A conceptual framework for cooperation in hinterland development between neighbouring seaport authorities

References

• Uni-Muenster. 2011. Wirtschaft: Häfen Antwerpen Und Rotterdam Wollen Sich in Duisburg Einkaufen.
   Google Scholar
• Acciaro, M., A. Bardi, M. I. Cusano, C. Ferrari, and A. Tei. 2015. “Contested Port Hinterlands an Empirical Survey.” Presented at WCTRS- SIGA2, Antwerp.
   Google Scholar
• Aronietis, R., E. Van De Voorde, and T. Vanelslander. 2011. “Competitiveness Determinants of Some European Ports in Containerized Cargo Market.” http://www.vliz.be/imis/imis.php?module=ref&refid=202453.
   Google Scholar
• Blauwens, G. 1988. Welvaartseconomie En Kosten-Batenanalyse. Deurne: MIM.
   Google Scholar
• Blauwens, G., D'Haens, P., and A. Van Breedam. 2004. Logistiek: Laatste Front in De Concurrentieslag. Antwerpen: Garant.
   Google Scholar
• Blauwens, G., E. Van De Voorde, and P. De Baere. 2016. Transport Economics. Berchem: De Boeck.
   Google Scholar
• Chou, C.-C. 2005. “A Comparative Study of Models for Port Choice.” In Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies 5: 608–616.
   Google Scholar
• Chou, C.-C. 2010. “AHP Model for the Container Port Choice in the Multiple-Ports Region.” Journal of Marine Science and Technology 18 (2): 221–232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Langen, P. W. 2007. “Port Competition and Selection in Contestable Hinterlands; the Case of Austria.” European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 7 (1): 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• De Langen, P. W. 2008. Ensuring Hinterland Access Role of Port Authorities. OECD - International Transport Forum, Paris.
   Google Scholar
• De Langen, P. W., and A. Chouly. 2004. “Hinterland Access Regimes in Seaports.” European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 4 (4): 361–380.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2011. White Paper on Transport: Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area : Towards a Competitive and Resource-Efficient Transport System. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission, and Eurostat. 2011. Road Freight Transport Methodology Reference Manual for the Implementation of Council Regulation No 1172/98 on Statistics on the Carriage of Goods by Road. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
   Google Scholar
• Eurostat. 2016. “Road Freight Transport by Type of Goods - Statistics Explained.” http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Road_freight_transport_by_type_of_goods#Road_freight_transport_by_type_of_cargo.
   Google Scholar
• Ferrari, C., and E. Musso. 2011. “Italian Ports: Towards a New Governance?” Maritime Policy & Management 38 (3): 335–346. doi:10.1080/03088839.2011.572698.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferrari, C., F. Parola, and E. Gattorna. 2011. “Measuring the Quality of Port Hinterland Accessibility: The Ligurian Case.” Transport Policy 18 (2): 382–391. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.11.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franc, P., and M. Van Der Horst. 2010. “Understanding Hinterland Service Integration by Shipping Lines and Terminal Operators: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis.” Journal of Transport Geography 18 (4): 557–566. Special Issue on Comparative North American and European gateway logistics. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2010.03.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, G., A. Korzhenevych, and J. Bröckner. 2014. “Update of the Handbook on External Costs of Transport.” Ricardo AEA. http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/sustainable/studies/doc/2014-handbook-external-costs-transport.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Goss, R. O. 1990. “Economic Policies and Seaports: The Economic Functions of Seaports.” Maritime Policy & Management 17 (3): 207–219. doi:10.1080/03088839000000028.
   Google Scholar
• Guo, L., and Z. Yang. 2017. “Evaluation of Foreign Trade Transport Accessibility for Mainland China.” Maritime Policy & Management 45 (1): 34–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heaver, T. D., H. Meersman, and E. Van De Voorde. 2001. “Co-Operation and Competition in International Container Transport: Strategies for Ports.” Maritime Policy & Management 28 (3): 293–305. doi:10.1080/03088830110055693.
   Google Scholar
• Kuipers, B. 2014. “De Container Is De Beste Uitvinding Van De Laatste 100 Jaar.” In Prijsvraag 2014: Bekroonde Essays. Haarlem: Koninklijke Hollandse Maatschappij der Wetenschappen.
   Google Scholar
• Kupfer, F., P. Goos, R. Kessels, E. Van De Voorde, and A. Verhetsel. 2012. “The Airport Choice of Freighter Operators - a Multinomal Logit Model.” Presented at the TRB 91st Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C., January.
   Google Scholar
• Lam, J. 2010. “An Integrated Approach for Port Selection, Ship Scheduling and Financial Analysis.” NETNOMICS: Economic Research and Electronic Networking 11 (1): 33–46. doi:10.1007/s11066-009-9036-3.
   Google Scholar
• Levinson, M. 2008. The Box: How the Shipping Container Made the World Smaller and the World Economy Bigger. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
   Google Scholar
• Magala, M., and A. Sammons. 2008. “A New Approach to Port Choice Modelling.” Maritime Economics & Logistics 10 (1): 9–34. doi:10.1057/palgrave.mel.9100189.
   Google Scholar
• Malchow, M., and A. Kanafani. 2001. “A Disaggregate Analysis of Factors Influencing Port Selection.” Maritime Policy & Management 28 (3): 265–277. doi:10.1080/03088830110060840.
   Google Scholar
• Malchow, M.., and A. Kanafani. 2004. “A Disaggregate Analysis of Port Selection.” Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 40 (4): 317–337. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2003.05.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meers, D. 2016. ‘From Mental to Modal Shift: Decision Support for Intermodal Transport’. VUB, Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• Meers, D., T. Vermeiren, and C. Macharis. 2014. “Intermodal Break-Even Distances: A Fetish of 300 Kilometres?” In Sustainable Logistics, 6:217–243. Transport and Sustainability 6. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Meersman, H., E. Van De Voorde, and T. Vanelslander. 2007. ‘Zeehavens En Maritiem Transport Cruciale Schakels Voor Logistiek Succes’. Steunpunt Goederenstromen, Antwerpen.
   Google Scholar
• Meersman, H., E. Van De Voorde, and T. Vanelslander. 2012. ‘Beïnvloedingsfactoren Van Havenconcurrentie’. In: Met Have, Goed & Schip over De Schelde. Vijftien Jaar Evolutie Inzake Havengebeuren, Logistiek En Scheepvaart in De Scheldemonding, edited by E. Somers, J. Coppens, G. Gonsaeles. Maklu. Antwerpen
   Google Scholar
• Nazemzadeh, M., and T. Vanelslander. 2015. “The Container Transport System: Selection Criteria and Business Attractiveness for North-European Ports.” Maritime Economics & Logistics 17 (2): 221–245. doi:10.1057/mel.2015.1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newton, S. E., Y. Kawabata, and R. Smith. 2011. ‘The Balance of Container Traffic Amongst European Ports’. Zoetermeer, Netherland: NEA.
   Google Scholar
• Nir, A.-S., K. Lin, and G.-S. Liang. 2003. “Port Choice Behaviour–From the Perspective of the Shipper.” Maritime Policy & Management 30 (2): 165–173. doi:10.1080/0308883032000069262.
   Google Scholar
• Notteboom, T. 2008. “The Relationship between Seaports and the Inter-Modal Hinterland in Light of Global Supply Chains.” In OECD/ITF Joint Transport Research Centre Discussion Papers.Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2008. “Port Competition and Hinterland Connections.” In. Vol. 2008–19. International Transport Forum. http://internationaltransportforum.org/jtrc/DiscussionPapers/DP200819.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Paardenkooper-Suli, K. 2014. ‘The Port of Rotterdam and the Maritime Container: The Rise and Fall of Rotterdam’s Hinterland (1966–2010)’. Erasmus School of History, Culture and Communication (ESHCC), Rotterdam.
   Google Scholar
• Panayides, P., and D.-W. Song. 2012. “Determinants of Users’ Port Choice.” In The Blackwell Companion to Maritime Economics, edited by W. K. Talley, 599–622.Hoboken USA
   Google Scholar
• Platform Synchromodaliteit. 2014. “Wat Is Synchromodaliteit: Definitie.” 2014. www.Platformsynchromodaliteit.nl.
   Google Scholar
• Port of Antwerp. 2014. “Antwerpse Haven Verbetert Ontsluiting Met Zuidoost-Nederland.” 05 2014. http://www.portofantwerp.com/en/node/6381.
   Google Scholar
• Rahimi, M., A. Asef-Vaziri, and R. Harrison. 2008. “An Inland Port Location-Allocation Model for a Regional Intermodal Goods Movement System.” Maritime Econ Logistics 10 (4): 362–379. doi:10.1057/mel.2008.17.
   Google Scholar
• Rashed, Y. 2016. ‘Container Throughput Modelling and Forecasting. An Empirical Dynamic Econometric Time Series Approach : Proefschrift’. Antwerp: Universiteit Antwerpen.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, R. 2002. “Ports as Elements in Value-Driven Chain Systems: The New Paradigm.” Maritime Policy & Management 29 (3): 241–255. doi:10.1080/03088830210132623.
   Google Scholar
• Slack, B. 1985. “Containerization, Inter-Port Competition, and Port Selection.” Maritime Policy & Management 12 (4): 293–303. doi:10.1080/03088838500000043.
   Google Scholar
• Song, D.-W., and P. M. Panayides. 2008. “Global Supply Chain and Port/Terminal: Integration and Competitiveness.” Maritime Policy & Management 35 (1): 73–87. doi:10.1080/03088830701848953.
   Google Scholar
• Suykens, F., and E. Van De Voorde. 1998. “A Quarter A Century of Port Management in Europe: Objectives and Tools.” Maritime Policy & Management 25 (3): 251–261. doi:10.1080/03088839800000037.
   Google Scholar
• Sys, C., K. De Langhe, E. Van De Voorde, and T. Vanelslander. 2012. ‘Hinterlandonstluiting Haven Van Zeebrugge’. UA: Steunpunt goederenstromen.
   Google Scholar
• Tang, L. C., M. W. L. Joyce, and S. W. Lam. 2008. “Understanding Port Choice Behavior—A Network Perspective.” Networks and Spatial Economics 11 (1): 65–82. doi:10.1007/s11067-008-9081-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavasszy, L., and V. M. Jaco. 2011. Modal Shift Target for Freight Transport above 300 Km: An Assessment. Brussels: ACEA.
   Google Scholar
• Tongzon, J. 2009. “Port Choice and Freight Forwarders.” Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 45 (1): 186–195. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2008.02.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tongzon, J., and L. Sawant. 2007. “Port Choice in a Competitive Environment: From the Shipping Lines’ Perspective.” Applied Economics 39 (4): 477–492. doi:10.1080/00036840500438871.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van De Voorde, E., and P. Verhoeven. 2014. “The Economics of Port Authority Reform. A Framework for Ex-Post Evaluation.” Working Paper 2014017. University of Antwerp, Faculty of Applied Economics.
   Google Scholar
• Van Den Berg, R., and P. W. De Langen. 2011. “Hinterland Strategies of Port Authorities: A Case Study of the Port of Barcelona.” Research in Transportation Economics 33 (1): 6–14. doi:10.1016/j.retrec.2011.08.002.
   Google Scholar
• Van Den Berg, R., and P. W. De Langen. 2014. “Towards an “Inland Terminal Centred” Value Proposition.” Maritime Policy & Management 42 (5): 499–515. doi:10.1080/03088839.2014.928955.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Der Horst, M., and P. W. De Langen. 2008. “Coordination in Hinterland Transport Chains: A Major Challenge for the Seaport Community.” Maritime Economics & Logistics 10 (1–2): 108–129. doi:10.1057/palgrave.mel.9100194.
   Google Scholar
• Van Der Horst, M., and L. Van Der Lugt. 2011. “Coordination Mechanisms in Improving Hinterland Accessibility: Empirical Analysis in the Port of Rotterdam.” Maritime Policy & Management 38 (4): 415–435. doi:10.1080/03088839.2011.588257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Der Lugt, L. 2015. Beyond the Landlord - A Strategic Management Perspective on the Port Authority. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
   Google Scholar
• Van Hassel, E., H. Meersman, E. Van De Voorde, and T. Vanelslander. 2014. “Impact of Scale Increase of Container Ships on the Generalised Chain Cost.” Presented at IAME 2014, Norfolk USA.
   Google Scholar
• Verhoeven, P. 2010. “A review of port authority functions: towards a renaissance? ” Maritime Ploicy & Management 37(3), 247-270.
   Google Scholar
• Vigarié, A.1979. Ports De Commerce Et Vie Littorale. Paris: Hachette.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, C., Q. Chen, and R. Huang. 2017. “Locating Dry Ports on A Network: A Case Study on Tianjin Port.” Maritime Policy & Management 45 (1): 71–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiegmans, B. W., A. Van Der Hoest, and T. E. Notteboom. 2008. “Port and Terminal Selection by Deep-Sea Container Operators.” Maritime Policy & Management 35 (6): 517–534. doi:10.1080/03088830802469329.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, A. 2008. “The Impact of Hinterland Access Conditions on Rivalry between Ports.” OECD Publishing. http://internationaltransportforum.org/jtrc/discussionpapers/dp200808.pdf.
   Google Scholar