According the Institute of Shipping Economics and Logistics(ISL)in its annual report issued in October 2000, the year 1999 was marked by the recovery of the nations in the Far East. Most of the ports in this region regained their respective traffic volumes of 1996, with the marked exception of the Japanese ports. On average, these latter are still almost 14 percent short of their 1996 volumes, whereas all other ports gained 9.1 percent(based on 20 major ports in the Far East). The other regions showed a rather steady growth in this period with average annual growth rates of 4.9 percent in Africa, 2.9 percent for Oceania, 2.8 percent for the Americas, and 2.6 percent in Europe.^vi

　

　　The list of the most dynamic ports in Figure 3 reveal that they are almost exclusively Asian or North American. Port Kelang, the fastest growing port in the ISL Port Database, increased its cargo traffic from 40 million tons in 1995 to 61 million tons in 1999, despite the financial crisis in SE Asia in 1998. In North America, Los Angeles boosted its container traffic from 3.5 million TEU in 1998 to 4.4 million TEU in 1999.

　

　　On the other hand, with the exception of the Port of Virginia who lost more than 40 percent of its coal exports between 1995 and 1999, all ports suffering major cargo traffic losses are Japanese, witness of its economic difficulties.^vii

　

　　In spite of the Asian crisis in 1998, the dynamism of container traffic has hardly suffered. The 15 largest container hubs in the Far East(not counting Japanese ports)have increased their container traffic by 32.8 percent compared to 1996, once again outperforming European ports(30.9 percent)and North America(30.1 percent).

　

　　As one can see in Figure 4, containerized cargo continues to gain in importance. The degree of containerization, i.e., the share of general cargo shipped in containers, already approaches the 100 percent mark in some ports in North America and in the Far East, where the process of containerization is thus largely completed, at least in the very large hub ports analyzed here.^viii

　

　　The integration of regional markets have become a universal trend. This is especially the case for trading areas where regional trade is promoted through multilateral agreements(e.g. NAFTA, ASEAN, EU). Market integration also means that the regions(i.e, SE Asia, Europe, and North America)act as a single market, offering shippers the possibility of pan-regional distribution strategies. The regions' major ports have become these distribution hubs. Thus, container traffic is increasingly important for the major load centers not only in terms of traffic volumes, but also in terms of traffic acquisition.^ix

　

　　The regional spreading of cargo traffic of the world's major ports provides further indication of the importance of intra-regional trading. This is especially true for Asian ports. The traffic of all of the Asian ports is concentrated to more than 50 percent on intra-Asian trade, with shares of more than 70 percent for Yokohama, Tokyo, and Hong Kong. At European hubs, this share typically lies between 40 and 50 percent in the Le Havre and Rotterdam corridor.^x

　

　　Whereas the regional distribution of cargo traffic is largely dictated by geography in North America(to/from Asia on the West Coast, to/from Europe on the East Coast), the European North ports show specializations that can only be explained by long lasting trade relationships and by deliberate search for cargo traffic niches in the competition among these ports. Thus, Rotterdam's intercontinental traffic is concentrated on Asia, Hamburg's on America and Le Havre's on Africa. On the other hand, the proximity to Africa is reflected in the cargo distribution of the Mediterranean ports represented here by Marseilles and Genoa.^xi