CHƯƠng trình dự kiến tham dự HỘi thảo quốc tế TẠi tp hcm thời gian: từ ngày 8 đến ngày 10 tháng 12 năm 2011 Thành phần: 24 cán bộ, giảng viên của trường Đại học Thương mại


Figure 1: Port foreland and hinterland



tải về 1.63 Mb.
trang4/12
Chuyển đổi dữ liệu08.04.2018
Kích1.63 Mb.
#36868
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12

Figure 1: Port foreland and hinterland

Source: Rodrigue, J.P and Notteboom, T. (2006) Challenges in the Maritime-Land Interface: Port Hinterlands and Regionalization. Report prepared for the Korean Government, Ministry of Maritime Affairs & Fisheries, The Master Development Plan for Port Logistics Parks in Korea.

Prior to the era of containerization, the importance of a port could be secured by its exclusive hinterland, which usually embrace the port city and the surrounding region (Hayut, 1987). However, the development of containerization as well as intermodality has blurred traditional hinterland boundaries. Container can be transshipped several times in different ports as well as transported by several transportation modes in domestic without intervening inside goods. As a result, import/export cargoes can have different route options. Freight from Germany can be shipped overseas via Antwerp, Rotterdam, Bremerhaven or Hamburg. Consequently, exclusive hinterlands have been increasingly transferred into common hinterlands where different players can get the share; hence a port can no longer depend on natural gateways to rich hinterlands (Slack, 1993).

Competition for captive traffic has become aggressive. In line with the expansion of hinterland transport network, some ports may lose their regional traffic at the hands of others. For many ports, the connection with hinterland is in a state of flux (Hilling and Hoyle, 1984). Notteboom (2008) mentioned that rarely has a port captive hinterland in the Hamburg-Le Havre range. For instance, Antwerp competes strongly with Rotterdam for local and European hinterland, with Le Havre for French cargoes, with Bremen and Hamburg for traffic to/from Germany, the Alpine region, Northern Italy, Central and Eastern Europe.

In the global supply chain, ports are subjected to many challenges. Port choice has become increasingly the decision of shipping lines. It is the fact that ports are not selected by shippers, but by carriers (Blumenhagen, 1981; Lago, Malchow & Kanafani, 2001). The status of ports is declining; ports are more based upon shipping lines and become pawns in the game of global transportation system (Slack, 1993). They are doing business with powerful clients, who possess strong bargaining power vis-à-vis terminal operations and inland transport operations (Notteboom & Winkelmans, 2001). Ports may spend a significant amount of money for container traffic without the guarantee of use, so containerization is likened to a lottery (Slack, 2001). Their risk of loosing important customers can derive not only from the weakness in port infrastructure, terminal operation or inland connection but from the change in customers’s strategies related to service networks or service providers as well (Carbone and De Martino, 2003). In the middle of 2011, that Maersk Line restructured its network in Mediterranean Sea would cease its operation at the transshipment hub of Gioia Tauro (Italy). About 25 percent throughput of the port would be lost due to the movement of the port’s largest customer (Barnard, 2011).

Conventionally, demand for maritime transport is derived demand, which is generated by the demand for products. Nowadays, it should be an integrated demand, which is emanated by the need to minimize costs, enhance reliability, and add value and other factors pertaining to the carriage of goods from manufacturers to consumers (Panayides, 2006). In the conceptual metamorphosis of the transport system, cargo movements have been viewed in light of the total distribution system (Hayut, 1987). Consequently, it is impossible to see ports as individual places where handle cargoes between sea and land but members within supply chains.

The competition is more and more determined by supply chains, not by individual ports. A port is selected not merely by its service packages, but more significantly, by the quality and reliability of the entire network, in that, it is just a node. A port should be a member of supply chain, in which different parties combine to bring value to final consumers (Carbonea and De Martino, 2003). Port competition is on the basis that ports are embedded in the supply chain that offers shippers greater value and competitive advantage (Robinson, 2002). Successful ports in the 21st century will be ports that are “customer led”, understand customer needs and can provide “best-in-class” performance (Notteeboom & Wilkemans, 2001; Notteboom, 2007). The attractiveness of a port will count on the link in a specific supply chain, effective service packages for ship and cargo, as well as good hinterland connection.

2. Sea ports integration

It is the fact that ports have been no longer stops in end-to-end transport chains, but intermediaries between points of production and points of consumption in the global supply chain. Nowadays, ports have been less and less like a bucket system, where each bucket has its own storage capacity, but more and more like valves at pipeline junctions, where flows are channeled a long several routes, or accumulated into one big flow (Hall, 2007).

In addition, ports are among the very few sites in the supply chain that can bring together various members thanks to their positions as key intermodal transport intersections (Bichou & Gray, 2004, 2005). Therefore, apart from the traditional interface between sea and land, ports are ideal locations for value-added activities. The conventional role of ports has been altered, the importance of traditional waterfront services has been decreased and new value-added functions have been provided in seaports (Hayut, 1987). Some empirical studies indicated that it is possible for ports to charge higher price as long as they offer value-added services perceived by their clients (Panayides, 2007; Song & Panayides, 2008). Some new services in ports have been realized such as assembly, packaging, localizing and customizing, installation and instruction, quality control and product testing, product training and bonded exhibition, storage, material handling, cross docking, consolidation and break bulk (ESCAP, 2002; UNCTAD, 2004).

One of the major trends in the port industry is to develop logistics centers, for example free trade zones or international logistics zones (ESCAP, 2005). The strategy is aim to accommodate value-added logistics activities and to attract global companies. Thanks to these specific logistics zones, ports are able to secure freight volume, attract foreign investment and create new employment. Different models of logistics centers in ports around the world have been viewed in various issues (see more in ESCAP, 2002, 2005; Jacobs & Hall, 2007; Pettit & Beresford, 2009; Wang & Cheng, 2010, WB ,2007).






tải về 1.63 Mb.

Chia sẻ với bạn bè của bạn:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12




Cơ sở dữ liệu được bảo vệ bởi bản quyền ©hocday.com 2024
được sử dụng cho việc quản lý

    Quê hương