上海港集装箱内陆集疏运网络韧性评估

doi:10.16097/j.cnki.1009-6744.2026.03.011

交通运输系统工程与信息 ›› 2026, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (3): 114-123.DOI: 10.16097/j.cnki.1009-6744.2026.03.011

上海港集装箱内陆集疏运网络韧性评估

赵楠^a，崔浩淼^b，钟发春^b，郁斢兰^*a

上海海事大学，a.上海国际航运研究中心；b.交通运输学院，上海201306

收稿日期:2026-01-14 修回日期:2026-03-23 接受日期:2026-04-16 出版日期:2026-06-25 发布日期:2026-06-22
作者简介:赵楠（1986—），女，山西忻州人，研究员，博士。
基金资助:
中国社会科学院上海市人民政府上海研究院项目 (2025jb006)；上海市人民政府决策咨询研究重大课题 (2025-A-07)。

Resilience Assessment of Shanghai Port's Containerized Inland Hinterland Network

ZHAO Nan^a, CUI Haomiao^b, ZHONG Fachun^b,YU Tiaolan^*a

a. Shanghai International Shipping Institute; b. College of Transport and Communications, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai 201306, China

Received:2026-01-14 Revised:2026-03-23 Accepted:2026-04-16 Online:2026-06-25 Published:2026-06-22
Supported by:
The Project of Shanghai Academy,Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and Shanghai Municipal People's Government (2025jb006)；The Major Project of Decision-Making Consultation of the Shanghai Municipal People's Government (2025-A-07)。

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 港口内陆集疏运网络由港口、铁路/公路集装箱站等多类节点耦合构成，重大扰动会造成局部连通性下降并在运输组织重分配下引发功能性连锁退化。为量化该类网络在重大扰动下的韧性水平，本文提出韧性四边形模型，将韧性过程解构为抵御-吸收-适应-恢复这4个阶段，并基于Space-P法构建上海港内陆集疏运无向加权网络，涵盖253个节点（港口、铁路/公路集装箱站）与1067条连边。在此基础上，设计并仿真4类节点攻击-恢复策略（随机/蓄意攻击×随机/蓄意恢复），评估不同扰动与恢复规则下的网络韧性差异。结果表明：在“随机攻击+蓄意恢复”策略下网络韧性最优（网络韧性度量值 NT =0.16，网络韧性损失值SNT=172.50），而“蓄意攻击+随机恢复”策略下韧性最差（NT =0.27，SNT=257.50）；子网络中，公路网络下降速率最小，恢复速度最快，韧性排序为公路>水路>铁路；在移除集疏运网络中的全部水路节点、铁路节点和公路节点后，剩余集疏运网络性能值分别为0.57、0.91和0.37，子网络在集疏运网络中的重要性为公路>水路>铁路。

关键词: 综合交通运输, 网络韧性评估, 复杂网络理论, 集装箱内陆集疏运网络

Abstract: The port-hinterland intermodal transport network consists of multiple types of coupled nodes, including ports and rail/ road container terminals. Major disruptions can reduce local connectivity and, through the reallocation of transport operations, trigger cascading functional degradation. To quantify the resilience of multimodal container networks under major disruptions, this paper proposes a "resilience quadrilateral" model that decomposes the resilience process into four sequential phases, including resist, absorb, adapt, and recover. Using the Space-P approach, this study built an undirected weighted hinterland network for the Port of Shanghai which encompasses 253 nodes (port terminals, rail container yards, and road container depots) and 1 067 links. On this basis, four node attack-recovery strategies are designed and simulated to evaluate differences in network resilience under different disruption and recovery rules. The results reveal that (1) the overall network attains its highest resilience under the "random attack + prioritized recovery" regime ( NT = 0.16, SNT = 172.50) and has its lowest resilience under "targeted attack + random recovery" ( NT = 0.27, SNT = 257.50); (2) at the sub-network level, the road network shows the smallest performance decline rate and the fastest recovery, the resilience of road is better than inland-waterway, and inland-waterway has better resilience than rail; (3) after removing all waterway nodes, all rail nodes, and all road nodes, the remaining network performance values are respectively 0.57, 0.91, and 0.37, indicating that the sub-network importance ranks as road, then waterway, then rail.

Key words: integrated transportation, network resilience assessment, complex network theory, port-hinterland container feeder network

中图分类号:

U113

赵楠, 崔浩淼, 钟发春, 郁斢兰. 上海港集装箱内陆集疏运网络韧性评估[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2026, 26(3): 114-123.

ZHAO Nan, CUI Haomiao, ZHONG Fachun, YU Tiaolan. Resilience Assessment of Shanghai Port's Containerized Inland Hinterland Network[J]. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 2026, 26(3): 114-123.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: http://www.tseit.org.cn/CN/10.16097/j.cnki.1009-6744.2026.03.011

http://www.tseit.org.cn/CN/Y2026/V26/I3/114

参考文献

[1]HOLLING C S. Resilience and stability of ecological systems[J]. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 1973, 4(1): 1-23.

[2] OMER M, MOSTASHARI A, NILCHIANI R, et al. A framework for assessing resiliency of maritime transportation systems[J]. Maritime Management, 2012, 39(7): 685-703.

[3] Policy & SONG G, NAN L. Improving the resilience of port hinterland container logistics transportation systems: A bi-level programming approach[J]. Sustainability, 2021, 14(1): 180-180.

[4]PANAHI R, GARGARI N S, et al. Developing a resilience assessment model for critical infrastructures: The case of port in tackling the impacts posed by the COVID-19 pandemic[J]. Ocean Coast Management, 2022, 226: 106240.

[5]秦娅风,郭建科,王绍博,等.中国航运网络韧性的动态过程及其影响因素[J].地理学报,2026,81(2): 526 547. [QIN Y F, GUO J K, WANG S B, et al. Dynamic process and influencing factors of resilience in China's shipping network[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2026, 81 (2): 526-547.]

[6]王直欢,胡炜琴,王逸文.基于复杂网络的长三角和粤港澳航运网络韧性评估[J].交通运输系统工程与信息,2023, 23(5): 184-193. [WANG Z H, HU W Q, WANG Y W. Resilience assessment of Yangtze River Delta and Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao shipping networks based on complex network[J]. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 2023, 23(5): 184-193.]

[7] 苏婉,吕靖,张聆晔.韧性视角下我国原油进口海运网络恢复策略优化研究[J].交通运输系统工程与信息, 2025, 25(1): 36-43. [SU W, LV J, ZHANG L Y. Optimization of recovery strategy for China's crude oil import maritime network from a resilience perspective[J]. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 2025, 25(1): 36-43.]

[8]冯芬玲,方源,张泽,等.风险扰动视角下中欧班列运输网络韧性评估[J].交通运输系统工程与信息,2025, 25(2): 338-351. [FENG F L, FANG Y, ZHANG Z, et al. Resilience assessment of China Railway Express transport network from perspective of risk disturbances [J]. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 2025, 25(2): 338-351.]

[9] CAO Y H, XIN X R, WANG X J, et al. Multi-objective resilience-oriented optimization for the global container shipping network against cascading failures[J]. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 2025, 200: 104659.

[10] 吴暖, 林婷,王晚香.东北海陆大通道运输网络关键节点识别与抗毁性分析[J].交通运输系统工程与信息, 2026, 26(1): 2-10. [WU N, LIN T, WANG W X. Identification of key nodes and invulnerability analysis of Northeast Sea-land Corridor transportation network[J]. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 2026, 26(1): 2-10.]

[11] BRUNEAU M, CHANG E S, EGUCHI T R, et al. A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic resilience of communities[J]. Earthquake Spectra, 2003, 19(4): 733-752.

[1]	李平, 李海军, 代存杰, 县勇, 黄岩. 基于微分博弈的冷链公铁联运温控协同与补贴优化[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2026, 26(3): 144-155.
[2]	王清斌, 梁瑛昊, 郑建风. 考虑时间不确定的东北亚—欧洲多式联运路径优化[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2026, 26(2): 1-10.
[3]	王静, 雷德明, 翟静, 陈淑楣, 刘林凡. 数据与决策协同的长江航运多式联运优化研究[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2026, 26(2): 11-23.
[4]	黄兆察, 蒋林桥, 王志美, 陈军华, 张星臣. 面向电煤保供的采购成本与铁水联运协同优化方法[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2026, 26(2): 24-34.
[5]	赵媛, 石柏松, 王丹. 考虑船舶到港延误的班列时刻表优化[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2026, 26(2): 35-46.
[6]	吴暖, 林婷, 王晚香. 东北海陆大通道运输网络关键节点识别与抗毁性分析[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2026, 26(1): 2-10.
[7]	李小静, 袁静, 秦怡豪. 定制客运动态乘降点与车辆路线联合优化[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2026, 26(1): 228-238.
[8]	谷远利, 武志磊, 宇泓儒, 杨澄璐. 社区-客流耦合视角下城市轨道交通网络脆弱性评估[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2026, 26(1): 340-350.
[9]	马奇飞, 贾鹏, 匡海波. 中国综合交通运输绿色效率的空间特征研究[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2022, 22(6): 300-308.
[10]	左大杰，肖国胜，王孟云. 产业转移背景下西部运输需求的完全分解模型[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2020, 20(5): 15-20.
[11]	冯涛，彭其渊，陶思宇，陈昕梅. 站城融合模式下既有铁路车站城市功能开发体量预测研究[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2020, 20(5): 21-28.
[12]	叶菲菲，杨隆浩，王应明，蓝以信. 基于数据包络分析和扩展置信规则库的交通运输业环境治理成本预测[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2020, 20(3): 20-27.
[13]	周晓晔，崔瑶，何亮，马小云，王思聪. 基于地铁—货车联运的物流配送路径优化[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2020, 20(3): 111-117.
[14]	骆晨，李想，钟林峰，胡姗姗. 基于家庭属性差异的大学生出行方式选择行为研究[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2020, 20(3): 227-232.
[15]	诸立超，刘昭然. 托运人在不同时空下的选择行为差异揭示[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2020, 20(1): 27-32.

上海港集装箱内陆集疏运网络韧性评估

Resilience Assessment of Shanghai Port's Containerized Inland Hinterland Network

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics