A review and analysis of the investment in, and cost structure of, intermodal rail terminals

Wiegmans, Bart; Behdani, Behzad

doi:10.1080/01441647.2017.1297867

Cited by 33 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, q and K are expressed in million TEU, while p and c(= 1) are in euro per TEU and c h (= 0.5) in euro per TEU per year. In this way, it is reflected that the operational variable cost (c) in infrastructure projects is relatively low (Wiegmans & Behdani, 2018). As a simplification, the slope of the demand function is normalised to 1.…”

Section: Case Study Description and Parameter Calibrationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The case of public and private ports with two actors: Capacity investment decisions under congestion and uncertainty

Balliauw

Kort

Meersman

et al. 2020

Case Studies on Transport Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since port capacity investments involve expensive large projects with high uncertainty and irreversibility, we use real options calculations to study the optimal size and timing of the investment decision in new port capacity. This paper focuses on cases where the managing port authority (PA) is responsible for the investment in infrastructure on the one hand. On the other hand, the terminal operating company (TOC) that obtained a concession from the PA to handle the containers, invests in the superstructure. Moreover, the PA is often partly or fully publicly owned, leading to the consideration of social welfare among its objectives. Examples of such container ports include Gioia Tauro in Italy when it was developed, and the port of Luanda in Angola. In the type of ports considered, the PA's strategy could be to urge the TOC to invest in the PA's individual optimum. When a share of the PA is owned publicly, social welfare is to be maximised. In this light, the PA and the TOC could agree to invest at the service ports' single actor optimum and redistribute the additional aggregate gains. Higher public involvement leads to a larger investment that is also made earlier, augmenting benefits generated by the port. This relationship between investment size and timing is exceptional in the real options literature. Moreover, the investment decision is complicated by the fact that port users are averse to congestion and the costs it involves. When this cost or uncertainty are higher, it is found that more capacity will be installed, but at a later moment. Highlights:• The port capacity investment decisions of two actors are studied under uncertainty: a terminal operator and a port authority, which can be (partly or fully) publicly owned.• Higher uncertainty and congestion costs lead to postponing the investment, which will be larger.• More public money involvement leads to larger and earlier investment.• The concession fee allows the port authority to urge the terminal operator to follow the same investment strategy.• The joint investment decision could also result from negotiation.

show abstract

Section: Case Study Description and Parameter Calibrationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, the average total port dues equal 7.35 euro per TEU. The terminal tariff is 69 euro per TEU, as handling a container, involving two moves, costs about 110 euro and the average container is 1.59 TEU (Port of Antwerp, 2017b;Saeed & Larsen, 2010;Wiegmans & Behdani, 2018).…”

Section: Case Study Description and Parameter Calibrationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The case of public and private ports with two actors: Capacity investment decisions under congestion and uncertainty

Balliauw

Kort

Meersman

et al. 2020

Case Studies on Transport Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is perceived as a bottleneck in relation to the insufficient capacity of European railways, including transhipment facilities, in terms of northern and southern routes connecting China and Europe. The improvement of Poland's situation in this area is reflected in EU initiatives and projects, such as RECORDIT, REORIENT or BELOGIC, which aim to improve the efficiency of rail transport (Wiegmans and Behdani, 2018).…”

Section: Specificity Of Logistics In Polandmentioning

confidence: 99%

Logistics Development in European Countries: The Case of Poland

Sadowski¹,

Wąsowska²,

Nowak³

2020

ERSJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The purpose of the article is to show the diversity of logistics development in European countries at the national and regional level, taking into account the countries of Western, Central and Eastern Europe. The focus is on the development of logistics in Poland, a country with a special location in Europe between Germany, the leader in European and global logistics, and Russia. Design/Methodology/Approach: Research includes changes in the volume of freight transport by air, rail, road and sea in 33 countries in 2010-2018. Spatiotemporal analysis of statistical data with the use of GIS (Geographic Information Systems) and ArcMap 10.5 is proposed. Findings: Logistics in Europe is strongly diversified in national and regional terms. In most countries, logistics developed for all modes of transport during the period considered. The development of the logistics system in Poland mainly involved road, rail and sea transport. Air transport of goods increased to a lesser extent. The integration process of Central and Eastern European logistics with German logistics is visible. Practical Implications: The contribution of the research is to show the general interrelationships between logistics policy and initiatives at the national level and changes in the volume of freight transport across the most important transport branches. Originality/Value: Use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to represent the changes occurring in logistics in Europe. Identification of countries and regions with different logistics development models and paths.

show abstract

“…The fact the return of investments takes a long time, independent and individual engagements of the private sector in this field are rare. Furthermore, due to high operational costs in the initial years of terminal exploitation, the terminals often operate without any profit, so a financial intervention of the public sector [12] through different forms of publicprivate partnerships (PPP) [13] is needed. Through PPP, the public and private sectors mutually share expenses, risks, responsibilities, benefits and profits [13,14].…”

Section: Intermodal Transportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financial analysis of the intermodal terminal in Belgrade

Tadić¹,

Petrović-Vujačić²,

Kovač³

2020

Tehnika

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of logistics infrastructure in Serbia is the key to achieving regional competitiveness and economic prosperity of the state. Intermodal terminals have great significance in logistics networks and their development enables the implementation of intermodal transport technologies as well as participation in international goods flows. Belgrade, the national and regional economic centre and an important traffic node, attracts significant intermodal, container flows. For this reason, it represents a location for the development of an intermodal terminal that would play an important role in the logistics network of Serbia and the region as well. This paper analyses the financial justification of the development of an intermodal terminal in Belgrade, based upon four parameters - net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR), benefit-cost ratio (B/C) and investment return period (RP). Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis of the observed parameters regarding the change of input parameter values (the volume of intermodal, container flows and the service price levels) is conducted. Two project funding scenarios are defined according to the involvement of the private sector in overall investments. The result analysis indicates that in both of the scenarios, the development of an intermodal terminal in Belgrade would be financially justified. The sensitivity analysis has shown that the financial justification of the development of the observed intermodal terminal is more sensitive to the change in container flow volumes in comparison with the change in terminal service price levels.

show abstract

A review and analysis of the investment in, and cost structure of, intermodal rail terminals

Cited by 33 publications

References 34 publications

The case of public and private ports with two actors: Capacity investment decisions under congestion and uncertainty

The case of public and private ports with two actors: Capacity investment decisions under congestion and uncertainty

Logistics Development in European Countries: The Case of Poland

Financial analysis of the intermodal terminal in Belgrade

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About