Search

The chapter looks at maritime commerce and transport, in the process highlighting the imperfect match between the policies of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the challenges posed by climate change to the world’s oceans. As the principal regulator of international maritime transport, the IMO is an obvious venue for devising policies for addressing climate-related challenges for shipping. However, the IMO is not up to the task for a number of reasons. It has always advocated a staid approach to addressing environmental concerns related to shipping, relying, for example, on existing technologies rather than pushing members to adopt new ones. Although the IMO has called for improvements in the energy efficiency of ships, it has not embraced the decarbonisation of maritime transport. Indeed, greenhouse gas emissions from shipping continue to increase and even the IMO does not expect them to fall before 2050. Because the IMO has lacked initiative and consequently lacks legitimacy in this issue area, actions to limit climate-changing pollution from shipping have fallen to often-fragmented schemes implemented by regional organisations, ports and private actors.

This paper applies the marketing strategy literature to the four phases of the intermodal terminal life cycle (ITLC) to identify the appropriate competitive strategy to be undertaken at each phase, based on fluctuating markets and competitor behaviour. Not only can applying the correct strategy at each phase help to obtain a competitive advantage, but anticipating future strategies in advance can underpin the success of current strategies and ensure that both public and private stakeholders are prepared for future challenges.The paper derives the appropriate strategies, provides empirical examples and discusses the opportunities and challenges inherent in each strategy. The paper concludes with suggestions for future research on strategy options that go beyond the traditional view of terminals as homogeneous interchangeable assets. Rather than simple improvement of factor conditions by investing in the infrastructure, innovative strategies to obtain competitive advantage should focus on partnerships with external stakeholders such as rail operators, 3PLs and shippers.Free download until 7th May 2017: https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1UkLi7sdbMeOvO

Seaports play a critical role as gateways and facilitators of economic interchange and logistics processes and thus have become crucial nodes in globalised production networks andmobility systems. Both the physical port infrastructure and its operational superstructure have undergone intensive evolution processes in an effort to adapt to changing economic environments, technological advances,maritime industry expectations and institutional reforms. The results, in terms of infrastructure, operator models and the role of an individual port within the portsystem, vary by region, institutional and economic context. While ports have undoubtedly developed in scale to respond to the changing volumes and structures in geographies of trade (Wilmsmeier, 2015), the development of hinterland access infrastructure, regulatory systems and institutional structures have in many instances lagged behind. The resulting bottlenecks reflect deficits in the interplay between the economic system and the factors defining port development (e.g. transport demand, the structure of trade, transport services, institutional capacities, etc. cf. Cullinane and Wilmsmeier, 2011). There is a wide range of case study approaches and analyses of individual ports, but analyses from a port system perspective are less common, and those that exist are seldom critical of the dominant discourse assuming the efficiency of market competition (cf. Debrie et al., 2013).This special section aims to capture the spectrum of approaches in current geography research on port system evolution. Thus, the papers reach from the traditional spatial approach (Rodrigue and Ashar, this volume) to network analysis (Mohamed-Chérif and Ducruet, this volume) to institutional discussions (Vonck and Notteboom, this volume; Wilmsmeier and Monios, this volume). The selection of papers allows an opening of discussion and reflection on current research, necessary critical analysis of the influences on port systemevolution and,most importantly, future directions. The remainder of this editorial aims to reflect on these challenges and identify the potential for future research.

SEStran is the Statutory Regional Transport Partnership for South East Scotland. SEStran was established under the Transport Scotland Act (2005) as the strategic transport planningauthority for an area covering the eight local authorities of Borders, East Lothian, West Lothian, Midlothian, Edinburgh, Fife, Falkirk and Clackmannanshire. SEStran aims to develop a sustainable transportation system for SE Scotland that will enable business tofunction effectively, and provide everyone living in the region with improved access to healthcare, education, public services and employment opportunities. The development of SEStran’s Regional Transport Strategy (RTS) was an historic opportunity to plan for thetransport needs of 1.5 million people, living in Scotland’s most economically vibrant region.It is a blueprint for transport development in South East Scotland that will form the core of our work for the next 15 years.....

SEStran is the Statutory Regional Transport Partnership for South East Scotland. SEStranwas established under the Transport Scotland (2005) Act as the strategic transport planningauthority for an area covering the eight local authorities of Borders, East Lothian, WestLothian, Midlothian, Edinburgh, Fife, Falkirk and Clackmannanshire. SEStran aims todevelop a sustainable transportation system for SE Scotland that will enable business tofunction effectively, and provide everyone living in the region with improved access tohealthcare, education, public services and employment opportunities. The development ofSEStran’s Regional Transport Strategy (RTS) was an historic opportunity to plan for thetransport needs of 1.5 million people, living in Scotland’s most economically vibrant region.It is a blueprint for transport development in South East Scotland that will form the core ofour work for the next 15 years.....

This FAL Bulletin demonstrates the evolutionof maritime networks and port development atprimary and secondary ports in Latin Americaand the Caribbean. An analysis of time seriesdata on container movements between 1997 and2013 reveals patterns of cargo flows and transshipmentlocation choices. The institutional contextof devolution processes and new investmentsin the region provide additional insight into theperformance of selected ports.

This thesis presents an analysis of the role of intermodal transport in Notteboom and Rodrigue's (2005) port regionalisation concept, an approach to port development that focuses on the inland aspects of the process, as well as taking port development models from a spatial focus to a focus on institutions. It is argued that the port regionalisation concept is insufficiently disaggregated; it does not identify or classify different processes within the concept, nor does it explain how they operate or who drives them.In this thesis, the port regionalisation concept is broken down into its three constituent parts: inland terminals, market and logistics and the resolution of collective action problems. Each of these is examined in its own chapter, based on a case study methodology. The methodology was chosen for its ability to provide rich detail and build or extend theory, as the overall aim of this thesis is to critique the port regionalisation concept and extend its explanatory power. Part one follows a multiplecase design, analysing numerous European inland terminal developments in order toimprove inland terminal classifications that can then contribute to the port regionalisation concept. Parts two and three each utilise a single case design, taking a single case in depth in order to explore in rich detail how these issues play out in industry. Part two studies the role of large retailers as the primary drivers of intermodal transport in the UK, while part three examines the development of an intermodal corridor in the United States, offering the opportunity to study a collective actionproblem in detail.Part one reveals that port actors, both port authorities and port terminal operators, can be directly involved in the development of inland terminals, and that differences can be observed between terminals developed by port actors and those developed by inland actors. A conceptual distinction is proposed to capture this observation. Part two identifies barriers to port regionalisation, such as operational issues, spatial development decisions and a lack of integration between inland market players. Part three demonstrates the difficulties faced by public bodies attempting to direct regionalisation strategies, constrained by legitimacy and agency conflicts and an institutional structure that limits their effectiveness. An added contribution to the literature is the theoretical framework that is developed for the analysis of the institutional factors at play in resolving a collective action problem.While additional cases are required to advance the concept further, the cases in this thesis elucidate reasons why ports may not be controlling or capturing hinterlands through the strategies of integration that the port regionalisation concept suggests. It may be more accurate to state that regionalisation can only occur as long as a set of favourable commercial and institutional conditions are maintained. The findings from the cases presented in this thesis suggest that it is not easy to maintain such conditions, implying that regionalisation may be the exception rather than the norm.

This research benefits the strategic governance of inland ports located within urban areas by analysing the logistical dedicatedness and the geographic reach of economic activities that take place within a specific inland port. We find that the port under consideration faces challenges of retaining relatively new traffic categories (e.g. pallets) characterised by a high potential for transport mode substitution, whilst the more traditional traffic categories (e.g. construction materials) show higher levels of logistical dedicatedness to the port. The latter do so, while generating negative local externalities. As a result, this assessment and application of the PHI matrix serves the creation of crucial strategic insights that allow policy makers to improve their urban freight policy and the role of inland ports therein. Furthermore, these insights allow for the identification of key stakeholders with whom strategic objectives can or cannot be easily aligned in the context of urban logistics.

Performance indicators on socio-economic impacts of seaport activities are important instruments in supporting and strengthening the societal acceptance of these activities. However, the use of these indicators for the purpose of gaining broader acceptance for seaport activities and port expansion is limited and has been questioned by scholars, as well as different stakeholders within the seaport environment. Recognizing the problems associated with these indicators, through evaluating the building of such a measurement system at an European level, this chapter particularly focuses (1) on the results of a stakeholder consultation on methodological aspects of socio-economic impact calculation in 58 European ports, and (2) the results of the attempt to develop a top-down harmonized calculation method for calculating socio-economic indicators for all European core ports and (3) the results of developing a proxy-based methodology to allow seaports to calculate basic socio-economic impacts. Findings are on variable and data-specifications needed for future possibilities for building such measurement systems as well as on institutional requirements.

In this chapter, we critically review the stakeholder management literature applied to port(s) and port authorities, in terms of stakeholder identification and mapping. For each contribution, we discuss the main stakeholders identified, and the context(s) within which the research took place. Based on the reviewed contributions, we conclude on the generic stakeholders identified across all contributions, and highlight the rising importance of local community inclusion for port sustainability. Based on these insights, we formulate ideas for further research as well as managerial implications, and discuss structural approaches such as sustainability reporting and license to operate measurement. For stakeholder-inclusive port planning purposes, we identify and discuss six major elements for consideration in future port planning and design processes, with the aim to achieve a more sustainable port development.