Optimal number of ports and implications for Korea’s port policy

Abstract

Purpose Many governments around the world have strategically privatized their ports. The privatized ports try to maximize profits by setting higher charges for port services and attracting transship cargos. This paper shows that such privatization of ports can be complemented by adjusting the number of ports. Specifically, the purpose of this paper is to derive the optimal number of ports in cases in which ports serve transship and domestic cargos. Design/methodology/approach This paper constructs a theoretical model in which ports compete with each other for transship and domestic cargos. In the first stage, the government determines the number of ports. In the second stage, the ports compete with each other in quantity to maximize profits. The authors have derived the optimal number of ports that maximizes national welfare. Findings The optimal number of ports is expressed as a function of the slope of the demand curve, the slope of the supply curve, and the share of domestic demand relative to total demand for port services. It is shown that the optimal number of ports tends to increase as the share of domestic cargo increases. The optimal number of ports, n*, is given as n*=1/(1−θ), where θ denotes the share of domestic demand in total demand for port services, when the unit cost of port services is constant. Research limitations/implications The analysis in the present paper is confined to the case of unilateral intervention by the government of the domestic country. Analyzing interaction among governments via competition policy would offer valuable policy implications. Practical implications The results of the current research offer important implications for Korean port policy in the context of maritime industrial changes, in particular, China’s New Silk Road initiative. In particular, the findings of this study suggest that Korea’s investment in ports should be concentrated on ports with competitive advantages. Originality/value Relatively scant attention has been paid to the possibility, or need, of strategic privatization being complemented by governmental competition policy. Filling this knowledge gap, the authors have shown that the government can mitigate the negative effects of privatization on domestic consumer surplus by introducing competition in the supply of port services.

Understanding the implications of Belt and Road Initiative for sustainable supply chains: an environmental perspective

“…While extant literature sheds some light on the role of the BRI within supply chain domain (Hsu, 2016; Bao and Ma, 2017; Chen et al , 2017; Du and Shi, 2017; Gallo et al , 2017; Lee and Cho, 2017; Hu et al , 2017; Hu, 2017), however, these studies use the BRI as a context only for work conducted on other topics, and there is no empirical evidence about how the BRI can impact the organization’s environmental supply chains. Indeed, the BRI is a megaproject and unique phenomenon of this time, which is indeed worthy of observation and demands empirical work specifically concerning the implication of the BRI on sustainable supply chain management.…”

Exploring the Potential Challenges of Belt and Road Initiative for Sustainable Supply Chains: South Asian Perspective

“…These findings contradict with extant literature on the role of BRI within sustainable supply chains. For instance, Lee and Cho (2017) argued that BRI will bring more transparency in the procurement process globally. However, our results suggest otherwise.…”

“…Our results highlight that BRI certainly has the potential to affect sustainable supply chains from environmental, social, and governance perspectives. While extant literature sheds some light on the role of BRI within the supply chain domain (Hsu 2016 Bao andMa 2017;Chen et al 2017;Du and Shi 2017;Gallo et al 2017;Lee and Cho 2017;Hu, Ou, and Hu 2017;Hu 2017), however, these studies use BRI as a context only for work conducted on other topics, and there is no empirical evidence about how BRI can impact sustainable supply chains. Indeed, BRI is a mega project and unique phenomenon of this time, worthy of observation and demands empirical work specifically concerning BRI's implication on sustainable supply chain management.…”

Exploring potential implications of Belt and Road Initiative for supply chain resilience: a comparative study of five South Asian countries

“…In pursuing this goal, our results present three positive (quality of logistics infrastructure, greater connectivity for logistics firms, new markets for customers) and two negative impacts of BRI on resilient supply chains (political instability and management of logistics infrastructure). While extant literature sheds some light on BRI's role within supply chain resilience (Hsu, 2016;Bao and Ma, 2017;Chen et al, 2017;Du and Shi, 2017;Gallo et al, 2017;Lee and Cho, 2017). These studies use BRI as a context only for work conducted on other topics.…”