Study of trends in the effective development of mariupol seaport
https://doi.org/10.18384/2949-5024-2024-1-96-111
Abstract
Aim. The purpose of the work is to study possible trends in the development of Mariupol seaport.
Methodology. A critical analysis of scientific and practical literature and its systematization have been carried out. When processing statistical data, methods of economic and statistical analysis, normalization, regression analysis, and scenario building were used.
Results. Based on the results of the study, the predominance of one of the considered scenarios for the seaport, namely the negative scenario, is substantiated. The authors have identified segments, the indicators of which, a seaport must give priority attention to ensure survival and prepare the basis for future development in the new operating conditions.
Research implications. The results of the proposed study and the approaches used can become the basis for monitoring and identifying trends in the activities of seaports.
About the Authors
M. V. Makarenko
Mariupol State University University named after
A. I. Kuindzhi
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Maryna V. Makarenko – Dr. Sci. (Economics), Assoc. Prof., Vice-Rector for Scientific and Pedagogical Work and International Affairs
ul. Stroiteley 129, Mariupol 287549, Donetskiy region, DNR
A. V. Kravchenko
Mariupol State University University named after
A. I. Kuindzhi
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Alla V. Kravchenko – Cand. Sci. (Economics), Assoc. Prof., Department of Finance and Accounting
ul. Stroiteley 129, Mariupol 287549, Donetskiy region, DNR
E. A. Chernyshenko
Mariupol State University University named after
A. I. Kuindzhi
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Elena A. Chernyshenko – Senior Lecturer, Department of System Analysis and Information technology
ul. Stroiteley 129, Mariupol 287549, Donetskiy region, DNR
References
1. Ashar А. Counting the moves. In: Port Development International, 1997, vol. 13, рр. 25–29.
2. Barros C. P. The measurement of efficiency of Portuguese seaport authorities with DEA. In: International Journal of Transport Economics, 2003, vol. 30 (3), pp. 335–354.
3. Bendall H., Stent A. On measuring cargo handling productivity. In: Maritime Policy and Management, 1987, vol. 14 (4), pр. 337–343.
4. Bichou K., Grey R. A logistic and supply management approach to port performance management. In: Maritime Policy Management, 2004, vol. 31, рp. 47–67.
5. Bichou K. Review of port performance approaches and a supply chain framework to port performance benchmarking. In: Research in Transportation Economics, 2006, vol. 17, рp. 567–598.
6. Bjerkan K. Y., Hanne S. Reviewing tools and technologies for sustainable ports: does research enable decision making in ports? In: Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2019, iss. 72, pp. 243–260.
7. Christodoulou A., Panayotis C., Hande D. Sea-level rise in ports: a wider focus on impacts. In: Maritime Economics & Logistics, 2019, vol. 21, pp. 482–496.
8. Cullinane K. P. B., Song D. W., Gray R. A. Stochastic frontier model of the efficiency of major container terminals in asia: accessing the influence of administrative and ownership structures. In: Transportation Research Part A, 2002, vol. 36, рp. 743–762.
9. Cullinane K., Wang T. The efficiency analysis of container port production using DEA panel data approaches. In: Spectr, 2010, vol. 32, рp. 717–738.
10. Ferreira D. C., Marques R. C., Pedro M. I. Explanatory variables driving the technical efficiency of European seaports: an order-α approach dealing with imperfect knowledge. In: Transportation Research Part E: Logist Transport, 2018, vol. 119, pp. 41–62.
11. Francou B. Port Performance Indicators: Unpublished lecture handout. Malmö, World Maritime University, 2002.
12. Gong X., Wu X., Luo M. Company performance and environmental efficiency: a case study for shipping enterprises. In: Transport Policy, 2019, vol. 82 (C), pp. 96–106.
13. Ha M. H., Yang Z., Lam J. S. L. Port performance in container transport logistics: a multistakeholder perspective. In: Transport Policy, 2019, vol. 73, pp. 25–40.
14. Langen P. D. Clustering and performance: the case of maritime clustering in The Netherlands. In: Maritime Policy & Management, 2002, vol. 29 (3), pр. 209–221.
15. Talley W. K. Performance indicators and port performance evaluation. In: Logistics and Transportation Review, 1994, vol. 30 (4), pp. 339–352.
16. The labour market for the port of the future. A case study for the port of Antwerp / A. Esser, C. Sys, T. Vanelslander, A. Verhetsel. In: Case Studies Transport Policy, 2019, vol. 8 (2), pp. 349–360
17. Tongzon J. Efficiency measurement of selected Australian and other international ports using data envelopment analysis. In: Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 2001, vol. 35 (2), рp. 107–122.
18. Valentine V., Gray R. The measurement of port efficiency using data envelopment analysis: Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 9th world conference on transport research. In: European Journal of Operational Research, 2001, vol. 52 (1), pp. 1–15.
19. Wang T. F., Cullinane K. The efficiency of European container terminals and implications for supply chain management. In: Maritime Economics & Logistics, 2006, vol. 8 (1), р. 82–99.
20. Ensslin L., LongaraA. A., Dutra A., Ensslin S. R., Brasil, R. Munhoz P. Using MCDA-C to assess the organizational performance of industries operating at Brazilian maritime port terminals. In: Operations Research Perspectives, 2019, vol. 6, pp. 1–8.
Review
Views:
145
Email this article 