IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i3p1067-d315807.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Masterplanning at the Port of Dover: The Use of Discrete-Event Simulation in Managing Road Traffic

Author

Listed:
  • Geoffrey C. Preston

    (Kent Business School, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7FS, UK)

  • Phillip Horne

    (Dover Harbour Board, Harbour House, Marine Parade, Dover CT17 9BU, UK)

  • Maria Paola Scaparra

    (Kent Business School, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7FS, UK
    Centre for Logistics and Heuristic Optimisation, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7FS, UK)

  • Jesse R. O’Hanley

    (Kent Business School, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7FS, UK
    Centre for Logistics and Heuristic Optimisation, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7FS, UK)

Abstract

The Port of Dover is Europe’s busiest ferry port, handling £119 billion or 17% of the UK’s annual trade in goods. The Port is constrained geographically to a small area and faces multiple challenges, both short- and long-term, with managing the flow of five million vehicles per year to/from mainland Europe. This article describes some of the work that the Port is doing to minimize the impact of port road traffic on the local community and environment using discrete-event simulation modeling. Modeling is particularly valuable in identifying where future bottlenecks are likely to form within the Port due to projected growth in freight traffic and comparing the effectiveness of different interventions to cope with growth. One of our key findings is that space which can be used flexibly is far more valuable than dedicated space. This is supported by the much greater reduction in traffic congestion that is expected to be achieved given a 10% increase in freight traffic by reallocating space at the front of the system to temporarily hold vehicles waiting to pass through border control and check-in compared to extending the amount of space for ferry embarkation at the rear of the system. The importance of flexible space has implications for port design that can be applied more broadly. Modeling is also useful in identifying critical thresholds for vehicle processing times that would cause the system to become overwhelmed. Increasing the check-in time by just three to five minutes, for example, would completely exceed the Port’s capacity and produce indefinite queueing. This finding has important implications for Brexit planning. From a wider context, the research presented here nicely illustrates how simulation can be used to instill more evidence-based thinking into port masterplanning and support “green port” and other corporate sustainability initiatives.

Suggested Citation

  • Geoffrey C. Preston & Phillip Horne & Maria Paola Scaparra & Jesse R. O’Hanley, 2020. "Masterplanning at the Port of Dover: The Use of Discrete-Event Simulation in Managing Road Traffic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:3:p:1067-:d:315807
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/3/1067/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/3/1067/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Panagiotis Angeloudis & Michael G. H. Bell, 2011. "A review of container terminal simulation models," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(5), pages 523-540, February.
    2. Roso, Violeta & Woxenius, Johan & Lumsden, Kenth, 2009. "The dry port concept: connecting container seaports with the hinterland," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 338-345.
    3. Lehnfeld, Jana & Knust, Sigrid, 2014. "Loading, unloading and premarshalling of stacks in storage areas: Survey and classification," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 297-312.
    4. Branislav Dragović & Ernestos Tzannatos & Nam Kuy Park, 2017. "Simulation modelling in ports and container terminals: literature overview and analysis by research field, application area and tool," Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 4-34, March.
    5. Woo, Su-Han & Pettit, Stephen J. & Kwak, Dong-Wook & Beresford, Anthony K.C., 2011. "Seaport research: A structured literature review on methodological issues since the 1980s," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 667-685, August.
    6. P. Taneja & W.E. Walker & H. Ligteringen & M. Van Schuylenburg & R. Van Der Plas, 2010. "Implications of an uncertain future for port planning," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(3), pages 221-245, May.
    7. Lucas Martins Ikeziri & Fernando Bernardi de Souza & Mahesh C. Gupta & Paula de Camargo Fiorini, 2019. "Theory of constraints: review and bibliometric analysis," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(15-16), pages 5068-5102, August.
    8. Mariia Dushenko & Clemet Thærie Bjorbæk & Kenn Steger-Jensen, 2018. "Application of a Sustainability Model for Assessing the Relocation of a Container Terminal: A Case Study of Kristiansand Port," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, December.
    9. Kap Hwan Kim & Hoon Lee, 2015. "Container Terminal Operation: Current Trends and Future Challenges," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Chung-Yee Lee & Qiang Meng (ed.), Handbook of Ocean Container Transport Logistics, edition 127, chapter 2, pages 43-73, Springer.
    10. Korovyakovsky, Eugene & Panova, Yulia, 2011. "Dynamics of Russian dry ports," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 25-34.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Neven Grubisic & Tomislav Krljan & Livia Maglić & Siniša Vilke, 2020. "The Microsimulation Model for Assessing the Impact of Inbound Traffic Flows for Container Terminals Located near City Centers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-19, November.
    2. Orlando Marco Belcore & Massimo Di Gangi & Antonio Polimeni, 2023. "Connected Vehicles and Digital Infrastructures: A Framework for Assessing the Port Efficiency," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-16, May.
    3. Wenrui Qu & Tao Tao & Bo Xie & Yi Qi, 2021. "A State-Dependent Approximation Method for Estimating Truck Queue Length at Marine Terminals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-18, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Amir Gharehgozli & Nima Zaerpour & Rene Koster, 2020. "Container terminal layout design: transition and future," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 22(4), pages 610-639, December.
    2. Branislav Dragović & Ernestos Tzannatos & Nam Kuy Park, 2017. "Simulation modelling in ports and container terminals: literature overview and analysis by research field, application area and tool," Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 4-34, March.
    3. Damla Kizilay & Deniz Türsel Eliiyi, 2021. "A comprehensive review of quay crane scheduling, yard operations and integrations thereof in container terminals," Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 1-42, March.
    4. Park, Jaehun & Lee, Byung Kwon, 2020. "Liner-dedicated manageability estimation for port operational reliability," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    5. de Almeida Rodrigues, Thiago & Maria de Miranda Mota, Caroline & Manuele dos Santos, Inez, 2021. "Determining dry port criteria that support decision making," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    6. Kastner, Marvin & Kämmerling, Nicolas & Jahn, Carlos & Clausen, Uwe, 2020. "Equipment selection and layout planning - Literature overview and research directions," Chapters from the Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conference of Logistics (HICL), in: Jahn, Carlos & Kersten, Wolfgang & Ringle, Christian M. (ed.), Data Science in Maritime and City Logistics: Data-driven Solutions for Logistics and Sustainability. Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conferen, volume 30, pages 485-519, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute of Business Logistics and General Management.
    7. Miguel Hervás-Peralta & Sara Poveda-Reyes & Gemma Dolores Molero & Francisco Enrique Santarremigia & Juan-Pascual Pastor-Ferrando, 2019. "Improving the Performance of Dry and Maritime Ports by Increasing Knowledge about the Most Relevant Functionalities of the Terminal Operating System (TOS)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-23, March.
    8. Facchini, F. & Digiesi, S. & Mossa, G., 2020. "Optimal dry port configuration for container terminals: A non-linear model for sustainable decision making," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 164-178.
    9. Alena Khaslavskaya & Violeta Roso, 2020. "Dry ports: research outcomes, trends, and future implications," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 22(2), pages 265-292, June.
    10. Feng, Yuanjun & Song, Dong-Ping & Li, Dong & Zeng, Qingcheng, 2020. "The stochastic container relocation problem with flexible service policies," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 116-163.
    11. Gharehgozli, Amir Hossein & Vernooij, Floris Gerardus & Zaerpour, Nima, 2017. "A simulation study of the performance of twin automated stacking cranes at a seaport container terminal," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(1), pages 108-128.
    12. Leonard Heilig & Stefan Voß, 2017. "Inter-terminal transportation: an annotated bibliography and research agenda," Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 35-63, March.
    13. Monios, Jason & Wilmsmeier, Gordon, 2012. "Giving a direction to port regionalisation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1551-1561.
    14. Gharehgozli, Amir & Zaerpour, Nima, 2018. "Stacking outbound barge containers in an automated deep-sea terminal," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(3), pages 977-995.
    15. Krüger, Stephan & Schwientek, Anne Kathrina & Jahn, Carlos, 2021. "Evaluation of an integrated planning and simulation tool," Chapters from the Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conference of Logistics (HICL), in: Jahn, Carlos & Kersten, Wolfgang & Ringle, Christian M. (ed.), Adapting to the Future: Maritime and City Logistics in the Context of Digitalization and Sustainability. Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conf, volume 32, pages 351-371, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute of Business Logistics and General Management.
    16. Bask, Anu & Roso, Violeta & Andersson, Dan & Hämäläinen, Erkki, 2014. "Development of seaport–dry port dyads: two cases from Northern Europe," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 85-95.
    17. Josip Božičević & Ivica Lovrić & Dajana Bartulović & Sanja Steiner & Violeta Roso & Jasmina Pašagić Škrinjar, 2021. "Determining Optimal Dry Port Location for Seaport Rijeka Using AHP Decision-Making Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-21, June.
    18. Bierwirth, Christian & Meisel, Frank, 2015. "A follow-up survey of berth allocation and quay crane scheduling problems in container terminals," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(3), pages 675-689.
    19. Chen, Hong & Cullinane, Kevin & Liu, Nan, 2017. "Developing a model for measuring the resilience of a port-hinterland container transportation network," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 282-301.
    20. Lättilä, Lauri & Henttu, Ville & Hilmola, Olli-Pekka, 2013. "Hinterland operations of sea ports do matter: Dry port usage effects on transportation costs and CO2 emissions," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 23-42.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:3:p:1067-:d:315807. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.