28°01′35″，位于中国东南沿海，北邻宁波港、南毗福州港，东南与台湾的高雄、基隆港隔海相望、居于以上海浦东为龙头的长江三角洲经济区内，拥有350千米海岸线。 [6]温州港位于中国大陆海岸线的中段，与最北的营口港（1042海里）、最南的三亚港（986海里）距离几乎相等，而且与北面的上海港（320海里）、宁波港（219海里）和南面的厦门港（393海里）、福州港（236海里）距离也适中，并且靠近中国台湾地区和日、韩及其他东南亚等国家。 [5]温州港拥有市区老港区、杨府山港区、龙湾港区、七里港区等四大港区。气候条件气温乐清湾港区温州港为中亚热带季风气候区，冬夏季风交替显著，温度适中，四季分明，雨量充沛。年平均气温17.3至19.4摄氏度，1月份平均气温4.9至9.9摄氏度，7月份平均气温26.7至29.6摄氏度。冬无严寒，夏无酷暑。降水温州港年降水量在1113至2494毫米之间。春夏之交有梅雨，7至9月间有热带气旋，无霜期为241至326天。全年日照数在1442至2264小时之间。 [8]水文特征温州港属不规则半日潮。最高潮位6.46米（按吴淞海基面，以下同），最低潮位－0.52米，最大潮差6.39米，最小潮差0.73米。 [9]温州港最大潮流流速发生在中潮位，憩流时间发生高、低潮后半小时左右。一般涨潮流速小于落潮流速。 [9]硬件设施播报编辑货场截至2005年，温州港共有仓库24座，面积2.14万平方米；堆场24处，总面积10.69万平方米。 [9]装卸截至2005年，温州港拥有各类装卸机械297台，最大起重能力40吨，牵引车24台。 [9]船泊截至2018年，温州港共拥有生产性码头泊位206个、货物综合通过能力7052万吨，万吨级以上泊位21个，其中5万吨级以上泊位7个。 [4]航道温州港口外东北方向有沙头水道，航道走向西南，可通航3000吨以下船舶；口外东向黄大岙水道，航道走向西偏北，可通航2万吨级船舶；南口的南水道已经淤浅，很少通航。 [9]锚地截至2005年，温州港共有7个锚地，其中货轮锚地4个，引航和外轮联检锚地1个，避风锚地2个。另有系泊浮筒3个：锚地最大系泊能力为万吨级船舶，浮筒最大系泊能力2.5万吨级船舶。经营范围播报编辑主营业务截至2005年，温州港经营范围涉及国际与中国国内集装箱、内外贸件杂散货装卸、货物仓储中转、船货代理、理货、驳运、客运、滚装车渡、水路公路货物运输、燃油及船用物资供应、港口信息服务等业务。 [9]以煤炭、金属矿石、钢材、水泥为主。 [10]航班航线截至2005年，温州港与日本、韩国、科威特、俄罗斯、新加坡及香港等10多个国家和地区的港口有着航运贸易往来，开辟了至韩国釜山、新加坡、青岛、广州、宁波、上海、营口等航线，至中国沿海南北及长江港口航线； [9]温州港水路货运航线通大连、厦门等沿海港口以及长江沿线的汉口、九江、南京等地；国际货运航线通往日本、朝鲜、中国香港特别行政区等22个国家和地区。 [11]2017年，温州港新增日本博多港、门司港及韩国釜山港航线。 [12]2019年7月，温州港开通第二条近洋直航国际航线，航线沿途停靠大阪—神户—清水—东京—宁波—温州—香港—海防—高雄—厦门—大阪。 [13]客货运量温州港大小门岛1995年温州港完成货物吞吐量600.62万吨，旅客吞吐量146.87万人次；外贸吞吐量30.75万吨；国内集装箱12011自然箱；国际集装箱19302TEU；该港下属企业货物吞吐量267.63万吨。2012年，温州港完成港口货物吞吐量6996.96万吨，比2011年增长15.90%。其中，外贸货物吞吐量492.56万吨，同比增长10.27%；集装箱吞吐量51.75万标准箱，同比增长10.27%；对台集装箱完成9315标箱，同比增长92.7%。 [14]2017年，温州港完成货物吞吐量8925.62万吨，同比增长6.2%，其中外贸货物吞吐量完成492万吨，同比增长12.6%。其中煤炭及制品完成2530.62万吨，同比增长11.5%；金属矿石完成183.40万吨，同比增长16.4%；钢铁完成328.59万吨，同比增长46.4%；粮食完成6.17万吨，同比增长138.7%。全港集装箱吞吐量完成60.09万标箱，同比增长6.9%，其中外贸集装箱吞吐量完成12.21万标箱，同比增长2.26%。台湾航线完成吞吐量17911标箱，同比下降22.12%；东南亚航线完成吞吐量为6872标箱；重箱出口3573标箱。 [3]交通配套播报编辑铁路金温铁路1998年投入运营，有港口专线直达温州港龙湾港区。 [9]2015年5月，乐清湾港区铁路支线开工，线路东起乐清湾港区，向西经永嘉、鹿城至外垟与金温货线接轨，全长76.71公里，桥隧占比76.6%，共设黄田、乐清港等8个货站。 [15]公路温州疏港高速公路连通温州港主要港区和机场，直接连接甬台温（国家高速公路）和甬台温复线，并通过绕城高速公路北线连接金丽温（国家高速公路）和诸永高速公路，是温州港集疏运主通道。航空温州龙湾国际机场离温州市区24公里，开辟至北京、上海、扬州、宁波、厦门、广州、武汉、成都等航线。船渡温州港水上客运航线有到上海、宁波、定海、广州及香港的班轮。建设规划播报编辑停靠在温州港的国际邮轮2008年，《温州港总体规划》获中华人民共和国交通运输部和浙江省政府批复。 [16]根据中华人民共和国交通部和浙江省政府联合批复的《温州港总体规划》，温州港规划为“一港七区”，包括乐清湾、状元岙、大小门岛等三大核心港区以及瓯江、瑞安、平阳、苍南等四个辅助港区。乐清湾港区是温州港最具发展潜力的综合性港区，可开发港口岸线34公里，可建设万吨级以上泊位33个，设计吞吐能力8200万吨，该港区以散货起步，重点构建“水铁联运”物流基地。状元岙港区可利用岸线14140米，规划建设深水泊位25个，吞吐能力7000万吨，其中集装箱500万TEU，该港区将形成以集装箱运输和液体化工品中转基地为主的深水港区。大小门岛港区规划总面积约为67.8 平方公里，被列为浙江省海洋经济示范区第一批开发利用的重要岛屿，规划泊位54个，其中20万吨以上泊位2个，规划年总通过能力1.3亿吨，该港区重点发展石油化工品仓储、运输，兼顾大宗散货、件杂货运输，建设临港产业岛。 [17]价值意义播报编辑改革开放以来，几经沉浮的温州港，伴随着状元岙港区、乐清湾港区、大小门岛港区等三大核心港区的相继建成，以及新金温、甬台温、温福铁路和金丽温、沈海、诸永及绕城高速等综合交通体系的不断完善，逐渐成为中国乃至东南沿海的重要港口之一。 [6]（《温州职业技术学院学报》评）新手上路成长任务编辑入门编辑规则本人编辑我有疑问内容质疑在线客服官方贴吧意见反馈投诉建议举报不良信息未通过词条申诉投诉侵权信息封禁查询与解封©2024 Baidu 使用百度前必读 | 百科协议 | 隐私政策 | 百度百科合作平台 | 京ICP证030173号京公网安备110000020000

Rapid seaward expansion of seaport footprints worldwide | Communications Earth & Environment

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain

the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in

Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles

and JavaScript.

View all journals

Explore content

About the journal

Publish with us

RSS feed

nature

communications earth & environment

articles

article

Rapid seaward expansion of seaport footprints worldwide

Download PDF

Article

Open access

Published: 27 November 2023

Rapid seaward expansion of seaport footprints worldwide

Dhritiraj Sengupta

ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1341-23221,2 & Eli D. Lazarus

ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2404-96612

Communications Earth & Environment

volume 4, Article number: 440 (2023)

Cite this article

989 Accesses

4 Altmetric

Metrics details

Subjects

Climate-change adaptationGeography

AbstractAs global maritime traffic increases, seaports grow to accommodate and compete for higher volumes of trade throughput. However, growth trajectories of seaport footprints around the world have gone unmeasured, likely because of a lack of readily available spatio-temporal data. Here, we use geospatial analysis of global satellite imagery from 1990–2020 to show that 65 seaports among the world’s top 100 container ports, as ranked by reported throughput, have been expanding rapidly seaward. Collectively, these seaports have added approximately 978 km2 in gross port area in three decades through coastal land reclamation. We also find that the relationship between footprint expansion and throughput volume is highly variable among seaports. Understanding patterns of seaport expansion in space and time informs global assessments of critical infrastructure and supply chain vulnerability to climate-driven hazard. Seaport expansion also sets up complex trade-offs in the context of environmental impacts and climate adaptation.

Similar content being viewed by others

Impact of 1, 2 and 4 °C of global warming on ship navigation in the Canadian Arctic

Article

08 July 2021

Lawrence R. Mudryk, Jackie Dawson, … Mike Brady

Global forecasts of shipping traffic and biological invasions to 2050

Article

18 March 2019

Anthony Sardain, Erik Sardain & Brian Leung

Tracking the global reduction of marine traffic during the COVID-19 pandemic

Article

Open access

27 April 2021

David March, Kristian Metcalfe, … Brendan J. Godley

IntroductionSeaports are essential to flow of global trade1: approximately half of all global trade, by value, is maritime2. For such valuable infrastructural assets, seaports are precariously exposed to coastal natural hazards. Recent research has shown that seaport and maritime supply chain exposure to multiple climate-driven natural hazards is geographically heterogeneous, with hotspots of risk concentrated in cyclone corridors3,4,5,6. But even for seaports where the current risk of disruption from natural hazards is relatively low3, functional risk to seaport infrastructure and operations is expected to increase before 20504,7. In general, this intensification of future risk may be exacerbated by two underlying drivers. One is sea-level rise and changes in climate-related forcings more generally, which, by compounding the potential landward reach of extreme sea levels, will tend to shift coastal flooding regimes toward more frequent, higher-magnitude events7,8,9. The other is global maritime traffic, which is projected to grow by between two and 12 times its current volume by mid-century10. Of these two drivers, the latter likely imparts a more immediate effect on the global distribution of seaport risk11. As greater maritime trade volume demands more seaport infrastructure and accommodation space in existing and new locations, the sector must expand the physical area available for operation7,12 – and so seaports get bigger.While regional and global analyses of risk to seaport infrastructure and international trade networks are becoming more powerful, nuanced, and detailed2,3,4,13, current assessments treat the spatial footprints of seaports as static quantities, and do not account for seaport expansion, typically seaward, over time (Fig. 1)14. Spatio-temporal patterns of change in seaport footprints affect routes of global trade as seaports compete for throughput12, inform the dynamics and implications of climatic risk3,4, physically reshape coastlines where exposure to hazard impacts is already high8,15,16, and are associated with detrimental environmental consequences for coastal ecology17,18,19,20,21. Reports of coastal land reclamation related to port expansion, specifically, tend to be geographically focused22,23,24. Thus far, trajectories of seaport footprint growth around the world have gone unmeasured, likely because of a lack of readily available spatio-temporal data on seaport areas4,7.Fig. 1: Examples of seaport expansion seaward with coastal land reclamation.Spatio-temporal patterns of expansion in selected container seaport footprints around the world, 1990–2020. Light shades delineate earlier reclamation, dark shades more recent works. Maps were generated using annual rasters of seaport expansion exported from Google Earth Engine (see “Methods” section) and compiled in ArcGIS.Full size imageHere, we measured annually over three decades (1990–2020) patterns of seaward expansion in 65 of the world’s top 100 container ports as ranked by throughput25 (Fig. 2), using a recently published method for quantifying spatial footprints of coastal land reclamation from satellite imagery in Google Earth Engine14 (Fig. 1; see “Methods” section). Coastal land reclamation involves the engineered conversion of a nearshore subaqueous or intertidal environment to subaerial dry land or an enclosed water body14,26. A seaport complex may expand seaward to accommodate changing requirements for a host of operational reasons (e.g., new or larger vessel berths, terminal accessibility and logistics, storage area, onsite production), but also because there may be no option or availability to expand inland, given terrain or conflicts with existing land uses22,27,28,29.Fig. 2: Geographic distribution and magnitudes of seaport expansion seaward among major container seaports.Bar plot shows total area (km2) of seaward expansion between 1990 and 2020 for 65 of the world’s top 100 container seaports by reported trade volume in 202025. Regions are those defined by Lloyd’s List25. a Inset map shows their geographic distribution; circle size indicates the relative magnitude of total seaward expansion. (Global basemap from OpenStreetMap land polygons). b Inset plots shows an annual time series of the total seaward-directed change in area for these 65 seaports between 1990 and 2020, and their comparative distributions of seaward area (in log scale) in 1991 versus 2020.Full size imageOur remote-sensing method uses as its baseline a 1990 composite coastline from an annual dataset of global surface water30. Coastal land-reclamation activities after 1990 emerge as seaward-directed relocations of the global surface-water coastline over time. To differentiate “seaports” from ports in riverine and inshore settings, we mapped the Lloyd’s List25 of the 100 largest container ports by reported container throughput in 2020, and identified 89 container ports located on an open-water coastline. From those 89 sites, we excluded 24 seaports where total seaward-directed changes were smaller than 1 km2 (see Methods). A list of the container ports excluded from our analysis is provided along with the data for the results presented here (see “Data availability” section).Seaward expansion greater than 1 km2 since 1990 does not reflect the full spatial footprint of any given seaport complex. Determining from remotely sensed data landward expansion and patterns of change in the total footprints of seaport area across coastal and terrestrial spaces requires a different analytical approach. Nor does our method differentiate among specific uses of seaport-related space, such as terminal facilities, storage, industry, or other integrated layouts4,13,14: the seaward footprints that we measure must be interpreted as a partial gauge of gross port area. Imagery from Google Earth and Planet Basemap, and targeted queries in OpenStreetMap, corroborate that the seaward growth we measure at these 65 sites is associated with expansion of seaport complexes.ResultsWe find that since 1990, 65 seaports among the world’s top 100 container ports by reported throughput in 202025 have expanded their spatial footprints seaward through coastal land reclamation by a total of 978 km2 (Fig. 2). This sum is large (~22%) relative to the current estimated area of port terminals worldwide (~4500 km2)4. These 65 seaports also represent a significant segment of the global port sector. According to UNCTAD, 798.9 million TEUs (industry-standard “twenty-foot equivalent units”) of containers were handled worldwide in 202031, of which the top 100 container ports processed 632.2 million TEUs (79%)25. The 65 container seaports in our analysis moved 500 million TEUs in 2020: 79% of the total volume among the top 100 container ports, and 63% of the overall volume of maritime container trade worldwide.Two thirds (43) of the 65 seaports in our analysis are in Asia, and collectively reclaimed 871 km2 (89%) of the total seaward expansion we measured (Fig. 2). Twenty-one of those seaports are in China, and account for 627 km2 (63%) of seaward expansion. The port of Tianjin alone has reclaimed more than 183 km2 (18%), more than triple the area reclaimed by the port of Singapore, which has expanded by the second-largest extent. These outliers make the majority of seaport expansions seaward appear modest: approximately half (32) of the 65 seaports identified have reclaimed less than 5 km2. But in relative terms, even this growth is meaningful. All but seven of the 65 have at least doubled their seaward area since 1990; 39 have quadrupled it; 12 have expanded it by an order of magnitude.Beyond ranked totals, time series of spatial growth in individual seaports reveal a variety of patterns and pulses of seaward expansion (Fig. 3). Although spatial scales of expansion among these seaports span three orders of magnitude, the time series exhibit some qualitatively similar characteristics. For example, the time series are punctuated by one or more step-changes in area, indicative of major expansions. Marked seaward reclamation early in the time series produces an asymptotic curve (concave down: e.g., ports of Algeciras, Taicang); rapid expansion late in the time series produces a more exponential curve (concave up: e.g., ports of Colombo, Yingkou). Pronounced growth through the middle of the time series produces a sigmoidal curve (e.g., ports of Barcelona, Jinzhou); punctuated growth at the beginning and end of the time series produces a more cubic curve (e.g., ports of King Abdullah, Laem Chabang). Most of the time series express variations on these curve shapes, including some seaports with sustained periods of effectively linear growth (e.g., ports of Busan, Incheon). While seaports in China and greater Asia constitute the majority of our sample, no particular time-series shape appears specific to a given region. The majority of these 65 seaports show trends of substantial seaward growth within the past 10–15 years.Fig. 3: Annual time series of seaport expansion seaward.Subplots document expansion seaward, in km2 (left axis) between 1990 and 2020 for 65 of the world’s top 100 container seaports by reported trade volume in 202025. Subplots are arranged in alphabetical order. Colour indicates region, with China denoted independently. Gaps indicate missing data. Parenthetical values in each subplot report the mean running standard deviation (in km2) for the series (see “Methods” section), and that value as a percentage of the total reclaimed area for that seaport in 2020, respectively. Note that the scale of the vertical axis differs among subplots.Full size imageThe regional distribution of seaward expansion among container seaports in our results (Fig. 2) aligns broadly with the regional distribution of trade dominance globally. According to the Lloyd’s List25, in 2020, 25 ports in China absorbed almost 40% of the container volume among the top 100 container ports, and 25 ports across the rest of Asia routed an additional 28%. The 21 seaports in China in our analysis handled 237 million TEU, or 38% of volume among the top 100 container ports in 2020; 22 other major seaports across Asia handled an additional 160 million TEU (25%). But our analysis also shows other regional patterns relevant to trade dominance. For example, 10 seaports in Northern Europe and eight in the Middle East had 8.6% and 5.6% shares, respectively, of reported volume among the top 100 container ports in 2020. While three of those seaports in Northern Europe (3% volume share) have expanded seaward a total of ~29 km2 (3%) since 1990 – and most of that in Rotterdam alone – all eight of those seaports in the Middle East have collectively reclaimed ~49 km2 (5%).Even though the handful of seaports responsible for the most seaward reclamation since 1990 are also the largest by container throughput in 2020, a more inclusive roster of seaports yields a scattered relationship between seaward reclamation and container throughput (Fig. 4a). Past work relating port area to handled tonnage in 1990 for 27 ports around the world fit a linear relationship7,32, but our results indicate a more complicated dynamic. First, comparing rank by total reclaimed area versus rank by container throughput in 2020 suggests that a number of seaports among the top 100 container ports are pushing to grow relative to their counterparts (Fig. 4b): we find 29 seaports (45% of those in our analysis) with an outsized reclamation signature (above the 1:1 reference line) relative to their container throughput. Second, a partial phase space described by seaward expansion and container throughput demonstrates a variety of trajectories among individual seaports over time (Fig. 5). For 43 of the 65 seaports in our sample (a subset determined by data availability), we show reported container throughput as a function of seaward reclamation area annually between 2011 and 2020 (Fig. 5). This reversal of the axes in Fig. 4 and previous work7,32 is deliberate, to explore seaward expansion as a potential driver of trade volume. In many cases, container throughput increases with seaward expansion, suggesting that reclamation can serve as a key means by which seaports may capture volume share and thereby climb up the global rankings. But these data also show plenty of exceptions to that correlation. For example, newly reclaimed land is not immediately ready for use14: there is a lag between reclamation and the infrastructure installation necessary to handle higher trade volumes, which some of these trajectories may reflect. Moreover, expansion does not guarantee ipso facto greater trade capture, nor does a larger seaport footprint itself ensure that a given throughput volume is sustained. Seaport expansion and container throughput are steered by political, policy, and market forces illegible to this analysis. Given the variety we see in these reclamation and trade volume trajectories, we echo recent cautions against invoking “simple scaling relationships [between seaport area and trade volume] across countries“4. Indeed, even a scaling relationship for one seaport may be a poor predictor for another.Fig. 4: Relationship between total seaward expansion and reported container throughput in 2020.a Scatterplot, in log-log scale, of total reclaimed area seaward (km2) between 1990–2020 and reported container throughput (millions TEU) in 2020 for 65 of the world’s top 100 container seaports25. Colour indicates region, with China denoted independently; marker size is uniform. Convention of axes is consistent with ref. 16. b Scatterplot of normalised seaport rank by total seaward expansion (as in Fig. 2) versus normalised rank by reported container throughput in 202025. Axes convention is such that top-ranked seaports by both metrics (largest expansion, greatest throughput) cluster at upper left. Marker size represents relative magnitude of total seaward expansion. Reference line indicates hypothetical 1:1 correlative relationship, in relative terms, between seaward expansion and container throughput (where top ranks appear at far left).Full size imageFig. 5: Trajectories of container trade volume relative to seaport expansion seaward.Subplots show partial phase space defined by container trade volume (TEU millions) and seaport expansion seaward (km2) between 2011 and 2020 for 43 of the world’s top 100 container seaports by reported trade volume in 202025. Subplots are arranged in alphabetical order. Marker colour indicates region, with China denoted independently; marker value indicates year, advancing from light (2011) to dark (2020).Full size imageDiscussion and implicationsOur analysis is intended to synthesise and quantify a collective pattern of seaward expansion among a majority of the largest container seaports in the world (Fig. 3). Port expansion is typically discussed in broad terms or at the scale of case studies22,23,24, but the globally distributed pattern in our results is notable for its apparent ubiquity, transcending national-scale differences in policy and regulatory contexts. We also show that while a positive relationship between expansion and container throughput volume is generally evident (Fig. 4a), as others have found7,32, that relationship may be less straightforward at the scale of an individual seaport (Fig. 5). Trade volume through a given seaport depends on market dynamics, which can go up or down, but seaport expansion is a ratchet that can only advance. For any given seaport, expansion thus enables and assumes a precarious model in which its market share – or the volume of the market itself – will continue to grow. Moreover, although growth in global maritime traffic is a fundamental driver of seaward expansion among container seaports7,10,12, it is not necessarily the only driver, especially in coastal urban centres straining at the edges of their available real estate14,22,28,29.Partial phase spaces like the one we explore (Fig. 5) are useful windows into dynamical systems, but our study is unlikely to help a given seaport authority profile the dimensions of its infrastructural vulnerability. The logistical, policy, ecological, environmental, hazard-exposure, and climate-adaptation ramifications of seaward seaport expansion are inevitably case-specific. Our work does, however, contribute to a wider discourse regarding emergent patterns of coastal risk around the world, of which the infrastructure of maritime trade is an intrinsic component. For example, the spatio-temporal footprints of seaward seaport expansion that we measure are a further documentation of ocean sprawl: “the rapid proliferation of hard artificial structures…in the marine environment“19, with deleterious consequences for marine sedimentary habitats, biodiversity, and ecological connectivity18,19,20,21. The spatial extent of ocean sprawl and anthropogenic coastal hardening is still being assessed33 and its proliferation forecast34. Our findings, and related efforts to quantify coastal land reclamation globally14,26, reflect only a component of ocean sprawl, but are indicative of its unprecedented pace and coevolution with socio-ecological and socio-economic risk34,35,36.How seaports and maritime supply chains will adapt to future climate change is an open question5,6,7,12,37,38,39 with material implications40,41. A recent conceptual experiment considered the volume of material needed to raise 100 US seaports by two metres, and found that such retrofitting would require 704 million m3 of fill – a quantity equivalent to the total estimated volume of sand delivered by all beach nourishment projects in the US since 197242. Not all fill material used in land reclamation is sand, but sand (with particular granular characteristics) is the essential ingredient in concrete, and surging demand for construction-grade sand has triggered a deepening environmental crisis related to sand mining43,44,45. Because the geography of suitable fill material is heterogeneous, the projected scale of construction required for seaport adaptation and expansion globally could result in an unprecedented “worldwide race for adaptation resources“40,41. Coastal reclamation itself is an ancient engineering technology, yet the current scale, rate, and global extent of coastal reclamation is a novel phenomenon14. Furthermore, new regional hotspots of seaward seaport expansion may develop, if, for example, China’s national Belt and Road Initiative increases and converts on its investments in seaports around the African continent46,47,48, where signatures of coastal land reclamation are already visible14.The analysis we employ here is not limited to container seaports, and could be directed toward other seaport types4. To unpack patterns and consequences of seaport expansion seaward, future research might examine the layered and nuanced context of market movements, investment policies, climate adaptation, and operational sustainability at the case-study scale. Another avenue of inquiry might take advantage of increasingly powerful tools for Earth observation to gain a comprehensive perspective of seaports as dynamic sites of intensive anthropogenic coastal modification, bellwethers of coastal risk, and, potentially, of infrastructural climate-proofing.MethodsTo select seaports for our analysis we used the Lloyd’s List25 report of the 100 largest container ports globally, based on reported container throughput in 2020. We differentiated seaports from riverine and inshore ports by mapping them and confirming their industrial land use in OpenStreetMap49. We identified 89 container ports located on an open coastline.We then applied a recently published open-source method for quantifying spatial footprints of coastal land reclamation from satellite imagery in Google Earth Engine, described in detail in ref. 14 (see also Code Availability). We measured annual patterns of seaport reclamation using the 30 m resolution Global Surface Water (JRC-GSW) dataset from 1990 through 202030 and its Yearly Water Classification History (v1.4), including “no water” and “seasonal” bands, in Google Earth Engine14. Seaport expansion by reclamation (Fig. 1) registers as lateral changes in water surface at the coastline, or “lost permanent water surfaces“38. We recorded the area of these seaward-shifting footprints at annual intervals, relative to a 1990 benchmark coastline: in 1990, seaward expansion is assumed to be zero; we thus measure non-zero seaward expansion from 1991. Because the image-processing technique underpinning the JRC-GSW dataset uses pixel-scale annual composites, and because coastal reclamation processes are designed to reduce tidal effects on construction50, we did not apply a tidal correction. Nor did we treat the resulting expansion data with any manual post-processing (e.g., pixel correction, interpolation, smoothing). The time series for some seaports include excursive, uncorrected data points that are likely artefacts of the automated analysis. To explore their effects we also undertook a parallel, intensively manual post-processing method of pixel correction, interpolation, and smoothing, and found that the automatic and manual methods delivered only a ~ 1% difference in global total area of seaward expansion in 2020. Manual post-processing might therefore affect the time series for a given seaport in detail but not in absolute shape. Here we present the automated measurements because we find them to be a sufficiently accurate representation of seaward expansion, and because they are reproducible.Delineating an approximate analytical region-of-interest for each seaport was a manual process. We began by querying land-use polygons in OpenStreetMap (e.g., industrial area, industrial land use, terminal islands, etc.) in the vicinity of each seaport. However, such polygons in OpenStreetMap are themselves composites, and do not necessarily reflect the current footprint of a given seaport. We therefore iteratively checked the OpenStreetMap footprint of each seaport against output from the Google Earth Engine analysis for visualising coastal land reclamation14 to draw a bounding polygon large enough to accommodate the apparent extent of the seaport in 2020. The landward edges of each polygon get clipped to the 1990 composite shoreline by the Google Earth Engine analysis. The bounding polygons for the 65 seaports that we examine in this work are provided with the analytical code (see Code Availability).Of the 89 container seaports we investigated, 24 seaports returned total areas of seaward expansion smaller than 1 km2 (equivalent to ~1100 30 ×30 m pixels of lost permanent water surface). In the interest of a conservative survey, we excluded these 24 seaports from consideration. The remaining 65 seaport are associated with seaward expansion greater than 1 km2 since 1990. Seaward expansion greater than 1 km2 since 1990 does not reflect the full spatial footprint of a given seaport complex, which may include land reclaimed prior to 1990, and/or extend landward. To corroborate that the seaward growth we measured at these 65 sites is associated with expansion of seaport complexes, we used compilations of recent images (2018–2020) in Google Earth and Planet Basemap to make visual assessments of seaport space relative to the areas returned by our automated process in Google Earth Engine. Our method does not differentiate among specific uses of seaport-related space (e.g., terminal facilities, storage, industry, or other integrated layouts4,14), which makes the seaward extents that we observe a partial measure of gross port area.Given that: (1) the time series for some seaports include artifactual data points, (2) most of the time series are nonlinear, (3) major reclamation projects can register as abrupt jumps in seaward seaport area, and (4) the scale of seaward expansion among these seaports collectively spans three orders of magnitude, we estimated series variability in the following way. Missing data points within a given time series were filled by linear interpolation. Using a three-year sliding window, we detrended each three-point sub-series and calculated its standard deviation (in km2). For each seaport, we report the mean of theses sliding standard deviations, and also report that mean as a percentage of the total seaward reclamation in 2020 (Fig. 3). We find 53 of the 65 seaports have a mean sliding standard deviation <1 km2, and 61 seaports <2 km2. For 47 seaports, the mean sliding standard deviation represents less than 5% of their total reclaimed area in 2020, and does not exceed 10% for any seaport in our sample. All 65 mean sliding standard deviations in our analysis sum to ~42 km2, or ~4% of the total seaward expansion we calculate for 2020. Again, standard deviation here is not strictly a measure of excursive artifacts from the automated data-extraction process, since large reclamation initiatives register in the time series as abrupt jumps in seaward area; cleaning erroneous returns (whether high or low) for a given year at a given seaport would need to be done manually, from the relevant imagery. Note also that variability we estimate pertains to the time series in our analysis, which is separate from considerations of pixel-scale uncertainty in the underlying Global Surface Water (JRC-GSW) dataset30. Our calculations of time series variability are included in the analytical code that accompanies this work (see “Data Availability” section).Records of TEU throughput between 2011–2020 for 43 of these 65 seaports were compiled from archived Lloyd’s List reports.

Data availability

Study data are available at ref. 51.

Code availability

Code for calculating seaport area using Google Earth Engine is available at https://github.com/dhritirajsen/Seaport_reclamation. Code for generating the analyses presented in this article are available at ref. 51 and https://github.com/envidynxlab/Seaports.

ReferencesRobinson, R. Ports as elements in value-driven chain systems: the new paradigm. Marit. Policy Manag. 29, 241–255 (2002).Article

Google Scholar

Verschuur, J., Koks, E. E. & Hall, J. W. Ports’ criticality in international trade and global supply-chains. Nat. Commun. 13, 4351 (2022).Article

CAS

Google Scholar

Izaguirre, C. et al. Climate change risk to global port operations. Nat. Clim. Chang. 11, 14–20 (2021).Article

Google Scholar

Verschuur, J. et al. Multi-hazard risk to global port infrastructure and resulting trade and logistics losses. Commun. Earth Environ. 4, 5 (2023).Article

Google Scholar

Becker, A., Ng, A. K., McEvoy, D. & Mullett, J. Implications of climate change for shipping: ports and supply chains. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 9, e508 (2018).

Google Scholar

Becker, A. Climate change impacts to ports and maritime supply chains. Marit. Policy Manag. 47, 849–852 (2020).Article

Google Scholar

Hanson, S. E. & Nicholls, R. J. Demand for ports to 2050: climate policy, growing trade and the impacts of sea-level rise. Earth’s Future 8, e2020EF001543 (2020).Article

Google Scholar

Vousdoukas, M. I. et al. Global probabilistic projections of extreme sea levels show intensification of coastal flood hazard. Nat. Commun. 9, 2360 (2018).Article

Google Scholar

Taherkhani, M. et al. Sea-level rise exponentially increases coastal flood frequency. Sci. Rep. 10, 6466 (2020).Article

CAS

Google Scholar

Sardain, A., Sardain, E. & Leung, B. Global forecasts of shipping traffic and biological invasions to 2050. Nat. Sustain. 2, 274–282 (2019).Article

Google Scholar

Gong, L. et al. Seaport investments in capacity and natural disaster prevention. Transport. Res. D–Transport Environ. 85, 102367 (2020).Article

Google Scholar

Notteboom, T., Pallis, A., & Rodrigue, J. P. Port Economics, Management And Policy (Routledge, 2022).Becker, A., Hallisey, N. & Bove, G. Toward regional hazard risk assessment: a method to geospatially inventory critical coastal infrastructure applied to the Caribbean. J. Infrastruct. Preserv. Resil. 2, 13 (2021).Article

Google Scholar

Sengupta, D. et al. Mapping 21st Century global coastal land reclamation. Earth’s Future 11, e2022EF002927 (2023).Article

Google Scholar

Almar, R. et al. A global analysis of extreme coastal water levels with implications for potential coastal overtopping. Nat. Commun. 12, 3775 (2021).Article

CAS

Google Scholar

Nicholls, R. J. et al. A global analysis of subsidence, relative sea-level change and coastal flood exposure. Nat. Clim. Chang. 11, 338–342 (2021).Article

Google Scholar

OCED. Environmental Impacts of International Shipping: The Role of Ports (OECD Publishing, 2011).Martin, D. et al. Ecological impact of coastal defence structures on sediment and mobile fauna: evaluating and forecasting consequences of unavoidable modifications of native habitats. Coast. Eng. 52, 1027–1051 (2005).Article

Google Scholar

Firth, L. B. et al. Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Review, Vol. 54 (eds Hughes, R. N. et al.) 189–262 (Taylor & Francis, 2016).Heery, E. C. et al. Identifying the consequences of ocean sprawl for sedimentary habitats. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 492, 31–48 (2017).Article

Google Scholar

Bishop, M. J. et al. Effects of ocean sprawl on ecological connectivity: impacts and solutions. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 492, 7–30 (2017).Article

Google Scholar

Yap, W. Y. & Lam, J. S. L. 80 million-twenty-foot-equivalent-unit container port? Sustainability issues in port and coastal development. Ocean Coast. Manage. 71, 13–25 (2013).Article

Google Scholar

Zhu, G. et al. Land reclamation pattern and environmental regulation guidelines for port clusters in the Bohai Sea, China. PLoS ONE 16, e0259516 (2021).Article

CAS

Google Scholar

Wang, N. et al. Transitions and suggestions for China’s coastal port reclamation policies. Ocean Coast. Manage. 236, 106532 (2023).Article

Google Scholar

Lloyd’s List. One Hundred Ports 2021. Available at: https://lloydslist.maritimeintelligence.informa.com/-/media/lloyds-list/images/top-100-ports-2021/top-100-ports-2021-digital-edition.pdf (Accessed July 2023).Martín-Antón, M. et al. Review of coastal land reclamation situation in the world. J. Coastal Res. 75, 667–671 (2016).Article

Google Scholar

Notteboom, T. E. & Rodrigue, J. P. Port regionalization: towards a new phase in port development. Marit. Policy Manag. 32, 297–313 (2005).Article

Google Scholar

Felsenstein, D., Lichter, M. & Ashbel, E. Coastal congestion: simulating port expansion and land use change under zero-sum conditions. Ocean Coast. Manage. 101, 89–101 (2014).Article

Google Scholar

Czermański, E. et al. Preconditions of new container terminal location in the Maritime Spatial Planning framework. A case study for the Central Port Concept in Gdańsk. Mar. Policy 130, 104585 (2021).Article

Google Scholar

Pekel, J. F. et al. High-resolution mapping of global surface water and its long-term changes. Nature 540, 418–422 (2016).Article

CAS

Google Scholar

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). Annual container port throughput, 2010–2020. Available at: https://unctadstat.unctad.org/wds/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=13321 (Accessed February 2023).Dronkers, J., et al. Strategies for adaptation to sea level rise. Report of the IPCC Coastal Zone Management Subgroup: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 1990). Available at: http://papers.risingsea.net/IPCC-1990-Strategies-for-Adaption-to-Sea-Level-Rise.html (Accessed July 2023).Bugnot, A. B. et al. Current and projected global extent of marine built structures. Nat. Sustain. 4, 33–41 (2021).Article

Google Scholar

Floerl, O. et al. A global model to forecast coastal hardening and mitigate associated socioecological risks. Nat. Sustain. 4, 1060–1067 (2021).Article

Google Scholar

Jouffray, J. B. et al. The blue acceleration: the trajectory of human expansion into the ocean. One Earth 2, 43–54 (2020).Article

Google Scholar

Glavovic, B. C., et al. Cross-Chapter Paper 2: Cities and settlements by the sea. In: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Pörtner, H.-O., et al., eds.). p. 2163–2194 (Cambridge University Press, 2022).Miola, A., Marra, M. & Ciuffo, B. Designing a climate change policy for the international maritime transport sector: Market-based measures and technological options for global and regional policy actions. Energy Policy 39, 5490–5498 (2011).Article

Google Scholar

Becker, A. et al. Climate change impacts on international seaports: knowledge, perceptions, and planning efforts among port administrators. Clim. Change 110, 5–29 (2012).Article

Google Scholar

da Veiga Lima, F. A. & de Souza, D. C. Climate change, seaports, and coastal management in Brazil: An overview of the policy framework. Reg. Stud. Mar. Sci. 52, 102365 (2022).

Google Scholar

Becker, A. et al. A method to estimate climate-critical construction materials applied to seaport protection. Glob. Environ. Change 40, 125–136 (2016).Article

Google Scholar

Becker, A., Hippe, A. & Mclean, E. L. Cost and materials required to retrofit US seaports in response to sea level rise: a thought exercise for climate response. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 5, 44 (2017).Article

Google Scholar

Program for the Study of Developed Shorelines (PSDS). Beach Nourishment Viewer. Available at: https://beachno.wcu.edu/ (Accessed July 2023).United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Sand, Rarer than One Thinks (UNEP Global Environmental Alert Service (GEAS), 2014). Available at: https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/8665 (Accessed July 2023).United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Sand and sustainability: 10 strategic recommendations to avert a crisis. (GRID-Geneva, United Nations Environment Programme, 2022). Available at: https://www.unep.org/resources/report/sand-and-sustainability-10-strategic-recommendations-avert-crisis (Accessed July 2023).Bendixen, M. et al. Time is running out for sand. Nature 571, 29–31 (2019).Article

CAS

Google Scholar

Liu, Z., Schindler, S. & Liu, W. Demystifying Chinese overseas investment in infrastructure: port development, the Belt and Road Initiative and regional development. J. Transp. Geogr. 87, 102812 (2020).Article

Google Scholar

Yang, Z. et al. China’s investment in African ports: spatial distribution, entry modes and investor profile. Res. Transport. Bus. Manag. 37, 100571 (2020).Article

Google Scholar

McBride, J., Berman, N., & Chatzky, A. China’s massive belt and road initiative. Council on Foreign Relations (2 February 2023). Available at: https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/chinas-massive-belt-and-road-initiative (Accessed July 2023).OpenStreetMap. Available at: https://www.openstreetmap.org/about (Accessed July 2023).Zhu, W., Yan, J. & Yu, G. Vacuum preloading method for land reclamation using hydraulic filled slurry from the sea: a case study in coastal China. Ocean Eng. 152, 286–299 (2018).Article

Google Scholar

Sengupta, D., & Lazarus, E. D. Data for “Rapid seaward expansion of seaport footprints worldwide” [dataset]. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7674075 (2023).Download referencesAcknowledgementsThe authors thank the editors and two reviewers for their constructive comments that improved the manuscript, and gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Leverhulme Trust (to E.D.L.; RPG-2018-282), the UKRI Natural Environment Research Council (to E.D.L.; NE/X011496/1), and the British Society for Geomorphology (to D.S.; BSG-2022-21).Author informationAuthors and AffiliationsPlymouth Marine Laboratory, Plymouth, UKDhritiraj SenguptaEnvironmental Dynamics Lab, School of Geography & Environmental Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UKDhritiraj Sengupta & Eli D. LazarusAuthorsDhritiraj SenguptaView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in

PubMed Google ScholarEli D. LazarusView author publicationsYou can also search for this author in

PubMed Google ScholarContributionsD.S.: conceptualisation; data curation; formal analysis; investigation; methodology; visualisation; and writing. E.D.L.: data curation; formal analysis; investigation; methodology; visualisation; writing; project administration; and supervision.Corresponding authorsCorrespondence to

Dhritiraj Sengupta or Eli D. Lazarus.Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Communications Earth & Environment thanks Jasper Verschuur and Austin Becker for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editors: Martina Grecequet and Joe Aslin. A peer review file is available.

Additional informationPublisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.Supplementary informationPeer Review FileRights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissionsAbout this articleCite this articleSengupta, D., Lazarus, E.D. Rapid seaward expansion of seaport footprints worldwide.

Commun Earth Environ 4, 440 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023-01110-yDownload citationReceived: 07 March 2023Accepted: 14 November 2023Published: 27 November 2023DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023-01110-yShare this articleAnyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:Get shareable linkSorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.Copy to clipboard

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

CommentsBy submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Download PDF

Explore content

Research articles

Reviews & Analysis

News & Comment

Collections

RSS feed

About the journal

Aims & Scope

Journal Information

Open Access Fees and Funding

Journal Metrics

Editors

Editorial Board

Calls for Papers

Referees

Editorial Values Statement

Editorial policies

Conferences

Contact

Publish with us

For authors

Language editing services

Submit manuscript

Search articles by subject, keyword or author

Show results from

All journals

This journal

Advanced search

Quick links

Explore articles by subject

Find a job

Guide to authors

Editorial policies

Communications Earth & Environment (Commun Earth Environ)

ISSN 2662-4435 (online)

nature.com sitemap

About Nature Portfolio

About us

Press releases

Press office

Discover content

Journals A-Z

Articles by subject

Protocol Exchange

Nature Index

Publishing policies

Nature portfolio policies

Open access

Author & Researcher services

Reprints & permissions

Research data

Language editing

Scientific editing

Nature Masterclasses

Research Solutions

Libraries & institutions

Librarian service & tools

Librarian portal

Open research

Recommend to library

Advertising & partnerships

Advertising

Partnerships & Services

Media kits

Branded

content

Professional development

Nature Careers

Nature

Conferences

Regional websites

Nature Africa

Nature China

Nature India

Nature Italy

Nature Japan

Nature Korea

Nature Middle East

Privacy

Policy

Use

of cookies

Your privacy choices/Manage cookies

Legal

notice

Accessibility

statement

Terms & Conditions

Your US state privacy rights

Close banner

Email address

I agree my information will be processed in accordance with the Nature and Springer Nature Limited Privacy Policy.

Close banner

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox.

i.1 – Defining Seaports | Port Economics, Management and Policy

Port Economics, Management and Policy

A comprehensive analysis of the port industry

HOME

CONTENTS

I. PORTS & MARITIME SHIPPING

II. CONTEMPORARY PORTS

III. PORT TERMINALS

IV. PORT GOVERNANCE

V. PORT COMPETITION

VI. PORT PERFORMANCE

VII. PORT POLICIES & DEVELOPMENT

VIII. PORT MARKETS

IX. CASE STUDIES

GLOSSARY

MEDIA

你所不知道的波士顿—Seaport篇 - 知乎

你所不知道的波士顿—Seaport篇 - 知乎切换模式写文章登录/注册你所不知道的波士顿—Seaport篇Grace-Zhang波士顿探秘：Seaport大概由于波士顿是美国文化发源地的原因，大多数人对这里的印象与历史、起源、文化底蕴相关，建筑也大部分以砖红色英伦风为主。但与Downtown隔着一道窄窄海峡的Seaport区域，却像是另一个世界。这里鳞次栉比的现代建筑极富设计感，玻璃墙面映射着新兴文明的繁荣，仿若一座崭新的城市一般。Seaport区毗邻金融区和要塞岬海峡历史街区，面朝大海，地理位置优越，并且飞速发展，已经成为波士顿首屈一指的新中心。同时，这里也是波士顿核心区仅存的可整体开发土地，与CBD、洛根国际机场三者共同组成了波士顿核心三角，距离CBD仅1公里。其实早在20世纪中叶，Seaport海港区是基本陷入衰退和废弃的地方。随着政府的“城南行动计划”规划引发麻州城市建设的新热潮，极大地促进了经济的复苏。Seaport逐渐成为集创业工作、居家生活和休闲娱乐为一体的多功能城市社区，即Innovation District，是迅速成长的波士顿南海滨创新区的中心。近年来，Seaport正在转型为尖端科技公司汇聚地，成为波士顿大公司首选。GE通用电气、PwC普华永道、BCG波士顿咨询、福泰制药公司、锐步等都纷纷落座于此。除了各大科技巨头，Seaport区的艺术氛围也很足。The Institute of Contemporary Art当代艺术院，用于展示许多著名当代艺术作品。Seaport World Trade Center则是新英格兰国际活动的焦点，提供国际贸易和商业会议，展览等活动最大的区域场馆之一。Seaport的餐厅和这片区域一样，充满现代化的恢弘与对细节的精细把控，加上遥望Downtown的无敌海景，无疑是波士顿独具特色的用餐好去处。在这里，你能享受到美食届的奥斯卡奖——James Beard奖项获得者Barbara Lynch、Ming Tsai和Joanne Chang等人制作出来的美食佳肴，多滋多样，应有尽有。发布于 2019-06-24 13:30波士顿赞同 1添加评论分享喜欢收藏申请

中国港口列表,中国港口大全-全球港口查询_港口代码查询-航隼帮货代网

航隼帮致力货运供需无缝对接网站首页求舱广场海运现舱运费查询产品服务国际快递企业黄页货代达人工具数据

物流资讯

交流圈子

会员中心

会员登录个人注册企业入驻

港口查询

世界港口

船公司

世界机场

航空公司

快递公司

海运航线

海关编码

FBA仓库

邮政编码

当前位置：首页>工具数据>世界港口列表>中国港口列表

中国港口列表基本港:[30]，港口总数量:[112]

航隼帮港口在线查询功能，为您搜索到112个中国港口，其中港口名带有标志的为中国主要港口，其他为偏港。即

中山、

深圳盐田、

上海洋山、

洋浦港、

厦门、

威海、

上海外高桥、

天津新港、

顺德、

深圳蛇口、

汕头、

上海、

钦州、

青岛、

宁波、

广州南沙、

南沙新港、

福州马尾、

连云港、

福州江阴、

为中国主要港口。港口详细信息请查看下表：

港口中文名

港口英文名

港口代码

所在航线

海运费

中山

zhongshan

CNZSN

中国航线

中山海运费

深圳盐田

yantian

CNYTN

中国航线

深圳盐田海运费

上海洋山

yangshan

CNYAN

中国航线

上海洋山海运费

洋浦港

yangpu

CNYPG

中国航线

洋浦港海运费

厦门

xiamen

CNXIA

中国航线

厦门海运费

威海

weihai

CNWEI

中国航线

威海海运费

上海外高桥

waigaoqiao

CNWGQ

中国航线

上海外高桥海运费

天津新港

tianjin

CNTJN

中国航线

天津新港海运费

顺德

shunde

CNSUD

中国航线

顺德海运费

深圳蛇口

shekou

CNSHE

中国航线

深圳蛇口海运费

汕头

shantou

CNSTO

中国航线

汕头海运费

上海

shanghai

CNSHA

中国航线

上海海运费

钦州

qinzhou

CNQZW

东南亚航线

钦州海运费

青岛

qingdao

CNQIN

中国航线

青岛海运费

宁波

ningbo

CNNBO

中国航线

宁波海运费

广州南沙

nansha

CNNSA

中国航线

广州南沙海运费

南沙新港

nansha new port

CNNSN

中国航线

南沙新港海运费

福州马尾

mawei

CNMAW

中国航线

福州马尾海运费

连云港

lianyungang

CNLYG

东南亚航线

连云港海运费

福州江阴

jiangyin,fuzhou

CNJGY

中国航线

福州江阴海运费

江门

jiangmen

CNJMN

中国航线

江门海运费

广州黄埔

huangpu

CNHPU

中国航线

广州黄埔海运费

黄埔旧港

huangpu old port

CNHPO

中国航线

黄埔旧港海运费

黄埔新港

huangpu new port

CNHPN

中国航线

黄埔新港海运费

福州

fuzhou

CNFUZ

中国航线

福州海运费

中国拓展阅读

中文名称：中国

英文名称：China

国家代码：cn

港口数量：112

中国港口主要包括：中国|(China)，位于东亚，是以华夏文明为源泉、中华文化为基础并以汉族为主体民族的多民族国家，通用汉语。中国人常以龙的传人、炎黄子孙自居，汉族又与其他少数民族被统称为“中华民族”。中国是世界四大文明古国之一，有着悠久的历史，距今约5000年前，以中原地区为中心开始出现聚落组织进而形成国家，后历经多次民族交融和朝代更迭，直至形成多民族国家的大一统局面。20世纪初辛亥革命后，君主政体退出历史舞台，共和政体建立。1949年中华人民共和国成立后，在中国大陆建立了人民代表大会制度的政体。中国疆域辽阔、民族众多，先秦时期的华夏族在中原地区繁衍生息，到了汉代通过文化交融使汉族正式成型，奠定了中国主体民族的基础。后又通过与周边民族的交融，逐步形成统一多民族国家的局面，中国文化渊远流长、……

会员信息

登录注册

中国相关文章

时间:2023-06-27 15:48:58非洲物流专线：中国出口加蓬货物运输方案（加蓬清关要求）

时间:2023-10-17 21:29:56非洲物流专线：中国出口加纳货物运输方案（加纳的清关要求）

时间:2023-11-20 10:16:01中国出发到莱索托海运该如何走？要多长时间？

时间:2023-06-28 14:19:35非洲物流专线：莫桑比克海运运输(怎么把中国货物运送到非洲莫桑比克？)

时间:2023-09-25 18:15:23海关总署公告2023年第102号（关于实施中国-塞尔维亚海关“经认证的经营者”（AEO）互认的公告）

时间:2023-08-04 13:41:26欧盟双反的意义及对中国的影响（如何应对欧盟双反措施对中国出口的影响）

时间:2024-01-25 12:58:23中国海运的办理及运输流程?

时间:2024-01-25 12:58:23中国海运集团和中集集团是一家公司吗?

时间:2024-01-25 12:58:23中国民营十大海运公司?

时间:2024-01-25 12:58:23中国六大海运基港

时间:2024-01-25 12:58:23中国海运三大巨头是谁?

时间:2024-01-25 12:58:23中国到俄罗斯海运标准?

时间:2024-01-25 12:58:23中国十大海运公司排名?

时间:2024-01-25 12:58:23中国远洋海运集团的优势?

时间:2024-01-25 12:58:23中国海运到加拿大需要多长时间价格怎样?

时间:2024-01-25 12:58:23远洋集团与中国远洋海运集团是什么关系?

您当前正在浏览港口查询，

这里收集了全球基本所有的港口数据，包括港口中英文、港口线路、港口地图位置及详细的港口介绍！

您可以通过上方查询框输入港口中文名称，港口英文名称，国家中文名称，国家英文名称，国家简码进行海运港口查询，也可以通过航线、国家分类进行查询港口，如果数据有误，请联系平台的管理员进行反馈，谢谢支持航隼帮！

- 平台介绍 - VIP服务 - 服务协议 - 隐私说明 - 联系我们 - 站长地图 - 交流圈子 - 货代词典 - 广告设置 - 全站搜索 - 网址导航 - 展会信息 -

合作/建议电话:18029259151 Email:hsbcs@chantoos.com工信部备案:粤ICP备2023016857号-1 粤公网安备 44060602002471号

免责声明：若本站所使用内容侵犯了相关权利人的知识产权，请联系QQ:461894667采取删改处理！

物流工具

世界港口

船公司

世界机场

航空公司

快递公司

海运航线

海关编码

FBA仓库

邮政编码

Just a moment...

a moment...Enable JavaScript and cookies to conti

Follow

tokenpocket钱包app下载网址|seaport

tokenpocket钱包app下载网址|seaport

Pixel Federation - players to players

seaport_百度百科

SEAPORT中文(简体)翻译：剑桥词典

区别辨析harbour、port、wharf、pier与seaport - 田间小站

温州港_百度百科

Rapid seaward expansion of seaport footprints worldwide | Communications Earth & Environment

i.1 – Defining Seaports | Port Economics, Management and Policy

你所不知道的波士顿—Seaport篇 - 知乎

中国港口列表,中国港口大全-全球港口查询_港口代码查询-航隼帮货代网

Just a moment...

最近的新闻

您可能喜欢的文章

im钱包官方下载安装|sdfs

苹果版Bitpie最新版app|shel

比特派不交易怎么锁定账号

比特派被盗怎么找回微信

比特派子钱包怎么转账的

比特派怎么接受多签邀请

比特派地址授权怎么弄