This study examines how concurrent shocks from economic policy uncertainty (EPU), trade policy uncertainty (TPU), geopolitical risk (GPR), and climate policy uncertainty (CPU) affect China’s shipping markets. Because these shocks may be correlated, we use the joint impulse response function (jIRF) to estimate their combined effect after removing broad market movements captured by the China Securities Index300 (CSI 300). The shipping stock returns response turns negative and then rebounds before converging toward zero. EPU and TPU account for most of the early contraction, whereas CPU partly offsets it at some horizons and GPR contributes less consistently. Sector level results reveal marked heterogeneity. The responses of Dry bulk sector are strongly cyclical, container sector changes direction frequently but with smaller amplitudes, and tanker sectors exhibit the largest fluctuations. Rolling window estimates show that both the magnitude and direction of the responses vary across major trade, pandemic, and geopolitical events. These findings demonstrate the importance of modeling correlated uncertainty shocks jointly and tailoring risk management to the timing of each shipping sector.
Port electrification is increasingly considered an important pathway for reducing emissions from port operations. However, investment decisions related to electrification are often assessed through cost–benefit analyses at a project level, or technology specific evaluations based on specified assumptions regarding costs, demand, utilisation and infrastructure availability. While these approaches provide important evidence on project feasibility and economic performance, they do not typically represent the endogenous feedbacks, implementation delays and evolving infrastructure constraints that can shape electrification pathways over time. This paper frames port electrification as a dynamic decision problem shaped by interacting financial and infrastructure constraints. rather than as a one-off investment choice. A system dynamics model is developed to represent the feedback mechanisms governing port electrification decisions, including capital allocation dynamics, infrastructure deployment constraints, and the interactions between investment decisions and infrastructure development. The model is applied as an exploratory decision-support tool to examine how different economic and infrastructural conditions influence electrification pathways over time. Scenario experiments assess the effects of alternative investment allocation strategies and infrastructure constraints on electrification deployment. In addition, the model is applied using parameter values informed by publicly documented electrification programmes at the ports of Aberdeen and Bilbao, representing different investment scales and grid reinforcement strategies. The results indicate that electrification outcomes depend heavily on the interaction between investment timing, infrastructure capacity, and investment allocation strategies. By making these dynamics explicit, the proposed approach provides complementary insights into dynamic interactions and sequencing effects that are not explicitly represented in conventional project-level assessments. The paper contributes a system-level framework for analysing long-term port electrification pathways.
Port digitalization represents one of the most significant transformations in global maritime logistics. In Portugal, a country with a strong maritime tradition and an economy open to international trade, technological modernization of ports generates significant direct and indirect effects across multiple sectors of the national economy. Using an input–output analytical framework, based on the 2017 input–output matrix of the Portuguese economy, covering 82 sectors, this study assesses how the digital transformation of Portuguese ports affects different sectors of the Portuguese economy and stimulates value generation across the economy. The results show that Smart Port initiatives produce positive ripple effects beyond the port boundaries, benefiting a range of sectors, including those directly associated with technology and digital services, as well as those indirectly connected, such as logistics, energy, and manufacturing. These spillover effects reflect the interdependence between port-related activities and other sectors of the economy. The analysis indicates that port digitalization projects generate impacts equivalent to 150.9
China’s seaport investments along the Maritime Silk Road have generated considerable controversy amid great power competition and cognitive-informational contestation. China-built or China-operated seaports are perceived by great powers as strategic pivots, often framed as China’s peer competitors. Meanwhile, seaport construction often faces local financing challenges. Many have been securitised (Outside the finance domain and in securitisation theory and international relations, securitisation is defined as the way non-threatening public issues are transformed into urgent security threats. See H. Stritzel (2014). Securitization Theory and the Copenhagen School. In H. Stritzel, ed., Security in Translation. New Security Challenges Series. London: Palgrave Macmillan.) in Western and Indian narratives, as the ‘digital trojan horse’, ‘string of pearls’, ‘state capitalism’, ‘debt-trap diplomacy’ and ‘neo-colonialism’. Three factors drive the securitisation of China’s seaport investments: geostrategic, geopolitical and geoeconomic. Yet, it remains an open question as to how China has applied multiple measures to transform projects from securitisation to de-securitisation. To address this puzzle, the paper introduces the concept of ‘seaport diplomacy’ and argues that China seeks to forge a nexus between the government’s strategic interests and the commercial interests of foreign seaport enterprises along the Maritime Silk Road. As a strategy, the Chinese government has taken significant measures to cultivate a new narrative by advancing a discourse that defends its seaport projects through concepts such as ‘Business Orientation’, ‘Land-Sea Linkage’, ‘People’s Livelihood First’, ‘Developmental Peace’ and ‘Win-Win Cooperation’, falling into three tactics of ‘commercialisation’, ‘localisation’ and ‘socialisation’. This China-style and government-driven counter-narrative has generated mixed outcomes: it has mitigated external criticism but has failed to strengthen local endorsement in host countries. China’s overseas seaport investments may face grave hurdles if local anti-China sentiments flare up.
There is increasing attention paid to the manipulation of ships’ Automatic Identification System (AIS) signals, with implications for maritime safety, law enforcement, and security. Based on the literature and narrative reports, this paper proposes a framework that answers why and when ships engage in AIS manipulations by tracing the purpose, goals, and strategies of their operators. Drawing from the academic literature and narrative reports on AIS manipulation cases by different countries’ shadow fleets, warships, fishing vessels, maritime pirates, and commercial vessels engaged in legitimate transits, the paper argues that AIS manipulation can be used to shield ships from both legitimate and illegitimate maritime actors by engaging in deception and denial through concealment and deterrence. Ships seeking protection from legitimate maritime actors while engaging in illegal activities are likely to use spoofing and falsification strategies, as well as strategies that strategically or intermittently drop the AIS signal. States seeking protection from hostile maritime actors (both legitimate and illegitimate), as they carry out legal activities, are likely to use both disruption strategies and strategic dropping of their AIS signals. This paper has implications for policies implemented by the shipping industry, maritime authorities, and regional and global networks. Effectively addressing AIS manipulation requires a multi-pronged approach that combines regulatory reform, stronger enforcement, technological solutions, and enhanced international cooperation and information sharing.
