• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.29-58
• /
• 2016

The purpose of this paper is to show the clustering trend and the comparison of empirical results and is to choose the clustering ports for 3 Korean ports(Busan, Incheon and Gwangyang Ports) by using the bootstrapped DEA(Data Envelopment Analysis) and game Cross-efficiency models for 38 Asian ports during the period 2003-2013 with 4 input variables(birth length, depth, total area, and number of cranes) and 1 output variable(container TEU). The main empirical results of this paper are as follows. First, bootstrapped DEA efficiency of SW and LT is 0.7660, 0.7341 respectively. Clustering results of the bootstrapped DEA analysis show that 3 Korean ports [ Busan (6.46%), Incheon (3.92%), and Gwangyang (2.78%)] can increase the efficiency in the SW model, but the LT model shows clustering values of -1.86%, -0.124%, and 2.11% for Busan, Gwangyang, and Incheon respectively. Second, the game cross-efficiency model suggests that Korean ports should be clustered with Hong Kong, Shanghi, Guangzhou, Ningbo, Port Klang, Singapore, Kaosiung, Keelong, and Bangkok ports. This clustering enhances the efficiency of Gwangyang by 0.131%, and decreases that of Busan by-1.08%, and that of Incheon by -0.009%. Third, the efficiency ranking comparison between the two models using the Wilcoxon Signed-rank Test was matched with the average level of SW (72.83 %) and LT (68.91%). The policy implication of this paper is that Korean port policy planners should introduce the bootstrapped DEA, and game cross-efficiency models when clustering is needed among Asian ports for enhancing the efficiency of inputs and outputs. Also, the results of SWOT(Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, and Threat) analysis among the clustering ports should be considered.

• 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.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.41-60
• /
• 2008

Korea has been doing a two-port system as a main port development policy and developing the port of Busan and Gwangyang as the transshipment hubs in the northeast Asia. However, the growth rate of the transshipment container volume of the Gwangyang port in 2007 was sharply dropping more than 31.4%. The reasons why reduced the growth rate of transshipment cargo were from the port development in north China and the direct callings of ships. Therefore, it is time to evaluate the transshipment hub port policy of Korea. This study would recognize the decision criteria of shipping companies as customers for the transshipment hub in the northeast Asia by the AHP methodology based on Lirn et al. (2004). It has been known the costs of shipping companies and port location as the main first tier criteria for transshipment ports, and container handling charges, closeness to the main navigation route, carriers' strategy, and nearness to the feeder ports as the important second tier factors. Finally, the domestic terminal operating companies would focus on only a few attributes including the terminal cost factor, but the international shipping companies would be considering more several factors than they do. Therefore, the transshipment port strategy should be enriched in the near future.

• Journal of Korean Society of Transportation
• /
• v.20 no.7
• /
• pp.43-50
• /
• 2002

Competition to attract the increasing container cargoes of North China and the West Japan in North-East Asia region is fairly intensed in recent days between the main ports of Korea, China, and Japan. Inducing a new container cargo make those countries possible to invest enormous fund to mordernize its port facilities, as well as to improve efficiency in Port operation and management. In this situation, Strategy to attract transshipment cargoes is of the immediate necessity, This study, therefore, aims to establish the feasible strategies to attract transshipment container cargoes in the North-East Asian region by empirical analysis, he major output of the research is as follows : First, Busan Port to attract transshipment cargoes is required to adjust port tariff and free storage period with flexibility for liner shipping companies and freight forwarder. Second, Price-Demand function of Busan port between main competitive ports in North-East Asian region that is derived from strategies to attract transshipment cargoes, helps marketing manager to fix scientifically port price as understanding the change of demand quantity.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• 2003.05a
• /
• pp.273-280
• /
• 2003

The purpose of this study is to identify and evaluate the competitiveness of ports in ASEAN(Association of Southeast Asian Nations), which plays a leading role in basing the hub of international logistics strategies as a countermeasure in changes of international logistics environments. This region represents most severe competition among Mega hub ports in the world in terms of container cargo throughput at the onset of the 21 st century. The research method in this study accounted for overlapping between attributes, and introduced the HFP method that can perform mathematical operations. The scope of this study was strictly confined to the ports of ASEAN. which cover the top 100 of 350 container ports that were presented in Containerization International Yearbook 2002 with reference to container throughput. The results of this study show Singapore in the number one position. Even compared with major ports in Korea (after getting comparative ratings and applying the same data and evaluation structure), the number one position still goes to Singapore and then Busan(2) and Manila(2), followed by Port Klang(4), Tanjugn Priok(5), Tanjung Perak(6), Bangkok(7), Inchon(8), Laem Chabang(9) and Penang(9). In terms of the main contributions of this study, it is the first empirical study to apply the combined attributes of detailed and representative attributes into the advanced HFP model which was enhanced by the KJ method to evaluate the port competitiveness in ASEAN. Up-to-now, none have comprehensively conducted researches with sophisticated port methodology that has discussed a variety of changes in port development and terminal transfers of major shipping lines. Moreover, through the comparative evaluation between major ports in Korea and ASEAN, the presentation of comparative competitiveness for Korea ports is a great achievement in this study. In order to reinforce this study, it needs further compensative research, including cost factors which could not be applied to modeling the subject ports by lack of consistently qualified in ASEAN.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.25-46
• /
• 2008

By using data envelopment analysis(DEA) this research measures the efficiency of Korea's five seaports and their Malmquist productivity from 1997 to 2006. Under the assumption of CRS(constant returns to scale) and VRS(various returns to scale), seaports' rankings of efficiency are measured. Busan port is confirmed as a best-performed port in the various measurements. Important finding facts are as follows. 1)Busan, lncheon and Ulsan seaports are efficient ports under the assumption of CRS and VRS. 2)Gwangyang port shows 4.3% lower efficiency level compared with efficient ports. 3)Pohang port shows 27.3% lower efficiency level compared with efficient ports. 4)Average total factor productivity of Korea's five ports has been lower at the rate of 3.1% during the period from 1997 to 2006. Main policy implications are 1)Busan port is more efficient than Gwangyang port, which reflects the difference of economic activities between two regional econmies. 2)During the period 1997-2006, Korea's five largest ports has experienced lower efficiency levels in the first half period because of the 1997 Korean Financial Crisis, but higher efficiency levels in the second half period because of economic recovery. In future research the more and better data will be expected to improve the understanding of Korean seaports' efficiency characteristics.

• Journal of Navigation and Port Research
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.363-372
• /
• 2002

Recently, mutual economy cooperation in Northeast Asia has leaded steady growth among main countries of it and rather promoted a single economy circle. In this region, Busan container port competes with min container ports in China, Taiwan and Japan in it for attracting transshipment container traffic of north-Shanghai in China and for-east Russia. Therefore, this paper aims to suggest competitive strategies for Busan container port to attract container traffic in Northeast Asia To do so, it evaluates the preference of important ports in the competitive situation and competitiveness edgy of important ports in Northeast Asia, and finally proposes the relative order of important factors. Based on the evaluation of it, first, the Busan ports hue tn strengthen port facilities to attract more traffic and in detail, reinforce the number of berth, yard areas and handling equipment Second, they also have to provide high quality of services to deliver cargos in time, not being damaged and swiftly response to shipowner and shipper's claim, Third, they need to review the strategy to adopt flexible tariff policy and to invest the profit from tariff in port service and facilities, as providing higher port tariff level by a regular rate.

• 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.

• Journal of Navigation and Port Research
• /
• v.39 no.6
• /
• pp.499-506
• /
• 2015

To analyze the port choice hierarchy, factorial and AHP analysis were conducted based on the survey for shippers using west coastal ports. As the result of analysis with 17 factors, 6 main factors; port service, port operation and geographical condition, connectivity to hinterland, port cost, accessibility and facilities were chosen. Based on this, AHP and correlation analysis of each factor were conducted. And the results were shown as cost, service, facility, connectivity, accessibility and operation in order. In addition, several ways for incentive program, the most important factor based on AHP analysis, to influence shippers around west coastal port were reviewed. As the result of review for the incentive program of domestic container ports, it was shown that three ports, Gun-san, Dae-san and Mok-po, offer incentive to shipper while two ports, Pyeong-tak and Dang-jin, do not. Therefore, the former three ports need to reinforce the existing incentive program while the latter ones introduce it.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• 2006.10a
• /
• pp.37-45
• /
• 2006

This paper summarized the operation experience and development trend of overseas port logistics, social environment for the development of China's port logistics, and the strategic significance for accelerating the development of China's port logistics. Then it analyzed the main problems in the process of the development of China's port logistics. Finally, it put forward measures and suggestions to accelerate the development of China's port logistics.