Towards a New Intermediate Hub Region in Container Shipping? Relay and Interlining Via the Cape Route Vs
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Transport Geography 22 (2012) 164-178 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Journal of Transport Geography ELSEVIER journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jtrangeo Towards a new intermediate hub region in container shipping? Relay and interlining via the Cape route vs. the Suez route Theo E. Notteboom* ITMMA - University of Antwerp, Kipdorp 59, BE-2000 Antwerp, Belgium Antwerp Maritime Academy, Noordkasteel Oost 6, 2030 Antwerp, Belgium ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: The Suez Canal plays a pivotal role in today's global container shipping network, in particularly in accom Container shipping modating vessels sailing on the important Asia-Europe trade lane. This paper analyses to what extent and Vessel routing for which trade lanes the Cape route could develop into a competitive alternative to the Suez route. The Competition market potential of the Cape route is analysed using a distance analysis, a transit time analysis and a gen Interlining eralized cost analysis for a large set of 0/D relations. We compare vessel interlining via the port of Algec- Suez Canal iras w ith interlining via the new port of Ngqura in South Africa. The results show that the Cape route has Cape the potential to serve as an alternative to the Suez route on 11 trade lanes. A scenario and sensitivity anal ysis reveals that interlining via a hub near the Cape is expected to become more competitive due to a combination of higher Suez Canal transit fees, better vessel economics, higher bunker costs, slow steam ing practices and subject to a more competitive terminal pricing strategy of southern African tranship ment facilities. The expected emergence of the Cape route should be seen as the embodiment of a promising development of south-south trade volumes between Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa and South America. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Mediterranean, to name but a few. The role of intermediate hubs in maritime hub-and-spoke systems has been discussed exten From a network perspective, the location and function of sively in recent literature (see for instance Baird, 2006; Fagerholt, terminal facilities is not always guided by centrality vis-à-vis a 2004; Guy, 2003; McCalla et al., 2005). The hubs have a range of local/regional service area. Fleming and Hayuth (1994) pointed common characteristics in terms of nautical accessibility, proxim out that intermediate locations can emerge between origins and ity to main shipping lanes and ownership, in whole or in part, by destinations. While the concepts of centrality and intermediacy carriers or multinational terminal operators. These nodes m ultiply are not always clear-cut in practice, intermediate nodes are added shipping options and improve connectivity within the network to a network when considered appropriate by the network opera through their pivotal role in regional hub-and-spoke networks tors in view of overall performance of the network. Intermediacy and in cargo relay and interlining operations between the carriers’ typically improves the overall network connectivity and service east-west services and other inter- and intra-regional services. frequency, allows better use of economies of scale in transport Rodrigue and Notteboom (2010) argue that such intermediate equipment and generates additional cargo handling in the network. hubs in some cases go beyond a pure transfer function in the net Intermediacy has become increasingly prevalent in container work through processes of foreland-based regionalization. liner shipping. Container cargo is bundled by combining/linking Most of the intermediate hubs are located along the global belt two or more liner services through the setting of hub-and-spoke way or equatorial round-the-world route (i.e. the Caribbean, networks that rely on mainline/feeder, relay and interlining activ Southeast and East Asia, the M iddle East and the Mediterranean). ities in intermediate hub terminals. Intermediate hubs emerged Port sites situated close to strategic passage ways such as the since the mid-1990s within many global port systems: Freeport Straits o f Gibraltar, the Suez Canal, the Panama Canal and the Ma (Bahamas), Salalah (Oman), Tanjung Pelepas (Malaysia), Gioia lacca Straits act as magnets on the development of transhipment, Tauro, Algeciras, Taranto, Cagliari, Damietta and Malta in the relay and interlining activities. While the route via the Cape at the southern tip of the African continent can also be considered as a strategic passage way, at present it does not play a significant * Address: ITMMA - University of Antwerp, Kipdorp 59, BE-2000 Antwerp, Belgium. Tel: +32 3 265 51 52/3 205 64 30; fax: +32 3 265 51 50. role in the global container shipping network. The container port E-mail address: [email protected] systems in countries like South Africa, Mozambique, Namibia and 0966-6923/$ - see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, doi: 10.1016/j.j trangeo.2012.01.003 T.E. Notteboom/Journal of Transport Geography 22 (2012) 164-178 165 the islands of Madagascar and Mauritius are considered remote to Middle East/Asia and Europe. This process has accelerated since the main network and are served by a limited number of container the 1970s when significant scale increases in oil tankers and bulk carriers (m ainly Maersk Line, MSC, MOL, Evergreen and CMA CGM). carriers coincided w ith m ajor upgrades o f the Suez Canal. The glo There are no hub-and-spoke and relay/interlining operations in the bal container shipping network now primarily relies on the equa region comparable to the ones found along the global beltway. The toria l route in w hich the Suez Canal is a key m aritim e passage. geographical location and the current limited cargo potential of 6852 container vessels transited the Suez Canal in 2010, an in southern Africa seem to make the ports in the region no match crease of 46% compared to 2001. More than a third of all vessels for the traditional relay/interlining centres located at the cross using the Canal are container vessels (Table 2). About 646 million roads of east-west and north-south trade. As a result, tranship tons of cargo passed via the Canal in 2010. Some 57% of the cargo ment incidence in Africa was around 32% in 2008, but this is volume is containerized (Table 3). Total container volumes reached mainly the result of the North-African transhipment hubs of Port an estimated 33 million TEU in 2010 compared to 20 million in Said (transhipm ent incidence o f 96.3%), Damietta (83.1%), Alessen- 2004. Nearly 93% of these container flows are related to the Eur- dria (77.3%) and Tanger Med (99.1%). Africa, excluding these North ope-Asia trade routes. North America (East Coast)-Asia trade rep African hubs, has a low transhipment incidence of only 12% which resents about 5.3% (figures Boston Consulting and Suez Canal points to a port system with a weak ‘intermediacy’ in the global Authority). container shipping network. Important for this study is that the North-South and diagonal Recent history has shown that container shipping remains a trade lanes (e.g. North Europe-West Africa and North Europe- highly dynamic market. Shippers and shipping lines are continu South America) are largely connected to the main beltway via tran ously re-assessing the design of their shipping and distribution shipment and interlining/relay hubs such as Algeciras in Spain, networks in search of high cost efficiency, manageable risks and in Tanger Med in Morocco and Port Said and Damietta in Egypt. creased routing flexibility. Against this background, this paper In this paper we w ill analyze the market potential of the Cape analyses to what extent and for which trade lanes interlining/relay route by answering the following research question: operations along the Cape route could develop into a competitive What is the current and expected future market position of alternative to existing routes. We particularly zoom in on the po intermediate hub locations in southern Africa vis-à-vis interme tential for ports in southern part of Africa to serve as an alternative diate hubs in the Mediterranean for east-west and north-south to the main hubs on the east-west shipping routes for attracting relay and interlining operations? relay/interlining business. This paper not only assesses the current competitive position of southern Africa in this respect, but also Fig. 1 gives a schematic representation of the methodology de elaborates on the conditions that need to be met in order to make ployed. The concept of ‘market position’ is made operational by the Cape route a viable option in container shipping networks. analyzing and comparing relative distances, transit times and gen In the first part of this paper, we develop the research question eralized costs on a set of origin-destination relations. A first qual and a methodology to analyse route competition between the Cape itative analysis of the relevant routes to consider when comparing route and the Suez route. Next, the results of the route competition the Cape route and the Suez route resulted in 14 relevant origin- analysis are discussed. The paper concludes w ith a discussion on destination relations (Table 4). The choice of the 14 routes w ill key issues related to the com petitive position o f the Cape route be further substantiated in the distance and transit time analyses. vs. the Suez route. Most of the selected routes relate to shipments between West Afri ca and Asia and South America and Asia. 2. Research question and methodology We compare the Suez route and the Cape route by using pivotal ports: the port of Algeciras as a main transhipment and interlining/ Over the last 50 years or so, the development and upgrading of relay hub linked to the Suez route and the new port of Ngqura in the Suez Canal (Table 1 ) gradually undermined the position of the South Africa as a potential transhipment and interlining/relay route via the Cape as the dominant vessel route between the hub linked to the Cape route.