由 lltx1822 The Efficiency Dilemma: How Operational Models, Infrastructure, and External Environment Constrain Hong Kong’s Port
**
By the end of 2025, Hong Kong’s port is mired in an efficiency crisis stemming from both internal and external factors. The prolonged waiting of ships in open sea anchorages, densely stacked containers in the yards, and the long queues of vehicles on cross-border channels reflect the triple constraints of rigid operational models, lagging infrastructure, and drastic changes in the external environment. These three factors do not exist in isolation; rather, they form a chain reaction of “models constraining efficiency — facilities struggling to support — environment exacerbating imbalance,” dragging the operational efficiency of Hong Kong’s port to a low point. As a key hub in the global supply chain, the efficiency dilemma of Hong Kong’s port not only affects its own competitiveness but also impacts the smooth flow of trade between the Asia-Pacific manufacturing hinterland and the global market. A deep analysis of the internal logic and combined effects of these three constraining factors is the core prerequisite for resolving the efficiency predicament.
I. Rigid Operational Models: Process Blockages and Lack of Coordination
The operational model of Hong Kong’s port has long remained within the traditional port management framework, lacking digital coordination, market flexibility, and regional integration. This leads to poor connection between various links and inefficient resource allocation, becoming an “internal shackle” to efficiency improvement.
Process segmentation causes inefficiencies throughout the chain. The operational links of Hong Kong’s port exist in a segmented state of “each acting on its own.” Terminal operations, pilotage services, customs clearance supervision, and collection and distribution lack unified scheduling and information sharing, creating multiple efficiency bottlenecks. Taking pilotage services as an example, due to policy differences in the Shenzhen-Hong Kong Dapeng Bay waters, large vessels traveling to and from the eastern port area of Shenzhen previously required “secondary pilotage” – switching pilots in the Shenzhen and Hong Kong waters respectively. This added over 30,000 yuan in cost and more than an hour per voyage for a single vessel, while also increasing navigation risks. This process segmentation is not an isolated case. In the customs clearance process, procedures like manifest declaration, customs declaration, and inspection at Hong Kong’s port still have a high proportion of offline operations and information barriers between departments. The average clearance time in 2025 reached 1.5 hours, far exceeding the under 30-minute level at Shenzhen’s Yantian Port. Process segmentation creates “connection gaps” between links: after berthing, ships wait for pilotage; after loading/unloading, they wait for clearance; after unloading, they wait for container pickup. The overall chain turnover time is significantly extended.
Fixed charging and management models exacerbate operational friction. The charging standards and management models of Hong Kong’s port have long lacked flexibility, making it difficult to adapt to market changes and shipper needs. The voucher sales model and designated electronic payment system implemented by the mid-stream operators’ association increase the operational and time costs for shippers and have even led to disputes between consignees and shipping companies over terminal handling charges. By the end of 2025, container detention due to fee disputes accounted for 5%, further increasing yard turnover pressure. Meanwhile, overall port charges are relatively high. Cross-border trucking costs are 20%-30% higher than at Shenzhen’s Yantian Port, and terminal handling charges lack a flexible adjustment mechanism, gradually losing price advantage in regional competition. This rigid charging and management model not only reduces shippers’ willingness to cooperate but also constrains the port’s own revenue growth, making it difficult to form a virtuous cycle of “quality service — reasonable charges — efficiency improvement.”
Lagging digital coordination amplifies efficiency shortcomings. Amid the global trend of ports transforming into “smart ports,” the digital coordination process at Hong Kong’s port is noticeably lagging. Although the SAR government planned to complete the construction of the “Port Community System” (PCS) within 2025, by the end of the year, the system had still not achieved seamless integration with mainland port logistics information platforms. Real-time information sharing between shipping companies, terminals, customs, shippers, and other parties remains unrealized. Information asymmetry leading to issues like manifest errors and cargo mismatches accounted for 18% of the causes of congestion at Hong Kong’s port by the end of 2025. In contrast, Shenzhen’s Yantian Port has built a mature digital coordination platform, using blockchain technology for real-time verification of customs declaration documents. The digital applications at Hong Kong’s port are still concentrated in single links, failing to form chain-wide digital coordination, resulting in low operational efficiency and a high rate of human error.
Lack of regional coordination mechanisms wastes resource potential. The coordination mechanisms within the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area port cluster are not yet perfected. Hong Kong’s port has not formed effective resource sharing and division of labor with ports like Shenzhen and Guangzhou. The ports are highly homogeneous in route networks and cargo types. The transshipment trade share of Hong Kong’s port is as high as 60%, while the transshipment shares of Yantian Port and Nansha Port are also increasing year by year, leading to cargo dispersion and insufficient equipment utilization. Meanwhile, core resources like anchorages and yards have not achieved regional sharing. When the anchorage of Hong Kong’s port was saturated at the end of 2025, vessels could not be promptly diverted to anchorages at Yantian Port or Nansha Port, while some berth resources at neighboring ports were idle, creating a resource misallocation pattern of “uneven busyness.” This lack of coordination in the operational model makes it difficult to improve the overall efficiency of the Greater Bay Area port cluster and leaves Hong Kong’s port to bear the pressure of peak cargo flows alone.
II. Lagging Infrastructure: Capacity Bottlenecks and Technological Gaps
Infrastructure is the hardware foundation of port efficiency. Hong Kong’s port infrastructure has long faced the triple dilemma of “saturated capacity, outdated technology, and poor connectivity,” making it difficult to adapt to the transportation needs of ultra-large vessels, explosive cargo flows, and high-value-added goods. It has become a “physical shackle” to efficiency improvement.
Core facilities are approaching their limits. The Kwai Tsing Container Terminal, the core hub of Hong Kong’s port, has a designed annual handling capacity of over 20 million TEUs. However, its throughput reached 42 million TEUs in 2023. During the peak season at the end of 2025, daily throughput frequently exceeded 150,000 TEUs, far exceeding the optimal daily handling threshold. The scarcity of land resources leaves no room for port expansion. There is no additional land available for development around the Kwai Tsing port basin. Land reclamation progresses slowly due to environmental controversies and lengthy approval processes. The channel and berth facilities are also struggling to meet demand. The 17-meter-deep channel can barely accommodate ultra-large vessels but requires waiting for high tide, significantly reducing berthing efficiency. This stands in stark contrast to Shenzhen’s Yantian Port, which has an 18-meter-deep channel allowing 24/7 berthing. By the end of 2025, Hong Kong’s port’s 24 deep-water berths were chronically saturated. The average waiting time for ultra-large vessels to berth reached 3-5 days, with some vessels even waiting over 7 days.
Technological equipment upgrades are severely lagging. Against the backdrop of global ports transitioning towards automation and intelligence, the technological equipment level of Hong Kong’s port lags noticeably behind its competitors. The coverage rate of automated quay cranes is less than 30%, far lower than Singapore’s port (70%) and Shenzhen’s Yantian Port (60%). The per-container handling efficiency is 15%-20% lower than Yantian Port. The hourly handling rate per quay crane is only around 30 moves, while Yantian Port has exceeded 40 moves. Yard automation levels are even lower. The coverage rate of automated stacking cranes is less than 20%, still relying on manual scheduling, leading to a surge in re-handling rates. By the end of 2025, the average number of re-handles for laden containers reached 2.3 times. The time spent per container re-handle extended to 45 minutes, directly dragging down quay crane handling efficiency by 30%. Although Hong Kong has introduced AI sorting systems and automatic X-ray scanning technology in some logistics centers, doubling parcel inspection speeds, the application scope of such technologies is limited and does not cover the core operational links of the port.
Poor connectivity in the collection and distribution system. Hong Kong’s port’s collection and distribution system with the Pearl River Delta hinterland overly relies on cross-border trucks. The proportion of railway and waterway intermodal transport is only about 20%, far lower than the 45% in the Yangtze River Delta port cluster. Cross-border trucking is constrained by road capacity, clearance efficiency, and other factors. By the end of 2025, vehicle queues around the Kwai Tsing Container Terminal reached up to 5 kilometers at their longest, with trucks averaging over 2 hours of waiting time to enter. There are also shortcomings in the connection between the channel and the mid-stream operation area. The mid-stream operation area handles an annual volume of about 3.3 million TEUs, but its wharf length and land area are limited. During the peak cargo flow in the first week of December 2025, the longest waiting time for vessels to berth reached 36 hours. Delays in barge unloading led to poor connectivity in lighterage transfer, creating chain-wide congestion from “yard — terminal — mid-stream operation area.”
Supporting facilities struggle to adapt to changes in cargo structure. Against the backdrop of trade rebound, the cargo structure at Hong Kong’s port has changed significantly. The proportion of high-value-added goods increased to 38%, and dangerous goods throughput grew by 35% year-on-year. However, the port’s supporting facilities have not been upgraded accordingly, lacking sufficient dedicated berths, temperature-controlled yards, and rapid inspection equipment. High-value-added goods like precision electronic components and medical equipment require special storage conditions. Yet, ordinary yards account for as much as 80% of Hong Kong’s port,难以满足恒温、防潮、防震动的需求; Dangerous goods transportation requires dedicated handling equipment and inspection channels. However, dedicated dangerous goods berths at Hong Kong’s port account for only 5%, and the inspection process is cumbersome, leading to low handling efficiency for such goods and further squeezing the transportation resources for ordinary cargo.
III. Drastic Changes in the External Environment: Competitive Squeeze and Demand Restructuring
The operational efficiency of Hong Kong’s port is constrained not only by internal factors but also faces external shocks from the intense competition of the Greater Bay Area port cluster, the restructuring of global supply chains, and changes in the trade environment. These factors collectively constitute the “external shackles” to efficiency improvement, further amplifying internal shortcomings.
Fierce competition within the Greater Bay Area port cluster. Ports like Shenzhen’s Yantian Port and Guangzhou’s Nansha Port have continuously increased infrastructure investment and policy support in recent years, creating a “siphon effect” on Hong Kong’s port. Relying on its 18-meter deep-water channel, 60% automated quay crane coverage, and 20%-30% logistics cost advantage, Yantian Port has become the preferred port for US and Europe mainline services in South China. Its throughput reached 33 million TEUs in 2024, diverting a large amount of high-value-added cargo from Hong Kong. Nansha Port, leveraging its hinterland advantage, focuses on domestic trade and Southeast Asia routes. Its throughput exceeded 25 million TEUs in 2024, capturing nearly 15% of Hong Kong’s near-sea route market share. More critically, surrounding ports have further reduced cargo flow costs through subsidy policies for “sea-rail intermodal” and “river-sea intermodal” transport and efficient smart clearance systems. Hong Kong’s port is gradually losing its policy红利 and efficiency advantages. Some shippers are “voting with their feet,”转向成本更低、效率更高的周边港口.
Global supply chain restructuring triggers changes in demand. The global supply chain is transitioning from “globalization” to “regionalization,” placing higher demands on port efficiency, resilience, and service capabilities. ASEAN has become China’s largest export destination. However, Hong Kong’s port’s route network still focuses on US and Europe mainlines, with insufficient coverage of emerging Southeast Asian markets. In 2025, routes to Southeast Asia accounted for only 20%, far lower than Nansha Port’s 45%. Simultaneously, the share of cargo from emerging markets in Asia, Africa, and Latin America increased from 25% to 40%. This type of cargo has a slower turnover speed, with an average berthing time 1.5 days longer than US and Europe routes, further dragging down the port’s overall efficiency. Additionally, companies have an increasing demand for digitalization and visibility in their supply chains. The lagging digital transformation of Hong Kong’s port makes it difficult to meet demands for real-time cargo tracking and optimized logistics solutions, leading to its gradual marginalization in the global supply chain restructuring.
Trade environment and policy changes bring additional pressure. Geopolitical conflicts have increased global trade uncertainty. The Russia-Ukraine conflict has trapped approximately 60,000 Ukrainian and Russian seafarers, further exacerbating shipping capacity tightness and indirectly affecting vessel berthing and operational efficiency at Hong Kong’s port. Meanwhile, there is still room for improvement in policy coordination between Hong Kong and the mainland. Although the “one-time pilotage, one-time charge” cooperation model in the Shenzhen-Hong Kong Dapeng Bay waters has achieved significant results, cumulatively reducing enterprise operating costs by 650 million yuan and saving nearly 1 hour per voyage for a single vessel, the coverage of such policy coordination is limited. Barriers still exist in areas like customs clearance supervision and data flow. Furthermore, tightening environmental policies pose new challenges for port operations. Hong Kong’s port’s green transition is progressing slowly. The application scope of electric container trucks is limited, and green fuel bunkering facilities are lacking. Some vessels failing to meet environmental standards face berthing restrictions, further impacting operational efficiency.
IV. The Combined Effect of the Triple Constraints: The Vicious Cycle of Declining Efficiency
The triple constraints of operational models, infrastructure, and external environment do not act in isolation. They intertwine and amplify each other, forming a vicious cycle of “declining efficiency — decreasing competitiveness — insufficient revenue — lagging upgrades — further efficiency decline,” making the efficiency dilemma of Hong Kong’s port increasingly severe.
The combination of operational models and infrastructure: Process blockages amplify hardware shortcomings. The rigid operational model of Hong Kong’s port makes it difficult for the already lagging infrastructure to perform at its maximum potential. For example, the hardware shortcoming of insufficient automated quay crane coverage, combined with the lack of coordination from a digital dispatching system, leads to poor connection between quay cranes, yards, and trucks, further reducing handling efficiency. The hardware limitation of insufficient channel depth, coupled with the operational issue of segmented pilotage procedures, significantly prolongs the berthing time of ultra-large vessels. This叠加 of “hardware deficiency + software lag” results in the port’s overall efficiency being far lower than that of ports with similar hardware levels but advanced operational models.
The combination of infrastructure and external environment: Hardware bottlenecks struggle to cope with external shocks. The explosive cargo flow brought by the global trade rebound creates a sharp contradiction with the saturated infrastructure of Hong Kong’s port. Meanwhile, the competitive squeeze from surrounding ports in the Greater Bay Area makes it impossible for Hong Kong’s port to effectively divert excess cargo flow, leading to cargo accumulation and efficiency decline. For example, in November-December 2025, weekly container arrivals exceeded 1 million TEUs, far exceeding the port’s designed peak handling capacity of 800,000 TEUs/week. The efficient facilities of surrounding ports attracted a large amount of high-value-added cargo, leaving Hong Kong’s port to mainly handle lower-value-added cargo with slower turnover, further exacerbating congestion and efficiency decline.
The combination of operational models and external environment: Rigid models lose competitive advantage. In the context of fierce competition within the Greater Bay Area port cluster and global supply chain restructuring, the rigid operational model of Hong Kong’s port makes it difficult to quickly adapt to market changes. Surrounding ports attract cargo through flexible charging policies, efficient coordination mechanisms, and digital services. In contrast, Hong Kong’s port’s fixed charges, segmented processes, and digital lag place it at a disadvantage in competition. The loss of high-value-added cargo leads to weak growth in port revenue. The average per-container revenue in 2025 was 12% lower than at Yantian Port, making it difficult to invest sufficient funds in operational model innovation and infrastructure upgrades, forming a vicious cycle.
V. The Path to Resolution: Systemic Innovation Across Three Dimensions
To resolve the efficiency dilemma of Hong Kong’s port, it is essential to break away from the mindset of addressing single factors. A systemic solution of “operational model innovation — infrastructure upgrade — external environment adaptation” must be constructed. Through multiple means like process optimization, technological empowerment, and regional coordination, the vicious cycle can be broken, and efficiency advantages can be reshaped.
(I) Operational Model Innovation: Building a Coordinated and Efficient Governance System
Deepen digital coordination transformation. Comprehensively advance the implementation and upgrade of the “Port Community System” (PCS) to achieve real-time information sharing among shipping companies, terminals, customs, shippers, and other parties. Fully digitize processes like manifest declaration, customs declaration/inspection, and container pickup appointments to shorten cargo clearance and pickup times. Learn from the experience of the Central Asia Regional Hub Center by widely applying AI technology in core port operational links. Build intelligent dispatching systems to optimize the full-process scheduling of vessel berthing, yard operations, and truck transportation, improving resource allocation efficiency. Simultaneously, expand the application scope of technologies like automatic X-ray scanning and intelligent sorting to more than double parcel inspection speeds, enhancing inspection efficiency and accuracy.
Optimize charging and management models. Establish a “Port Charges Coordination Committee” involving the government, port operators, shippers, and shipping companies to formulate transparent and flexible charging standards. Implement differentiated pricing based on cargo volume and type to reduce shipper costs. Abolish the voucher sales model for mid-stream operations and implement a diversified electronic payment system to simplify operational processes and reduce fee disputes. Meanwhile, learn from the successful experience of Shenzhen-Hong Kong Dapeng Bay pilotage cooperation. Expand the scope of regional coordination by promoting a “one-time handling, universal passage” cooperation model in areas like customs clearance supervision and crew allocation to reduce cross-border logistics costs and time losses.
Strengthen regional coordination mechanisms. Deepen the division of labor and cooperation within the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area port cluster. Clearly define Hong Kong’s port’s core positioning as “international transshipment, air-sea intermodal transport, and high-end shipping services.” Divert some US and Europe mainline cargo to Yantian Port and domestic trade/Southeast Asia route cargo to Nansha Port to form a differentiated development pattern. Establish a Greater Bay Area port resource sharing platform to achieve coordinated scheduling of core resources like anchorages, yards, and berths. When Hong Kong’s port anchorage is saturated, promptly divert vessels to anchorages at surrounding ports. Advance the construction of the “Shenzhen-Hong Kong Combined Port” and “Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Logistics Channel” to achieve terminal resource sharing, slot互认, and customs clearance mutual recognition, enhancing the overall efficiency of the regional port cluster.
(II) Infrastructure Upgrade: Breaking Through Capacity Bottlenecks and Technological Gaps
Advance core facility expansion and upgrade. Explore combined solutions of “land reclamation + terminal vertical transformation.” Plan reclamation projects around Tsing Yi Island or Lantau Island to add 1-2 deep-water berths, increasing the annual handling capacity to over 25 million TEUs. Implement vertical transformation of the Kwai Tsing Container Terminal by constructing smart automated storage and retrieval systems (AS/RS), raising container stacking height to 12 tiers, and increasing storage capacity by 30% without occupying additional land. Simultaneously, initiate the second-phase channel dredging project to increase the channel depth to 18 meters, enabling 24/7 berthing for ultra-large vessels and eliminating the efficiency impact of waiting for tide.
Accelerate the automation transformation of technological equipment. Increase investment in automated equipment. Raise the automated quay crane coverage rate to 50% and the automated stacking crane coverage rate to 40%. Introduce AI intelligent handling systems to reduce per-container handling time from 3 minutes to 2.5 minutes and increase the hourly handling rate per quay crane to over 40 moves. Build an intelligent yard management system to achieve full-process automation of container storage, retrieval, and transfer, compressing re-handling time to within 15 minutes and significantly improving yard turnover efficiency. Additionally, improve the construction of supporting facilities. Add 3-5 dedicated dangerous goods berths and temperature-controlled yards to enhance the handling capacity for high-value-added and special cargo.
Optimize the connectivity of the collection and distribution system. Reduce reliance on cross-border trucks. Increase the frequency of barge routes and railway trains between Hong Kong and inland cities in the Pearl River Delta. Promote “sea-rail intermodal” and “river-sea intermodal” models to raise the proportion of railway and waterway intermodal transport to over 40%. Expand cross-border channels like Tsing Lek Bridge and Container Terminal Road. Add dedicated freight lanes. Set up large truck buffer zones at terminal entrances. Implement a “scheduled container pickup + time-slot release” system to compress truck entrance waiting time to within 30 minutes. Simultaneously, deepen Shenzhen-Hong Kong pilotage cooperation by expanding the applicability of “one-time pilotage” to cover more waters and vessel types, further improving vessel berthing efficiency.
(III) External Environment Adaptation: Enhancing Competitive Resilience and Demand Responsiveness
Optimize route network and market positioning. Adapt to the trend of global supply chain regionalization. Increase route frequency to emerging markets like Southeast and South Asia from Hong Kong, raising the proportion of routes to Southeast Asia to over 35%. Leverage Hong Kong’s free port policy advantages to focus on high-value-added international transshipment and air-sea intermodal business. Build a “high-end shipping service center” offering integrated services like cargo distribution, bonded warehousing, and supply chain finance to increase per-container revenue and core competitiveness. Simultaneously, strengthen cooperation with major global ports to build a “Hong Kong + overseas hub” shipping network, enhancing its voice in the global supply chain.
Deepen policy coordination with the mainland. Advance the integration of customs clearance between Hong Kong and the mainland. Expand the coverage of “co-location clearance” by including high-value-added goods, dangerous goods, and other special cargo into the rapid inspection channel. Establish a cross-border logistics data sharing platform between the two sides to achieve real-time synchronization of cargo information, vessel trajectories, and clearance status, eliminating information barriers. Learn from the tripartite cooperation model of Shenzhen-Hong Kong Dapeng Bay pilotage cooperation to strengthen cooperation between Hong Kong and the mainland in areas like maritime management, crew allocation, and emergency coordination, improving the smoothness and safety of cross-border logistics.
Accelerate green transformation to adapt to environmental policies. Formulate a green transformation plan for Hong Kong’s port. Achieve full electrification of short-distance transport within the port area before 2030 by expanding the application of electric container trucks and electric barges. Construct green fuel bunkering facilities to attract environmentally friendly vessels to berth, enhancing the port’s sustainable competitiveness. Simultaneously, strengthen exchanges on environmental technologies with international ports. Introduce advanced exhaust gas treatment and wastewater treatment equipment to reduce the port operation’s environmental impact. Ensure compliance with increasingly stringent global environmental standards to avoid affecting operational efficiency due to environmental issues.
Conclusion
The efficiency dilemma of Hong Kong’s port is the inevitable result of the combined constraints of operational models, infrastructure, and the external environment. Rigid operational models cause process blockages; lagging infrastructure creates physical bottlenecks; drastic changes in the external environment intensify competitive pressure. The vicious cycle formed by their interaction causes Hong Kong’s port to gradually lose its advantage in global port competition. However, Hong Kong’s port is not without cards to play. Its free port policy,完善的法律体系, and globally connected shipping network remain core advantages that are difficult for other Greater Bay Area ports to替代 in the short term.
To resolve the efficiency dilemma, Hong Kong’s port must跳出 the “patchwork” localized mindset and break the triple constraints through systemic innovation: eliminate internal process blockages through the digitalization and coordination of operational models; break through physical capacity bottlenecks through the automation and verticalization of infrastructure upgrades; enhance competitive resilience and demand responsiveness through the regionalization and market adaptation of the external environment. Only in this way can the vicious cycle of declining efficiency be broken, revitalizing Hong Kong’s port, consolidating its status as an international shipping center, and enabling it to play a core hub role within the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area port cluster, providing solid support for the stable development of global trade. During the critical period of global supply chain restructuring, the efficiency innovation of Hong Kong’s port is not only related to its own development but also has a profound impact on the smoothness and resilience of trade in the Asia-Pacific region and globally.