An assessment of port reform in Argentina: outcomes and challenges ahead

References and notes

• Hoffmann , J . 2001 . Latin American ports: results and determinants of private sector participation . International Journal of Maritime Economics , 3 : 221 – 241 .
   Google Scholar
• Juhel , M . 2001 . Globalisation, privatisation and restructuring of ports . International Journal of Maritime Economics , 3 : 139 – 174 .
   Google Scholar
• Ibid. 1
   Google Scholar
• For a comprehensive study of the extent of privatization trends in the world's top 100 container ports see Baird A 2002 Privatization trends at the world's top-100 container ports Maritime Policy & Management 29 271 284 For a comprehensive view of all the dimensions involved in the reform of ports see the toolkit developed by the World Bank: World Bank and PPIAF, 2003, Port Reform Toolkit. Effective Decision Support for Policymakers Washington DC World Bank Available at www.ppiaf.org
   Google Scholar
• The data collected in table 1 deals exclusively with projects in which private companies assume development and operating risks during the contract period. Investments are recorded on a commitment basis in the year of financial closure. Actual disbursements are not tracked
   Google Scholar
• The specific legal instruments applied to the port sector were: the Decrees 906/91, 2284/91 and 817/92, the Ports’ Law (Ley 24.093, June 1992 complemented by Decree 1092/92) and the Regulation of the Law (Decree 769/93)
   Google Scholar
• Sgut M 2000 Informe sobre reestructuración portuaria. Impacto social del Puerto de Buenos Aires. Oficina Internacional del Trabajo XX Reunión del Comité Técnico Permanente de Puertos de la Organización de los Estados Americanos, Cali Colombia OIT
   Google Scholar
• World Bank 1996 Argentina-transport Privatization and Regulation: The Next Wave of Challenges Report No. 14469 Washington DC World Bank
   Google Scholar
• Coelli T Estache A Perelman S Trujillo L 2003 A Primer on Efficiency Measurement for Utilities and Transport Regulators Washington DC World Bank Institute Development Studies
   Google Scholar
• Estache A Serebrisky T 2004 Where Do We Stand on Transport Infrastructure Deregulation and Public–Private Partnership? Policy Research Working Paper Series, No. 3356 Washington DC World Bank
   Google Scholar
• Source: Ministerio de Planificación Federal, Inversion Pública y Servicios, Subsecretaría de Puertos y Vías Navegables, puertosbuenosaires.gov.ar
   Google Scholar
• Ibid 4 World Bank
   Google Scholar
• Estache A De Rus G 2000 Privatization and Regulation of Transport Infrastructure: Guidelines for Policymakers and Regulators Washington DC World Bank Institute Development Studies
   Google Scholar
• For an empirical study of the relationship of port efficiency and maritime transport costs in Latin America see Sánchez R Hoffmann J Micco A Pizzolitto G Sgut M Wilmsmeier G 2003 Port efficiency and international trade: port efficiency as a determinant of maritime transport costs Maritime Economics & Logistics 5 199 218
   Google Scholar
• A model for monitoring the conditions in which anticompetitive conducts are likely to develop is developed in Kent P Ashar A 2001 Port competition and regulation: a tool for monitoring for anti-competitive behaviour International Journal of Maritime Economics 3 27 51 This tool could be of significant help for countries that do not have significant antitrust experience and lack human resources specialized in transport economics. Besides, the model could be jointly developed and applied by the sector regulator (port authority) and the antitrust agency, fostering the much needed cooperation between these agencies
   Google Scholar
• Flor , L and Defilippi , E . 2003 . Port infrastructure: an access model for the essential facility . Maritime Economics & Logistics , 5 : 116 – 132 .
   Google Scholar
• Heaver , T , Meersman , H , Moglia , F and Van de Voorde , E . 2000 . Do mergers and alliances influence European shipping and port competition? . Maritime Policy & Management , 27 ( 4 ) : 363 – 373 .
   Google Scholar
• The concern for competition was present throughout the privatization process. Bidders were allowed to bid for more than one terminal but had to express a preference and could be awarded only one terminal. Terminals 1 and 2 would eventually be awarded jointly
   Google Scholar
• Comisión Nacional de Defensa de la Competencia ‘Maersk Argentina Holdings SA, Terminal 4 SA y Terminal EMCYM SA S/notificación art 8 Ley 25156’
   Google Scholar
• A relevant geographic market is the minimum area where a hypothetical monopolist can profitably increase prices. In other words, the minimum area where there is no effective competition because consumers (or users) cannot demand services from other suppliers. For a detailed description of port competition in geographical areas see Heaver T Meersman H Van de Voorde E 2001 Co-operation and competition in international container transport: strategies for ports Maritime Policy & Management 28 293 305
   Google Scholar
• For US thresholds see US Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission Merger Guidelines. The CNDC does not pre-define changes and levels thresholds in merger analysis
   Google Scholar
• The existence of barriers to entry in the European container handling industry and the potential consequences of having firms with dominant position in this industry is discussed in Notteboom T 2002 Consolidation and contestability in the European container handling industry Maritime Policy & Management 29 257 269
   Google Scholar
• Dock Sud is an actual competitior, with a market share of 30% in the relevant market. Zarate opened a container terminal in November 2001 with a capacity of 50,000 TEUs and has plans to expand it to 500,000 TEUs
   Google Scholar
• For an analysis of the role of excess capacity as an efficiency enhancing decision or a tool for entry deterrence in ocean liner shipping markets see Fusillo M 2003 Excess capacity and entry deterrence: the case of ocean liner shipping markets Maritime Economics & Logistics 5 100 115
   Google Scholar
• Haralambides , HE . 2002 . Competition, excess capacity and the pricing of port infrastructure . Maritime Economics & Logistics , 4 : 323 – 347 .
   Google Scholar
• Estache , A , González , M and Trujillo , L . 2002 . Efficiency gains from port reform and the potencial for yardstick competition: lessons from Mexico . World Development , 30 : 545 – 560 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• See publications at, http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/3888
   Google Scholar
• Rowlinson M Wixey S 2002 The Politics and Economics of Developing Coastal Shipping IAME Panama 2002 Conference Proceedings Available at, http://www.eclac.cl/Transporte/perfil/iame_papers/papers.asp
   Google Scholar
• Breuillet A Harding A West R 2002 The Potential for Regional Cabotage in Central America IAME Panama 2002 Conference Proceedings Available at, http://www.eclac.cl/Transporte/perfil/iame_papers/papers.asp
   Google Scholar