Transactions on the Built Environment vol 36, 1998 WIT Press, ISSN

Transcription

1 The future of small and medium sized ports P.W. de Langen Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, Room HI2-23, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands Abstract In this paper an analysis is made of the position of small and medium sized ports in the maritime transport market. First, a typology of five port activities is developed. Second, the primary port activity -throughput- is segmented in bulk throughput and breakbulk throughput. Both segments are analysed. In the breakbulk market, rationalisations have revolutionised shipping and port services. The introduction of the container led -amongst others- to the creation of hub ports. Many ports are now competing to gain a hub status. However, in order to be able to compete, ports need to invest substantial amounts of capital, for instance in dredging and handling equipment. In this paper it is questioned whether it is a good strategy for medium sized ports to aim to gain a hub status. It is argued that medium sized ports do have a promising future, whereas the hub-concept might lose its incontestable status. Thus, other strategies might be more attractive for medium sized ports. Two reasons to support this claim are identified. First, an analysis of the sources of container throughput growth indicates that in the future the growth of maritime container transport might be at best moderate. Thus, the market for hub-ports might be limited. Second, increasing transit time competition contests the concept of a single hub, as direct calls are normally faster. This again limits the potential for hub ports. In the bulk segment, the competitive position of small and medium sized ports is compared with large ports and inland locations. Furthermore, an analysis is made of the future potential of bulk throughput The paper concludes by offering considerations for developing a strategic orientation for medium sized ports.

2 264 Maritime Engineering and Ports Introduction The port industry accounts for a substantial part of regional and national economies in most nations (Haralambides and Veenstra [1]). Furthermore, the port industry facilitates trade and has therefore an indirect impact on the economy. The performance of ports is thus important for the prosperity of regions and national economies. In this paper an analysis is made of the position of small and medium sized ports (SMSP's) in the maritime transport market. The research questions are: which future developments that affect the future position of small and medium sized ports can be expected; how will these developments alter the future for such ports and what policies -if anycan such ports develop to effectively deal with these developments. In order to answer these questions a port typology is developed that makes a distinction between large ports and SMSP's. Most literature on ports deals explicitly or implicitly with large ports. However, in Europe and elsewhere, substantial numbers of small and medium sized ports exist. This paper deals specifically with these ports. First an analysis is made of the activities that are performed in ports. Second, the distinction between large ports and SMSP's is elaborated and some major differences between SMSP's and large ports are given. Third, an overview is given of relevant future developments and their impact on SMSP's. The paper concludes with suggesting some policies for SMSP's to deal with these developments. 1 Port activities An analysis of the future of ports should start with a definition of what activities are considered as port activities, because different definitions co-exist. In this paper we use a broad definition: not only the primary port activities are included, but other directly port related activities as well. Figure 1 gives an overview of five different port activities, that are included in our definition. First and foremost, a port is a throughput location. On top of that, a port offers maritime services, such as shipping agents, bunkering services, maritime insurance companies and shipping banks. Third, ports frequently locate a number of maritime industries, such as ship-repairing and crane construction.

3 Maritime Engineering and Ports 265 sea land Figure 1 typical port activities Q Maritime services [] Maritime industries 1 Port-related industries m 1 distribution Fourth, ports can locate a number of 'resource industries', such as the chemical industry and the food processing industry. Fifth, a port can locate a number of distribution activities. Such activities can be found in the port itself, but as well in the hinterland of a port (see for a similar break up of port activities the Rotterdam port authority [2]). Although not all the activities as described above are located in all ports, these activities are so closely related to the throughput function that they should be taken into account by analysing the future of a port. For example, in Rotterdam the employment generated by the direct throughput function is only a minority of the total employment in the port. Below, each of these five port activities will be discussed in some more detail. Five port activities The primary activity of a port is the throughput activity. Throughput activities are -apart from the unloading and loading of ships- also activities such as ship towing, dredging and pilotage. In throughput, a distinction is often made between bulk and breakbulk. The characteristics of bulk throughput are entirely different from those of breakbulk throughput. Bulk products, such as oil, coal and iron ore, are part of logistics chains that are radically different from logistics chains in

4 266 Maritime Engineering and Ports breakbulk. In bulk chains, only a small number of companies are involved, that have large volumes of cargo. Furthermore, most bulk commodities have dedicated throughput equipment. The throughput of breakbulk is revolutionised since the introduction of the maritime container, in the 1960s. Shipping lines are continuously upgrading their service level by offering faster, more frequent and more reliable shipping services to a variety of destinations, with more and larger ships. Partly in response to these changes, the throughput of containers has changed dramatically as well. Hub ports have been created from which cargoes are feedered to the 'spoke-ports. The throughput activity, as a 'double derived demand', is influenced by changes is trade systems as well as transport systems. Thus, the dynamism in the breakbulk industry is large. Ports are a natural location for various maritime services, such as ship finance, maritime lawyers, ship management, ship supply services etc. In Rotterdam, the direct employment in these maritime services is about persons (GHR [3]). Maritime services are quite 'footloose': they are not tied to a port. This is illustrated by the fact that London locates a lot of maritime services, even though its port is relatively small. Maritime industries, such as shipbuilding and crane construction, are functionally related to the throughput function. Furthermore, these activities are tied to a deep-water location. Thus such activities are regularly located in ports. Resource industries can be considered as port activities because they are regularly located in ports in order to minimise transport costs. Resource industries use raw resources to refine these to semi-finished or finished products. Examples are steel plants and oil refineries. Even though such industries can be located elsewhere, ports have proven to be favourable locations. Distribution activities are activities adding value to the cargo. The majority of such activities take place outside the port. For example, in Rotterdam, only 7% of all containers is 'opened' in the port (GHR [2]). However, the distribution activities, such as warehousing and assembling are performed relatively close to the port along so-called hinterland corridors and these activities have a strong functional relationship with the port (van Klink [3]. These five port activities are functionally related. The throughput is the core activity. The throughput of bulk commodities fuels the resource industry and the throughput of breakbulk fuels the distribution activities. The maritime industries and maritime services are generated

5 Maritime Engineering and Ports 267 predominantly by the arrival of ships, and are less related to the type of cargo that is unloaded. 2 The distinction between large ports and SMSP's Does a distinction between large ports and SMSP's make sense? It can be argued that the differences between various SMSP's, such as differences in institutional structure, market niche, history and main actors are more important than the similarities. We fully agree that by no means all SMSP's are similar, or that analysing the future of all SMSP's answers all strategic questions of particular SMSP's. Rather, such a general analysis can complement an analysis of individual SMSP's, because it highlight some general themes and developments. Literature exists on individual ports, either large or medium sized (see for instance Haynes et al [5]). Furthermore, literature exists on methods of analysis of ports (see for instance Verbeke et al [6] and [7]). However, literature that uses the distinction between SMSP's and large ports is non-existent. This paper claims that the similarities of SMSP's vis-a-vis large ports justify an analysis of SMSP's in general. 2.1 Classifying ports Although the distinction between large ports and SMSP's is based on size, measuring the throughput in tons is not the only criterium. Traditionally, the size of a port is measured in tons throughput. We claim that this measure focuses on one element -throughput- only. In our approach, for each of the five port activities it is evaluated if a port is large, medium-sized or small. Ports can be small or large for different activities. For these activities, large ports have similar characteristics and SMSP's have similar characteristics as well. This evaluation is based on the relative size of the port activity, compared to other ports in the same country or continent. Large ports have an international impact. They do not serve as regional gateways only, but outreach their home region. Their hinterland infrastructure is very well developed. Medium sized ports serve especially 'the home region' that is, the regional hinterland of a port. Medium sized ports do not have good multimodal hinterland accessibility outside their home region. Small ports, finally, merely serve a local hinterland. They do not have good hinterland accessibility. The differences between medium-sized and small ports are

6 268 Maritime Engineering and Ports not sharp. They have the same characteristics, but a different scale. Thus, in this paper, small and medium sized ports are taken as one group. Thus, the hierarchy of ports is determined to a large extent by their hinterlands. For each of the five port activities the size of this hinterland differs. Examples of two ports are given in table one and two, to clarify the concepts of SMSP's. Table 1: an example of classifying port activities: Rotterdam (R), Amsterdam (A) and Zeebrugge (Z) Bulk Breakbulk Maritime Throug hput Value added Through put Value added Services Indus tries Small Medium sized Large Z A R Z A R A R,Z Z A R Z, A R Z,A R Table 1 shows the five port activities as mentioned in section one. Resource industries are classified as value added to bulk and distribution is classified as value added of breakbulk. 2.2 Differences between SMSP's and large ports This analysis of general differences between large ports and SMSP's focuses on the throughput and value added in ports. The port activities related to ships, -maritime services and industries- are not analysed, because these activities have specific location preferences and a specific dynamic. An analysis of these port related maritime activities is beyond the scope of this paper. Scale economies Large ports have scale economies. This is a clear advantage over SMSP's. Three kinds of scale economies in the port industry can be observed. First, scale economies of handling cargo exist. Second, large ports have scale economies in hinterland transport, because they are able to offer a larger variety and higher frequency of services. This is especially important for multi-modal hinterland transport. Third, large ports generate agglomeration effects (see Harrison [8]). Agglomeration effects arise if a concentration of activities in a particular place attracts new similar activities, because of the availability of specific knowledge, resources, infrastructure etc. In ports, maritime services and some 'resource industries' tend to cluster together because of agglomeration

7 Maritime Engineering and Ports 269 effects. Large ports with a concentration of activities have 'scale advantages' over SMSP's without a concentration of these activities. Hinterland infrastructure Large ports have in general good hinterland connections. Large amounts of goods are transported to the hinterland. Thus, infrastructure needs to be provided. The large transport flows to/from the hinterland have negative consequences for the port city: the accessibility of the port is threatened by congestion, especially on the road. Furthermore, the living environment is relatively unfavourable, because of the dense network of infrastructure and the presence of industries that causes negative 'external effects'. Small and medium sized ports do not have a vast hinterland network. However, they do not have the accessibility problems faced by the large ports neither. Thus, their regional accessibility is relatively good. Focus on throughput and land scarcity Large ports offer reliable, fast and cheap transport to the hinterland, because their clients demand this. For this reason, large ports focus on efficient throughput. This focus on throughput leads to expansions to the sea, in order to be able to accommodate the increasingly large ships. Such expansion is obviously expensive, and the land is valuable, due to the scarcity of land at a deapsea location. Small and medium sized ports do not have this focus on throughput. They have not expanded to the same extent towards the sea. Therefore, these ports do not have the same scarcity of land as the large ports. Port as core activity of the region For regions with large ports, the port and the port-related activity is often an important source of income. The importance of the port industry leads to an expansive attitude of most large ports and consequently heavy competition between different large ports. In large ports, labourers and employers tend to be well-organised in labour unions and employers organisations. Also, formal organisations of safety and pollution control and of ship guidance are created. As such institutions have to serve a lot of clients, the flexibility tends to be limited. SMSP's tend to have a smaller organisation and less formal structures. Thus, in general, SMSP's have more flexibility. Table 2 summarises the differences between large ports on the one hand and SMSP's on the other hand.

8 270 Maritime Engineering and Ports Table 2: differences between SMSP's and large ports Scale economies Hinterland Land Port policies Large ports Scale advantages in throughput, hinterland transport and clustered industries Good international hinterland accessibility, congestion within the port Land scarcity, due to expansion towards the sea Expansive public and private policies SMSP's Limited scale advantages Local and regional hinterlands, little congestion Land available Flexible and more pragmatic policies 3 Future developments affecting the position of SMSP's The future of SMSP's cannot be analysed in general. The five port activities as described in section one are better 'units of analysis'. In this section, future developments in the bulk market and the breakbulk market will be analysed in terms of expenctations for the development of throughput and value added in SMSP's 3.1 The future developments in the bulk segment In the bulk segment, ports serve as nodal points in transport chains and as location sites for resource industries. Changes in technology and information systems have lowered the need for resource industries to be located in a port. Industries do not select their location by minimising transport costs only. Competition between regions for the location of resource industries has increased. Resource industries can be located in hinterland regions as well as in ports. The competitiveness of (port) regions in attracting resource industries depends on the location preferences of industrial firms. These firms have criteria for deciding which location they consider the most attractive. Seven criteria (see for comparable criteria van Klink [4]) are given in table 3, together with an overview of the competitive position of SMSP's, large ports and inland industrial sites.

9 Maritime Engineering and Ports 271 Table 3: the attractiveness of three locations for resource industries SMSP as Large ports as Inland location location location Availability and costs of land ** ** * Flexibility in the environment *** ** #** Labour costs and labour supply ** ** #** Transport costs #* *** * Logistics attractiveness ** ##* *** Cluster potential * #** ** Environmental issues *** ** * * means relatively unattractive; **** means relatively attractive Table 3 shows that ports in general are attractive locations for resource industries. Inland regions are less attractive, for three reasons. First, inland locations in general have limited expansion potential, because inland locations have developed over time and occupy already a substantial land area. Ports can reclaim land from the sea, an option that is not open for inland destinations. Land for industrial activity tends to be scarce and expansion possibilities for the industry are found especially in seaports. Second, the transport costs of inland locations are, generally speaking, higher than in ports. Third, the environmental concern is a more restricting factor in inland locations. In ports, industries can be separated relatively well from other activities such as housing and shopping. Furthermore, the transport from ports can be relatively environmentalfriendly. Competition between seaports The port industry is characterised by a lot of competition between ports. In the bulk segment, large ports have some advantages over the SMSP's, such as the cluster potential and logistics attractiveness. Furthermore, large ports are better locations with regard to transport costs. Large ports have generally a better sea-accessibility and they offer more transport services to the hinterland. However, SMSP's have advantages over large ports as well. Most importantly, the majority of large ports seem to reach the expansion limits, and thus, land is scarce and expensive to develop. Therefore, relatively high land prices are a likely result. Furthermore, environmental constraints might be relatively high in large ports, because the pressure on the environment is already large.

10 272 Maritime Engineering and Ports Finally, SMSP's might have a higher 'environmental flexibility'. This means that SMSP's might offer better opportunities to get a 'tailor-made' service, because suppliers as well as public parties show a relatively high willingness to cooperate. In general, resource industries are of declining importance in the 'postindustrial world'. Technological progress has reduced the employment in the industrial sector dramatically. The growth prospects of most industrial activities are at best moderate, except for the chemical industry, which is likely to grow significantly. However, the mobility of industrial activities has increased substantially. Resource industries are not concentrated in one location anymore, but plants are part of a (global) production chain. Industrial processes have been decomposed spatially. Because of the growing importance of industrial production chains, logistics is vital for industrial firms. Thus, ports are attractive locations for resource industries, if their location fits in the overall production and distribution chain. An analysis of the attractivemness of a port has to focus on the relevant logistics chain. In section four the relevance of this overview for SMSP's strategies is discussed. 3.2 The future of SMSP's in the breakbulk segment The introduction of the container for maritime breakbulk cargo, in the 1960s revolutionised liner shipping. Five generations of specialised container ships have been build, dedicated container terminals have been developed, shipping lines have formed conferences and consortia, and shipping lines are striving to become global partners of shippers. Two recent developments in the shipping industry will -in our opinion- have an impact on the competitive position of SMSP's. Both are discussed below Moderate container growth The last three decades, containerised trade flows have risen rapidly. The global maritime container market has grown faster than expected. The container carrying capacity in 1994 was twenty times as much as in 1970, an annual growth rate of more than 13%. In this section, an analysis is made of the sources of this tremendous growth. This is done in order to be able to analyse future growth rates in the container transport market. Two different types of sources can be divided: variables that influence the size of trade flows between countries and variables that influence the containerised proportion of all trade flows. In general, the container

11 Maritime Engineering and Ports 273 volume on the trade between country i and j (CTy ) is the containerised proportion of the trade (6y ) multiplied by the total trade flow (TTy ). CTij=6ij*TTjj. (1) The two variables: containerised proportion of trade and total trade, are both determined by other variables. The total trade in volume (TT) between two countries is determined by the size of an economy (GDP), the openness of this economy (I resp. E), the importance of the other country as trade partner (DT) and the value density (VD). In formula form this can be written as: TTy = (Ii * GDPi * DTj)/ VDy. (2) The first two variables determine the total trade of country I, the third variable indicates the share of that trade to country j and the fourth changes the value figures of that trade to volume figures, that can be used for deriving throughput forecasts. The containerised share of the trade is determined by the variables composition of trade (CT), that shows the containerisable share of trade, the competitive position of sea transport (CP), and the actual containerisation rate (CR). This can be written as follows: 6ij = CTij * CPy * CRij (3) Thus the seven variables as mentioned above will determine the future growth of the container volumes. Each of these is discussed below to analyse its impact on the container throughput. GDP-growth (GDP) GDP growth obviously generates 'ceteris paribus' more trade, as a larger economy trades more than a small economy. Opening up of the economy (I respectively E) Changes in the export and import ratios (I respectively E) change trade flows: a more open economy trades more. Over the last decade, the global economy has become more open. This trend is obviously temporary: the process of opening up cannot continue infinitely.

12 274 Maritime Engineering and Ports Direction of trade (DT) Whether or not trade can be containerised, depends on the direction of trade. Trade between neighbouring countries will generally be transported overland. This trade is not containerisable sea trade. Some economists argue that a regionalisation of production and trade is likely to occur. Obviously, this limits the market prospects for sea transport, as sea transport normally requires a long sea leg. The value density (VD) Containers carry a more or less stable tonnage, while the value of the content of a container varies to a very large extent. GDP and trade flows are commonly given is monetary values. The underlying volume of goods varies over time. This influences the container volume. The value density has been increasing due to more sophisticated production and the miniaturisation of components. Composition of trade (CT) Economies generally export raw products -that are in general not containerisable- and (semi) manufactured products, that are containerisable. Most countries have witnessed an increase of the share of the latter type of products. This changing composition of traded products has led to an increase in the maritime container transport. Competitive position of sea transport (CP) The competition between modes influences container volumes. On the intercontinental trade, market share can only be won from or lost to air cargo. In terms of tonnage, air transport does have a very small market share (some 3-4% on the Atlantic, De Langen [9]). This might change in the future with changes in the competitive position of modes of transport. Containerisation rate (CR) The number of products carried in containers is still rising. Currently, a move to container transport is considered for fresh fruits, special ores and cars. These changes constitute another increase in the potential of containerised cargo. Teurelincx et al [12] argue that the Containerisation rate in Nothern Europe will increase from 61% to 73% in th year These seven variables together determine the container throughput volumes. Button [13] argues that throughput predictions are by no means trustworthy: error margins tend to be large. Furthermore, there is no established consensus on the methodology of prediction. Thus, rather

13 Maritime Engineering and Ports 275 than quantitative forecasts, this paper gives some qualitative considerations only. These indicate, contrary to the common belief, that the large growth of container throughput is temporary, ad that the growth is likely to diminish in the medium long run. Source GDP I resp. E CT VD DT CR CP Table 4: sources of container throughput growth: past and future Effect Expectations for the future Moderate effect. GDP growth Stable effect, the global GDP facilitated trade growth Substantial effect. The globalisation of the economy was an important driver of trade growth Limited effect, the composition of trade changed slightly towards containerisable goods Substantial negative effect, the value density has increased substantially. Moderat effect, changes in the direction of trade have promoted sea-transport. Substantial effect, the rising containerisation rate was the most important driver of higher throughput volumes No effect. The competitive position of sea transport was stable. growth will continue to contribute to throughput growth Diminishing effect, the process of opening up has led to global trade flows. The speed of further opening up is likely to decrease. Diminishing effect, financial flows will dominate physical flows. This reduces the containerisable potential of trade. Stable effect, the miniaturisation of products is likely to endure, at least in the medium long run. Diminishing effect. Trade between continents is likely to diminish due to 'glocalisation'. Diminishing effect, the containerisation rate on the main trades is high, so the potential for a further rise is limited. No significant effect, the vast majority of intercontinental transport will continue to be transported overseas. If the expectations of table 4 are correct, the rise in containerised transport will diminish. However, the dominant 'mental map' in the port industry is for continued high container throughput growth. We claim that this is not beyond doubt and that container flows -at least in developed countries- might stabilise in the medium long run. This is not in line with most throughput prospects, which claim continued growth, albeit at a lower pace, of about 3-5% (see [2] and [12]). The -implicit or explicit- expectations of future throughput volumes are important ingredients for formulating port strategies. In section 4 some considerations for strategic policies of SMSP's are given.

14 276 Maritime Engineering and Ports Transit time competition and service differentiation Sophisticated tracking and tracing systems enable transport flows to be regarded as moving stock. As the reliability and damage rates of different services are converging, transit time is likely to gain importance as a source of competitive advantage, as it reduces generalised transport costs and lowers the size of the stock. One clearly visible sign of this transit time competition is the planned introduction for afastship service across the Atlantic Ocean. This service is aiming to attract time-sensitive cargo, and claims to become operational in 2001 (De Langen [9]). Relatively small fastships are already operational, amongst others in Japan, and fast ferries are in operation as well. Thus, it seems that transit time competition is becoming more important in the maritime container transport market. Service differentiation is a result of transit time competition. If a service offers a direct link to a certain port that is not called directly by other services, it is likely to provide an advantageous transit time. Furthermore, a service can differ in that is offers a direct service between two ports whereas other competing services make one or more stops before they call at the same port. In this case, the transit time of the first service is likely to be shorter. Thus in principle, more different services will reduce average transit times. Shipping services are in a process of continuous adaptation to market demands (Slack [10]). One adaptation is the creation of 'mega hubs' and the development of a port hierarchy (Robinson [11]). At the moment deepsea shipping services are concentrated in a few hub ports. Simple hub and spoke network Network with hub, second order and third order ports Figure 2: an example of service differentiation

15 Maritime Engineering and Ports 277 However this port hierarchy is evoluting in time. A port network is developing with first order, second order, third order and 'pure' feeder ports. Different services connect al these ports. We claim that, as a result of more service differentiation, especially second and third order ports are able to attract more direct calls. Obviously, this trend offers opportunities for SMSFs. Figure two illustrates this trend. 4 Considerations for SMSP's strategic policies A port strategy has to be based both on a general overview of market developments and an analysis of specific characteristics of one particular port. In this paper an overview of general market developments has been given. We conclude with some considerations for strategy formulation. Obviously, for any particular port, these have to be supplemented by a specific strategic analysis for this port. 4.1 Strategic considerations for SMSP's regarding the bulk segment SMSFs can be attractive locations for resource industries. Based on the competitive advantages of SMSP's compared with inland destinations and large ports, some specific activities can be targeted. Generally speaking, for industrial activities for which clustering is important, such as the chemical industry, a location in a large port is favourable. Furthermore, for activities which require a good maritime access, such as the steel and coal industry large ports have a competitive advantage as well. In general, SMSP's have a competitive advantage in providing a good environment for specialised activities that require flexibility. Thus SMSP's could target activities that cannot be standardised. Examples are the assembling industry of large construction components and the decompositioning industry of offshore installations. Furthermore, industries such as the foodprocessing, cacao and flour industry require flexibility, because these activities have large seasonal fluctuations. These industries can be attracted by SMSP's as well. 4.2 Strategic considerations for SMSP's in the breakbulk segment The trees in the container segment will not grow into heaven. Volumes will grow at a moderate pace only. Thus, SMSP's should not blindly strive to become transhipment ports. Many ports are now competing to

16 278 Maritime Engineering and Ports gain a hub status. However, in order to be able to compete, ports need to invest substantial amounts of capital, for instance in dredging and handling equipment. These investments are not the most effective way for SMSP's to expand their ports. SMSP's could be able to attract a few direct calls, because the service differentiation will rise, so that relatively small ports have the opportunity to attract a few direct calls. Although the general market prospects are moderate, growth prospects in the short sea market are better, as the competitive position of sea transport is likely to improve. Furthermore, intercontinental flows have been containerised to a large extent, but intracontinental flows have not. Thus, a rising containerisation might provide a source of additional throughput growth. SMSP's could thus be able to improve their shortsea services. Furthermore, just as in the bulk industries, SMSP's have a competitive advantage in serving clients with special dedicated wishes. These are not likely to be found in the container market, but in the conventional breakbulk market. Activities such as the throughput of heavy cargo, wood, paper and pulp, fruit and cars can be attracted by SMSP's. Such acticities generate relatively much value-added and employment. Thus targeting such activities seems a viable strategy. 4.3 An SMSP's league SMSP's have similar characteristics and also similar interests. An SMSP's league that promotes the interests of SMSP's and aims to achieve cooperation amongst SMSP's where benifcial could thus be usfull for SMSP's. Public policies, on the national as well as international level, are important for the future of ports. SMSP's have similar interests for public policies. For instance, a well functioning shortsea shipping industry is not possible without well functioning SMSP's. These ports can reduce the overland transport distance and make shortsea shipping an alternative for large numbers of shippers. An SMSP-league could secure the SMSPinterests in national and international policy making. Furthermore, new technologies are knocking on the door of the port industry. Self-unloading ships, fastships and ships with new unloading systems are technically feasible. However, in order to ensure commercial viability, ports need to facilitate the introduction of new technologies. An SMSP's league might lead to co-operation between various SMSP's in order to develop new services with new technologies.

17 Maritime Engineering and Ports 279 References [1] HARALAMBIDES, H.E. and VEENSTRA, A.W. Ports as trade facilitators in the export-led growth strategies of developing countries, Conference Proceedings of the Conference Cooperation, Population growth and Economic Development in the Mediterranean Area, [2] GHR, 2020; integrale verkenningen voor haven en Industrie, 1998 [3] GHR, Scheepsgebonden maritieme diensten in Rotterdam, 1997 [4] KLINK, A. van (1995) Towards the borderless mainport Rotterdam, an analysis of functional, spatial and administrative dynamics in port systems Thesis Publishers Amsterdam [5] HAYNES, K. E., KING, Y. M. and STOUGH, R. R. (1997) Regional port dynamics in the global economy: the case of Kaoshiung, Taiwan Maritime Policy and Management 24 (1) 1995 p [6] VERBEKE,A. PEETERS, C. and DECLERQ, E., De toepassmg van de produktfoliomethode in functie van een zeehavenstrategie, Tijdschrift Vervoerswetenschap (3) pp , 1995 [7] VERBEKE, A. PEETERS, C. and DECLERQ, E., Trafiekprognoses in Zeehavens, Tijdschrift Vervoerswetenschap (3) pp ,1995 [8] HARRISON, B. Industrial districts: old wine in new bottles.' Regional studies 26 (5) pp , [9] LANGEN, P.W. de, Time centrality in transport, paper presented at the 8* WCTR conference, Antwerp, [10] SLACK, B. and COMTOIS, C. and SLETMO, G. (1996) Shipping lines as agents of change in the port industry Maritime Policy and Management 23 (3) 1996 p [11] ROBINSON, R. (1998) Asian hub/feeder nets: the dynamics of restructuring Maritime policy and management 25 (1) 1998 p [12] TEURELINCX, D., VERBEKE, A. and DECLERQ, E, De economische betekenis van zeehavenprojecten, 1998 [13] BUTTON, K.J. Transport Economics, second edition, Edward Elgar 1993