Search results

Logistics service performance measurement (PM) is a fundamental activity pertaining to the achievement of logistics goals and the improvement of services. The choice of logistics PM criteria depends on stakeholder goals and expectations, including logistics service providers, customers and government and regulatory institutions. PM is especially challenging in areas where high values are at stake, several actors are involved and uncertainty about cause-and-effect relations is high. This paper aims to examine the measurement of performance in offshore oil and gas logistics, which has unique characteristics such as a supply chain (SC) exposed to a harsh environment, the presence of several independent carriers and a highly specialised and costly set of vessels involved in long-distance transport legs.

The study is designed as a multiple case study of two Norwegian shipping companies and two international oil and gas companies. Data were collected from several parts of the offshore service SC in several Arctic oil and gas fields.

This paper sheds light on the performance of the SC and presents key performance indicators for logistics operations. It concludes that the measurement of SC performance must be context-specific and emphasis needs to be placed on the degree of uncertainty and inter-dependency related to the SC in question.

The study suggests a list of context-specific key performance indicators for offshore logistics with a special emphasis on the peculiarities of a harsh operational environment.

This chapter reviews and analyses the contemporary development of liner shipping, port development and competition. It begins with a comprehensive review on the latest developmental trends of liner shipping and business strategies, as well as their impacts on port development and competition. Then, it discusses the responses of ports, past, present and (likely) future, in addressing these new demands and challenges. A very important point from this analysis indicates that, in the past decade, port development and competition have gradually evolved from being individual, technical efficiency-oriented to become more regional, economic efficiency-oriented. At the same time, ports have also moved out of their rather passive positions and undertaken positive steps to avert the traditionally strong bargaining power of shipping lines. This illustrates that port development and competition is a continuous morphological process which can change dramatically within a rather short period of time. This chapter provides a new perspective on port development and competition and a decent platform for further research.

There is significant amount of literature tackling different issues related to the port industry. The present chapter focuses on a single business unit of seaports aiming at the documentation of works related to container terminals.

An effort to review, collect and present the majority of the works present in the last 30 years, between 1980 and 2010, has been made in order to picture the problems dealt and methods used by the authors in the specific research field. To facilitate the reader, studies have been grouped under five categories of addressed problems (productivity and competitiveness, yard and equipment utilization, equipment scheduling, berth planning, loading/unloading) and four modelling methodologies (mathematics and operations research, management and economics, simulation, stochastic modelling).

The analysis shows that most works focus on productivity and competitiveness issues followed by yard and equipment utilisation and equipment scheduling. In reference to the methodologies used managerial and economic approaches lead, followed by mathematics and operations research.

In reference to future research, two fields have been identified where there is scope of significant contribution by the academic community: container terminal security and container terminal supply chain integration.

The present chapter provides the framework for researchers in the field of port container terminals to picture the so far works in this research area and enables the identification of gaps at both research question and methodology level for further research.

The purpose of this paper is to define and empirically develop measures to evaluate the extent of integration of seaport container terminals in supply chains.

A literature review identified four key variables hypothesized to be part of the higher‐order construct of “terminal supply chain integration (TESCI)”. The hypotheses were theoretically justified a priori and data for operationalizing the conceptualized variables obtained via a large‐scale survey of container terminal operators. A model was developed and validated using confirmatory factor analysis.

The validated variables of the higher‐order construct of TESCI included “information and communication systems”, “value‐added services”, “multimodal systems and operations” and “supply chain integration practices”.

The study develops measures from the standpoint of the container terminal (the centric supply chain actor). Supply chains involve a network of companies and it would be useful to obtain data as to integration from other supply chain participants. The usual caveats of cross‐sectional research apply and longitudinal case studies may provide supplementary information.

There are valuable practical implications for container terminals that seek to measure the extent of integration into supply chains and for port users that place value on container TESCI in their choice and evaluation criteria.

The study is the first of its nature that attempts to provide a valid theoretical construct and empirical measures of seaport container TESCI. The study shifts container TESCI from an abstract concept to a theoretical construct with validated measures.

Ports are widely recognised as crucial nodes in international trade and transport. However, for various reasons, capacity does not always match demand: sometimes there is overcapacity, whereas in other cases, demand exceeds capacity and there is a shortage of the latter. This chapter therefore looks at where port congestion occurs, both globally and in the port-calling chain; it analyses actual responses by various chain actors, and it sheds some light on potential future evolution and reaction patterns.

Congestion, in general, can feature various forms of appearance: it can be more or less hidden, featuring congestion costs, or it can be visually present, featuring queues which are building up. The chapter discerns eight zones in the port-calling chain where congestion may emerge. As a result of a wide literature search, supplemented with a survey, it can first of all be observed that quite some congestion seems to occur, globally spread, and hitting larger as well as smaller ports. Most of the congestion is generated at the terminals, hinterland connection points and hinterland transport itself.

In terms of reaction patterns, one would assume that pricing throughout the system is adapted in such way that demand equals capacity. In practice, prices are hardly making any effort to make marginal revenue equal marginal cost. The reason is mainly that the power balance is quite strongly in favour of shipping companies, who impose on port and port operators the need to expand capacity at low fees. Port operators, in turn, apply various kinds of technical and procedural adaptations. The same is true for hinterland operators.

Looking towards the future, it seems that with the increase in world trade, the risk of port congestion will be even more outspoken, be it in some parts of the world more than in others. It is also very much likely that most problems will occur landside, as this is the part of the chain where solutions are least easy: who is going to take the initiative, how will co-ordination take place and where will the funding come from? Most actors seem to be aware of this trend, and seek for solutions like dedicated terminals and vertical integration or co-operation.

With the above observations, the chapter sheds some light on where the future needs and trends in the abatement of capacity will lie. It is therefore useful from a scientific point of view as well as with an eye on policy-making and operational port management.

To examine the EU ‘Short Sea Shipping’ (SSS), its ‘motorways of the sea (MoS)’ and green ports, within short sea maritime logistics.

To present past research and report recent developments speculating on future trends.

The dominance of SSS over road is questioned; as road transport has expanded, hubs are expected to become larger and fewer with feeders. Road transport is not certain to follow SSS and its four motorways. This result was responsible for the relocation of industry from West to East and North–East inter-port competition.

The SSS ship size and port are undefined; specific data on these concepts are unavailable.

‘Door-to-door’ services are highly sought after in this sector, but difficult to establish.

The green element introduced here, mainly for ports, will dominate future discussions because of the high importance given to climate change.

This chapter outlines for the first time the development of the policy on EU Eco-ports, the relocation of industry, the West–East port competition, the MoS and the long-term deterioration of SSS logistics which is likely to persist in the future.

This study aims to promote strategic maritime management as a new emerging discipline to foster research in strategic maritime issues.

An existing academic discipline maturity model is adapted by including four phases of dynamic evolutionary paths to evaluate the phase of maturity of a research discipline. The model is validated by means of two matured disciplines: strategic management and maritime economics.

It is found that the current research of strategic maritime management is at a phase of emergence of discipline and ready to move to the maturity phase. It is also found that the evolution of the path of strategic maritime management resembles the early evolution path of strategic management but lags 30 years behind. Future research directions of strategic maritime management can be referred to the research streams in the maturity phase of strategic management.

The adapted academic discipline maturity model brings in the longitudinal and dynamic perspectives of the evolution of an academic discipline, which helps maritime strategists identify gaps and opportunities and evaluate the appropriateness of applying a strategic management paradigm to a specific research topic.

The adapted academic discipline maturity model brings in the longitudinal and dynamic perspective of the evolution of an academic discipline, which helps maritime strategists define the gaps and opportunities in strategic maritime management research.