A Study of Dry Port Implementation in Iran

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Department of Management, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Yazd, Iran

2 Department of Management, Faculty of Economic & Official Sciences, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

 Dry port is a potential solution for better inland seaport capabilities access. Surely, the success of the implementation of dry port is related to the investigation and identification of the impediments and the ways we want to develop advanced intermodal terminals. In order to find the way of establishing dry port in Iran, interviews and literature review have been carried out. We used a hybrid approach based on DEMATEL and DELPHI methods to discover essential factors of implementation of dry port in Iran and casual relationship between them. The most common and important factors that affect on dry port implementation classified in 8 variables and we suggested a conceptual model. The propose behind the study is to contribute to a better understanding of the way of accomplishment of dry port projects in Iran.

Keywords

References

1- Bagchi, P. and Virum, H. 1996., European Logistic alliances: A management model, International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 93-108.
2- Beresford, A.K.C. and Dubey, R.C. 1990. Handbook on the Management and Operation of Dry Ports. Geneva: UNCTAD.
3- Brooks, M.R. and Cullinane, K.P.B. eds.. 2007. Devolution, Port Governance and Port Performance, Research in Transportation Economics, Vol. XVII. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
4- Christiansen, M., Fagerholt, K. and Ronen, D. 2004. Ship routing and scheduling: Status and perspectives. Transportation Science 38: 1–18.
5- Cullinane, K.P.B. 2010. Revisiting the productivity and efficiency of ports and terminals: Methods and applications. In: C. Grammenos ed.. Handbook of Maritime Economics and Business. London: Informa Publications, pp. 907–946.
6- Cullinane, K.P.B. and Khanna, M. 1999. Economies of scale in large container ships. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 332.: 185–208.
7- Cullinane, K.P.B. and Khanna, M. 2000. Economies of scale in large containerships: Optimal size and geographical implications. Journal of Transport Geography 83.: 181–195.
8- Economic Commission for Europe. 2001. Terminology on Combined Transport. New York and Geneva: UN.
9- Guan, Y. and Cheung, R.K. 2004. The berth allocation problem: Models and solutions. OR Spectrum 261.: 75–92.
10- Hanaoka, Shinya., Regmi, Madan B., 2011.. Promoting intermodal freight transport through the development of dry ports in Asia: An environmental perspective, IATSS Research, Vol. 35, pp. 16–23.
11- Hanappe, P. 1986. Plates-formes logistique, centres de logistigue, ports secsy. Recherche Transports Se´curite´, INRETS, Arceuil, Decembre, 21–26.
12- Hansen, P., Oguz, C. and Mladenevic, N. 2008. Variable neighborhood search for minimum cost berth allocation. European Journal of Operational Research 1913.: 636–649.
13- Ho¨ltgen, D. 1995., “Terminals, intermodal logistics centres and European infrastructure policy, dissertation, European Centre for Infrastructure Studies, Rotterdam.
14- Imai, A., Nishimura, E., Papadimitriou, S. and Liu, M. 2006. The economic viability of container mega-ships. Transportation Research E 421.: 21–41.
15- Kim, K.H. and Moon, K.C. 2003. Berth scheduling by simulated annealing. Transportation Research B 37: 541–569.
16- Monios, Jason. 2011.. The role of inland terminal development in the hinterland access strategies of Spanish ports. Research in Transportation Economics, Vol. 33, pp. 59-66.
17- Park, Y.M. and Kim, K.H. 2003. A scheduling method for berth and quay cranes. OR Spectrum 25: 1–23.
18- Pettit, S.J., 2008. United Kingdom ports policy: changing government attitudes. Marine Policy 32 4., 719–727.
19- Robinson, R. 2002.. Ports as elements in value-driven chain systems: the new paradigm. Maritime Policy & Management, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 241–255.
20- Robinson, R. 2002.. Ports as elements in value-driven chain systems: the new paradigm. Maritime Policy & Management, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 241–255.
21- Roso, V. 2007a., “Evaluation of the dry port concept from an environmental perspective: a note”, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 12 No. 7, pp. 523-7.
22- Roso, V. 2007b., “Emergence and significance of dry ports”, paper presented at the 11th World Conference on Transportation Research WCTR., Berkeley, CA, 24-28 June.
23- Roso, V. 2008. Factors influencing implementation of a dry port. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management 3810.: 782–798.
24- Roso, V. and Lumsden, K. 2010. A review of dry ports. Maritime Economics and Logistics 122.: 196–213.
25- Roso, V., Woxenius, J. and Lumsden, K. 2009. The dry port concept: Connecting container seaports with the hinterland. Journal of Transport Geography 175.: 338–345.
26- Slack, B. 1999., “Satellite terminals: a local solution to hub congestion?”, Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 7, pp. 241-246.
27- Vis, I.F.A. and Koster, R.D. 2003. Transshipment of containers at a container terminal: An overview. European Journal of Operational Research 147: 1–16.
28- World Cargo News. 2000a. Dry port Dunkirk. March 2000: 12.
29- Woxenius, J. 1998., “Development of small-scale intermodal transportation in a systems context”, dissertation, Report 34, Department of Transportation and Logistics, Chalmers University of Technology, Go¨teborg. Rodrigue, Jean-Paul., Notteboom, Theo. 2012.. Dry ports in European and North American intermodal rail systems: Two of a kind?, Research in Transportation Business & Management, Vol. 5, pp. 4-15.
30- Zeng, Qingcheng., Maloni, Michael J., Paul, Jomon Aliyas., Yang, Zhongzhen., 2014.. Dry Port Development in China: Motivations, Challenges, and Opportunities, Transportation Journal, Vol. 52, No. 2, pp. 234-263.
31- Zhang, C., Wan, Y., Liu, J. and Linn, R.C. 2002. Dynamic crane deployment in container storage yards. Transportation Research B 366.: 537–555.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics