• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.175-192
• /
• 2008

Today's individual firms no longer compete as solely autonomous entities, but rather as supply chain. As such the competitive position of a port is not only determined by its internal strengths but also it is also affected by its links in a global supply chin. In other words, port competitiveness is becoming increasingly dependent on external coordination and control of the whole supply chain. The main purpose of this paper is to examine how a port embeds itself into supply chain in order to strengthen its competitive position by focusing on Dubai port case. This paper found that Dubai port used three phases-insertion, integration and dominance-as a strategies for how it can embedded into global supply chain successfully. Dubai's global supply chain strategies give some implications for the further development of the Port of Gwangyang. First, the Port of Gwangyang should fully utilize symbiotic relationship with Gwangyang free Economic Zone. Second, the integration between Korea Container Terminal Authority and GYFEZ can be recommended for fast decision-making and providing a one-stop-service. Finally, Gwangyang should pursue an aggressive supply chain strategy, aims at dominance in the regional port network through port alliance with small and medium ports in neighboring area.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.53-82
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this paper is to show the clustering trend by using the context-dependent and measure-specific models for 38 Asian ports during 10 years(2001-2009) with 4 inputs and 1 output. The main empirical results of this paper are as follows. First, clustering results by using context-dependent and measure-specific models are same. Second, the most efficient clustering was shown among the Hong Kong, Singapore, Ningbo, Guangzhou, and Kaosiung ports. Third, Port Sultan Qaboos, Jeddah, and Aden ports showed the lowest level clustering. Fourth, ranking order of attractiveness is Guangzhou, Dubai, HongKong, Ningbo, and Shanghai, and the results of progressive scores confirmed that low level ports can increase their efficiency by benchmarking the upper level ports. Fifth, benchmark share showed that Dubai(birth length), and HongKong(port depth, total area, and no. of cranes) have affected the efficiency of the inefficient ports.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.143-175
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this paper is to show the clustering trend by using the variable group benchmarking(VGB) and categorical variable(CV) models for 38 Asian ports during 9 years(2001-2009) with 4 inputs(birth length, depth, total area, and number of crane) and 1 output(container TEU). The main empirical results of this paper are as follows. First, clustering results by using VGB show that Shanghai, Qingdao, and Ningbo ports took the core role for clustering. Second, CV analysis focusing on the container throughputs indicated that Singapore, Keelong, Dubai, and Kaosiung ports except Chinese ports are appeared as the center ports of clustering. Third, Aqaba, Dubai, Hongkong, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Ningbo ports are recommended as the efficient ports for the target of clustering. Fourth, when the ports are classified by the regional location, Dubai, Khor Fakkan, Shanghai, Hongkong, Keelong, Ningbo, and Singapore ports are the core ports for clustering. On the whole, other ports located in Asia should be clustered to Dubai, Khor Fakkan, Shanghai, Hongkong, Ningbo, and Singapore ports. The policy implication of this paper is that Korean port policy planner should introduce the VGB model, and CV model for clustering among the international ports for enhancing the efficiency of inputs and outputs.

• Journal of Navigation and Port Research
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.57-63
• /
• 2008

Recently, Green Port project to develop an environment-friendly port is active to lead by Port of LA, Port of LB in the USA and Port of Rotterdam. While, Port of Singapore, Shanghai Port and Dubai Port are trying to be a complex Port to function as a true portal not only for freight, but also for people and information. Ports, in this era, doesn't just play a simple transportational role for passengers and freight. Ports in this 21st century, play a role as a center where passengers, freight, information and money gather and a place where freight is created from nearby supporting area. Therefore, this study intends to draw action plans for Port of Busan to grow as Complex Port in the 21st century by AHP analysis and evaluate the action plans of each field by quantitative factors (business portion in the area/specialty/synergy effect with other industry) and qualitative factors (potential for future growth/competitiveness/ capability for innovation). The evaluation result can be used as basic information to decide business priority.

• 해운
• /
• no.8 s.30
• /
• pp.23-33
• /
• 2006

컨테이너화물 유치를 위한 세계주요항만간의 경쟁이 날로 치열한 양상을 보이고 있는 가운데 컨테이너화물 처리량에서 과거의 최고기록을 갱신하는 항만이 속출하고 있다. 더구나 중국과 유렵항만의 신장세가 두드러지고 있다. 다음은 한국컨테이너부두공단의 자료를 정리한 것이다.(편집자 주)

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.151-168
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this paper is to show the brief efficiency and clustering measurement way by using the game cross-efficiency model which is newly introduced in this paper for 13 container ports during 3 years(2009, 2010, and 2013) with 3 input variables(depth, total area, and number of crane) and 1 output variable(container TEU). The main empirical results are as follows. First, the average rankings of game cross-efficiency model are Ningbo, Hongkong, Shanghai, Dubai, Singapore, Qingdao, Kaosiung, Busan, Tokyo, Incheon, Nagoya, Manila, Gwangyang ports in order. Second, according to ANOVA analysis, three models show the similar results in terms of the efficiency rankings. Third, in the clustering analysis using dendrogram, group A(Shangahi and Busan), group B(Ningbo and Nagoya), and group C(Incheon and Manila) show the common clustering ports during 3 or 2 years. The policy implication of this paper is that Korean port policy planner should introduce the game cross-efficiency method when measuring the individual port efficiency. Also port authority should consider the merits of the clustering ports for improving the port management and operations.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.27-42
• /
• 2016

This study is to investigate seaport clustering by using meta-frontier and cross-efficiency models. Data covers the 13 Asian ports during 2009, 2010 and 2013 with 3 inputs(depth, total area, and number of cranes) and 1 output(TEU). Correlations coefficient from cross-efficiency matrix are used for measuring clustering dendrogram. After that, meta-frontier analysis for investigating whether the clustering using cross-efficiency method increases the meta-efficiency. Empirical main results are as follows: First, group efficiencies of Busan, Incheon, and Gwangyang ports are increased. Second, meta and group efficiencies of China ports are greater than those of Korean ports. Third, distortion of technology gap of Gwangyang is lower than that of Busan and Incheon. Fourth, Gwangyang, clustering with Ningbo, Chingtao, Tokyo and Caosung ports in 2009 and with Dubai port in 2013 can increase the efficiency. Fifth, to enhance the efficiency, Busan port should be clustered to group 2 in 2010 and group 1 in 2013, and Incheon port clustered to group 2 in 2010 and 2013. Fifth, it is empirically investigated that Busan, Incheon and Gwangyang ports can increase the efficiency by using Cross-efficiency and Meta-frontier models. Port policy planner should promote the clustering policy for Busan with Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Singapore, Incheon and Gwangyang with Chingtao, Nagoya, Ningbo, Tokyo, and Kaoshung ports.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.23-55
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this paper is to show the clustering trend and to choose the clustering ports for 3 Korean ports(Busan, Incheon and Gwangyang Ports) by using the self organizing maps based on neural network(SOM) and Tier models for 38 Asian ports during 11 years(2001-2011) with 4 input variables(birth length, depth, total area, and number of crane) and 1 output variable(container TEU). The main empirical results of this paper are as follows. First, clustering results by using SOM show that 3 Korean ports[Busan(26.5%), Incheon(13.05%), and Gwangyang(22.95%) each]can increase the efficiency. Second, according to Tier model, Busan(Hongkong, Sanghai, Manila, and Singapore), Incheon(Aden, Ningbo, Dabao, and Bangkog), and Gwangyang(Aden, Ningbo, Bangkog, Hipa, Dubai, and Guangzhou) should be clustered with those ports in parentheses. Third, when both SOM and Tier models are mixed, (1) efficiency improvement of Busan Port is greater than those of Incheon and Gwangyang ports. (2) Incheon port has shown the slow improvement during 2001-2007, but after 2008, improvement speed was high. (3) improvement level of Gwangyang port was high during 2001-2003, but after 2004, improvement level was constantly decreased. The policy implication of this paper is that Korean port policy planner should introduce the SOM, and Tier models with the mixed two models when clustering among the Asian ports for enhancing the efficiency of inputs and outputs.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.87-106
• /
• 2009

This paper is intended to suggest benchmarking ascension for the Gwangyang Port as a hub for international logistics. Most countries that seek to join. and lead, the global trading system as they work to develop production and logistics systems that establish a reputation for leadership in international logistics. Our focus in this research is on the Gwangyang Port and whether Gwangyang Port is capable of carving out a competitive niche as a hub of international logistics. Our analysis is based on comparison and analysis with benchmark port developments around the world. As proposals to promote and activate Gwangyang Port as a hub for international logistics, we recommended in this paper several benchmarks. First, Gwangyang Port FTZ must strengthen the incentive system for tenant companies and providing an inducement for new global companies. Second, Gwangyang Port needs to moderation of regulation on the investment tenant companies and strengthening one-stop service. Third, it is required to stabilize labor and management relationship and securing of flexibility of labor market. Lastly, Gwangyang Port must strengthen mutual interaction of Free Economic Zone (FEZ), Customs Free Zone(CFZ) and Free trade Zone(FTZ) in Korea.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.37 no.1
• /
• pp.31-70
• /
• 2021

The purpose of this paper is to measure the clustering change and analyze empirical results, and choose the clustering ports for Busan, Incheon, and Gwangyang ports by using Hierarchical clustering(single, complete, average, and centroid), Silhouette, and 2SCE[the Second Stage(Type II) cross-efficiency] matrix clustering models on Asian container ports over the period 2009-2018. The models have chosen number of cranes, depth, birth length, and total area as inputs and container TEU as output. The main empirical results are as follows. First, ranking order according to the efficiency increasing ratio during the 10 years analysis shows Silhouette(0.4052 up), Hierarchical clustering(0.3097 up), and 2SCE(0.1057 up). Second, according to empirical verification of the Silhouette and 2SCE models, 3 Korean ports should be clustered with ports like Busan Port[ Dubai, Hong Kong, and Tanjung Priok], and Incheon Port and Gwangyang Port are required to cluster with most ports. Third, in terms of the ASEAN, it would be good to cluster like Busan (Singapore), Incheon Port (Tanjung Priok, Tanjung Perak, Manila, Tanjung Pelpas, Leam Chanbang, and Bangkok), and Gwangyang Port(Tanjung Priok, Tanjung Perak, Port Kang, Tanjung Pelpas, Leam Chanbang, and Bangkok). Third, Wilcoxon's signed-ranks test of models shows that all P values are significant at an average level of 0.852. It means that the average efficiency figures and ranking orders of the models are matched each other. The policy implication is that port policy makers and port operation managers should select benchmarking ports by introducing the models used in this study into the clustering of ports, compare and analyze the port development and operation plans of their ports, and introduce and implement the parts which required benchmarking quickly.