Share:


A research on operational patterns in container liner shipping

    Nguyen Khoi Tran Affiliation
    ; Hans-Dietrich Haasis Affiliation

Abstract

This article studies operational patterns in container liner shipping with the emphasis on End-To-End (ETE), Round-The-World (RTW), and pendulum patterns. The first research issue deals with their deployment on designing shipping routes on the East–West corridor. The second issue compares their operational characteristics to realize their strength and weakness. The empirical work is carried out using 2074 route records of the top 20 shipping lines from 1995 to 2011. During the period, ETE was the dominant pattern. From 81 to 93% of the surveyed routes operated under this pattern. Pendulum was in favour in the early 2000s, but its use later declined. Round the world had been expected as an innovation in the industry but it was employed limitedly. An important feature of RTW and pendulum patterns is to include multiple trades on a single route, which can bring about the advantages of traffic bundling and less fleet requirement. On the other hand, multiple trades result in more complexity of these patterns, displayed through long voyage distance and time, a greater number of visited regions and more ports of call. Additionally, the deployment of mega vessels is also restricted due to traffic discrepancy between trade lanes.

Keyword : maritime transport geography, container liner shipping, operational pattern, end-to-end, round-the-world, pendulum

How to Cite
Tran, N. K., & Haasis, H.-D. (2018). A research on operational patterns in container liner shipping. Transport, 33(3), 619-632. https://doi.org/10.3846/transport.2018.1571
Published in Issue
Jul 10, 2018
Abstract Views
62
PDF Downloads
70
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

References

Angeloudis, P.; Bichou, K.; Bell, M. G. H. 2007. Security and reliability of the liner container-shipping network: analysis of robustness using a complex network framework, in K. Bichou, M. G. H. Bell, A. Evans (Eds.). Risk Management in Port Operations, Logistics and Supply Chain Security, London, 95–106. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315850504

Ashar, A. 2002. Revolution now, Containerisation International (January): 56–59.

Asahr, A. 2000. 2020 vision, Containerisation International (January): 35–39.

Ashar, A. 1999. The fourth revolution, Containerisation International (December): 57–61.

Aversa, R.; Botter, R. C.; Haralambides, H. E.; Yoshizaki, H. T. Y. 2005. A Mixed integer programming model on the location of a hub port in the east Coast of South America, Maritime Economics & Logistics 7(1): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.mel.9100121

Baird, A. J. 2006. Optimising the container transhipment hub location in Northern Europe, Journal of Transport Geography 14(3): 195–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2004.12.004

Boyes, J. R. C. 1985. Yangming prepares to swing into action with pendulum service, Containerisation International (August): 30–33.

Chen, C.; Zeng, Q. 2010. Designing container shipping network under changing demand and freight rates, Transport 25(1): 46–57. https://doi.org/10.3846/transport.2010.07

Chineseshipping. 2011. Grand China Bundles SPX and TPX Loops into California Butterfly Service. Available from Internet: http://www1.chineseshipping.com.cn/en/news/newsinfo.jsp?id=265551

CI. 2012. Containerisation International Yearbook 2012. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 2011. Containerisation International Yearbook 2011. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 2010. Containerisation International Yearbook 2010. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 2009. Containerisation International Yearbook 2009. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 2008. Containerisation International Yearbook 2008. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 2007. Containerisation International Yearbook 2007. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 2006. Containerisation International Yearbook 2006. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 2005. Containerisation International Yearbook 2005. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 2004. Containerisation International Yearbook 2004. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 2003. Containerisation International Yearbook 2003. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 2002. Containerisation International Yearbook 2002. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 2001. Containerisation International Yearbook 2001. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 2000. Containerisation International Yearbook 2000. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 1999. Containerisation International Yearbook 1999. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 1998. Containerisation International Yearbook 1998. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 1997. Containerisation International Yearbook 1997. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

CI. 1996. Containerisation International Yearbook 1996. Containerisation International (CI). Informa Publisher.

Container Insight. 1988. Ming pendulum, Container Insight (January): 8–9.

Cullinane, K.; Khanna, M. 2000. Economies of scale in large containerships: optimal size and geographical implications, Journal of Transport Geography 8(3): 181–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6923(00)00010-7

De Monie, G. 2001. Re-evaluating the economics of transshipment, in TOC 2001: Terminal Operations Conference, 20 June 2001, Lisbon, Portugal.

Drewry. 2013. Annual Container Market Review and Forecast. Drewry Shipping Consultants Publisher, London.

Drewry. 2012. Annual Container Market Review and Forecast. Drewry Shipping Consultants Publisher, London.

Drewry. 2004. Annual Container Market Review and Forecast. Drewry Shipping Consultants Publisher, London.

Drewry. 2001. Annual Container Market Review and Forecast. Drewry Shipping Consultants Publisher, London.

Drewry. 2000. Annual Container Market Review and Forecast. Drewry Shipping Consultants Publisher, London.

Drewry. 1986. Traffic and Competition on Round-the-World Container Routes. Drewry Shipping Consultants, London.

Ducruet, C. 2013. Network diversity and maritime flows, Journal of Transport Geography 30: 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.03.004

Dynamar. 2007. Transhipment & Feedering: Trades, Operators, Ships, Dynamar B.V., Alkmaar, Netherlands. 15 p. Available from Internet: https://www.dynamar.com/system/table_of_contents/1/original/Feedering%202007%20-%20Contents%20Overview%20and%20Preface.pdf

Fleming, D. K. 2010. Patterns of international ocean trade, in C. Grammenos (Ed.). The Handbook of Maritime Economics and Business, 67–98. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203721636

Fleming, D. K. 2000. A geographical perspective of the transhipment function, International Journal of Maritime Economics 2(3): 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1057/ijme.2000.15

Frankel, E. G. 2004. The future of containerization, IAME 2004: Annual Conference of the International Association of Maritime Economists, 30 June–2 July 2004 Izmir, Turkey.

Fremont, A. 2007. Global maritime networks: the case of Maersk, Journal of Transport Geography 15(6): 431–442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2007.01.005

Gardiner, P. 1998. The Liner Market 1997/98: New Alliances and the New Era. London: Lloyds of London Press.

Gelareh, S.; Maculan, N.; Mahey, P.; Monemi, R. N. 2013. Huband-spoke network design and fleet deployment for string planning of liner shipping, Applied Mathematical Modelling 37(5): 3307–3321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2012.07.017

Gibney, R. F. 1987. McLean – v – the Rest. US Lines’s Jumbo R-T-W Gamble Fails – Impact on the Mainstream Market. Container Insight Publisher. 35 p.

Gielessen, H. G. 1991. Port selection – a round the world (RTW) container liner perspective, in R. G. Stuchtey (Ed). Port Management Text Book – Volume 3: Port Marketing. ISL Publisher, 213–230.

Gilman, S. 1999. The size economies and network efficiency of large containerships, International Journal of Maritime Economics 1(1): 39–59. https://doi.org/10.1057/ijme.1999.4

Gouvernal, E.; Debrie, J.; Slack, B. 2005. Dynamics of change in the port system of the western Mediterranean, Maritime Policy & Management: the Flagship Journal of International Shipping and Port Research 32(2): 107–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088830500083539

Hanjin Shipping. 2016. Hanjin Shipping Co. Ltd. Available from Internet: http://www.hanjin.com

Heaney, S. 2000. Reliability vs. cost, American Shipper (October): 68–69.

Imai, A.; Nishimura, E.; Papadimitriou, S.; Liu, M. 2006. The economic viability of container mega-ships, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 42(1): 21–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2004.07.002

Kim, C. K. 1987. An Innovation in Liner Shipping: the Round-the-World Service as a Global Strategy. Institute of Shipping Economics and Logistics, Bremen. 150 p.

Knee, R. 1987. Senator line begins RTW service, American Shipper (July): 12–13.

Konings, J. W. 2006. Market development in container barge transport by means of hub-and-spoke networks, in J. O. Puig, R. M. Barbé, V. G. Carcellé (Eds.). Maritime Transport III, 109–129.

Lim, S.-M. 1996. Round-the-world service: the rise of evergreen and the fall of U.S. lines, Maritime Policy & Management: the Flagship Journal of International Shipping and Port Research 23(2): 119–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839600000070

Lim, S.-M. 1994. Economies of container ship size: a new evaluation, Maritime Policy & Management: the Flagship Journal of International Shipping and Port Research 21(2): 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839400000031

Lloyd’s List. 1994. Evergreen. Round-the-world service ... ten years on. Lloyd’s of London Press. 48 p.

Ma, S. 2006. Maritime Economics. Unpublished lecture handout. World Maritime University, Malmo, Sweden.

McCalla, R. J. 2008. Container transshipment at Kingston, Jamaica, Journal of Transport Geography 16(3): 182–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2007.05.006

Notteboom, T. E. 2012. Towards a new intermediate hub region in container shipping? Relay and interlining via the Cape route vs. the Suez route, Journal of Transport Geography 22: 164–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.01.003

Stenvert, R.; Penfold, A. 2007. Container Port Strategy: Emerging Issues. Ocean Shipping Consultants Ltd. 142 p.

Pearson, R.; Fossey, J. 1983. World Deep-Sea Container Shipping: A Geographical, Economic and Statistical Analysis. Gower Pub Co. 288 p.

Robinson, R. 1998. Asian hub/feeder nets: the dynamics of restructuring, Maritime Policy & Management: the Flagship Journal of International Shipping and Port Research 25(1): 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839800000043

Rodrigue, J.-P.; Comtois, C.; Slack, B. 2009. The Geography of Transport Systems. 2nd edition. Routledge. 368 p.

Sartini, N. 1999. Transhipment versus direct ports, in TOC 1999: Terminal Operations Conference, 1–3 June 1999, Genova, Italy.

Slack, B. 1999. Intermodal transportation, in B. S. Hoyle, R. Knowles (Eds.). Modern Transport Geography, 263–289.

SOL. 2008. Evergreen to Offer Butterfly Loop on Asia – US Trade. Shipping OnLine Inc. Available from Internet: http://www.shippingonline.cn/news/newsContent.asp?id=4782

Sutcliffe, P.; Ratcliffe, B. 1995. The battle for med hub role, Containerisation International (July): 95–99.

Tongzon, J. L.; Chang, Y. T. 2009. Hub and spoke networks versus direct shipments, in IAME 2009: Annual Conference of the International Association of Maritime Economists, 24–26 June 2009, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Tran, N. K. 2011. Studying port selection on liner routes: An approach from logistics perspective, Research in Transportation Economics 32(1): 39–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2011.06.005

Tran, N. K.; Haasis, H.-D. 2014. Empirical analysis of the container liner shipping network on the East–West corridor (1995–2011), Netnomics: Economic Research and Electronic Networking 15(3): 121–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11066-014-9088-x

Tran, N. K.; Haasis, H.-D. 2015a. An empirical study of fleet expansion and growth of ship size in container liner shipping, International Journal of Production Economics 159: 241–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.09.016

Tran, N. K.; Haasis, H.-D. 2015b. Literature survey of network optimization in container liner shipping, Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal 27(2–3): 139–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10696-013-9179-2

Tran, N. K.; Haasis, H.-D.; Buer, T. 2017. Container shipping route design incorporating the costs of shipping, inland/feeder transport, inventory and CO2 emission, Maritime Economics & Logistics 19(4): 667–694. https://doi.org/10.1057/mel.2016.11

Transport 2000. 1985. The Evergreen dynasty begins, Transport 2000 (January): 30–32.

UNCTAD. 2009. Transport Newsletter. No 43. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).

Visser, D.; Braam, T. B. C. 2001. Liner Trade 2020 – Vision of a Huge Global Operation, in DYNAMAR (Ed.). Liner Shipping 2020, Dynamar B.V., Alkmaar, Netherlands, 69–82.

Vrenken, H.; Macharis, C.; Wolters, P. 2005. Intermodal Transport in Europe. European Intermodal Association, Brussels. 267 p.

Wang, J. J.; Slack, B. 2000. The evolution of a regional container port system: the Pearl River delta, Journal of Transport Geography 8(4): 263–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6923(00)00013-2

Willmington, R. 2004. When US lines timed out, Fairplay (December): 40–40.

ZIM. 2016. ZIM Integrated Shipping Services Ltd. Available from Internet: http://www.zim.com