ArticlePDF Available

Waterfront redevelopment and territorial integration in Le Havre (France) and Southampton (UK): Implications for Busan, Korea


Abstract and Figures

This paper proposes common directions of waterfront redevelopment in Korea through a qualitative approach by interpreting the relation between waterfront area and the overall structure of the port city in Europe. It argues that the more a redevelopment project is integrated to the structure of the city, the more it becomes successful in terms of attractiveness for both citizens and businesses. The findings provide many implications for Busan waterfront redevelopment. The direction of waterfront redevelopment is believed to be induced from the internal and external forces that are coincidentally in juncture. Drastic changes in the regional environment have exerted impacts on specific port cities, resulting in specific trajectories in different regions of the world. In order to respond to those changes, new policies are implemented while city and port enhance their mutual cohesion and increase their overall competitiveness. Busan waterfront redevelopment should not copy other cases of waterfront redevelopment. Its waterfront redevelopment shall not neglect dynamics of port competition and its connection with the city's needs and structure.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Waterfront redevelopment and territorial integration in Le Havre (France)
and Southampton (UK): implications for Busan, Korea
Published in: Ocean Policy Research 21(1), 127-156
César Ducruet1 & Sung Woo Lee2
연구는 유럽의 항만도시에 대한 친수공간 개발사업의 차이점들을 지역통합모델
관점에서 분석하여 도시특성에 맞는 바람직한 친수공간 개발 방향을 제안하고자
하였다. 르와브르시(프랑스) 사우스샘턴(영국) 다른 친수공간 개발패턴과 공간적
통합과정 설명을 통해 대규모 친수공간 개발이 임박한 우리나라 친수공간 개발의
시사점을 찾아보고자 한다. 주요 발견내용은 항만과 도시기능의 충돌을 고려하여
공간에 대한 충분한 고민과 연구와 함께 공간적인 통합, 역사적인 통합, 기능적인 통합,
문화적인 통합계획이 필요하다. 이는 새로운 친수공간과 기존 도시 혹은 항만공간과의
충돌을 방지하여 항만과 도시, 구시가지와 신시가지의 유기적 연결이 가능해 지기
때문이다. 또한 항만도시별 특성에 맞는 친수공간 개발의 중요성을 강조하였다.
Busan, Le Havre, Southampton, Territorial Integration, Waterfront redevelopment
1 Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements (KRIHS)
1591-6 Gwanyang-dong, Dongan-gu, Anyang-si, Gyeonggi-do 431-712 Republic of Korea
Tel. +82 (0) 31-380-0183 / Fax +82 (0) 31-380-0482 / Email:
2 Korea Maritime Institute (KMI)
1027-4 Bangbae-3 dong, Suam B/D, Seocho-gu, Seoul, Korea
Tel: (82)-2-2105-2830, Fax: (82)-2-2105-2839/ E-mail:
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
Author manuscript, published in "Ocean Policy Research 21, 2 (2006) 127-156"
1. Introduction
Recent trends involving logistics integration, port area expansion and extended hinterland in
the port and maritime industry have redefined the functional role of port cities within supply
chains. As a result of logistics integration and extended hinterland, many load center ports are
focused on inland terminals and transport network to preserve their attractiveness and to fully
exploit potential economies of scale against their rival ports in general perspective
(Notteboom and Rodrigue, 2005), while developing distriparks, logistic centers and free trade
zones around the port area. As well, the surrounding city is affected by port dynamics,
because of the economical and spatial interaction between port and city, but also tries to
develop its own attractivity, based on non-marine initiatives. Waterfront redevelopment lies at
the core of these two trends port and urban dynamics -, aiming at increasing the economy
and living environment as a whole instead of the sole port activity, which has become less
profitable to local communities.
The question whereas there is a regional specificity of port-city relationships has been
recently discussed through international comparison at a world level (Ducruet, 2005), about
Europe and Asia (Ducruet, 2004; Ducruet and Jeong, 2005) and among Asian hub port cities
(Lee, 2005), using mostly quantitative methods. If global and regional factors become
recognized in the process of port-city linkages (Lee et al., 2007) and waterfront
redevelopment (Hoyle, 2000), there are still few studies comparing the internal organization
of port cities as revelatory of global and regional change from a crossed urban and port
Having the aforementioned in mind, this paper proposes to introduce a spatial model of the
European port city through the concept of “territorial integration”, defined by Brunet (1997)
as a process “connecting, supporting interrelationships and reducing disrupts and distances
between elements which, however, keep their own identity (…) An integrated territory
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
corresponds to a number of places correctly linked with each other and with decision centers;
all its parts are correctly irrigated with services, goods, information, labor facilities ;
products of any kind efficiently drained and redistributed”. Generally used to depict regional
integration, it can also be applied to the local level, by looking at the level of combination of
different urban and transport functions. Thus, this paper proposes direction of waterfront of
Korea through a qualitative approach so as to interpret the relation between waterfront
redevelopment and the overall structure of the port city in European cities. It argues that the
more a redevelopment project is integrated to the structure of the city, the more it becomes
successful in terms of attractivity for both citizens and businesses. Inversely, the low spatial
integration (resulting from cultural, political, economical factors) of the projects puts a threat
on its attractivity and relevance for the whole local community. This approach is original
compared to previous ones based on maritime identity in cultural geography (Brocard, 1996),
political science (Fouilland, 2001) and social geography (Hoyle, 1995). Moreover, it allows a
comparative approach, while most previous works privileged one case study only, and gives
suggestions of waterfront redevelopment to the Busan case.
First section brings out the phenomenon of conflict of global and local force in port cities. In
the second section, it carries out a literature review of spatial models related to port cities in
general, followed by the European model itself. Then, the model is applied to Le Havre and
Southampton, which face similar aspects with Busan: proximity to a global city (Paris,
London, Seoul) and to a major sea lane (English Channel, Asian corridor). The application of
the model aims at showing the varying successfulness of territorial integration regarding
waterfront redevelopment in the two European cities, before addressing some implications
about Busan case.
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
2. Conflict of local and global forces in port cities
Globalization has influenced urban spatial structure as well as the growth of the port through a
rapid increase of exports and imports and the advance of port technology and operation in port
cities. The rise of hub port cities is by all means its product. In this context, Hambleton et al.
(2002) mention that globalization encompasses an enormous range of activities and is
performed by a revolution in transportation and communication. The revolution has not only
shrunk time and contracted space, but has also made transmissions across national boundaries
breathtakingly cheap. The revolution stemming from globalization allows countries and cities
that are far apart to be closely connected. A few hub port cities also become global cities. As a
result of the growth of port activities, their other industries and urban economies, have rapidly
grown. However, these cities still have not identified the factors that affect both urban and
port areas in terms of symbiosis.
A port faces with a variety of pressures, whose two sources are (i) outer effects from global
forces (e.g., globalization, containerization and intermodalism) and (ii) inner effects from
local forces (e.g., post-industrialization and post-modernism). These forces are altering port
and city development and interaction. Thus, the spatial pattern of port businesses and
operations, in a number of countries, increasingly reflect this interrelationship through the
creation of intra- and inter-port competition at local, regional and global scales, mainly related
to port reforms. This in turn pushes urban redevelopment trends towards port (de)
concentration (Hayuth, 1981).
In this respect, various studies dealing with port growth patterns in both developing and
developed countries have been proposed on the port side (Wang, 1998). Others on the urban
side have discussed urban redevelopment policies in obsolete port areas under post-
industrialized trends (Gordon, 1997; Marshall, 2001).
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
A number of hub ports are facing similar problems (i.e., space limitation and traffic
congestion) as shown in Figure 1 under the influence of the global and local forces, as
mentioned by Notteboom (1997, p. 100): "diseconomies of scale in some load centres emerge
in the form of a lack of space for expansion and limited foreland or hinterland accessibility".
Thus, the efficient management of peripheral port areas is important for such port cities.
Figure 1 illustrates the relational mechanism between port and city and the potential role of
their common interface.
3. A spatial model of the European port city
3.1 General trends
European port cities are part of a continental system of ports and cities. With the combination
of globalization on one side, which affects both ports and cities, and localization or
regionalization on the other side, which shows the emergence of an integrated European
Given the spatial pattern of European settlement, often described as a core-periphery pattern
with the „blue banana‟ at the centre and its surrounding areas, it is very difficult for European
port cities to be both big ports and big cities. It means that port and urban activities are
spatially distributed according to a gradient of centrality and nodality. As showed in Figure 2,
a “ring” of peripheral metropolises is characterized by important urban functions (primate
capital cities) and secondary port functions (ro-ro, shortsea and ferry services), from Dublin to
Saint-Petersburg in the North, and from Lisbon to Istanbul in the South. Another “ring” is
made of gateways, where port function if very important for the local economy, which is often
dependent on trade and industrial activities, from Le Havre to Hamburg in the North, and
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
from Valencia to Trieste in the South. Finally, the last “ring” is made of inland metropolises:
Paris-Lyon-Vienna-Berlin, defined by a full range of activities.
This gradient is an important factor to explain the diverse importance of waterfront
redevelopment. Compared to the maritime cities, gateways have to sustain an important port
and logistics function and are likely to redevelop their wastelands “for new port uses”
(Charlier and Malezieux, 1997) rather than for strictly commercial and non-port purposes.
The city size is another important factor to accompany the redevelopment, in terms of budget,
traffic congestion and lack of space. The strategy of big cities is to maintain and/or increase
their position within the network of global cities, while smaller cities will face the
contradiction of specialization: how can they both take the advantage of being a port city and
manage to diversify their economy?
A recent study (IRSIT, 2004) on European port cities has showed that 28 among 39 cities
have wastelands close to the CBD due to the shift of port activities, with Figure 3 as an
example of the results. Most of wastelands constitute large areas (100 hectares as a mean
value) and the importance of wastelands “seems to be more related to the attractiveness of the
port than to its overall size”.
This study distinguishes between the cities where wastelands have been reintegrated in the
urban structure (e.g. Barcelona, Hamburg) and those where wastelands are still conflicting
areas (e.g. Marseilles). Among 73 cities studied, 51 declare to be involved in redevelopment
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
projects at the port-city interface, but 7 have no project (Wilhelmshaven, Felixstowe, Riga,
Tallinn, Cagliari, Gioia Tauro and Nice) and others did not specify. The surface of the
reconversion project varies from 2 hectares in Zeebrugge to 520 hectares in Dublin, showing
that most industrial port cities are engaged in vast projects of redevelopment, particularly in
northern Europe.
3.2 Previous models of port cities
Although “the influence of the sea on the city plan is quite simple, as main streets converge
towards the waterfront” (Lavedan, 1936), “urban models almost never consider the effects of
port activities on the city‟s spatial structure” (Gleave, 1997).
The „Anyport‟ model of Bird (1963) proposes successive stages of port development from an
upstream urban site to a downstream / deepwater site, with implicit reference to London but
which can be found elsewhere in Europe and has been confirmed by the more recent spatial
model of the European estuary (Brocard et al., 1995). The models of Zaremba (1962) are very
dependent on the morphology of port cities, with the natural site as one of the main factors to
explain their industrial and urban development. Hudson‟s model (1996) is also dependent on
site issues, but through a more synthetic approach with only two types.
Other models are specific to one regional area, like the classical one of McGee (1967) on the
southeast Asian city, the colonial Indian city (Kosambi and Brush, 1988), extended
metropolitan region of Rodrigue (1997) from the case of Singapore, the one of Eliot (2003) on
the South Asia port metropolis and the other of Lee (2005) on the Asian hub port cities.
The diagrams of Frémont (1996) and Chédot (1999) bring the time dimension in the model, so
as to define trajectories of port development according to their insertion in three dimensions:
city, maritime networks and hinterland. It is also the task of Hoyle (1990) with its successive
stages of port-city separation and redevelopment. Unfortunately, the ones of Lecoquierre
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
(1999) on European ports and the chrono-spatial model of Marcadon and Comtois (1996) do
not have a spatial approach despite their relevance to explain the evolution of port-city
Spatial models of port-city relationships are numerous but remain relatively limited as tools
for international comparison, notably concerning waterfront redevelopment. Even the more
specific studies of Hayuth (1982) on the port-city interface, or the one of West (1989) on the
rent remain conceptual and are not applied to specific cases.
3.3 The European case
This paper proposes a general model of the port city in order to encompass the complexity of
internal dynamics taking place at the waterfront. It is applied to Le Havre and Southampton in
Europe so as to test its relevance. Three steps are proposed to build the model: the site, the
territorial dimension and the reticular dimension (Figure 4). Then, a synthesis is given before
its application (Figure 5).
A first step combines two types of sites (bay, estuary) so as not to limit the approach to one
particular physical configuration, and to lower the importance of the site compared to other
development factors (A). Three main stages of development are highlighted, showing the
gradual spread of port functions outside the urban core, together with industrialisation and
urbanisation processes. Two important factors intervene: the lack of space and the traffic
congestion (e.g. difficult transit of trucks through the city; technological change in the
maritime world).
With the combination of functions (B), particular territories emerge: the “sailortown”, of
which the “waterfront” is the area adjacent to the docks and the sea, the Maritime and
Industrial Development Area (MIDA) where industrial and port activities integrate. Thus, a
specific aspect of the port city pattern is the mixture of functions instead of a simple zoning,
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
highlighted by a “cut” between the port city itself (upper part) and the “anycity” (lower part).
These territories are often depicted by land use conflict and overlapping strategies of different
nature (municipal, port, private companies), which are accentuated when the areas belong to
different jurisdictions.
The reticular dimension (C) is based of a common use of transportation networks by several
players: daily commuting, trucking to and from the port and the city, river transport for
barging and other activities (recreational, crossing). The port city is a place where all transport
modes can be represented, compared to “anycity”: sea, port, river, air, road, rail and other
additional activities like storage, distribution, packaging and logistics. Intermodality is more a
potential, which effectiveness depends on the operational integration of different modes
within a transport chain, but it remains very complex to assess in reality. On one side, the lack
of efficient transfer brings a risk of congestion and loss of competitiveness; but on the other
side, an efficient interconnection has the risk to lower the local value-adding process. A
recurrent pattern seen in numerous cases is the formation of a major axis between the port city
and its surrounding region, that may cut the city from the port.
The general model is a simplified combination of these steps, insisting on the dichotomy
between “anycityand “port city”. This asymmetrical organization rules the daily life of the
city, and gives its major specific character when compared to “non-port cities”. The crossing
of “port/city” and “sea/land” enable to give a general principle of a port city‟s organization.
Other principles are: the reciprocal relationship between port traffic intensity and distance to
the urban core, the concentration of terrestrial traffic along a major axis used for both
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
commuting, trucking and freight logistics (river, railway), and the emergence of a new
centrality on former docks, so as to value the waterfront and its outlying neighborhoods.
4. Le Havre and Southampton case study
4.1 General context of the two port cities
Le Havre and Southampton are two port cities of the English Channel, the densest sea of the
world in terms of maritime trade. Although Southampton dates back to medieval times, Le
Havre has been planned as a new port city at modern times (1517). They have in common to
be both commercial and passenger ports, with Le Havre being a main gateway to America
with giant liners, but the rise of aviation reduced this activity to some ferryports while it
sustained in Southampton for cruise services (Queen Mary 2). The two port cities were
bombed during WWII and faced similar steps of development since then: the rise of oil traffic
and the construction of remotely located oil berths (Fawley and Antifer), the development of
containerization and the prospects for new port development (Dibden Bay and Port 2000).
However, Port 2000 has started its operation in march 2006 while Dibden Bay project failed
to get recognition from central government. Finally, some major differences remain like the
type of port governance: Le Havre is an “autonomous port” (public administration controlled
by central government) while Southampton is managed by Associated British Ports, a private
company operating several ports in Great Britain. It is obvious but important to mention that
Le Havre is a maritime and river port (Seine estuary) at the mouth of a corridor to Paris while
Southampton has no navigable inland waters and is not connected to mainland Europe by
ferry links.
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
The two cities have developed very differently despite the apparent similarity of their
situation. They both face the advantages and constraints of being close to the national capital
(London and Paris, two global cities), but Southampton has a better position in the urban
system because it has no direct competitor before London or Bristol in the south (Portsmouth
being an industrial city and former naval port) while Rouen is keeping its position between Le
Havre and Paris as Normandy‟s regional capital (Brocard, 1994). It had direct effects on the
two city‟s economic structure: Le Havre remained an industrial city located in a rural area,
with a majority of low-skilled employees in big factories like automobile (Renault) and
chemicals (Total), shifted during the 1960s from the Paris capital region; Southampton
became a commercial and tertiary center during the shift of financial services and light
industries in the 1980s from London thanks to lower rental costs (Mason et al., 1990), better
economic attractivity and radial position in the transportation network (Monkhouse, 1964).
Due to their specific situation, they have started both in 1993 a strategy of “urban
networking” so as to cooperate with neighboring cities in terms of territorial development to
help addressing new projects, of which waterfront redevelopment (Ducruet, 2006).
4.2 Territorial integration and waterfront redevelopment in Le Havre and Southampton
4.2.1 The morphological factor
The two sites of the port cities bring interesting differences in terms of morphology and
potential development. As noticed by Zaremba (1962), whose case study is notably based on
Le Havre and Southampton among several other cases, Le Havre‟s site is characterized by
more advantages than for Southampton‟s, as showed in Table 1 and Figure 6. Then,
waterfront development projects will be dependent on two essential factors: the particular
morphology of the port city (1) and its economic identity as part of an urban network (2).
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
The application of the European port city model starts with Figure 7, so as to determine a
more precise land use pattern for the two port cities, using satellite images. In terms of overall
urban area pattern, Southampton has more developed than Le Havre thanks to its inland
position, while Le Havre has been blocked to the south by the river Seine. Although this
shows the limits of Zaremba‟s models to explain particular case studies, it confirms the
varying size of the two cities‟ interface, which is larger in Le Havre than in Southampton.
Then in Southampton, port areas and industries have been limited not only due to port
competition and the nature of activities, but also for morphological reasons. It also means that
there would be less wastelands in Southampton, as land has been less available in the past for
port and industrial development. Then, waterfront redevelopment is a less important topic in
Southampton than in Le Havre.
4.2.2 Territorial integration in Le Havre
In Le Havre, the port-city interface is a vast territory running from the seaside / museum
Malraux to the Vauban docks / entrance of the city, along the docks, warehouses and canals
that penetrate inland. In particular, the neighborhoods of Saint-Nicholas, Eure and Neiges are
symbols of the port-city interface in Le Havre, with old industrial architecture and abandoned
lands. Current projects include “Vauban-Gare”, to refresh the entrance and the city close to
old docks (hotels, logistic companies, chamber of commerce, concert hall and the new “center
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
for sea and sustainable development”). The main project, “Docks Vauban” follows the
redevelopment of the beach area (ancient houses and walkways) and the PIC URBAN project
(European funding) for the redevelopment of the southern parts of the city, adjacent to the
port. Its originality is the central situation of the project (entrance of the city, strategic for the
connection of the city and the port inland access) and its nature (multifunctional with a
preference to maritime-related activities, using warehouses along the docks that have been
abandoned since port activities shifted toward deep dea). The total project is estimated to cost
100M Euros, financed by private investors, on 66 square kilometers (of which 40 are for
commercial use). The accessibility is well organized both for public transport (bus lines,
several parking areas) and freight transport (trucks can use the main roads or bypass the city
entrance to the south without creating congestion).
Thus, the project can be said to participate to the general dynamic of the whole city, because it
is a part only of a global policy to rise Le Havre‟s status from a port industrial city to a
commercial maritime city.
4.2.3 Territorial integration in Southampton
The case of Southampton (UK) is by many ways very instructive about the possible failure of
waterfront redevelopment, caused by a lack of territorial integration. As a dynamic city of
Southern England, and a major UK port, Southampton faces the problem of all British cities:
the budget of the local authority is totally dependent from the central government. Moreover,
it is a medium-sized city (220,000 inhabitants) and also faces the constraints and advantages
to be close to a global city (London).
Then, Southampton tried to overcome its difficulties by launching ambitious projects of
waterfront redevelopment in the 1990s, as a means to reinforce its attractivity and to bring
additional budget from the private sector. Projects include the redevelopment of Ocean
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
Village, Town Quay and West Quays, very influenced by the mood for “postmodern
waterfronts” (Northcliffe et al. 1996). The content of the waterfront areas is mostly based on
consumption (fast-food, theaters, nightclubs, shopping malls, marinas and bars) without much
link with the maritime character of the city. It has even been said that the redevelopment
strategies of Southampton have been “mediocre” (Brunskill, 2001), given the poor urban
design brought by the planners to the privately funded projects.
As a result, the different projects remained separated from each other, both institutionally
(different developers) and spatially (southeast and southwest). Moreover, each redevelopment
(Ocean Village and Town Quay, on both sides of Southampton Waters) are not well planned
in terms of accessibility (few parking places and low bus coverage) and attractivity (most of
attractions have seen their frequentation decline in the recent years and many commercial
stores have closed). Thus, the content of the projects are mostly oriented towards mass
consumption (stores) and upper class (marinas), without being spatially integrated to the rest
of the city structure. The lack of spatial and economical integration (i.e. the West Quays
redevelopment was recently blamed by the central government for being too much
commercially-oriented and for surpassing the city‟s budget) led to a relative failure of the
whole waterfront redevelopment.
The relative failure of these projects to attract tourists and public frequentation raises a
number of questions. First, the short term strategy has focused on a poor qualitative content,
mostly made of commercial activities (fish and chips, bars) and recreational (nightclubs,
marinas, cinemas). Second, the projects are quite small and isolated a) from each other b)
from the rest of the city. Then, their frequentation has gradually declined until the recent
period, as Southampton inhabitants (e.g. students) preferred to stay in the city center which is
more lively and attractive. Another problem was the low car accessibility of the different
areas, and their poor urban design.
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
As a result, the central government has blamed Southampton City Council to have
overweighted its budget and used it for only its profits. It is an effect of a limited public
debate and discussion about what should be developed in this city. Moreover, the failure of
the new port project (Dibden Bay) of Southampton, condemned by the central government,
adds to the general mismanagement of the port city.
Then, some UK urbanists have started to argue in favour of the “redevelopment of the
redeveloped areas” which constitutes a dramatic loss of time and money. Their principal
argument is that the urban landscape and the integration of the projects within the whole city
should be improved, so as to erase the very limited content of the previous waterfront
4.3 Interpretation
This case study has used the concept of territorial integration applied to waterfront
redevelopment policies in two European port cities. It appears that despite the similar
situation and history of the cities, and despite the relative success of Southampton in the last
decades as a commercial city compared to the stagnating industrial character of Le Havre, the
evaluation of the projects‟ successfulness is in favor of the French port city.
Our main argument is verified, as based on the varying degree of interaction between the
redevelopment process and the entire city dynamic and structure as shown in Figure 8.
It means that Southampton‟s waterfront redevelopment was too much disconnected from the
city needs and structure, being the direct application of a “model” like the London Docklands
or the Boston examples. Without being integrated to the city area and economy, the project
cannot reach sufficient recognition towards companies and citizens, and then become useless
to the daily life of the city. It constitutes enormous wastes of money and land, especially
given the particular peninsular site of Southampton.
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
For Le Havre, although investment is private, the spirit of the planning project has respected
the city dynamics, economy and culture. It shall become a successful project but yet it is not
opened to the public (completion in 2008), what is a difficulty for comparing the two
achievements. Still, the way the projects was realized gives much argument about the way
waterfront redevelopment is led in France (see also Marseille “Euroméditerranée” Project
under completion which is also based on an interaction with the city structure). The
methodological approach using spatial models is not an end in itself. It helps to recognize the
degree of interaction between different functions and to address general trends in terms of
spatial homogeneity, disrupt and integration.
In conclusion, it can be said that waterfront redevelopment, in Europe and elsewhere, shall be
of four kinds:
- Economic integration: focus on the needs and lacks of the city economy, taking into
account its relative situation in its urban network (what are the specific functions
compared to other neighboring cities and how can redevelopment can value these
- Spatial integration: focus on the accessibility of the project area, at the level of the
whole agglomeration (prevent from congestion, divide public and freight flows)
- Cultural integration: focus on the link with the sea and the maritime function, so as
not to cut the redevelopment from its past.
- Historical integration: focus on the conservation of old port facilities and old
building in the CBDs so as to prevent disconnection from its past.
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
5. Implication for Busan waterfront redevelopment
5.1 Brief introduction
Having grown to be North Asia‟s hub ports, Busan has established itself as a top class
container port. It has excellent natural conditions for anchorage and a geographical location
that is a connection between Asia to both Japan and America for shipping lines (Figure 9). It
has also played an important role as a gateway for Korea‟s manufacturing industry and an
alternative transshipment platform to Japan (especially, since the Kobe earthquake in 1995).
Busan has a long history as a trade port dating back to 1407. However, the port has played an
important role in modern trading since it was colonized by Japan in 1910. After independence
from Japan in 1945, the port has grown rapidly. It has been greatly influenced by Korea‟s
economic structure in relation to export-based manufacturing industry. Thus, remarkable
growth has been recorded in a short period of time. It began to handle containers in 1970 with
only 5 thousand TEUs per annum, but it soon reached 2.3 million TEUs in 1990. Its traffic
increased by 322% in 10 years to reach 7.5 million TEUs by 2000. In 2005, it achieved a
throughput of 11.8million TEUs (Containerisation International Yearbook, various years).
Such evolution has made the port develop all around Busan bay, blocking the urban spaces
from reaching the seaside.
5.2 Territorial pressure
Busan is confronted with the big change resulting from conflict between local and global
forces. It is the opening of new port and the redevelopment of old port areas. The waterfront
redevelopment has to consider the particular growth of Busan (Figure 10).
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
Busan old port still has to handle a number of container cargoes (the capacity is about 600
million TEUs) above 20 years and a part of the port needs to be redeveloped as urban function
area. As a result, waterfront redevelopment is an important project for harmonizing space as
mentioned in European case. It should consider combination among port, old fishery market,
ferry and train terminals, and the other CBD functions. Another particular feature of Busan
compared to Le Havre and Southampton, like between Asia and Europe in general, is the
continued activity at the “old port” whereas it has totally stopped in European inner port
cities. Then, Busan has an additional pressure from the port side. Such pressure is illustrated
in the difficult passage of trucks through the city to and from the port (Frémont and Ducruet,
2005), which is compensated financially, but not spatially, by a container tax levied by the
municipal government (Kim et al., 2002). The lack of space for building a new waterfront is
also accentuated, compared to Europe, by the lack of abandoned areas: every area in Busan is
maximized in its utilization. There also one can recognize a particular feature of Asian port
cities: the high productivity rates at the terminals resulting from the lack of space.
Figures 11 and 12 show the principles of Busan‟s land use before assessing its implications
for waterfront redevelopment.
5.3 The international and national contexts
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
While other waterfront redevelopment cases in Asian port cities are backed by already
established global cities such as Hong Kong, Singapore, Tokyo, Shanghai, etc., it is not the
case for Busan.
Despite its important demographic size (4 million inhabitants), and its remarkable port
function (5th container port of the world for TEU throughput in 2005, 90% of Korea‟s port
throughput), it is not the core of Korea‟s economy. Seoul region concentrates about 96% of
the major public and private companies‟ headquarters (Hong, 1996). This enormous
concentration is a major constraint to attract strategic activities and diversify Busan economy,
and is an increasing trend despite the governmental efforts to deconcentrate the capital region.
Thus, a waterfront redevelopment project in Busan shall ask the question: how can it be a tool
to overcome the heavy weight and lock-in effect of the Korean urban system, and how can it
turn the maritime and port function into an advantage?
Another important condition for the success of Busan‟s waterfront redevelopment is to
overcome the drastic competition with other South Korean ongoing projects, such as Songdo
New City within the Incheon Free Economic Zone, Saemangeum tourism project in Jeolla
province, the New Administrative City (or ubiquitous city) under way especially close to
Daejeon and, especially, the plethora of free trade zones which are usually built between port
and urban areas for industrial purposes: customs free zones, free trade zones, free economic
zones, foreign exclusive and industrial complexes, foreign investment zones and the free
international city of Jeju.
In economic terms, the attraction of companies within the Busan waterfront project seems
hampered by this international and national context. Although Busan participates to the
national strategy of free zones, with Busan-Jinha Free Economic Zone and its Customs Free
Zone, it is far from being recognized as a leading location for investors.
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
6. Conclusion
This paper suggest to common direction of waterfront redevelopment through the different
point between two European waterfront redevelopments in terms of territorial integration. The
findings are given to many implication for Busan waterfront redevelopment. The direction of
waterfront redevelopment is believed to be induced from the internal and external forces that
are coincidentally in juncture at the same time. The drastic changes in the regional
environment have exerted impacts on specific port cities, causing them to evolve in a specify
way which is different from their counterparts in other regions of the world. In order to
respond to the changes, new policies are implemented and the city and port become more
cohesive and connect very close to each other to increase the competitiveness.
By reviewing and comparison of European cases, the waterfront redevelopment keeps role of
four kinds for achieving combination between local and global force, urban and port function
and old and new evolution, respectively:
- Economic integration: Busan has to integrate commercial and logistic functions as
economic cluster.
- Spatial integration: Busan has to connect between commercial and logistics zones
like port and FTZ, and commercial and transport zones like train platform and ferry
- Cultural integration: Busan has to maintain the cultural connection between
maritime function like fishery market, new commercial zone and CBD.
- Historical Integration: Busan has to conserve the historical entities coming from old
CBD and old port area.
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
With the above content in mind, Busan waterfront redevelopment does not copy to the other
cases of waterfront redevelopment in any countries. Its waterfront redevelopment has to
understand its situation in terms of port competition. It is also supposed to consider
connection from the city needs and structure. Without being integrated to the city area and
economy, the project cannot reach sufficient recognition towards companies and citizens, and
then become useless to the daily life of the city. It constitutes enormous wastes of money and
land, especially given the particular Busan waterfront redevelopment. What factors make and
increase Busan attractiveness, compared with domestic and international competitors?
Compared with competitors in Korea, waterfront is an important factor for increasing Busans
attractiveness. Therefore, considering port function in core urban area, Busan should
implement common planning document for the waterfront.
Anuman Interactive (2003) Planet Observer 2. ESRI France, CNES.
Bird, J. (1963) The Major Seaports of the United Kingdom. Hutchinson of London, London.
Brocard, M. (1994) Deux villes frontières portuaires: Le Havre et Southampton. La Revue
d’Ici 11, 8-12.
Brocard, M. (1996) L‟identité maritime des villes portuaires. Congrès International de
Géographie, La Haye, 10 août 1996.
Brunet, R. (1997) Territoires de France et d’Europe: Raisons de Géographe. Belin, Paris.
Brunskill, P. (2001) Urban design in Southampton. Quarterly Journal of the Urban Design
Group 78.
Charlier, J. and Malézieux, J. (1997) Les stratégies alternatives de redéveloppement portuaire
en Europe du nord-ouest, pp. 107-114 in: Baudouin, T., Collin, M. and Prelorenzo, C.
(Eds.), Urbanité des cités portuaires, L‟Harmattan, Collection „Maritimes‟.
Chédot, C. (1999) Diagramme triangulaire : une représentation de la trajectoire spatiale des
ports, pp. 165-173 in: Les Ports Normands, un Modèle ? Actes du Colloque Rouen Le
Havre, 28-29 mai 1998, Publications de l‟Université de Rouen.
Containerisation International, various years, Containerisation International Yearbook.
London, Emap Business Communications Ltd.
Ducruet, C. (2000) Le Chorotype de la Ville Portuaire: Concepts, Méthodes et Applications
en Europe Occidentale. Undergraduate Dissertation in Geography and Territorial
Planning, Le Havre University, 84 p.
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
Ducruet, C. (2004) The trans-scalar development of transportation hubs: a quantitative
comparison of European and East Asian container port cities in the 1990s.
18(2), Inha University, 171-199.
Ducruet, C. (2005) Approche comparée du développement des villes-ports à l‟échelle
mondiale: problèmes théoriques et méthodologiques. Cahiers Scientifiques du Transport
48(1), 59-79.
Ducruet, C. (2006) Benchmarking urban networking strategies in Europe: An application of
chorems to France and Great Britain. The Korea Spatial Planning Review 49, 3-24.
Ducruet, C. and Jeong, O. (2005) European Port-city Interface and its Asian Application.
Research Report n° 17, Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements, 143 p.
Eliot, E. (2003) Chorotype de la métropole portuaire d‟Asie du Sud. Mappemonde 69(1), 7-9.
Fouilland, B. (2001) A la Recherche de la Décision Urbaine. Aménager les Villes Portuaires:
Le Havre et Southampton. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation in Political Science, Institut
d‟Etudes Politiques de Paris, 3 tomes.
Frémont, A. (1996) Le port du Havre, un triangle magique? pp. 84-87 in: Atlas de l’Estuaire
de la Seine, Publications des Universités de Rouen et du Havre.
Frémont, A. and Ducruet, C. (2005) The emergence of a mega-port, the case of Busan, from
the local to the global. Tijdschrift voor Econ. En Soc. Geografie 96(4), 421-432.
Gleave, M.B. (1997) Port activities and the spatial structure of cities: the case of Freetown,
Sierra Leone. Journal of Transport Geography, 5(4), 257-275.
Gordon, D.L.A. (1997) Managing the changing political environment in urban waterfront
redevelopment. Urban Studies 34(1), 61-83.
Hambleton, R., Savitch, H.V. and Stewart, M. (Eds.) (2002) Globalism and Local Democracy:
Challenge and Change in Europe and North America. Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Hayuth, Y. (1981) Containerization and the load centre concept. Economic Geography 57,
Hayuth, Y. (1982) The port-urban interface: an area in transition. Area 14(3), 219-224.
Hong, S.W. (1996) Seoul: a global city in a nation of rapid growth, pp. 144-178 in: Lo, F.C.
and Yeung, Y.M. (Eds.) Emerging World Cities in Pacific Asia, Tokyo, New York &
Paris, United Nations University Press.
Hoyle, B.S. (1990) Introduction: beyond the waterfront, pp. 1-3 in: Hoyle, B.S. (Ed.) Port
Cities in Context: the Impact of Waterfront Regeneration, Transport Geography Study
Group, Institute of British Geographers.
Hoyle, B.S. (1995) A shared space: contrasted perspectives on urban waterfront
redevelopment in Canada. Town Planning Review 66(4), 345-371.
Hoyle, B.S. (2000) Global and local change on the port-city waterfront. Geographical Review.
90(3), 395-417.
Hudson, B.J. (1996) Cities on the Shore: the Urban Littoral Frontier. Pinter, 180 p.
IRSIT (2004) Les Villes Portuaires en Europe, Analyse Comparative. CNRS, GDR Libergeo
1559, Institut de Recherche en Stratégie Industrielle et Territoriale, CIRTAI, Université
du Havre, 168 p.
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
Kim, K.W., Kwack, K.S. and Kim, G.S. (2002) A study on the container tax collection of
Busan city, pp. 21-30 in: Proceedings of the 26th Annual Spring Meeting on Navigation
and Port Research, Busan, Korea Institute of Maritime and Fisheries Technology.
Kosambi, M. and Brush, J.E. (1988) Three colonial port cities in India. Geographical Review,
78(1), 32-47.
Lavedan, P. (1936) Géographie des Villes. Gallimard, N.R.F., Paris, 206 p.
Lecoquierre, B. (1999) Un modèle diachronique des ports de la Basse-Seine dans l‟espace
européen, pp. 227-230 in : Les Ports Normands, un Modèle ? Actes du Colloque Rouen
Le Havre, 28-29 mai 1998, Publications de l‟Université de Rouen.
Lee, S.W. (2005) Interaction Between City and Port in Asian Hub Port Cities. Unpublished
PhD Dissertation in Urban Planning, University of Seoul.
Lee, S.W., Song, D.W. and Ducruet, C. (2007) A tale of Asia‟s world ports: the spatial
evolution in global hub port cities. Geoforum (forthcoming).
Marcadon, J. and Comtois, C. (1996) Le modèle chrono-spatial appliqué aux villes portuaires
maritimes françaises et chinoises, pp. 171-183 in: La Ville Maritime, Temps, Espaces,
Représentations, Actes du Colloque de Brest, 9-10-11 juillet 1996, Université de Bretagne
Occidentale, 358 p.
Marshall, R. (2001) Waterfronts in Post-industrial Cities. Spon Press, London.
Mason, C., Pinch, S. and Witt, S. (1990) Flexible employment strategies in British industry :
evidence from the UK Sunbelt. Regional Studies 25(3), 207-218.
McGee, T.G. (1967) The Southeast Asian City: A Social Geography of the Primate Cities of
Southeast Asia. G. Bell & Sons.
Monkhouse, J.F. (1964) A Survey of Southampton and its Region. Southampton University
Press, Southampton.
Norcliffe, G., Bassett, K. and Hoare, T. (1996) The emergence of postmodernism on the urban
waterfront. Journal of Transport Geography 4(2), 123-134.
Notteboom, T. (1997) Concentration and load centre development in the European container
port system. Journal of Transport Geography 5, 99-115.
Notteboom, T. and Rodrigue, J.P. (2005) Port regionalization: towards a new phase in port
development. Maritime of Policy and Management 32(3), 297-313.
Reeves, P. (1989) Studying the Asian port city, pp. 29-53 in: Broeze, F. (Ed.), Brides of the
Sea: Port Cities of Asia from the 16th - 20th Centuries, University of Hawaii Press,
Rodrigue, J.P. (1994) Transportation and spatial development in the Singapore extended
metropolitan region. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 15(1), pp. 56-74.
Savitch, H.V. (1988) Post-Industrial Cities. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Vigarié, A. (1979) Ports de Commerce et Vie Littorale. Collection „Hachette Université‟, 496
West, N. (1989) Urban-waterfront developments: a geographic problem in search of a model.
Geoforum 20(4), 459-468.
Zaremba, P. (1962) Les principes du développement des villes portuaires. Académie
Polonaise des Sciences, Centre Scientifique de Paris, Fasc. n° 32.
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
Table 1: Advantages and constraints of Le Havre and Southampton’s morphology
Le Havre
a) The city keeps the whole coastal area for
its development
b) Port and urban areas are well integrated
and the public space along the river can be
developed for citizens
c) port and related industries are compactly
organized, that facilitates transport links
between city and port
d) this morphology allows to separate clearly
the city in two parts, one for residential and
working functions, one for leisure functions,
without representing a constraint to the port
a) city develops freely towards inland, as it is
not constrained by port areas
b) the port area between the sea and the city has
remained thin because of the lack of space
a) The link between the major city and the
satellite city (here Honfleur) is often difficult
b) The upstream growth of the port might
become an obstacle for land transportation,
because of overlapping areas and necessitates
to improve road links
c) The communication between the two river
banks lead to costly works like bridge or
tunnel because of the river
a) The peninsular situation forces the city to
develop on another bank using costly works
like bridges, what reduces its access to inland
through one direction only
b) The port is forced to shift on a scarce
remaining land along the peninsula so as to
reinforce its access to inland transportation
networks (rail, road)
Source: adapted from Zaremba, 1962.
Figure 1. Relational Mechanism between Port and City
Source: modified from Lee, 2005
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
Figure 2. Major ports and cities in Europe
Sources: Containerisation International; Helders, 2006
Figure 3. Size of some European waterfront redevelopment projects (Unit: Ha)
Le Havre
Tees & Hartlepoo l
Source: IRSIT, 2004
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
Figure 4: Building a spatial model of the European port city
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
Figure 5: Spatial model of the European port city
Figure 6: Zaremba’s models of Southampton (left) and Le Havre (right)
Source: adapted from Zaremba, 1962
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
Figure 7: Spatial pattern of Le Havre and Southampton
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
Figure 8: Synthesis of Le Havre and Southampton case study
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
Figure 9: Territorial layout of Busan port city
Source: adapted from Frémont and Ducruet, 2005.
Figure 10: Spatial pattern of Busan port city
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
Figure 11: Networks and nodes in Busan port city
Figure 12: A territorial model of Busan port city
halshs-00459369, version 1 - 24 Feb 2010
... Waterfronts have always been the catchment area of human socio-cultural life in port cities and they were evolving towards increasing porosity of their edges [1,2]. Due to the constant urbanization pressure on the one hand and the process of port functions' of migration towards the sea on the other [3][4][5][6][7], waterfronts constantly evolve, being usually transformed into new, active centers of port cities [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]. In the literature [17] the strong social impacts of the process of urban waterfront regeneration were identified. ...
Full-text available
The constant struggle with rising sea levels and flood hazards has resulted in the change of the paradigm in shaping urban waterfronts towards increasing their permeability and creation of urban blue spaces. The aim of the paper was to indicate a new approach in designing public spaces at the sea–land interface by presenting a comparative study of the design solutions used in case of the four selected case studies: the Sea Organs in Zadar (Croatia), Norwegian National Opera and Ballet in Oslo (Norway), the Coastal Public Sauna in Helsinki (Finland) and Tel Aviv’s Central Promenade (Israel). The studied examples take into account the permeability of waterfronts (understood as a feature of the edge between water–land consisting of being soft and permeable). The authors decided to use the case study method as the main approach, analyzing such elements as: the site’s location and urban context, features of urban and architectural design (with usage of graphic methods and a qualitative description), and the land–water edge type (defined according the existing typologies). The study proved, that in recent years the designers have started to replace the vertical quay walls, which create a “rigid” water–land border, with multi-level solutions having a high degree of permeability for water.
... social fabric,131,139 interaction,14,15,25,52,68,82 life,22,32,33,74,92 media,51,132,145,151 network,14,22 networking,22 product,81,84 socialization,31,40,46 South Asia,ix,13,26,141,152,157,159,162,167 spatial relationship,60,65 transformation,30,74,81 squatter settlement,66,68 stakeholder,69,71,73,146,154 streetscape,40,45,47,48 stupa,8,9,21,26,159 sustainable urban development,32 symbolism,134,135 symmetry,17,37 Taleju, 110, 135 Taleju Bhagwati temple, 110 tangible heritage, 64 Tansen, 133 Taulachhen Tole ,80,[87][88][89]7,9,12,21,42,110,124,151,163 third space,92,97 Tinkhya,106,See also Tundikhel tole,[11][12][13]16,22,80,89,90,105,106,136 town planning,5,25,27,133 traditional neighborhood,2,3,13,15,22 towns,ix,xi,[1][2][3][4]6,11,14,17,20,23,24,31,80,85,103 transformation,v,vii,x,xi,30,31,38,39,48,50,[53][54][55][56]58,59,62,67,[73][74][75][77][78][79][81][82][83][84][85]98,99,101,[103][104][105]108,118,126,127,151,155,165 Tripureshwor,108 Tundikhel,vi,[103][104][105][106][107][108][109][110][111][112][113][114][115][116][117][118][119][120][122][123][124][125][126][127][128]137,147,148,155,167 typology,3,8,10,15,17,62,64,83,84,98,156 UNESCO,45,86,146,152,156,158,163 urban block,5,19 change,x,xi,31,39,48,50,82 See also urban transformation condition,xi,30,38,45,48 culture,24,80 design,vii,2,5,17,52,68,71,74,99,104,105,116,127,167 development,vii,x,2,55,56,104,166 elements,10,11,20,43,86,95,96,103 expansion,80 fabric,11,37,53,55,56,80,81,83,136 form,5,7,11,13,[25][26][27]33,35,37,38,40,43,[47][48][49][50]55,81,86,157 governance,129,131,133,134,145,149,153,156,160 growth,x,80,81,[86][87][88]98,99,131,133,152,153,155,157,159,165,See also urban development heritage,33,49,95,131,158 image,35,See also city image life,1,2,25,46,82 management,38,130,145 neighborhood,2,3,11,15,21 pattern,7,10 planning,x,51,53,99,100,125,127,128,131,159, ix,2,5,[7][8][9]14,17,21,25,29,31,38,42,44,45,[48][49][50]79,81,[84][85][86]95,[98][99][100]104,120,122,126,[129][130][131][132][133]137,150,153,154 square,xi,2,10,12,13,15,17,18,25,[31][32][33]35,50,52,103 transformation,xi,2,31,33,45,79,83,100 urbanism,32,37,52,64,76,78,84,86,99,165 urbanization,31,50,63,64,85,131,[141][142][143]91 Vastupurusha Mandala,7 World Heritage List,86,152 Site,99,144,146,158,162 Yaksha Malla,5 Yamuna,59,75 ...
Full-text available
Contemporary urban development of Kathmandu Valley, the major urban centre of Nepal, has largely failed to deliver positive outcomes, with direct consequences on its public realm. While the problem demands effective management of urban growth and change, there is also a need to expand scholarly dialogues on the impact of urbanization on public space quality. This book responses to this need and aims to instigate a new debate on contemporary issues of public realm by engaging readers with the challenges of the ongoing transformation and management of public spaces. The book consists of six chapters written on a range of topics, covering both the traditional and contemporary public spaces. Chapter One reviews public realm in the traditional towns of the Kathmandu Valley and reinforces our current understanding of the provision and use of historic urban squares. Chapter Two takes the study on the historic urban squares into a new level by examining these public spaces in relation to contemporary city identity in the context of urban change. The third chapter examines the current transformation of historic riverfronts in the Kathmandu Valley, outlining the physical features and the cultural and religious activities taking place in the riverfronts from the perspective of the cultural landscape theory. Chapter Four is an analytical wrap up on the changing nature of the public spaces in the urban fringe of a historic town. Chapter Five presents the case study of a major civic space in Kathmandu, which is currently in dispute due to encroachment and has become a matter of serious concern among local architects and planners. The final chapter examines how Guthi as a traditional institutional setup for civic governance may be reconsidered to devise a new model for public space governance at present.
... Such evidence has been confirmed through a number of models and case studies about the physical and functional separation between ports and cities in the last decades (Bird, 1963;Hoyle, 1989;Murphey, 1989;Norcliffe et al., 1996). Other studies have demonstrated the temporal and geographic variability of such a phenomenon (Brocard, 1988;Ducruet and Lee, 2006;Lee et al., 2008;Ducruet and Itoh, 2016), echoing earlier critiques of the central place theory ignoring the port function, using the concept of gateway (Burghardt, 1970;Bird, 1973). In Europe, port cities were found to be demographically larger (Vleugels, 1969) and economically richer (Lever, 1995) than other cities. ...
... El Puerto de Rio de Janeiro pasó por un redimensionamiento de sus actividades y sus flujos, lo que está vinculado con las consecuencias de la privatización y especialización de terminales. Ducruet & Lee (2006) interpretan el conflicto entre los puertos y ciudades de Europa y Asia resaltando la interrelación de las transformaciones globales y locales. Actualmente, pocas ciudades asumen la condición globalizada de concentración de la actividad portuaria (hub ports). ...
Full-text available
RESUMEN-El objetivo de este artículo es describir el proceso de maritimización utilizando el concepto de trayectoria sociotécnica de la bahía de Pasaia desde el siglo XVI, fecha a partir de la cual se dispone de cartografía, hasta la época actual gracias al desarrollo de los sistemas de información geográfica (SIG), que permiten situar los lugares con precisión, por medio de mapas elaborados a partir de fuentes históricas cartográficas y documentales existente sobre la materia. En este ejercicio, se plantea distinguir los eventos de las rupturas para producir una síntesis geohistórica a través de la elaboración de mapas con el propósito de estudiar la huella portuaria en un territorio a lo largo del tiempo. La metodología empleó la observación, a través de los mapas antiguos, las distintas etapas de cambio y mutación de la relación ciudad-puerto y medición de este proceso en su dimensión espacial. Este enfoque permite cuestionar el papel de un puerto en el proceso de elaboración territorial y, al final, interrogarse sobre la legitimidad de los puertos en decadencia a seguir ejerciendo una autoridad sobre el desarrollo territorial.
The paper proposes a theoretical model of container terminals and container port development, based on the life cycle theory, threshold theory and catastrophe theory, and in references to Kuznets' swings (interpreted as waves of infrastructural investments), and Kondratiev long economic waves. The aim of this model is to explain the development process of a container terminal and a port within one technological generation, as well as in intergenerational configuration, and relate it to the migration process of container terminals in the scale of a port-city urban area. Then, the applicability of this model was checked in the case of the container ports in Gdynia and Gdańsk (Poland). The analysed evolution process of ports of Gdynia and Gdańsk conforms with the proposed theoretical model, proving that the migration of container terminals within these ports is a part of their natural process of evolution, being a consequence of their threshold development and location splitting. Considering the physical location of development investments within the container ports of Gdańsk and Gdynia, it was noticed that there are two basic directions of migration of container terminals. One is the migration of the port's main container activity (core terminal or terminals), being a result of a generational change taking place after overcoming the maturity point. The second type of migration is connected with dispersion of port development investments in the increasingly distant port hinterland, caused by the need of the life extension of terminals within one technological generation. In an analogy to the processes of development of living organisms, we can treat the migration of terminal outsourced functions as a “vegetative” increase, being an attempt to extend the life of the terminal, while the migration of the core terminal within the port area (erecting a new generation terminal) can be treated as “generative” growth.
European cities, like most of the world’s cities, are to some degree dependent upon maritime transport for their development, as more than 90% of seaborne trade volume is carried by sea. This also applies to Europe’s external trade. While cities possessing ports play a crucial role in the distribution of goods traffic in such a context, the maritime influence exerted by global trade on non-port, inland cities have not been so far studied from a combined sea-land perspective. The results show a differentiation of the European territory in terms of modal specialisation, core-periphery, polycentricity, and intermodal centrality/accessibility. We map the maritime specialisation of European cities in recent decades, showing that combined sea-land centrality has stable but different relationships according to the type of place considered. The conclusion discusses the outcomes of our results for policy and further research on coupled networks and urban studies.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
All facets of present day society are being subjected to an ever increasing rise in uncertainty. Seaports are no exception. As complex clusters of industrial activity and gateways for distribution networks, they are vulnerable to external and internal shocks disrupting supply chains. This in turn, forces stakeholders to ponder on “sustainable development,” and to foster adaptive capabilities and creating opportunities. The development and further substantiation of the notion of ‘resilience’ underlined the need to study how clusters and networks (should) respond to major disturbances. In this paper, we scrutinize the concept of port resilience by revisiting the Panarchy and adaptive cycle theorem of Holling (2001). Our objective is to determine if this framework can be molded towards port development and to investigate particular cases of poverty and rigidity traps or collapsing Panarchies. The paper is structured as follows: the first section outlines the literature surrounding Panarchy and adaptive cycles and links it to ports. The second section provides a short overview of the general theorem and explains the value for maritime research. The final part of the paper concludes with a particular set of cases applying the framework to waterfront redevelopment and port sustainability challenges.
Full-text available
This paper explores the impact of city-port relations on the spatial structure of housing prices, an issue common to many European cities. We focus on measuring and understanding the mechanisms induced by the different historical phases of these relationships: port activities, port wastelands, and led-gentrification (urban renewal). The selected case, on the one hand, has the advantage of an ambitious and fast implementation, and, on the other hand, presents a high geographical extent for representativeness of observations. A notarial database (DIA) is used with 38,000 real estate transactions in 31 districts over the period 1985 and 2010. Given the length of the period, the available data are basic but nevertheless allow resorting to a hedonic function. This function considers the characteristics of housing, neighborhoods, and proximities to the historic city center and the harbor. The parameter estimations of the proximity to the port in annual regressions are then used to read the impact of different historic phases on the structure of housing prices. The results show the complexity of the price movements, the impact of agents' expectations and permit to measure the price movements resulting of each phase of the port-city relationships.
This paper reports on a component of a research project in Canadian dimensions of waterfront redevelopment based upon 46 interviews held in Canadian port cities with port authority representatives, urban planners and developers. Interviewees were invited to complete a questionnaire and to respond to a series of proposition sets. The findings from three proposition sets, dealing with urban planning problems, outcomes and evaluations, are discussed in this paper. Contrasts between planning philosophies in different professions are discussed, and some methodological problems are highlighted. -Author
The long-standing spatial and functional ties between ports and cities are gradualy weakening. Technological developments in ocean transportation, the growing public recognition of the asset of the waterfront, and emerging intermodal transportation systems are among the main reasons behind the recent changes that have occurred at the port-urban interface.-Author
Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta share a distinctive pattern of urban morphology that is part of their colonial past. Basic features are a nucleus with a European-style fort and open esplanade, segregated, residential areas for Europeans and Indians, a central business district, and peripheral military and manufactural zones. Evolution of these features varied in each city, and they survived largely intact until the early twentieth century.
Busan Port which is the representative social overhead capital facilities for international trade of goods has need the driving force for economic development in Korea. Therefore, the central government should play the major role in building a rear road to Busan Port in order that it may function as a moor port of Northeastern Asia through the systemization of mutual assistance among connected facilities, completely equipped with port-related facilities befitting to the principal port of imports and exports. In this study, the validity of container tax is being examined, analyzing container tax which is considered as an obstacle to the development of Busan Port and its purpose, and grasping the present conditions by the realistic speculation on container tax issues and its abolition. First, the port rear road as a social overhead capital facilities, which connects port and expressway, should be considered as part of port, and port is social overhead capital invested by government. Second, the Busan City imposes taxes on container. As a result, a shipper and a shipping company are paying a double charge by paying container tax with port dues. Third, Empty container and Tranship container are the factor of Busan city traffic jam but their was excluded from container tax. This is deviate from equilibrium of the tax object. Forth, it has bad influence upon the competitiveness of Busan Port as Northeastern logistics base, as other ports who are competing with Busan Port like china, Taiwan, Japan's port make their competitiveness strong by decreasing the cost of port dues.
Political issues in urban waterfront redevelopment projects are examined in this paper, based upon case studies in New York, London, Boston and Toronto. The perspective of the redevelopment agency is adopted when considering techniques for managing the changing political environment over the decades that it takes to implement these projects. The specific issues which are addressed include start-up politics, managing changes in political leadership, allocation of benefits and managing relations with residents and local government. Effective waterfront redevelopment agencies take a long-term approach towards management of their political environment.
PINCH S., MASON C. and WITT S. (1991) Flexible employment strategies in British industry: evidence from the UK ‘sunbelt’, Reg. Studies25, 207–218. A study of industrial restructuring in forty manufacturing firms and forty-seven private sector service firms in the Southampton city-region between 1981 and 1987 shows that, while changes in numerical flexibility and subcontracting in both services and manufacturing are similar in form and magnitude to those discovered elsewhere in Britain, there have been fewer major shifts within manufacturing towards increased functional flexibility. This is explained by the fact that the Southampton city-region lacks three factors that have facilitated the introduction of increased functional flexibility into manufacturing plants in peripheral regions: greenfield sites; plants under threat of closure; and changes in ownership.PINCH S., MASON C. et WITT S. (1991) Stratégies d'emploi souples dans l'industrie en Grand-Bretagne: des preuves provenant de la zone ‘ensoleillée’ au Royaume-Uni, Reg. Studies25, 207–218. Une étude à propos de la restructuration industrielle de 40 entreprises manufacturières et de 47 prestataires de services du secteur privé situés dans la métropole de Southampton de 1981 à 1987 montre que tandis que l'évolution de la souplesse numérique et de la sous-traitance dans le tertiaire et le secondaire sont comparables en termes de leur structure et de leur ampleur à celle découverte ailleurs en Grande-Bretagne, il y a eu moins de restructurations importantes dans l'industrie en faveur d'une souplesse fonctionnelle accrue. Cela s'explique par le fait que la métropole de Southampton manque trois facteurs qui ont facilité l'introduction d'une souplesse fonctionnelle accrue dans les établissements industriels aux régions périphériques: à savoir, espaces vertes, établissements menacés de fermeture, reprises d'activité.PINCH S., MASON C. und WITT S. (1991) Elastische Arbeitseinsatztaktiken in der britischen Industrie: Beweismaterial vom ‘Sunbelt’ (Wohlstandsgebiet), Reg. Studies25, 207–218. Eine Studie der industriellen Umstrukturierung in vierzig Fertigungsbetrieben und siebenundvierzig Dienstleistungsfirmen des Privatsektors im Stadtgebiet von Southampton während des Zeitraums 1981–87 zeigt, dass, obwohl Umstellungen in numerischer Elastizität und Zuliefertätigkeit im Fertigungs-wie im Dienstleistungswesen in Form und Ausmass denen andernorts in Grossbritannien entdeckten ähnlich sind, doch weniger grössere, auf vermehrte Funktionselastizität abzielende Verschiebungen innerhalb der Fertigungsindustries stattgefunden haben. Dies erklärt sich durch die Tatsache, dass es dem Stadtgebiet von Southampton an drei Faktoren mangelt, die die Einführung vermehrter Funktionselastizität in Produktionsbetrieben in Randgebieten erleichtert haben: an Freilandbauplätzen, an von Schliessung bedrohten Betrieben und an Besitzerwechsel.