<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>DIVERSION OF OVERSEAS TRADE BETWEEN U.S. AND CANADIAN PORTS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/4522</link>
      <description><![CDATA[United States-Canadian trade diversion is discussed with regard to actual and potential diversion, causes of trade diversion, and the economic impact thereof.  Special reference is made to a recent report prepared by Manalytics Incorporated for the US Federal Maritime Commission. Their estimates of diversion potential are shown to be inadequate and misleading in their application.  Also, the examination of transportation costs and prices presented in the same report is superficial and requires further development.  Major reasons for trade diversion cited in this report are dock strikes, port congestion, lower transport costs on Canadian routes, and service characteristics.  The discussion also criticizes the use of trade volume statistics as a measure of economic impact. It is pointed out that impact is related to transportation revenues generated or lost as a result of cargo diversion and to the savings accruing to shippers who ship by efficient, low cost routings.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2001 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/4522</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE FOREIGN NON-FUEL CARGO TRAFFIC DEMAND OF THE MAJOR BRITISH SEAPORTS IN 1980 AND 1985, A MARKOV CHAIN APPROACH</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/152545</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Projections of the future traffic demand of British seaports are of great importance to port-management bodies because of the huge capital investment required for installing modern port facilities.  In this paper, the author uses a first order Markov Chain model to forecast the nonfuel cargo traffic demand of the major British seaports in 1980 and 1985.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 1980 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/152545</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A CRITICAL REVIEW OF "THE ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF THE CLOSURE OF THE SUEZ CANAL"</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/10346</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A critical review of a study that was performed by the UNCTAD Secretariat entitled.  "The Economic Effects of the Closure of the Suez Canal", is given.  Areas of increased shipping costs that resulted from the closing of the Suez Canal that are reviewed in this paper include: longer hauls, increased tanker investment, value of the ships and cargo trapped in the Canal, increased cost of commercial credit, and several other areas.  The paper reviews the increased cost figures given by the UNCTAD Secretariat, comments on them, and offers revised cost figures based on new criteria.  The author concludes that the increased cost figures given by the UNCTAD Secretariat are exaggerated, and states that the revised figures given in his review are closer to the actual figures.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Nov 1974 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/10346</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>U.S.-CANADIAN OVERSEAS TRADE DIVERSION</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/4524</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The routing of U.S. overseas trade through Canadian ports has attracted wide public attention recently because of several concurrent developments.  In 1971, ports on both U.S. seaboards were closed by strikes, and large volumes of overseas freight which normally would use U.S. routings were diverted through Canadian ports.  The Canadian ports, and the rail and ocean carriers who serve them, have greatly increased container-handling capabilities in the last few years and are aggressively soliciting U.S. overseas traffic.  Their efforts are being spurred, in part, by the container ship overcapacity on the North Atlantic, which has created intense competition between the carriers both within and without the existing conferences.  In spite of the increased interest, little is known of the extent of the actual or potential diversions--either the amounts or the reasons.  Since U.S. regulatory policy might be involved if the diversions are being encouraged by certain actions of the carriers, the Federal Maritime Commission authorized this study to:  1) develop definite statistics on the U.S. and Canadian overseas trades which originate or terminate in one country but transit ports in the other; and 2) determine why these shipments do not use home-country ports.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 1973 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/4524</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE RISE OF NATIONAL FLEETS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/9188</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Developing nations' current merchant fleets bear little relationship with their involvement in international dry cargo seaborne movement.  Over 40% of such trade originates from the developing countries, yet their total fleet is 7.5% of the world fleet in terms of gross registered tonnage and 6.8% in terms of deadweight tonnage.  Lack of preinvestment cost studies has lead to building or buying ships that are not suited to the countries' needs.  Flag discrimination practices are not always enforceable because ships are not available.  The developing countries need help and assistance from experienced shipowners to develop viable fleets that can operate at a profit in world trade.  Help is particularly needed in developing managerial and technical skills.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 1973 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/9188</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>