Modelling the global maritime container network

  • Yanni Huang
  • Taha Hossein Rashidi
  • Lauren Gardner
Original Article

Abstract

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.

Keywords

transport modelling container network 4-step modelling 

References

  1. Anderson, J.E. (2011) The gravity model. Annual Review of Economics 3: 133–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, J.E. and Wincoop, E.V. (2004) Trade costs. Journal of Economic Literature 42(3): 691–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 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
  4. Baier, S.L. and Bergstrand, H.J. (2007) Do free trade agreements actually increase members’ international trade? Journal of International Economics 71(1): 72–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barigozzi, M., Fagiolo, G. and Garlaschelli, D. (2010) Multinetwork of international trade: A commodity-specific analysis. Physical Review E 81(4): 046104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bell, M.G., Liu, X., Rioult, J. and Angeloudis, P. (2013) A cost-based maritime container assignment model. Transportation Research Part B 58: 58–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bensassia, S., Martinez-Zarzoso, I. and Suárez, C. (2014) The effect of maritime transport costs on the extensive and intensive margins: Evidence from the Europe–Asia trade. Maritime Economics and Logistics 16(3): 276–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bergstrand, J.H. (1984) The gravity equation in international trade: Some microeconomic foundations and empirical evidence. The Review of Economics and Statistics 67: 474–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bougheas, S., Demetriades, P.O. and Morgenroth, L.E. (1999) Infrastructure, transport costs and trade. Journal of International Economics 47: 169–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carrere, C. (2006) Revisiting the effects of regional trade agreements on trade flows with proper specification of the gravity model. European Economic Review 50(2): 223–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chou, C.-C., Chu, C.-W. and Liang, G.-S. (2008) A modified regression model for forecasting the volumes of Taiwan’s import containers. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 47(1): 797–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Egger, P. (2000) A note on the proper econometric specification of the gravity equation. Economics Letters 66: 25–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Elsdon, P. and Burdall, T. (2004) Container Terminal Planning and Design, s.l.: Ports 2001.Google Scholar
  14. Ferguson, M. et al. (2012) Transferability and enhancement of a microsimulation model for estimating urban commercial vehicle movements. Journal of Transport Geography 24: 358–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gosasang, V., Chandraprakaikul, W. and Kiattisin, S. (2011) A comparison of traditional and neural networks forecasting techniques for container throughput at bangkok port. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics 27(3): 463–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. IHS Maritime & Trade (2016) IHS World Trade Service, https://www.ihs.com/pdf/World-Trade-Service_205126110913044932.pdf, accessed 11 January 2015.
  17. Kaluza, P., Kolzsch, A., Gastner, M.T. and Blasius, B. (2010) The complex network of global cargo ship movements. Journal of the Royal Society Interface 7(48): 1093–1103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lam, H.W., Ng, L.P., Seabrooke, W. and Hui, C.E. (2004) Forecasts and reliability analysis of port cargo throughput in Hong Kong. Journal of urban Planning and Development 130: 133–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lightfoot, A., Bolin, R. and Lubulwa, G. (2009) Australian Sea Port Activity to 202930. s.l.: Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics.Google Scholar
  20. Limao, N. and Venables, A.J. (2001) Infrastructure, geographical disadvantage, trasport costs, and trade. The World Bank Economic Review 15(3): 451–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Luo, M. and Grigalunas, T.A. (2003) A spatial-economic multimodal transportation simulation model For US Coastal Container Ports. Maritime Economics & Logistics 5(2): 158–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 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
  23. Marcouiller, D. and Anderson, J.E. (2002) Insecurity and the pattern of trade: An empirical investigation. Review of Economics and statistics 84(2): 342–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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
  25. Newton, S. (2009) WORLDNET Final Report (D11). Zoetermeer: NEA Transport Research and Training.Google Scholar
  26. Nuzzolo, A., Crisalli, U. and Comi, A. (2013) An aggregate transport demand model for import and export flow simulation. Transport 30: 43–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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.
  28. Rodrigue, J.-P. (2013) The Geography of Transport Systems, 3rd edn. New York: Hofstra University.Google Scholar
  29. Sapienza, P., Zingales, L. and Sapienza, P. (2006) Does culture affect economic outcomes? Journal of Economic Perspectives 20(2): 23–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 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
  31. Taplin, G.B. (1967) Models of world trade. Staff Papers 14(3): 433–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. The UNCTAD Secretariat (2012) Review of Maritime Transport. Geneva: United Nations Publication.Google Scholar
  33. Viton, P.A. (1994) Calibrating the Gravity Model, Working Paper. Columbus: Department of City and Regional Planning, The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  34. World Trade Organisation (2013) World Trade Report 2013. s.l.: World Trade Organisation.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yanni Huang
    • 2
  • Taha Hossein Rashidi
    • 1
  • Lauren Gardner
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Transport Advisory GroupAECOM Australia Pty Ltd.SydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations