Abstract
It is uncommon that country pairs would be directly connected by shipping services. The concept of “intermediacy” is thus important in regional or global freight distribution, as it addresses a whole range of network structures and nodes using to connect different market scales. In this chapter, the comparative intermediacy of transport nodes in Europe and North America is assessed over intermodal rail transport, and especially in container shipping. The respective cases of gateways, gateway port systems, and coastal and inland waterways are discussed. Each exemplifies a particular dimension of the intermediacy and freight regionalism that distinguishes North America and Europe.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Often labeled Class I rail carriers.
References
Berglund M, van Laarhoven P, Sharman G, Wandel S (1999) Third-party logistics: is there a future? Int J Logistics Manag 10(1):59–70
Brooks M (2008) North American freight transportation: the road to security and prosperity, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Brooks M (2009) Liberalization in maritime transport, International Transport Forum, OECD, Paris, p 31
Brooks M, Trifts V (2008) Short sea shipping in North America: understanding the requirements of Atlantic Canadian shippers. Marit Policy Manag 35(2):145–158
Button K (1997) Lessons from European transport experience. Ann Am Acad Polit Soc Sci 55(31):157–167
Charler JJ, Ridolfi G (1994) Intermodal transportation in Europe: of modes, corridors and nodes. Marit Policy Manag 21(3):237–250
Coe NM, Hess M, Yeung HW-C, Dicken P, Henderson J (2004) ‘Globalizing’ regional development: a global production networks perspective. Trans Inst Br Geog 29(4):468–484
Debrie J,Gouvernal E (2006) Intermodal rail in Western Europe: actors and services in a new regulatory environment. Growth Change 37(3):444–459
Drewry (2009) Container market 2009/2010: annual review and forecast, Drewry Shipping Consultants, London
European Commission (2009) Communication and action plan with a view to establishing a European maritime transport space without barriers [COM (2009) 11 final]. <http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/subpage_mpa_en.html#1>
Eurostat (2009) Statistics in focus, 58, Eurostat, Brussels
Fleming DK, Hayuth Y (1994) Spatial characteristics of transportation hubs: centrality and intermediacy. J Transp Geogr 2(1):3–18
Frémont A, Franc P, Slack B (2009) Inland barge services and container transport: the case of the ports of Le Havre and Marseille in the European context. Cybergeo, Espace, Société, Territoire, article 437, http://cybergeo.revues.org/index21743.html
Gouvernal E, Daydou J (2005) Container railfreight services in North-West Europe: diversity of organizational forms in a liberalizing environment. Transp Rev 25(5):557–571
Johnson E (2010) Time for a rethink. American Shipper, pp 32–37
Levinson M (2006) The box: How the shipping container made the world smaller and the world economy bigger, Princeton University Press, Princeton
Leinbach T, Capineri C (eds) (2007) Globalized freight transport: intermodality, E-commerce, logistics and sustainability, transport economic, management and policy series, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham
Lieb RC, Millen RA, Van Wassenhove LN (1993) Third party logistics services: a comparison of experienced American and European manufacturers. Int J Phys Distrib Logistics Manag 23(6):35–44
Kreuzberger E (2005) Hub and spoking in a process of changing bundling concepts of intermodal rail networks: current developments in the light of intermodal efficiency. In: Witlox F, Dullaert W, Vernimmen B (eds) Proceedings of the BIVEC-GIBET transport research day 2005, Nautilis, Ghent, pp 405–436
Notteboom T (2006) The time factor in liner shipping services. Marit Econ Logistics 8:19–39
Notteboom T (2007) Container river services and gateway ports: similarities between the Yangtze River and the Rhine River. Asia Pac Viewpoint 48:330–343
Notteboom T (2008) Bundling of freight flows and hinterland network development. In: Konings R, Priemus H, Nijkamp P (eds) The Future of intermodal freight transport, operations, technology, design and implementation, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 66–88
Notteboom T (2009a) The relationship between seaports and the intermodal hinterland in light of global supply chains: European challenges. Round Table no. 143, OECD—International Transport Forum (ITF): Paris, pp 25–75
Notteboom T (2009b) Path dependency and contingency in the development of multi-port gatewaygateway regions and multi-port hub regions. In: Notteboom T, Ducruet C, De Langen P (eds) Ports in proximity: competition and coordination among adjacent seaports, Ashgate, Alderschot, pp 55–74
Notteboom T (2010) Concentration and the formation of multi-port gateway regions in the European container port system: an update. J Trans Geogr 18(4):567–583
Notteboom T, Konings R (2004) Network dynamics in container transport by barge. Belgeo, 5:461–477
Notteboom T, Rodrigue J-P (2007) Re-assessing port-hinterland relationships in the context of global supply chains. In: Wang J, Notteboom T, Olivier D, Slack B (eds) Ports, cities, and global supply chains, Ashgate, Alderschot, pp 51–68
Notteboom T, Rodrigue J-P (2010) Foreland-based regionalization: integrating intermediate hubs with port hinterlands. Res Trans Econ 27:19–29
OECD (2001) Short sea shipping in Europe, OECD, Paris
Paixao AC, Marlow PB (2002) Strengths and weaknesses of short sea shipping short sea shipping. Mar Policy 26:167–178
Randolph D (2008) Preparing for the future Mexican land bridge to the United States. North American Transportation Competitiveness Research Council. Working Paper No. 6
Rodrigue J-P (2006) Transportation and the geographical and functional integration of global production networks. Growth Change 37(4):510–525
Rodrigue J-P (2011) Factors impacting North American freight distribution in view of the panama canal expansion. The Van Horne Institute, University of Calgary
Rodrigue J-P, Notteboom T (2009) The geography of containerization: half a century of revolution, adaptation and diffusion. Geo J 74:1–5
Rodrigue J-P, Notteboom T (2010) Comparative North American and European gateway logistics: the regionalism of freight distribution. J Trans Geogr 18(4):497–507
Selviaridis K, Spring M (2007) Third party logistics: a literature review and research agenda. Int J Logistics Manag 18(1):125–150
Slack B (1996) Along different paths: intermodal rail terminals in North America and Europe. In: Proceedings of the 7th WCTR conference. World Conference of Transport Research Society, pp 123–131
UNCTAD (2009) Transport Newsletter, No. 43, http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/webdtltlb20092_en.pdf
Van Klink HA, Van den Berg GC (1998) Gateways and intermodalism. J Trans Geogr 6(1):1–9
Vernimmen B, Dullaert W, Engelen S (2007) Schedule unreliability in liner shipping: origins and consequences for the hinterland supply chain. Marit Econ Logistics 9:193–213
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rodrigue, JP., Notteboom, T. (2013). Containerized Freight Distribution in North America and Europe. In: Bookbinder, J. (eds) Handbook of Global Logistics. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 181. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6132-7_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6132-7_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-6131-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-6132-7
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)