Transportation Congestion and Transportation Security at a U.S. Seaport

Problem Area

According to recent data, it has been estimated that more than 90 percent of global trade is conducted by sea. Today, port congestion is not just an issue in the United States but across the world due to an increase in container traffic over the last decade, massive effects of the Covid-19 pandemic and the ongoing consolidation that is happening in the shipping industry compound to other growing concerns such as customs delays, inefficient transfers to inland transportation and unforeseen issues due to weather and labor-related slowdowns (Lee & Cullinane, 2016) . The seaports in the United States play a vital role in the United States economy as well as provide the backbone for the world's economy. Global trade is of paramount relevance to the economy of the United States, and with the TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) and TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership), free trade agreements assure the role that the United States will play in global trade and its expansion in the years to come. (Lee & Cullinane, 2016) This is an indication that international trade will be more ingrained in the economy of the United States. 

The productivity and congestion of ports in the United States are a significant concern in that they present a severe threat to the reliability and efficiency of industries and supply chains in America. Over the last decade, it has become evident that the infrastructure and operational systems at America's seaports, as well as inland links, have not been comprehensively upgraded to meet the growth in international trade and the ever-changing maritime and the shipping industry trends. According to Lee and Cullinace (2016), the supply chains in the United's States are losing their competitive edge in global markets, as congestion and the country's inability to keep up with the improvements and advancements of other nations that negatively impact the ability of America's supply chain in meeting the cost demands and global shipping requirements. As a result, Lee and Cullinane (2016) denote that congestion at the seaports and other points in the nation's intermodal system presents a serious risk factor to the country's supply chains, trade, and economic growth. 

The seaport system in the United States is an industrial engine that drives the country's economic prowess and success. The seaport system has created over 24 million jobs and injected more than 5 trillion in terms of economic activity. In 2017, the Port of Los Angeles independently processed slightly over 6 million containers, and the trade volume in the United is expected to quadruple by 2030 (AlRukaibi et al., 2020) . The safe and unrestricted flow of cargo has made it possible for America to be regarded as a global economic giant. Therefore, the safety of America's seaport is vital to the country's national financial health and homeland security; thus, collaborative efforts from all stakeholders and security agencies are required to make that the country is not susceptible to attacks. Seaports in America have continued to be beneficiaries of advanced computer systems and new technologies that make the nation's seaports predisposed to rogue nation-states and cybersecurity threats from international hackers. In June 2017, the Port of Los Angeles was shut down due to a cybersecurity incident that affected computers various organizations in Europe and across the world to a ransomware named Petya. The 48-hr shutdown of the APM Terminal resulted in more than $300 million in economic sabotage (AlRukaibi et al., 2020) . In May 2019, a dockworker was seriously injured, and another one died at the Los Angeles Fenix Terminal that led to the shutdown of the port for investigations to be conducted. Such security incidents affect the productivity of the ports in the United States, and more resources must be put towards addressing the gaps in maintaining sound security policies and practices at the ports to ensure that they are operating efficiently and securely for the benefit of the country and that of local communities. 

Purpose of the Study

To address and minimize the disruption of the supply chain in the United States and that of international markets, there is a need to implement different cargo security and congestion measures at both local and national borders. Two principles guide the purpose of this study on transport congestion and security at American seaports, and they include; (a) document the current and new technologies being deployed and used in support of closed container inspections, (b) the effects of privatization if seaports in the United States have on efficiency and performance. The economic activities carried out by seaports in the United States and across the world must not be regarded as the provision of a single service but rather the provision of multiple activities with interconnected performance that have significant effects on trade and shipping (Leonard et al., 2015) . The ineffectiveness of a single-entry point results in inefficiencies or delays that defeat the advantages, purposes as well as the economics of scale achieved from sea transport by making the venture expensive. Efficiency and effectiveness in security and decongestion can only be achieved through innovation and application of the right expertise in seaport operations and management from an economic point of view. It must also be noted that all the activities in a seaport tale place in a limited area; thus, it is vital to study how seaport activities are organized and the role played by port authorities as well as other institutions towards regulating activities and infrastructure at seaports (Leonard et al., 2015) . Over the last decade, profound changes have occurred in maritime transport that has largely affected the balance between labor and capital. Seaports are not becoming capital-intensive ventures, while in the past, they sued to be labor-intensive. 

Significance of the Study

The problem of congestion and security in maritime transportation affects the efficiency of both local and international supply chains (AlRukaibi et al., 2020) . More efficient supply chains result not only in an increase in the volume of goods and services of trade but also lowers the cost of the imported and exported goods as well as increased the distances of which the goods and services can be sold or sourced. The elimination of congestion and security issues is critical to increasing the efficiency of the United States international supply chain interrelates with the global effort of the country to facilitate trade. The lack of efficiency in trade facilitation, supply chain, logistics, and security are comparable to trade tariffs that are imposed on imported or exported goods (AlRukaibi et al., 2020) . The efficient flow of goods imported and exported in and out of America is critical to the nation's economic security. Exporting firms play an essential role in the ongoing economic recovery, and by importing overseas products, producers and consumers in the United States enjoy reduced costs in the acquisition of goods as well as injecting additional revenue and value into the country's domestic supply chains (Gong et al., 2012) . Maximizing the economic benefits of international trade requires a reliable, secure, and efficient maritime infrastructure such as roads, air, and rail that represent the physical channels between the international market place and the local economy. 

Literature Review and Background of the Study

International trade in the United States is responsible for creating jobs. In 2010, more than one-quarter of all agricultural and manufacturing jobs in the United States were supported by exports (Gong et al., 2012) . Today, over half of the goods traded in the economy of the United States encompasses intermediate products or inputs. The importation of intermediate products is more sensitive to congestion costs (including trade costs) than finished products. Since the gross domestic product and international trade are closely entwined, efficient processes at seaports are a necessity in not only maintaining a healthy and vibrant economy but also in facilitating international trade (Leonard et al., 2015) . In 2014, the WTO (World Trade Organization) stated that the dollar value on the trade of world merchandise was $19 trillion, of which $4 trillion was accounted for by the United States. The WTO also estimates that the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development projects that trade in international freight is expected to expand by 2050 by a factor of 4.3. International trade that occurs through the seaports in the United States accounts for about 35 percent of the nation’s GDP, and the figure is expected to rise to 65 percent by 2030. 

Figure 1 : Total value of U.S. trade in goods (export and import) worldwide from 2004 to 2019 

Leonard et al (2020) notes that the seaports in the United States are the most critical links that tie up both local and international economies. From significant cargo airports in Los Angeles and Louisville to seaports in New York and Long Beach, to land border crossings in Detroit and Laredo, the country boasts of over 500 unique freight handling seaports (Jeevan & Roso, 2019) . These seaports process over 40 million separate trade products and services annually on imports alone. The seaports also boast of unique attributes when it comes to their commodities, types of products handled, and global connections. For example, while the Miami International Airport devotes itself to Latin American products and flowers, the port of Seattle specializes in the shipping of specialized containers between East Asian markets. The United States boasts of over 360 ports scattered across the country that play an indispensable role in connecting the country. To optimize the economic returns at a national level, many stated in the country largely depend on easy access to specific seaports, thus benefit from effective operations within these seaports (Jeevan & Roso, 2019) . 

Figure 2 : Total value of U.S. trade in goods (export and import) worldwide from 2004 to 2019 

Private organizations in the United States manage the flow of goods and products through individual seaport terminals, while public actors are tasked with maintaining their products and assets within and outside ports. For instance, statewide and municipal seaport bodies own and operate seaports and airports, while state agencies apply the same model for land border crossings (Jeevan & Roso, 2019) . These agencies then collaborate with local agencies to guide land-use decisions and transportation financing. These ventures represent a considerable web of bureaucratic involvements that are not sustainable for the long-term. These bureaucratic involvements among agencies limit the coordination among different stakeholders, thus complicate future investment and development plans (Leonard et al., 2015) . Most of the seaports in the United States serve and operate in large geographical markets resulting in a lack of prioritization as the financial resources are spread thinly coupled with the lack of a clear long-term freight strategy (Jeevan & Roso, 2019) . Consequently, both local and international consumers and producers are forced to operate at an economic disadvantage and hence fail to gin the best value from the investment of public infrastructure. 

Over the last decade, the seaports in the United States are showing signs of negligence, a disturbing prospect that has made the nation unable to compete in an increasingly dynamic global economy (Jeevan & Roso, 2019) . Many aspects of America's seaport infrastructure and management are heirlooms from the mid-century. As the seaports in Asia and Europe are becoming more modern and productive, America's seaports are experiencing a lack of significant upgrading and investments and may soon become obsolete. According to research, the movement of freight by sea is projected to triple by 2020 (AlRukaibi et al., 2020) . According to port statistics, in 2019, there was an increase of 21.6 percent of imports in Los Angeles and 7.9 percent in long beach. In 2019, the Los Angeles long beach port experienced congestion due to the peak season for holiday merchandise and the rush by the front-loading of import as manufacturers and retailers attempted to beat the 25 percent tariff threat by the Trump administration on the more than $200 million imports from China. The industrial estate space in South California was oversubscribed in their more than 1.5 billion square feet space because retailers decided to delay shipping of their merchandise, causing inbound containers to bulk up at the ports (AlRukaibi et al., 2020) . 

Tariff	Value Affected U.S. Imports (2019)	Tariff rate	Additional Burden Cost
Section 232, Steel	$11.4 B	25%	$2.9
Section 232, Aluminum	$8.4 B	10%	$814.4M
Section 232, Derivative Steel	$510.2 M	25%	$127.5 M
Section 232, Derivate Aluminum	$249.1 M	10%	$24.9 M
Section 301, List 1	$22.9 B	25%	$5.7 B
Section 301, List 2	$8.5 B	25%	$2.1 B
Section 301, List 3	$128.0 B	25%	$32.0 B
Section 301, List 4A	$174.7 B	7.5%	$13.1 B
Section 301, List 4B	$159.3 B	Suspended	$0
Total	$354.8 B	7.5-25%	$56.8 B

Table 1: The Total Cost of the Trump Administration's Imposed Tariffs 

Across the world, maritime cargoes and vessels are increasingly becoming targets by organized criminal groups or persons who are involved in terrorism, drug smuggling, cargo theft, and alien smuggling (Jeevan et al., 2018) . These criminals, many at times, exploit the weaknesses in port security, which is central to these crimes. The implications of these crimes include direct financial losses by seaports, negative impacts on productivity, and possible loss of life. Real costs include liability exposure and the loss of reputation and goodwill, increased insurance and operational costs. The September 9/11 attacks played a critical role in highlighting the vulnerability of all modes of transport systems to terrorist attacks. Although the security measures established through private and public partnerships in the United States have improved the overall security at the ports while maintaining their efficiency, America's seaports are still under threat, and new threats such as cyber threats have emerged (Jeevan et al., 2018) . American seaports are a vital driver to the country's economy as more than 900,000 vessels make calls on the United States seaports annually, moving about 60 percent of imports and 50 percent of exports. 

The visibility and economic importance of ports in the United States make their operations and infrastructure attractive as targets of terrorism (Jeevan et al., 2018) . The potential vulnerability of these ports also increases the possibility of future maritime terrorist attacks, which could cause severe consequences in the form of property damage. Disruption of trade and commerce and mass casualties. The speed and efficiency associated with shipping can be taken advantage of by malicious individuals to move weapons and operatives (Jeevan et al., 2018) . Very few individuals would dispute that if terrorists were to use a cargo container to conceal weapons of mass destruction and then detonated them on arrival to a seaport the United States, the impact on the world economy and trade could be devastating. In 2019, the American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) requested $4 billion from the federal government, which is vital to port and supply chain security needs for the next ten years (Ibrahimi, 2017) . The AAPA states that the funds will be used in ensuring that American seaport facilities are appropriately equipped in addressing new and evolving security challenges. According to the AAPA, there needs to be a refocus of the grants issued out to the organization in order to meet the security infrastructure needs of publicly-owned commercial seaports and related operations (Ibrahimi, 2017) . An estimated $2.62 billion will be used in the maintenance of and upgrades to port security and systems, and $1.27 billion would be invested to tackle drone mitigation, cybersecurity, active shooter, and other evolving security threats (Ibrahimi, 2017) . 

Seaports are the most critical nodes in the global supply chain and hence play a vital role in business continuity. In the economy of the United States, seaports are responsible for providing jobs, enabling trade and tourism as well as supplementing the need for energy. Jeevan and Rosto (2019), states that 96 percent of overseas trade by weight and 75 percent by value travels through the ports in the United States. Many of the critical targets, including hazardous material storage facilities and petroleum tank farms, are located around seaports in the United States. Also, several major cities in the United States lay close to seaports and waterways. Thus, a well-coordinated attack at a major seaport in the United States could be devastating to the population in terms of casualties and nationwide economic damage. Jeevan el al. (2018), notes that the impact of an attack at an American seaport could vary. The predicted cost implication of closing a seaport could the United States economy $1 trillion. Ibrahimi (2017 ) , states that the cost implication of a dirty bomb could cost the economy about $100 billion. Containers can be regarded as the "Trojan Horses" to port security in the modern era, and the failure of the AAPA and the federal government to recognize these vulnerabilities my leave the United States homeland unguarded from an imminent attack. 

Discussion on Security and Congestion at American Seaports

Seaports can be described as regional multimodal convergence of global supply chains in that they work in the context of business transactions, complex transactions, and regulations (Pagano et al., 2013) . The global economy is in high demand for maritime transportation, and this has led to ports facing increasing pressures to enhance their production in terms of environmental, safety, economic, functional, and energy challenges that influence their sustainability (Pagano et al., 2013) . The key elements and issues that are associated with seaports include security (active shooter scenarios, drug smuggling, human trafficking, cybersecurity attacks, armed robberies, and the use of ports as conduits for terrorist attacks and moving weapons), operations (lack of information sharing, delays, congestion, and operating errors), safety (striking while at berth, berthing impacts, and vessel collisions), energy (the impacts of energy disruption on port activities, rising energy consumption, and costs), and environment (waste disposal, lack of space for construction and expansion activities, as well as air, water, and noise pollution) (Pagano et al., 2013) . If preventive measures and counteractive actions are not planned and implemented on time, these issues will persist. 

Time is one of the most crucial factors when it comes to container shipping. In the shipping industry, supply chains are primarily shaped and determined by the arrival and departure times of vessels, and the choice of a seaport to use is decided based on its accessibility and proximity, both of which have a time dimension (Pagano et al., 2013) . From this point of view, there are two components of time; the time at seas and the time in port, which affect the decisions being made at the shipping line. Research suggests that most attention is given to the former because the transit times of containers between ports are usually the most extended component in the provision of shipping services. The adoption of slow steaming in 2007 accelerated by high fuel costs hence the need for adjustments in service configurations in addition to the number of vessels deployed. The time required by each seaport call encompasses the process of attaching mooring lines and securing the ship at berth, provisioning ship supplies, and bunkering of which the most time-consuming operation involves the loading and unloading of containers between the ships and the shore. Jeevan and Roso (2019) found out that the average terminal turnaround times differed regionally with the North and East Asian ports having the shortest terminal turnaround times and the African and West Coast U.S. generating the longest average terminal turnaround times. 

Over the last decade, port authorities and administrations are geared towards implementing policies that are focused on improving the efficiency and performance of seaports (Gong et al., 2012) . The seaports in the United States play a vital role in the economic health of the country as well as facilitating international trade. All the major ports in the United States are owned and operated by public authorities, which has resulted in the lack of exposure to full commercial competitive advantage, and they experience reduced incentives in order to operate efficiently (Gong et al., 2012) . Many, at times, they are prone to political interferences. The privatization of ports in the United States can be used an effective tool towards improving port efficiency, reducing port congestions, and the financial burden on the American government in the form of capital-related expenditure and wages while bringing to the shipping industry a wealth of commercial and technical expertise in the management and operations of ports (Gong et al., 2012) . From a theoretical perspective on privatization is that privately-owned enterprises face a complete set of market disciplines and thus operate efficiently when compared to publicly operated enterprises who depend on taxpayers and have little or no incentives to monitor performance. Therefore, ownership of the ports by the private sector can bring much control and accountability to the shipping industry. 

In contrast, publicly owned and operated enterprises are not fully exposed to competition in the product and private markets (Gong et al., 2012) . When compared to private companies, companies in the public sector cannot go bankrupt. Similarly, the link between cost control and revenues many at times is often unavailable or weak in publicly owned enterprises. 

Figure 3 : Annual change in imports of trade goods and services from the United States from 1990 to 2024* 

Known Seaport Risks

Over the past decade, insurance companies have warned that increasing the size of the vessel leads to a higher accumulated risk. In the last few years, evidence has shown that the growing numbers and costs of incidences such as fires, engine failure, and the loss of cargo have a negative impact on the safety and risk management improvements. Such incidents result in the claims in the hundreds of millions of dollars, if not more (Leonard et al., 2015) . The worst result that could happen is the collision and grounding two large shipping vessels in an environmentally sensitive location could result in a loss of more than $4 billion when the cost of environmental claims, disruption of service, and salvaging the wreck are considered (Leonard et al., 2015) . This is an indication that the loss prevention measures are not keeping up with the upscaling of vessels. Advancements in technology and the overreliance of technology in the maritime sector is vital as it has the potential help avoid incidents and improve navigation. The use of motion sensors can reduce insurance claims through active performance monitoring and early intervention programs that can help mitigate cargo losses (Leonard et al., 2015) . However, overreliance on technology has resulted in accidents. 

Although seafarers have been programmed to trust what they see on their screens, they must be imparted with the right training and the fundamentals of situational awareness and sound navigation (Leonard et al., 2015) . Across the world, political risks remained heightened even with the outbreak of the Coronavirus, which has posed significant threats to the shipping industry, trade and has affected global supply chains through territorial disputes, piracy, conflicts, and sanctions. Immigrant rescues and the availability of stowaways has severe consequences, including delays and diversions, as well as putting crew members under pressure in addition to repatriation measures, which are complicated and costly (Leonard et al., 2015) . 

The Concept Smart Ports

The wave of the Fourth Industrial Revolutions, technological advancements such as 3D printing, the use of unmanned vehicles, artificial intelligence, and the internet of things have influenced production and consumption as it is known today. The adoption of digital technologies in supply chain management promises new levels of visibility and connectivity into supply chain processes by enabling state-of-the-art management of the increasingly complex global supply chains. The benefits of increased visibility in the supply chain include improved logistics flexibility, improved inventory control, shorter order fulfilment times, asset performance, and better demand forecasting. According to research, increased information sharing between seaports and supply chain actors leads to the increased flexibility of the systems and reduced cycle times and inventories. Besides, better visibility also leads to the ability of seaports to accommodate better their growing capacities, congestion, security as well as other trends in a highly low-margin, competitive, and highly fluctuating industry. 

Over the last century, the shipping industry has experienced reinventions ushering in electronic data exchanges, containerization, and larger vessels (Fan et al., 2012) . Despite these significant improvements, seaport operations are still dependent on paper-based and manual systems. Global trade is not coming to a standstill, and the ever-increasing cargo volumes and vessel sizes are putting immense pressure on terminals and ports that must keep innovating in order to keep up (Fan et al., 2012) . In addition, seaport environments include intertwined networks including off-dock storage providers, port authorities, shipping lines, terminals as well as trucking and logistics companies. In order to be truly effective, all the stakeholders in the shipping industry, either public or private, must do more than just adopt these technologies. They have to embrace technological platforms and services that will make it easier for shipping supply chains to work together in promoting the efficiency of the overall ecosystem. By implementing smart technologies, American ports will be in a position to improve operations as well as re-engineer how basic tasks get done without any significant investments in new equipment and infrastructure (Fan et al., 2012) . Boyes (2014) state that smart technologies do involve the use of traditional IT services such as systems interrogation or terminal automation systems that have been built to sever a single entry. The adoption of smart technologies includes the use of information systems that support the essential functions and infrastructure of ports as well as tools for managing traffic, assuring the safety, handling cargo, and monitoring the efficient use of energy (Boyes, 2014) . The selection process of these technologies depends on the strategic issues that seaports face, which should act as a guiding principle in the selection process. For example, a port’s need may be driven by its level of competition or location (Boyes, 2014) . Other factors that may come into play include the needs of the port, the size of the port, the level of maturity, and the competition that they face from neighbouring ports. 

Figure 4 : How Smart technologies can Improve Port Operations 

New Solutions to the Problem

The significance of port efficiency and reliability of seaports towards the US economy cannot be side-lined. Dynamic technological advancement and changes in trends has led to several projected issues in the seaports that must be addressed. In other words, there is a need for the US government to take into consideration measures that could help alleviate congestions and security problems at seaports (Heilig and Voß, 2017). Doing this will go a long way in ensuring efficiency and establishing long-term strategic solutions to the shipping industry. Similarly, minimizing congestion will contribute to the overall effectiveness of the seaport logistics. 

The most significant solution to the congestion problem is modernizing the United States ports. As Hillestad et al. (2010) contends, modernizing ports would require a coordinated effort from all stakeholders on many fronts. The first step towards achieving modern ports is creating awareness on the problems mentioned above to ensure all parties recognize the scope of the issues and the significance of change. This can also be achieved by institutionalized national dialogue on the future of American seaports. While the decentralized nature of the US ports management hinders the possibility of a comprehensive national broad upgrade program, the national dialogue will help all parties establish common goals, issues, and perhaps most strategic approaches. (Bookman, 1996) argues that the timing of such an approach could be well placed, based on the steadily growing interest in national economy, international trade, and international competitiveness – matters that exemplify the significance of ports. Once a common ground is established amongst all ports, the second step will be to take action. This can be done by investing in logistics and monitoring data in the shipping industry. Studies by Hillestad et al. indicates that the real-time transmitting and receiving of shipping data, including shipping travels, and logs could enable the seaports to eliminate the prospects of delays (2010). Such technology allows for tracking and monitoring of vessels to ensure the management keeps up to date with shipping traffic facilitating identification and mitigation of disruptions on time. Although the US ports have invested largely in technology, the existence of congestion means current investment needs to be more strategically placed to achieve projected outcomes. 

The need for new ports has been a topic of discussion amongst a national research council researchers, policymakers, and public debates. The NRC study concluded that the US needs to shift focus towards advancing the capabilities of its three coasts to handle large ships efficiently (Di Francesco et al. 2015). This aspect encompasses the establishment of deeper ports that exhibit contemporary technologies. Given the length of the US coastline, the NRC report found a need to build deeper yet highly technological ports "superports," especially in the Gulf of Mexico and on the west coast (Bookman, 1996). These two locations are deemed to ease congestions in the ports, especially in Los Angeles. Although constructing new ports may run into billions of dollars, the use of modern technology provides cheaper alternatives. For instance, Japan has been investing in coastal land reclamation and construction of port facilities offshore for decades. Hillestad et al. points out that the construction of Deepwater ports miles off the coast could help ease seaport congestions (2010). With adequate sea depth, ample shore-side space for marshalling cargo, and tranquil sea accesses, perhaps Deepwater ports could be built in Louisiana. This will also necessitate modernized technology, including rapid transit systems, to facilitate the movement of containers from the ships to the marshalling areas. However, Los Angeles and the Long beach may be forced to create artificial islands since the two are running out of land. Primarily, Los Angeles is expected to double its cargo shipping by the end of 2020. This has necessitated the creation of landfills at Sad Pedro Bay. The Japanese and Dubai Technology is a crucial example of an attainable creation of artificial islands within a short period of time. The projects may serve as a model for other ports by reflecting innovative planning tailored to local port needs, conditions, and environment. 

Although building new ports, and ensuring port modernization is critical, planning tactics are needed to provide road and rail, and vessels access to the ports. Regional planning of ports based on specific port preferences could also ease congestion. Primarily, inadequate planning has been cited as a significant challenge facing United States ports today. Making changes in the port system requires a regional effort that encompasses both ports management and inland transport systems management. One of the most identifiable barriers to this effort has been increased focus towards mass transport rather than port access by the local and state government. Regional programmers, therefore, need to address roads and rail access to the seaports, which will effectively minimize congestion by improving logistics. What is more, planners ought to address waterways management capabilities. Bookman (1996) recognizes the existence of budget shortfall, which is likely to frustrate NOAA and Coast Guard in efforts to improve the seaports. Usually, installing and operating waterways-management systems can be costly in the short run. This is because few ports can afford to resolve modernization needs single-handedly. Therefore, regional planning would bring together federal agencies to resolve the issues. This aspect will necessitate funding models such as the 1993 maritime infrastructure bank of California. The bank can issue bonds, accept grants, and guarantee loans necessary for such big projects. Los Angeles – Long beach complex comprises both public and private partnerships, a move that can provide operating solutions to problems facing waterway management systems. 

Nonetheless, useful technology and workforce management is necessary for both decongestions and the establishment of security measures. The port industry in the United States has steadily advanced with the advancement in technology creating a need for speed, and more precise operation measures (Di Francesco et al., 2015). In this regard, a well-organized workforce is crucial to ensure the efficiency of shipping data and essential incoming and outgoing goods. Similarly, efficient human resource management will facilitate the identification of areas that need technological integrations. For instance, some operations create the need to embrace robotic and drone technology, especially in the warehouses. Robotic-machines and automation of services would not only reduce operating costs but also ensure competence in the seaports. Moreover, an effective workforce is necessary to ensure the safety of technological systems and consequently, the entire seashore. The use of computer-based technologies creates loopholes for data leak and possible cyber terrorism. There is, therefore, a need to organize a seaport workforce in such a way that cyberterrorism can be easily pinned to avoid crisis. Extensive use of contemporary technology can alleviate several challenges that faces the port industry. For instance, autonomous tracking and artificial intelligence would substantially cut on transportation costs, which would, in turn, facilitate the construction of new ports. Moreover, Carlan et al. (2016) argue that the incorporation of technology could help identify security threats and other challenges facing the industry. Autonomous monitoring and IoT mechanisms can help port companies minimize workforce flaws while improving the communication between seaport management and managers of the road and rail transport systems (Heilig and Voß, 2017). This aspect would reduce congestion at the ports due to increased efficiency. Moreover, the strategy would help involved agencies to work together in the creation of standard security assessment programs. 

Pots security is a crucial aspect of the maritime industry. Ports security training can help mitigate common deficiencies in the security systems. Studies by Taylor and Kaufman (2009) indicate that a seaport increases its security vulnerability twofold by failing to either implement reasonable security measures or train its personnel in ineffective security practices. Studies by Roh et al. (2018) indicate that a risk assessment provides the necessary tools for identifying security threats in the seaports. Ultimately, port safety planning strategy ought to develop and implement essential measures of reducing susceptibilities. Primarily, lest there exist tools for recognizing prospective liabilities, appropriate countermeasures cannot be established or implemented. Thus, risk assessment programs are crucial to ascertain the magnitude and nature of the security risks that could threaten ports operations (Roh et al., 2018). Currently, lack of modernized seaport management and technological systems hinders effective security surveys and assessments. As such, there is a need for American seaports to embrace modernizations of ports to both mitigate congestions and security threats towards future ports operations. The achievement of these strategies is dependent on the support of federal, state, and local governments towards port management. Although the operation of ports across the globe assumes a similar pattern, every port is characterized by unique challenges, trade circumstances, and activities. For instance, US seaports have consistently become busy with increased trading activities. Thus, the US government should conduct a customized risk assessment to identify security threats. 

Terrorism threat has consistently raised concerns across the globe, especially with technological advancements. The September 11 attack led to closure of seaports for many days, a realization that ships, just like vehicles and planes, can serve as lethal weaponries. Studies by Taylor and Kaufman indicate five critical practices necessary to mitigate terrorism threats; awareness, prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery from an attack (2009). Awareness is mostly reliant on on information allotment and necessitates a high level of collaboration amongst the seaport’s management, government agencies, and the public domains. Moreover, the US should coordinate with other countries in the region to boost its data collection capacity regarding potential threats to the US seaports (Beaumont, & Wolthusen, 2017). Consequently, prevention of terrorism attacks is dependent on the premise that a strong, yet visible defense systems can deter an imminent threat. This includes physical security at the seaports, limiting entry into the seaports, and extensive technological systems for detection and inspection of potential threats. 

The preparedness practice requires a quantifiable capacity to respond to fears with reliable harmonized efforts from all involved agencies. These may include emergency services, federal, state, government agencies, elected officials, police, and public health personnel. Just like preparedness, response towards an attack requires planning based on uncertainties. A set of guidelines and protocols should be established to minimize disruptions by monitoring chains of command during and after the attack. Finally, recovery following an attack is a vital element since billions of dollars' worth of cargo pass through US ports every day. Thus, delays in re-opening could cause long time economic consequences for both the US an international trade. Local, regional, and international partners join hands to restore the facility and ensure the smooth flow of seaport operations. Indeed, terrorism attacks, which pose one of the most significant security threats towards the United States seaports, require complex measures to mitigate. 

Conclusion

During the last decade, the strategic focus of seaports in the United States has been centered on security, efficiency, operations, and designs. The approach to reducing congestion and improving security at American seaports can be termed as contemplative as port authorities have to focus on the port boundaries that can be revamped in order to generate the efficiencies that are required by both regional and global shippers. The need for efficient processing of cargo at all levels of the supply chain has increased in recent years. The port of Los Angeles, for example, is faced with the need to process different cargo, and it is also required to tackle the issue of growing import volumes, which as rising faster than exports. The concept of port security in the United States must be separated into two different concepts. The first idea relates the role of the port as the first line of defense against defamatory cargo whose intended destination lies inland, and the second idea relates to the security of American ports as an economic asset. The seaports in the United States have been heavily capitalized and hence generate low returns; thus, the federal and local governments need to invest in new facilities in order to deal with the growth of international containers effectively. 

References 

AlRukaibi, F., AlKheder, S., & AlMashan, N. (2020). Sustainable port management in Kuwait: Shuwaikh port system. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics , 36 (1), 20-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2019.10.002 

Beaumont, P., & Wolthusen, S. (2017). Cyber-risks in maritime container ports: An analysis of threats and simulation of impacts. ISG MSc Information Security thesis series 2017. 

Bookman, C. (1996). US Seaports: At the crossroads of the global economy.  Issues in Science and Technology ,  13 (1), 71-77. 

Carlan, V., Sys, C., Vanelslander, T., & Roumboutsos, A. (2016). Digital Innovation in the Port Sector: Barriers and Facilitators. The challenges of digitalization and the use of data , 11. 

Di Francesco, M., Fancello, G., Serra, P., & Zuddas, P. (2015). Optimal management of human resources in transshipment container ports . Maritime Policy & Management, 42(2), 127-144 

Boyes, H. (2014). Maritime Cyber Security – Securing the Digital Seaways. Engineering & Technology Reference . https://doi.org/10.1049/etr.2014.0009 

Fan, L., Wilson, W., & Dahl, B. (2012). Congestion, port expansion and spatial competition for US container imports. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics And Transportation Review , 48 (6), 1121-1136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2012.04.006 

Gong, S., Cullinane, K., & Firth, M. (2012). The impact of airport and seaport privatization on efficiency and performance: A review of the international evidence and implications for developing countries. Transport Policy , 24 , 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2012.06.020 

Heilig, L., & Voß, S. (2017). Information systems in seaports: a categorization and overview.  Information Technology and Management ,  18 (3), 179-201. 

Hillestad, R., Yoho, K., & Van Roo, B. (2010).  Modernizing the U.S. Freight-Transportation System for Future Economic Growth . Rand.org. Retrieved May 31, 2020, from https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9457-1.html . 

Ibrahimi, K. (2017). A theoretical framework for conceptualizing seaports as institutional and operational clusters. Transportation Research Procedia , 25 , 261-278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.393 

Jeevan, J., & Roso, V. (2019). Exploring seaport - dry ports dyadic integration to meet the increase in container vessels size. Journal Of Shipping And Trade , 4 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41072-019-0047-4 

Jeevan, J., Chen, S., & Cahoon, S. (2018). The impact of dry port operations on container seaports competitiveness. Maritime Policy & Management , 46 (1), 4-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2018.1505054 

Leonard, T., Gallo, P., & Véronneau, S. (2015). Security challenges in United States sea ports: an overview. Journal Of Transportation Security , 8 (1-2), 41-49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12198-015-0155-9 

Pagano, A., Wang, G., Sánchez, O., & Ungo, R. (2013). Impact of privatization on port efficiency and effectiveness: results from Panama and US ports. Maritime Policy & Management , 40 (2), 100-115. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2012.756589 

Pagano, A., Wang, G., Sánchez, O., & Ungo, R. (2013). Impact of privatization on port efficiency and effectiveness: results from Panama and US ports. Maritime Policy & Management , 40 (2), 100-115. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2012.756589 

Roh, S., Tam, J., Lee, S. W., & Seo, Y. J. (2018). Risk assessment of maritime supply chain security in ports and waterways. 

Stergiopoulos, G., Valvis, E., Mitrodimas, D., Lekkas, D., & Gritzalis, D. (2018). Analyzing Congestion Interdependencies of Ports and Container Ship Routes in the Maritime Network Infrastructure. IEEE Access , 6 , 63823-63832. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2018.2877659 

Tam, K., & Jones, K. (2018). Maritime cybersecurity policy: the scope and impact of evolving technology on international shipping. Journal Of Cyber Policy , 3 (2), 147-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/23738871.2018.1513053 

Taylor, B., & Kaufman, P. (2009). Protecting America’s ports.  National Institute of Justice Journal ,  262 . 

Wan, Y., Zhang, A., & Li, K. (2017). Port competition with accessibility and congestion: a theoretical framework and literature review on empirical studies. Maritime Policy & Management , 45 (2), 239-259. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2017.1403053 

Lee, P., & Cullinane, K. (2016). Dynamic Shipping and Port Development in the Globalized Economy . Palgrave Macmillan UK.