IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i17p7414-d1465706.html

Analysis of the Liner Shipping Network Structure of the Asia–Europe Main Trunk Route Using Social Network Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Sunghoon Park

    (Plymouth Business School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK)

  • Saeyeon Roh

    (Plymouth Business School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK)

  • Inhyeok Yeo

    (Plymouth Business School, University of Plymouth, Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK)

Abstract

Due to COVID-19, the shipping market has faced uncertainty, and the possibility of changes in port routes has increased. The purpose of this study was to analyze the network of container liner shipping routes between Asia and Europe. In particular, this research focused on a global risky situation—the COVID-19 pandemic. The data examined encompassed Asia–Europe route schedules from January 2018 to October 2021, which exhibited significant fluctuations due to the COVID-19 pandemic originating in 2019. To access this problem, utilizing concepts of centrality from social network analysis (SNA), namely degree centrality and betweenness centrality, this analysis incorporated route capacity as a weighted factor. The findings revealed that the port of Rotterdam held the highest degree of centrality in 2018, 2019, and 2021, while Shanghai claimed the highest degree of centrality in 2020. Singapore exhibited the highest betweenness centrality. Asian ports wielded greater influence during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to European ports. Furthermore, Singapore emerged as a pivotal mediator in the Asia–Europe routes, playing a significant role within the global supply chain. Results showed that the port could be put into an unstable situation. Therefore, the managers of port and shipping companies should be ready to minimize risk. From an academic perspective, it is difficult to integrate and analyze container liner schedules as they are monthly updated. This study therefore analyzed continuous schedules to examine dynamic changes in schedules. By adopting SNA, we presented changes in connectivity over multiple periods. This study addressed questions stakeholders may have had about route changes during the global crisis, contributing to sustainable container transportation. This study provides a general understanding of Asia–Europe container scheduling for decision makers. Using market schedules, this research analyzed the connections, and evaluated and compared each port.

Suggested Citation

  • Sunghoon Park & Saeyeon Roh & Inhyeok Yeo, 2024. "Analysis of the Liner Shipping Network Structure of the Asia–Europe Main Trunk Route Using Social Network Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-10, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:17:p:7414-:d:1465706
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/17/7414/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/17/7414/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wenpin Tsai, 2002. "Social Structure of “Coopetition” Within a Multiunit Organization: Coordination, Competition, and Intraorganizational Knowledge Sharing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 179-190, April.
    2. Buchnea, Emily & Elsahn, Ziad, 2022. "Historical social network analysis: Advancing new directions for international business research," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(5).
    3. Park, Han Woo & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2013. "Decomposing social and semantic networks in emerging “big data” research," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 756-765.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Florian Becker-Ritterspach & Christoph Dörrenbächer, 2011. "An Organizational Politics Perspective on Intra-firm Competition in Multinational Corporations," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 533-559, August.
    2. Artur Hugon & An-Ping Lin & Stanimir Markov, 2024. "Intrafirm Knowledge Sharing in the Investment Research Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(4), pages 2427-2446, April.
    3. Hyejin Park & Han Woo Park, 2018. "Two-side face of knowledge building using scientometric analysis," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(6), pages 2815-2836, November.
    4. Miguel Afonso Sellitto & Guilherme Schreiber Pereira & Rafael Marques & Daniel Pacheco Lacerda, 2018. "Systemic Understanding of Coopetitive Behaviour in a Latin American Technological Park," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 479-494, October.
    5. Maruccia, Ylenia & Solazzo, Gianluca & Del Vecchio, Pasquale & Passiante, Giuseppina, 2020. "Evidence from Network Analysis application to Innovation Systems and Quintuple Helix," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    6. Mierzejewska Wioletta, 2023. "Does coopetition pay off? Benefits of intra-organizational coopetition within business groups," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 59(2), pages 150-167, June.
    7. Goh, Shao Hung & Eldridge, Stephen, 2019. "Sales and Operations Planning: The effect of coordination mechanisms on supply chain performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 80-94.
    8. Tippmann, Esther & Sharkey Scott, Pamela & Reilly, Marty & O’Brien, Donal, 2018. "Subsidiary coopetition competence: Navigating subsidiary evolution in the multinational corporation," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 540-554.
    9. Linda Argote & Sunkee Lee & Jisoo Park, 2021. "Organizational Learning Processes and Outcomes: Major Findings and Future Research Directions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5399-5429, September.
    10. Wu, Sihong & Fan, Di & Su, Yiyi, 2025. "International relations and foreign divestment of multinational enterprises," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(5).
    11. Jungwon Yoon & Joshua SungWoo Yang & Han Woo Park, 2017. "Quintuple helix structure of Sino-Korean research collaboration in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 61-81, October.
    12. Kimberly A. Whitler & Lopo L. Rego & Neil A. Morgan, 2025. "Chief marketing officer role design," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 53(6), pages 1670-1691, December.
    13. Hattula, Johannes D. & Schmitz, Christian & Schmidt, Martin & Reinecke, Sven, 2015. "Is more always better? An investigation into the relationship between marketing influence and managers' market intelligence dissemination," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 179-186.
    14. Petersen, Daniel Agerbech & Goodall, Keith, 2025. "Leadership development in the cross-cultural context of China: Who really cares?," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(3).
    15. Pieter‐Jan Bezemer & Gregory F. Maassen & Frans A. J. Van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2007. "Investigating the Development of the Internal and External Service Tasks of Non‐executive Directors: the case of the Netherlands (1997–2005)," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(6), pages 1119-1129, November.
    16. Darren Nel & Araz Taeihagh, 2025. "Tackling the soft non-technical challenges of the adoption of complexity science in policymaking," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 58(4), pages 643-678, December.
    17. Zhang, Feng & Jiang, Guohua & Cantwell, John A., 2019. "Geographically Dispersed Technological Capability Building and MNC Innovative Performance: The Role of Intra-firm Flows of Newly Absorbed Knowledge," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 1-1.
    18. Joshua Keller & Jeffrey Loewenstein, 2011. "The Cultural Category of Cooperation: A Cultural Consensus Model Analysis for China and the United States," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(2), pages 299-319, April.
    19. Esther Tippmann & Pamela Sharkey Scott & Vincent Mangematin, 2014. "Subsidiary managers’ knowledge mobilizations: Unpacking emergent knowledge flows," Post-Print hal-00864324, HAL.
    20. Zeng, Rong & Grøgaard, Birgitte & Steel, Piers, 2018. "Complements or substitutes? A meta-analysis of the role of integration mechanisms for knowledge transfer in the MNE network," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 415-432.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:16:y:2024:i:17:p:7414-:d:1465706. 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.