Sponsored by:

In cooperation with:

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

Freight Mobility 

and Intermodal 

Connectivity 

in China 

International

Technology

Scanning 

Program

May 2008
NOTICE

The Federal Highway Administration provides 

high-quality information to serve Government, 

industry, and the public in a manner that promotes 

public understanding. Standards and policies are 

used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA 

periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its 

programs and processes to ensure continuous 

quality improvement.
1. Report No.

FHWA-PL-08-020

2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

4. Title and Subtitle

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity 

in China 

5. Report Date

May 2008

6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s) 

David Cole, Tony Furst, Sharon Daboin, 

Warren Hoemann, Dr. Michael Meyer, 

Richard Nordahl, Marygrace Parker, Leo Penne, 

Norman Stoner, Dr. Tianjia Tang

8. Performing Organization Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

American Trade Initiatives

P.O. Box 8228

Alexandria, VA 22306-8228

10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

11. Contract or Grant No.

DTFH61-99-C-005

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Office of International Programs 

Office of Policy 

Federal Highway Administration, 

 U.S. Department of Transportation

American Association of State Highway and 

 Transportation Officials

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplementary Notes

FHWA COTR: Hana Maier, Office of International Programs

16. Abstract

Trade growth between the United States and China has increased U.S. interest in how the Chinese 

transportation system handles exports. The Federal Highway Administration, American Association of State 

Highway and Transportation Officials, and National Cooperative Highway Research Program sponsored a 

scanning study to identify how China provides intermodal access to its ports and uses investment strategies 

to foster freight mobility and intermodal connectivity.

The scan team learned that China’s national, provincial, and metropolitan transportation policy is closely 

coordinated with the country’s economic policy and social harmony goals. The transportation system is 

expanding rapidly to meet global intermodal freight demands and promote expansion into underdeveloped 

regions of the country.

Team recommendations for U.S. implementation include reviving a national transportation infrastructure 

focus to maintain U.S. competitiveness in the global market, conducting a study on how China uses 

performance measures to manage transportation policy, and synthesizing the results of this and earlier 

scans on intermodal freight and connectivity around the world. 

17. Key Words

freight mobility, intermodal connectivity, investment, 

ports, rail, trade, transportation policy

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions. This document is available to the public from the: 

Office of International Programs,

FHWA-HPIP, Room 3325, U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Washington, DC 20590

international@fhwa.dot.gov

www.international.fhwa.dot.gov

19. Security Classify. (of this report)

Unclassified

20. Security Classify. (of this page)

Unclassified

21. No. of Pages

60

22. Price

Free

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized

Technical Report Documentation Page

Freight Mobility 

and Intermodal 

Connectivity 

in China 

May 2008

David Cole (cochair)

Maine DOT

Tony Furst (cochair)

FHWA 

Sharon Daboin

Pennsylvania DOT

Warren Hoemann

American Trucking Associations

Dr. Michael Meyer (report facilitator)

Georgia Institute of Technology

Richard Nordahl

California DOT

Marygrace Parker

I-95 Corridor Coalition

Leo Penne

AASHTO

Norman Stoner

FHWA

Dr. Tianjia Tang

FHWA

for

Federal Highway Administration

U.S. Department of Transportation

American Association of State 

Highway and Transportation Officials

National Cooperative Highway 

Research Program

Prepared by the International Scanning Study Team:
T he International Technology Scanning 

Program, sponsored by the Federal 

Highway Administration (FHWA), 

the American Association of 

State Highway and Transportation 

Officials (AASHTO), and the National 

Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), 

evaluates innovative foreign technologies and 

practices that could significantly benefit U.S. 

highway transportation systems. This approach 

allows for advanced technology to be adapted 

and put into practice much more efficiently 

without spending scarce research funds to 

re-create advances already developed by 

other countries.

FHWA and AASHTO, with recommendations from 

NCHRP, jointly determine priority topics for teams 

of U.S. experts to study. Teams in the specific 

areas being investigated are formed and sent 

to countries where significant advances and 

innovations have been made in technology, 

management practices, organizational structure, 

program delivery, and financing. Scan teams 

usually include representatives from FHWA, State 

departments of transportation, local governments, 

transportation trade and research groups, the 

private sector, and academia. 

After a scan is completed, team members evaluate 

findings and develop comprehensive reports, 

including recommendations for further research 

and pilot projects to verify the value of adapting 

innovations for U.S. use. Scan reports, as well 

as the results of pilot programs and research, 

are circulated throughout the country to State 

and local transportation officials and the private 

sector. Since 1990, about 70 international 

scans have been organized on topics such as 

pavements, bridge construction and maintenance, 

contracting, intermodal transport, organizational 

management, winter road maintenance, safety, 

intelligent transportation systems, planning, 

and policy. 

The International Technology Scanning Program 

has resulted in significant improvements and 

savings in road program technologies and practices 

throughout the United States. In some cases, 

scan studies have facilitated joint research and 

technology-sharing projects with international 

counterparts, further conserving resources and 

advancing the state of the art. Scan studies have 

also exposed transportation professionals to 

remarkable advancements and inspired implementation of hundreds of innovations. The result: large 

savings of research dollars and time, as well as 

significant improvements in the Nation’s 

transportation system.

Scan reports can be obtained through FHWA 

free of charge by e-mailing international@dot.gov. 

Scan reports are also available electronically and 

can be accessed on the FHWA’s Office of International Programs Web site at www.international.

fhwa.dot.gov.

iv

International

Technology 

Scanning Program
n Safety 

Safety Applications of Intelligent Transportation 

Systems in Europe and Japan (2006)

Traffic Incident Response Practices in Europe (2006)

Underground Transportation Systems in Europe: 

Safety, Operations, and Emergency Response (2006)

Roadway Human Factors and Behavioral Safety in 

Europe (2005) 

Traffic Safety Information Systems in Europe and 

Australia (2004) 

Signalized Intersection Safety in Europe (2003) 

Managing and Organizing Comprehensive Highway 

Safety in Europe (2003) 

European Road Lighting Technologies (2001) 

Commercial Vehicle Safety, Technology, and 

Practice in Europe (2000) 

Methods and Procedures to Reduce Motorist Delays 

in European Work Zones (2000) 

Innovative Traffic Control Technology and Practice 

in Europe (1999) 

Road Safety Audits—Final Report and Case Studies 

(1997) 

Speed Management and Enforcement Technology: 

Europe and Australia 1996) 

Safety Management Practices in Japan, Australia, 

and New Zealand (1995) 

Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety in England, Germany, 

and the Netherlands (1994) 

n Planning and Environment 

Active Travel Management: The Next Step in 

Congestion Management (2007)

Managing Travel Demand: Applying European 

Perspectives to U.S. Practice (2006)

Transportation Asset Management in Australia, 

Canada, England, and New Zealand (2005)

Transportation Performance Measures in Australia, 

Canada, Japan, and New Zealand (2004) 

European Right-of-Way and Utilities Best Practices 

(2002) 

Geometric Design Practices for European Roads 

(2002) 

Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Across European 

Highways (2002) 

Sustainable Transportation Practices in Europe 

(2001) 

Recycled Materials in European Highway 

Environments (1999) 

European Intermodal Programs: Planning, Policy, 

and Technology (1999) 

National Travel Surveys (1994) 

n Policy and Information 

European Practices in Transportation Workforce 

Development (2003) 

Intelligent Transportation Systems and Winter 

Operations in Japan (2003) 

Emerging Models for Delivering Transportation 

Programs and Services (1999) 

National Travel Surveys (1994) 

Acquiring Highway Transportation Information 

From Abroad (1994) 

International Guide to Highway Transportation 

Information (1994) 

International Contract Administration Techniques 

for Quality Enhancement (1994) 

European Intermodal Programs: Planning, Policy, 

and Technology (1994) 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 

International

Technology Scan 

Reports

International

Technology

Scanning Program:

Bringing Global

Innovations to 

U.S. Highways

All publications are available

on the Internet at 

www.international.fhwa.dot.gov.
n Operations 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in 

China (2008)

Commercial Motor Vehicle Size and Weight 

Enforcement in Europe (2007)

Active Travel Management: The Next Step in 

Congestion Management (2007)

Managing Travel Demand: Applying European 

Perspectives to U.S. Practice (2006)

Traffic Incident Response Practices in Europe (2006)

Underground Transportation Systems in Europe: 

Safety, Operations, and Emergency Response (2006)

Superior Materials, Advanced Test Methods, and 

Specifications in Europe (2004) 

Freight Transportation: The Latin American Market 

(2003) 

Meeting 21st Century Challenges of System 

Performance Through Better Operations (2003) 

Traveler Information Systems in Europe (2003) 

Freight Transportation: The European Market (2002) 

European Road Lighting Technologies (2001) 

Methods and Procedures to Reduce Motorist Delays 

in European Work Zones (2000) 

Innovative Traffic Control Technology and Practice 

in Europe (1999) 

European Winter Service Technology (1998) 

Traffic Management and Traveler Information 

Systems (1997) 

European Traffic Monitoring (1997) 

Highway/Commercial Vehicle Interaction (1996) 

Winter Maintenance Technology and Practices—

Learning from Abroad (1995) 

Advanced Transportation Technology (1994) 

Snowbreak Forest Book—Highway Snowstorm 

Countermeasure Manual (1990) 

n Infrastructure—General

Audit Stewardship and Oversight of Large and 

Innovatively Funded Projects in Europe (2006)

Construction Management Practices in Canada and 

Europe (2005) 

European Practices in Transportation Workforce 

Development (2003) 

Contract Administration: Technology and Practice in 

Europe (2002) 

European Road Lighting Technologies (2001) 

Geometric Design Practices for European Roads 

(2001) 

Geotechnical Engineering Practices in Canada and 

Europe (1999) 

Geotechnology—Soil Nailing (1993) 

n Infrastructure—Pavements 

Warm-Mix Asphalt: European Practice (2007)

Long-Life Concrete Pavements in Europe and 

Canada (2007)

Quiet Pavement Systems in Europe (2005)

Pavement Preservation Technology in France, South 

Africa, and Australia (2003) 

Recycled Materials in European Highway 

Environments (1999) 

South African Pavement and Other Highway 

Technologies and Practices (1997) 

Highway/Commercial Vehicle Interaction (1996) 

European Concrete Highways (1992) 

European Asphalt Technology (1990) 

n Infrastructure—Bridges 

Bridge Evaluation Quality Assurance in Europe 

(2008)

Prefabricated Bridge Elements and Systems in 

Japan and Europe (2005) 

Bridge Preservation and Maintenance in Europe and 

South Africa (2005) 

Performance of Concrete Segmental and CableStayed Bridges in Europe (2001) 

Steel Bridge Fabrication Technologies in Europe and 

Japan (2001) 

European Practices for Bridge Scour and Stream 

Instability Countermeasures (1999) 

Advanced Composites in Bridges in Europe and 

Japan (1997) 

Asian Bridge Structures (1997) 

Bridge Maintenance Coatings (1997) 

Northumberland Strait Crossing Project (1996) 

European Bridge Structures (1995) 

vi International Technology Scan Reports
Executive Summary.................................... 1

General Observations............................................. 1

Lessons for the United States................................ 5

Implementation Strategies, Dissemination, 

 and Recommendations ....................................... 7

Chapter 1: Introduction............................ 9

Scan Composition................................................... 9

Report Organization.............................................. 10

Chapter 2: Chinese Context ............... 11

Stage of Development.......................................... 11

Governmental Structure for Decisionmaking.... 11

Transportation Planning....................................... 12

Transportation Investment and Finance............. 14

Chinese Economic Growth................................... 15

Chapter 3: China’s Transportation 

System and Plans for the Future....... 19

Highways ............................................................... 19

Rail.......................................................................... 20

Navigable Waters.................................................. 22

Ports........................................................................ 23

Meetings with Shipping, Retail, Logistics, 

 and Warehousing Firms .................................... 24 

Chapter 4: General Observations 

and Lessons for the United States ... 29

China’s Economic Growth and Driving 

 Forces .................................................................. 29

Transportation Infrastructure Development 

 and Operations................................................... 30

Governmental Structure, Decisionmaking, 

 and Analysis ....................................................... 32

Shipper and Carrier Perceptions ......................... 34

Lessons for the United States.............................. 34

Chapter 5: Implementation Strategies 

and Recommendations ........................... 39

Appendix A: 

Scan Team Members................................ 41

Appendix B: 

Amplifying Questions.............................. 45

Appendix C: 

Host Country Contacts............................ 51

Figures

Figure 1. Chinese governmental structure......... 12

Figure 2. Multimodal transportation system 

 in the Pearl River Delta. ..................................... 14

Figure 3. China export destinations and U.S. 

 import origins for sea-based trade................... 16

Figure 4. The four economic regions of China. .. 17

Figure 5. Average annual total investment in 

 Chinese transportation infrastructure (US$)... 19

Figure 6. Growth and expected growth in 

 Chinese transportation infrastructure.............. 20

Figure 7. China’s major highway network.......... 21

Figure 8. China’s rail network............................... 21

Figure 9. TEU throughput in selected Chinese 

 ports, 2006 and 2011.......................................... 23

Figure 10. TEU throughput in Chinese and 

 U.S. ports, 2006. ................................................. 24

Figure 11. Expected Chinese share of global 

 container market. ............................................... 24

Figure 12. Many container transshipments in the 

 Pearl River basin take place in midstream, 

 primarily to avoid fees for land terminal use.. 25

Figure 13. The new Yangshan deep-sea port 

 in Shanghai......................................................... 25

Figure 14. The new bridge connecting the 

 Port of Yangshan to the mainland.................... 25

Figure 15. The Port of Qingdao is one of the 

 most efficient ports in China............................. 26

Figure 16. The new Lingang industrial park 

 has the road and sewer infrastructure built, 

 waiting for development to occur. ................... 27

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China vii

Contents
Tables

Table 1. Role and responsibilities of relevant 

 national Chinese organizations in 

 infrastructure provision..................................... 12

Table 2. Forecasted economic factors for 

 China, 2007 and 2011......................................... 16

Table 3. Characteristics of China’s road 

 network, 2005–2006. .......................................... 20

Table 4. Characteristics of China’s navigable 

 water network..................................................... 22

Table 5. Comparative costs and time to 

 transport a TEU to Shanghai from 

 Chongqing. ......................................................... 22

viii Contents
China’s transportation system is 

rapidly expanding to support 

economic growth, meet 

projected global intermodal 

freight demands, and promote 

expansion into underdeveloped 

regions of the country. Given the current understanding of intermodal freight movement that was 

not available when the United States developed 

its port capacity, the purpose of this scan was to 

identify how China provides intermodal access to 

its new, greenfield maritime ports and the possible 

application of those methods in the United States. 

The scan also looked at the investment strategies 

adopted by Chinese officials to foster freight 

mobility and intermodal connectivity in support 

of their global competitiveness.

The scan team represented a diverse set of interests 

and concerns for national and State decisionmaking. In addition to Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA) officials at the national and division levels, 

the team included representatives from the 

departments of transportation for California, Maine, 

and Pennsylvania; a representative of the I-95 

Corridor Coalition; a representative of the American 

Association of State Highway and Transportation 

Officials (AASHTO); a representative of the 

American Trucking Associations; and a university 

professor who also acted as the report writer. These 

scan members reflected different modal interests 

and expertise in intermodal freight transportation, 

trucking, transportation policy and planning, and 

transportation system operations.

The scan team met with government officials at the 

national, provincial, and metropolitan levels; port 

authorities and terminal operators; U.S. shippers 

and retailers; logistics and warehousing companies; and research organizations. Although most 

of the team’s visits were to specific organizations, 

meetings were also held under the auspices of 

the local American Chambers of Commerce in 

Shanghai and Hong Kong that provided an 

opportunity to meet with representatives of many 

shipper, carrier, and trade organizations. 

General Observations 

The scan team made numerous observations about 

the way China has provided transportation infrastructure in support of its impressive economic 

growth. These observations are presented below. 

However, several major takeaways from this scan 

provide important lessons to the United States:

Given the global market and supply chain, what 

happens in China does affect the U.S., State, and 

local economies. Everyone is part of a global 

economy; flows of people and goods do not stop 

at jurisdictional boundaries. Although this scan 

focused on China, in reality the transportation 

system of each country is part of a global transportation network and should be viewed that way. 

It is surely the way the companies that move 

freight view it. 

Although the Chinese system of governance is 

very different from the United States, several 

characteristics of the system are noteworthy:

National, provincial, and metropolitan transportation policy is closely coordinated among the 

three levels and is linked to other policy goals, 

the most prominent ones being economic 

development and what the Chinese call 

“social harmony.”

This strong linkage often results in a unified 

vision of what is necessary in the transport 

sector to achieve policy goals.

The Chinese government at all levels targets 

investment on those components of the 

transportation system that best advance 

national goals. As a result, the evolving 

Chinese transportation system is focused 

on excelling in markets dominated by 

international trade.

The expanding opportunities for investment in 

China have resulted in many public-private 

joint ventures for transportation projects. 

Ñ

Ñ

w

w

w

w

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 

Executive Summary
However, in most cases, the government 

retains majority control in the joint venture. 

It always has the majority say.

On intermodal access to the maritime ports, the 

scan team did not find new or different operational technology than is used in the United States or 

European Union. There were, however, significant 

differences in port operating rules because of 

different labor conditions and the focus on 

competing in a global market.

The following observations from the scan are 

organized in four categories: China’s economic 

growth and driving forces; transportation 

infrastructure development; governmental 

structure, decisionmaking, and analysis; and 

global shipper and carrier perceptions. 

China’s Economic Growth and Driving 

Forces

1. China’s economic growth over the past 10 years 

has been dramatic. Both government officials and 

private sector representatives expect this growth 

to continue in the foreseeable future at or near its 

current rate of about 10 percent per annum. 

2. Although the national and local governments 

have invested heavily in infrastructure, much 

of the recent economic growth has been fueled 

by private investment. As different sectors of 

the economy have been opened to foreign 

investment, joint ventures and other financial 

partnerships have provided an institutional 

framework for expansion of the transportation 

infrastructure and the economy. Even with this 

foreign investment, the government is still in a 

dominant position on investing in the transport 

sector, especially in such areas as the national 

rail system.

3. The economic expansion of China started in the 

south (Pearl River Delta), moved north along the 

coastal area based on national economic policy, 

and is now pushing west in accordance with the 

“Go West” national government campaign. This 

campaign has significant implications to supply 

chain logistics costs and to the efficiency of the 

Chinese transportation system in moving 

exports to the coastal ports. 

4. Much of China’s economic expansion has 

occurred in urban areas where the population 

Ñ

provides the labor force. The consequence of 

such large urban concentrations is that the 

central government pays particular attention to 

and provides the resources to make sure that the 

basic needs of these populations are met (social 

harmony). From a transportation perspective, 

the consequence of this policy focus is that 

passenger transportation often receives priority 

over freight movement (although in port cities 

freight movement often receives close attention 

from transportation officials), especially in peak 

holiday seasons.

5. Although it appears that economic development 

is still the primary goal of governmental policy, 

additional goals and performance measures 

relating to environmental quality and energy 

consumption have been added to the national 

agenda. 

Transportation Infrastructure Development 

and Operations

1. Recognizing the vital role that transportation 

plays in meeting its goal of continued economic 

growth, China is investing heavily in transport 

infrastructure, an investment estimated at more 

than 9 percent of the country’s gross domestic 

product (GDP). This investment comes from both 

public and private (joint venture) funds. 

2. Substantial levels of private capital are being 

invested, in some cases with low expectations 

of rapid return on investment. In other words, 

investors are willing to accept lower immediate 

returns in exchange for longer term benefits. 

Over the past several years, this investment has 

occurred primarily in seaports, highways, airports, and logistics parks. Private investment 

in rail infrastructure and intermodal terminals 

has had limited success, although some recent 

agreements suggest that the rail sector will 

also see private investment. 

3. Coastal and river shipping is a significant 

component of China’s intermodal transportation 

system. In some port markets, as much as 35 

percent of the containers arriving for export 

do so by barge. 

4. The central government’s “Go West” policy 

has shifted investment attention to inland 

transportation and the challenges facing such 

 Executive Summary
transportation, especially the connections to the 

major international ports. 

5. China’s intermodal rail service faces significant 

challenges. The movement of containers receives 

low in priority on China’s rail network, following 

military, passenger, energy (coal), and food 

movements. About 12,000 kilometers (7,456 

miles) of passenger-only track are being built to 

separate passenger and freight movements. This 

will free up the existing combined-use track for 

freight movements. A goal of 10 million 20-foot 

equivalent units (TEUs) carried by rail (now less 

than 3 million) has been established for China’s 

current 5-year planning period. 

6. The Chinese central government has encouraged joint ventures to finance the national 

expressway system, the intent of which is to 

stretch government funds to support a variety 

of new modal investments. Consideration is also 

being given in some locales to how tolls can

be used to influence truck routing.

7. Toll rates are comparable to those found in 

the United States and Europe, but the Chinese 

believe this does not reflect the economic reality 

of travelers in China, where per capita GDP is 

much lower. In some cases, the Chinese are 

trying to renegotiate concession agreements 

to allow lower toll rates, offsetting lower toll 

revenues with longer concession time periods 

(from 30 to 50 years).

8. The national expressway plan is centered 

primarily on three major economic and political 

centers: Beijing, Shanghai, and the Pearl River 

Delta. In essence, the national expressway 

system and the national rail network will be the 

major means of connection between the political 

and economic centers of the country, reinforcing 

their importance in the economic future of China. 

Intermodal connection has been an important 

consideration in network design. 

9. Trucking is the predominant means of moving 

containers to and from the ports, especially 

in the river delta manufacturing regions. The 

trucking industry consists mainly of small 

businesses (one to three trucks), which makes 

its contribution to China’s economic growth 

even more impressive. Enforcement of the 

standard vehicle configuration regulation is 

weak, and integration of technology into 

trucking operations appears to be limited. 

10.Given the relatively large number of trucking 

businesses found in China and the intense 

competition for freight movements, it was not 

surprising to find that oversized and overweight 

trucks have become an emerging and important 

concern for transportation officials. It appears 

that Chinese transportation and enforcement 

organizations have just recently begun to 

implement national and provincial weight 

enforcement programs.

11.Chinese port productivity is the best in the world. 

Chinese ports operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a 

week, 365 days a year. Operational strategies 

are impressive—cranes that lift four TEUs, 20- to 

30-minute truck turns, nine cranes working one 

ship, etc. New ports are being developed and the 

capacity of existing ports is being expanded 

rapidly. 

12.Given the significant level of trade to the United 

States and current U.S. legislation, security was 

a growing concern to port terminal operators. 

The relatively new infrastructure at China’s 

ports allows terminal operators to build 

security measures into terminal operations, 

especially using technologies to screen 

outbound containers. 

13.China has not progressed to the point of 

systematically managing its transportation 

infrastructure; it is still in the “build” mode. 

The scan team saw little evidence that this 

infrastructure was being designed with system 

management challenges in mind, such as truck 

weight and size enforcement. Nevertheless, in 

a few of the more mature areas experiencing 

significant congestion, transportation officials 

indicated a need to begin paying serious 

attention to system management. 

14.Intermodal connectivity and landside access to 

Chinese ports are not approached differently or 

in a more sophisticated way than in the United 

States or European Union. Many new port 

facilities are located in large urban areas, yet 

the access to and from these ports involves 

traversing mixed-use roadways that will, in the 

future, present the same challenges now faced 

in the United States and European Union. 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 
15.Rail access to maritime port facilities is not being 

built consistently into new port design. With the 

exception of the Port of Qingdao, which has 

no river access and is being looked at as one 

terminus of a rail-land bridge from Asia to the 

European Union and Russia, no other port 

facility was being built with on-dock rail. This is 

partly due to a perception by shippers and ocean 

carriers that container movement receives low 

priority on the Chinese freight rail network, 

which results in little pressure to improve or 

provide rail access to the ports.

Governmental Structure, Decisionmaking, 

and Analysis

1. China’s policymaking and implementation 

process identifies clearly specified national 

goals with corresponding performance metrics. 

However, local officials have leeway under this 

national policy to implement projects that also 

meet their local objectives. A national 5-year 

plan provides policy direction on what will be 

emphasized during the plan’s timeframe 

(China is in its 11th 5-year plan). 

2. National transportation agencies have different 

modal responsibilities (e.g., Ministry of 

Communications,* Ministry of Railways, Ministry 

of Construction, Central Administration of Civil 

Aviation). Because the performance of government officials is measured by results, attention 

is paid to measures of progress. National data 

on overall modal performance and the state of 

the economy are collected and analyzed. Data 

analysis is used to determine the extent to 

which goals are being met at different levels 

of government. Some officials referred to 

this as “results-oriented planning.”

3. The performance of local officials and governments is measured against national goals. 

For example, many noted that the most 

important metric for local officials is the degree 

to which economic growth occurs during their 

tenure, defined primarily as job growth. China’s 

tax policy also supports this goal because the 

tax revenue from the economic activity in a 

province stays, for the most part, in the 

province.

4. Although this scan did not conduct a systematic 

assessment of the capability of municipal 

government agencies to plan and provide for 

transportation infrastructure and services, 

every meeting with local officials included 

the staff members responsible for each mode. 

In other words, all of the modes were located 

in one agency, which encouraged the 

adoption of a multimodal systems perspective 

when looking at regional transportation 

investment. 

5. In most cases, there was little evidence that 

carriers or shippers were asked for advice on 

national strategic transportation plans or investments. However, at the provincial or regional 

level, the inclusion of the private sector in tactical 

investment decisions was evident in the number 

of public-private partnerships.

6. Port development plans considered modal 

access strategies as part of the planning process, 

but multimodal port access did not always result 

(note comment 15 in the previous section about 

rail access to ports). The interesting aspect of 

this port planning was that the boundary of such 

studies encompassed a much larger area than 

that adjacent to the port itself. Access was a key 

concern.

7. Project development occurs much faster in 

China than in the United States. Transportation 

projects are viewed as a priority for economic 

development, so they move forward rapidly.

8. In keeping with the national policy of social 

harmony, government officials are concerned 

about the negative impacts of transportation 

facility operations and expansion on local 

communities. They provided examples of 

efforts to mitigate the impact when community 

displacement does occur.

9. Hong Kong’s role in the competitive market 

of the Pearl River Delta is evolving. New ports 

 Executive Summary

 *In April 2008, the Chinese government created a Ministry of Transportation that incorporates the former Ministry 

of Communications. Aviation, maritime, and highways are among the functions in the Ministry of Transportation. 

The Ministry of Railways remains separate. The result is a transportation policy and development entity similar 

in structure to the U.S. Department of Transportation.
nearby (along with dredging in the river to 

allow access to these ports for bigger ships), as 

well as new manufacturing development on the 

west bank of the Pearl River, will likely cause a 

shift in container exports to other ports. It 

remains to be seen how the market will adjust 

to these changing conditions, but it appears 

that Hong Kong’s relative position in global 

container flows could evolve in a different 

direction in the future. 

Shipper and Carrier Perceptions

1. Many of the international ocean carriers and 

shippers the team met during this scan view 

the serious constraint in international trade 

and supply chain efficiency as being on the 

receiving end, in Europe and the United States. 

The prevalent perception is that terminal 

throughput in the United States and European 

Union is limited by terminal operational limitations, landside access capacity, growing road 

congestion, and protracted decisionmaking 

processes. 

2. Shippers and carriers believe that the effect 

of a widened Panama Canal and increased 

transits through the Suez Canal will likely be 

more shipments heading to east coast U.S. 

ports, but that the west coast U.S. ports 

will still be the major destination for most 

transpacific containers.

3. Several shippers and carriers identified the 

“bunching” of vessel departures from Chinese 

ports (because of when merchandise arrives 

at the ports and when it is needed in the U.S. 

market) as the cause of a significant peaking 

problem. It was observed that a peaking in 

departures from China usually results in a 

peaking in arrivals at U.S. ports, especially 

Los Angeles-Long Beach in California. 

Several shippers and carriers believe that 

this peaking phenomenon could be remedied 

by working with retailers, shippers, and 

manufacturers.

Lessons for the United States

The lessons learned from this scan are organized in 

two major categories: consequences to the United 

States and its transportation system, and different 

approaches to planning and project development 

in support of a growing economy. 

Consequences to the United States and the

U.S. Transportation System

1. China competes as a nation. For the United 

States to remain competitive globally, it needs 

to invest in transportation infrastructure, apply 

new system management technologies, and 

consider institutional change in how it identifies, funds, operates, and makes key infrastructure improvements to key elements of the 

national transportation system. 

2. Trade from China will put increasing pressure 

on east coast ports. With new service routes 

through the Suez and Panama Canals, States 

on the east coast will experience increasing 

demands on their transportation systems. 

3. Given the navigable draft and terminal capacity 

of most U.S. ports, the largest container ships 

might not be providing service to the United 

States. This means most U.S. ports will be 

served by vessels carrying less than or equal 

to 10,000 TEUs. 

4. Similar to what teams observed during intermodal freight scans in Europe and Latin America, 

the difference in port efficiency between China 

and the United States is dramatic. If U.S. ports 

are unable to expand because of community 

concerns or geographic limitations, maximizing 

the use of existing capacity and improving port 

throughput are imperative to handle increasing 

container flows. 

5. The United States can learn a lot from China 

on using natural geography to the maximum 

extent, particularly in the use of barge and 

coastal shipping as access modes to major 

ports. In China, the Pearl and Yangtze 

River ports are being developed to act as 

transshipment ports, and new manufacturing 

capacity is being developed and located to 

take advantage of river transport. 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 

“Whereas the United States 

focuses on China...China 

focuses on the world.”

–Scan team member
6. Freight bottlenecks are viewed as a drain on 

transportation system and economic productivity. This is a perspective the United States should 

adopt as well. Solving these bottlenecks involves 

more than just expanding physical capacity. It 

also requires using technology and operational 

strategies. 

7. Chinese officials have recognized that freightoriented transportation investments, especially 

ports, are an important part of the nation’s 

economic development. Accordingly, Chinese 

transportation agencies have invested heavily 

in improving port capacity. 

8. The United States is fortunate to have a much 

more developed rail network, which in many 

cases provides on-dock service to port terminals. 

This is a significant advantage to U.S. trade 

flows, and one that needs to be nurtured. 

9. Given China’s experience with oversize and 

overweight vehicles and the corresponding 

infrastructure damage, it becomes even more 

apparent that the United States should ensure 

that its commercial motor vehicle size and 

weight program continues to advance and is 

provided adequate resources. 

10.One challenge facing west coast ports is the 

bunching of vessel departures from China that 

results in vessels arriving at about the same time 

in the United States. If vessel bunching could be 

reduced, this could significantly benefit both U.S. 

and Chinese ports. In discussions with shippers 

and carriers in China, the scan team heard 

optimism that this could in fact occur.

How the Chinese Invest In and Operate 

Their Transportation System to Support 

a Growing Economy

1. China has a national transportation investment 

policy that is closely linked to its trade and 

economic policy. National transportation investment appears to focus on two major goals 

(besides military defense): strategies to foster 

social harmony among Chinese citizens and 

strategies to support economic growth, with 

the second goal supporting the first. The United 

States would benefit from adopting a national 

transportation investment policy that supports 

the nation’s economic health. 

2. The Chinese central planning function is not a 

model that would work in the United States. 

However, the concept of locally executing a 

strategic network focused on national interests 

with national financing support (along the lines 

of the initial effort to build the U.S. Interstate 

Highway System) is worth considering. Such a 

system should use performance measures to 

monitor progress in developing and operating 

key elements of the national transportation 

system. 

3. Many of the assets that work in tandem with the 

Chinese transportation system (port terminal 

development, logistics parks, etc.) are partially 

funded through private investment. In some 

cases, the return on this investment is not likely 

to be realized in the short term. Instead, it will 

take years for the investment to start producing 

net gains. However, companies made it clear that 

because the Chinese can make infrastructure 

investment decisions quickly and show progress 

toward improvement, they are willing to invest. 

This suggests that if transportation agencies in 

the United States are interested in encouraging 

more private investment in transportation 

facilities, they need to give greater attention to 

timely public sector decisionmaking. Agencies 

simply need to get to the decision point earlier. 

4. The primary instrument of privatization in China 

is the joint venture. In almost all cases, private 

investors do not get a majority share of the 

investment (the exception being port terminals). 

Government agencies or state-owned enterprises retain at least 51 percent control. 

5. Chinese planning for intermodal centers, and 

indeed for regional transportation networks, 

adopts a systems perspective on performance 

and investment. In the United States, several 

multistate coalitions seek to coordinate multijurisdictional activity. To achieve systems-level 

coordination, more efforts along these lines 

will be necessary. 

6. Air cargo is the fastest growing segment of 

freight movement in China. While it is still 

only a small percentage of total tonnage, the 

implication to the U.S. transportation system 

of this growth in both air cargo hubs and belly 

freight is new stress on the transportation 

network at already-overcrowded U.S. airports.

 Executive Summary
Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 

7. National data collection in China provides a 

springboard for national transportation planning, 

investment, and performance evaluation. U.S. 

freight data systems should not only be continued, but expanded to provide the information 

needed for optimal transportation investment 

decisionmaking, especially given the important 

role that freight plays in the economic health 

of the Nation.

8. Finally, it was noteworthy that the Chinese 

transportation officials who met with the scan 

team were very high quality professionals and 

most often quite young. They were expert in the 

use of data and data analysis and knowledgeable 

about how their respective transportation 

systems fit into a much larger transportation 

systems perspective.

Implementation Strategies, 

Dissemination, and Recommendations

The scan team developed recommendations for 

implementing the results of this scan. These 

related to dissemination, policy development, 

outreach, and research and data analysis activities. 

For example, the scan team recommends a wakeup call on the need for the United States to invest 

in transportation infrastructure with a more national perspective if it is to stay competitive in a global 

market. This first, and perhaps most important, 

recommendation is to develop a “Reveille for 

Refocus” on a fresh, strategic, national perspective 

for U.S. transportation and elected officials. This 

document would draw a sharp focus on the importance of the transportation-economic integration 

so evident in China. More discussion of the 

implementation plan is in the report. 
 Chapter 1: Introduction
Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 

	 C H A P T E R 1

Introduction

China has been a major trading 

partner with the United States for 

many years. This relationship is 

likely to become even stronger in 

the future. The success of this 

trading relationship very much 

depends on the efficiency and productivity of freight 

movements between the two countries and the 

logistics system that supports such movements. 

With an increasing volume of imports coming into 

the United States from China, the ability of the 

Chinese transportation system to handle its exports 

is of great interest to U.S. transportation officials. 

The ability of the U.S. transportation system to 

handle these volumes on the receiving end is also 

important—and cause for concern. The Chinese 

government has invested heavily in transportation, 

with much of this investment coming from private 

investors. The United States can learn from this 

experience.

China’s transportation system is rapidly expanding 

to support economic growth, meet projected global 

intermodal freight demands, and promote expansion into underdeveloped regions of the country. 

Given the current understanding of intermodal 

freight movement that was not available when the 

United States developed its port capacity, the 

purpose of this scan was to identify how China 

provides intermodal access to its new, greenfield 

maritime ports and the possible application of 

those methods in the United States. The scan also 

looked at the investment strategies adopted by 

Chinese officials to foster freight mobility and 

intermodal connectivity in support of their global 

competitiveness.

Scan Composition

The scan team represented a diverse set of interests 

and concerns for national and State decisionmaking (see appendix A for scan team member 

biographies). In addition to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) officials at the national 

and division levels, the team included 

representatives from the departments of transportation for California, Maine, and Pennsylvania; 

a representative of the I-95 Corridor Coalition; 

a representative of the American Association 

of State Highway and Transportation Officials 

(AASHTO); a representative of the American Trucking Associations; and a university professor who 

also acted as the report writer. These scan members 

represented different modal interests and expertise 

in intermodal freight transportation, trucking, 

transportation policy and planning, and 

transportation system operations.

The scan team met with the following groups 

during its 15-day trip: 

Ministry of Communications (intercity highways, 

airports, and ports)*

China Railway Container Corp. (organization 

under the Ministry of Railways)

Provincial officials and representatives 

of the Hong Kong Special Administrative 

Region

Port authorities 

Port terminal operators

Ocean carriers

Municipalities (Shanghai, Shenzhen, and 

Qingdao)

U.S. shippers and retailers

Logistics and warehousing firms

China Development Institute

Although most of the team’s visits were to specific 

organizations, meetings were also held under the 

auspices of the local American Chambers of 

Commerce in Shanghai and Hong Kong. The 

meetings provided an opportunity to meet with 

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

 *In April 2008, the Chinese government created a Ministry of Transportation that incorporates the former Ministry 

of Communications. Aviation, maritime, and highways are among the functions in the Ministry of Transportation. 

The Ministry of Railways remains separate. The result is a transportation policy and development entity similar 

in structure to the U.S. Department of Transportation.
individuals representing many different shipper, 

carrier, and trade organizations. 

In preparation for the scan, the team sent a set 

of amplifying questions (see Appendix B) to the 

organizations it planned to visit to outline the 

type of information desired.

Report Organization

This report is organized in five chapters. Chapter 2 

discusses the special circumstances that reflect 

the Chinese experience with infrastructure provision, the expansion of the Chinese economy over 

the past decades, and the implications to the 

transportation system. Chapter 3 describes China’s 

investments in transportation and plans for the 

future, and presents observations from private 

company representatives who met with the 

scan team. Chapters 4 and 5 present general 

observations, lessons for the United States, 

and recommendations for implementing the 

scan results.

10 Chapter 1: Introduction
I

t is often difficult to compare the United 

States to other countries because of 

differing governmental structures, patterns 

of economic development, and positions 

in the global marketplace. This is especially 

true in any comparison between China and 

the United States. This section describes the key 

contextual differences between the two countries 

that should be considered when drawing conclusions or making observations on the characteristics 

of respective transportation system investment or 

productivity. 

Stage of Development 

China is in a very different stage of development 

than the United States. In essence, China is building 

a transportation network in 10 years comparable to 

what the United States did in 50 years, and it is 

doing so by learning lessons from more developed 

countries. Opening the Chinese market to foreign 

investment in the late 1980s and 1990s was a 

calculated step by the central Chinese government 

to speed up the process of modernizing and 

developing economic linkages to the rest of the 

world. Thus, the fact that China is investing almost 

10 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) in 

all of its infrastructure (compared to just under 

4 percent in the United States) and that the Chinese 

economy is expanding at more than 10 percent a 

year (compared to 2 to 3 percent in the United 

States) should not be surprising.

China’s rapid economic development has been 

reflected in the significant investment in the 

nation’s transportation system. As this report 

shows, China has devoted considerable resources 

and has attracted much more private investment to 

its transportation system. China is directing almost 

all of the funding to new construction, while 

paying little apparent attention to incorporating 

aspects of systems management into facility 

design (such as weigh-in-motion technologies). 

In the United States and Europe, transportation 

agencies are now learning that thinking about 

systems operations and management in the early 

stages of network development saves time and 

resources later when such technologies must be 

retrofitted onto the network.

Governmental Structure for

Decisionmaking

China has a very different form of government and 

decisionmaking process than the United States. 

With a strong centralized government and central 

planning authority, much of what happens in 

China is strongly influenced by central government 

policy. There are also significant differences in 

landownership and how land is transferred to 

private developers by lease instead of purchase. 

Figure 1 (see next page) shows the organizational 

structure of different levels of government in China. 

The Central Party Committee (CPC) is the most 

important participant in the broad policymaking 

process in China, providing leadership to the 

National People’s Congress, State Council, and 

Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference. 

The CPC establishes national policy and often plays 

a critical role in making sure adopted policies are 

carried out. This is done primarily by having party 

members serve as heads of agencies (at the national level) or by having at least a party member and 

an administrator serve jointly as agency head (at the 

local level). Ministries and commissions report to 

the State Council. All ministries must submit an 

infrastructure development plan to the National 

Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) 

for approval. Table 1 (see next page) shows the 

roles of the different groups involved in Chinese 

infrastructure policy, planning, and implementation. 

The following are the most important transportationrelated ministries:

Ministry of Communications—Responsible for 

national roads and highways, inland waterways, 

ports, and ocean shipping

Ñ

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 11

	 C H A P T E R 2

Chinese Context
12 Chapter 2: Chinese Context

Ministry of Railways—Responsible for the 

national railway system

Ministry of Construction—Responsible for 

urban planning and urban transport

Central Administration of Central 

Aviation—Responsible for planning and 

developing airports

At the provincial and municipal levels, each 

government has its own transportation 

agency, often with responsibility for all 

modes of transportation.

Transportation Planning

Infrastructure planning in China is really a 

combination of top-down and bottom-up 

processes. The national government provides 

its vision for national infrastructure through 

the development of 5-year plans. The current 

5-year plan, the 11th in the series, covers 2006– 

2010. Policies and targets in the plan relating 

to transportation include the following:

The target for economic growth was to be 

7.5 percent a year.

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Organization Role and Responsibilities Relevant to Infrastructure

Central Party 

Committee

Sets national development policy direction and general guidance on long-term and medium-term 

national socioeconomic development plans.

National People’s 

Congress

The national legislative body. Three of its committees are relevant to infrastructure policies and laws: 

Legislative Affairs, Finance and Economy, and Environment and Resources. It reviews and approves 

national economic and social development plans, the national budget, and investment megaprojects 

such as the Three Gorges Dam.

Chinese People’s 

Political Consultative 

Conference

A multiparty advisory board, with main functions in political consultation and supervision on major 

political, economic, and social policies. It is a major channel for constructive criticism of government 

policies.

State Council The administrative body of the central government.

National Development 

and Reform 

Commission

Formulates and organizes the implementation of national socioeconomic development strategy, 

long-term plan, medium-term plan (i.e., 5-year plan), and annual plan. Provides policy 

recommendations for macroeconomic management and sectoral development of national 

significance. Coordinates policy implementation across sectors and levels of government. Sets 

and guides implementation of price policies. Determines the size of fixed-asset investment. 

Guides and approves major infrastructure investment projects.

Ministry of Finance Formulates and supervises the implementation of medium-term and annual budget plans. Sets 

and supervises the implementation of fiscal policies. Supervises central government expenditures. 

Allocates funds to central government investment projects. Sets public debt policy and manages 

public debt. Formulates state debt issuance plans.

Commissions

Ministries

Central Bank

Central Party

Committee (CPC)

State

Council

National People’s

Congress (NPC)

Local

Governments

Provincial

Governments

Chinese People’s

Political Consultative

Conference (CPPCC)

Table 1. Role and responsibilities of relevant national Chinese organizations in infrastructure provision.

Figure 1. Chinese governmental structure. 

Source: Liu, Z., “Planning and Policy Coordination in China’s Infrastructure 

Development,” Paper prepared for the ADB-JBIC-World Bank East Asia 

Pacific Infrastructure Flagship Study, undated.
Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 13

Organization Role and Responsibilities Relevant to Infrastructure (continued)

People’s Bank of China 

(Central Bank)

Analyzes, formulates, and implements macro financial credit policy based on national socioeconomic 

development policy and sectoral policy.

Ministry of 

Communications

(now Ministry of 

Transportation)

Ministry responsible for roads and highways, inland waterway, ports, and ocean shipping.

Ministry of Railways Ministry responsible for railways.

Ministry of 

Construction

Ministry responsible for urban planning, urban development and construction, urban utilities, and 

urban transport.

Ministry of Information 

Industry

Ministry responsible for information and telecommunications industry.

Ministry of Land and 

Resources

Ministry for planning, protecting, and managing the use of, land, mineral, and maritime resources.

Civil Aviation 

Administration 

of China

Central level bureau for civil aviation.

State Environmental 

Protection 

Administration

Sets guidelines for project environmental impact assessment.

State-Owned Asset 

Supervision and 

Administration 

Commission of the 

State Council

A special agency established in 2003 under the State Council to supervise and manage the stateowned enterprises (SOEs) (including the infrastructure sector SOEs such as China Power Grid Co.) 

and SOE reform and restructuring. 

China Development 

Bank

A policy bank reporting to the State Council that is heavily involved in infrastructure financing.

State Commercial 

Banks

Responsible for infrastructure financing and SOE financing.

Development 

Research Center of 

the State Council

An in-house think tank for the Sate Council, focusing on the overall, comprehensive, strategic, 

and long-term issues in the national economic and social development, and providing policy 

recommendations and consulting advice. Among its research departments are three highly 

relevant to infrastructure: Development Strategy and Regional Economy, Sectoral Economy, 

and Technology Economy (survey and study on major construction projects and regional 

development projects).

China International 

Engineering 

Consulting 

Corporation

The primary agency designated for the due diligence of the feasibility studies of key investment 

projects that require NDRC approval. It provides its services mainly on commission from project 

sponsors, including governments at all levels and enterprises.

Institute of 

Geography, China 

Academy of 

Sciences

Heavily involved in regional planning, regional urban system planning, and detailed surveys of 

natural resources across the country and assessment of their economic potential.

Source: Liu, Z., “Planning and Policy Coordination in China’s Infrastructure Development,” Paper prepared for the ADB-JBIC-World Bank 

East Asia Pacific Infrastructure Flagship Study, undated.
14 Chapter 2: Chinese Context

National policy was aimed at supporting an 

economic expansion in the western provinces 

of China.

Logistics was for the first time identified as a 

national issue, with reducing logistics cost 

defined as a governmental objective. 

Six new rail lines totaling 17,000 kilometers (km) 

(10,563 miles (mi)), six railway transportation 

hubs, 18 intermodal yards, 40 container handling 

stations, 150 intermodal substations, and 

1 million km (621,371 mi) of rural roads were 

to be built.

A 10 percent market share for rail intermodal 

traffic was established.

All cities with more than 1 million people and 

90 percent of cities with 200,000 to 1 million 

people were to be connected to the national 

road network.

The following ports were identified as being of 

national significance and thus needing improvements in port access and port infrastructure 

(see figure 7 for the locations of these port areas):

Yangtze River Delta—Shanghai and Ningbo

Pearl River Delta—Shenzhen and Guangzhou

Bohai Region—Dalian, Tianjin, and Qingdao

Within the construct of the 5-year plan, local officials 

appeared to have some flexibility in investing in 

transportation infrastructure that meets national 

goals while satisfying their jurisdictional needs. 

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Scan team discussions with national transportation 

officials emphasized the cooperative nature of 

transportation investment, whereas local decisions 

were described as being much more targeted at 

increasing the jurisdiction’s competitive advantage. 

Thus, local officials appeared to have a great deal of 

flexibility in targeting transportation investment in 

ways that best meet their needs.

The scan team met with representatives from 

several provincial and metropolitan transportation 

organizations. It was difficult to determine exactly 

how these organizations were structured, but it was 

notable that almost all modal planning functions 

were found within the government agency. This 

appeared to foster a multimodal perspective on 

transportation planning. Figure 2 for example, was 

presented as an illustration of how the Pearl River 

Delta economic and transportation system worked. 

The different symbols represent economic activities 

and transportation facilities. The map shows 

logistics corridors through which large freight 

volumes flow, connecting to the ports, airports, 

and river and barge terminals. 

Transportation Investment 

and Finance

China has seen a profound change in its infrastructure financing strategy over the past 20 years, and 

not just in transportation. In 1981, 

for example, 57 percent of all 

infrastructure finance in China 

was funded directly by the 

national government through its 

general budget. By 1997, this had 

declined to 6 percent. By this 

date, most infrastructure was 

financed either through foreign 

direct investment, user fees, state 

debt, or loans from the China 

Development Bank. 

China joined the World Trade 

Organization in 2001, with 

commitments to liberalize certain 

sectors of its market by set 

deadlines. In transportation, the 

government established a 

timetable for allowing foreign 

investment in different sectors. 

For example, in December 2002, 

Source: Charles Guowen Wang, China Development Institute

Figure 2. Multimodal transportation system in the Pearl River Delta.
Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 15

the Ministry of Communications established a policy 

that foreign investment can reach 75 percent in road 

transport enterprise joint ventures (that is, joint 

ventures relating to trucking firms, warehousing, 

and trucking terminals). For investments that relate 

to roads, bridges, and other large-scale infrastructure development, foreign investment is limited to 

49 percent, thus maintaining government control. 

This is referred to as asset equitization versus asset 

monetization (in which the public sector gets money 

from selling or leasing infrastructure). Some flexibility is allowed in increasing the private share of a 

joint venture under special circumstances. For 

example, private investment in facilities or services 

that serve the targeted western provinces of 

China can exceed the 75 percent maximum with 

permission of the Ministry of Communications.

Because of the many different means of investing in 

transportation infrastructure in China, the transportation financing picture in China can be confusing to 

the outsider. Data from the national ministries often 

do not represent the overall investment picture in 

logistics-related infrastructure. Rail and airport 

investment is mainly conducted by the national 

government; most seaports are invested in and 

owned by local government agencies or stateowned enterprises on behalf of government agencies. According to some local officials, investment 

incentives by local governments sometimes 

cause repetitive investment and overinvestment in 

logistics infrastructure (seaports, logistics parks).

In some cases, the Chinese government invests in 

infrastructure largely by itself (such as 18 freight 

intermodal yards) because it cannot interest 

private investors in the opportunity. In other cases, 

provincial or municipal governments invest in 

facilities in combination with private investors. In 

still others, joint ventures have been formed with 

several partners to develop and operate a facility. 

In many of these investment cases, the return on 

investment is small, but the expectation is that 

future demand (for example, volumes for toll 

roads) will provide bigger returns later on. 

Thus, it becomes impossible to generalize about 

transportation finance in China, except to say 

that the Chinese take advantage of any private 

investment dollars they are able to secure.

In summary, given the economic growth in China, 

the resources this places in the hands of the government, the governmental structure, the government’s 

willingness to partner with private capital, private 

capital’s interest in development opportunities, 

and the ability to use technological standards for 

roadway design and construction developed by the 

United States and European Union, it is not surprising to find that China has been able to expand its 

transportation infrastructure at such a rapid pace. 

Chinese Economic Growth

During the 30 years after the founding of the 

People’s Republic of China in 1949, the national 

economy was centrally planned and largely 

controlled on the basis of traditional socialist 

principles. Beginning in 1978, and starting in 

rural areas, the central government began to relax 

some of the stringent constraints on economic 

growth. The results have been dramatic. Over the 

past 25 years, China’s GDP has grown an average 

of more than 8 percent per year, with a 10.4 

percent annual growth rate from 2002 to 2006. 

As table 2 (see next page) shows, this growth 

is expected to continue at very high rates into 

the near future. 

Growth in foreign trade has been the major factor 

spurring this economic growth. From 2002 to 2006, 

for example, the value of exports grew by 31.4 

percent a year and the value of imports grew 

29.5 percent annually. Much of this trade has 

been with the United States. Figure 3 (see next 

page) shows the Chinese export destinations 

and the U.S. import origins for sea-based trade in 

2006 (U.S. imports from Canada and Mexico are 

excluded). Although China is a dominant source 

of sea-based trade with the United States, the 

country has a much more diverse set of export 

destinations. Many in China expected this to 

continue in the future, with intra-Asian trade 

becoming more prominent for China than 

it is today.

“Chinese transportation 

officials are much more 

aware of the importance of 

logistics to their economy 

than American officials.”

–American Presidents

Line representative
16 Chapter 2: Chinese Context

According to officials at A.P. Moller–

Maersk, a major shipping line serving the 

Chinese market, the major factors that 

have contributed to this growth include 

the following:

Privatization—Most small and medium 

state-owned enterprises (SOEs) have 

become privatized.

SOE reform—Larger SOEs have become 

more efficient and profit oriented 

because of governmental reforms.

Banking system and capital market 

reform—China’s financial system has 

been overhauled with the public listing 

of the major banks and reform of 

nontradable shares.

Urbanization—Rapid urbanization 

across the country has created both an 

accessible labor pool and a rapidly 

growing consumer market.

Industry upgrade—Chinese enterprises 

have been improving the quantity and 

quality of their manufacturing in an 

attempt to move up the value chain and 

produce more valuable goods.

All of the analysts who participated in the 

scan meetings expected China’s historical 

economic growth to continue in the 

foreseeable future. One assessment 

concluded that GDP growth would occur 

at a 17.1 percent annual rate (at market 

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

2007 2011 CAGR

GDP 

(US$ bn at market exchange rates)

 3,320.3 6,236.5 17.1%

GDP (RMB bn at 1995 price) 18,698.0 25,817.0 8.4%

GDP per head (US$) 2,510.0 4,620.0 16.5%

Goods: export fob (US$ bn) 1,200.4 2,422.0 19.2%

Goods: import fob (US$ bn) (891.5) (2,059.0) 23.3%

Foreign direct investment 

(pledged US$ bn)

 83.4 92.9 2.7%

Exchange rate (RMB/US$) average 7.62 6.45 -4.1%

Greater China Area export volume 

(million 40-ft equiv)

19.62 32.68 13.6%

Greater China Area import 

(million 40-ft equiv)

7.96 13.43 14.0%

China’s Share of the World in 2011

Share of world GDP 

(% at market exchange rate)

6.32 9.36

Share of world GDP (% at PPP) 16.05 18.82

Share of world exports (%) 8.73 13.56

Note: Export and import volume data is from GCAMKT

Source: EIU country forecast report, August 2007

Table 2. Forecasted economic factors for China, 2007 and 2011.

Source: A.P. Moller-Maersk

Figure 3. China export destinations and U.S. import origins for sea-based trade.

2006 China Export by Country/Area 2006 U.S. Import by Country/Area

27.2% Others 

4.4% Japan 

3.9% Hong Kong

3.3% Taiwan

2.8% Germany

2.4% Brazil

2.3% Thailand

2.3% Italy

1.9% India

3.1% Korea

46.3%

Mainland

China

33.8% Others 

10.1% Japan 

6.2% Hong Kong

5.0% Korea

4.8% Germany

3.2% Netherlands

3.1% U.K.

2.1% Taiwan

1.9% Canada

1.8% Australia

28.1% U.S.
Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 17

exchange rates), the value of exports would grow 

by 19.2 percent a year and imports by 23 percent 

a year, China’s share of the world’s GDP at market 

exchange rates would increase from 6.32 percent 

in 2007 to 9.36 percent in 2011, and China’s share 

of world exports would increase from 8.73 percent 

in 2007 to 13.56 percent in 2011. With China’s 

government focusing on economic growth and 

targeting its policies on investments to foster 

growth, it appears likely that these predictions 

will come true.

An example of the linkage between central 

planning and economic development that has 

important implications for the Chinese transportation system is the plan the State Council’s Research 

and Devel­opment Center developed in early 2005 

that divided China into four 

regions (see figure 4). These 

regions were divided into 

eight economic zones:

The northeast economic 

zone would mainly develop 

heavy industry, machinery, 

raw materials, and manufacturing, as well as 

become the national 

agriculture base. 

The northern coastal zone 

would focus on high technology and manu­facturing.

The eastern coastal zone 

would be headed by 

Shanghai and would 

be developed into a comprehensive manufacturing 

center, becoming the most 

competitive region. 

The southern coastal zone would develop 

an outbound econo­my and a consumer 

commodity base. 

The mid-Yellow River zone would be 

developed into a coal, energy, iron, 

and steel production zone. 

The mid-Yangtze River zone would primarily 

develop planting and agriculture, with 

secondary emphasis on iron, steel, and 

automobile industries. 

The southwest zone would be built into a 

heavy industrial, textile, and tourist zone. 

The northwest zone would mainly develop 

energy, farm and raise livestock, and 

develop the tourist industry.

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

 An important characteristic of this economic 

structure is that much of China’s economic 

production and growth originates in the coastal 

provinces. For example, 93 percent of China’s 

exports originate in these provinces. Almost 40 

percent of the exports originate in the Pearl River 

Delta region alone (the region including Hong 

Kong, Shenzhen, and Guangzhou), the first region 

opened to foreign economic development. The 

Yangtze River region (Shanghai) was the second 

region to experience substantial economic growth. 

Over the past 10 years, the government has 

attempted to spur economic growth in the northeast and northern coastal zones, and most recently 

it has adopted a national investment and economic 

policy to support economic progress in the inland 

western provinces. This “Go West” policy has 

Figure 4. The four economic regions of China.

Northeastern 

Region

Coastal

Region

Central

Region

Western Region

“China will have the infrastructure in place to 

handle increasing trade flows. The real problem 

is in Europe and the United States, where 

governments do not seem able or willing to 

invest in the transportation system. The Chinese 

clearly see the relationship between economic 

development and transportation system 

productivity. It is not clear if European and 

American officials understand this linkage.”

 – Moller-Maersk representative
18 Chapter 2: Chinese Context

important implications to trade and logistics 

because goods manufactured in the western 

provinces will have to make their way to 

the ports on the coast, possibly increasing 

logistics costs.

The growth in China’s GDP and its place in the 

global market are even more impressive when 

one considers the costs of logistics on the Chinese 

mainland. Logistics costs represent more than 20 

percent of the total cost of product manufacturing 

and delivery (compared to around 10 percent for the 

United States). Many of the shippers and retailers 

that participated in scan meetings pointed to 

reducing this level of logistics costs as being the 

greatest productivity improvement that could 

occur in the Chinese market.

Caution should be exercised in interpreting the 

20 percent logistics cost. In many ways, this larger 

percentage (compared to the United States or 

Japan) can be explained by the different structure 

of the economy. Services, which generate little 

freight movement, are only 32 percent of China’s 

GDP, compared to 81 percent in the United States 

and 68 percent in Japan. In addition, the average 

value of Chinese manufactures is well below the 

corresponding values in the United States and 

Japan. Thus, it might not be surprising that China’s 

logistics costs are a larger part of the delivered 

price of manufactured goods. According to a 

long-time economist who has observed China’s 

economic progress for many years, “As its wage 

levels rise, China will need to move up the value 

chain, gradually reducing the ratio of transport to 

final prices and hence its logistics-to-GDP ratio...

It is wrong to use this ratio at this time to allege 

that logistics services are—across the board, 

anyway—high cost.” 
Chinese officials at all levels of 

government and in the private 

sector agree that investing in the 

transportation system is one 

of the country’s most important 

investment priorities. Not only 

does a reliable and efficient transportation system 

support economic development, but it also 

provides mobility for an increasingly mobile 

Chinese population. 

Figure 5 shows the level of investment that has 

occurred since 2000 in different elements of the 

transportation system and the expected level of 

investment up to 2010, in U.S. dollars. Figure 6 

(see next page) shows the extent of four transportation networks in terms of network expansion. 

The investment strategy in each modal network is 

very different, including who is involved, what type 

of investment is being contemplated, and the 

expected role each modal network is to play in the 

overall transportation system. Each modal network 

will be discussed in the following sections.

Highways

Of all the transportation investments made in China 

over the past 5 years, the largest amount has been 

dedicated to the nation’s road network. In fact, the 

pace of investment has been so fast over the past 

5 years that any comparison with years before this 

does not provide a good picture of what is happening with road investment today. Table 3 (see next 

page) presents some of the most important 

characteristics of China’s road network. As the table 

shows, the growth rate in both network expansion 

and network use has been substantial. 

According to the Ministry of Communications, 

the total highway investment in 2006 was US$84.3 

billion, a 13.6 percent 

increase over the 2005 

investment level. Domestic loans (from the China 

Development Bank) and 

self-finance bonding 

accounted for the bulk 

of the revenue for this 

investment program, 40.7 

percent and 32.8 percent, 

respectively, of the 

funding. Only 1.5 percent 

of the capital investment 

came from the national 

government budget. 

The government has 

plans to expand the 

national expressway 

system, as shown in 

figure 7 (see page 21). 

By 2010, the expressway 

system is expected to be 

65,000 km (40,389 mi) 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 19

	 C H A P T E R 3

China’s Transportation 

System and Plans for 

the Future

Source: A.P. Moller-Maersk

Figure 5. Average annual total investment in Chinese

transportation infrastructure (US$).

➤

➤

➤

➤

➤

➤

➤

➤

➤

➤

➤

➤

Average annual investment (USD billions)

2001–2004 2005–2010 (estimated)
long; by 2025, the total expressway network is 

expected to be 85,000 km (52,800 mi). This expressway network is designed to have seven major 

expressways radiating out of Beijing, nine northsouth expressways, and 18 east-west expressways 

(the so-called 7-9-18 plan). This network is intended 

to link most cities with a population of more than 

500,000. In addition, expressway extensions into 

the western provinces are aimed at increasing 

economic opportunity in this part of the country.

To a large extent, this expressway network is 

modeled after the U.S. Interstate network, with 

similar geometric designs and operational 

characteristics. Also similar to U.S. expressways, 

the urban portions of this network are severely 

congested during peak periods. 

Transportation officials and U.S. shippers 

pointed to overweight trucks as one of the 

most important challenges facing Chinese 

transportation agencies. Given that the 

trucking industry consists primarily of 

numerous one- to three-truck firms, many 

markets are highly competitive. In addition, 

Chinese manufacturers have the right to 

choose the carrier for the first move from 

the plant, which provides a strong incentive 

to load a truck as much as possible to 

maximize revenue. The national, provincial, 

and municipal governments have established enforcement programs, but the sense 

among transportation officials is that a large 

number of oversized and overweight trucks 

are still on the road. 

Rail

Chinese officials realize that the rail network 

needs to be improved if it is to play an 

important role in international trade. Figure 

8 shows the major rail lines in China. Similar to the 

national expressway network, China plans to add 

to this network to create an 84,973-km (52,800-mi) 

main rail network by 2010 and a 100,000-km 

(62,137-mi) network by 2025. The current 5-year 

plan targeted the following rail investments:

Build an express passenger transport network 

with four north-south and four east-west lines, 

plus three intercity express routes.

Enhance rail access to ports.

Target rail investments in the western region.

Optimize rail network by electrifying and 

building dual track.

Construct 18 intermodal container rail terminals 

and develop a double-stack container 

transportation route.

Construct five major hubs.

Container movements by rail face several 

challenges. Container movement on the 

rail network carries about 2.2 percent of the 

national rail freight tonnage and 1.5 percent 

of the total container volume moved in 

the country. Three types of rail intermodal 

services are available: scheduled, 

unscheduled, and block trains. Scheduled 

and unscheduled trains have the least 

priority on the rail network, with military, 

passenger, coal, and foodstuffs coming first 

(the rail network is shared by freight and 

passenger rail services). Freight movements 

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

20 Chapter 3: China’s Transportation System and Plans for the Future

Source: APL, Inc.

Figure 6. Growth and expected growth in

Chinese transportation infrastructure.

90

184

142

2000

2005

2010

Commercial

Airports

651

1250

1030

2000

2005

2010

Deep Water

Berths

42,000

53,000

46,000

2000

2005

2010

Rail Network

(miles)

867,000

1,429,000

1,181,000

2000

2005

2010

Road Network

(miles)

Infrastructure (U.S. dollars)

Characteristic 2005 2006 % change

Total road mileage (miles) 2,078,603 2,148,080 3.3

Expressway (miles) 25,479 28,172 10.6

Freight tonnage by highway 

(100 million tons) 134.2 146.6 9.3

Freight ton-miles 

(100 million ton-miles) 5,401 6,061 12.2

TEUs carried by truck 24,649.224 35,178,263 42.7

Source: Ministry of Communications, Transport Statistics Yearbook, 2006

Table 3. Characteristics of China’s road network, 2005–2006.
by rail are often unreliable and, in many markets, 

face stiff competition from trucking firms. Few ports 

have dockside rail access, so some form of intermodal transfer must occur before containers reach the 

port that enables them to be 

loaded onto a ship. 

China plans to invest in the 

freight rail network with 

expectations that more 

freight (especially containers) will be hauled by rail. 

A 10 million 20-foot equivalent unit (TEU) target via rail 

has been established as part 

of the 5-year planning 

process. Given that the level 

is now 3 million TEUs, this is 

an ambitious goal. Eighteen 

new intermodal yards are 

part of the strategy to attract 

more container traffic to rail. 

Several of these yards are 

open and others are under 

construction. New freightonly track is being constructed in major origin-destination 

corridors and investments are being made in 

rolling stock. However, unlike many of the major 

road projects, private investors have not actively 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 21

Figure 7. China’s major highway network.

Figure 8. China’s rail network.

5 Rail hubs

18 Intermodal yards

Rail express lines

(4 vertical and 4 horizontal)

Year 2010 Inter-city Expressway Network
sought investment opportunities in the rail 

network. Government solicitations to participate 

in some of the intermodal rail yard projects, for 

example, did not attract much attention from the 

investment community. 

Navigable Waterways

Throughout China’s history, rivers and coastal 

shipping routes have been major thoroughfares 

for commerce. The Pearl and Yangtze Rivers, in 

particular, have served as the commercial arteries 

for much of China’s economic development. 

As noted earlier, the Pearl River Delta was the 

first region to experience large-scale foreign 

investment, becoming a major manufacturing and 

transportation hub of China’s international trade. 

Table 4 shows statistics on the importance of 

China’s navigable water network. These statistics 

are national and thus hide the more local nature 

of barge transportation. For example, about 

30 percent of the transshipments that occur 

in Shanghai involve barges. In the Pearl River 

Delta, the percentage is slightly higher. The 

exact percentage in the Pearl River Delta is hard 

to estimate because many transshipments occur 

in midstream from one barge to another to avoid 

terminal fees. Also, some terminals have limited 

barge access because of capacity constraints, 

so barges must have a minimum of six containers 

to berth pier-side.

Those interviewed for the scanning study had 

different opinions about the Pearl and Yangtze River 

barge operations. The sense was that too much 

barge capacity exists in the Yangtze River market 

and, given the numerous small operators (similar 

to the trucking industry), it is a highly competitive 

market. In some cases, the freight forwarder is also 

the barge operator, which results in a 

mixing of interests on expediting the 

movement of the container. Few berths 

are available for barges along the river 

and at the mainland port itself (this is 

not true for the new port built off the 

coast). In addition, the recent opening 

of a new port in Shanghai (Yangshan) 

many miles from the old port and 

located in deep water raises questions 

about the seaworthiness of the existing 

barge fleet to serve the new port. 

For the Pearl River, the sense was that 

barge capacity is sufficient to handle 

market demand, although competition 

is still quite high, in this case among 

larger barge companies. New river ports 

have been constructed in the Pearl River 

to cater to barge traffic, thus providing 

more convenient intermodal transfer 

(although a large percentage of the 

transshipments occur midstream). 

Table 5 indicates why inland water 

transportation is so important for the 

supply chain in China. This table shows 

estimated costs and transit time to move 

a 20-foot container from Chongqing to 

Shanghai, a distance of 2,092 to 2,575 

km (1,300 to 1,600 mi), depending on the 

modal network (see map in figure 8 for 

the location of Chongqing). Although 

22 Chapter 3: China’s Transportation System and Plans for the Future

Characteristic 2005 2006 % change

Total navigable mileage (miles) — 76,639 —

Inland river berths — 30,942 —

Coastal port berths 4,298 4,511 5.0

Number of barges 41,000 37,000 -9.8

Fleet net dead weight (million tons) 11.0 12.0 9.0

Tonnage by waterway (billion tons)

• River

• Coastal

• Oceangoing

2.2

1.05

0.65

0.49

2.5

1.2

0.8

0.5

13.2

9.8

19.5

12.1

Ton-miles (100 million ton-miles)

• River

• Coastal

• Oceangoing

30,865

1,632

5,279

23,954

34,477

1,880

6,141

26,456

11.7

15.2

16.3

10.4

TEUs carried by water 19,400,000 23,300,000 20.21

Source: Ministry of Communications, Transport Statistics Yearbook, 2006

Chongqing to 

Shanghai

Distance

(Miles)

Transit Time 

(Days)

Cost

(US$, 20-ft container)

Road 1,300 3–4 (40 hours) $1,500

Rail 1,600 7–10 $ 540

Barge 1,500 8 (11 upriver) $ 315

 Source: APL, Inc.

Table 4. Characteristics of China’s navigable water network.

Table 5. Comparative costs and time to transport a TEU

to Shanghai from Chongqing.
barge transport takes a longer transit time than 

truck, it costs almost 80 percent less. For commodities that are not time sensitive, barge transportation 

is clearly the preferred mode on the basis of cost.

Ports

The economic growth that China has experienced 

over the past two decades has been driven primarily 

by international trade. This trade could not have 

occurred without port capacity to handle the everincreasing flow of containers coming from mainland 

factories. Figure 9 shows TEU movement for selected Chinese ports in 2006 and that expected in 2011. 

Growth in these ports has averaged greater than 

20 percent per annum over the past 5 years, so the 

forecasted volumes do not appear unreasonable. 

Figure 10 (see next page) shows a comparison 

between TEU throughput in Chinese and U.S. 

ports. Figure 11 (see next page) shows the expected 

growth in China container movements as a share of 

the global market, from a 31 percent share in 2006 

to an expected 34 percent share by 2011. Ten of the 

top 30 container ports are located in China, as are 

three of the top four (Hong Kong, Shenzhen, and 

Shanghai). By 2010, eight of the top 15 container 

ports will be in China, with Shanghai expected to 

be the largest container port in the world.

The ports in Shanghai, in particular, play a 

significant role both in the Chinese economy and 

the global market. Tonnage through the ports in 

Shanghai will exceed 350 million in 2007, making it 

the largest port in the world from the perspective of 

tonnage moved. Shanghai has already overtaken 

Hong Kong as the largest container port in China 

(an expected 27 million TEUs in 2007), and expected 

future growth will only solidify this position. 

The new Shanghai Port of Yangshan is an example 

of the type of investment the Chinese are making 

in port infrastructure (see figures 12 and 13 on page 

25). The first two phases of the US$14.5 billion 

Yangshan deep-sea port are now open, with a 2020 

target year for achieving the full capacity of the port 

(33 to 50 deep-sea berths) at 25 million TEUs per 

year. The port is located about 32 km (20 miles) 

offshore and is connected to the mainland by a 

highway bridge (there is no direct rail connection 

to the port, although there is a new intermodal rail 

yard on the mainland near the bridge gateway).

One of the most impressive aspects of the Yangshan 

Port, and indeed other Chinese ports, is its operational productivity. The terminal can handle 35 

TEU operations per hour per crane, with a daily 

throughput record of 23,044 TEUs. The terminal is 

open 7 days a week, 365 days a year. The terminal 

operator commits to loading and unloading a barge 

within 5 hours and a vessel within 20 hours, and it 

has a posted truck turn time of a maximum 30 

minutes. Some ports can use seven cranes per 

vessel in the loading and unloading process, 

greatly speeding up the vessel turnaround time.

The Yangshan Port has not only created a modern 

facility to export goods to the world, but it has also 

spurred local growth. For example, the mainland 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 23

 Source: A.P. Moller-Maersk

Figure 9. TEU throughput in selected Chinese ports, 2006 and 2011.

40,000

30,000

20,000

10,000

0

Shanghai Shenzhen Hong Kong Guangzhou Ningbo Qingdao Tianjin Kaohsiung Xiamen Dalian

2006 Throughput

2011 Throughput

Unit: 1’000 TEU
entry to the port bridge has become a highly 

desirable location for logistics and warehousing 

centers. A new town has been created to house port 

employees, and what was once agricultural land is 

turning into manufacturing, freight consolidation, 

and warehousing sites. 

Meetings With Shipping, Retail, 

Logistics, and Warehousing Firms 

The scan team met with many representatives 

of U.S. retailers and shipping, warehousing, and 

consolidation firms. Many of these discussions 

focused on their perceptions of the performance 

of the U.S. transportation system as much as on 

the Chinese transport system. The major point the 

private sector participants in these meetings made 

is that they have every expectation that the Chinese 

government, along with private investors, will 

provide a transportation system that will meet the 

needs of the supply chain in China. Their concern 

is more with the ability of the United States and 

European Union to provide reliable transportation 

serving their own ports. Much of the discussion 

centered on the poor productivity of U.S. port 

operations compared to Chinese ports. 

Several companies provided the scan team with 

estimates of future trade trends. Firms such as 

ProLogis, Moller-Maersk, and American Presidents 

Line made several observations that they believe 

characterize the current and expected market 

situation in China. The following is a compilation 

of their observations:

World trade is expected to grow 6 to 12 percent a 

year over the next 5 years, and 80 percent of this 

trade will be carried by ships. 

Asian growth (especially in China) is key. More 

than 51 percent of worldwide container traffic 

passes through Asia. In 2001, international trade 

represented 79 percent of East Asian GDP, up 

from 50 percent in 1991.

Although China still faces serious challenges 

ahead, its strong growth momentum will be 

maintained in the next 5 years.

Key challenges facing China include deteriorating environmental conditions, undersupply of 

natural resources, asset inflation, an aging 

population, a social welfare system under 

pressure, employment demands because of 

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

24 Chapter 3: China’s Transportation System and Plans for the Future

 Source: A.P. Moller-Maersk

Figure 11. Expected Chinese share

of global container market.

Source: A.P. Moller-Maersk

Figure 10. TEU throughput in Chinese and U.S. ports, 2006.

Dalian

3,205

Qingdao

7,678

Tianjin

5,941

Xiamen

3,950

Shenzhen

18,171

Ningbo

7,033

Shanghai

21,576

Hong Kong

23,331

Guangzhou

6,456

Houston

1,606

New Orleans

176

San Pedro Bay

LA & Long Beach

15,760

Punta Colonet

Portland

214

Tacoma

2,067

Vancouver

2,208 Seattle

1,987

Oakland

2,390

Savannah

2,160

Charleston

1,970

Norfolk

2,046

New York (NY & NJ)

5,092

Halifax

2006 TEU Throughput

(in thousands)

Bubble size is approximately in 

proportion to 2006 TEU Volume

Global Port Throughput

(Mill TEUs)

CAGR

(06-11)

GCA% of world

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

2006 2011

424

642

31% 34%

Rest

of the

World

Greater

China
accelerated urbanization, 

uneven income distribution, 

and protectionism in 

international trade.

Coastal infrastructure is first 

class, but inland infrastructure 

is inadequate. The sources of 

China’s economic growth are 

concentrated in coastal China, 

but growth in coastal China is 

slowing as costs rise. Linking 

coastal China to untapped 

inland markets is a key to 

the future.

Rail use in mainland China’s 

hinterland still remains the key 

bottleneck for the future. Rail 

rates over long distances are still challenged 

by truck, which enjoys fuel price protection on 

diesel (to a degree). There is little enforcement 

of over-the-road weight limit, allowing one truck 

to carry what would normally require two to 

three. This makes some long-haul truck routes 

competitive with rail, especially because of 

speed.

Mainland China is dominated by mom-and-pop 

truck operators. The average trucking company 

has one to two trucks.

Current ship orders (3.15 million TEUs) 

represent more than 45 percent 

of worldwide capacity. Thirtyfive ships are in service with a 

capacity in excess of 7,500 

TEUs, with orders for 126 

additional ships of this size 

or larger.

In North America, there is a 

clear trend by shippers to 

diversify inbound shipments to 

multiple ports. The goal is to 

minimize the risk of disruption 

in the supply chain in the event 

a single port is impacted by 

labor unrest, terrorism, etc. 

North American and European 

transportation systems are a 

concern because of insufficient 

investment in infrastructure, limited terminal 

capacity, road congestion, and the inability of 

government to provide timely investments. 

Harbor depths, port terminal size and equipment, 

capacity of regional highway and intermodal rail 

infrastructure, land availability, and labor and 

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

environmental constraints will limit or enhance 

port growth in North America and Europe.

Few U.S. ports will be able to accommodate postPanamax ships, trade routes will become more 

concentrated between major ports, inland ports 

will grow in number, and interest in intermodal 

Ñ

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 25

Figure 12. Many container transshipments in the Pearl River basin 

take place in midstream, primarily to avoid fees for land terminal use.

Figure 13. The new Yangshan

deep-sea port in Shanghai.

Figure 14. The new bridge connecting the

Port of Yangshan to the mainland.
rail links will increase in Europe and 

North America. Gateway ports with 

good intermodal rail links to inland 

ports (Seattle, Houston, Rotterdam, 

Hamburg) may experience less 

warehouse demand as many containers are transported directly inland. 

The number of transshipment hubs 

will grow. Twenty-eight percent of the 

worldwide volume of containers 

(85 million TEUs) are transshipped. In 

China, new direct shipment ports are 

emerging in areas that traditionally 

used transshipment hubs. As a result, 

the ports at Los Angeles-Long Beach 

and New York-New Jersey will likely 

lose market share to several emerging 

North American ports, yet the sheer 

volume of containers handled at the 

major North American ports will 

remain dominant.

Larger, multimarket, global terminal 

operators continue to grow (Hutchinson, Eurogate, PSA Corp., HHLA, CSX 

World Terminals, International 

Container Terminal Services, Inc.). 

Major shipping lines (A.P. MoellerMaersk, Evergreen, APL, COSCO, 

NYK, Mediterranean Shipping Co., 

P&O) continue to integrate vertically, 

offering more value-added services 

(consolidation and deconsolidation, 

rail shuttles, logistics, third-party 

logistics services (3PLs), etc.). Increasingly, 3PLs and ship lines will be 

customers for port-related properties.

The need for deconsolidation warehouse facilities will increase in North 

America and Europe, especially at the 

emerging direct shipment ports. 

Logistics providers (shipping lines and 

3PLs) are increasingly seeking deconsolidation warehouse facilities where 

inbound product can be unloaded, 

mixed, and repacked for direct distribution. Proximity to port terminals is 

essential and foreign trade zone 

designation is increasingly meaningful.

In China, facilities for import- and 

export-oriented activities will increase: 

export consolidated forwarding 

services for consolidation (nonbonded), international logistics (bonded), 

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Port of Qingdao

The city and Port of Qingdao, located in the province 

of Shandung on the Yellow River, has been one of 

the fastest growing economic centers in China. GDP 

growth in the province has averaged just over 16 percent 

a year for the past 3 years, with growth in foreign direct 

investment averaging just over 13 percent a year. The Port of 

Qingdao has been one of the fastest growing ports in China. 

Port officials expected about 9 million TEUs to move through 

the port in 2007. The United States has the highest number of 

container exports (19 percent), but Japan (18 percent) and 

South Korea (14 percent) are just behind. The European 

Union represents 17 percent of port exports. 

Figure 15. The Port of Qingdao is one of

the most efficient ports in China.

The port used to be located in center city, some 80 km (50 mi) 

away. However, because of community concerns about port 

expansion so close to neighborhoods, government officials 

decided that a new port should be constructed some distance 

away. A toll road was built to connect to the new port. Qingdao 

is one of six cities in China that has been given planning 

authority by the central government, so it has been able to 

develop an economic development strategy that emphasizes 

the competitive advantages of the surrounding region.

The port itself is one of most modern in China. It has ondock rail facilities (one of the few in China that does), as 

well as barge transshipment terminals. The major terminal 

in the port, the QQCT terminal, is a joint venture of four 

shareholders—a government corporation (31 percent 

share), Dubai Ports (29 percent), Maersk (20 percent), and 

Cosco Pacific (20 percent). Just over US$880 million has 

been invested in the terminal to date. Terminal operations 

include the monitoring of key performance measures, such 

as gross crane rate (36.6 moves per hour), gross vessel rate 

(69 hours), net crane rate (40.8 moves per hour), and truck 

turnaround time (34 minutes).

26 Chapter 3: China’s Transportation System and Plans for the Future
Development of Distribution 

Centers: Case of ProLogis

ProLogis is the world’s largest owner, manager, and 

developer of distribution facilities, with 44.9 million 

square meters (483 million square feet) of industrial 

space in 105 markets across North America, Asia, and 

Europe. The company leases its industrial facilities to 4,700 

customers, including manufacturers, retailers, transportation 

companies, third-party logistics providers, and other enterprises with large-scale distribution needs. Since going public 

in 1994, ProLogis has experienced extraordinary growth. It 

has gone from $400 million in assets under management in 

just nine U.S. States to a global portfolio of properties valued 

at more than $34 billion. ProLogis continues to follow its 

customers into new markets and to extend its position as 

the global leader in industrial real estate.

Figure 16. The new Lingang industrial park has the road 

and sewer infrastructure built, waiting for

development to occur.

ProLogis identified China as a major market several years 

ago and now has facilities in 19 markets in the country. 

ProLogis has also been a major player in developing the 

Lingang industrial park near the new Yangshan Port. The 

Lingang industrial area is expected to be about 300 square 

km (116 square mi) in area (half the size of Singapore), with 

land uses targeted for manufacturing, heavy industry, high 

tech, logistics, and residential and commercial activities. 

The 2020 population is expected to reach 800,000.

The ProLogis facility in Lingang, a joint venture with a 

state-owned agency, has an area of about 2.8 square km 

(1.1 square mi) and currently has 15 acres of warehousing 

floorspace and just over 52 acres for a container yard. At 

build out, this facility is expected to have about 1.4 million 

square meters (15 million square feet) of usable space. 

Investment in the ProLogis facility was based on expectations 

that the new Yangshan Port will generate large demands for 

both bonded and nonbonded warehousing and containerhandling facilities. The local government invested in the local 

road infrastructure with the expectation that development 

would occur at some future point.

and inbound consolidated forwarding 

services for deconsolidation (bonded). 

The provision of such facilities should 

not be difficult, given the access to 

world finance markets that Chinese 

development projects enjoy.

Many other private company participants echoed the observations made 

by these three companies. Economic 

growth is expected to continue at high 

rates. The Chinese government is 

investing heavily in transportation 

infrastructure and is slowly opening the 

transport sector to foreign investment. 

There are areas of concern for the 

Chinese transportation system (e.g., the 

freight rail network), but generally most 

believed that transportation to and from 

the ports will not be a big issue in the 

future, although lowering the cost of 

logistics will be a major focus of both 

public and private organizations.

ProLogis Metrics 

for Evaluating Port 

Markets for Future 

China Investment

The most important criterion for 

investment is that a port is in the 

government’s plan for expansion and 

improvement. Once this prerequisite 

is satisfied, the following criteria are 

important:

Proximity to large local population 

base

Physical port capacity for growth 

in TEUs handled

Good road infrastructure

Inland ports—intermodal rail-river 

connections

For export markets, proximity to 

diverse manufacturing centers 

(e.g., Shanghai)

Availability and cost of labor

Frequency and availability of 

dedicated ocean carrier service

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 27
28 Chapter 3: China’s Transportation System and Plans for the Future
T he major observations from this scan 

are organized in four categories—

China’s economic growth and driving 

forces; transportation infrastructure 

development; governmental structure, 

decisionmaking, and analysis; and 

global shipper and carrier perceptions. 

China’s Economic Growth and Driving 

Forces

The following are observations on factors and 

driving forces that have contributed to China’s 

impressive economic growth:

1. The economic growth of China over the past 

10 years has been dramatic. Both government 

officials and private sector representatives the 

team met with during the scan expected this 

growth to continue in the foreseeable future at 

or near its current rate. The estimate for 2007 

was that China’s GDP would increase by about 

10 percent. This follows a trend line that shows 

annual GDP growth of 10.4 percent per year for 

the past 10 years. The growth in the economy 

was mirrored by the office expansion of the 

global companies the team met with during the 

scan, such as the rapid expansion of subsidiary 

offices of APL, Maersk, and ProLogis throughout 

China.

2. Much of the economic growth has been fueled 

by private investment. As different sectors of 

the economy have been opened to foreign 

investment, joint ventures and other financial 

partnerships have provided the institutional 

framework for the expansion of the economy.

This is especially true in the transport and 

logistics sectors, where foreign investments 

have occurred. 

3. The economic expansion of China started in the 

south (Pearl River Delta), moved north based on 

national economic policy, and is now pushing 

west based on government policy. Ninety 

percent of China’s exports are manufactured in 

the coastal provinces, which is causing large 

demographic shifts that are straining China’s 

resources and social fabric. The “Go West” 

campaign, an attempt to mitigate these strains, 

was a continuing theme of the team’s discussions 

with both government officials and private sector 

representatives during the scan. (“West” refers 

to the next set of provinces west of the coastal 

provinces). This national campaign has significant implications to supply chain logistics costs 

and to the efficiency of the Chinese transportation system in moving exports to the coastal 

ports. With logistics costs already high in China 

(about 20 percent of GDP), the movement of 

manufacturing westward will require efficient 

intermodal services leading to the coastal ports, 

643 to 804 km (400 to 500 mi) away.

4. Although China has had large urban populations 

for centuries, urbanization has reached 

unprecedented levels over the past 10 years. 

Much of China’s economic expansion has 

occurred in urban areas, where the large 

population provides a substantial labor force. 

However, many laborers move from one urban 

area to another looking for jobs, so large 

portions of the urban labor force are transient. 

The consequence of such large urban concentrations is that the central government must 

pay particular attention to these populations 

and provide resources to make sure their 

basic needs are met. The term “social harmony” 

was an often-heard theme to describe the 

intent of governmental programs. From a 

transportation perspective, the consequence 

of this policy focus is that passenger transportation often receives priority over freight 

movement (although in port cities freight 

movement often receives close attention 

from transportation officials).

5. Environmental degradation and energy 

consumption are consequences of China’s 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 29

	 C H A P T E R 4

General Observations 

and Lessons for the 

United States
rapid economic growth and the equally rapid 

increase in its urban populations. Air quality in 

particular has received increased government 

attention. Although it appears that economic 

development is still the primary goal of governmental policy, additional goals and performance measures relating to environmental 

quality and energy consumption have been 

added to the national agenda. 

Transportation Infrastructure 

Development and Operations

The following are observations on the characteristics 

of China’s transportation infrastructure and how it 

has been provided:

1. Recognizing the vital role that transportation 

plays in its goal of continued economic growth, 

China is investing heavily in transport infrastructure, over 9 percent of the country’s GDP. This 

investment comes from both public and private 

(joint venture) sources. The current 5-year plan 

has allocated billions of dollars for a national 

expressway system, new freight rail lines, port 

improvements, and 18 new rail intermodal yards. 

Much of the national investment in transportation is intended to attract private investment to 

specific facilities, such as toll roads.

2. Substantial levels of private capital are being 

invested, in some cases with low expectations 

of rapid return on investment, but investors 

anticipate long-term benefits from investing in 

China. This investment has occurred primarily 

over the past several years in highways, port 

facilities, and logistics parks. Private investment 

has been sought in rail infrastructure and 

intermodal terminals with limited success.

3. China is leveraging its natural geography to 

facilitate movement of goods. River and coastal 

shipping continues to be a significant component of China’s intermodal transportation 

system. The Pearl and Yangtze Rivers traditionally have been China’s highways to the world. 

To a large extent, this is true today. China relies 

on barges and coastal shipping to access its 

major ports served by rivers. For example, 

about 40 percent of the containers shipped to 

Shanghai’s new Yangshan Port arrive by barge. 

New barge-only ports upstream of the Pearl 

River Delta provide a similar percentage of 

barge traffic to several container ports in the 

delta. The central government is also adopting 

barge design and energy standards along with 

subsidies for their adoption to improve consistency and efficiency in barge operations. For the 

development of the ports along the Bohai Bay, 

rail and truck access is used to bring cargo to 

the port facilities. 

4. The central government’s “Go West” policy 

has shifted investment attention to inland 

transportation and the challenges facing such 

transportation, especially the connections 

to the major international ports. In cases 

where barge transportation can be used costeffectively, such as on the Pearl and Yangtze 

Rivers, inland economic development relies 

on barge transportation to move a large 

percentage of the intermodal freight. However, 

where barge transportation is not feasible or 

economical, government investment in highway and rail networks provides alternative 

means of accessing the coast. Both the trucking 

and barge industries, however, are highly 

fragmented and consist of many small 

owner-operators, offering few of the economies 

of scale that occur with larger companies. 

Although the market for moving containers is 

competitive, the limited capacity of individual 

barge and trucking firms forces shippers to 

deal with many different operators, increasing 

the transaction costs associated with moving 

substantial levels of intermodal freight to 

the coast. 

5. China’s intermodal rail service faces significant 

challenges. The movement of containers 

receives low priority on China’s rail network, 

following military, passenger, energy (i.e., coal), 

and food movements. Accordingly, intermodal 

rail movement tends to be unreliable, often with 

no scheduled departures. It is estimated that 

rail handles about 2 percent of the intermodal 

moves in the country. However, the government 

is investing heavily in improving this service. 

Eighteen intermodal yards are in various stages 

of development, although those that are open 

are lightly used because of network reliability 

problems. About 12,000 km (7,456 mi) of freightonly track are being built to separate passenger 

and freight movements. A goal of 10 million 

TEUs carried by rail (now less than 3 million) 

has been established for the current 5-year plan 

period. However, even with a threefold increase 

30 Chapter 4: General Observations and Lessons for the United States
in TEUs handled (which will be a challenge), the 

market share for rail intermodal movements 

will still be only 3 percent.

6. The Chinese central government has encouraged joint ventures to finance the national 

expressway system, stretching government 

funds to support a variety of new modal 

investments. Historically, tolls on these 

expressways have not been used to influence 

travel behavior, but to raise revenue. However, 

consideration is now being given in some 

locales to using tolls to influence truck 

movement. In Shanghai, for example, a 

distance-based toll system on a ring road was 

converted to a considerably less expensive flat 

toll rate to encourage trucks accessing the port 

to use the ring road and reduce congestion on 

other inner-city expressways. This is exactly 

what happened, but this mechanism is not 

always possible. The three tunnels between 

Kowloon and Hong Kong are tolled. The ability 

to change toll rates is limited, so the older 

tunnel, priced lower than the other two, has 

considerably more traffic and is routinely 

congested. Governmental authorities face 

heavy resistance to toll increases for social 

reasons, so the other two toll tunnels, even 

though they provide what could be viewed 

as premium service for a higher price, are 

underused. 

Chinese toll rates are comparable to those 

in the United States and Europe, but the 

Chinese believe this does not reflect the 

economic reality of travelers in China, where 

the per capita GDP is much lower. Accordingly, 

the Chinese are trying in some cases to 

renegotiate concession agreements to allow 

lower toll rates, but offset lower toll revenues 

with longer concession time periods (from 

30 to 50 years).

There was some limited indication that, as in 

the United States, the tolling of highways can 

run into public opposition. In Hong Kong, for 

example, truckers and the public opposed tolls 

on a new highway, so the government had to 

use its own funds rather than private investment to build the road. The official in charge 

noted that this represented a perspective 

of a road as a social asset rather than an 

economic one.

7. The national expressway plan is centered 

primarily on three major economic and political 

centers: Beijing, Shanghai, and the Pearl River 

Delta. In essence, the national expressway 

system will be the major means of connection 

between the political and economic centers of 

the country, reinforcing their importance in the 

economic future of China. The scan team noted 

that all of the new intermodal rail terminals 

are next to a national expressway, as are ports 

and major airports. Intermodal connection has 

been an important consideration in network 

design.

8. Trucking is the predominant means of moving 

containers to and from the ports, especially 

in the river delta manufacturing regions.

The trucking industry consists mainly of small 

businesses (one to three trucks), which makes 

its contribution to China’s economic growth 

even more impressive. No standard vehicle 

configuration exists, and little integration of 

technology in trucking operations is apparent. 

Truck movements respond to changes in cost 

structure, as the Shanghai example above 

shows. The trucking industry is maturing, 

with a variety of strategies being used or 

considered to improve industry productivity. 

Different strategies are being considered for 

different purposes. American trucking companies are entering into partnerships with Chinese 

companies to provide financial capital and 

expertise.

The makeup of the Chinese trucking industry 

also means that containers do not move 

considerably beyond the port facilities. Goods 

are brought into consolidation-deconsolidation 

facilities, where they are placed in containers 

for export or devanned for further movement 

inland. It will be interesting to see how these 

operations change as China’s trucking industry 

matures and commercial motor vehicles more 

closely resemble those in the United States or 

European Union, as well as when China’s 

intermodal rail network is complete and 

containers can be loaded directly onto doublestack rail for movement west.

9. Given the relatively large number of trucking 

businesses in China and the intense competition 

for freight movements, the team was not 

surprised to find that oversized and overweight 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 31
trucks have become an important concern to 

transportation officials. Chinese officials are 

developing a national strategy for enforcing size 

and weight regulations, especially on the country’s new expressway system, and are considering fixed truck weigh stations. They apparently 

are not seriously considering weigh-in-motion 

technologies. A national campaign to enforce 

load limits has been in place for about a year.

10. Chinese port productivity is the best in the 

world. Chinese ports operate 24 hours a day, 

7 days a week, 365 days per year. Operational 

strategies are impressive—cranes that lift four 

TEUs, 20- to 30-minute truck turns, nine cranes 

working one ship, etc. New ports are being 

developed and the capacity of existing ports 

is being expanded rapidly. Although the scan 

team did not examine any safety data, terminal 

operators noted that the safety record for 

Chinese terminals was as good as, if not better 

than, terminals elsewhere in the world. 

11. Given the significant level of trade to the 

United States and current U.S. legislation, 

security compliance was a growing concern for 

port terminal operators. The relatively new 

infrastructure at China’s ports allows terminal 

operators to build security measures into 

terminal operations, especially using technologies screening outbound containers. One 

terminal in Hong Kong has undertaken a 3-year 

demonstration to show how X-ray and other 

scanning technologies can be used to screen all 

containers entering the terminal with minimal 

disruption to terminal efficiency.

12. China has not progressed to the point of 

systematically managing its infrastructure; 

it is still in the “build” mode. Nevertheless, at 

a few of the more mature areas experiencing 

significant congestion transportation officials 

indicated a need to begin paying serious 

attention to system management. 

13. Intermodal connectivity and landside access to 

Chinese ports are not approached differently or 

in a more sophisticated way than in the United 

States or European Union. With the exception 

of a truck-only access road that was retrofitted 

from the national network to the Port of Yantian, 

there was little evidence of the Chinese building 

into their large container port facilities a 

dedicated capacity to maintain free flow of 

cargo. The general consensus is that the 

congestion would be dealt with when it arrived.

14. Rail access to maritime port facilities is not 

being consistently built into new port design.

With the exception of the Port of Qingdao, 

which has no river access and which is being 

looked at as the entry port for land bridge cargo 

from the rest of Asia to the European Union and 

Russia, no other port facility was being built 

with on-dock rail. This appears to reflect the 

lack of reliability that stems from the low 

priority intermodal cargo has on the rail network (fourth behind passengers, energy, and 

agricultural products) and that the majority of 

the goods made for export are manufactured in 

the coastal provinces, making the distance from 

manufacturing facility to export port less than 

500 km (310 mi). How this will play out with the 

building of the 18 intermodal rail terminals and 

the “Go West” policy will be interesting to 

watch.

Governmental Structure, 

Decisionmaking, and Analysis

The following are observations on the institutional 

structure and process of making transportation 

investment decisions in China:

1. China’s policymaking and implementation 

process identifies national goals, some of which 

have performance metrics. However, local 

officials have leeway in implementing projects 

so that they also meet local objectives. A national 5-year plan provides policy direction on what 

will be emphasized during the plan’s timeframe 

(China is now in its 11th 5-year plan). 

2. The transportation agencies in the national 

government have different responsibilities 

focusing on different modes (e.g., Ministry of 

Communications, Ministry of Railways, Ministry 

of Construction). Because governmental officials’ 

performance is measured by results, they pay 

attention to measures of progress. National data 

are collected and analyzed on overall modal 

performance and the state of the economy. 

Some challenges the national transportation 

agencies face are responsible for the sometimes 

conflicting roles of planning, operating, and 

regulating a modal system. Some viewed 

this as a hindrance to achieving progress on 

32 Chapter 4: General Observations and Lessons for the United States
performance goals. This was the specific reason 

the CRCT was separated from the Ministry of 

Railroads and given the sole responsibility of 

operating the rail network.

3. Data analysis is used to determine the extent to 

which goals are being met at different levels of 

government. Some referred to this as “resultsoriented planning.” The port terminals are all 

private operations and the terminal operators 

routinely use metrics.

4. The performance of local officials and local 

governments is measured against national 

goals. Many noted, for example, that the most 

important metric for local officials is the degree 

to which economic growth occurs during their 

tenure, defined primarily as job growth for 

residents. China’s tax policy also supports this 

goal, because the tax revenue from the economic activity in a province stays, for the most part, 

in the province. Local officials clearly understand 

the linkage between expanding transportation 

infrastructure and their ability to create new 

economic development. While economic development is still the primary metric and motivator, 

growing environmental concerns appear to be 

increasing attention on measuring governmental 

performance on environmental quality (for 

example, the number of days cities experience 

a certain level of air pollution). 

5. Although the scan team did not conduct a 

systematic assessment of the capability of 

municipal government agencies to plan and 

provide for transportation infrastructure and 

services, every meeting with local officials 

included the staff members responsible for each 

mode. In other words, all of the modes were 

located in one agency, which encouraged the 

adoption of a multimodal systems perspective 

when looking at regional transportation investment. For example, in Shenzhen the relationship 

among sea cargo, barge transportation, highway 

travel, and air cargo was discussed with an 

understanding of how each affected the other. 

The same was true in the other municipalities 

visited. 

6. In most cases, there was little evidence that 

Chinese officials sought advice from carriers or 

shippers on national strategic transportation 

plans or investments. However, at the provincial 

and regional levels the inclusion of the private 

sector in tactical investment decisions was 

evident in the number of public-private partnerships. Although not reflective of the common 

practice on the mainland, in Hong Kong, an 

advisory committee to the government consisting of carriers and shippers routinely provides 

advice on overall transportation policy. Also, the 

national government is seeking advice from the 

private sector as the 18 intermodal rail hubs are 

being developed.

7. Port development plans considered modal 

access strategies as part of the planning process, but it did not always result in multimodal 

port access. The officials responsible for ports, 

and especially newer ports, were very aware of 

and concerned about port access. Planning for 

ports included attention to highway and barge 

access and, in the case of Shenzhen, rail. This 

represented a much broader, multimodal perspective on planning than is usually found in the 

United States. Rail access to the ports is limited, 

primarily because of a perception that the rest 

of the intermodal rail network suffers from 

unreliable and slow service.

8. Project development occurs much faster in 

China than in the United States. Transportation 

projects are viewed as a priority for economic 

development, so they move forward rapidly. 

Chinese officials noted that project alignments 

and other project characteristics were sometimes 

modified by environmental considerations, but 

they could not identify any project that was 

stopped for environmental reasons. Given the 

rapid growth in China’s economy and the need 

for expeditious provision of supporting infrastructure, it is not surprising that environmental 

considerations are not viewed as a controlling 

factor in project development (similar to the 

early years of the U.S. Interstate Highway 

System). However, it appears that environmental 

considerations are becoming more important 

to local officials and that future project 

development efforts will be influenced even 

more by such factors.

9. In keeping with the national policy of social 

harmony, government officials are concerned 

about the negative impact of transportation 

facility operations and expansion on local 

communities. For example, there was evidence

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 33
that at least two new ports that replaced central 

city ports were built some distance from the city 

center to reduce traffic and development pressures on the surrounding communities and the 

complications of inner-city congestion. When 

community displacement does occur, efforts are 

made to mitigate the impacts (e.g., a new logistics park that displaced farmers trained them to 

earn a living in the logistics park).

10. Hong Kong’s role in the competitive market of 

the Pearl River Delta is evolving. Having the 

largest container port terminals in south China 

positioned Hong Kong as a major port of departure for mainland exports. However, new ports 

in nearby Shenzhen and along the Pearl River 

(along with dredging in the river to allow access 

to these ports for bigger ships), as well as new 

manufacturing development on the west bank 

of the river, will likely cause a shift in container 

exports to other ports. Second, certain cost 

advantages associated with exports through 

Hong Kong could soon disappear because of 

infrastructure improvements on the mainland. 

Third, containers can enter Hong Kong only on 

trucks driven by Hong Kong drivers. This labor 

cost is much higher than comparable movements to the Shenzhen ports. Once the special 

tariffs expire, the cost structure for goods moving though Hong Kong’s terminals will not be 

very advantageous. It remains to be seen how 

the market will adjust to these changing conditions, but it appears that Hong Kong’s relative 

position in global container flows could evolve 

in a different direction in the future. 

Shipper and Carrier Perceptions

The following are observations made by shippers 

and carriers in the China market:

1. Many of the international ocean carriers and 

shippers the team met with during this scan 

view the serious constraint in international trade 

and supply chain efficiency as being on the 

receiving end, in Europe and the United States.

The prevalent perception is that terminal throughput in the United States and European Union is 

limited by terminal operational limitations, 

landside access capacity, and growing road 

congestion. There was a strong perception that 

the United States lacks the political will to invest 

in infrastructure and could not deliver needed 

investments in infrastructure in a timely manner 

even if desired. China is viewed as proactive on 

infrastructure provision by building for the future 

and clearly stating in its strategic plans what will 

be built and when. The United States, on the 

other hand, is perceived as reactive. The biggest 

complaint was the length of time it took to reach 

decisions on transportation projects. Industry 

representatives expressed an understanding of 

governmental laws, regulations, and structures, 

but were frustrated with not knowing a project’s 

fate for a long period of time, so long in some 

cases that other investment or logistics decisions 

could not be made. 

2. Shippers and carriers believed that the effect of 

a widened Panama Canal and increased transits 

through the Suez Canal will likely be more 

shipments heading to east coast ports, but that 

west coast ports will still be the major destination for most containers. The shifting of sea 

routes is in response to transportation costs 

and the reliability of ground access modes at the 

west coast ports. With increased capacity at the 

Panama Canal, some carriers believed it would 

become a more appealing route than rail or truck 

services across the continental United States. In 

addition, carriers mentioned that one constraint 

in all movements is that the new generation of 

container ships (10,000 to 12,000 TEUs) cannot 

physically dock at most U.S. ports. The larger 

ships are used primarily to serve Europe because 

of market factors and the capacity of many 

European ports to handle larger vessels.

3. Several shippers and carriers said bunching of 

vessel departures from Chinese ports (because 

of when merchandise arrives at the ports and 

when it is needed in the U.S. market) causes a 

significant peaking problem. They observed 

that a peaking in departures from China usually 

results in a peaking in arrivals at U.S. ports, 

especially Los Angeles-Long Beach. Several 

shippers and carriers believed that this peaking 

phenomenon could be remedied by working 

with retailers, shippers, and manufacturers.

Lessons for the United States

The lessons learned from this scan are organized in 

two major categories—consequences to the United 

States and its transportation system, and different 

approaches to planning and project development 

in support of a growing economy. 

34 Chapter 4: General Observations and Lessons for the United States
Consequences to the United States and the 

U.S. Transportation System

1. Under current economic projections in the United 

States and China, trade flows from China to the 

United States will continue to grow. China is 

building the infrastructure to handle them, but 

there are questions about whether the U.S. 

transportation system is ready. With a limited 

number of ports of entry, the U.S. transportation 

system necessarily concentrates these imports 

at a few strategic locations. For the United States 

to remain competitive globally, investment in 

transportation infrastructure is needed, new 

system management technologies should be 

applied, and institutional change in how the 

country identifies, funds, operates, and makes 

targeted infrastructure improvements to key 

elements of the national transportation system 

should be considered. These improvements help 

not only to expedite the movement of imported 

goods, but also to reduce the logistics cost of 

U.S. companies to compete in the global market.

2. Trade from China increasingly will become an 

east coast issue. With new service routes through 

the Suez and Panama Canals, States on the east 

coast will experience increasing demands on 

their transportation systems. Shippers and 

carriers noted that these routes will become 

even more important if land access to west 

coast ports deteriorates. 

3. Given the navigable draft and terminal capacity of 

most U.S. ports, the largest container ships will 

not provide service to the United States. This 

means that U.S. ports will be served by vessels 

carrying less than or equal to 10,000 TEUs. With 

increasing cargo volumes, that means more 

vessel calls. 

4. Similar to what scan teams observed during the 

intermodal freight scans in Europe and Latin 

America, the team noted a dramatic difference 

in port efficiency between China and the United 

States. Hours of operation, the time to turn 

trucks, crane productivity, and good land access 

make Chinese ports very efficient. If U.S. ports 

are unable to physically expand because of 

community concerns or terrain limitations, 

maximizing the use of existing capacity and 

improving port throughput are imperative to 

the United States’ ability to handle increasing 

container flows. 

5. The United States can learn much from China 

on using natural geography to the maximum 

extent, particularly in the use of barge and 

coastal shipping as access modes to major 

ports. In China, the Pearl and Yangtze River 

ports are being developed as transshipment 

ports, and new manufacturing capacity is 

being developed and located to take advantage 

of river transport. Although the United States 

has few locations where manufacturing 

concentration is along navigable rivers that 

connect to major ports, the Chinese experience 

in barge operations might be informative in 

those locations where such operations make 

sense. Even if U.S. river systems and the ports 

they serve do not provide logical conduits for 

containerized freight movement, they provide 

key assets for bulk commodity movement. 

They need to be well maintained to ensure that 

goods move efficiently and do not shift to an 

already-burdened rail and highway network.

6. Freight bottlenecks are viewed as a drain 

on transportation system and economic 

productivity. This is a perspective the United 

States should adopt as well. Solving these 

bottlenecks involves more than just expanding 

physical capacity. It also involves using 

technology and operational strategies. The 

Port of Yantian is a good example. Ten years 

after the port was built, it became apparent to 

local officials that congestion on the roads 

serving the port was affecting not only freight 

movement, but also local traffic. They built a 

truck-separated access route to the port to 

eliminate the bottleneck. 

7. Chinese officials recognize that freight-oriented 

transportation investments, especially near 

ports, are an important part of the nation’s 

economic development. Accordingly, Chinese 

transportation agencies have implemented 

system management strategies aimed at 

improving port access. Efforts to encourage 

more efficient movement of trucks have included 

setting differential tolls, prohibiting trucks in 

congested areas, enhancing enforcement of 

pedestrian and passenger vehicle flows on 

streets near ports, separating trucks from 

passenger highway lanes, and encouraging 

the use of barges as an alternative access mode 

(although rail does not appear to be a major 

consideration at this point). 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 35
8. The United States is fortunate to have a much 

more developed rail network, which in many 

cases provides on-dock service to port terminals. This is a significant advantage to U.S. trade 

flows and one that needs to be nurtured. The 

efficiency of the feeder services into and out of 

U.S. ports will be a key factor in the ability of the 

U.S. transportation system to support increased 

container demands from China. The U.S. rail 

network, although facing congestion issues of its 

own, still provides an indispensable capacity for 

moving containers once they reach U.S. ports. 

Improving the productivity of such services will 

be an important element of the U.S. strategy to 

remain competitive in the global market. The 

team noted that the new Chinese freight-only rail 

track being built to connect the 18 new intermodal hubs will have no at-grade crossings.

9. Given China’s experience with oversize and 

overweight vehicles and the infrastructure 

damage it is grappling with, the United States 

should ensure that its commercial motor vehicle 

size and weight program continues to advance 

and receive adequate resources. This is a critical 

part of the road management system. 

As the scan team learned in China, when such 

a program is not in place, roads wear out much 

faster than expected. Thus, Federal and State 

efforts to monitor and enforce appropriate size 

and weight standards on the Nation’s road 

network need to be continued and supported. 

10. One challenge facing west coast ports is the 

bunching of vessel departures from China that 

result in vessels arriving at about the same time 

in the United States. This is primarily due to 

operations in which ships depart Chinese ports 

over the weekend in response to manufacturing, 

supply chain, and market requirements. If vessel 

bunching could be reduced, this could significantly benefit both U.S. and Chinese ports. 

Shippers and carriers in China expressed some 

optimism that this could in fact occur.

How the Chinese Invest In and Operate 

Their Transportation System to Support 

a Growing Economy

1. China has a national transportation investment 

policy that is closely linked to its trade and 

economic policy. It was clear in discussions 

with Chinese officials at all levels of government that they were aware of the national 

transportation policy and what it is intended to 

accomplish and supported it. China competes 

as a nation. National transportation investment 

appeared to focus on two major goals (besides 

military defense): strategies to foster social 

harmony among Chinese citizens and strategies 

to support economic growth, with the second 

goal supporting the first. Given where China is 

in its development cycle, there is little question 

that transportation infrastructure is considered 

a critical component of the nation’s economic 

future and that creating a transportation 

infrastructure network is critical to and in 

some cases leading the economic development 

pattern. The United States would benefit from 

adopting national transportation investment 

policy that supports the nation’s economic 

health and global competitiveness. Transportation, trade, and economic policies that coordinate transportation investment, especially 

freight-related investment, are vital. 

2. The Chinese central planning function is not 

a model that would work in the United States. 

However, it is worth considering a strategic 

investment plan for the national expressway 

network that is financially supported at the 

national level and executed locally (similar to 

the initial effort to build the U.S. Interstate 

Highway System) and that uses performance 

measures to monitor progress in developing 

and operating key system elements. A centrally 

planned and financially supported national 

expressway network provides the platform for 

China to compete as a nation—a united whole 

that works for the benefit of the entire nation. 

The three-tiered planning effort the Chinese 

employ—which covers central, provincial, and 

local needs—appears to work well in addressing national, intraregional, and local transportation needs. For example, performance measures and standards for the Interstate Highway 

System might be established nationally, with 

the means of achieving desired performance 

left to the States. 

3. Many assets that work in tandem with the 

Chinese transportation system (port terminal 

development, logistics parks, etc.) are funded 

through private investment. In some cases, it 

may take years for the investment to start 

producing net gains. However, companies made

36 Chapter 4: General Observations and Lessons for the United States
it clear they are willing to invest in China 

because the Chinese can make decisions and 

show progress toward infrastructure improvement. A similar confidence in the U.S. approach 

to decisionmaking and project development was 

lacking. For instance, a number of private sector 

representatives pointed to the length of time it 

takes to complete the environmental process on 

U.S. projects. They noted that it often exceeds the 

time companies can place a planned project or 

investment on hold. While they did not indicate 

that the United States should stop mitigating 

environmental impacts, they did point out that 

a more streamlined process for environmental 

(or other public) decisions could allow the private 

sector to look more favorably on business and 

capital investments. Companies know that in 

China they will get a timely decision on a proposed investment, but they have little confidence 

in the U.S. process for assuring that progress will 

be made. This suggests that if the United States 

is interested in fostering economic development 

and encouraging more private investment in 

transportation facilities, it needs to place greater 

emphasis on timely public sector decisionmaking. Agencies simply need to get to the decision 

point earlier.

4. The joint venture is the primary instrument of 

privatization in China. In almost all cases, private 

investors do not get a majority share of the 

investment (the exception being port terminals); 

government agencies or state-owned enterprises 

retain control. In some instances, such as the 

development of 18 intermodal rail yards, private 

investors have turned down participation in a 

joint venture because the government stipulations were too stringent. The major lesson, 

however, is that the model of private funding 

in China is that government participates in a 

significant way by steering where the investments can be made.

5. Chinese planning for intermodal centers and 

indeed for regional transportation networks 

adopts a systems perspective on performance 

and investment. The regional highway network, 

ports, airports, intermodal facilities, and warehousing and distribution centers appear to be 

planned with an understanding of how they 

interconnect and affect one another. While 

multistate coalitions seek to coordinate 

multijurisdictional activity in the United States, 

more effort along these lines will be necessary to 

achieve systems-level coordination. 

6. The team learned that Hong Kong’s international 

airport has been the busiest airport in the world 

since 1996 for international air cargo—not 

because of air cargo planes, but because of the 

freight shipped as belly cargo in passenger 

aircraft. The air cargo market in Hong Kong has 

grown rapidly but is not viewed as a new market, 

given the long-established air cargo business in 

Hong Kong (with the United States as the single 

largest destination for air cargo originating in 

Hong Kong). Air cargo is the fastest growing 

segment of freight movement. While it still is 

only a small percentage of total tonnage, the 

implication to the U.S. transportation system 

of this growth in both air cargo hubs and belly 

freight is new stress to the transportation 

network on already-stressed and overcrowded 

U.S. airports.

7. National data collection in China provides a 

springboard for national transportation planning, 

investment, and performance evaluation. This is 

especially true for investment in freight facilities 

and services. This is an important lesson for the 

United States. U.S. freight data systems should 

not only be continued, but expanded to provide 

the information needed for optimal transportation investment decisionmaking, especially given 

the important role that freight plays in the 

Nation’s economic health.

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 37
38 Chapter 4: General Observations and Lessons for the United States
The scan team developed the following preliminary 

recommendations for activities that should follow 

from the scan: 

1. The results of this scan are a wake-up call on the 

need for the United States to invest in transportation infrastructure with a more national perspective if it is to stay competitive in a global market. 

This first, and perhaps most important, recommendation is to revive a national focus for U.S. 

transportation officials. This effort would focus on 

the importance of the transportation-economic 

integration so evident in China. Key messages in 

this effort include the following: 

Federal, State, and local governments cannot 

dismiss the potential lessons to be learned 

from the Chinese experience because of preconceived notions that China’s form of governance has no application in the United States. 

Major differences in governance exist between 

the two countries, but that should not preclude 

U.S. consideration of successful concepts being 

deployed in China, such as unified national 

goals and performance measures. Similar 

concepts were once a vital part of U.S. 

initiatives such as the building of the 

Interstate Highway System. 

Transportation policy with a national 

perspective needs to be integrated with 

other key national and State-level policies. 

This integration could relate to economic 

development, trade, community development, 

environmental quality, etc. 

Transportation investment should be targeted 

to those elements of the national system that 

meet the established policy goals. Performance measures should be established and 

monitored to gauge the level of success 

achieved.

A national transportation policy has room 

for both public and private sector roles and 

responsibilities. China is ahead of the United 

States in the use of private investment in 

the transportation sector. In an era when 

resources are limited, private investment 

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

opportunities should be provided throughout 

the transportation system.

2. A study of the Yantian Port truck highway facility 

should be commissioned. This case study would 

be conducted by the Chinese Academy of Transportation Systems. It would focus on the metrics 

the Chinese used to quantify the congestion they 

experienced, how they used those metrics to vet 

potential solutions, and how they determined 

that a dedicated truck lane was the most appropriate solution. The study would also cover how, 

if at all, the Chinese have documented the effect 

of the new access road on the congestion they 

sought to resolve.

3. The Chinese governance structure uses 

established performance measures and national 

data collection extensively to manage transportation policy. The scan team believes this 

approach has useful constructs, but it is unclear 

what specific measures China uses. The concept 

of establishing performance goals or levels for 

national systems (such as the U.S. Interstate 

Highway System) has a potentially useful 

application in the United States. A study should 

be undertaken to understand how the Chinese 

government develops and uses performance 

measures to manage its national transportation 

policy. In the long term, it would be interesting 

to compare and contrast the available performance measures of both countries. 

4. A major observation of the scan was the need for 

a better understanding of the scheduling and 

operation of ship movements to the U.S. west 

coast. Because of long-standing traditions and 

market considerations, most ships leave China 

during the weekend and arrive on the U.S. west 

coast at about the same time, placing peak 

demands on port operations. It became clear 

during the scan visit that opportunities exist to 

work with retailers, manufacturers, logistics 

providers, shippers, carriers, and terminal 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 39

	 C H A P T E R 5

Implementation 

Strategies and 

Recommendations
operators to flatten out this peak arrival distribution. FHWA will conduct a preliminary analysis of 

vessel bunching to develop a better understanding of the nature of vessel arrival times in key 

U.S. ports. If the data show that a problem does 

exist, FHWA will convene a forum to address the 

streamlining of vessel bunching at U.S. ports.

5. This report is the third of three that have documented international scans on intermodal freight 

and connectivity in different parts of the world. 

The scan team recommends that a synthesis be 

undertaken of all three scan findings to determine what has been learned, the implications 

to the United States of these lessons, and the 

research and training opportunities that should 

be developed on these topics to educate the 

U.S. transportation community. 

6. China appears to have a wealth of data on 

freight, ports, etc., that is of interest to the U.S. 

transportation community. It would be beneficial 

to both countries to compare national data 

collection strategies and to share information 

of mutual benefit. The U.S. Department of 

Transportation should pursue a data exchange 

program between FHWA and the U.S. Research 

and Innovative Technology Administration and 

the Chinese Ministry of Communications. A 

memorandum of understanding (MOU) has been 

signed, so the scan team’s recommendation is to 

implement this MOU as soon as possible.

7. Chinese officials expressed an interest in learning how the U.S. truck information management 

system works. A comparison should be made 

between U.S and Chinese truck information 

management systems to see if there are areas 

of joint benefit and possible applications in the 

United States.

8. The Chinese are in the early stages of truck size 

and weight enforcement strategies. They are 

starting to recognize the damage that overweight 

vehicles cause on the road network. FHWA 

should make information available to relevant 

Chinese agencies on size and weight enforcement methodologies, including weigh-in-motion 

technologies, and identify possible further 

technology exchange opportunities.

9. The scan team has identified numerous conferences and meetings at which the results of this 

scan could be presented. Scan team members 

will pursue as many of these opportunities as 

possible. Other outreach efforts will target specific audiences, such as congressional committees, 

national commissions, Federal and State 

agencies, and professional organizations.

10. Much of what was reported from this scan 

reflects the poor level of understanding that 

elected officials and the general public have of 

China and its emerging role as a trade superpower. Educational and public outreach efforts 

should be undertaken to inform key constituencies. This would include incorporating the results 

of this scan (and the other two freight scans) into 

professional training courses, especially those 

focused on freight movement.

11. Given the rapid pace in economic growth and 

the corresponding expansion of the transportation system, consideration should be given to 

visiting China again in a few years to see what 

has happened in several key areas. Among the 

questions that it would be useful to explore are 

the following: 

How might the further development of rail in 

China affect passenger and freight movement? 

What lessons can the United States learn as it 

invests in its rail system?

What has been the impact of private 

investment on transportation facilities?

How have new security technologies been 

incorporated into port terminal operations? 

What has been the impact of the “Go West” 

campaign on logistics costs? 

To what extent are barges still an important 

mode of access to coastal ports? 

How has the massive investment in port and 

inland transportation infrastructure affected 

the relative competitive advantage of different 

Chinese ports? 

How has the trucking industry evolved in 

vehicle technology and industry structure? 

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

40 Chapter 5: Implementation Strategies and Recommendations
Scan Team 

Members

Contact Information

David Cole (AASHTO Cochair)

Commissioner, Maine Department of Transportation

16 State House Station

Transportation Building

Augusta, ME 04333

Telephone: (207) 624-3003

Fax: (207) 624-3001

E-mail: david.a.cole@maine.gov

Tony Furst (FHWA Cochair)

Director, Office of Freight Management

FHWA, HOFM-1

1200 New Jersey Ave. SE

Washington, DC 20590

Telephone: (202) 366-2201

Fax: (202) 366-3225

E-mail: tony.furst@dot.gov 

Sharon Daboin

Deputy Secretary for Performance Improvement

Governor’s Budget Office

7th Floor Verizon Tower

303 Walnut Street

Harrisburg, PA 17105-3441

Telephone: (717) 787-2033

Fax: (717) 787-0827

E-mail: sdaboin@state.pa.us

Warren Hoemann

Senior Vice President–Industry Affairs

American Trucking Associations

950 North Glebe Road, Suite 210

Arlington, VA 22203-4181

Telephone: (703) 838-7956

Fax: (703) 838-1781

E-mail: whoemann@trucking.org

Dr. Michael D. Meyer (Report Facilitator)

School of Civil & Environmental Engineering

Georgia Institute of Technology

790 Atlantic Dr.

Atlanta, GA 30332

Telephone: (404) 385-2246

Fax: (404) 894-2278

E-mail: mmeyer@ce.gatech.edu

Richard Nordahl

Chief, Office of Goods Movement

California Department of Transportation

Division of Transportation Planning, MS 32

PO Box 942874

Sacramento, CA 94274-0001

Telephone: (916) 653-0426

Fax: (916) 653-1447

E-mail: richard.nordahl@dot.ca.gov

Marygrace Parker

Freight Mobility, Safety, and Security Program 

 Coordinator

I-95 Corridor Coalition

3206 Tower Oaks Blvd.

Rockville, MD 20852

Telephone: (518) 436-2817

Fax: (518) 692-8640

E-mail: i95mgp@ttlc.net

Leo Penne

Program Director

Intermodal & Industry Activities

AASHTO

444 North Capitol St. NW, Suite 249

Washington, DC 2001

Telephone: (202) 624-5813

Fax: (202) 624-5806

E-mail: lpenne@aashto.org

(continued)

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 41

	 A P P E N D I X A
Norman Stoner

Division Administrator

FHWA Illinois Division

3250 Executive Park Dr.

Springfield, IL 62703

Telephone: (217) 492-4730

Fax: (217) 492-4230 or 4621

E-mail: norman.stoner@dot.gov

Dr. Tianjia Tang

Office of Freight Management, Room 6320

FHWA

1200 New Jersey Ave. SE

Washington, DC 20590

Telephone: (202) 366-2217

Fax: (202) 366-3225

E-mail: tianjia.tang@dot.gov 

Biographic Sketches

David Cole (AASHTO cochair) is the commissioner for the Maine Department of Transportation. 

He is responsible for planning, building, and 

maintaining Maine’s transportation system, 

including highways, bridges, mass transit, railroads, ferries, ports, airports, and bicycle and 

pedestrian trails. Before his appointment as 

commissioner, Cole served as president and 

chief executive officer of the Eastern Maine 

Development Corp., focusing on entrepreneurial 

development and advocacy at the local, State, 

and national levels, including reverse foreign 

investments. Cole also became a member of 

the Maine Port Authority in 1997. Cole serves on 

the Board of Directors of the American Association 

of State Highway and Transportation Officials 

(AASHTO) and is vice chair of the AASHTO 

Subcommittee on Intermodal Transportation and 

Economic Development. Cole graduated from the 

University of Maine and with a master’s degree 

in public administration.

Tony Furst (FHWA cochair) is a senior 

executive with the Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA) in Washington, DC. Furst is director of the 

Office of Freight Management and Operations, 

which develops freight policy for FHWA, provides 

data analysis and decision-support tools for 

transportation professionals evaluating freight 

projects, develops and promulgates professional 

capacity-building programs and training for freight 

professionals, provides truck size and weight 

program guidance and interpretation, and evaluates 

and promotes freight technology development for 

national and international deployment. Before 

joining FHWA, Furst held a range of positions in 

the U.S. Department of Transportation, including 

program coordinator with the Maritime Administration, regional coordinator for intermodal projects 

in the Northeastern States and California in the 

Secretary of Transportation’s Office of Intermodalism, and branch chief of the Maritime Infrastructure 

Security Branch in the Maritime and Land Security 

Directorate of the Transportation Security Administration. Furst is a retired U.S. Coast Guard officer. 

He has a bachelor’s degree in marine biology from 

Florida State University and a master’s degree in 

business administration from the University of 

Washington. 

Sharon Daboin was the deputy secretary for 

aviation, rail freight, ports, and waterways for 

the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation 

(PennDOT) when this scan took place. She oversaw 

the administration of financial assistance grants and 

technical assistance to more than 135 public-use 

aviation facilities and 67 regional and shortline 

railroad operators. Daboin was PennDOT’s lead 

on intermodalism, participating in multimodal, 

multistate transportation studies and initiatives. 

Daboin represented PennDOT on the Aviation and 

Rail Freight Advisory Committees, cochaired the 

Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commissions’ 

Goods Movement Task Force and the Pennsylvania 

Air Service Committee, and was a member of the 

AASHTO Standing Committees on Aviation and Rail 

Transportation (cochairing the task force for State 

programs), the I-95 Corridor Coalition, and the 

South Central Pennsylvania Regional Goods Movement Steering Committee. Before joining PennDOT, 

Daboin held several positions in the Federal 

Aviation Administration, including manager of the 

Harrisburg Airports District Office. Daboin served 

4 years in the U.S. Air Force and has a bachelor’s 

degree in organizational management from 

Pennsylvania’s Eastern University. 

Warren E. Hoemann is a senior vice president 

with the American Trucking Associations (ATA). 

Hoemann oversees ATA councils and conferences 

and is the ATA liaison with key affiliate 

42 Appendix A: Scan Team Members
organizations. Before joining ATA in 2006, 

Hoemann was deputy administrator of the Federal 

Motor Carrier Safety Administration at the U.S. 

Department of Transportation. Before his Federal 

government service began in 2003, Hoemann had 

a long career in the trucking industry. He was vice 

president of the California Trucking Association 

and vice president of government relations for 

Yellow Corporation (now YRC Worldwide), where 

he handled the company’s political and legislative 

affairs in the 50 States and U.S. Congress. From 

1978 to 1986, Hoemann was the general counsel 

for the Western Highway Institute, a nonprofit 

trucking industry research organization. He started 

his career as a private attorney in Denver, CO, 

representing motor carriers. Hoemann is a Phi Beta 

Kappa graduate of St. Olaf College in Minnesota 

with a law degree from the University of Colorado 

School of Law. He has studied international law at 

Cambridge University in England and has spoken 

at universities on trucking issues.

Dr. Michael D. Meyer (report facilitator)

is a professor of civil engineering in the School of 

Civil and Environmental Engineering at the Georgia 

Institute of Technology. He is also director of 

the Georgia Transportation Institute. Meyer has 

conducted research on transportation investment 

planning and program development, systems 

engineering, and intermodal transportation. Before 

joining Georgia Tech, he was director of transportation planning and development for Massachusetts, 

and before that he was a professor of civil engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology 

(MIT). Meyer has published more than 180 articles 

on topics related to transportation decisionmaking 

and has served on numerous national transportation committees. He is a graduate of the University 

of Wisconsin-Madison and holds a master’s degree 

in civil engineering from Northwestern University 

and a Ph.D. in civil engineering from MIT. He is a 

licensed professional engineer in Georgia and 

served as chair of the Executive Committee of 

the Transportation Research Board in 2006.

Richard Nordahl is chief of the Office of Goods 

Movement at the California Department of 

Transportation. His office, part of the Division 

of Transportation Planning, is responsible for 

statewide goods movement planning, including 

the analysis of goods movement by truck and rail 

and movement through California’s airports, 

seaports, and border crossings. His responsibilities 

include developing major portions of the Goods 

Movement Action Plan of the California Business, 

Transportation, and Housing Agency and the 

California Environmental Protection Agency. 

His foreign experience includes participation in the 

U.S.-China Modern Logistics Conference in Beijing 

in May 2004 and an October 2006 briefing of China 

Ministry of Communication officials. Other major 

assignments include serving as the department’s 

acting chief of planning in San Diego, staff to Gov. 

Gray Davis’ Commission on Building for the 21st 

Century, and project manager and assistant project 

manager for the 1993 California Transportation Plan. 

Nordahl holds a degree in environmental studies 

from California State University and a certificate 

in rail transportation from the University of 

California’s Institute for Transportation Studies.

Marygrace M. Parker serves as program 

coordinator for freight mobility, safety, and security 

for the I-95 Corridor Coalition, an alliance of 

transportation and related agencies in the 16 

States from Maine to Florida. Parker provides 

program oversight and coordination for the 

coalition’s Intermodal Freight and Commercial 

Vehicle Operations program committees. She 

oversees a number of coalition studies, including 

assessment of rail operational bottlenecks in 

the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and Southeast I-95 

Corridor regions and the potential for short sea 

shipping along the I-95 Corridor/Eastern Seaboard. 

Before joining the coalition staff, she served as 

director of the Office of Traffic Management for 

the New York State Thruway Authority, where 

she oversaw the various bureaus responsible for 

traffic operations, communications, emergency 

management, and intelligent transportation 

systems. Parker is a former New York State Police 

officer. She holds a bachelors’ degree in criminal 

science from Russell Sage College. She has served 

on several technical committees for the Transportation Research Board and National Cooperative 

Highway Research Program panels. 

R. Leo Penne is program director for intermodal 

and industry activities with the American 

Association of State Highway and Transportation 

Officials (AASHTO). He is responsible for issues 

involving freight transportation by all modes—

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 43
rail, truck, aviation, ports, and waterways—and for 

liaison with industries with significant interests in 

freight movement. He shares responsibility for 

developing and communicating the case for the 

economic benefits of transportation and for 

demonstrating the linkage between transportation 

and economic development. Penne has initiated 

and carried out programs for advocacy, policy 

development, and research in areas such as 

transportation, economic development, urban 

development, environmental protection, public 

finance, training, and tourism and has written 

and edited books, reports, and articles on these 

subjects. He has held positions dealing with issues 

of strategy and policy analysis for the State of 

Nevada, the U.S. Department of Commerce, and 

the National League of Cities. He holds degrees 

in political science from Seattle University and the 

University of Washington and has served as an 

adjunct faculty member at the University of 

Maryland.

Norman R. Stoner is the administrator for 

the FHWA Illinois Division. He leads the Illinois 

Division’s professional staff in partnership with 

State and local highway agencies to deliver an 

effective Federal-aid highway program in Illinois. 

Stoner has been active in the Chicago Region 

Environmental and Transportation Efficiency 

Program (CREATE), an effort to relieve rail freight 

and highway congestion in the Chicago freight 

hub. Since joining FHWA in 1969, Stoner has 

served in a variety of positions and in other FHWA 

offices, including the Michigan Division, where 

he was involved in projects addressing growing 

freight demands at the border crossing with 

Canada. Stoner received his bachelor’s degree 

in civil engineering from Ohio University and 

is a registered professional engineer in Ohio.

Dr. Tianjia Tang is a transportation specialist for 

FHWA in Washington, DC. He is responsible for the 

Freight Analysis Framework (FAF) and the Freight 

Modeling Improvement Program (FMIP). The FAF 

provides strategic analysis of commodity movements in the United States related to transportation 

infrastructure and investment needs. It supports 

policymaking and legislation development and 

enactment. The FMIP is developing a new generation of freight forecasting and modeling tools for 

State and local government agencies to use in 

transportation planning, programming, and project 

development processes. Before joining FHWA’s 

headquarters staff in 2004, Tang served as highway 

engineer and environmental specialist in FHWA’s 

Resource Center in Atlanta, GA, and Baltimore, MD. 

Before his Federal tenure, he served in a wide range 

of positions, including project engineer, project 

manager, and megaproject development and design 

manager with a State DOT and private consulting 

firms. Tang is a Ph.D. graduate of the University 

of Arkansas and a registered professional engineer 

in Georgia. He is a member of the American 

Society of Civil Engineers and serves on several 

freight-related technical committees of the 

Transportation Research Board. 

44 Appendix A: Scan Team Members
Amplifying 

Questions

The following questions indicate the type of 

information that the U.S. delegation is interested in 

obtaining during our visit. We have organized the 

questions from the perspective of the professional 

responsibilities of the individuals we would like 

to talk to. In addition, we have listed primary 

questions, or questions we want to focus on during 

our visit, and secondary questions, or questions 

we would like to discuss if time permits or to 

obtain answers from other sources. 

National Transportation Policy 

Officials

Primary Questions

1. Please briefly describe the relationship among 

the central government, provincial government, 

local government, and private freight operators 

as it relates to the movement of freight. Who 

owns and operates what part of the nation’s 

freight transportation system? What does the 

national government regulate with respect to 

freight transportation (for example, vehicle 

requirements, pricing, etc.)? What is expected 

to be funded and operated by the government? 

By private companies? 

2. Is there a national freight policy on transportation’s role in economic development, mobility, 

and system investment? If so, what are the 

specific elements of this policy that relate 

to international trade and investment in the 

nation’s transportation system? What does 

the policy say about the relative role and 

investment in harbors and seaports, railroads, 

highways, and inland water infrastructure? 

How are national decisions made on which 

mode or intermodal facilities will receive 

investment (for example, investing in highway 

versus rail, or one port versus another)? 

In what agency are these decisions made? 

Who is involved? How does the government 

provide for an integrated transport system 

in its decisionmaking process? 

3. What are the most important economic and 

transportation factors influencing transportation 

system investment decisions? What performance measures are considered when making 

investment decisions (for example, reduce travel 

time, increase travel time reliability, reduce 

transportation cost, and create new jobs and 

economic opportunity in underserved parts of 

China)? Do you collect data on the performance 

of China’s transportation system? If so, what 

data are collected?

4. How does China’s transportation system 

accommodate freight and passenger traffic? 

Do they use the same infrastructure? Which 

takes priority in investment and operations? 

How is the decision made to invest in one 

type of transportation project (for example, for 

passenger movement) versus another that will 

provide greater benefit to freight movement?

5. How are trade and transportation policy 

coordinated? How is China’s national 

transportation policy linked to a national 

energy policy, and what role does the freight 

sector play in this relationship?

6. To what extent are public-private partnerships 

and partnering agreements used to fund 

transportation infrastructure, particularly with 

financial equity arrangements? To what extent 

is private sector input included in determining 

what transportation investments are made?

7. What are the most challenging issues China faces 

on the movement of freight? What do you think 

will be the most challenging issues in the future 

(for example, 10 years from now)?

8. How are environmental considerations 

(for example, air quality and water quality) 

addressed when transportation investments 

are made? Similarly, how are community 

concerns (for example, urban development 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 45

	 A P P E N D I X B
and land use) addressed when such investments 

are made?

Secondary Questions

1. Is there a widespread understanding of the 

importance of freight transportation and support 

for major freight infrastructure projects at all 

levels of government?

2. From a pricing standpoint, how competitive is 

truck compared with rail and river transport? 

Does the government play a role in determining 

these prices or is the market deregulated?

3. When investments are made, do the calculations 

provide estimates of the cost to maintain in the 

future?

4. What other factors (such as the 2008 Summer 

Olympics in Beijing) are driving the nation’s 

transportation policy and investment strategies?

5. So that you may best export goods to U.S. 

customers, what changes in U.S. infrastructure 

would you like to see occur? What level of 

Chinese investment in U.S. transportation 

infrastructure do you foresee?

6. Are certain revenue sources dedicated exclusively 

to transportation at the national, provincial, or 

local levels? If so, please describe. Does the 

national government have a dedicated capital 

budget for major transportation investments or 

are investments by the government treated as 

part of the general budget?

National Transportation Planning and 

Engineering Officials

Primary Questions

1. For China’s highway network:

Please describe China’s national highway 

investment plan. What steps are being taken to 

improve China’s road network (for example, 

new highways serving major ports)?

Do you separate local and passenger traffic 

from freight traffic to and from your ports? 

Have you or are you planning to develop lanes 

or highways dedicated exclusively to truck 

traffic? If so, are they for port connectors, 

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

bypasses to urban congestion, or longer 

segments of the highway system?

How do you determine truck size and weight 

limits to protect your road infrastructure 

investment? How do you enforce those 

limits?

What are the key challenges facing the 

movement of freight by highway?

When investments are made, do the 

calculations provide estimates of the 

cost to maintain in the future?

2. For China’s rail network:

Please describe China’s national rail investment 

plan. Is there a policy to attain a certain share of 

freight movement by rail? 

What steps are being taken to improve China’s 

rail network (for example, investing in rail lines 

to allow double stacking of containers or 

separating passenger and freight rail lines)?

What rail investments are being made to 

improve rail access to your export-import 

ports?

What percentage of your total rail freight traffic 

is intermodal (that is, uses containers)?

Will your new rail lines be completely grade 

separated?

When investments are made, do the 

calculations provide estimates of the cost 

to maintain in the future?

What are the key challenges facing the 

movement of freight by rail?

3. For China’s inland water system:

Please describe China’s national inland water 

system investment plan. Is there a policy to 

attain a certain share of freight movement by 

water? What steps are being taken to improve 

the nation’s inland water network (for example, 

investing in inland intermodal ports or improving river navigation)? How important is your 

inland water system for both container and bulk 

freight movement in the future? 

What inland water investments are being made 

to improve water transport access to your 

export and import ports?

Do you see coastal shipping (that is, from one 

Chinese port to another) as an important 

element of your future freight transportation 

system?

When investments are made, do the calculations provide estimates of the cost to maintain 

in the future?

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

46 Appendix B: Amplifying Questions
What are the key challenges facing the 

movement of freight by river and canal?

Who is responsible for maintaining navigation 

channels and how it is being funded?

4. How long does it take to move a major freight 

infrastructure investment from the original 

proposal to completion? What are the major 

planning and project development steps 

followed in this process?

How do you balance investment in access 

corridor versus intermodal terminal needs? 

Line-haul versus distribution systems? 

Urban versus rural regional needs?

Secondary Questions

1. Do you have a national database that describes 

the flow of freight on the different modes of 

transportation? What kind of national freight data 

does this database include? At what level of 

geographic detail do you collect data—national, 

provincial, local? Are data required from private 

operators of port terminals and other freight 

carriers?

2. How do you link information on port traffic 

to decisions on investment in landside 

transportation?

3. Are there opportunities for sharing data on freight 

traffic between the United States and China that 

would benefit both?

4. What types of new technologies are being 

considered for the movement of freight (for 

example, magnetically levitating (maglev) 

trains, innovative port handling systems, etc.)?

5. Do you use a national freight transport model to 

predict future freight flows? If so, what kind of 

modeling tool do you use?

6. To what extent are vehicles standardized in the 

country? For example, are all heavy trucks 

designed to the same standard and weight 

limitations? Rail cars? Barges? Do you have 

hours-of-service regulations for truck drivers? 

Do truck size and weight standards affect 

distribution center activity? 

7. Can you provide examples in which investment 

has been made in the nation’s freight system to 

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

minimize or eliminate the need to transfer freight 

from one mode of transportation to another?

8. What projections of future growth are you using 

for freight volumes and passenger traffic? 

To what degree are you separating domestic and 

international movements? For international trade, 

how are export-versus-import considerations 

taken into account? To what extent are your 

projections broken out geographically, international (global versus regional) versus domestic 

perspectives? How are these projections used in 

transportation investment decisions?

Provincial, Municipal, and Port 

Government Officials

Primary Questions

1. What are the most important economic and 

transportation factors influencing transportation 

system investment decisions in your jurisdiction? 

What performance measures are considered 

when making investment decisions (for example, 

reduce travel time, increase travel time reliability, 

reduce transportation cost, and create new jobs 

and economic opportunity in underserved parts 

of your jurisdiction)? 

2. Do you have a policy or plan that relates to 

transportation’s role in economic development, 

mobility, and transportation system investment? 

If so, how is freight movement included in this 

policy? What does the policy or plan say about 

the relative role and investment in harbors and 

seaports, railroads, highways, and inland water 

infrastructure? How are decisions made on 

which freight facilities will receive investment? 

How does your agency provide for an integrated 

transport system perspective in its decisionmaking process?

3. Is your transportation system designed to 

accommodate both freight and passenger 

traffic? Do they use the same infrastructure? 

Which takes priority in investment and operations? How is the decision made to invest in one 

type of transportation project (for example, for 

passenger movement) versus another that will 

provide greater benefit to freight movement?

4. How are environmental considerations (for 

example, air quality and water quality) considered when transportation investments are made? 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 47
Similarly, how are community concerns (for 

example, urban development and land use) 

considered when such investments are made? 

To what extent is port development integrated 

into the community’s development plan?

5. How are provincial, municipal, and port freight 

transportation projects funded? To what extent 

are public-private partnerships and partnering 

agreements being used to fund transportation 

infrastructure, particularly with financial equity 

arrangements? To what extent is private sector 

input included in determining what transportation investments are made?

6. What are the most challenging issues your 

jurisdiction or government faces on the 

movement of freight? What do you think will 

be the most challenging issues in the future 

(for example, 10 years from now)?

Secondary Questions

1. What types of projects are you considering to 

improve land access to your port? For example, 

are you building new port access roads? 

New barge facilities? 

2. Is there a widespread understanding of the 

importance of freight transportation and support 

for major freight infrastructure projects among 

officials in your jurisdiction?

3. For port officials, how do you link information on 

port traffic and expected movements to decisions 

on investment in landside transportation?

4. How long does it take to move a major freight 

infrastructure investment from the original 

proposal to completion? What are the major 

planning and project development steps 

followed in this process?

Freight Carriers, Terminal Operators, 

and Shippers

Primary Questions

1. Generally, what is the role of foreign investment 

in intermodal freight facilities? Ownership? 

Construction? Operations? For a new intermodal 

freight terminal or facility or a major expansion 

of an existing one, who has general responsibility 

for and pays for the following:

Planning?

Design and construction?

Operations?

If government funds are used to support these 

activities, are the funds dedicated solely to that 

purpose? 

2. What are the underlying ownership arrangements 

for the transportation modes that serve 

intermodal facilities (rail, trucking, barges, etc.)? 

The intermodal facility itself? The surrounding 

land? The individual equipment components 

(chassis, etc.)?

3. In the siting of freight intermodal terminals or 

other freight-related facilities, to what degree 

are national, provincial, or municipal land use 

planning objectives taken into account? How 

are projects linked to the plans and activities of 

surrounding communities? Similarly, how are 

environmental concerns addressed in building 

and expanding facilities? What is the process 

for identifying and remediating any adverse 

environmental and community impacts that 

would be produced by the facility?

4. What are the key factors that drive intermodal 

facility capacity design? How is freight 

“surge” accommodated? Has there been 

any consideration of using departure control 

strategies to minimize congestion at the port? 

To what extent do security concerns affect 

facility productivity?

5.To what extent are you included in the decisionmaking process on changes to landside access, 

both rail and highway, for the terminals you 

operate?

6. What expectations are you under to operate 

your facilities 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to 

maximize use of the existing infrastructure?

Secondary Questions

1. What is the transport mode split in freight moving 

to this facility (that is, what percentage arrives by 

inland water, rail, or highway)? In your opinion, 

what are the key factors in the decision to access 

your facility by each access mode? In other 

Ñ

Ñ

Ñ

48 Appendix B: Amplifying Questions
words, why does some freight come by train and 

other by truck?

2. To what extent is freight demand being directed 

or modified though the application of user 

charges (fees or tolls)? Are such charges 

limited to those applied to transport carriers 

(for example, tolls for trucks), or are they also 

being imposed on users of the intermodal 

facility (for example, a per container fee)?

3. How would differences in labor rules and 

expectations, safety, and security procedures 

account for differences in productivity at 

different intermodal facilities?

4. What kind of a benefit-cost analysis is done to 

determine whether the facility is justified?

5. What are the major benefits associated with 

investment in this intermodal facility? Access 

to labor? Better access and handling capacity to 

final markets? Improved financial performance? 

Minimized shipper costs? Enhanced freight 

handling productivity?

6. What performance measures are used to monitor 

the performance of the intermodal facility (for 

example, productivity measures, delay, etc.)? 

How are data collected in support of these 

performance measures? How are reliability, 

travel time, throughput, cost, or environmental 

impacts measured and considered?

7. To what extent has automated data collection 

been designed into terminal operations? 

What freight movement or vehicle tracking 

capabilities are available? If there are such 

systems, how widely are they used?

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 49
50 Appendix B: Amplifying Questions
Host Country 

Contacts

Jens Eskelund

Director-Government Relations

Maersk China, Ltd.

China World Tower 2, 30th Floor

1 Jian Guo Men Ave.

100004 Beijing

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: gcacorpmng@maersk.com

Nancy Q. Sun

CRCT

China Railway Business Plaza, Suite 723

24 Yaziqiao Road, Xuanwu District

100055 Beijing

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: nancy.sun@crct.com

Juguang Li

Department of International Cooperation

Ministry of Communications

11 Jianguomennei Avenue

100736 Beijing

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: lijg@moc.gov.cn

Xiaoqing Shi

Secretary-General

Qingdao City Logistics Association

Eastern Coach Station Office Building, Room 1215

33 Lishandong Road

266100 Qingdao

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: shixiaoqing@qdla.org

Cecil C. C. Lee

General Manager

Qingdao Qianwan Container Terminal Co., Ltd.

Fenjin 4th Road

Port of Qianwan

Huangdao District

266500 Qingdao

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: cecil.lee@qqct.com.cn

Siobhan M. Das

Director-Committees

AMCHAM Shanghai

Shanghai Centre, Suite 568

1376 Nanjing Road West

200040 Shanghai

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: siobhan.das@amcham-shanghai.org

Jeffrey Bernstein

Managing Director

Emerge Logistics Co., Ltd.

PO Box 040-080

200040 Shanghai 

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: jeffrey_bernstein@emergelogistics.com

Michelle Liu

Director

BNSF Railway International Services

Shanghai Times Square, Unit 2903

93 Huaihai Middle Road

200021 Shanghai

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: chengdong.liu@bnsf.com

William Chan

Vice President & Managing Director

APL China Co., Ltd.

9f, Raffles City Office Tower

268 Xi Zang Road Central

200001 Shanghai

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: william_chan@apl.com

Samuel Michael

National Account Manager

ProLogis

Azia Center, Room 2708

1233 Lujiazui Ring Road, Pudong

200121 Shanghai

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: msamuel@prologis.com

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 51

	 A P P E N D I X C
Helen Yang

Shanghai Municipal Construction & 

 Communications Bureau

100 Da Gu Road

200003 Shanghai

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: hyyang@jsw.shanghai.gov.cn

Jian Hua Zhu

Deputy Director-General

Shanghai Municipal Port Administration Bureau

13 ZhongShan East Road

200002 Shanghai

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: zhujh@sse.net.cn

Charles Guowen Wang

Director-Research Center of Logistics

China Development Institute

CDI Mansion

1 Jinhu Road, Silver Lake

518029 Shenzhen

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: cwang@cdi.com.cn

George Goldman

Vice President-HK and South China

APL Co. Ltd/APL Logistics

16th floor, Wharf T&T Centre

7 Canton Road, TST

Kowloon

Hong Kong

E-mail: george_goldman@apl.com

Lawrence Cheung

General Manager

APL Co. Ltd/APL Logisitics

Kerry Centre, Room 2309-12

518001 Shenzhen

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: lawrence_cheung@apl.com

Candy Liu

Bureau of Communications of Shenzhen 

 Municipality

Highway Hub Management & Control Center, 

 Zhuziling

Shennan Road, Futian

518040 Shenzhen

People’s Republic of China

E-mail: herewithcandy@yahoo.com.cn

John R. Harries

Port Development Director

Hutchison Ports South China

Terminal 4

Container Port Road South

Kwai Chung

Hong Kong

E-mail: harries.john@hit.com.hk

Charles G. Wellins

Maersk Hong Kong Limited

Vice President-Sales, GCA

19th floor, Sunning Plaza

10 Hysan Avenue, Causeway Bay

Hong Kong

E-mail: gcasalmang@maersk.com

Frank Jensen

General Manager-Commercial

Modern Terminals

Berth One, Kwai Chung

Hong Kong

E-mail: fj@modernterminals.com

Janice Tse

Deputy Secretary (Transport)

38th floor, 2 Exchange Square

Connaught Place, Central

Hong Kong

E-mail: janicetse@thb.gov.hk

52 Appendix C: Host Country Contacts

OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS

FHWA/US DOT (HPIP)

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Phone: (202) 366-9636 • Fax: (202) 366-9626

international@fhwa.dot.gov

www.international.fhwa.dot.gov

Publication No. FHWA-PL-08-020

HPIP/5-08(3.5)EW