Search results

This study explores the characteristics of high-speed rail (HSR) and air transportation networks in China based on the weighted complex network approach. Previous related studies have largely implemented unweighted (binary) network analysis, or have constructed a weighted network, limited by unweighted centrality measures. This study applies weighted centrality measures (mean association [MA], triangle betweenness centrality [TBC], and weighted harmonic centrality [WHC]) to represent traffic dynamics in HSR and air transportation weighted networks, where nodes represent cities and links represent passenger traffic. The spatial distribution of centrality results is visualized by using ArcGIS 10.2. Moreover, we analyze the network robustness of HSR, air transportation, and multimodal networks by measuring weighted efficiency (WE) subjected to the highest weighted centrality node attacks. In the HSR network, centrality results show that cities with a higher MA are concentrated in the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta; cities with a higher TBC are mostly provincial capitals or regional centers; and cities with a higher WHC are grouped in eastern and central regions. Furthermore, spatial differentiation of centrality results is found between HSR and air transportation networks. There is a little bit of difference in eastern cities; cities in the central region have complementary roles in HSR and air transportation networks, but air transport is still dominant in western cities. The robustness analysis results show that the multimodal network, which includes both airports and high-speed rail stations, has the best connectivity and shows robustness.

Recently the route connecting the trans-Korean railway and the trans-Siberian railway has become of particular interest for many academics and policy-makers in East Asian countries. The extensive review of previous studies, however, reveals that literature on the subject is lacking solid analytical framework. Most studies are one-sided, focusing on the political aspects of the issue or paying little attention to the economic aspects of the problem.

This study intends to develop an analytical framework through which the most efficient route among four major alternative routes connecting the trans-Korean and trans-Siberian railways can be identified. It attempts to assign priorities to the four alternative routes according to their level of economic efficiency.

This study utilizes a simple cost-benefit analysis in evaluating the four routes. Cost side, transportation time, effectiveness of customs procedures, and gauge difference are selected as the main economic factors. The volume of cargo, industrial production in adjacent regions, access to natural resources, and market size and foreign investment climate are used to evaluate the benefits of the routes.

The study concludes that Route 3, which connects ‘Busan - Seoul (South Korea) –Pyongyang -Sinuiju (North Korea) –Shenyang –Beijing - Erenhot (China) –Ulaanbaatar (Mongolia) –Ulan-Ude - Moscow (Russia)’ is the most efficient route.