Privatization trends at the world's top-100 container ports

Over recent years, the role of the private sector in seaports has been greatly expanded. Yet, in practice, the extent of privatization in ports can vary significantly, in part due to the different methods employed to bring about private sector participation. This paper identifies and analyses, through a survey of ports, recent trends in regard to privatization at the world's top-100 container ports. The survey has benefitted from, and seeks to extend, a previous survey undertaken by the International Association of Ports and Harbours (IAPH). Findings suggest that, although the influence of private sector actors in ports is growing, the role of public sector agencies also remains significant.     

Privatization trends at the world's top-100 container ports

Over recent years, the role of the private sector in seaports has been greatly expanded. Yet, in practice, the extent of privatization in ports can vary significantly, in part due to the different methods employed to bring about private sector participation. This paper identifies and analyses, through a survey of ports, recent trends in regard to privatization at the world's top-100 container ports. The survey has benefitted from, and seeks to extend, a previous survey undertaken by the International Association of Ports and Harbours (IAPH). Findings suggest that, although the influence of private sector actors in ports is growing, the role of public sector agencies also remains significant.     

The legal framework

The major and minor ports in India operate within different legal frameworks. Both allow privatization, but impose different conditions. Administrative culture has acted as a constraint on privatization in the major ports; private development at the minor ports has been very responsive to the amount of assistance offered by individual States.     

The political economy of ports in the United States and Great Britain

Abstract

This is an exploration of the political economy of ports in the United States and Great Britain. A number of technical, economic, and political issues concerning ports are examined. Particular attention is paid to the institutional evolution of ports from private to public ownership, and its consequences for port efficiency. The paper concludes with a set of recommendations designed to reverse the trend toward port nationalization in both countries.     

Marketing management at the world's major ports

Recent technological developments in maritime transport, particularly in container shipping and larger vessels, are having major repercussions at ports the world over. The latest wave of innovations has increased the level of competition in maritime transport, in particular in port activities. Shippers have many more alternatives available, something that tends to increase the hinterland of each port, precisely by reducing captive hinterlands. Ports are now generally moving towards formulas in which private initiative has a bigger role to play. Increases in competition combined with growth in private initiatives highlight the usefulness of marketing tools in two ways. Externally, because they help to achieve throughputs from remote points of origin and destination, and internally, by aiding the proper coordination of business and organizational activity at a commercial port. The present paper is a transversal study of the current situation of marketing and quality tools at major ports, including the opinions of a range of port commercial and marketing managers. We have also tried to describe the differentiated groups to be found at ports, as a useful methodology for identifying the nearest competition or ports with similar characteristics.     

Marketing management at the world's major ports

Recent technological developments in maritime transport, particularly in container shipping and larger vessels, are having major repercussions at ports the world over. The latest wave of innovations has increased the level of competition in maritime transport, in particular in port activities. Shippers have many more alternatives available, something that tends to increase the hinterland of each port, precisely by reducing captive hinterlands. Ports are now generally moving towards formulas in which private initiative has a bigger role to play. Increases in competition combined with growth in private initiatives highlight the usefulness of marketing tools in two ways. Externally, because they help to achieve throughputs from remote points of origin and destination, and internally, by aiding the proper coordination of business and organizational activity at a commercial port. The present paper is a transversal study of the current situation of marketing and quality tools at major ports, including the opinions of a range of port commercial and marketing managers. We have also tried to describe the differentiated groups to be found at ports, as a useful methodology for identifying the nearest competition or ports with similar characteristics.     

U.S. ports: evolution and structure

U.S. ports are facing competitive pressures similar to those being felt by ports elsewhere around the world. Despite the public enterprise nature of U.S. port authorities, they tend to function as 'business-like' organizations. This enterprise-like approach stems from their evolution from being primarily private railroad ports in the 19th century to public competitive port authorities in the 20th century. This paper provides an overview of the evolution of U.S. ports and the ongoing effect of earlier legislation, the varied resulting institutional structures, and current national and regional level issues. Although there is no national ports plan or strategy in the U.S.A. (the Constitution limits federal actions in the ports field) the federal government is involved in providing dredging services through the Army Corps of Engineers, navigation aids via the Coast Guard and other minor port-related services. U.S. ports typically come under the jurisdiction of state or local governments. Increasing competition coupled with other port issues (growing financial constraints, difficulties in obtaining dredging permits, environmental concerns and restricted landside access) is forcing some U.S. ports to enter into strategic alliances with others at a regional level.     

The potential role of public–private partnerships in the upgrade of port infrastructure: normative and positive considerations

There is a broad consensus on the need for the major expansion of many ports. Traditionally, ports and related facilities have involved significant levels of direct or indirect government ownership or some degree of government financing. Most governments, however, are reluctant to either borrow money to fund the needed additional capital infrastructure or to fund it directly. Public–private partnerships (P3s) are thus an attractive potential option. But are they the answer? This article examines the normative rationales for P3s and presents a positive theory perspective that focuses on the conflicting goals of public and private partners. It argues that the major government impetus for P3s is likely to be for physical port infrastructure with moderate levels of market failure, such as small to medium sized ports, and not for intangible port activities. Furthermore, small to medium sized port P3s are likely to be successful in terms of having relatively low transaction costs and lower total social costs than alternative provision mechanisms. Nonetheless, even in this situation, the different goals of public and private partners may give rise to conflict. Drawing on the global empirical evidence on P3s, this article proposes some institutional design features that will help to ensure P3 success.     

Port reform in Australia: issues in the ownership debate

Australia port reform initiatives have taken on a variety of forms — from out-right sale and transfer of ownership, to the sale of particular assets of infrastructure or services, or to long-term lease arrangements; or in some cases state governments, unable to relinquish control, have opted for corporatization or commercialization strategies. Reform is driven by the belief that ownership impacts on efficiency and efficiency is perceived to suffer if governments either retain ownership or direct control. As a result a major aim of reform is to either remove or distance governments from day to day port operations. The sale of ports removes government control outright and privatized ports are subject to identical regulatory constraints as any company in the private sector. But corporatization strategies are such that government ownership is retained and ports have been transformed into statutory state owned corporations. Effectiveness of this strategy requires legislation to be such that port corporations are free to operate like their private sector counterparts. To date this has not occurred and some serious impediments are emerging which are embedded in legislation and which, rather than reduce, have indeed, increased government control.     

The Indian dry ports sector, pricing policies and opportunities for public-private partnerships

At the time of writing (2010), the world is witnessing the aftermath of the most severe financial sector meltdown in modern economic history caused by the real estate bubble in the United States. Its consequences on the real economy, especially in Europe, are yet to be fathomed, and this of course includes the longer-term impacts on international ocean transportation, ports and the distribution of global production.The economic recession has left the international shipping and port sectors with substantial overcapacity. This has resulted in drastic cost cutting measures on the one hand, and voluntary, often consensual, and coordinated reduction of supply on the other. These measures, together with a noticeable recovery in demand, are gradually leading again to improvement in prices charged by carriers and other transport service providers.In view of the country’s expanse; size of population; and regional inequalities, India’s dry ports (inland cargo consolidation and distribution centres) are seen by the government as a pivot of export-led growth and economic development (Haralambides & Gujar, 2011). Moreover, public and private sectors alike see the coordinated development of dry ports as the only way forward in terms of easing pressures at congested coastal ports, thus improving supply chain efficiency. In spite of this, dry port development and operations are still dominated by the public sector, under prices, capacity, land acquisition policies and other conditions that make private sector participation risky and comparatively unattractive. In order to rationalize dry port capacity and prices, this paper argues in favour of greater devolution through competition-enhancing Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs). The paper puts forward recommendations for the necessary legal, regulatory and general economic policy interventions based on international best practice, while keeping Indian specificities in the right perspective.     

Competitiveness between short sea shipping and road freight transport in mainland port connections; the case of two Greek ports

While road freight transport is essential to any modern economy, short sea shipping (SSS) offers a competitive alternative mode of freight transport in terms of private and social costs, when applied in the connection of mainland ports. This mainly stems from the fact that within the context of the latter costs, accidents and environmental impacts in many road links constitute undesirable externalities with which road freight transport is heavily burdened. This paper compares the aforementioned economics of road and sea transport with reference to the connection of the port of Patra (the main western freight gate of Greece) with West Attica (the biggest Greek industrial centre), aiming at providing a viable solution towards the promotion of SSS in the transport chain between mainland ports.     

Sustainable development in seaports: a multi-case study

Seaports are a vital part of the maritime transport industry and have a key role in integrated transport chains and regional economies. However, ports are also sites of environmental pollution originating from land-based activities, ship movements and ports’ own activities. It is, therefore, increasingly recognised that economic growth in ports must be balanced with environmental protection and social progress. This has led to enhanced appreciation of the need for sustainable development (SD) in ports. Whilst much has been written about port environmental practices in European and American ports, there is limited synthesis and comparison of sustainable port practices from different parts of the world. Furthermore, in-depth case analysis and critical examination of the practices and challenges of sustainable port development in a globalised era is limited. This paper presents findings from a qualitative multi-case study that aimed to compare sustainable policies and practices of ports in four different continents and to understand the dilemmas, challenges and opportunities they face in attaining SD. This paper reports findings pertaining to the following research questions: (1) What policy frameworks do ports adopt to attain sustainable development? (2) What specific sustainable practices do ports utilise to manage environmental aspects such as air pollution, water quality, ballast water, dredging and disposal of dredged materials, waste disposal, hazardous substances and land/resource use? (3) What are the driving and constraining forces in achieving sustainable development in ports? Port authorities were studied by reviewing documents and secondary data. The following ports were studied: Port of Long Beach (USA), Port of Rotterdam Authority (The Netherlands), Sydney Ports Corporation (Australia) and Transnet Limited that owns and manages South African ports. Findings of the study demonstrate that the SD paradigm has gained momentum, albeit to differing degrees, in the functioning, organisation and the very ethos of case study ports. An important theme from all case studies is that, whilst there is definite progress towards SD, several practices deemed to be sustainable can be controversial and must be critically examined from the perspectives of different stakeholders including shippers, port-related businesses and the local and global community. Lack of data to monitor environmental impacts, economic costs of implementing sustainable practices and complexities of international, regional and national regulations were other constraining factors. On the other hand, reconciling differences between stakeholders and capitalising on economic opportunities, operational efficiencies and cost savings offered by environmental friendliness can advance port SD. Public–private partnerships and policies negotiated by involving all stakeholders were found to foster port sustainability. Most importantly, this study found that, with globalisation, environmental impacts of ports are not always localised. ‘Sustainable’ practices can have unintended consequences in other parts of the world. Therefore, globalisation necessitates a more critical and global analysis of port operations and environment practices in order to be truly sustainable. Although the scope of the research findings is limited to case study ports, the lessons drawn can be constructively applied to any port operating within an institutional system of structured SD.     

Container terminals in South Korea: problems and panaceas

Korea has achieved remarkable economic growth over the last three decades. This has largely been due to the adoption of export-oriented economic policies. This economic development has resulted in a rapid increase in export and import cargos. Since the foreign trade of Korea is carried predominantly by sea transport (approximately 99.8% in terms of volume), ports play a crucial role in this process. Although recent port developments are aimed at keeping pace with ever-growing seaborne cargoes, problems persist, especially insufficient port capacity and inefficient management and operations. As a consequence, the ports of Korea suffer from serious port congestion. This problem is particularly acute in Pusan, the fifth largest container port in the world. In the past, all ports in Korea were controlled and administered by the Korea Maritime and Port Administration which was a public port authority. In August 1996, the Korean government established a new government organization, the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (MMAF), with a remit to control and manage its seaports and other related activities and to improve management efficiency in the maritime area. As a way of solving problems related to port congestion and other sources of inefficiency, the new MMAF has launched several new port development schemes. In this context, this paper will discuss (1) the extent of congestion in Korean ports, especially Pusan, the major seaport of the country; and (2) governmental and commercial reaction to solving the problems, including measures such as new port development schemes aimed at attracting private and foreign finance. From this analysis, a strategy for port development in developing countries may be inferred.     

Port competition in Latin America and the Caribbean: the role of concessions and competition policy

Appropriate port regulation and competitive forces tend to be related to higher levels of operational and economic performance of ports. From a policy-making perspective, pursuing efficiency and securing competition in ports to reach a level playing field is a two-step process requiring (1) ex-ante regulations to set the rules that maximize the competition for the market, especially when the policy objective is to attract private operations to ports on competitive concession processes and (2) ex-post competition policy to monitor and preserve competition in the market. This paper studies port regulation in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) from a competition perspective, analyzing both ex-ante and ex-post policies implemented in the region. The analysis reveals that the competitive environment in LAC is low, giving room for possible anticompetitive practices in the LAC port sector. Since the end of the 1990s, approximately 80% of container terminals in the region were granted to only five companies. Chile and Mexico have been found to be the best practices in the region, with better conditions assuring robust competition in the market. The main policy implication from this analysis is the need for a stronger involvement of antitrust agencies throughout the port concession processes.     

Sustainability and national policy in UK port development

Given the private sector character of the UK port system it might well be thought that, so far as port development is concerned, the market ruled. There are of course permissions to be obtained, including planning consent under the Town and Country Planning Acts; but this process has not so far been considered to interfere with market function. Ports are already well used to the process of obtaining approval, to negotiations with objectors and environmental interests, and to mitigating the effects of development when defining projects and seeking approval.

However, as ports policy is being brought into line with transport policy generally, and in particular with Government policy for sustainable development, ports are being faced with a more challenging regulatory framework. The search for sustainable transport is leading Government towards a broader based approach to the approval of development applications in which market need and commercial viability are simply two of a number of considerations which ports must take into account in designing projects which also meet environmental concerns.

There has been a long standing requirement for developers of major projects to carry out Environmental Impact Assessments. In addition Government policy is set out in a number of publications, applying sustainability and the associated “New Approach to Transport Assessment” (NATA) to the ports sector. In a separate and broader initiative it has also considered a radical reform of the planning system and the establishment of national priorities for infrastructure combined with a simplification of the Public Inquiry process. In the event it has been decided not to establish national priorities in the ports sector, although the aim of simplification of the Inquiry process remains.

The aim of this paper is to explore the emerging theoretical and practical issues arising within the development approval process. These are of most concern in the development of major projects for cargoes which have broad hinterlands, and where there are competing locations for new facilities. The most important example of this is in the deep sea container sector where there is a demand for new capacity and a choice of widely spaced locations in the south east of the UK. Some comment will be made on this sector and on the issues arising at the Public Inquiries for the proposed container port developments at Dibden Bay (Southampton) and the London Gateway at Shellhaven on the north bank of the Thames.     

Sustainability and national policy in UK port development

Given the private sector character of the UK port system it might well be thought that, so far as port development is concerned, the market ruled. There are of course permissions to be obtained, including planning consent under the Town and Country Planning Acts; but this process has not so far been considered to interfere with market function. Ports are already well used to the process of obtaining approval, to negotiations with objectors and environmental interests, and to mitigating the effects of development when defining projects and seeking approval.

However, as ports policy is being brought into line with transport policy generally, and in particular with Government policy for sustainable development, ports are being faced with a more challenging regulatory framework. The search for sustainable transport is leading Government towards a broader based approach to the approval of development applications in which market need and commercial viability are simply two of a number of considerations which ports must take into account in designing projects which also meet environmental concerns.

There has been a long standing requirement for developers of major projects to carry out Environmental Impact Assessments. In addition Government policy is set out in a number of publications, applying sustainability and the associated “New Approach to Transport Assessment” (NATA) to the ports sector. In a separate and broader initiative it has also considered a radical reform of the planning system and the establishment of national priorities for infrastructure combined with a simplification of the Public Inquiry process. In the event it has been decided not to establish national priorities in the ports sector, although the aim of simplification of the Inquiry process remains.

The aim of this paper is to explore the emerging theoretical and practical issues arising within the development approval process. These are of most concern in the development of major projects for cargoes which have broad hinterlands, and where there are competing locations for new facilities. The most important example of this is in the deep sea container sector where there is a demand for new capacity and a choice of widely spaced locations in the south east of the UK. Some comment will be made on this sector and on the issues arising at the Public Inquiries for the proposed container port developments at Dibden Bay (Southampton) and the London Gateway at Shellhaven on the north bank of the Thames.     

Public goods and the public financing of major European seaports

Seaports are recognized for their importance in facilitating trade growth and associated economic development. These attributes often give rise to the notion that seaports, or infrastructure elements of seaports, are public goods. Public goods are regarded as goods or services which a market acting in isolation might have difficulty in providing, or at least providing in sufficient quantity and/or at a competitive price. An important element of a public good relates to its non-rival consumption, the implication being that it is impossible to exclude anyone, whether they pay or not. Key questions this paper seeks to address are, what constitutes public goods in seaports, to what extent is it necessary for the public sector to provide these goods, and can such intervention lead to market distortion in respect of competing ports? The paper describes the more common examples of public goods in seaports. This is followed by discussion of public and private sector investment at major north European seaports. The paper considers the potential for market distortion due to public sector expenditure on so-called public goods in seaports, and proposes that a more cohesive policy for major ports, particularly those very large containerports serving a common European hinterland, is necessary in order to deliver a sustainable transport system in the long term.     

The role of dry port in hub-and-spoke network under Belt and Road Initiative

Dry port plays increasingly an important role in the integration of inland regions with seaports, and cross-border inland ports especially in the context of Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) originally proposed by China. This paper studies a logistics network connecting the inland regions by dry ports based on a two-stage logistical gravity model. First, a basic logistical gravity model is developed to analyze the radiated inland regions from dry ports, where the logistical quality of dry ports is calculated by principal component analysis. Second, considering mutual impacts among dry ports, seaports and cross-border inland ports, the influence of logistical gravity on the network is examined by using a coefficient based on the Ordered Weighted Averaging Operator in multi-attribute decision theory. An improved logistical gravity model is further developed to investigate the logistical connections among various ports (e.g. dry ports, seaports and cross-border inland ports; hub and feeder ports). Then, a hub-and-spoke network can be established. Dry ports are potential to connect to the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road. So a Chinese case is used to verify the proposed method. The strategies of embedding inland regions in the BRI are discussed based on the experimental studies.     

Productivity change in Nigerian seaports after reform: a Malmquist productivity index decomposition approach

ABSTRACT

During the 1990s, Nigerian seaports were considered inefficient, unsafe due to massive cargo theft (wharf rat phenomenon) and one of the most expensive port systems in the world. This resulted in long turnaround times for ships and increased container dwell times. As a result, port operations were transferred to the private sector through concession contracts. This paper employs a Malmquist productivity index (MPI) technique to benchmark pre-and post-reform total factor productivity growth of the six major Nigeria seaports (Apapa, Calabar, Onne, Port Harcourt, TinCan Island and Warri) for the period 2000–2011 which represents six years before (2000–2005) and six years after (2006–2011) the reform. The results indicate progress in technical efficiency of the ports after reform but deterioration in technological progress. Overall productivity growth was higher in the pre-concession period compared to the post-concession period. The source of pre-concession period productivity growth was technological progress while the change in productivity of the post-concession period is generated by an increase in scale efficiency. This suggests that concessionaires have not brought in the much anticipated investment in modern technology to drive port efficiency. The ports of Calabar and Apapa experienced the highest productivity growth while lowest result was Onne.     

西方港口民营化经验对我国的启示

在世界港口业发生变革的进程中,港口民营化在港口经营管理中是至关重要的一环,对港口今后的发展有着深远的影响。分析了西方国家和中国港口民营化现状,对几种港口民营化情况做了研究和比较,最终阐述了西方港口民营化经验对我国的启示。