Advertisement

Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal

, Volume 29, Issue 3–4, pp 659–688 | Cite as

The regional port competition with different terminal competition intensity

  • Mingzhu YuEmail author
  • Chung-Yee Lee
  • James Jixian Wang
Article

Abstract

This paper studies the regional container port competition problem which involves two port cities each with its own container terminal. We provide two-level game-theoretic models to characterize several practice-related issues, such as container terminal cooperation situation, and the difference between local in/out and transshipment container throughputs. Numerical experiments are conducted based on the port system in the Pearl River Delta area of China. We find that (1) the two ports in the heterogeneous regional port system should focus on differentiating services rather than compete with each other in every service; (2) the terminal cooperation may not be preferred by both of the port city governments; (3) the developed port will gradually dominate the transshipment container business in the system, leaving the developing port to focus its efforts on the local in/out container business instead.

Keywords

OR in maritime industry Container terminal Port competition Terminal cooperation Hotelling model 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The work described in this paper was substantially supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council of the HKSAR, China, T32-620/11. The first author is partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71302109) and Natural Science Foundation of SZU (Grant No. 201422). The authors are also grateful to the managers from Hong Kong International Terminals (HIT) for their valuable information.

References

  1. Anderson CM, Park YA, Chang YT, Yang CH, Lee TW, Luo M (2008) A game-theoretic analysis of competition among container port hubs: the case of Busan and Shanghai. Marit Policy Manag 35(1):5–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asgari N, Farahani RZ, Goh M (2013) Network design approach for hub ports-shipping companies competition and cooperation. Transp Res Part A 48:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balvers R, Szerb L (1996) Location in the Hotelling duopoly model with demand uncertainty. Eur Econ Rev 40:1453–1461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bottasso A, Conti M, Ferrari C, Merk O, Tei A (2013) The impact of port throughput on local employment: evidence from a panel of European regions. Transp Policy 27:32–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cachon G, Netessine S (2004) Game theory in supply chain analysis. In: Simchi-Levi D, Wu SD, Shen M (eds) Supply chain analysis in the eBusiness Era. Kluwer, BostonGoogle Scholar
  6. Castro-Villaverde J, Coto-Milln P (1998) Port economic impact: methodologies and application to the port of Santander. Int J Transp Econ 2:159–179Google Scholar
  7. Chang YT, Lee SY, Tongzon JL (2008) Port selection factors by shipping lines: different perspectives between trunk liners and feeder service providers. Mar Policy 32(6):877–885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cullinane K, Teng Y, Wang T (2005) Port competition between Shanghai and Ningbo. Marit Policy Manag 32(4):331–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Borger B, Proost S, Van Dender K (2008) Private port pricing and public investment in port and hinterland capacity. J Transp Econ Policy 42:527–561Google Scholar
  10. De Langen PW (2007) Port competition and selection in contestable hinterlands: the case of Austria. Eur J Transp Infrastruct Res 7(1):1–14Google Scholar
  11. Fan L, Wilson WW, Dahl B (2015) Risk analysis in port competition for containerized imports. Eur J Oper Res 245:742–753CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Ferrari C, Percoco M, Tedeschi A (2010) Ports and local development: evidence from Italy. Int J Transp Econ 37:1–26Google Scholar
  13. Garrido RA, Leva M (2004) Port of destination and carrier selection for fruit exports: a multi-dimensional space-time multi-nomial probit model. Transp Res Part B 38(7):657–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gripaiosa P, Gripaiosa R (1995) The impact of a port on its local economy: the case of Plymouth. Marit Policy Manag 22(1):13–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ishii M, Lee PT-W, Tezuka K, Chang Y-T (2013) A game theoretical analysis of port competition. Transp Res Part E 49:92–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kaselimi EN, Notteboom TE, Borger BD (2011) A game theoretical approach to competition between multi-user terminals: the impact of dedicated terminals. Marit Policy Manag 38(4):395–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Leachman RC (2005) Final report: port and modal elasticity study. Piedmont, Southern California Association of Governments, PiedmontGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee PT-W, Flynn M (2011) Charting a new paradigm of container port development policy: the Asian doctrine. Transp Rev 31(6):791–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lee PT-W, Hu K-C (2012) Evaluation of the service quality of container ports by importance–performance analysis. Int J Shipp Transp Logist 4(3):197–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Luo M, Liu L, Gao F (2012) Post-entry container port capacity expansion. Transp Res B 46(1):120–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Malchow MB, Kanafani A (2004) A disaggregate analysis of port selection. Transp Res Part E 40:317–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Murphy PR, Daley JM, Dalenberg DR (1992) Port selection criteria: an application of a transportation research framework. Logist Transp Rev 28:238–254Google Scholar
  23. Nir A-S, Lin K, Liang GS (2003) Port choice behaviour—from the perspective of the shipper. Marit Policy Manag 30(2):165–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Notteboom TE (2004) Container shipping and ports: an overview. Rev Netw Econ 3(2):86–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Notteboom T, Winkelmans W (2001) Structural changes in logistics: how will port authorities face the challenge? Marit Policy Manag 28:71–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pallis AA, Vitsounis TK, De Langen PW (2010) Port economics, policy and management: review of an emerging research field. Transp Rev 30(1):115–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pantouvakis A (2006) Port-service quality dimensions and passenger profiles: an exploratory examination and analysis. Marit Econ Logist 8(4):402–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Saeed N, Larsen OI (2010) An application of cooperative game among container terminals of one port. Eur J Oper Res 203:393–403CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Shan J, Yu M, Lee C-Y (2014) An empirical investigation of the seaports economic impact: evidence from major ports in China. Transp Res Part E 69:41–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Slack B (1985) Containerization, inter-port competition and port selection. Marit Policy Manag 12(4):293–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Song DW (2002) Regional container port competition and co-operation: the case of Hong Kong and South China. J Transp Geogr 10:99–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Song DW (2003) Port co-opetition in concept and practice. Marit Policy Manag 30(1):29–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tiwari P, Itoh H, Doi M (2003) Shippers’ port and carrier selection behaviour in China: a discrete choice analysis. J Marit Econ Logist 5(1):23–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tongzon JL (2009) Port choice and freight forwarders. Transp Res Part E 45:186–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tongzon JL, Sawant L (2007) Port choice in a competitive environment: from the shipping lines’ perspective. Appl Econ 39(4):477–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tsay AA, Agrawal N (2000) Channel dynamics under price and service competition. Manuf Serv Oper Manag 2(4):372–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wang J, Olivier D (2007a) Hong Kong and Shenzen: the Nexus in South China. In: Cullinane K, Song DW (eds) Asian container ports. Development, competition and co-operation. Palgrave McMillan, Basingstoke, pp 198–212Google Scholar
  38. Wang J, Oliver D (2007b) Shanghai and Ningbo: in search of an identity for the Chanjiang Delta region. In: Cullinane K, Song DW (eds) Asian container ports. Development, competition and co-operation. Palgrave McMillan, Basingstoke, pp 183–197Google Scholar
  39. Wiegmans BW, Van Der Hoest A, Notteboom TE (2008) Port and terminal selection by deep-sea container operators. Marit Policy Manag 35(6):517–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Yeo GT, Roe M, Dinwoodie J (2008) Evaluating the competitiveness of container ports in Korea and China. Transp Res Part A 42(6):910–921Google Scholar
  41. Yip TL, Liu JJ, Fu X, Feng J (2014) Modeling the effects of competition on seaport terminal awarding. Transp Policy 35:341–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zhang A (2008) The impact of hinterland access conditions on rivalry between ports. Discussion Paper No. 208-8, OECD/ITFGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Transportation EngineeringShenzhen UniversityShenzhenChina
  2. 2.Department of Industrial Engineering and Logistics ManagementThe Hong Kong University of Science and TechnologyClear Water Bay, KowloonHong Kong
  3. 3.Department of GeographyThe University of Hong KongPokfulamHong Kong

Personalised recommendations