Analysis of strategic pricing in the port sector: The network approach
- 155 Downloads
This article demonstrates how interaction between ports in a network can be analysed in two stages. The first stage is the analysis of the price response functions and it examines how a port sets its prices for infrastructure services given those of its competitors. The second stage involves the identification of network relationships and analyses strategic interactions based on the results obtained from the first stage. The procedure is applied to analyse the network relationships between ports in three regions in Australia, namely Queensland, South Australia and Victoria, and Western Australia. The results provide insights into strategic interactions in port networks not previously seen in the literature. Especially, it has been found that, while some ports appear to strategically interact with each other in price setting, other ports prefer to set their own prices independently of each other. Moreover, strategic pricing can be asymmetric rather than symmetric. The result of our analysis has important implications for port management and policymakers. For example, while the existence of ‘complementary’ strategic pricing may not be seen as evidence of price leadership, it indicates that port users may not be able to shop around among competing ports if the existing port increases its prices.
Keywordsport pricing port competition port networks simultaneous equation modelling transport policy Australia
The above article is part of the NOL International Fellowship Research Project. The authors would like to thank the Editor-in-Chief and two anonymous referees for their feedback on an earlier version of the article. The untimely demise of our colleague Anthony Chin, while the article was under review, is also sadly acknowledged.
- Bandara, M.Y. and Nguyen, H.-O. (2014) Port Infrastructure Pricing Policy and Practice: A Case Study of Australia and New Zealand Seaports. Proceedings of the International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME); 15–18 July, Norfolk, Virginia.Google Scholar
- Bandara, M.Y., Nguyen, H.-O. and Chen, P. S.-L. (2014) Port Infrastructure Pricing: Findings from a Survey of International Seaports. Proceedings of the International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME); 15–18 July, Norfolk, Virginia.Google Scholar
- De Borger, B., Proost, S. and Van Dender, K. (2008) Private port pricing and public investment in port and hinterland capacity. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 42(3): 527–561.Google Scholar
- Ender, W. (1995) Applied Econometric Time Series. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
- Frankel, E.G. (1987) Port Planning and Development. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Hamilton, J.D. (1989) Time Series Analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Heaver, T.D. (2010) The response of liner shipping companies to the evolution of global supply chain management. In: C.T. Grammenos, N.K. Nomikos and A.H. Alizadeh (eds.) The Handbook of Maritime Economics and Business. London: Lloyd’s List, pp. 457–478.Google Scholar
- Sjostrom, W. (2010) Competition and cooperation in liner shipping. In: C.T. Grammenos, N.K. Nomikos and A.H. Alizadeh (eds.) The Handbook of Maritime Economics and Business. London: Lloyd’s List, pp. 433–456.Google Scholar
- Van De Voorde, E. and Vanelslander, T. (2009) Market Power and Vertical and Horizotal Integration in the Maritime Shipping and Port Industry. Integration and Competition between Transport and Logistics Businesses. Transport Research Centre, OECD, pp. 67–96.Google Scholar
- Zhang, A. (2008) The Impact of Hinterland Access Conditions on Rivalry between Ports. OECD/ITF Discussion Paper 2008–8, OECD Publishing, Paris.Google Scholar