Measuring the quality of port hinterland accessibility: The Ligurian case
AbstractTraditionally, distance was considered the parameter that could better reflect the economic influence of a seaport on land. Containerisation and intermodality progressively eroded such a paradigm and currently distance became only one of the factors across the overall "equation". In this respect, a fundamental role is played by the effectiveness of inland connections. The better the connection of a port to the various inland markets, the bigger the potential to enlarge its overall captive area. Furthermore, the higher the "frictions" (bottlenecks, delays, etc.) for reaching the hinterland, the lower the inland traffic flows. The major purpose of the paper is to measure container traffic diversion from Ligurian ports (Genoa, La Spezia and Savona) to the main Italian and European competitors. The application of a gravity model will reveal the current role of distance in drawing hinterland market share among the selected ports. Moreover, for evaluating the unexploited potentialities of Ligurian ports, we compared real traffic flows with the outcomes of a spatial interaction model, reassigning inland container flows to the different sampled ports. The calculation of the traffic delta through a gap analysis, allowed measuring the "frictions" thwarting the connectivity between the Ligurian ports and the sampled hinterland regions. Finally, the paper discusses the nature and the reasons for the above traffic diversion.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Transport Policy.
Volume (Year): 18 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 (March)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30473/description#description
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Theo E. Notteboom * & Jean-Paul Rodrigue, 2005. "Port regionalization: towards a new phase in port development," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(3), pages 297-313, July.
- Claudio Ferrari & Francesco Parola & Elena Morchio, 2006. "Southern European Ports and the Spatial Distribution of EDCs," Maritime Economics and Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 60-81, March.
- Emmanuel Guy & Bruno Urli, 2006. "Port Selection and Multicriteria Analysis: An Application to the Montreal-New York Alternative," Maritime Economics and Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(2), pages 169-186, June.
- Mateus Magala & Adrian Sammons, 2008. "A New Approach to Port Choice Modelling," Maritime Economics and Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1-2), pages 9-34, March.
- A G Wilson, 1971. "A family of spatial interaction models, and associated developments," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 3(1), pages 1-32, January.
- G P Clarke & M Clarke & A G Wilson, 1986. "Reexamining old problems with new methods: Portbury revisited," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Pion Ltd, London, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 4(3), pages 353-374, June.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.