Sedentary time, breaks in sedentary time and metabolic variables in people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes

Aims/hypothesis We investigated whether objectively measured sedentary time and interruptions in sedentary time are associated with metabolic factors in people with type 2 diabetes. Methods We studied 528 adults (30–80 years) with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes, who were participants in a diet and physical activity intervention. Waist circumference (WC), fasting HDL-cholesterol, insulin and glucose levels, HOMA of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and physical activity (accelerometer) were measured at baseline and at 6 months follow-up. Linear regression models were used to investigate cross-sectional and longitudinal associations of accelerometer-derived sedentary time and breaks in sedentary time (BST) with metabolic variables. Results In cross-sectional analyses each hour of sedentary time was associated with larger WC (unstandardised regression coefficient [B] [95% CI] 1.89 cm [0.94, 2.83]; p < 0.001), higher insulin (B = 8.22 pmol/l [2.80, 13.65]; p = 0.003) and HOMA-IR (B = 0.42 [0.14, 0.70]; p = 0.004), and lower HDL-cholesterol (B = −0.04 mmol/l [−0.06, −0.01]; p = 0.005). Adjustment for WC attenuated all associations. Each BST was associated with lower WC (B = −0.15 cm [− 0.24, −0.05]; p = 0.003) and there was evidence of a weak linear association with HDL-cholesterol, but no association with insulin levels or HOMA-IR. Volume of sedentary time at baseline predicted HDL-cholesterol (B = −0.05 mmol/l [−0.08, −0.01]; p = 0.007), insulin levels (B = 8.14 pmol/l [0.1.51, 14.78]; p = 0.016) and HOMA-IR (B = 0.49 [0.08, 0.90]; p = 0.020) at 6 months, though not WC. Baseline BST did not substantially predict any metabolic variables at follow-up. No change was seen in sedentary time or BST between baseline and 6 months follow-up. Conclusions/interpretation Higher sedentary time is associated with a poorer metabolic profile in people with type 2 diabetes

Impact of Yard Organisation on the Master Bay Planning Problem

In this paper we analyse the impact of the yard organisation on container stowing operations. We deal with the Master Bay Plan problem (MBPP), that consists in stowing containers of different types into available locations on a containership; the aim is to minimise the berthing time in such a way that structural and operational constraints, related to both the containers and the ship, are satisfied. In particular, we study how the total stowage time changes due to possible reloading operations, when different picking sequences are considered. We use a binary linear programming model for MBPP that has been recently proposed in literature considering two main scenarios. First, we assume to have all containers ready to be loaded on board in the quay independently of their stack position in the yard. In this case, we solve MBPP as it is having as objective function just the minimisation of the loading time. Then, we take into account the yard constraints following the directions of the planning office, which makes the bay plans according to the stocking area requirements and the picking list for the containers to be loaded. In the third case, we present a procedure that enables us to consider different lot arrivals and opportunely relax some constraints. Moreover, we assume that the containers are stored in the yard into different stacks on the basis of their size, destination and weight, depending on the storage strategy chosen by the yard managers. We evaluate alternative yard storage strategies with real size stowage plans of a containership located at a maritime terminal in Genoa. The results show that, when we look for the berthing time minimisation, it is quite important to think about the optimisation of the flow of containers from the yard to the quay. Maritime Economics & Logistics (2003) 5, 285–300. doi:10.1057/palgrave.mel.9100081

Port Planning: the Need for a New Approach?

Port planning should take into account the following elements: port development strategy; the relationship between port and city; port financing; the key financial players; economic impacts, both local and national; and environmental impacts. The master plan usually sets out a 10-year port development option, where many different interests come into play, and it requires an agreed course of action. This paper examines the challenges that a port faces in achieving its primary objectives as outlined in its master plan. Namely, economic expansion; employment; the strengthening of the maritime industry; the creation of value-added services – benefiting city and port alike; the provision and upgrading of infrastructure; and the development of an efficient management strategy. In what direction are we moving in terms of port planning models? This article is designed to stimulate a debate that may provide some of the answers for the future, where each individual port can tailor its own solution. Maritime Economics & Logistics (2003) 5, 413–425. doi:10.1057/palgrave.mel.9100089

Liner Shipping Companies and Terminal Operators: Internationalisation or Globalisation?

Issues of global integration between liner shipping companies and ports and terminals are investigated. For several years there has been a significant reorganisation and concentration of operators with the result that an increasing proportion of container shipping, handling and distribution capacity is now in the hands of fewer, larger companies. It is likely that this trend will continue into the foreseeable future. It is shown that in some areas, such as Europe, concentration of ownership is approaching saturation: freedom of choice and shortage of competition are becoming major issues. In both shipping and ports, while several companies are large, very few can claim to be truly global, although many aspire to be. For terminal operators, a certain minimum geographical coverage in terms of handling capacity is needed, and for liner shipping companies a minimum fleet slot capacity is likewise required. The increasingly complex pattern of ownership through, for example, shareholdings, suggests that there is a need for a clearer policy towards terminal ownership and shipping capacity provision at the global level, to ensure that a reasonable level of fair competition is maintained. Maritime Economics & Logistics (2003) 5, 393–412. doi:10.1057/palgrave.mel.9100088

The Time Scale of Internationalisation: The Case of the Container Port Industry

Institutional change of the 1990s in port sectors worldwide has been followed by the emergence of port investing/operating transnational corporations (TNCs). Yet the supply of investment opportunities may be diminishing and evidence suggests the investment time window is closing. Timing thus becomes a critical component of the internationalisation process of firms. This paper focuses on temporal aspects of internationalisation. It puts immediate emphasis on Asian TNCs since – as latecomers – they have grown to dominate the industry. We perform a longitudinal analysis of TNC behaviour in relation to changes in domestic and foreign market conditions. Constraints of an institutional nature facing TNC entry in foreign markets are forcing firms to ‘leapfrog’ some of the logical sequential phases of internationalisation often assumed by mainstream theory. The degree of openness of foreign markets still largely dictates both opportunities and modalities of private entry. Findings suggest that institutional conditions determine to a large extent what strategic choices may be possible in any given context. Maritime Economics & Logistics (2007) 9, 1–34. doi:10.1057/palgrave.mel.9100169

An Application of AHP on Transhipment Port Selection: A Global Perspective

The research presented in this paper applies the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to reveal and analyse transhipment port selection by global carriers. In all, 47 relevant service attributes were recorded from a literature review. Two rounds of Delphi surveys – followed by brainstorming sessions – were conducted among experts in industry and academia, in order to narrow their number to four main service attributes/criteria comprising 12 sub-criteria. An AHP designed questionnaire survey was distributed to 20 port users, which covered the total population of global ocean container operators, and to 20 transhipment service providers (port operators/authorities). The results of the AHP analysis revealed that both global container carriers and port service providers had a similar perception of the most important service attributes for transhipment port selection. However, the AHP weight ranking of the sub-criteria involved was not identical between the two surveys, providing scope for further adaptation of service providers to users' priorities. Differences in the performance ranking of six major container ports by global carriers, as revealed in the AHP survey, were then combined with the calculated weights for the 12 transhipment port selection sub-criteria to explore critical attributes where transhipment market strategy could focus. Maritime Economics & Logistics (2004) 6, 70–91. doi:10.1057/palgrave.mel.9100093

Private Entry and Emerging Partnerships in Container Terminal Operations: Evidence from Asia

This paper seeks to expand understanding of inter-firm partnerships in the maritime sector. The paper recognises ocean carriers and global terminal operators as leading agents of change in the container port industry. While useful, the extant literature's focus on strategic alliances among mega-carriers neglects the role of terminals in defining firms' global strategies in logistical expansion. Meanwhile, rapidly expanding port-operating transnational corporations (TNC) are forcing fundamental shifts in partnership dynamics, defining port–carrier interaction. A multilayered network framework is introduced to build a conceptual link between private entry and emerging partnerships in the container terminal industry. Evidence from Asian ports and Asian TNCs are provided in support of this. The paper concludes by stressing the need to recognise heterogeneity among strategic entry paths available to private entrants in their stake over container terminal operation and finance. Maritime Economics & Logistics (2005) 7, 87–115. doi:10.1057/palgrave.mel.9100131