“…(i.e. Liu, 1995;Baños-Pino et al, 1999;Martínez Budría et al, 1999, Coto Millán et al, 2000Valentine and Gray, 2001;Martin, 2002;Estache et al, 2002;Bonilla et al, 2002;Barros, 2003;Barros and Athanassiou, 2004;Estache et al, 2004;González and Trujillo, 2004;Barros, 2005and De, 2006 This is the main focus of this section. The exercise is however not free of problems when trying to apply it to a multi-country setting rather than to a specific country, simply because there is no homogeneous information system yet.…”
Because of their critical strategic role, ports have all traditionally been subject to some form of government control even if the legal form and the intensity of this control have varied across countries. The member countries of the European Union have not been different from the rest of the world in this respect. A significant difference however is the recurrent effort to integrate, in a coordinated way, the port sector in a transeuropean transport network (TEN-T) through the adoption of a common legal framework. In this context, if the objective of the reforms is to ensure that port networks, integrated in combined transport networks, become competitors of the road network, the concept of port efficiency becomes central. This paper provides an overview of the evolution of the European Port Legislation and shows how comparative economic measures can be used to highlight the scope for port efficiency improvements, essential to allow short sea shipping transport to compete with road transport in Europe. To our knowledge, this paper is also the first effort of estimating technical efficiency of European Port Authorities. The average port efficiency in 2002 was estimated to be around 60%, denoting that ports could have handled 40% more traffic with the same resources.
“…(i.e. Liu, 1995;Baños-Pino et al, 1999;Martínez Budría et al, 1999, Coto Millán et al, 2000Valentine and Gray, 2001;Martin, 2002;Estache et al, 2002;Bonilla et al, 2002;Barros, 2003;Barros and Athanassiou, 2004;Estache et al, 2004;González and Trujillo, 2004;Barros, 2005and De, 2006 This is the main focus of this section. The exercise is however not free of problems when trying to apply it to a multi-country setting rather than to a specific country, simply because there is no homogeneous information system yet.…”
Because of their critical strategic role, ports have all traditionally been subject to some form of government control even if the legal form and the intensity of this control have varied across countries. The member countries of the European Union have not been different from the rest of the world in this respect. A significant difference however is the recurrent effort to integrate, in a coordinated way, the port sector in a transeuropean transport network (TEN-T) through the adoption of a common legal framework. In this context, if the objective of the reforms is to ensure that port networks, integrated in combined transport networks, become competitors of the road network, the concept of port efficiency becomes central. This paper provides an overview of the evolution of the European Port Legislation and shows how comparative economic measures can be used to highlight the scope for port efficiency improvements, essential to allow short sea shipping transport to compete with road transport in Europe. To our knowledge, this paper is also the first effort of estimating technical efficiency of European Port Authorities. The average port efficiency in 2002 was estimated to be around 60%, denoting that ports could have handled 40% more traffic with the same resources.
“…Empirical estimations for the port production function have been performed by Chang (1978) and Tongzon (1993), whereas Kim and Sachis (1986), Martínez-Budría et al (2003), Martínez-Budría et al (1999), and Jara- Díaz et al (2002) estimated the cost functions of ports for both single-output and multiple-output cases. Using a single frontier function, Liu (1995), Notteboom et al (2000), and Estache et al (2002) estimated production frontiers or cost frontiers while recognising that some ports may not be at the efficient frontier.…”
Container ports are a major component of international trade and the global supply chain. Hence, the improvement of port efficiency can have a significant impact on the wider maritime economy. This paper deconstructs a representation in the existing literature that neglects the heterogeneity of individual and group-specific terminal operators. In its place, we present a hierarchical model to make a connection between efficiency and terminal operator group characteristics. The paper develops a stochastic frontier model that controls not only individual heterogeneity but also group-specific variations. The model decomposes the total stochastic derivation from the frontier into inefficiency, individual heterogeneity, group-specific variations, and noise components, with the estimation being performed using Markov chain Monte
Highlights• We decompose individual and group-specific variations in frontier analysis.• This study is at the terminal level rather than port level.• Inefficiency is overestimated by a homogeneous frontier analysis.• Terminal operator groups generate more terminal throughput.• Terminal operator groups are more efficient than individual operators.
“…The basic idea is that if efficiency change has occurred over a long period, temporal changes in efficiency can be attributed to two different sources related to port conditions, planning and management. These are: (a) frontier shift effects and (b) catch-up effects (Cheon 2007a, Estache, González, and Trujillo 2002, Estache, De La Fe, and Trujillo 2004. The frontier shift effects involve shift in the productive efficiency frontier and occur as a result of significant changes in technological progress.…”
Section: Methodsologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Prior to reform, the Nigerian port sector was characterised by poor performance compared to other West African ports. The port system was characterised by an over-bloated workforce, corrupt practices, insecurity of cargo, underinvestment, obsolete infrastructure, limited integration with inland transport and excessive charges (Mohiuddin 2006 There are studies such as Estache, González, and Trujillo (2002), that have investigated the productivity of Mexican ports after reform, Barros, Assaf, and Ibiwoye (2010), and Barros and Peypoch (2012) that investigated the productivity of African seaports using ports from Angola, Mozambique and Nigeria but no study has looked at the influence of Nigerian ports reform on the productivity of the ports. The Nigeria port privatisation is a guinea-pig for studying the impact of wholesale concessions on the performance of national ports in Africa and indeed the whole World, due to the manner and speed in which the programme was executed.…”
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 Overall productivity growth was higher in the pre-concession period compared to the postconcession 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.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.