Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of this study was to discover the policy alternatives for improving Keelung Harbor that would end its decline and restore its competitiveness. Theoretical framework. The theoretical framework of this study was based on the research foundations of: classical bureaucracy; market government; participative government; flexible government; deregulated government; and environmental factors. Methodology. This study used the research design of multiple-case study and comparative method, which intended to explore the best alternatives (smart practices). The subjects in the present study were 15 interviewees from five different international ports across the Pacific Ocean, which included port administrators, city managers, and other decision makers regarding port policy. The five chosen international ports are similar in perspectives of history, location, and ranking; moreover, the main data collection technique used in this study was in-person interviews with assistance of tape recording. Findings. All five ports illustrated their own unique history, current construction projects, and future strategic plans facing the steep challenges of globalization and the trend of mega-containerships. Each port also has its own method and opinion regarding the current obstacles and future of the maritime industry. Conclusion and recommendations. The findings of the five ports were divided into past, present, and future categories, in which each port responded differently to the challenges due to their unique circumstances. There are four recommendations for increasing Keelung Harbor's competitiveness: (a) forming a GLC (Government Linked Company) combining all major international ports of Taiwan, (b) focusing its niche market and developing travel and tourism aggressively, (c) expanding ports along the west bank of Keelung Harbor through landfills, and (d) shifting terminals and buildings of KLHB from the center of Keelung City.