Modelling the global maritime container network
Travel demand modelling has a long history going back to 50s when the conventional four-step modelling structure was introduced and developed for Chicago and Detroit, USA. However, the first travel demand models for freight movements were not developed until 40 years after the first model for passenger cars. Freight models are yet limited to studies looking at goods movements by truck and rail. This paper explores the effectiveness of the conventional travel demand modelling techniques for maritime container movements. Two approaches for modelling the movement of trade in the global maritime container network are discussed. The conventional methods of trip generation and distribution are applied in a sequential model, and compared against an alternative joint model methodology. Results show that the sequential methodology achieves high accuracy, while the joint methodology reveals more detailed trade relationships. Significant relationships are revealed, such as the varying influence of airports, the negative impact of coastline length and the impact of being an island, on containerised trade volumes. The findings of this paper provide a basis for modelling the container network from a transportation discipline viewpoint.
Keywordstransport modelling container network 4-step modelling
- Auld, J., Hossein Rashidi, T. and Lin, J. (2009) Analysis of National Country-Level Heavy-Duty Freight Truck Emissions. Orlando, FL: Transportation, Land Use, Planning and Air Quality, pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
- Burgess, A. et al. (2008) TRANS-TOOL Final Report, http://www.transport-research.info/sites/default/files/project/documents/20100304_172116_94411_TRANSTOOLS%20-%20Final%20Report.pdf, accessed 11 January 2015.
- Elsdon, P. and Burdall, T. (2004) Container Terminal Planning and Design, s.l.: Ports 2001.Google Scholar
- IHS Maritime & Trade (2016) IHS World Trade Service, https://www.ihs.com/pdf/World-Trade-Service_205126110913044932.pdf, accessed 11 January 2015.
- Lightfoot, A., Bolin, R. and Lubulwa, G. (2009) Australian Sea Port Activity to 2029–30. s.l.: Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics.Google Scholar
- Mansfield, E.D. and Milner, H.V. (2010) Regime type, veto points, and preferential trading arrangements. Stanford Journal of International Law 46: 219.Google Scholar
- Martinez-Zarzoso, I. and Nowak-Lehmann, F. (2003) Augmented gravity model: An empirical application to Mercosur–European union trade flows. Journal of Applied Economics 6(2): 291–316.Google Scholar
- Newton, S. (2009) WORLDNET Final Report (D11). Zoetermeer: NEA Transport Research and Training.Google Scholar
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2016) Metro Version 1 Model Documentation, http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=TAD/TC/WP(2014)24/FINAL&docLanguage=En, accessed 11 January 2015.
- Oxford Economics (2015) Global Economic Model, http://www.oxfordeconomics.com/forecasts-and-models/countries/scenario-analysis-and-modeling/global-economic-model/overview, accessed 11 January 2015.
- Rodrigue, J.-P. (2013) The Geography of Transport Systems, 3rd edn. New York: Hofstra University.Google Scholar
- Sinha-Ray, P. et al. (2003) Container World: GLOBAL Agent-Based Modelling of the Container Transport Business. In Proceedings 4th Workshop of Agent-Based Simulation, Montpellier.Google Scholar
- The UNCTAD Secretariat (2012) Review of Maritime Transport. Geneva: United Nations Publication.Google Scholar
- Viton, P.A. (1994) Calibrating the Gravity Model, Working Paper. Columbus: Department of City and Regional Planning, The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
- World Trade Organisation (2013) World Trade Report 2013. s.l.: World Trade Organisation.Google Scholar