Global maritime networks

Frémont, Antoine

doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2007.01.005

Cited by 137 publications

(84 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While there is some regional orientation, many maritime shipping companies have established true global liner service networks, see e.g. Frémont (2007) on the Maersk case. More recently a similar process took place in the port operation industry.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The corporate geography of global container terminal operators

Notteboom

Rodrigue

2012

Maritime Policy & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The terminal and stevedoring industry is confronted with several challenges, including economies of scale in maritime shipping and competition from new entrants, in particular from container carriers, logistics companies and investment groups, the massification of hinterland distribution and stringent performance requirements from its customers. In response to the concentration trend that is unfolding in container shipping, a number of terminal operators have opted for scale increases and the development of global networks. One of the most multinational industries known to exist has emerged within global freight distribution. There is thus an emerging corporate geography in the container terminal sector with issues related to the similarities or differences among terminal locations, the processes leading to the expansion of these holdings and the interactions they maintain as nodes within the global freight distribution system. The paper deals with the geographical characteristics of the investment strategies of global terminal operators in the container industry. It will demonstrate that terminal operators are becoming multinational enterprises (MNEs) with varying degrees of involvement in the main cargo handling markets around the world. It analyzes how the global terminal networks emerged and to what extent the global terminal operators are really "global". It also aims at unravelling the corporate geography of the investment strategies of global terminal operators such as Hutchison Ports Holding, PSA, DP World and APM Terminals, but also operators that are more regionally focused, such as Ports America, Eurogate, SSA and ICTSI.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The corporate geography of global container terminal operators

Notteboom

Rodrigue

2012

Maritime Policy & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From a geographic viewpoint (H2-H3), carriers involved in trade lanes originating from Far East are more inclined to cooperate while large carriers prefer to operate and cooperate along transoceanic lanes. Only Evergreen Line and Cosco Container Line largely cooperate in the Intraregional Asian lane (Frémont, 2007;Ferrari et al, 2008).…”

Section: Discussion and Implications For Academics And Practitionersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The latter simply shows the willingness to stipulate agreements without taking into consideration the multiplying effect on the production capacity and the implications on the overall commercial capacity. In this regard, the rather conservative approach traditionally adopted by the leading carriers (often labelled as 'independent', Slack et al, 2002;Frémont, 2007) suggests a cautious use of leverage for preserving operational and commercial independence. Therefore, we can expect that: H4 Larger carriers are less inclined to resort to a higher 'leverage effect' when joining cooperative agreements.…”

Section: 'Leveraging' the Operated Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In recent years, the search for economies of scale has experienced a dramatic acceleration, crossing an important dimensional threshold for vessel size (i.e., 18,000 TEU vessels). The deployment of such mega-vessels potentially represents a critical point in shaping alliance, as just a few top carriers have such large vessels (Frémont, 2007). Therefore, given the limited number of available partners willing to achieve high economies of scale, we suggest that:…”

Section: 'Leveraging' the Operated Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Measuring the scope of inter-firm agreements in the container shipping industry: an empirical assessment

Parola

Caschili

Medda

et al. 2014

IJSTL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In container shipping industry inter-firm agreements are becoming progressively popular as ship-owners share their slot capacity with commercial partners in order to have fully loaded container ships and reduce financial risk. This manuscript focuses on the cooperative agreements among shipping firms, i.e., vessel sharing and slot charter agreements within consortia and strategic alliances. Through a quantitative approach based on network and OLS regression analysis, we scrutinise the propensity to cooperate, the geographic extent and 'leveraging effect' generated by this commercial practise on the container-shipping industry. Results show that carriers, usually regarded as independent, are instead fairly cooperative, especially when involved in trade lanes originating from the Far East. Finally, we show that carriers increase their commercial objectives by leveraging the operated fleet capacity. We conclude with some implications for managers and practitioners as well as a discussion on limitations and future extensions of this study. Measuring the scope of inter-firm agreements in the container shipping industry 467

show abstract

“…Taaffe et al focused on spatial relationships of the port system [14]. The study described how concentration and de-concentration evolution over time and space is the main direction in port systems research [8,15]. In general, port activities concentrated on one or two geographical locations to enjoy economies of scale [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional Differentiation and Sustainability: A New Stage of Development in the Chinese Container Port System

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adjacent ports played a significant role in the evolution of the port system. In our study, we selected five pairs (i.e., Dalian-Yingkou, Qingdao-Yantai, Shanghai-Ningbo, Xiamen-Quanzhou, and Shenzhen-Guangzhou) of the most important adjacent ports in China to reveal the recent trend of China unique port system development; how and why will port system development be de-concentrated; and integrate the conceptual modal into in-depth analysis. The major findings are as follows: (1) There is functional differentiation in adjacent ports. To some big ports' sustainability, they focus on foreign trade while other small ports, in order to achieve sustainable development, they focus on domestic trade; (2) First-mover advantage and dislocation competition is a mechanism of China ports functional differentiation; (3) Shanghai and Ningbo are unique in that both ports are similarly focused on foreign trade because they both have deep-water harbors, excellent geographical location, export-oriented hinterland economy, and close foreign investment relationships.

show abstract

Global maritime networks

Cited by 137 publications

References 16 publications

The corporate geography of global container terminal operators

The corporate geography of global container terminal operators

Measuring the scope of inter-firm agreements in the container shipping industry: an empirical assessment

Functional Differentiation and Sustainability: A New Stage of Development in the Chinese Container Port System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About