Competition or cooperation in a hub and spoke-shipping network: the case of the North Adriatic container terminals
Abstract
This article examines the problem of the competition or cooperation of the container terminals in the North Adriatic hub and spoke system with respect to the leadership position of the ship owners, which defines the flow of containers. The problem is defined as a two-stage game where the shipping companies act as leaders and the container terminals are the followers. The stages of the game are defined as a multi-objective optimization problem on a graph. The proposed simulations and the results obtained could be a first step in defining a sustainable method of collabora-tion in the hub and spoke system between the ports and the ship owners. The purpose of the article is also to present a systematic examination of a hub and spoke port network based on a competition–cooperation model. The model could also be used by the shipping companies or container terminals to find an optimal strategy in the game and validate their business decisions.
First published online 16 January 2017
Keyword : maritime transport, container terminals, hub-and-spoke network design, game theory, multi-objective optimization, graph optimization
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Asgari, N.; Farahani, R. Z.; Goh, M. 2013. Network design approach for hub ports-shipping companies competition and cooperation, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 48: 1–18. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2012.10.020
Chang, Y.-T.; Lee, S.-Y.; Tongzon, J. L. 2008. Port selection factors by shipping lines: different perspectives between trunk liners and feeder service providers, Marine Policy 32(6): 877–885. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2008.01.003
Chen, C.; Zeng, Q.; Zhang, Z. 2012. An integrating scheduling model for mixed cross-operation in container terminals, Transport 27(4): 405–413. http://doi.org/10.3846/16484142.2012.753642
Chong, E. K. P.; Zak, S. H. 2013. An Introduction to Optimization. 4th edition. Wiley. 640 p.
Colson, B.; Marcotte, P.; Savard, G. 2007. An overview of bi-level optimization, Annals of Operations Research 153(1): 235–256. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-007-0176-2
Dempe, S. 2002. Foundations of Bilevel Programming. Springer. 309 p. http://doi.org/10.1007/b101970
Imai, A.; Shintani, K.; Papadimitriou, S. 2009. Multi-port vs. hub-and-spoke port calls by containerships, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 45(5): 740–757. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2009.01.002
Ishii, M.; Lee, P. T.-W.; Tezuka, K.; Chang, Y.-T. 2013. A game theoretical analysis of port competition, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 49(1): 92–106. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2012.07.007
Liu, Q.; Medda, F. 2009. Port infrastructure efficiency: the Europe-Mediterranean case, International Journal of Shipping and Transport Logistics 1(4): 361–385. http://doi.org/10.1504/IJSTL.2009.027680
Marler, R. T.; Arora, J. S. 2004. Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering, Structural and Multi-disciplinary Optimization 26(6): 369–395. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-003-0368-6
MDSTL. 2012. NAPA: Market Study on the Potential Cargo Capacity of the North Adriatic Ports System in the Container Sector. Final Report 211015R3. 78 p. MDS Transmodal Limited (MDSTL). Available from Internet: http://www.assoporti.it/sites/www.assoporti.it/files/documenti/MDS-%20NAPA%20cntrs%20market%20-%20final%20report.pdf
Meng, Q.; Wang, X. 2011. Intermodal hub-and-spoke network design: Incorporating multiple stakeholders and multi-type containers, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 45(4): 724–742. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2010.11.002
NAPA. 2013. North Adriatic Ports Association (NAPA). Available from Internet: http://www.portsofnapa.com
Nie, P.-Y. 2011. Dynamic discrete-time multi-leader–follower games with leaders in turn, Computers & Mathematics with Applications 61(8): 2039–2043. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2010.08.063
Panayides, P. M.; Wiedmer, R. 2011. Strategic alliances in container liner shipping, Research in Transportation Economics 32(1): 25–38. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2011.06.008
Rasmusen, E. 2006. Games and Information: an Introduction to Game Theory. 4th edition. Wiley-Blackwell. 558 p.
Saeed, N.; Larsen, O. I. 2013. A tale of two ports: extending the Bertrand model along the needs of a case study, in H. Hanappi (Ed.). Game Theory Relaunched, 77–104. http://doi.org/10.5772/54425
Saeed, N.; Larsen, O. I. 2010a. An application of cooperative game among container terminals of one port, European Journal of Operational Research 203(2): 393–403. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2009.07.019
Saeed, N.; Larsen, O. I. 2010b. Container terminal concessions: a game theory application to the case of the ports of Pakistan, Maritime Economics & Logistics 12(3): 237–262. http://doi.org/10.1057/mel.2010.8
Simonella, I.; Pettenati, P.; Balloni, V. 2012. Intermodalità: dalle infrastrutture allo sviluppo dei servizi. Rapporto 2012. Istituto Adriano Olivetti, Italy. 70 p. (in Italian).
Song, D.-P.; Dong, J.-X. 2012. Cargo routing and empty container repositioning in multiple shipping service routes, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 46(10): 1556–1575. http://doi.org/10.1057/mel.2010.8
Toth, P.; Vigo, D. 2014. Vehicle Routing: Problems, Methods, and Applications. 2nd edition. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM). 481 p.
Turocy, T. L.; Stengel, B. V. 2003. Game theory, in H. Bidgoli (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Information Systems, 403–420. http://doi.org/10.1016/B0-12-227240-4/00076-9
Wang, C.; Wang, J. 2011. Spatial pattern of the global shipping network and its hub-and-spoke system, Research in Transportation Economics 32(1): 54–63. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2011.06.010
Wikipedia. 2014. Port of Gioia Tauro. Available from Internet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Gioia_Tauro