Skip to main content

Ship routing and scheduling: the cart before the horse conjecture

Abstract

The literature on ship routing and scheduling has grown substantially over the last few decades, with many papers authored by top experts in this area and examining various versions of the problem. Many publication outlets have hosted these papers, with a broad variety of problem formulations, solution approaches, and application contexts. Equally broad is the range of angles of these papers, spanning the wide field from mostly theoretical analyses, focusing on specific methodological tools, all the way to applied studies, focusing on specific real-world applications. The basic hypothesis of this paper is that we are increasingly seeing papers that are more of theoretical than practical value, and in fact some of them often place the solution approach before real problem definition. As a result of this approach, the connection between these papers and reality is sometimes distant or elusive. To investigate this hypothesis, this paper tries to explain some misconceptions, refers to a limited sample of such papers, and suggests possible ways to rectify this situation in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Agarwal, R., and Ö. Ergun. 2008. Ship scheduling and network design for cargo routing in liner shipping. Transportation Science 42 (2): 175–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnesen, M.J., M. Gjestvang, X. Wang, K. Fagerholt, K. Thun, and J. Rakke. 2017. A traveling salesman problem with pickups and deliveries, time windows and draft limits: Case study from chemical shipping. Computers and Operations Research 77: 20–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bausch, D., G. Brown, and D. Ronen. 1998. Scheduling short-term marine transport of bulk products. Maritime Policy and Management 25: 335–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G., G. Graves, and D. Ronen. 1987. Scheduling ocean transportation of crude oil. Management Science 33: 335–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen, M., K. Fagerholt, and D. Ronen. 2004. Ship routing and scheduling: status and perspectives. Transportation Science 38 (1): 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen, M., K. Fagerholt, B. Nygreen, and D. Ronen. 2013. Ship routing and scheduling in the new millennium. European Journal of Operational Research 228: 467–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devanney, J.W., 2010. The impact of bunker price on VLCC spot rates, in Proceedings Of the 3rd International Symposium on Ship Operations, Management and Economics, SNAME Greek Section, Athens, Greece, October.

  • Grønhaug, R., M. Christiansen, G. Desaulniers, and J. Desrosiers. 2010. A branch-and-price method for a liquefied natural gas inventory routing problem. Transportation Science 44 (3): 400–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagerholt, K. 2001. Ship scheduling with soft time windows: an optimization based approach. European Journal of Operational Research 131: 559–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagerholt, K., and D. Ronen. 2013. Bulk ship routing and scheduling: Solving practical problems may provide better results. Maritime Policy and Management 40 (1): 48–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, H.-S., S. Visoldilokpun, and J.M. Rosenberger. 2008. A branch-and-price-and-cut method for ship scheduling with limited risk. Transportation Science 42 (3): 336–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C.Y. and Meng, Q (eds.) 2015. Handbook of ocean container transportation logistics: making global supply chains effective, Springer.

  • Li, C., X. Qi, and C.Y. Lee. 2015. Disruption recovery for a vessel in liner Shipping. Transportation Science 49 (4): 900–921.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magirou, E.F., H.-N. Psaraftis, and T. Bouritas. 2015. The economic speed of an oceangoing vessel in a dynamic setting. Transportation Research Part B 76: 48–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meng, Q., and S. Wang. 2011. Optimal operating strategy for a long-haul liner service route. European Journal of Operational Research 215: 105–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meng, Q., S. Wang, H. Andersson, and K. Thun. 2014. Containership routing and scheduling in liner shipping: Overview and future research directions. Transportation Science 48 (2): 265–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norstad, I., K. Fagerholt, and G. Laporte. 2011. Tramp ship routing and scheduling with speed optimization. Transportation Research Part C 19: 853–865.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Psaraftis, H.N., and C.A. Kontovas. 2013. Speed models for energy-efficient maritime transportation: a taxomomy and survey. Transportation Research Part C 26: 331–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Psaraftis, H.N., and C.A. Kontovas. 2014. Ship speed optimization: Concepts, models and combined speed-routing scenarios. Transportation Research Part C 44: 52–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Psaraftis, H.N., and C.A. Kontovas. 2016. Green maritime transportation: Speed and route optimization. In Green transportation logistics: In search for win-win solutions, ed. H.N. Psaraftis. New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Psaraftis, H.N., M. Wen, and C.A. Kontovas. 2016. Dynamic vehicle routing: Three decades and counting. Networks 67 (1): 3–31. doi:10.1002/net.21628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rana, K., and R.G. Vickson. 1991. Routing container ships using lagrangean relaxation and decomposition. Transportation Science 25 (3): 201–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronen, D. 1982. The effect of oil price on the optimal speed of ships. Journal of the Operational Research Society 33: 1035–1040.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronen, D. 1983. Cargo ships routing and scheduling: Survey of models and problems. European Journal of Operational Research 12: 119–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronen, D. 1993. Ships scheduling: the last decade. European Journal of Operational. Research 71 (3): 325–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tirado, G., and L.M. Hvattum. 2016. Improved solutions to dynamic and stochastic maritime pick-up and delivery problems using local search. Annals of Operations Research. doi:10.1007/s10479-016-2177-5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, S., Q. Meng, and Z. Liu. 2013. Containership scheduling with transit-time-sensitive container shipment demand. Transportation Research Part B 54 (2013): 68–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, S., A. Alharbi, and P. Davy. 2014. Liner ship route schedule design with port time windows. Transportation Research Part C 41: 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xia, J., K.X. Li, H. Ma, and Z. Xu. 2015. Joint planning of fleet deployment, speed optimization, and cargo allocation for liner shipping. Transportation Science 49 (4): 922–938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the Editor and two anonymous referees for their comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Harilaos N. Psaraftis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Psaraftis, H.N. Ship routing and scheduling: the cart before the horse conjecture. Marit Econ Logist 21, 111–124 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-017-0080-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-017-0080-x

Keywords

  • Ship routing and scheduling
  • Fleet deployment
  • Speed optimization