MODELING CHINA'S DRY PORT COOPERATION IN SUPPLY CHAINS

Publications

Share / Export Citation / Email / Print / Text size:

Transport Problems

Silesian University of Technology

Subject: Economics, Transportation, Transportation Science & Technology

GET ALERTS

eISSN: 2300-861X

DESCRIPTION

10
Reader(s)
10
Visit(s)
0
Comment(s)
0
Share(s)

VOLUME 16 , ISSUE 3 (September 2021) > List of articles

MODELING CHINA'S DRY PORT COOPERATION IN SUPPLY CHAINS

Egor PLOTNIKOV / Aleksandr RAKHMANGULOV *

Keywords : dry port; cooperation; competition; seaport; supply chain; simulation; anyLogistix

Citation Information : Transport Problems. Volume 16, Issue 3, Pages 89-103, DOI: https://doi.org/10.21307/tp-2021-044

License : (CC BY 4.0)

Received Date : 22-April-2020 / Accepted: 09-September-2021 / Published Online: 30-September-2021

ARTICLE

ABSTRACT

Currently, focus on dry ports in the People's Republic of China (PRC) is growing, and therefore, the number of dry ports in the country is actively increasing. Due to the multifunctionality of dry ports, they meet the modern requirements of China's transport policy, which prioritizes improving the quality of providing transportation services by providing general access to value-added and high-quality services. The purpose of the PRC's transport system is also to facilitate the movement of freight flows within the State's territory, due to a faster modal shift, increased accessibility of transport, development of auxiliary functions, and construction of integrated transport hubs. Dry ports deal with the mentioned tasks; however, with the increase in the number of dry ports in the PRC, the issue of optimizing the interaction between dry ports has become urgent. The purpose of this research is to scientifically substantiate the need for strengthening technological cooperation between dry ports. The problem of determining the optimal structure of the system of interaction of dry ports was solved using the method of discreteevent simulation and the anyLogistix software tool. The results of assessment of the economic efficiency of the interaction between dry ports are presented. The results of experiments with a model of China’s dry port system showed the possibility of increasing the total profit of participants of the supply chain by 2.3 times and their profitability by 2.6 times, reducing the cost of container transportation by 1.3 times, and fully meeting the demand for transportation. It has been proven that the cooperation of dry ports in supply chains provides enhanced opportunities for processing cargo flows, as a result of the redirection of cargo consignments from overloaded dry ports to dry ports with reserves with processing capacity. A methodology for optimizing the structure of the system of interaction of dry ports is presented. The methodology is proposed for use as a tool for strategic and current planning of supply chains.

Content not available PDF Share

FIGURES & TABLES

REFERENCES

1. Container port traffic (TEU: 20 foot equivalent units). The World Bank Group. Available at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IS.SHP.GOOD.TU?end=2018&start=2000&view=chart.

2. Николаева, А.И. & Багинова, В.В. Логистические методы и технологии организации функционирования сухих портов. Современные проблемы транспортного комплекса России. 2011. Vol. 1. No. 1. P. 49-57. [In Russian: Nikolaeva, A.I. & Baginova, V.V. Logistic methods and technologies for the organization of functioning of dry ports. Modern Problems of Russian Transport Complex].

3. Rakhmangulov, A. & Sładkowski, A. & Osintsev, N. & et al. Sustainable Development of Transport Systems for Cargo Flows on the East-West Direction. In: Transport Systems and Delivery of Cargo on East–West Routes. Sładkowski, A. (ed.). Cham: Springer International Publishing. 2018. P. 3-69.

4. Chen, D. & Bhatt, Y. The Impacts of Industrialization on Freight Movement in China. 2019.

5. Sładkowski, A. & Abdirassilov, Z. & Molgazhdarov, A. Transnational Value of the Republic of Kazakhstan in International Container Transportation. In: Transport Systems and Delivery of Cargo on East–West Routes. Sładkowski, A. (ed.). Cham: Springer International Publishing. 2018. P. 171-204.

6. UNCTAD. Review of Maritime Transport 2020. New York and Geneva. 2020.

7. China: EU’s largest partner for imports. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/en/web/products-eurostat-news/-/DDN-20180522-1.

8. Robinson, R. Ports as elements in value-driven chain systems: the new paradigm. Maritime Policy & Management. 2002. Vol. 29. No. 3. P. 241-255.

9. Tran, N.K. & Haasis, H.-D. An empirical study of fleet expansion and growth of ship size in container liner shipping. International Journal of Production Economics. 2015. Vol. 159. P. 241-253.

10. Jiang, C. & Wan, Y. & Zhang, A. Internalization of port congestion: strategic effect behind shipping line delays and implications for terminal charges and investment. 2017. Vol. 1. P. 112-130.

11. Roso, V. & Woxenius, J. & Lumsden, K. The dry port concept: connecting container seaports with the hinterland. Journal of Transport Geography. 2009. Vol. 17. No. 5. P. 338-345.

12. Black, J. & Roso, V. & Marušić, E. & et al. Issues in Dry Port Location and Implementation in Metropolitan Areas: The Case of Sydney, Australia. Transactions on Maritime Science. 2018. Vol. 7. No. 1. P. 41-50.

13. Chen, G. & Govindan, K. & Golias, M.M. Reducing truck emissions at container terminals in a low carbon economy: Proposal of a queueing-based bi-objective model for optimizing truck arrival pattern. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review. 2013. Vol. 55. P. 3-22.

14. Lee, C.-Y. & Meng, Q. Handbook of Ocean Container Transport Logistics. Cham: Springer International Publishing. 2015.

15. Jin, Z. & Lin, X. & Zang, L. & et al. Lane Allocation Optimization in Container Seaport Gate System Considering Carbon Emissions. Sustainability. 2021. Vol. 13. No. 7. P. 3628-3628.

16. Abu Aisha, T. & Ouhimmou, M. & Paquet, M. Optimization of Container Terminal Layouts in the Seaport – Case of Port of Montreal. Sustainability. 2020. Vol. 12. No. 3. P. 1165-1165.

17. Optimal threshold control of empty vehicle redistribution in two depot service systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control. 2005. Vol. 50. No. 1. P. 87-90.

18. Zhou, S. & Zhuo, X. & Chen, Z. & et al. A New Separable Piecewise Linear Learning Algorithm for the Stochastic Empty Container Repositioning Problem. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. 2020. Vol. 2020. P. 1-16.

19. Shanghai Containerized Freight Index. Available at: https://en.sse.net.cn/indices/scfinew.jsp.

20. Hsiao, Y.-J. & Chou, H.-C. & Wu, C.-C. Return lead–lag and volatility transmission in shipping freight markets. Maritime Policy & Management. 2014. Vol. 41. No. 7. P. 697-714.

21. Lam, J.S.L. & Su, S. Disruption risks and mitigation strategies: an analysis of Asian ports. Maritime Policy & Management. 2015. Vol. 42. No. 5. P. 415-435.

22. Vilko, J. & Ritala, P. & Hallikas, J. Risk management abilities in multimodal maritime supply chains: Visibility and control perspectives. Accident; analysis and prevention. 2019. Vol. 123. P. 469-481.

23. Gou, X. & Lam, J.S.L. Risk analysis of marine cargoes and major port disruptions. Maritime Economics & Logistics. 2019. Vol. 21. No. 4. P. 497-523.

24. Alyami, H. & Lee, P.T.-W. & Yang, Z. & et al. An advanced risk analysis approach for container port safety evaluation. Maritime Policy & Management. 2014. Vol. 41. No. 7. P. 634-650.

25. Verschuur, J. & Koks, E.E. & Hall, J.W. Port disruptions due to natural disasters: Insights into port and logistics resilience. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2020. Vol. 85. P. 102393-102393.

26. Jeevan, J. & Roso, V. Exploring seaport - dry ports dyadic integration to meet the increase in container vessels size. Journal of Shipping and Trade. 2019. Vol. 4. No. 1.

27. Notteboom, T.E. & Parola, F. & Satta, G. & et al. The relationship between port choice and terminal involvement of alliance members in container shipping. Journal of Transport Geography. 2017. Vol. 64. P. 158-173.

28. Khaslavskaya, A. & Roso, V. Outcome-Driven Supply Chain Perspectives on Dry Ports. Sustainability. 2019. Vol. 11. No. 5. P. 1492-1492.

29. Beresford, A. & Pettit, S. & Xu, Q. & et al. A study of dry port development in China. Maritime Economics & Logistics. 2012. Vol. 14. No. 1. P. 73-98.

30. Paixão, A.C. & Bernard Marlow, P. Fourth generation ports – a question of agility? International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management. 2003. Vol. 33. No. 4. P. 355-376.

31. Jeevan, J. & Salleh, N. & Loke, K.B. & et al. Preparation of dry ports for a competitive environment in the container seaport system: A process benchmarking approach. International Journal of e-Navigation and Maritime Economy. 2017. Vol. 7. P. 19-33.

32. Veenstra, A. & Zuidwijk, R. & van Asperen, E. The extended gate concept for container terminals: Expanding the notion of dry ports. Maritime Economics & Logistics. 2012. Vol. 14. No. 1. P. 14-32.

33. Jeevan, J. & Chen, S.-L. & Cahoon, S. The impact of dry port operations on container seaports competitiveness. Maritime Policy & Management. 2019. Vol. 46. No. 1. P. 4-23.

34. Sładkowski, A. & Cieśla, M. Analysis and Development Perspective Scenarios of Transport Corridors Supporting Eurasian Trade. In: Transport Systems and Delivery of Cargo on East–West Routes. Sładkowski, A. (ed.). Cham: Springer International Publishing. 2018. P. 71-119.

35. Wang, J.J. & Ng, A.K.-Y. & Olivier, D. Port governance in China: a review of policies in an era of internationalizing port management practices. Transport Policy. 2004. Vol. 11. No. 3. P. 237-250.

36. Zeng, Q. & Maloni, M.J. & Paul, J.A. & et al. Dry Port Development in China. Transportation Journal. 2013. Vol. 52. No. 2. P. 234-234.

37. Jeevan, J. & Chen, S.-L. & Lee, E.-s. The Challenges of Malaysian Dry Ports Development. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics. 2015. Vol. 31. No. 1. P. 109-134.

38. Roso, V. Factors influencing implementation of a dry port. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management. 2008. Vol. 38. No. 10. P. 782-798.

39. Sun, Z. & Tan, K.C. & Lee, L.H. & et al. Design and evaluation of mega container terminal configurations: An integrated simulation framework. SIMULATION. 2013. Vol. 89. No. 6. P. 684-692.

40. Roy, D. & Koster, M.B.M. de. Modeling and Design of Container Terminal Operations. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2014.

41. Rahimi, M. & Asef-Vaziri, A. & Harrison, R. An Inland Port Location-Allocation Model for a Regional Intermodal Goods Movement System. Maritime Economics & Logistics. 2008. Vol. 10. No. 4. P. 362-379.

42. Ka, B. Application of Fuzzy AHP and ELECTRE to China Dry Port Location Selection. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics. 2011. Vol. 27. No. 2. P. 331-353.

43. Flämig, H. & Hesse, M. Placing dryports. Port regionalization as a planning challenge – The case of Hamburg, Germany, and the Süderelbe. Research in Transportation Economics. 2011. Vol. 33. No. 1. P. 42-50.

44. Talley, W.K. & Ng, M. Hinterland transport chains: Determinant effects on chain choice. International Journal of Production Economics. 2017. Vol. 185. P. 175-179.

45. Haralambides, H. & Gujar, G. On balancing supply chain efficiency and environmental impacts: An eco-DEA model applied to the dry port sector of India. Maritime Economics & Logistics. 2012. Vol. 14. No. 1. P. 122-137.

46. Henttu, V. & Lättilä, L. & Hilmola, O.P. Optimization of relative transport costs of a hypothetical dry port structure. 2011. Vol. 12. P. 12-19.

47. Hanaoka, S. & Regmi, M.B. Promoting intermodal freight transport through the development of dry ports in Asia: An environmental perspective. IATSS Research. 2011. Vol. 35. No. 1. P. 16.23.

48. Lättilä, L. & Henttu, V. & Hilmola, O.-P. Hinterland operations of sea ports do matter: Dry port usage effects on transportation costs and CO2 emissions. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review. 2013. Vol. 55. P. 23-42.

49. Qiu, Y. & Lu, H. Competition Game Model of Regional Seaport Logistics Terminals: Case Study of Seaports in China. In: Eighth International Conference of Chinese Logistics and Transportation Professionals (ICCLTP). Chengdu, China. DOI: 10.1061/40996(330)482.

50. Huo, W. & Zhang, W. & Chen, P.S.-L. Recent development of Chinese port cooperation strategies. Research in Transportation Business & Management. 2018. Vol. 26. P. 67-75.

51. Yazir, D. & Şahin, B. & Yip, T.L. & et al. Effects of COVID-19 on maritime industry: a review. International maritime health. 2020. Vol. 71. No. 4. P. 253-264.

52. Egypt ‘seizes’ ship that blocked Suez Canal, demands nearly $1 billion compensation. Available at: https://www.thejournal.ie/egypt-suez-canal-seized-ship-5408806-Apr2021/.

53. Herrera Dappe, M. & Suárez-Alemán, A. Competitiveness of South Asia’s Container Ports: A Comprehensive Assessment of Performance, Drivers, and Costs. Washington, DC: World Bank. 2016.

54. Abdoulkarim, H.T. & Fatouma, S.H. & Munyao, E.M. Dry Ports in China and West Africa: A Comparative Study. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management. 2019. Vol. 09. No. 03. P. 448-467.

EXTRA FILES

COMMENTS