In this article, the author describes how the creation of the Danish maritime museums in 1915 and 2013 – both generously funded by maritime foundations and actors – was perceived by the shipping industry as initiatives that would help market the industry in the eyes of the public. He argues more generally that national maritime museums constitute focal points for disseminating narratives that legitimate maritime activities and establish these activities as symbols of national identities. It is suggested that maritime historians, curators and scholars reflect on the relationship between maritime industry actors and museum exhibition narratives, and consider the interests and capital that potentially underpin museums’ and curators’ decisions.
We introduce a decision support tool for liner shipping companies to optimally determine the sailing speed and needed fleet for a global network. As a novelty we incorporate cargo routing decisions with tight transit time restrictions on each container such that we get a realistic picture of the utilization of the network. Furthermore, we show that it is possible to extend the model to include optimal time scheduling decisions such that the time associated with transshipments is also reflected accurately. To solve the speed optimization problem we propose an exact algorithm based on Benders decomposition and column generation that exploits the separability of the problem. Computational results show that the method is applicable to liner shipping networks of realistic size and that it is important to incorporate cargo routing decisions when optimizing speed.
According to the narratives transmitted through media and political discourse, climate change reduces the ice coverage in the Arctic and enhances shipping and other forms of maritime activities. Especially, expectations of an increasing level of transit shipping between Asian, especially Chinese, ports and ports in Europe and North America is dominant. Evidence, however, tells that the numbers of transit shipping through the Arctic Ocean are very limited, and dominated by European shipping companies. For Greenland, political expectations have also been high, since Greenland has been seen as "strategically" situated in relation to new shipping routes in the Arctic, But, again, the actual development has been moderate and not related to international transits but conditions in Greenland itself.
We solve a central problem in the liner shipping industry called the liner shipping fleet repositioning problem (LSFRP). The LSFRP poses a large financial burden on liner shipping firms. During repositioning, vessels are moved between routes in a liner shipping network. Liner carriers wish to reposition vessels as cheaply as possible without disrupting cargo flows. The LSFRP is characterized by chains of interacting activities with a multicommodity flow over paths defined by the activities chosen. Despite its industrial importance, the LSFRP has received little attention in the literature. We introduce a novel mathematical model and a simulated annealing algorithm for the LSFRP with cargo flows that makes use of a carefully constructed graph; we evaluate these approaches using real-world data from our industrial collaborator. Additionally, we compare the performance of our approach against an actual repositioning scenario, one of many undertaken by our industrial collaborator in 2011. Our simulated annealing algorithm is able to increase the profit from $18.1 to $31.8 million using only a few minutes of CPU time. This shows that our algorithm could be used in a decision support system to solve the LSFRP.
In 2018 the International Maritime Organization (IMO) agreed to cut the shipping sector’s overall CO2 output by 50% by 2050. One of the key methods in reaching this goal is to improve operations to limit fuel consumption. However, it is difficult to optimize speed for a complete liner shipping network as routes interact with each other, and several business constraints must be respected. This paper presents a unified model for speed optimization of a liner shipping network, satisfying numerous real-life business constraints. The speed optimization is in this research achieved by rescheduling the port call times of a network, thus, the network is not changed. The business constraints are among others related to transit times, port work shifts and emission control areas. Other restrictions are fixed times for canal crossing, speed restrictions in the piracy areas and desire for robust solutions. Vessel sharing agreements and other collaboration between companies must also be included. The modeling of the different restrictions is described in detail and tested on real-life data. The scientific contribution of this paper is threefold: We present a unified model for speed optimization together with numerous business constraints. We present a general framework for handling routes with different frequencies. Moreover, we present a bi-objective model for balancing robustness of schedules against fuel consumption. The tests show that the real-life requirements can be handled by mixed integer programming and that the model finds significant reductions of bunker consumption and cost for large-scale real-life instances.
With the rise of ‘new’ state capitalisms, control over transport infrastructure has returned to the forefront of competition in the global economy. This article investigates how different state capitalisms interact to enable economic developments in ports. It tracks the relationship between state-owned firms in the shipping and ports sectors through a case study of the port of Valencia in Spain and COSCO shipping group. The article identifies state capitalisms as variegated and relational to analyze the ways in which qualitatively different state capitalist dynamics interact at different scales. The article identifies two state capitalist dynamics which have been dominant in determining relations between Spanish and Chinese state capitalisms: 1) A commercial dynamic of maximizing Spanish ports profits by establishing new relationships with Chinese firms; and 2) an expansionary dynamic of increasing market share of Chinese state-owned firms in European shipping markets. These two dynamics are synergistic and have contributed to the competitiveness of Spanish ports and Chinese shipping firms by providing new capital to the port of Valencia and expanding the port's profile as a hub in the eastern Mediterranean, while also further solidifying COSCO's position in European shipping markets and its internalization and vertical integration strateg
Modern ports face not only a paradox of combining efficiency and effectiveness, but also a paradox of balancing activities characterized by different time horizons and stakeholder expectations. The structural changes underlying these paradoxes are the co-existence of downward pressures on market premiums and the increasing demands on the relational capabilities of port authorities. The increasing demand on relational capabilities is caused by the fact that modern ports are hubs for industrial activities that span the organizational boundaries of firms, integrating port systems and the hinterland. Thus, port authorities must simultaneously focus on cost efficiency and systemic coordination within complex port systems. As indicated by recent research on port governance and competitiveness, this implies that port authorities must assume and combine different organizational roles. The present paper takes this discussion further by classifying the organizational roles of port authorities in terms of role complexity, relational capital, and systemic functions within the port system. Based on a case study, the paper shows that the use of systemic functions implies the development of new business models, and that the adoption of the roles by port authorities depends on how emerging relational capabilities are embedded in structures of value co-creation and value co-capture.
As a young researcher—admittedly a long time ago—I was struggling with capturing the connections of the many published articles on logistics management. Apparently, many articles dealt with the same topics, yet they were not the same. There seemed to be different viewpoints on what was a scientific contribution and what kinds of methods were allowed. Why did everyone not agree with these questions? Without an understanding of the different research traditions, it was difficult to compare results, validate them and create a meaningful discussion of the various contributions.
Within the Nordic research community, which consists of economists, engineers and management researchers, there were several answers to these questions. In this community, I learnt about systems from engineers. Then, it became clear that there are various philosophies of science that do not have the same understanding of what a theory is and what appropriate methods are. I was searching the philosophy of science literature for a systems perspective and the research implications of such a perspective. To my surprise, I did not find it here, but luckily, I came across a book about methodologies in business research where the systems approach was one of three approaches. I also learnt that, depending on the methodology, the term theory has a different meaning depending on the philosophy of science it originates from. That made a lot of sense to me. Understanding this better, I published my research on this topic in “Schools in Logistics Research” in 2004 (Gammelgaard, 2004). This rather old article is still my daily research guide.
Maritime security in the Gulf of Guinea is a challenge that straddles multiple players and sectors, and crimes like piracy cause disruptions to international trade and shipping. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the global shipping industry tried to keep maritime security on the agenda, while advocating for global security assemblages, specifically, transnational policing initiatives as part of the maritime security governance. Using the notion of narratives and assemblage thinking, it is argued that although global shipping and Ghanaian state agents agree on the problem, they differ on which maritime security governance infrastructure to deploy, resulting in tensions between the two parties.