Maritime Economics & Logistics

, Volume 21, Issue 4, pp 497–523 | Cite as

Risk analysis of marine cargoes and major port disruptions

  • Xueni Gou
  • Jasmine Siu Lee LamEmail author
Original Article


As an interface between sea and land, ports are exposed to a wide range of natural hazards such as cyclones, floods and tsunami. At the same time, marine cargoes are growing both in terms of volume and value. Besides their exposure to various hazards during the sea trip, their concentration in ports increases the risk to the cargo itself as well as to the port. The objective of this paper is twofold. First, our study proposes a framework for catastrophe risk analysis of marine cargoes and ports by breaking-down the terminal operation process. This allows a more in-depth analysis by investigating the different parts of that process. Second, the study formulates a State Transition model for the simulation of scenarios. This is an integrated and robust risk model, to analyse exposure of marine cargoes and ports to natural hazards. The port of Laem Chabang is chosen as an example for demonstrating the risk simulation analysis. Findings show that losses can be in the form of both physical loss/damage and interruption loss with extensive cargo accumulation due to port disruptions.


Maritime risk Catastrophe risk Marine cargo Port disruption Terminal operation Natural hazard 



We wish to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions. This research is supported by the Singapore Maritime Institute under the SMI Simulation and Modelling R&D Programme (project SMI-2014-MA-03). We also wish to acknowledge the Institute of Catastrophe Risk Management at Nanyang Technological University as the collaborating institute.


  1. AAPA World Port Rankings. 2016. Accessed 4 May 2018.
  2. Akatsuka, K., and K. Leggate. 2001. Perceptions of foreign exchange rate risk in the shipping industry. Maritime Policy & Management 28 (3): 235–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alderton, P., and H. Leggate. 2005. The surge in regulation. In International Maritime transport: Perspectives, ed. H. Leggate, J. McConville, and A. Morvillo. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Alizadeh, A.H., and N.K. Nomikos. 2009. Shipping derivatives and risk management. UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. American Society of Civil Engineers, Ports Committee. 1998. Seismic guidelines for ports. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.Google Scholar
  6. Athanasatos, S., S. Michaelides, and M. Papadakis. 2014. Identification of weather trends for use as a component of risk management for port operations. Natural Hazards 72 (1): 41–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barnes, P., and R. Oloruntoba. 2005. Assurance of security in maritime supply chains: Conceptual issues of vulnerability and crisis management. Journal of International Management 11 (4): 519–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. BBC News. Accessed 13 Jan 2017.
  9. Becker, A., M. Acciaro, R. Asariotis, E. Cabrera, L. Cretegny, P. Crist, M. Esteban, A. Mather, S. Messner, S. Naruse, A. Ng, S. Rahmstorf, M. Savonis, D.-W. Song, V. Stenek, and A. Velegrakis. 2013. A note on climate change adaptation for seaports: A challenge for global ports, a challenge for global society. Climatic Change 120 (4): 683–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Becker, A., S. Inoue, M. Fischer, and B. Schwegler. 2012. Climate change impacts on international seaports: Knowledge, perceptions, and planning efforts among port administrators. Climatic Change 110 (1): 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Berle, Ø., B.E. Asbjørnslett, and J.B. Rice. 2011a. Formal vulnerability assessment of a maritime transportation system. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 96 (6): 696–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Berle, Ø., J.B. Rice, and B.E. Asbjørnslett. 2011b. Failure modes in the maritime transportation system: A functional approach to throughput vulnerability. Maritime Policy & Management 38 (6): 605–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brown, S., R. Nicholls, C. Wooddroffe, S. Hanson, J. Hinkel, A.S. Kebede, B. Neumann, and A.T. Vafeidis. 2013. Sea-level rise impacts and responses: a global perspective. In Coastal hazards, ed. C.W. Finkl, 117–149. Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cao, X., and J.S.L. Lam. 2018. Simulation-based catastrophe-induced port loss estimation. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 175: 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chhetria, P., J. Corcoranb, V. Gekaraa, C. Maddoxb, and D. McEvoy. 2015. Seaport resilience to climate change: Mapping vulnerability to sea-level rise. Journal of Spatial Science 60 (1): 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. EMCIP. 2015. Marine Casualties and Incidents. European Marine Casualty Information Platform.Google Scholar
  17. EMDAT. 2015. Natural disaster trends: World 1900–2011. The International Disasters Database.Google Scholar
  18. Gaythwaite, J.G. 2004. Design of marine facilities for the berthing, mooring, and repair of vessels. American Society of Civil Engineers, ASCE Press.Google Scholar
  19. Giziakis, K., and E. Bardi-Giziaki. 2002. Assessing the risk of pollution from ship accidents. Disaster Prevention and Management 11 (2): 109–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Goda, K., and J. Song. 2016. Uncertainty modeling and visualization for tsunami hazard and risk mapping: A case study for the 2011 Tohoku earthquake. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment 30 (8): 2271–2285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Godfray, H.C.J., J. Pretty, S.M. Thomas, E.J. Warham, and J.R. Beddington. 2011. Global food supply: Linking policy on climate and food. Science 311: 1013–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goerlandt, F., and J. Montewka. 2015. Maritime transportation risk analysis: Review and analysis in light of some foundational issues. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 138: 115–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Guha-Sapir, D., D. Hargitt, and P. Hoyois. 2004. Thirty years of natural disasters 1974–2003: The numbers. de Louvain: Presses univ.Google Scholar
  24. Gurning, S., and S. Cahoon. 2011. Analysis of multi-mitigation scenarios on maritime disruptions. Maritime Policy & Management 38 (3): 251–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hallegatte, S., N. Ranger, O. Mestre, P. Dumas, J. Corfee-Morlot, C. Herweijer, and R.M. Wood. 2011. Assessing climate change impacts, sea level rise and storm surge risk in port cities: A case study on Copenhagen. Climatic Change 104 (1): 113–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hillier, F.S., and G.J. Lieberman. 2015. Introduction to operations research. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  27. Hsieh, C.-H. 2014. Disaster risk assessment of ports based on the perspective of vulnerability. Natural Hazards 74 (2): 851–864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hsieh, C.-H., H.-H. Tai, and Y.-N. Lee. 2014. Port vulnerability assessment from the perspective of critical infrastructure interdependency. Maritime Policy & Management 41 (6): 589–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Huang, Y., T.H. Rashidi, and L. Gardner. 2016. Modelling the global maritime container network. Maritime Economics & Logistics. Scholar
  30. IMO GISIS. 2015. Marine Casualties and Incidents. Global Integrated Shipping Information System.Google Scholar
  31. IPCC. 2011. Summary for Policymakers: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.Google Scholar
  32. IRGC. 2011. Risk Governance of the Maritime Global Critical Infrastructure: An initial assessment of hazards in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore. International Risk Governance Council.Google Scholar
  33. John, A., D. Paraskevadakis, A. Bury, Z. Yang, R. Riahi, and J. Wang. 2014. An integrated fuzzy risk assessment for seaport operations. Safety Science 68: 180–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Knemeyer, M.A., W. Zinn, and C. Eroglu. 2009. Proactive planning for catastrophic events in supply chains. Journal of Operations Management 27 (2): 141–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lam, J.S.L., and J.A. Lassa. 2017. Risk assessment framework for exposure of cargo and ports to natural hazards and climate extremes. Maritime Policy & Management 44 (1): 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lam, J.S.L., C. Liu, and X. Gou. 2017. Cyclone risk mapping for critical coastal infrastructure: Cases of East Asian seaports. Ocean and Coastal Management 141: 43–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lam, J.S.L., and S. Su. 2015. Disruption risks and mitigation strategies: An analysis of Asian ports. Maritime Policy & Management 42 (5): 415–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Li, Q., and J.S.L. Lam. 2017. Conflict resolution for enhancing shipping safety and improving navigational traffic within a seaport: Vessel arrival scheduling. Transportmetrica A 13 (8): 727–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Liu, B., Y.L. Siu, and G. Mitchell. 2017. A quantitative model for estimating risk from multiple interacting natural hazards: An application to northeast Zhejiang, China. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment 31 (6): 1319–1340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lloyd’s List. Accessed 10 Oct 2016.
  41. Lloyd’s List. 2003. Pusan Picks up Pieces of Typhoon Carnage.Google Scholar
  42. Londoño-Kent, M.D.P., and P.E. Kent. 2003. A tale of two ports: the cost of inefficiency.Google Scholar
  43. Love, G., A. Soares, and H. Püempel. 2010. Climate change, climate variability and transportation. Procedia Environmental Sciences 1: 130–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McEvoy, D., and J. Mullett. 2013. Enhancing the resilience of seaports to a changing climate: Research synthesis and implications for policy and practice. Gold Coast: National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility.Google Scholar
  45. NASA Earth Observatory. Flooding in Southeast Asia. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
  46. NOAA. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Historical Hurricane Tracks. Accessed 13 Jan 2016.
  47. Normile, D. 2012. Japan’s reconstruction plans hit some walls. ScienceInsider.Google Scholar
  48. Notteboom, T., and J.S.L. Lam. 2014. Dealing with uncertainty and volatility in shipping and ports. Maritime Policy & Management 41 (7): 611–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. OECD. 2012. Disaster risk assessment and risk financing. The organisation for economic co-operation and development.Google Scholar
  50. Paul, J.A., and L. MacDonald. 2017. An empirical analysis of US vessel-related port accidents (2002–2012): Impact of union membership and port efficiency on accident incidence and economic damage. Maritime Economics & Logistics 19 (4): 723–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Paul, J.A., and M.J. Maloni. 2010. Modeling the effects of port disasters. Maritime Economics & Logistics 12 (2): 127–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Población, J. 2017. Are recent tanker freight rates stationary? Maritime Economics & Logistics 19 (4): 650–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Port Authority of Thailand. 2018. Accessed 8 May 2018.
  54. Raymond, C.Z. 2006. Maritime terrorism in southeast Asia: A risk assessment. Terrorism and Political Violence 18 (2): 239–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Reuters. Accessed 16 April 2017.
  56. Roumboutsos, A., N. Nikitakos, and S. Gritzalis. 2005. Information technology network security risk assessment and management framework for shipping companies. Maritime Policy & Management 32 (4): 421–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sanchez-Rodrigues, V., A. Potter, and M.M. Naim. 2010. Evaluating the causes of uncertainty in logistics operations. International Journal of Logistics Management 21 (1): 45–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Scarsi, R. 2007. The bulk shipping business: Market cycles and shipowners’ biases. Maritime Policy & Management 34 (6): 577–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Shipwreck Log. Accessed 20 Sept 2016.
  60. Siddiqui, A.W., and M. Verma. 2016. Assessing risk in the intercontinental transportation of crude oil. Maritime Economics & Logistics. Scholar
  61. Swiss Re. 2007. Natural catastrophes and man-made disasters in 2006: Low insured losses. Sigma 2/2007.Google Scholar
  62. Thai, V.V. 2009. Effective maritime security: Conceptual model and empirical evidence. Maritime Policy & Management 36 (2): 147–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tsai, M.C. 2005. Constructing a logistics tracking system for preventing smuggling risk of transit containers. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 40 (6): 526–536.Google Scholar
  64. UNCTAD. 2011. World Maritime Report 2011. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.Google Scholar
  65. UNCTAD. 2017. World Seaborne Trade. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.Google Scholar
  66. UNISDR. 2009. Global assessment report on disaster risk reduction: Risk and poverty in a changing climate—Invest today for a safer tomorrow. The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction.Google Scholar
  67. Vander Hoorn, S., and S. Knapp. 2015. A multi-layered risk exposure assessment approach for the shipping industry. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 78: 21–33.Google Scholar
  68. Vilko, J.P.P., and J.M. Hallikas. 2012. Risk assessment in multimodal supply chains. International Journal of Production Economics 140 (2): 586–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Vongvisessomjai, S. 2007. Impacts of Typhoon Vae and Linda on wind waves in the Upper Gulf of Thailand and East Coast. Songklanakarin Journal of Science and Technology 29 (5): 1199–1216.Google Scholar
  70. Wang, J. 2006. Maritime risk assessment and its current status. Quality and Reliability Engineering International 22 (1): 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wang, J., H.S. Sii, J.B. Yang, A. Pillay, D. Yu, J. Liu, E. Maistralis, and A. Saajedi. 2004. Use of advances in technology for maritime risk assessment. Risk Analysis 24 (4): 1041–1063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. WEF. 2013. Global Risks 2013 Eighth Edition: An initiative of the risk response network. The World Economic Forum.Google Scholar
  73. Wen, C.-H., P.-Y. Hsu, and M.-S. Cheng. 2017. Applying intelligent methods in detecting maritime smuggling. Maritime Economics & Logistics 19 (3): 573–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Yang, Z., and J. Wang. 2013. Prioritising security vulnerabilities in ports. International Journal of Shipping and Transport Logistics 5 (6): 622–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Limited 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Civil and Environmental EngineeringNanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations