由 lltx1822 Beyond the Pandemic: Delving into the Long-term Structural Causes of Hong Kong’s Port Congestion
The all-encompassing congestion at Hong Kong’s ports at the end of 2025 is no longer a temporary pain caused by short-term shocks like the pandemic. It is the inevitable outcome of the concentrated eruption of long-accumulated structural contradictions. When vessels awaiting berth form long queues in open sea anchorages, when containers are stacked to their limits in Kwai Tsing yards, and when vehicle queues on cross-border channels stretch for kilometers—behind these表象 lies a profound imbalance in Hong Kong’s ports across dimensions of spatial resources, cargo structure, regional competition, technological transformation, and institutional coordination. External factors like the pandemic or typhoons were merely catalysts. What truly pushed the ports to the brink of congestion were the long-unresolved structural problems. Only by深入剖析 these根源 can a破局之道 be found for the sustainable development of Hong Kong’s ports, allowing them to regain core competitiveness in the重构 of global supply chains.
I. Hard Constraints of Spatial Resources: The Unbreakable Development Ceiling
Hong Kong’s port congestion is first constrained by先天不足 in geographical space and后天扩张的制度限制, forming a物理天花板 that is difficult to突破. This is the most fundamental and顽固的一环 among all structural contradictions.
The scarcity of land resources fundamentally restricts port expansion. Hong Kong itself is mountainous with limited usable land. As the core hub, the Kwai Tsing Container Terminals have no additional land for development in their vicinity, with the port area long locked at 279 hectares. Unlike Singapore’s port, which continuously expands yard area through land reclamation, Hong Kong’s reclamation projects face strict environmental approvals and social controversy. Over the past decade, only small-scale reclamation has been completed, far from meeting port development needs. Data shows that through continuous reclamation, Singapore’s total yard area has exceeded 500 hectares, while Hong Kong’s port yard area is only about half of that, yet it handles a comparable cargo throughput. Naturally, storage density remains high. By the end of 2025, storage density at Kwai Tsing yards突破 640 TEUs per hectare, far exceeding the reasonable threshold of 500 TEUs per hectare, making congestion the norm.
Hardware短板 in channels and berths further加剧 the spatial bottleneck. Although Hong Kong port completed the 17-meter channel deepening project in 2016, it remains insufficient for increasingly large container vessels. Current global ultra-large container vessels commonly exceed 20,000 TEUs in capacity, with drafts over 16 meters. Hong Kong’s channels only allow them to berth勉强, often requiring tidal operations,大幅降低靠泊效率. In comparison, Shenzhen’s Yantian Port has an 18-meter deep channel, allowing全天候接纳 of ultra-large vessels, naturally diverting大量高附加值货源. Simultaneously, the number of deep-water berths at Hong Kong’s ports has long remained at 24, with no additions in the past five years, while Singapore’s port has over 40 deep-water berths. Insufficient berth supply directly leads to延长 vessel waiting times.
The固化 of spatial utilization模式 further wastes limited resources. Hong Kong’s port yard layout still relies primarily on平面堆存, with不足 development of vertical space. Container stacking height is limited to 8 tiers, whereas Singapore and Shanghai ports普遍采用 stacking modes of 12 tiers or more,提升单位面积堆存容量 by over 50%. Furthermore, the proportion of空箱堆存 at Hong Kong’s ports has long been偏高, surging to 40% by the end of 2025.大量空箱占用优质堆存空间, while urgently needed laden containers are挤在临时堆区, creating a资源错配困境 of “empty boxes占用 space, laden boxes无处可放.” This inefficient spatial utilization模式 undoubtedly加剧 congestion pressure in land-scarce Hong Kong.
II. Imbalanced Cargo Structure: Path Dependence on Low Value-Added Transformation
Hong Kong’s port cargo structure has long suffered from an imbalance characterized by “重转口、轻直航” (over-reliance on transshipment, neglect of direct shipping) and “重数量、轻质量” (emphasis on volume over value), creating a path dependence on low value-added transformation. This gradually erodes competitive advantage in the重构 of global supply chains, indirectly加剧 congestion.
Excessively high transshipment share lengthens logistics chains. As a free port, transshipment trade was once Hong Kong port’s core advantage. However, with the rise of other Greater Bay Area (GBA) ports, this advantage has gradually turned into a劣势. In 2025, Hong Kong’s port transshipment share was as high as 60%, far exceeding Shenzhen Yantian’s 25% and Guangzhou Nansha’s 18%. Transshipment trade means cargo must undergo multiple transfers via “Mainland port – Hong Kong port – Overseas port,” lengthening the logistics chain and increasing transshipment links. This not only raises cargo damage risk but also prolongs port dwell time. For example, cargo from Chongqing to Africa might travel by river vessel to Shenzhen, transfer by barge to Hong Kong, and finally load onto an ocean-going vessel—involving over 3 transshipments. Delays at any环节 can trigger port backlog.
Loss of high value-added货源 leads to decline in cargo quality. In regional port competition, Hong Kong’s port continuously loses high value-added货源 to ports like Shenzhen and Guangzhou. In 2024, Europe and America routes accounted for over 50% of Shenzhen Yantian’s volume. Cargo on these routes often consists of high-value electronic components,精密设备, etc., with high value per box and fast turnaround. Hong Kong’s share of Europe and America routes has fallen below 35%, forcing a转向利润较低、周转较慢的近洋航线和转口贸易. The loss of high value-added货源 leads to乏力的货运收入增长, making it difficult to invest sufficient funds in infrastructure upgrades, forming a恶性循环: “declining cargo quality – insufficient revenue – upgrade滞后 – low efficiency –加剧 congestion – further loss of货源.”
Mismatch between cargo flow and market demand加剧 congestion. With the区域化重构 of global supply chains, ASEAN has become China’s largest export destination. Yet, Hong Kong’s port航线布局 still focuses on Europe and America mainlines, with不足 coverage of emerging Southeast Asian markets. In 2025, routes from Hong Kong to Southeast Asia accounted for only 20%, far低于 Guangzhou Nansha’s 45%. Simultaneously, the share of cargo from emerging markets in Asia, Africa, and Latin America increased from 25% to 40%. However, vessel scheduling efficiency on these routes is lower, with average berthing times 1.5 days longer than Europe and America routes, further拖累 port turnaround efficiency. This mismatch between cargo flow and market demand prevents port resources from being集中服务于高需求航线,加剧 overall congestion.
III. Misaligned Regional Competition: Lack of Synergy in the GBA Port Cluster
The rapid rise of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (GBA) port cluster presents opportunities for协同发展 for Hong Kong’s port. However, due to the lack of a明确的分工协作机制, regional competition has陷入同质化困境. Hong Kong’s traditional advantages are continuously削弱, further放大 congestion pressure.
Homogeneous competition leads to货源分流与资源浪费. Hong Kong’s port, Shenzhen Yantian Port, and Guangzhou Nansha Port exhibit high overlap in航线布局 and cargo types, forming fierce同质化竞争. Yantian Port,凭借 18-meter深水航道, 60%自动化岸桥覆盖率, and logistics costs 20%-30% lower than Hong Kong, has become the preferred port for Europe and America mainlines in South China. Its 2024 container throughput reached 33 million TEUs, diverting大量高附加值货源 from Hong Kong. Nansha Port leverages its hinterland advantage, focusing on domestic trade and Southeast Asia routes. Its 2024 throughput突破 25 million TEUs, capturing nearly 15% of Hong Kong’s near-sea route market share. The同质化竞争 among the three major ports leads to货源分散. Each port struggles to achieve economies of scale, resulting in不足 utilization of port equipment. Yet, all face congestion pressure during peak seasons, causing资源浪费.
Lack of分工协作机制 hinders发挥协同效应. The GBA port cluster has yet to establish an effective分工协作机制. Ports operate independently, lacking统一规划与调度. Although Hong Kong’s Port Community System (PCS) construction has begun, seamless对接 with mainland ports’ logistics information platforms has not been achieved. Issues like documentation errors and cargo misallocation due to information asymmetry accounted for 18% of the causes of Hong Kong’s port congestion at end-2025.同时, resources like anchorages and yards among ports are not共享. When Hong Kong’s anchorages are saturated, vessels cannot be及时分流 to Yantian’s or Nansha’s anchorages, further加剧锚地拥堵. This缺乏协同的发展模式 makes it difficult to提升 the整体竞争力 of the GBA port cluster and adds to Hong Kong’s congestion woes.
Insufficient腹地经济衔接 weakens货源支撑. Hong Kong’s port主要 economic hinterland is the Pearl River Delta. However, with the shift of Pearl River Delta manufacturing inland and the rise of manufacturing in the Yangtze River Delta and Chengdu-Chongqing region, the腹地货源支撑 for Hong Kong’s port is gradually弱化.同时, logistics channel衔接 between Hong Kong and inland Pearl River Delta cities remains不畅. Cross-border trucking still dominates, with rail and waterway联运比例较低, around 20%, far低于 the Yangtze River Delta port cluster’s 45%. Inefficient衔接 of logistics channels leads to low集疏运效率 for hinterland cargo to Hong Kong’s port, further加剧港口拥堵. In comparison, Yantian and Nansha ports have closer衔接 with their hinterlands, with increasing海铁联运、江海联运比例,显著高于 Hong Kong’s port in集疏运效率.
IV. Lagging Technological Transformation: The Catch-up Dilemma in Digitalization and Automation
In the global wave of port transformation towards “smart ports,” Hong Kong’s port technological upgrade步伐 is明显滞后. Insufficient digitalization and automation levels lead to low operational efficiency, becoming a significant technological根源 of congestion.
Low automation levels cause低下装卸效率. Hong Kong’s port automated quay crane coverage is不足 30%, and automated stacking crane coverage is不足 20%,远低于 Singapore’s 70% and Shanghai’s 55%. Low automation directly leads to低下装卸效率. Hong Kong’s per-container handling效率 is 15%-20% lower than Singapore’s. Quay crane productivity is around 30 moves per hour, while Singapore achieves over 40 moves per hour. By the end of 2025, the average number of rehandles for laden containers at HIT reached 2.3 times, an increase of 1.1 times from the same period in 2024. Per-container rehandle time extended to 45 minutes, directly causing a 30% drop in quay crane productivity.滞后 in automation levels makes it difficult for Hong Kong’s port to快速提升处理能力 during cargo flow peaks, making congestion inevitable.
Slow digital transformation leads to不足信息协同. Hong Kong’s port digital transformation is still in its起步阶段, lacking a unified digital platform. Real-time information sharing among shipping lines, terminals, customs, and shippers is not achieved. Processes like customs declaration, inspection, and container pickup still rely mainly on线下操作, with low efficiency. Although the Hong Kong SAR Government planned to complete the PCS框架 within 2025, the system’s functionality有待完善, and information互联互通 with mainland customs has not been realized. In comparison, Shenzhen Yantian has built a relatively mature “smart port” system. Using blockchain technology for real-time sharing and verification of customs documents compresses clearance time to within 30 minutes, while Hong Kong’s average clearance time remains 1.5 hours.滞后 in digital transformation leads to衔接不畅 across links. Delays caused by information asymmetry account for 18% of congestion causes.
Single technology application scenarios limit效率提升. Hong Kong’s port technology application still主要集中在 traditional links like handling and clearance, with不足 application in高端场景 like intelligent dispatch, cargo flow prediction, and supply chain finance. For example, anchorage调度 at Hong Kong’s port is still based on arrival time, without引入 AI智能调度系统. It cannot optimize berthing sequence based on factors like vessel size or cargo urgency, causing vessels carrying急需物资无法优先靠泊. Singapore port already uses AI-powered dispatch systems, compressing average berthing waiting time to within 2 days.同时, Hong Kong’s port exploration in areas like RWA tokenization and supply chain finance digitalization is滞后. It fails to提升供应链的整体韧性与效率 through technological innovation, indirectly加剧 congestion.
V. Insufficient Institutional Coordination: Constraints of Policy Barriers and Management Models
Hong Kong’s port congestion is also束缚 by institutional factors, including不足 policy coordination in the GBA, rigid port management models, and滞后 industry regulation. These institutional factors further放大 structural contradictions.
Insufficient GBA policy coordination leads to不畅跨境物流. As a Special Administrative Region, Hong Kong has institutional differences with the mainland in areas like customs监管, tax policy, and data flow, without an effective协同机制 yet. Cross-border trucks need to complete clearance procedures separately at Hong Kong and mainland customs. Some货物 require反复核验 due to document discrepancies. By end-2025, average clearance time reached 1.5 hours, an increase of 0.4 hours from 2024. Although the “Co-location Arrangement” (一地两检) is implemented, inspection processes for some high-value goods and dangerous品 remain relatively complex, acting as a “绊脚石” for clearance efficiency.同时, progress on logistics data互联互通 between Hong Kong and the mainland is slow. A cooperation memorandum was only signed in November 2025, without实质性数据共享 yet. Information壁垒 cause low logistics efficiency.
Rigid port management models lead to不高运营效率. Hong Kong’s port management model is still dominated by traditional terminal operators, lacking a unified industry coordination body. This leads to不透明收费标准 and不统一运营规则. The voucher sales model and designated electronic payment system promoted by the Hong Kong Mid-stream Operators Association impose额外成本与不便 on shippers,甚至引发 disputes between consignees and shipping lines over Terminal Handling Charges. By end-2025, containers滞留 due to fee disputes accounted for 5%, further加重堆场周转压力.同时, port收费标准 have long been偏高. Cross-border trucking costs are 20%-30% higher than Shenzhen Yantian, causing some shippers to choose分流 to other ports. Yet, ports struggle to invest in upgrades due to收入不足, forming a恶性循环.
Lagging industry regulation leads to混乱市场秩序. Industry regulation for Hong Kong’s port has not kept pace with market development.漏洞 exist in regulation of the freight forwarding and trucking industries. Some unscrupulous forwarders恶意抬价、囤积舱位,加剧混乱 in the shipping market. The trucking industry lacks unified薪酬标准与激励机制, leading to日益严重的 driver shortage. As of October 2025, the shortage of local Hong Kong truck drivers reached 3,000, a缺口率超 25%.同时,监管标准 for port environmental protection and safety differ from the mainland, causing delays for some vessels unable to berth due to non-compliance with环保标准, further加剧 congestion.
VI. Global Supply Chain Restructuring: Long-term Impact of External Environmental Changes
The global supply chain is undergoing its most profound transformation since the Industrial Revolution. External environmental changes like geopolitical conflicts, regionalization restructuring, and digital transformation bring long-term冲击 to Hong Kong’s port development, further exposing its structural短板.
Geopolitical conflicts加剧 supply chain uncertainty. Geopolitical events like the Russia-Ukraine conflict and US-China trade war cause global trade route disruptions,加剧 demand volatility, and显著上升 supply chain uncertainty. Ukrainian and Russian seafarers account for 17% of the global total. The Russia-Ukraine conflict left about 60,000 crew members stranded at sea or in ports, further加剧航运运力紧张, indirectly causing下降 in vessel berthing efficiency at Hong Kong’s port.同时, increased trade barriers force some cargo to take绕行运输,延长物流时间, increasing货物积压压力 at Hong Kong’s port.
Supply chain regionalization restructuring changes cargo flow direction. As global supply chains shift from “globalization” to “区域化,” companies prefer establishing supply chain systems within regions, reducing cross-regional运输. ASEAN has become China’s largest export destination. Yet, Hong Kong’s port航线布局 still focuses on Europe and America mainlines, with不足 coverage of emerging Southeast Asian markets, leading to货源流失.同时, during Chinese enterprises’ “Going Global 2.0” phase, which emphasizes “AI-driven global capability configuration,” demands on port digitalization and智能化水平 are higher. Hong Kong’s滞后技术转型 makes it difficult to meet enterprise needs, further丧失市场份额.
The wave of digital transformation加剧竞争分化. The global supply chain is entering an era of “reconstruction driven by AI and RWA.” AI helps companies foresee disruptions and formulate response strategies, while RWA tokenization enhances transparency and liquidity. Ports like Singapore and Shanghai have taken the lead in digital transformation布局. Through technological innovations like AI intelligent dispatch, blockchain clearance, and RWA supply chain finance, they have enhanced supply chain efficiency and resilience. Hong Kong’s slow digital transformation fails to跟上行业发展趋势,逐渐被边缘化 in global port competition. Congestion is merely the外在表现 of its declining competitiveness.
Conclusion
The long-term structural congestion at Hong Kong’s port is the result of the combined effect of multiple factors: spatial resource constraints, imbalanced cargo structure, misaligned regional competition, lagging technological transformation, insufficient institutional coordination, and global supply chain restructuring. These structural contradictions intertwine and influence each other, forming a难以破解的拥堵困局. Short-term factors like the pandemic were merely导火索. The true根源 lies in Hong Kong’s port failing to及时调整发展战略 and effectively破解长期积累的结构性难题 amidst the shifting tides of globalization.
To破解 this困局, Hong Kong’s port must not止步于短期应急疏堵. It needs to fundamentally address structural contradictions. In spatial utilization, it should突破土地资源约束 by exploring立体开发与区域共享模式. In cargo structure, it should优化货源结构 and提升高附加值货物占比. In regional coordination, it should深化大湾区港口群分工协作 to achieve资源共享与优势互补. In technological transformation, it should加快数字化与自动化升级 to build a smart port ecosystem. At the institutional level, it should加强与内地的政策协同 to破除制度壁垒.
As an international shipping center, Hong Kong’s core advantages lie in its free port policy,完善的法律体系, and globally connected shipping network—advantages that are难以替代 for other GBA ports in the short term. At this关键时期 of global supply chain restructuring, only by正视自身的结构性短板 and promoting深层次改革 with系统性思维 can Hong Kong’s port摆脱拥堵困局,巩固其国际航运中心地位,发挥核心枢纽作用 within the GBA port cluster, and provide坚实支撑 for the stable development of global trade. In the future, Hong Kong’s port transformation concerns not only its own development but also has far-reaching implications for the韧性与效率 of the global supply chain. Only by突破结构性瓶颈 can it保持领先 in global port competition and continue to serve as the “trade bridge” connecting Asia-Pacific with the world.