Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Examining port selection factors in Sub-Saharan Africa using the modified importance-performance analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Maritime Economics & Logistics Aims and scope

Abstract

As a growing volume of international shipments are carried by ocean carriers and handled by ports worldwide, ports have been at the heart of international trade and serve as a key node in global supply chain activities. Since many competing ports worldwide vie to be the first choice for shippers’ global supply chains, they offer various maritime logistics services and pricing options. As such, selecting the right seaport has become an arduous task. In this regard, Sub-Saharan seaport selection is no exception. Considering a lack of attention paid to the rapidly developing African ports that can be an accelerator for business opportunities in the emerging Sub-Saharan African market, this paper investigates how African shippers select ports and examines to see if there is any significant difference in African shippers’ port selection behavior due to their varying priorities among different countries. We use the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation modeling (PLS-SEM) and Importance-Performance Analysis (IPMA), for an empirical analysis of shippers in Uganda and Nigeria. We find many cross-national differences between the two countries in their port selection strategies. In particular, we discover that African shippers’ geographical proximity to the coastal area influences their port selection decision. Also, our importance-performance map analysis (IPMA) revealed that African shippers consider cargo safety, port security, and port service quality the most crucial factors in their port selection. On the other hand, we found that Chinese shippers using the African ports valued port connectivity via multi-modal transfer links more than their African counterparts. In other words, domestic African shippers tended to have different priorities in selecting African ports from foreign Chinese shippers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Some of the non-confidential data will be available from the authors upon request.

References

  • Anami, L. 2022. Kampala-Mombasa most expensive route in EAC cargo transportation, August-08-2022. Monitor, https://www.monitor.co.ug/uganda/business/markets/kampala-mombasa-most-expensive-route-in-eac-cargo-transportation—3907384. Accessed 25 Nov 2022.

  • Ansah, R.K., K. Obiri-Yeboah, and G. Akipelu. 2020. Improving the freight transport of a developing economy: A case of Boankra inland port. Journal of Shipping and Trade 5 (1): 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharjee, S. 2022. 6 major ports and harbors in Uganda. Marine Insight, https://www.marineinsight.com/know-more/6-major-ports-and-harbours-in-uganda/. Accessed 10 Nov 2022.

  • CaillauxSant’Anna, M.A.A.P., and L.A. Meza. 2011. Container logistics in Mercosur: Choice of a transshipment port using the ordinal Copeland method, data envelopment analysis and probabilistic composition. Maritime Economics & Logistics 13 (4): 355–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castillo-Manzano, J.I., F. González-Laxe, and L. López-Valpuesta. 2013. Intermodal connections at Spanish ports and their role in capturing hinterland traffic. Ocean and Coastal Management 86: 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chin, W.W. 1998. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In Modern methods for business research, ed. G.A. Marcoulides, 295–358. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chin, W.W., J.-H. Cheah, Y. Liu, H. Ting, X.-J. Lim, and T.H. Cham. 2020. Demystifying the role of causal-predictive modeling using partial least squares structural equation modeling in information systems research. Industrial Management & Data Systems 120 (12): 2161–2209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd ed. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Langen, P.W. 2007. Port competition and selection in contestable hinterlands: The case of Austria. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 7 (1): 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Economist. 2020. Africa’s population will double by 2050, A Special Report of Economist. https://www.economist.com/special-report/2020/03/26/africas-population-will-double-by-2050. Accessed 7 June 2023.

  • Feo, M., and J. Martinez. 2022. Shippers vs freight forwarders: Do they differ in their port choice decisions? Evidence from the Spanish Ceramic tile industry. Research in Transportation Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2022.101195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garver, M. S. (2003). Best practices in identifying customer-driven improvement opportunities. Industrial Marketing Management 32(6): 455–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gohomene, D.A., Z.L. Yang, S. Bonsal, E. Maistralis, J. Wang, and K.X. Li. 2016. The Attractiveness of ports in West Africa: Some lessons from shipping lines’ port selection. Growth and Change 47 (3): 416–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J.F., Jr., M.C. Howard, and C. Nitzl. 2020. Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. Journal of Business Research 109: 101–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J.F., G.T.M. Hult, C.M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2022. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J.F., C.M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2011. PLS-SEM: Indeed, a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 19 (2): 139–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J.F., M. Sarstedt, C.M. Ringle, and S. Gudergan. 2018. Advanced issues in partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanafiah, M.H. 2020. Formative vs reflective measurement model: Guidelines for structural equation modeling research. International Journal of Analysis and Applications 18 (5): 876–889.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanusz, Z., J. Tarasinska, and W. Zielinski. 2016. Shapiro-Wilk test with known mean. REVSTAT-Statistical Journal 14 (1): 89–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haralambides, H., S. Veldman, E. Van Drunen, and M. Liu. 2011. Determinants of a regional port-centric logistics hub: The case of East Africa. Maritime Economics & Logistics 13 (1): 78–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henseler, J., C.M. Ringle, and R.R. Sinkovics. 2009. The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In New challenges to international marketing (Advanced in international Marketing), vol. 20, ed. R.R. Sinkovics and P.N. Ghauri, 277–319. Emerald: Bingley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). Testing measurement invariance of composites using partial least squares. International marketing review 33(3): 405–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Höck, C., C.M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2010. Management of multi-purpose stadiums: Importance and performance measurement of service interfaces. International Journal of Services Technology and Management 14 (2/3): 188–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kano, N. 1984. Attractive quality and must-be quality. Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality Control 31 (4): 147–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroes, E.P., and R.J. Sheldon. 1988. Stated preference methods: An introduction. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 22 (1): 11–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lai, I. K. W., & Hitchcock, M. (2015). Importance–performance analysis in tourism: A framework for researchers. Tourism Management 48, 242–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lagoudis, I.N., I. Theotokas, and D. Broumas. 2017. A literature review of port competition research. International Journal of Shipping and Transport Logistics 9 (6): 724–762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lirn, T.C., H.A. Thanopoulou, M.J. Beynon, and A.K.C. Beresford. 2004. An application of AHP on transshipment port selection: A global perspective. Maritime Economics & Logistics 6: 70–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lirn, T. C., Thanopoulou, H. A., Beynon, M. J., & Beresford, A. K. (2015). An application of AHP on transhipment port selection: a global perspective. In Port Management (pp. 314–338). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, M., F. Chen, and J. Zhang. 2022. Relationships among port competition, cooperation and competitiveness: A literature review. Transport Policy 118: 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macrotrends. 2023. Sub-Saharan Africa GDP growth rate 1961–2023. https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/SSF/sub-saharan-africa-/gdp-growth-rate. Accessed 8 June 2023.

  • Martilla, J.A., and J.C. James. 1977. Importance-performance analysis. Journal of Marketing 41 (1): 77–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Min, H., and B. Park. 2020. A two-dimensional approach to assessing the impact of port selection factors on port competitiveness using the Kano model. Maritime Economics & Logistics 22 (3): 353–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moglia, F., and M. Sanguineri. 2003. Port planning: The need for a new approach? Maritime Economics & Logistics 5 (4): 413–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P.R., J.M. Daley, and D.R. Dalenberg. 1992. Port selection criteria: An application of a transportation. Logistics and Transportation Review 28 (3): 237–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng, A.S.F., D. Sun, and J. Bhattacharjya. 2013. Port choice of shipping lines and shippers in Australia. Asian Geographer 30 (2): 143–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nir, A.S., K. Linb, and G.S. Lianga. 2003. Port choice behavior from the perspective of the shipper. Maritime Policy and Management 30 (2): 165–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onut, S., U.R. Tuzkaya, and E. Torun. 2010. Selecting container port via a fuzzy ANP-based approach: A case study in the Marmara region, Turkey. Transport Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuchunam, D.E. 2013. Port selection criteria by shippers in Nigeria: A discrete choice analysis. International Journal of Shipping and Transport Logistics. 5 (4/5): 532–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, B., and Y. Jung. 2018. Analyzing the port choice behavior of land-side decision makers in the port of Gwangyang (by Korean). Korea Logistics Review 28 (6): 29–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Population Matters. 2023. Population: Numbers, https://populationmatters.org/the-facts-numbers/?gclid=CjwKCAjw1YCkBhAOEiwA5aN4AQKQfJUhsGrf5dckaN8tyTY7npMcCOdNuTAUCcEd4y0WsC_7PmrI-BoCOTMQAvD_BwE. Accessed 7 June 2023.

  • Rigdon, E.E., C.M. Ringle, M. Sarstedt, and S.P. Gudergan. 2011. Assessing heterogeneity in customer satisfaction studies: Across industry similarities and within industry differences. measurement and research methods. International Marketing Advances in International Marketing 22: 169–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringle, C., and M. Sarstedt. 2016. Gain more insight from your PLS-SEM results: The importance-performance map analysis. Industrial Management & Data Systems 116 (9): 1865–1886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez, R.J., A.K.Y. Ng, and L. Garcia-Alonso. 2011. Port selection factors and attractiveness: The service providers’ perspective. Transportation Journal 50 (2): 141–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schloderer, M.P., M. Sarstedt, and C.M. Ringle. 2014. The relevance of reputation in the nonprofit sector: The moderating effect of sociodemographic characteristics. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing 19: 110–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shmueli, G. 2010. To explain or to predict? Statistical Science 25 (3): 289–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shmueli, G., S. Ray, J.M. Velasquez Estrada, and S.B. Chatla. 2016. The elephant in the room: Evaluating the predictive performance of PLS models. Journal of Business Research 69 (10): 4552–4564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shmueli, G., M. Sarstedt, J.F. Hair, J.H. Cheah, H. Ting, S. Vaithilingam, and C.M. Ringle. 2019. Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing 53 (11): 2322–2347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonetto, A. 2012. Formative and reflective models: State of the art. Electronic Journal of Applied Statistical Analysis 5 (3): 452–457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slack, B. 1985. Containerization inter-port competition and port selection. Maritime Policy and Management 12 (4): 293–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slack, N. (1994). The Importance‐Performance Matrix as a Determinant of ImprovementPriority. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 14(5): 59–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slack, B. 2001. Globalisation in Maritime Transportation: Competition, uncertainty and implications for port development strategy. Unpublished Working Paper No.8.2001, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM), Milano.

  • Somensi, K., S. Ensslin, A. Dutra, L. Ensslin, V. Ripoll Feliu, and V. Dezem. 2017. Knowledge construction about port performance evaluation: An international literature analysis. Intangible Capital 13 (4): 720–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steven, A. B., & Corsi, T. M. (2012). Choosing a port: An analysis of containerized imports into the US. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 48(4): 881–895.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiwari, P., H. Itoh, and M. Doi. 2003. Shippers’ port and carrier selection behavior in China: A discrete choice analysis. Maritime Economics & Logistics 5: 23–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tongzon, J.L. 2009. Port choice and freight forwarders. Transportation Research Part e: Logistics and Transportation Review 45 (1): 186–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ugboma, C., O. Ugboma, and I. Ogwude. 2006. An Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) approach to port selection decisions: Empirical evidence from Nigerian ports. Maritime Economics & Logistics 8: 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNECA. 2010. Chapter 7: The development of trade transit corridors in Africa’s landlocked countries, in Assessing Regional Integration in Africa IV Enhancing Intra-African Trade, 241–265.

  • Van der Lugt, L. 2017. Port development company: Role and strategy. In Ports and Networks: Strategies, operations and perspectives, ed. Harry Geerlings, Bart Kuipers, and Rob Zuidwijk, 54–66. New York: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Veldman, S.J., and E.W. Bukmann. 2003. A model on container port competition: An application for the West European container Hub-ports. Maritime Economics & Logistics 5: 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C.C., and Y.K. Chang. 2019. Crucial factors influencing international logistics operations for African landlocked countries—A case study of Burkina Faso. Maritime Policy & Management 46 (8): 939–956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeo, G.T., M. Roe, and J. Dinwoodie. 2008. Evaluating the competitiveness of container ports in Korea and China. Transportation Research Part a: Policy & Practice 42 (6): 910–921.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeo, G.T., M. Roe, and J. Dinwoodie. 2011. Measuring the competitiveness of container ports: Logisticians’ perspectives. European Journal of Marketing 45 (3): 455–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuen, C.L.A., A. Zhang, and W. Cheung. 2012. Port competitiveness from the users’ perspective: An analysis of major container ports in China and its neighboring countries. Research in Transportation Economics 35 (1): 34–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, Allen and Carol Schmidthorst College of Business, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH, 43403, USA

    Hokey Min

  2. Department of Logistics and Transportation, Chonnam National University, Yeosu, Korea

    Byung-In Park

Authors
  1. Hokey Min
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Byung-In Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hokey Min.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Min, H., Park, BI. Examining port selection factors in Sub-Saharan Africa using the modified importance-performance analysis. Marit Econ Logist 25, 755–777 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-023-00270-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-023-00270-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation