{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015479876160990712, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005307386112339673, 'mean_word_length': 5.01595744680851, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Retrospective analysis of commercial sea ports operation during first five-year plans and their role in USSR economic industrialization (1928-1940)

The article highlights the general regularities of the economic development of commercial sea ports in the USSR and defines their role in industrialization of the country. For the first time there has been carried out a comparative analysis of sea port cargo turnover dynamics in relation to the ports of Great Britain, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, the USA and France. The rates of port cargo turnover growth are investigated in comparison with the rates of industrial production growth, the volume of railway and inland water transport. The changes in the main cargo flows connected to the industrialization of the economy in all sea basins of the USSR have been studied. The dynamics of different types of cargo transshipment has been investigated. There has been stated the increasing rate of coastal cargo transshipment against the significant decrease in the export-import cargo transshipment due to the policy of self-reliance. The structure of foreign commercial cargos has been studied, a significant excess of exports over imports has been revealed. It has been found that the high growth rates of cargo turnover in the Soviet ports were due to the increase in the volume of oil cargo transshipment in the ports of the Caspian Sea. There have been calculated the average age and deadweight of Soviet ships in 1939, compared to the similar average international parameters and figures of the previous years. It was determined how the port's technical characteristics and lack of funding influenced these parameters. Investments to the seaports were hundreds of times less than investments to heavy industry and railway transport, and dozens of times less in inland waterways, since the seaports were not the priority objects in the program of economic industrialization. As a result, plans were not fulfilled, ships were idling in the ports, and labor productivity was low. It has been inferred that the activity of seaports during the first five-year plans was not profitable. There have been studied the specific features of the state system of seaports management during the first five-year plans.