DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Logistics and Maritime Studies-
dc.creatorYang, Den_US
dc.creatorNotteboom, Ten_US
dc.creatorZhou, Xen_US
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-13T08:31:38Z-
dc.date.available2021-05-13T08:31:38Z-
dc.identifier.issn0966-6923en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/89836-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherPergamon Pressen_US
dc.subjectInland porten_US
dc.subjectPort entry strategyen_US
dc.subjectPort governanceen_US
dc.subjectPort system developmenten_US
dc.subjectTerminal operatoren_US
dc.titleSpatial, temporal and institutional characteristics of entry strategies in inland container terminals : a comparison between Yangtze river and Rhine riveren_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.spage1en_US
dc.identifier.epage16en_US
dc.identifier.volume90en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102928en_US
dcterms.abstractRecent decades have brought a growing commitment of investors in the (co-)funding and management of inland terminals, particularly container terminals. However, the actors involved, the forms of third-party entry and the emerging partnerships in inland terminals have only been investigated on a fragmented basis in inland port research. To complement existing inland port research on governance, management and spatial development, this paper analyses entry strategies of actors in inland container terminals on the Rhine and Yangtze in terms of their spatial, temporal and institutional characteristics. The unit of analysis in this paper is the inland container terminal, not necessarily the entire inland port (which might have more than one terminal). The entry strategies and the drivers behind these strategies are examined using a conceptual framework focused on five questions, i.e. who, where, when, why and which way. The empirical application is based on a large dataset of all container terminals on the Rhine and Yangtze. Our findings suggest clear differences between the two rivers in terms of the type of operators, the sequence of inland port development and also the major actors shaping the inland terminal landscape. Despite these differences, there is also some level of similarity, including a low presence of international players, the absence of deepsea (landlord) port authorities and observed waves of single acquisition, multiple-site acquisition, and capital entry in the terminals. Government policies, institutional frameworks and the nature of shipping network development are determinants of inland port investment and the entry strategies adopted by relevant actors. The findings contribute to a better understanding of the drivers and contextual environment guiding entry strategies in inland ports and can help policy makers and port operators in inland rivers to assess and benchmark their strategy. The paper adds to existing literature by considering spatiotemporal aspects of terminal ownership and the strategic considerations of and institutional drivers and impediments to the inland terminal strategies of the corresponding actors.-
dcterms.accessRightsembargoed accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationJournal of transport geography, Jan. 2021, v. 90, 102928, p. 1-16en_US
dcterms.isPartOfJournal of transport geographyen_US
dcterms.issued2021-01-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85097127382-
dc.identifier.artn102928en_US
dc.description.validate202105 bchy-
dc.description.oaNot applicableen_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumbera0849-n13-
dc.identifier.SubFormID1783-
dc.description.fundingSourceRGCen_US
dc.description.fundingSourceOthersen_US
dc.description.fundingTextRGC: P0001325en_US
dc.description.fundingTextOthers: P0030393en_US
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
dc.date.embargo2023.01.31en_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.