Share:


Evaluation of port efficiency in Shanghai Port and Busan Port based on three-stage DEA model with environmental concerns

    Xiaoling Huang Affiliation
    ; Yawei Wang Affiliation
    ; Xiamei Dai Affiliation
    ; Jack Xunjie Luo Affiliation
    ; Jihong Chen Affiliation

Abstract

The global green development has led many ports to impose measures to reduce emissions and improve port efficiency. As large-scale construction can do damage to the environment, it is not supported under the green strategy, which makes it more important to make full use of existing resources in the port competition. While, whether there is a relationship between emissions and port efficiency, and whether the relationship can reflect the problems in port management are vital factors need to be considered when making port development strategy. To solve the two problems, this paper takes the case of Shanghai Port and Busan Port, and uses the three-stage Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to evaluate the efficiency of the two ports respectively. Pollutant emissions from the ports are selected as an environmental variable in the second stage to examine their effects on the redundancy of input variables. The results indicate that the efficiency of Shanghai Port is insufficient due to excessive scale and pollutant emissions. Based on the results, some suggestions are given to improve the drawbacks. Furthermore, the use of the three-stage DEA to study the annual change in performance of a single target in this paper is also a novelty.


First published online 20 November 2019

Keyword : port efficiency, pollutant emissions, three-stage DEA, Shanghai Port, Busan Port, cooperation

How to Cite
Huang, X., Wang, Y., Dai, X., Luo, J. X., & Chen, J. (2020). Evaluation of port efficiency in Shanghai Port and Busan Port based on three-stage DEA model with environmental concerns. Transport, 35(5), 454-461. https://doi.org/10.3846/transport.2019.11465
Published in Issue
Dec 11, 2020
Abstract Views
2067
PDF Downloads
1516
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

References

Aigner, D.; Lovell, C. A. K.; Schmidt, P. 1977. Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models, Journal of Econometrics 6(1): 21–37. http://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(77)90052-5

Banker, R. D.; Charnes, A.; Cooper, W. W. 1984. Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis, Management Science 30(9): 1078–1092. http://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078

Chang, Y.-T.; Park, H.; Lee, S.; Kim, E. 2018. Have emission control areas (ECAs) harmed port efficiency in Europe?, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 58: 39–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.10.018

Charnes, A.; Cooper, W. W.; Rhodes, E. 1978. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units, European Journal of Operational Research 2(6): 429–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8

Chen, C.; Lam, J. S. L. 2018. Sustainability and interactivity between cities and ports: a two-stage data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach, Maritime Policy & Management: the Flagship Journal of International Shipping and Port Research 45(7): 944–961. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2018.1450528

Chen, J.; Yahalom, S. 2013. Container slot co-allocation planning with joint fleet agreement in a round voyage for liner shipping, Journal of Navigation 66(4): 589–603. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0373463313000192

Cheon, S.; Maltz, A.; Dooley, K. 2017. The link between economic and environmental performance of the top 10 U.S. ports, Maritime Policy & Management: the Flagship Journal of International Shipping and Port Research 44(2): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2016.1275860

Cullinane, K.; Cullinane, S. 2019. Policy on reducing shipping emissions: implications for “green ports”, in R. Bergqvist, J. Monios (Eds.). Green Ports: Inland and Seaside Sustainable Transportation Strategies, 35–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-814054-3.00003-7

Dobos, I.; Vörösmarty, G. 2019. Inventory-related costs in green supplier selection problems with data envelopment analysis (DEA), International Journal of Production Economics 209: 347–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.03.022

IMO. 2014. Third IMO GHG Study 2014: Executive Summary and Final Report. International Maritime Organization (IMO), London, UK. 327 p. Available from Internet: http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Documents/Third%20Greenhouse%20Gas%20Study/GHG3%20Executive%20Summary%20and%20Report.pdf

Lai, S.; Gao, J.; Yan, Y.; Wang, Y. 2012. The study of health resources allocation efficiency in Shaanxi province based on DEA method, Chinese Health Service Management 29(8): 572–574. http://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1004-4663.2012.08.003 (in Chinese).

Lee, T.; Yeo, G.-T.; Thai, V. V. 2014. Environmental efficiency analysis of port cities: Slacks-based measure data envelopment analysis approach, Transport Policy 33: 82–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.02.009

Luo, J.; Cui, E.; Ji, J. 2014. An analysis on environmental efficiency of Chinese container ports with CO2 emissions based on SBM (Slacks Based Measurement) DEA, Science and Technology Management Research (21): 66–69. http://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-7695.2014.21.014 (in Chinese).

Markovits-Somogyi, R.; Bokor, Z. 2014. Assessing the logistics efficiency of European countries by using the DEA-PC methodology, Transport 29(2): 137–145. https://doi.org/10.3846/16484142.2014.928787

Meeusen, W.; Van den Broeck, J. 1977. Efficiency estimation from Cobb–Douglas production functions with composed error, International Economic Review 18(2): 435–444. http://doi.org/10.2307/2525757

Merkel, A.; Holmgren, J. 2017. Dredging the depths of knowledge: efficiency analysis in the maritime port sector, Transport Policy 60: 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.08.010

Schøyen, H.; Bjorbæk, C. T.; Steger-Jensen, K.; Bouhmala, N.; Burki, U.; Jensen, T. E.; Berg, Ø. 2018. Measuring the contribution of logistics service delivery performance outcomes and deep-sea container liner connectivity on port efficiency, Research in Transportation Business & Management 28: 66–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2018.03.002

Song, S. 2014. Ship emissions inventory, social cost and eco-efficiency in Shanghai Yangshan Port, Atmospheric Environment 82: 288–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.10.006

Sun, J.; Yuan, Y.; Yang, R.; Ji, X.; Wu, J. 2017. Performance evaluation of Chinese port enterprises under significant environmental concerns: an extended DEA-based analysis, Transport Policy 60: 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.09.001

UNCTAD. 2016. Review of Maritime Transport 2016. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). 115 p. https://doi.org/10.18356/8a715c05-en

Wang, Q.; Zhao, L.; Zeng, L.; Zhang, Q. 2018. A game model of air pollution control from vessels in and around ports, in Proceedings of the 2018 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Science Research (ICHSSR 2018), 25–27 April 2018, Wuxi, China. https://doi.org/10.2991/ichssr-18.2018.9

Wiegmans, B.; Witte, P. 2017. Efficiency of inland waterway container terminals: stochastic frontier and data envelopment analysis to analyze the capacity design- and throughput efficiency, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 106: 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.09.007

Yang, Z.; Guo, W. 2015. A study on the efficiency of health resource allocation in Beijing, Chinese Health Service Management 32(5): 359–363. (in Chinese).

Zhou, X.-J.; Jiang, G.-X. 2010. Evaluation and discussion on the allocative efficiency of health resource based on DEA, Modern Preventive Medicine (20): 3873–3875. (in Chinese).