Relationship Between Shipping Accessibility and Maritime Transport Demand: the Case of Mainland China

Article
  • 53 Downloads

Abstract

The relationship between shipping accessibility and maritime transport demand is studied based on the relationship between production and consumption and stochastic frontier analysis. First, the consumption market of the products produced in a region is classified into the local market, non-local domestic market and foreign market. Then, to obtain the potential export volumes, the production function, extended linear expenditure system model, and multi-regional input-output model are built to calculate the regional production, the consumption in local market, and the consumption in non-local market, respectively. Second, the impact of potential export volumes and shipping accessibility on maritime transport demand is studied based on the stochastic frontier gravity model. Finally, the data from 2006 to 2012 for eight domestic regions and eight overseas regions were used to conduct an empirical study. The findings indicate that the maritime transport demand is positively correlated with shipping accessibility and that the region with higher accessibility has the greater demand. Furthermore, adding shipping lines in Quanzhou Port had the largest positive effect on Chinese exports.

Keywords

Production function Consuming market Shipping accessibility Maritime transport demand Stochastic frontier analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research is supported by the key project of National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71431001) and the Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities of China (Grant No. 3132016303).

References

  1. Alamá-Sabater L, Márquez-Ramos L, Suárez-Burguet C (2013) Trade and transport connectivity: a spatial approach. Appl Econ 45(18):2563–2566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aigner D, Lovell CK, Schmidt P (1977) Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models. J Econ 6(1):21–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baier SL, Bergstrand JH (2001) The growth of world trade: tariffs, transport costs, and income similarity. J Int Econ 53(1):1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bensassi S, Márquez-Ramos L, Martínez-Zarzoso I, Suárez-Burguet C (2015) Relationship between logistics infrastructure and trade: Evidence from Spanish regional exports. Transp Res A Policy Pract 72:47–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bougheas S, Demetriades PO, Morgenroth EL (1999) Infrastructure, transport costs and trade. J Int Econ 47(1):169–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Calatayud A, Palacin R, Mangan J, Jackson E, Ruiz-Rua A (2016) Understanding connectivity to international markets: a systematic review. Transp Rev 1–24.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2016.1157836
  7. Carrasco R, Albarran P, Holl A (2009) Transport infraestructure, sunk costs and firms' export behaviour. Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de EconomíaGoogle Scholar
  8. Caschili S, Medda F, Parola F, Ferrari C (2014) An analysis of shipping agreements: the cooperative container network. Netw Spat Econ 14(3–4):357–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chi J (2016) Exchange rate and transport cost sensitivities of bilateral freight flows between the US and China. Transp Res A Policy Pract 89:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. China Statistical Year Book (2014) The total imports and exports of China (in Chinese). http://navi.cnki.net/KNavi/YearbookDetail?pcode=CYFD&pykm=YINFN&bh. Accessed 12 May 2015
  11. Clark X, Dollar D, Micco A (2004) Port efficiency, maritime transport costs, and bilateral trade. J Dev Econ 75(2):417–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cook WD, Zhu J (2014) DEA Cobb–Douglas frontier and cross-efficiency. J Oper Res Soc 65(2):265–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Coşar AK, Demir B (2016) Domestic road infrastructure and international trade: Evidence from Turkey. J Dev Econ 118:232–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Drysdale P, Huang Y, Kalirajan KP (2000) China’s trade efficiency: Measurement and determinants. In: Drysdale P, Zhang Y, Song L (eds) APEC and liberalization of the Chinese economy. Asia Pacific Press, Canberra, pp 259–271Google Scholar
  15. Fabling R, Grimes A, Sanderson L (2013) Any port in a storm: impacts of new port infrastructure on exporter behaviour. Transport Res E Log 49(1):33–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Homsombat W, Ng A, Fu X (2016) Regional transformation and port cluster competition: the case of the pearl river delta in South China. Growth Chang 47(3):349–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Huang JL (2008) Market size and industrial growth in Chinese provinces. China Econ Q 7(4):1317–1334 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  18. Hummels D (2007) Transportation costs and international trade in the second era of globalization. J Econ Perspect 21(3):131–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lee TC, Wu CH, Lee PTW (2011) Impacts of the ECFA on seaborne trade volume and policy development for shipping and port industry in Taiwan. Marit Policy Manag 38(2):169–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Limao N, Venables AJ (2001) Infrastructure, geographical disadvantage, transport costs, and trade. World Bank Econ Rev 15(3):451–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lu XD, Zhao QW (2010) China’s export potential and determinants. J Quant Tech Econ 10:21–35 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  22. Márquez-Ramos L, Martínez-Zarzoso I, Pérez-García E, Wilmsmeier G (2011) “Special issue on Latin-American research” maritime networks, services structure and maritime trade. Netw Spat Econ 11(3):555–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Martínez-Zarzoso I, García-Menéndez L, Suárez-Burguet C (2003) Impact of transport costs on international trade: the case of Spanish ceramic exports. Marit Econ Logist 5(2):179–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Martínez-Zarzoso I, Suárez-Burguet C (2005) Transport costs and trade: empirical evidence for Latin American imports from the European Union. J Int Trade Econ Dev 14(3):353–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Martinez-Zarzoso I, Pérez-García EM, Suárez-Burguet C (2008) Do transport costs have a differential effect on trade at the sectoral level? Appl Econ 40(24):3145–3157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Notteboom T, Yang Z (2017) Port governance in China since 2004: Institutional layering and the growing impact of broader policies. Res Transp Bus Manag 22:184–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Palacio A, Adenso-Díaz B, Lozano S, Furió S (2016) Bicriteria optimization model for locating maritime container depots: application to the port of Valencia. Netw Spat Econ 16(1):331–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Portugal-Perez A, Wilson JS (2012) Export performance and trade facilitation reform: hard and soft infrastructure. World Dev 40(7):1295–1307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ramli MKR, Ismail NW (2014) Role of infrastructures in explaining trade costs in ASEAN-5. Eng Econ 25(2):119–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sánchez RJ, Hoffmann J, Micco A, Pizzolitto GV, Sgut M, Wilmsmeier G (2003) Port efficiency and international trade: port efficiency as a determinant of maritime transport costs. Marit Econ Logist 5(2):199–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shi R, Hu Z, Zhou Y, Liu P (2014) Research on railway freight market share based on the whole process of transport. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 138:298–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Song DW (2002) Regional container port competition and co-operation: the case of Hong Kong and South China. J Transp Geogr 10(2):99–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tang LC, Low JM, Lam SW (2011) Understanding port choice behavior—a network perspective. Netw Spat Econ 11(1):65–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Thill JC, Lim H (2010) Intermodal containerized shipping in foreign trade and regional accessibility advantages. J Transp Geogr 18(4):530–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tinbergen J (1962) Shaping the world economy: suggestions for an international economic policy. The Twentieth Century Fund, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Tsiotas D, Polyzos S (2015) Analyzing the maritime transportation system in Greece: a complex network approach. Netw Spat Econ 15(4):981–1010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wang K, Ng A, Lam J, Fu X (2012) Cooperation or Competition? Factors and Conditions Affecting Regional Port Governance in South China. Marit Econ Logist 14(3):386–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wang L, Béland D, Zhang S (2014) Pension fairness in China. China Econ Rev 28:25–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wang Y, Cullinane K (2008) Measuring container port accessibility: An application of the Principal Eigenvector Method (PEM). Marit Econ Logist 10(1):75–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wang YF, Liu SL (2015) Dynamic effect of government spending structure on household consumption——empirical analysis based on DSGE model. Syst Eng Theory Pract 35(2):300–307 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  41. Wilmsmeier G, Hoffmann J (2008) Liner shipping connectivity and port infrastructure as determinants of freight rates in the Caribbean. Marit Econ Logist 10(1):130–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. WTO (2014) The seaborne trade shipments of each country. http://stat.wto.org/Home/WSDBHome.aspx?Language. Accessed 25 July 2015
  43. Xu LZ, Fang SC, Wang SY (2012) Analysis on transport costs and China's exports. Syst Eng Theory Pract 32(5):1057–1067 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  44. Yang D, Ong GP, Chin ATH (2014a) An exploratory study on the effect of trade data aggregation on international freight mode choice. Marit Policy Manag 41(3):212–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yang J, Wu X, Luo M (2014b) Regional economy, transportation infrastructure and container port system evolution process: a comparative study of China and the U.S. in 1979-2010. Econ Geogr 34(2):80–85Google Scholar
  46. Zeng Q, Qu C (2014) An approach for baltic dry index analysis based on empirical mode decomposition. Marit Policy Manag 41(3):224–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhang R, Huang K (2009) Path analysis of influential elements of collecting and dispatching system for container port. J Tongji Univ Nat Sci 37(1):57–62 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  48. Zhao Y, Kockelman KM (2004) The random-utility-based multiregional input–output model: solution existence and uniqueness. Transp Res B Methodol 38(9):789–807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zhuang W, Luo M, Fu X (2014) A game theory analysis of port specialization—implications to the Chinese port industry. Marit Policy Manag 41(3):268–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Transportation Engineering CollegeDalian Maritime UniversityDalianPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Faculty of Maritime and TransportationNingbo UniversityNingboPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations