Journal of Geographical Sciences >
Maritime network dynamics before and after international events
Author: Fang Zhixiang (1977-), Professor, specializing in transport geography, human behavior modeling, space-time GIS and intelligent navigation. E-mail: zxfang@whu.edu.cn
Received date: 2017-10-17
Online published: 2018-07-20
Supported by
Key Project of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, No.ZDRW-ZS-2016-6-3
The National Key Research and Development Program of China, No.2017YFB0503802
National Natural Science Foundation of China, No.40971233, No.41771473
LIESMARS Special Research Funding
Copyright
Investigating the influence of international events on global maritime networks is a challenging task that must comprehensively incorporate geographical, political, and maritime sciences. Understanding global maritime network dynamics is an initial and critical step in this investigation. This study proposes an automatic identification system (AIS)-based approach to understanding maritime network dynamics before and after international events. In this approach, a spatiotemporal modeling method is introduced to measure the similarity in shipping trends before and after international events. Then, a spatiotemporal analytic framework is proposed to understand the maritime network dynamics by grouping similar situation, and assessing possible indirect effects within a network. Finally, three case studies of international events, military conflict, lifted economic sanctions, and government elections, were used to investigate the observed network dynamics possibly affected by international events. The results indicate that container, tanker, and bulk shipping between India and its connected countries all declined more than 69% after military conflicts between India and Pakistan in August 2015. Tanker shipping between Iran and the United Arab Emirates increased 51% after economic sanctions on Iran were lifted. Container shipping between Sri Lanka and Singapore, Malaysia, and India increased more than 74% after the general election in Sri Lanka. These investigations demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed approach in assessing the possible effects of international events on maritime network dynamics.
FANG Zhixiang , YU Hongchu , LU Feng , FENG Mingxiang , HUANG Meng . Maritime network dynamics before and after international events[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2018 , 28(7) : 937 -956 . DOI: 10.1007/s11442-018-1514-9
Table 1 Summary of research on maritime networks |
Research category | Research contents |
---|---|
Structure and dynamics | Spatial structure (Xu et al., 2015); regional dynamics (Ducruet and Notteboom 2012; ; Yu et al., 2017); time dynamics (Ducruet, 2016); spatial heterogeneity (Liu et al., 2017; Li et al., 2016); reachability (Li et al., 2014b), and local strength and global weakness (Ducruet et al., 2009). |
Network and flows | Network diversity and maritime flows (Ducruet, 2013; Dinwoodie et al., 2013); statistical properties, including distribution extent, correlations, weight distribution, strength distribution, average shortest path length, line length distribution, and centrality measures (Hu and Zhu, 2009; Fugazza, 2017); centrality and vulnerability (Laxe et al., 2012; Viljoen and Joubert, 2016; Wu et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2016); connectivity and complexity (Jiang et al., 2015; Tian et al., 2007; Liu and Hu et al., 2017); inequality (Xu et al., 2015a); and evaluations of robustness (Peng et al., 2017). |
Maritime transport and efficiency | Direct port-to-port service, hub, and spoke networks (Fremont, 2007; Wang and Wang, 2011); maritime economics (Stopford, 2009); logistics (Rodrigue and Browne, 2002; Song and Lee, 2009; Davarzani et al., 2016); transportation (Guerrero and Rodrigue, 2014; Gagatsi et al., 2017); transport network design (Angeloudis et al., 2015; Karsten et al., 2017) and their network efficiency (Song et al., 2005; Tai and Hwang, 2005; Zeng and Yang, 2002; Fahmiasari and Parikesit, 2017); intermediacy (Rodrigue, 2017); maritime transport chain choice (Talley and Ng, 2013; Lam and Yam, 2011) and interactions (Knappett et al., 2008); and oligopolistic and competitive carrier behavior (Lee et al., 2012). |
Maritime safety | Risk (Akhtar and Utne, 2014; Lam et al., 2014a); safety (Hänninen et al., 2014); and maritime search and rescue operations (Bezgodov and Esin, 2014a) |
Figure 1 Proposed analytic framework |
Figure 2 Constructing maritime network from AIS data |
Figure 3 Indicators used to find similar spatiotemporal trend curves |
Figure 4 Grouping links with similar dynamics |
Figure 5 Evaluating countries potentially affected by an international event |
Table 1 Data categories in the vessel OD dataset |
Item | Meaning |
---|---|
MMSI | Unique ID for the vessel |
Start time (Ship entering the port)/End time (Ship leaving the port) | Second-level timestamp (e.g., 2015-06-10 01:16:58) |
Port’s location | Longitude and latitude of the port location |
World_port_index_number | Index number for a port |
Region_index | Index number for a region |
Port_name | Name of the port |
Wpi_country_code | Code for the port country |
Vessel_type | Type of vessel (bulk / container / tanker) |
Vessel_name | Name of the vessel |
Figure 6 Maritime network derived from AIS data for 2015 |
Figure 7 Grouped links based on similar dynamics for Event A, each panel shows international shipping trends with India via three types of ships: (a) tanker, (b) bulk, and (c) container. Columns 1-3 indicate the different groupings based on trade behavior before and after the event. |
Figure 8 Variations in the number of (a) bulk, (b) container, and (c)-1 and (c)-2 tanker shipping voyages between Iran and linked countries (regions) before and after Event B |
Figure 9 Variations in the number of bulk, container, and tanker shipping voyages before and after Event C between Sri Lanka and countries linked by shipping, (a) bulk shipping linked with major countries and regions, (b) tanker shipping linked with major countries and regions, (c)-1 container shipping linked with India, and (c)-2 container shipping linked with Malaysia and Singapore |
Figure 10 The countries possibly affected by Event A and their shipping linkages in terms of different types of shipping |
Figure 11 Spatial distribution of countries possibly affected by Event A |
Table 2 Countries potentially affected by Event B |
Link | Highest number of voyages and time period | Lowest number of voyages and time period | Average voyages before Event B | Average voyages after Event B | Minimum crossing area after standardi- zation | Time period for the same trend after standardi- zation | Similarity of time-varying changes (1/journeys) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Iran-United Arab Emirates | 143 (2015-10) | 64 (2015-01) | 59.806 | 121.176 | 0.353 | 0.167 | 0.473 |
United Arab Emirates- Indonesia | 17 (2015-10) | 3 (2015-02) | 5.871 | 12.294 |
Table 3 Countries potentially affected by Event C |
Link | Highest number of voyages and time period | Lowest number of voyages and time period | Average voyages before Event C | Average voyages after Event C | Minimum crossing area after standardi- zation | Time period of the same trend after standardi- zation | Similarity of time- varying changes (1/journeys) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sri Lanka-India | 412 (2015-03) | 0 (2014-07) | 34.286 | 241.286 | |||
India-United Arab Emirates | 136 (2015-06) | 0 (2014-07) | 15.571 | 85.857 | 0.444 | 0.361 | 0.811 |
India-Saudi Arabia | 39 (2015-03) | 0 (2014-06) | 4.429 | 23.857 | 0.530 | 0.259 | 0.489 |
India-Pakistan | 91 (2015-03) | 3 (2014-06) | 10.286 | 59.571 | 0.250 | 0.185 | 0.741 |
Sri Lanka-Singapore | 114 (2015-06) | 1 (2014-07) | 18.571 | 70.429 | 0.413 | 0.315 | 0.762 |
Singapore-Bangladesh | 50 (2015-03) | 1 (2014-07) | 8.833 | 23.714 | |||
Sri Lanka-Malaysia | 148 (2015-06) | 0 (2014-07) | 17.571 | 83.143 |
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
[1] |
|
[2] |
|
[3] |
|
[4] |
|
[5] |
|
[6] |
|
[7] |
|
[8] |
|
[9] |
|
[10] |
|
[11] |
|
[12] |
|
[13] |
|
[14] |
|
[15] |
|
[16] |
|
[17] |
|
[18] |
|
[19] |
|
[20] |
|
[21] |
|
[22] |
|
[23] |
|
[24] |
|
[25] |
|
[26] |
|
[27] |
|
[28] |
|
[29] |
|
[30] |
|
[31] |
|
[32] |
|
[33] |
|
[34] |
|
[35] |
|
[36] |
|
[37] |
|
[38] |
|
[39] |
|
[40] |
|
[41] |
|
[42] |
|
[43] |
|
[44] |
|
[45] |
|
[46] |
|
[47] |
|
[48] |
|
[49] |
|
[50] |
|
[51] |
|
[52] |
|
[53] |
|
[54] |
|
[55] |
|
[56] |
|
[57] |
|
[58] |
|
[59] |
|
[60] |
|
[61] |
|
[62] |
|
[63] |
|
[64] |
|
[65] |
|
[66] |
|
[67] |
|
[68] |
|
/
〈 | 〉 |