Page 64 - Sjæklen2005

64
4. Esbjerg Havn: 7UDÀNKDYQHQ /DQGVKDYQHSODQHQ ,
(VEMHUJ
5. KBN Consult: $QDO\VH DI (VEMHUJ NRQVXPÀVNHULKDYQ ,
Esbjerg 1993; CMRH: 1\W OLY Sn (VEMHUJ )LVNHULKDYQ,
(VEMHUJ 7UDÀNPLQLVWHULHW (VEMHUJ 7UDÀNKDYQV IUHP-
tid - hovedresultater af en analyse af havnen, COWI rap-
SRUW
6. Arbejdsmarkedsrådet for Ribe Amt: Beskæftigelsessitua-
WLRQHQ Sn (VEMHUJ +DYQ, COWI rapport, 2002; Morten Hahn-
Pedersen og Marit Jensen: $ÁHGW HIIHNW L (VEMHUJ .RPPXQH
RJ 5LEH $PW DI RIIVKRUHDNWLYLWHWHUQH Sn 1RUGV¡HQ Esbjerg
2002; Esbjerg Havn: Udkast til Masterplan (VEMHUJ
7. Morten Hahn-Pedersen og Marit Jensen: $ÁHGW HIIHNW L
(VEMHUJ .RPPXQH RJ 5LEH $PW DI RIIVKRUHDNWLYLWHWHUQH Sn
1RUGV¡HQ (VEMHUJ S
8. ) HNV 2GG 2OVHQ HW DO Ringvirkninger av Rosenberg.
‘NRQRPLVNH RJ NRPSHWDQFHP VVLJH YLUNQLQJHU DY HW RII
shore verft 5DSSRUW 5RJDODQGVIRUVNQLQJ
9. %O D 7LPRWK\ 3 5\DQ 7KH (FRQRPLF ,PSDFWV RI WKH 3RUWV
RI /RXLVLDQD DQG WKH 0DULWLPH ,QGXVWU\, University of New
Orleans 2001; Materiale fra Port of Nagoya og Copenhagen
Economics se Fiskeri og Søfartsmuseet, Esbjerg (FOS),
$ÁHGW HIIHNW DI DNWLYLWHWHU Sn (VEMHUJ +DYQ 23
10. I rapporten omhandlende beskæftigelsessituationen på
Esbjerg Havn publiceret af COWI i 2002 var den samlede
VYDUSURFHQW VnOHGHV VH $UEHMGVPDUNHGVUnGHW IRU 5LEH
Amt: %HVN IWLJHOVHVVLWXDWLRQHQ Sn (VEMHUJ +DYQ, COWI
UDSSRUW S +RV 'DQPDUNV 6WDWLVWLN DQVHV HQ VYDU-
SURFHQW Sn PHOOHP QRUPDOW VRP WLOIUHGVVWLOOHQGH DOW
HIWHU KYLONHQ W\SH DI XQGHUV¡JHOVH GHU HU WDOH RP
11. 7R Y VHQWOLJH WHRUHWLVNH JHQQHPJDQJH ÀQGHV GHVXGHQ L
% 6 +R\OH ' +LOOLQJ HGV Seaport systems and spatial
change 6XIIRON 5 /R\HQ et al HGV Struggling for
OHDGHUVKLS $QWZHUS 5RWWHUGDP SRUW FRPSHWLWLRQ EHWZHHQ
+HLGHOEHUJ
12. -YI QRWH
13. Danmarks Turistråd: Turismens økonomiske betydning
QDWLRQDOW RJ UHJLRQDOW 7¡EEH .EK S II
Summary
7KH UHVWUXFWXULQJ RI WUDIÀF LQFUHDVHG FRPSHWLWLRQ EHWZHHQ
GLIIHUHQW IRUPV RI WUDQVSRUW LQFUHDVHG HIÀFLHQF\ DQG HFRQR-
mies of scale in shipping, and steadily increasing pressure
RQ FRPPHUFLDO ÀVKLQJ DUH DPRQJ WKH UHDVRQV ZK\ WKH OHYHO
of activity in many Danish harbours appears to be less than
LW ZDV RQO\ D IHZ GHFDGHV DJR %XW WKH OHYHO RI JHQHUDO LQWHU-
est in the harbour areas has grown strongly in step with the
apparent fall in harbour activities, and in many places the
KDUERXU KDV GHYHORSHG LQWR D ]RQH RI FRQÁLFW EHWZHHQ WKH
original maritime interests and various alternative ways of
XWLOLVLQJ WKH DWWUDFWLYH DUHDV LQYROYHG
In Esbjerg too, the question of use of the harbour areas
for other than maritime activities has been a hot topic, not
least with respect to the so-called “Dokken project” with its
proposed new hotel and shopping and cultural centre in a
central harbour area, which has been the subject of vigor-
RXV GHEDWH IRU VRPH FRQVLGHUDEOH WLPH 7KH GHEDWH RQ WKH
“Dokken project” has been characterised by the fact that both
supporters and opponents have been arguing primarily on the
EDVLV RI EHOLHIV DQG DWWLWXGHV ZKLOH IHZ FRQFUHWH ÀJXUHV DQG
FDOFXODWLRQV KDYH EHHQ SUHVHQWHG 7KH UHDVRQ IRU WKLV ZDV
simple: there was no general overview of what the activities
DW (VEMHUJ KDUERXU UHDOO\ PHDQW IRU WKH FLW\ DQG WKH DUHD
This inspired the Fisheries and Maritime Museum to
propose a study of the knock-on effect of the activities at
(VEMHUJ KDUERXU 7KH SURSRVDO ZDV UHFHLYHG SRVLWLYHO\ DQG
JDLQHG ZLOOLQJ ÀQDQFLDO VXSSRUW IURP D ZLGH UDQJH RI DX-
WKRULWLHV WUXVWV DQG FRPSDQLHV 7KH VWXG\ FRPELQHG WKH
XVH RI YDULRXV RIÀFLDO VWDWLVWLFV ZLWK D PDMRU LQWHUYLHZ DQG
questionnaire survey with replies from almost two hundred
FRPSDQLHV RU RYHU RI DOO FRPSDQLHV DW (VEMHUJ KDU-
ERXU 7KH ZRUN FRPPHQFHG LQ $SULO DQG FRQFOXGHG LQ
August 2005 with the publication of the report $ÁHGW HIIHNW
DI DNWLYLWHWHU Sn (VEMHUJ +DYQ (The knock-on effect of ac-
WLYLWLHV DW (VEMHUJ KDUERXU
7KH UHSRUW·V PDLQ FRQFOXVLRQV FDQ EH EULHÁ\ VXPPDULVHG
as follows:
Esbjerg harbour is one of Denmark’s biggest and most
ZLGH VSHFWUHG KDUERXUV ZLWK DFWLYLWLHV FRYHULQJ WKH ÀVK-