Port related innovations: The answer to today's constraints and the challenges in seaports CHRISTA SYS

Transcription

1 October 6th, 2016

2 Port related innovations: The answer to today's constraints and the challenges in seaports CHRISTA SYS

3 Me, myself and I Christa Sys (christa.sys@uantwerpen.be) University of Antwerp Lecturer Operationele aspecten van maritiem transport (Dutch) Chair holder BNP Paribas Fortis Transport, Logistics and Ports C MAT Business environment Maritime economics and business Maritime supply chains HoGent Forwarding II (Maritime transport and inland navigation) University of Ghent Transport Economics 3

4 Innovation, a driver of economic growth A technological or organizational (including cultural as a separate sub set) change to the product (or service) or production process that either lowers the cost of product (or service) or production process or increases the quality of the product (or service) to the consumer. (Arduino et al., 2013) Cost Quality Delivery Flexibility/Customization Service Sustainability CO.INNOVATION 1950s 1990s 2000s 2016 Source: own compilation based on Collins Family Foundation

5 BCG perspectives Innovation in

6 the transport sector generally displays poor innovative strength International forum on Transport (2010). Transport and Innovation: Unleashing the Potential. Paris: OECD 6

7 Technology Technology, managerial, organizational, cultural business change Technology, managerial, organizational, cultural market change Policy initiatives Managerial, organizational, cultural Alphaliner Newsletter no Maersk Line cancels Daily Maersk (March, 10 th, 2015)

8 CO.Research: sharing knowledge and experience

9 I INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH Objective Understand patterns and characteristics, success factors and failure factors, taking into account the context of the respective challenges which prevailed when they emerged, and the goals they were planned to serve: economic, social and environmental

10 II UNIVERSITIES INVOLVED University of Southern California University of Antwerp Kühne Logistics University (coordinator) University of Genova University of Lisbon University of the Aegean Nanyang Technological University University of the Aegean

11 III INDUSTRY INVOLVED Shipyard Deep sea terminals Port Authorities (The Netherlands) (Italy) (Belgium) (Portugal) (Portugal) (Greece) Liner Carriers (Belgium) (Belgium) (Singapore) (Singapore) (Italy) (Singapore) Road operator Shipping agent (Italy) (Portugal) Stevedoring (Belgium) Rail operator (Italy) Forwarder (Belgium) (Italy) Shippers (Belgium) Other Inland terminal (Belgium) (Belgium) Barge operators ICT (The Netherlands) (Greece) Logistics (France) (Greece) (Belgium) Research on small barges (Belgium) (Belgium) (Belgium, the Netherlands Spain, Finland)

12 IV METHODS Cost/Benefit Analysis H and I index Evaluates the alignment between strategy and innovation outcome Qualitative Comparative Analysis Combines success and failure factors System of Innovation Approach Assess adoption of innovation Identify relations between actors and institutions

13 %, a mix of technological, administrative, organizational and cultural nature innovation that relates to the cargo flow and ICT are high on the agenda. the majority of initiatives are instances of private commercial innovations. the mainstream of the cases are examples of incremental innovations

14 V INNOVATION CASES: TYPOLOGY I Technological unit change II Technological market change III Technological, Managerial, Organisational, Cultural Business Change IV Technological, Managerial, Organisational, Cultural Market Change V Managerial, Organisation, Cultural Market Change VI Policy Initiatives (Managerial, Organisation, Cultural Market Change)

15 CO.Results

16 Cost/benefit analysis: developing a framework Category Examples Objective Decision process 1 Internal decision, no external incentives or disincentives 2 Strategic internal decision, external incentives or disincentives, no public funding or regulation 3 Responsive decision to public subsidies or regulation (responses to subsidies different from responses to regulation) Terminal appointment system; Automated stacking cranes Use AF dock equipment as part of green port programme; Restore natural habitat as part of green port programme Subsidies for shorthaul barge Scrubbers on ships Increase productivity, throughput and efficiency Increase public support, preempt regulation, protect business interests Reduce externalities, comply with regulatory requirements Number of cases Firm 21 (28.3%) Firm, sometimes with stakeholder input Firm, government, other stakeholders 37 (50%) 16 (21.6%) 16

17 The H and I indexes: What? New methodology aiming at assessing strategic alignment between degree of success and strategic importance But what defines success? One approach is to consider the strategic objectives of a certain innovation action So, an innovation is successful when it is able to achieve the strategic objective it is set to target But most innovation target multiple objectives Hence, ranking every innovation on the basis of how important it is to reach a certain objective 17

18 H/I index Virtual example Was this objective important? Is this innovation successful? Cost minimization 5 3 Gain market share 2 5 Integration with other actors

19 H/I index: misalignments exist between company strategies and degrees of success Economic objectives appear to be ranked higher in terms of importance than the other objectives Operation optimisation and service improvements are the most highly ranked objectives Obtaining first mover advantage Differentiation from competitors Social and environmental objectives seem to be achieved, but often are ranked as not important, suggesting that innovation success, when achieved, is often incidental CO 2 reduction instead, being a common metric, is present as a parameter in many innovation cases. Virtually all innovations are successful in Complying with social and labour regulation, which is also perceived as an important objective 19

20 Qualitative Comparitive Analysis (QCA) Actors and success/failure factors are analysed for any of the three stages through which an innovation initiative usually develops (initiation, development and implementation). Input values for each cell are given between 3 and +3, where 3 means total absence and +3 very strong presence, 0 being the neutral value. Actors Port Actors Immediate External Stakeholders Capacity Building Stakeholders Institutions Infrastructure Hard Institutions Soft Institutions Weak Networks Strong Networks Capacities Lock in effects Market Demand Competition (innovation) Innovation Champion Port Authority Terminal Operators Shipping Lines Freight Forwarders/ Shippers etc. Unions Municipal Authorities Society Innovation Sponsors & (e.g. Manufacturers) Regulators & Regulations Standardi sation bodies Research Institutes Financing Institutions Institutions with vested interests (e.g. EC) Competition (Port) Legend Initiation Development Initiation/Development/Implementation Development/Implementation Initiation/Development/Implementation 20

21 Qualitative Comparitive Analysis (QCA) 21 With the entire set of 40 cases, no combination of conditions consistently leads to success. Hence, all possible combinations of conditions are tried, and four each lead to a sufficient number of cases that consistently lead to success: 1. Terminal alignment with infrastructure, development and implementation phases 2. Shipping line alignment with infrastructure, development and implementation phases 3. Soft institutional involvement of innovation champion in all three stages 4. Innovation champion alignment with infrastructure and involvement with hard institutional arrangements in the inititation phase

22 Qualitative Comparitive Analysis (QCA) Terminal Shipping line Soft institutional Champion infra + Hard institutions Autotrakker (S1) DODO (AF1) Flexible spud wagon (AF3) Van Hool ECO chassis (D4) Leixões Port 3PL Primary Gate (H1) Modal shift (K2) Foldable container (N1) APCS (AJ2) Efficiency leadership (X1) Port Single Window (W1) All weather terminal (FI) (AG1) All weather terminal (ES) (AH1) Tandemlift Operations (A6) 10.6 feet high container (C1) SEAGHA (AJ1) IT Data Exchange (T1) Sea45 concept (C2) EDI (A2) e transit (F4) EDI (A2) Dredge pumps (AF4) All weather terminal 2 (NL) (AI2) All weather terminal 3 (NL) (AI3) All weather terminal 1 (NL) (AI1) Truck appointment system (A8) All weather terminal (BE) (Z1) Extended Gate 1.0 (F1) Automated stacking cranes (A4) Barge heavy lift ro/ro (E2) Barge heavy lift ro/ro (E2) 22

23 System of Innovation approach Conditions in the innovation system that need to be present in order to successfully implement an innovation. Context analysis Why innovation fails, even when the cost benefit assessment has justified its implementation or even though it contributes to business strategies. Pattern analysis H1: The importance of capacities (external knowledge and financing) H2: The accord of all actors involved, H3: The importance of market push and H4: The ability of the innovation champion to influence actors and outcome. 23

24 System of innovation approach Testing Hypotheses 1. The importance of capabilities (external knowledge and financing) No financial support Important: knowledge capabilities 2. The importance of market push 3. The cooperation of all actors involved 4. The ability of the innovation champion to influence actors and outcome But... Also the type of actors involved... 24

25 JOINT LESSONS The relativeness of public push Determinants of innovation success the strength of the innovation champion, mainly terminal operators and shipping lines the push by market demand and the fact that all actors have a common vision The predominant role of economic motives: concepts like efficiency, benefits, capacity and optimisation Without market demand, no innovation will make it to actual market uptake

26 Co.Innovation is the key issue!

27 GENERAL OUTCOME The port and maritime sector is innovative, but the innovation it produces is not always successful. Very limited quantitative data on costs or outcomes Innovation is a tool that can improve the competitive advantage of port related stakeholders Innovation is mainly driven by economic goals No unique recipe, but conditions for success Actor co operation also seems an important trend 27

28 CO.INNOVATION, A KEY ISSUE a new form of innovation where the intention of the parties is to build together new knowledge and create new opportunities for cooperation along maritime supply chains a tool that can improve the competitive advantage of port related stakeholders enables to answer to the challenges (a.o. intermodality, integrated chains and smooth management) facing the sector currently faces Supply chain innovation: benefits for smaller companies?

29 29 EXAMPLE OF THE INNOVATION MONITOR

30 Thank you for your attention Prof. Dr. Christa Sys BNP Paribas Fortis Chair Transport, Logistics and Ports Prinsstraat 13, > BNP Paribas Chair > BNPPF innovation event christa.sys@uantwerpen.be