1 / 28

Monica Grosso Feliciana Monteiro

Monica Grosso Feliciana Monteiro. WHICH ARE THE RELEVANT STRATEGIC CRITERIA WHEN CHOOSING A CONTAINER PORT ? ANALYSIS OF TWO EUROPEAN PORTS: ANTWERP and GENOA. SIET 15-18 June 2009. Outline of the presentation. Setting the scene Methodology Literature Review on Port Choice Survey

lorin
Download Presentation

Monica Grosso Feliciana Monteiro

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Monica GrossoFeliciana Monteiro WHICH ARE THE RELEVANT STRATEGIC CRITERIA WHEN CHOOSING A CONTAINER PORT ? ANALYSIS OF TWO EUROPEAN PORTS: ANTWERP and GENOA SIET 15-18 June 2009

  2. Outline of the presentation • Setting the scene • Methodology • Literature Review on Port Choice • Survey • Analysis of the Results • Conclusions SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  3. Setting the scene • Ports – interfaces between road, rail, inland waterway, maritime transport, logistic operators • Determine key factors for users when choosing a port • Awareness of these factors: • Ports improve its market share and growth • Efficiency gains in the port have impact on performance of its users SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  4. Purpose Identify the main factors and criteria influencing the freight forwarders decision of choosing a port, namely the Ports of Genoa and Antwerp • Container port • Freight Forwarders • Case study – Ports of Genoa and Antwerp SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  5. Methodology • Literature Review on port choice and outline the major findings • Survey to sample of freight forwarders operating in the ports of Genoa and Antwerp, 5 point Likert scale questionnaire, ranging from 1 (not relevant) to 5 (very relevant) • Data analysis - FA method • Validate findings of this case study against previous academic research SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  6. Literature Review on Port Choice Considerable research has been conducted on this topic: • Surveys of port users: • E.g. Slack (1985), D’Este and Meyric (1992), Dalenberg, Daley and Murphy (1988, 1989, 1991, 1992a, 1992b, 1994). • Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to prioritize survey responses in a determined way by giving weights to various factors • e.g. Lirn et al. (2004), Song and Yeo (2004). • Observed port decisions • e.g. Malchow and Kanifani, 2001 and 2004, & Tiwari et al., 2003. SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  7. Literature Review - Surveys RTRAL 12-14 February 2009 SIET 15-18 June 2009

  8. Literature Review – using AHP method SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  9. Literature Review – using trade data RTRAL 12-14 February 2009 SIET 15-18 June 2009

  10. Port of Genoa • In 2008: • 15th Port in Europe • 2nd Italian port after the transshipment port of Gioia Tauro • 1767 Mln teus • Strategic node for freight flows towards Central Europe • Rotterdam-Genoa rail freight corridor (TEN-T project) SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  11. Port of Genoa • Port location - problem for hinterland connections • Lack of space for the port’s expansion • Potential growth in port throughput related to: • improvements in infrastructure for logistics activities • accessibility to port area • administrative procedures and port operations efficiency (Midoro, Ferrari and Parola,2007) SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  12. Port of Antwerp • In 2008: • 2nd Port in Europe for overall traffic • 3rd Port in Europe for container traffic • 8663 Mln teus • Strategic node for freight flows towards Central Europe • Port location - problem for hinterland accessibility SIET 15-18 June 2009

  13. 2 Phases: I: telephone contacts, March-April- September 2008 II: Face to Face interviews, May-October-November 2008Respondent: general manager of the companyLocation: Genoa and Antwerp, head offices of the companies Field Survey (1) SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  14. Genoese Freight Forwarders AssociationBelfirst DataBase Field Survey (2) annual salesnumber of employeeslegal company form 46 companies contacted41 companies declared their willingness to participate2 companies withdrew39 companies Final Sample (85% response rate) SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  15. Questionnaire (1) Dual Questionnaire Structure : I. General information about the company II. Elements that influence the choice of the Ports of Genoa and Antwerp (Likert scale 1-5) SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  16. Questionnaire (2) PART 1 – GENERAL INFORMATION 1 GENERAL INFORMATION ON THE RESPONDENT 1.1 Name of the company: 1.2 Address: 1.3 Country 1.4 Nature of activity / Sector:  Manufacturer  Freight forwarder  MTO (global operator)  Maritime Agency  NVOCC  Logistic company 1.5 Size: Number of employees______________________________________ Annual sales:_____________________________________________ 1.6 Website: 1.7 Name of the interviewee: 1.8 Position / Department: 1.9 Telephone: 1.10 E-mail address: PART 2 – ELEMENTS INFLUENCING THE PORT CHOICE 2.2 Elements affecting port choice RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  17. Results: Descriptive Location: 1 km from Sech Container Terminal 15 km from Voltri Container Terminal 5 km from Antwerp Port Average number of employees: 58Average annualsales 2007: 27,8 Mln euroLegal company form: 64% Public Limited Company 33,3% Limited Liability Company 2,5% Commercial Partnership SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  18. Results: Descriptive Who decides which port to call? SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  19. Analysis Method: Factor Analysis Exploratory formVarimax orthogonal rotation Iterated principal component formSPSS program4 Factors SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  20. Results of Factor Analysis 4 Factors I Factor: Connectivity of the PortII Factor: Electronic Information III Factor: Cost and Port Productivity IV Factor: Logistics and administration of the Container57,91 % of total variance Factor I explains 31,5% of total variance SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  21. Results of Factor Analysis: I Factor Connectivity of the Port Crucial role of customsHandling FacilitiesHinterland connectionsForwarders and Maritime services SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  22. Results of Factor Analysis: II Factor Electronic Information Variables related to ITAdded value servicesTotal time Transit time SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  23. Results of Factor Analysis: III Factor Cost and Port Productivity Cost elements: port chargesPort characteristics SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  24. Results of Factor Analysis: IV Factor Logistics and administration of the Container Variables related to the location of the containerVariables related to the administrative procedures of the container SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  25. Conclusions Literature Review: - Port Survey - Analytic Hierarchy Process - Analysis on observed port decisions - geographical location - port fees - port characteristics Case Study: - I Factor: Connectivity of the Port - II Factor: Electronic Information - III Factor: Cost and Port Productivity - IV Factor: Logistics and administration of the Container SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  26. Conclusions Statistical approach can support literature findings and knowledge of the operators Problems: - hinterland connections - administrative procedures - port efficiency - accessibility Important criteria: - Connectivity of the Port - Cost and Port Productivity Genoa and Antwerp SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  27. Further research Analysis of other operators behavior (e.g. shippers)Enlarge the number of ports involved in the studyDevelop the study for different typology of ports SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

  28. Thank you for your attention SIET 15-18 June 2009 RTRAL 12-14 February 2009

More Related