Disentangling cross-border interactions

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to disentangle the interactions between logistics operators and government stakeholders in cross-border logistics operations with a specific focus on the UK and Brazil. Design/methodology/approach The research builds on supporting literature. The comparative cases of the UK and Brazil are examined by reference to an extensive series of focus group workshops as well as a series of interviews with key informants. Care was taken to make sure that comprehensive engagement the respective business and government communities were in place, and that there were opportunities to feedback on the analysis. Findings Suggestions were provided on how to improve the business–government interactions in cross-borders logistics operations. The analysis considered transaction costs and scope for trade facilitation. The research also helped produce a descriptive model of business–government interactions in cross-border logistics operations. Research limitations/implications The paper points to new directions in the understanding of how businesses interact with government agencies, and the kind of issues they face in cross-border logistics operations. However, the research only looked at two countries and there is significant scope for further enquiry within the logistics literature. Practical implications Reduced transaction costs at the border and subsequent economic opportunities for the UK and Brazil. Social implications A list of practical reform recommendations informed by the business communities of the UK and Brazil. Originality/value This paper’s original contribution to the literature is its framework for the analysis of transaction costs associated with the business–government interactions in cross-border logistics operations. In addition to the resulting findings in Brazil and the UK it may serve as a template for research elsewhere.

What Can the Brunei Government Do to Encourage Halal Logistics Adoption: Lessons from the Literature

“…Understandably, and as mentioned earlier, these terms are identical to one another (Overstreet et al, 2011). It is therefore evident that relief supply chain (Sheu, 2011(Sheu, , 2016Paul and Wang, 2015;Dube et al, 2016;Dubey et al, 2018;Acar and Kaya, 2019), environmental/sustainable supply chain (McKinnon, 2010a;Hall and Matos, 2010;Ehrgott et al, 2013;Sirilertsuwan et al, 2018), cross-border logistics (Hausman et al, 2010;Davis and Friske, 2013;Grainger and Morini, 2019), and halal logistics Ngah et al, 2015; are the regularly studied fields.…”

Regulatory bark and legal bite: how corruption and country institutional environments influence international logistics performance

“…, 2021; Paulraj and Chen, 2007; Rao and Goldsby, 2009). Grainger and Morini (2019) report that the risk of bureaucratic delays in cross-border shipments is the significant variance in resulting lead times. Wagner and Bode (2008) operationalize supply chain risk to include a construct for regulatory, legal and bureaucratic risk.…”

“…, 2012), and (2) over 50% of global manufacturing by value is traded across one or more international borders (Ortiz-Ospina and Roser, 2017). Bureaucratic delays in cross-border shipments' ILP can be significant (Grainger and Morini, 2019), increasing products' inventory costs, landed costs and reducing their competitiveness (Hausman et al. , 2013).…”

The Effect of the Exclusion of the Authorized Economic Operator for Customs Brokers in Brazil

“…In the same year that ISO 28000 was released, the AEO (Authorized Economic Operator) was introduced by the WCO, with its main goal being to boost the spirit of trade facilitation, that is about developing a regulatory environment within which transaction costs are minimized, in a perspective of mutual cooperation, in which Grainger & Morini (2019) designed an original model of analysis.…”