A Review Of An Optimal Public Transport Service Network In The Randstad Area: Is The Randstad Area In Control?

The general belief in the Netherlands is that the public transport in the western urbanized part of the Netherlands (the Randstad area) with the main cities of Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague and Utrecht can perform (much) better. The central research question of the article is: How does the optimal public transport service network in the Randstad area look like and how can actors use their responsibilities to contribute? The answer to the first part of the research question is ‘we don not know yet’. There is no clear picture of current infrastructure networks in the Randstad area and of the desired or actual quality levels of public transport in the area. The most important issues that are under control of the respective actors and can be improved in the short term are: coherence in spatial planning and investments in public transport infrastructure, public transport service coherence in the Randstad area, the quality of public transport services, and concessions. The most important issues that are not under control of the respective actors are: reliable relationships with private businesses in combined developments of public transport infrastructure and offices, and the national public rail transport services. The involved actors might focus on the respective issues they are able to (partly) control and see what their contribution could be for a PTSN for the Randstad area. For the longer term, an integrated picture of the current and 2050 public transport infrastructure network for the Randstad area, an integrated picture of the current and 2050 public transport services for the Randstad area and clarity about the degree of control of the different involved public actors and the role of the public transport authorities is needed. Overall, change the focus from problems to control issues and then start working on solutions for the short and longer term.Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies. Faculty of Economics and Business. The University of Sydne

Intermodal freight terminals : terminal business planning

The main purpose of this paper is to provide a framework for existing- and newly proposedinter-modal freight terminals in their business planning process. This framework is importantfor constructing- and improving the central terminal service portfolio of handling (loading,discharging, and transhipping) and storage of containerised cargo. Supportive activities (e.g. administration, customs) are taken into account as well.In particular, its aim is to investigate whether business planning offers a good approach for terminal operators in order to construct and improve their terminal service portfolio. The specific problem addressed here is as follows: To what extent is Business Planning useful for terminal operators inorder to be able to construct and improve their intermodal freight terminal service portfolio?Questions that will be answered in this paper are: who is the principle agent in the combinedtransport channel? How can the terminal operator improve its market power in the combinedtransport chain? Should the terminal operator seek a take-over with a European logisticsservice provider? Should the terminal operator look for a merger with a physical transportcompany? Should the terminal operator look for acquisitions of other freight terminals? Theterminal operator should look for a take-over by a global player? The conclusion of this paper is that business planning offers an excellent opportunity to terminal operators to betterconstruct and operate their terminal service portfolio. The main conclusions are that

Container terminal handling quality

In any service market, the price/quality relationship is of main importance. In the container terminal handling market, quality is important in attracting and retaining customers. Meeting customer needs and delivering high quality for low costs are critical factors for terminals to be successful. Container transport companies are interested in speed and reliability. The time a ship or barge stays in a port must be minimised, and, therefore, the handling of containers must be executed in a fast and reliable way. The operations at the terminal, after the handling of the containers on and off the ship, must be reliable as well. Quantitative information on container terminal quality is hard to obtain. Container terminals are monitoring their quality levels, but the results are not publicly available. Therefore, a literature survey forms the main input for this paper combined with interviews with terminal operators. The aim of this paper is to offer an operational approach for the measurement of the quality of container terminal services. The central research question is; ‘Which are critical performance conditions in terms of quality for container terminals?’ For the container terminal sector in Europe, ‘reliability’ is now the number 1 quality aspect in their transport services (including container terminal handling). Quality levels must meet high standards set by container carriers. Costs, incurred by better quality performance cannot be recovered through higher rates. ‘Reliability’, in terms of meeting container carriers’ demand, is thus a critical performance condition for maritime container terminals. An external performance improvement characteristic might be ‘flexibility’. Deep-sea ship arrivals are no easy planning task, as weather influences and other problematic developments make the terminal operator’s task more difficult. Through strict contracts, all risks of delays and terminal berth congestion are passed onto the terminal operator. This makes ‘flexibility’ a critical performance condition. A critical performance condition for continental terminal operators is a ‘total service’

Review of underground logistic systems in the Netherlands: an ex-post evaluation of barriers, enablers and spin-offs

Now, 10 years after the first plans, we analyse in this paper what has happened with Underground Logistic Systems (ULS). The major question in this paper is: Which barriers and enablers led to the failure of ULS and what ULS spin-offs can be found nowadays? Several factors can be classified as barriers or enablers. The main conclusions that can be drawn are that the opportunities for try-out were too limited; political support could have been gained on higher levels; the costs were too high, the catchment area was too limited; ULS in itself is a very promising system, but there was no one clear goal. In particular, the lack of a thorough and positive business model in combination with a lack of sufficient freight volumes almost immediately guaranteed the failure of the initiative. The spin-offs seem to have taken place in different directions: ranging from rather soft impacts (e.g. scientific knowledge) to more hard developments (adopting and developing transport and tunnelling technologies), and, although difficult to quantify, they are of great value

CONTAINER TERMINALS IN EUROPE

This paper aims to address the linkage between logistics (in particular, the management of marketing channel flows) and transport markets, while also the interaction between these two markets and intermodal container terminals is analysed. The marketing channel theory is used to describe all relevant actors and flows that run through marketing channels, starting with customer needs and ending with customer satisfaction. Porter's theory of competitive advantages is used to review competitive forces in both markets. Finally, a competitor analysis is performed for the logistics and transport market. These theories are applied so as to be able to determine the competitive position of intermodal container terminals with a view to the management of marketing channel flows and the physical transport of freight flows. Hence, the central question of this paper is: Which markets are served by intermodal container terminals and with whom are they competing? At present, neither the maritime container terminals nor the continental container terminals appear to have a significant influence in the logistics service market; they concentrate mainly on the physical movement of containers (transshipment). Furthermore, maritime container terminals and continental container terminals are not dominant players in the transport service market. Our conclusion is that continental terminals are predominantly competing with unimodal road transport, with neighbouring continental terminals and with barge transport companies

Intermodal freight terminals : terminal business planning

The main purpose of this paper is to provide a framework for existing- and newly proposed inter-modal freight terminals in their business planning process. This framework is important for constructing- and improving the central terminal service portfolio of handling (loading, discharging, and transhipping) and storage of containerised cargo. Supportive activities (e.g. administration, customs) are taken into account as well. In particular, its aim is to investigate whether business planning offers a good approach for terminal operators in order to construct and improve their terminal service portfolio. The specific problem addressed here is as follows: To what extent is Business Planning useful for terminal operators in order to be able to construct and improve their intermodal freight terminal service portfolio? Questions that will be answered in this paper are: who is the principle agent in the combined transport channel? How can the terminal operator improve its market power in the combined transport chain? Should the terminal operator seek a take-over with a European logistics service provider? Should the terminal operator look for a merger with a physical transport company? Should the terminal operator look for acquisitions of other freight terminals? The terminal operator should look for a take-over by a global player? The conclusion of this paper is that business planning offers an excellent opportunity to terminal operators to better construct and operate their terminal service portfolio. The main conclusions are that: 1 . Business planning provides a very useful framework to structure the planning process

Intermodal Freight Terminals: Marketing Channels and Transport Networks¹

745-763An attempt has been made to combine the current theory about marketing channels with combined transport and logistics in order to develop a customer-based and broadly applicable approach to the study of combined freight transport in Europe. Furthermore, an analytical framework is provided as a starting. point for the analysis of the performance -in terms of quality- of intermodal freight terminals. Much of the current research on transport is based on a comparison of features of distinct transport modes and their (dis)advantages. However, this approach presents a problem, because it fails to take into account the different combined transport solutions that are offered by carriers and terminals. This problem leads to the central research question of this paper: Which opportunities do intermodal freight terminals offer for an efficient functioning of combined transport marketing channels? Towards this end, a description of the theory of marketing channels is given. This theory states that different types of flows are employed in marketing channels (e.g. payment, ordering, promotion, etc.). All these marketing channel flows are, in principle, customer driven. Next, the central position taken by intermodal freight terminals in combined transport marketing channels is examined. Finally, the analysis is combined in a new approach towards combined transport and logistics, named cogistics. Cogistics is the management of marketing channel flows from the point of origin (production) to the point of final consumption, in accordance with customer requirements and focused on using combined transport to the maximum extent possible. Opportunities that terminals offer for an efficient functioning of marketing channels are: (1) focusing on solutions that are customer driven; (2) facilitating extensive communication between marketing channel members; (3) co-ordinating an efficient marketing channel organisation; (4) choosing the right marketing channel partners; (5) introduction of marketing channel commitment, trust, and co-ordination; and (6) equal sharing of benefits

Investments in container terminals: public private partnerships

The desire to create a more competitive, market based transport system has led to the involvement of the private sector in infrastructure investments. A private financing of transport infrastructure is one of the felds where this trend can be recognised. However, there are also distinct aspects, which make it unattractive to invest in transport infrastructure for private parties. This paper will elucidate the characteristics of investments in infrastructure in general, with the aim to clarify the hesitation under private investors. In addition, one specific category of infrastructure investments, viz. container terminals, will be discussed here as an exception. Container terminals are mostly financed with involvement of private parties. From a comparative study between 'normal' investments in infrastructure and investments in container terminal infrastructure, we will argue that terminals have several features, which lead to a lower risk for private parties, in particular restricted competition in the terminal market and protected monopoly profits, labour productivity gains and fall in unit costs, and a light regulatory framework. Because of these characteristics public private partnerships occur rather often and seem to be attractive. However, without government support it is still not realistic to attract private investment in the terminal market.

Container terminal services and quality

In this paper the relation between container terminal services and quality is explored. Quality elements that are important to terminal customers are reliability, flexibility, availability, time, costs, control, and after sales support. Overall, it is important for the terminal operator to provide services that deliver excellent quality and fit into the value chain of its customers. From past and current research it follows that especially reliability and costs (related to quality) are important quality dimensions for the overall quality. Theory shows that structural measurement of quality is possible and this also holds for quality of container terminal services. If measurement takes place, knowledge of the quality performance is the result. Probably, this knowledge about the quality performance results in a need for improvement. This improvement of terminal quality may result in a better price for the services provided. At this moment, it is not possible to compare terminal service quality on this regular bases, as no data are available.

Intermodal freight terminals : an analysis of the terminal market

Intermodality has become a major goal in modem transport policy. The improvement of combined transport within the European Union includes the refinement of the freight terminal services. A freight terminal is a nodal place where goods are transhipped between any two or more transport modes. In this paper we describe and analyse the freight terminal market with the help of Porter's model of five competitive forces. The central question is: who are the stakeholders in the terminal market? We will particularly address the critical decision factors faced by terminal operators in terms of strategic importance, location and network configuration of freight terminals by employing Porter's competitive focus. First, the industry competitors in the freight terminal market will be analysed. Second, the buyers of the freight terminal services will be described, followed by the suppliers of the terminal infrastructure. Other competitive forces are the potential entrants into the terminal market and the substitutes for the use of freight terminals. An additional competitive force is added to our conceptual model in the form of the terminal environment. After the outline of this analytical framework of the freight terminal market, it is possible to identify where the economic power is located in the terminal market and how the positions of the different players in the market can be enhanced. The analysis will further address (de)regulation competences for different governmental levels involved in terminal activities.