• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.111-132
• /
• 2018

As China continues to evolve as a major economic power and the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between the Republic of Korea and China was ratified on June 1, 2015, market volume between the two countries is expected to grow more rapidly. This study aims on improving the efficiency of car-ferry lines. We conducted two surveys- for shippers and forwarders of car-ferry companies, and container liners. The study analyzes the decision factors for delivery companies and their importance for shippers and forwarders of car-ferry companies and container liners. Based on analysis of prior studies on the competition for car-ferry companies and liners, three primary variables are selected-promptness, economics, and safety. The promptness variable consists of shipping time, loading/unloading time, and customs clearing time. The economic variable consists of marine transportation cost from a domestic harbor to China, loading/unloading cost in the harbor, and overland transport cost from the harbor to shippers inland. Finally, the safety variable consists of cargo damage rates, safety facilities, such as lashing and shoring, and punctuality of transportation time. The survey and AHP results show that the promptness, safety, and economics factors are 0.549, 0.309, and 0.142 in the shipper groups of car-ferry companies' category, respectively. It indicates that there is considerable difference in the importance of each factor. In contrast, the factors are 0.350, 0.348, and 0.302 in the forwarders category, which suggests that there is little difference in each factor's importance. As for shippers and forwarders of liners, the importance of each factor is found to be in the following order: economics, safety, and promptness.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.87-107
• /
• 2007

A rapid growth of interregional trade between China and Korea requires new development and expansion of ports. Currently, there is no rail-ferry system between China and Korea, however, a rapid growth of car-ferry industry shows possibilities. Several candidate cities and regions in East part of China and West part of Korea are selected. We identified times in clearance and station-to-station services as major benefits. We compared three transport modes including candidate cities and regions: container ships, car-ferry and rail-ferry. We used AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) as an evaluation method to select most competitive rail-ferry routes between two countries. We also used 7-point Likert scales to find out bottlenecks and factors to introduce rail-ferry services as other questionnaires. As a result, Rail Ferry System(RFS) is a little expensive due to wagon loading efficiency in cargo hold of the ship compared to Car Ferry System or Liner Shipping System. But RFS is recommendable in case of Block Train transport between Korea and EU area by may of TCR and TSR comparing Car Ferry System, because it can reduce total transport cost and connecting procedure at border lines of passing countries.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• 2003.05a
• /
• pp.273-280
• /
• 2003

The purpose of this study is to identify and evaluate the competitiveness of ports in ASEAN(Association of Southeast Asian Nations), which plays a leading role in basing the hub of international logistics strategies as a countermeasure in changes of international logistics environments. This region represents most severe competition among Mega hub ports in the world in terms of container cargo throughput at the onset of the 21 st century. The research method in this study accounted for overlapping between attributes, and introduced the HFP method that can perform mathematical operations. The scope of this study was strictly confined to the ports of ASEAN. which cover the top 100 of 350 container ports that were presented in Containerization International Yearbook 2002 with reference to container throughput. The results of this study show Singapore in the number one position. Even compared with major ports in Korea (after getting comparative ratings and applying the same data and evaluation structure), the number one position still goes to Singapore and then Busan(2) and Manila(2), followed by Port Klang(4), Tanjugn Priok(5), Tanjung Perak(6), Bangkok(7), Inchon(8), Laem Chabang(9) and Penang(9). In terms of the main contributions of this study, it is the first empirical study to apply the combined attributes of detailed and representative attributes into the advanced HFP model which was enhanced by the KJ method to evaluate the port competitiveness in ASEAN. Up-to-now, none have comprehensively conducted researches with sophisticated port methodology that has discussed a variety of changes in port development and terminal transfers of major shipping lines. Moreover, through the comparative evaluation between major ports in Korea and ASEAN, the presentation of comparative competitiveness for Korea ports is a great achievement in this study. In order to reinforce this study, it needs further compensative research, including cost factors which could not be applied to modeling the subject ports by lack of consistently qualified in ASEAN.