Content uploaded by Gunnar Prause
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Gunnar Prause on Mar 13, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
LOGISTICS CORRIDORS AND SHORT SEA
SHIPPING IN THE BALTIC SEA AREA
(Topic area: Economic impact of short sea shipping)
Joachim R. Daduna1, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Badensche Str. 52,
D - 10825 Berlin, Germany, daduna@hwr-berlin.de, +49 - 30 - 85789 – 114
Kristina Hunke, Wismar Business School, Philipp-Müller-Str. 14, D - 23966 Wismar,
Germany, kristina.hunke@hs-wismar.de, +49 3841 7537 519
Gunnar Prause, Wismar Business School, Philipp-Müller-Str. 14, D - 23966 Wismar,
Germany, gunnar.prause@hs-wismar.de, +49 3841 7537 297
ABSTRACT
__________________________________________________________________________________
The importance of Short Sea Shipping (SSS), also in connection to River Sea Shipping (RSS), will
increase in the next years. One significant aspect in this context is the decrease of terrestrial
transport services (road and rail) in contrast to increasing services in the maritime transport sec-
tor, especially considering the relief off the road and railway infrastructure. Looking at the present
situation, SSS as well as RSS is already used in many different transport fields all around the world.
However, there exists still a great potential which currently is not used or not sufficiently exploited
for many different reasons. With the focus on the positive effects of maritime transport that have
to be considered not only economically but also ecologically, so that SSS and the RSS should be
prioritized on political level.
The implementation of such projects implies the creation of an appropriate legal framework
and a necessary transport infrastructure which enables a definition of cross-border corridors. This
is the fundamental basis for the development of network structures which will be built of different
transport means including (hierarchically structured) logistic facilities. Operative elements of these
structures are available transport means possessing system-specific characteristics which funda-
mentally determine the organization of the transport conduction.
In order to identify the potential use of SSS and RSS different scenarios have been developed
(e.g. in Baltic Sea Region and the directly adjoining hinterland) pointing out alternative solutions in
terms of (multimodal) transport as well as transport conducted to and from this region. Options
depicted will be analyzed in detail and evaluated from different perspectives (e.g. considering
transport and handling costs, time consumption and the (transport-related) emissions). After-
wards, advantages and disadvantages of each alternative will be examined by taking into account
1 Presenting Author
2
expectations of the shippers. Finally, a short summary will give an outlook on future development
of SSS and RSS.
Keywords: Short Sea Shipping; River Sea Shipping; multimodal freight transportation
___________________________________________________________________________
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
3
LOGISTICS CORRIDORS AND SHORT SEA
SHIPPING IN THE BALTIC SEA AREA
1. MACRO LOGISTICS STRUCTURES IN FREIGHT TRANSPORT
Increasing globalization of industry and trade which is evermore being shaped by global dislo-
cated structures of procurement, production and distribution results in significant demands set on
the performance of (transport) logistics systems. In this respect, both the different modes of
transport and the macro logistic framework conditions, especially those concerning the transport
and communications infrastructure, have been affected. Only in case of a (quantitatively and quali-
tatively) sufficient extent of these particular structures it will be possible to build and control in-
ternationally oriented supply chains in an efficient way (especially along with multimodal freight
transport).
The main focus of this paper lays on development patterns in the Baltic Sea Region and its con-
nection to the North Sea Area which for historical reasons might be regarded as one homogenous
commercial space. This is particularly evident when referring to the structures of the Hanseatic
League and its significant economic and political importance in the Middle Ages (see i. a. Ewert /
Selzer 2007). With regard to the geopolitical developments in the 20th Century, especially after
the Second World War, these economic structures growing over the last centuries have been
largely resolved as a result of political bloc buildings. After the collapse of the Soviet-dominated
economic area of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (COMECON), now more than 20
years ago, however, the historically developed structures regained to a certain extent their tradi-
tional relevance, as the political boundaries have largely lost their meaning in many areas in the
course of the European Union (EU) enlargement processes.
In 1994, Pan-European corridors were defined (see i. a. HB-Verkehrsconsult / VTT 2005: 6 p.;
Vinukurov et al. 2009. 19 p.) in order to meet changing demands in the Central- and Southeast
European Regions as well. These corridors have to ensure connections both to the former EU terri-
tory (westbound) and to the Russian Federation (eastbound). On the basis of traffic flows and de-
velopments forecasted as well as by bearing in mind political objectives regarding the realization
of a (future) common European economic area, specific transport corridors were developed which
must build the backbone of highly efficient transport structures including the (partly realized)
structures of the Trans European Transport Network (TEN-T) (see i. a. Baird 2007; Stratigea et al.
2008; Dionelis / Giaoutzi 2008; de Ceuster et al. 2010: 15 pp.). Major focus is put here on terrestri-
al systems of road and rail transport as well as freight transport on inland waterways (see i. a. Not-
teboom 2007; Rohács / Simongáti 2007). In the maritime field, the Short Sea Shipping (SSS) (see i.
a. Ng 2009; Paixão Casaca / Marlow 2009; Styhre 2009; Daduna 2011) as well as the River Sea
Shipping (RSS) are considered as the main transport modes (see i. a. Kaup 2008; Radmilović et al.
2011).
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
4
The provision and maintenance of the associated infrastructure in contrast to the largely dereg-
ulated (operational) transport execution is understood as a primary task of governmental respon-
sibility (see i. a. Knorr 2005, Aberle 2009: 127 pp.), even if this view has been critically discussed,
especially when referred to the issue of non-state forms of financing (see i. a. Eisenkopf 2005;
Aberle 2009: 162 pp.). However, a strategic (and long-term) planning of basic structures is indis-
pensable in order to ensure a cross-country consistency of the corridor or network structures (see
i. a. Gutiérrez et al. 2011) and an efficient linkage of various modes of transport. Nevertheless, this
can only be achieved under governmental auspices as well as by taking into consideration the bal-
anced interests. The focus here is on the design of multimodal transport chains aiming to combine
the system-specific benefits of available transport modes under economic and environmental as-
pects.
The following discussion places emphasis on the (multimodal) freight transport, since it plays a
decisive role in international logistics and reveals the greatest potential in terms of a sustainable
competitiveness. First, essential aspects of the structural design of transport corridors and related
(traffic) logistic processes will be examined. Subsequently, possible transportation options be-
tween the North and the Baltic Sea are viewed and analyzed in terms of (technical and logistical)
performance. In this respect, questions regarding the modal shift and prevention of traffic-induced
emissions are dealt with. The paper concludes by providing statements for the design of sustaina-
ble transport concepts in the light of reasonable and cost-performance oriented aspects.
2. STRUCTURES OF TRANSPORT CORRIDORS
The (modal) infrastructure plays a crucial role in the design of transport corridors. In addition to
the (spatial) implementation (or availability) and the (capacitive) design of routes as well as their
intermodal network, the logistics facilities are essential too. Here, there is a need to cover differ-
ent modes of transport which demonstrate differentiated case-related benefits due to the general
framework. With regard to the efficient organization of operational processes, the field of (partly
mode-specific) information and communication technologies (ICT) systems should be considered
as another significant factor. This requires the use of high-performance ICT-based systems for
planning as well as for monitoring and control. The discussion below proceeds by briefly reviewing
and analyzing these four particular areas.
2.1 Network structures
In order to design more efficient processes for the multimodal transport, especially in combina-
tion with trans- and intercontinental structures of demand, appropriate network structures are
needed to map the existing (and future) flows of goods. Since these are not dependent on national
boundaries but rather are subject to structural realities of the economic areas, a cross-border (and
cross-mode) coordination of the infrastructure is absolutely necessary (see i. a. Gutiérrez et al.
2011), as well as the efficient use of available investment funds. This means that it is primarily a
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
5
political task which, in addition to the development of regional structures, also has to integrate the
needs of spatial linkages of the economy.
On this basis, higher-level structures necessary for the design of transport processes at the
macro logistical level emerge within the EU sphere (including neighboring countries) through the
Pan-European corridors along with the TEN-T projects. Currently, there are defined ten corridors
(see i. a. Reynaud 2003; HB-Verkehrsconsult / VTT 2005: 6 p.; Vinukurov et al. 2009. 19 p.) and 30
priority TEN-T projects (see i. a. Baird 2007; Stratigea et al. 2008; Dionelis / Giaoutzi. 2008; de
Ceuster et al. 2010), as shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2. Regardless of the actual status of planning
and implementation, they form a (European-wide) framework for a targeted development as well
as a restructuring and expanding of the (transport logistics) macrostructures. However, the
potential performance of area-wide network structures can only be achieved due to consistent
implementation which is currently not yet (or only with limitations) possible because of the time
required for the planning and realization. Additionally, there exist financial restrictions in the pub-
lic sector as well as general discussions concerning upcoming application for financing (see i. a.
Proost et al. 2011).
Figure 1 Overview TEN-T Projects
Figure 2 Overview Pan-European Corridors
Although these basic structures are essential from the transport and economic point of view,
they are, however, subject to some critical remarks (see i. a. Peters 2003). Major criticism points
to the concentration of transport investments in the existing economic structures. As a result, a
key objective of the EU emphasizing the harmonization of living conditions, i. e. the EU-wide eco-
nomic and social cohesion, is being neglected. Therefore, it has to be counteracted that
investments with limited availability lead to a significant restriction resulting in forced setting of
priorities. Besides, the EU-wide competition and the resulting development opportunities can only
be realized if a sufficient mobility of people and goods is ensured.
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
6
2.2 Logistics facilities
In transport networks, the nodes provide not only the starting and destination points of
transport flows but also the basis for a targeted organization of movements of goods. In this light,
the structuring of multimodal transport chains has the priority within the inter- and
transcontinental supply chains (see i. a. Panayides / Song 2008; Rodrigue / Notteboom 2009;
Rodrigue et al. 2010). The nodes are regarded as logistics facilities with (hierarchical) varying
functionality and dimensioning. The focus here is on the bi- or tri-modal combinations of different
transport modes and, in an extended form, on the provision of services in the field of
warehousing, distribution, and (logistics related) services (see i. a. van der Lugt / de Langen 2005;
Grundey / Rimi 2007; Jaržemskis 2007).
Within the basic structures (in terms of the transport functions) the following (maritime and
terrestrial) facilities can be located:
° Seaport Container Terminals (SCT) with international hub function and multimodal linkages (see
i. a. Notteboom 2008; Roso et al. 2009; Rodrigue / Notteboom 2010; Daduna 2011), within
trunk and feeder networks. Considering the area in question the focus lays primarily on the SCT
of the North Range along with the dominant ports in this region of Antwerp, Rotterdam and
Hamburg.
° Regional and local SCT in the SSS with a normally restricted hinterland which constitute the
predominant form, e. g. in the Baltic Sea Region.
° Inland ports with regional and local function and, if applicable, connection to the River-Sea
Shipping (RSS).
° Hinterland terminals with supra-regional function (e. g. in the form of MegaHubs with the focus
on rail / rail transshipment) (see i. a. Alicke 2002; Rodrigue 2008; Limbourg / Jourquin 2009;
Daduna 2011).
° Regional and local transshipment terminals with (bi- or multimodal) cargo transport, especially
taking into account the access to railway freight transport.
The crucial point appears to be in this context the scale of investments required for the
handling equipment and its payback, especially in case of local and regional facilities. In terms of
the (currently) available solutions (see i. a. Woxenius 2007) terminals with lower turnover levels
can rarely be operated economically thus reducing potential rail / road transshipment possibilities
and restricting the access to rail transport. Different technologies in a simplified (and therefore
cost-efficient) horizontal cargo handling, e. g. the system Mobiler (or Cargo Domino) (see i. a.
Becker / Dünnbier 2002, Bruckmann 2006: 69 pp.) and the (rolling highway) system ModaLohr (see
i. a. Deutsch 2007; Dalla Chiara et al. 2008) are already being tested operationally. Whether these
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
7
technical solutions are likely to be sustainable ones from operational and economic perspective it
still needs to be proven.
By integrating further features into the design of logistics facilities, e. g. warehousing, distribu-
tion and services, the following basic forms can be distinguished (primarily related to the logistical
hinterland structures) which comprise a hierarchically graded structure (see also i. a. Nobel 2004:
47 pp.; Wermuth / Wirth 2005; Grundey / Rimi 2007; Nathanail 2007):
° Freight villages with supra-regional (or international) relevance (see i. a. Nobel 2004: 51 pp.;
Ballis / Mavrotas 2007; Rall 2008) which should serve as a basis for the European-wide net-
works of freight transport.
° Regional freight distribution centers for a spatially limited aggregation and disaggregation of
freight flows (see i. a. Tanaguchi et al. 1999). These can also be Dedicated Warehouses (see i. a.
Nobel 2004: 47 pp.) which, for instance, have been operated by logistics service providers on
behalf of (online) retail trading companies.
° City terminals or Urban Consolidation Centers (UCC) along with a locally oriented distribution in
major cities as well as metropolitan areas (see i. a. Yang et al. 2005; Van Duin et al. 2010; Allen /
Browne 2010; Quak / Tavasszy 2011). In this case, the objective is to take (i. a. including city lo-
gistics concepts) full advantage of bundling effects as well as enable a customer oriented
delivery of goods.
A schematic overview of the structural contexts of the logistics facilities concerned is given in
Figure 3.
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
8
Seaport container
terminal (SCT)
Regional /
local SCT
Inland harbor (with
RSS connection)
Freight village
(Regional) distri-
bution centre
City terminal
Hinterland termi-
nal (MegaHub)
Regional / local
multi.modal terminal
Corridor
Figure 3 Corridor formation and network of logistics facilities
In practice, however, the above listed (basic) forms with a largely clear delineation are rarely to
be found. The rationale behind this might be the very complex objectives associated with freight
facilities as a result of different interests of participants (and stakeholders) (see i. a. Nobel 2004:
55 pp.). Therefore, with regard to particular structural conditions, facilities adapted functionally
and spatially should be taken as a starting point. This is the case, in particular, when dealing with
the question of generation of synergy effects, e. g. by spatial linkages between hinterland termi-
nals for intermodal rail / road and logistics facilities (see i. a. Rodrigue 2010). Accordingly, these
facilities are reflected through functional combination of services in transportation, warehousing
and logistics service providing. Similar development patterns emerge in the SCT as well (see i. a.
van der Lugt et al. 2007; Gouvernal et al. 2011).
2.3 Transport modes
Available transport modes with the transport systems truck, rail and barge (in inland waterway
transport) as well as vessels in the SSS and the RSS can be described by systemic (qualitative and
quantitative) performance indicators that are referred to as values of transportation services.
These enable a comparison according to their technical and functional capabilities in transport
operations (see i. a. Eisenkopf et al. 2008; Daduna 2009):
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
9
° Quickness of transport operations: Sum of driving speed and the (technically or organizationally
related) dwell time which, in this context, may not be understood as punctuality in terms of
process control system.
° Ability for bulk goods forwarding: Available capacity of the transport mode used and the
amount of costs for transporting a unit of weight or volume of a given good.
° Ability to form (dense) networks: Possibility of establishing direct transportation links between
shippers and customers, i. e. if pre-carriage and on-carriage operations become necessary, the
ability to form a transportation network is reduced.
° (Time-related) predictability of transport operations: This indicator implies the compliance with
the service times scheduled (on the basis of timetables) as well as ensuring the planned dura-
tion of transportation services.
° Frequency of available transport services in a given period of time and on specific routes: Scope
of operations, depending on the amount of existing potentials on the routes concerned.
° Security and free of malfunction: Appearance of external influences on transport operations
that hamper the continuity of operational flows.
° Convenience: Presence of possibilities to access the transportation networks, i. e. what effort is
required to initiate the transport execution by applying an appropriate mode of transport.
An assessment of the transport modes according to their (economic and technical) perfor-
mance indicators is shown in Table 1.
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
10
Table 1 Comparison of systems on the basis of economic efficiency
Performance indicators
Transport mode
Truck
Train
Barge (Deep)
sea
vessel
Air-
craft Net-
works*
Quickness of transport services
++
+
-
-
++
+
Ability to forward bulk goods -- ++ ++ ++ -- ++
Ability to form (dense) networks
++
-
-
--
-
--
(Time-related) predictability of
transportation services + + o o + +
Frequency of available transport
services ++ o o - o ++
Security and free of malfunctions o ++ + + ++ ++
Convenience (access to available
means of transport) ++ - - -- -- -
Rating: ++ Excellent / + Good / o Indifferent / - Not so good / -- Poor
* Pipeline, tube, and cable networks
However, in this respect, the organizational framework needs to be considered which has sig-
nificant impact on the efficiency of service providing processes, as it is currently the case, in par-
ticular, in the rail freight transport (see i. a. Schnieder 2007; Tsamboulas 2008).
By leaving aside such points of discussion, with regard to the efficiency and sustainability in
transport execution the focus should be put on the multimodal transport chains, rather than the
use of individual modes of transport (usually the road transport), even if this kind of
transportation is technically possible. A high performance quality is only achieved due to a de-
mand-oriented combination of the positive performance indicators of diverse transport modes, i.
e. within network structures. However, there cannot be a universally applicable standard solution,
since the transportation and logistical needs of shippers impact the necessary framework.
2.4 Information and communication systems
Powerful ICT systems serve as inevitable prerequisite for an efficient (and sustainable)
planning, monitoring and control of (transport-related) logistics processes (see i. a. den Hengst
2008). In addition to the systems in macro logistics sector, there exist three further application
areas at the operational level (see i. a. Daduna / Voß 2000). These ones need to be regarded as
differentiated:
° ICT systems related to infrastructure within the (modal-related) control, signaling and safety
technology which are used to monitor and control traffic flows at the macro logistics level. In
this context, these are, for instance, the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS)
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
11
(see i. a. Hauner / Jänsch 2008) or the River Information Services (RIS) (see i. a. ZKR 2004;
Kühtreiber et al. 2007). Both of them are currently being established (within the EU). These par-
ticular systems serve primarily for the technical supervision and control of operations that influ-
ence the structuring of transportation processes.
° ICT systems applied in logistics facilities as a basis for (computer-aided) co-operation of all
enterprises and (public) institutions in this sector. The main focus here is on planning and
monitoring internal processes and, to a certain extent, external interconnections as well. As ex-
ample serves the Data Communication System of the Port of Hamburg (DAKOSY) (see
http://www. dakosy.de/ loesungen/pcs-seehafen).
° User-group-related ICT systems for computer-aided interconnection of (closed) groups or
individual sectors, such as the Electronic Waterway Information System (ELWIS) for inland
waterways in the Federal Republic of Germany (see http://www.elwis.de) or the IATA Cargo
Accounts Settlement System (IATA CASS) used within the air freight transport operations (see
http:// www.iata.org/ps/financial_services/pages/cass.aspx).
° Internal ICT systems for planning, monitoring and control of internal (as well as cross-company)
processes. These involve, for instance, software tools, i. a. for computer-aided planning and
control of transport processes as well as fleet management systems used in the road (freight)
transport (see i. a. Daduna 2005, Goel 2008: 61 pp.; Crainic et al. 2009), for instance, the system
FleetBoard (see http://www.fleetboard.com/ info/de/transportmanagement.html).
In order to ensure an adequate performance of the computer-aided systems used on different
levels, there is an absolute necessity to link these particular systems based on clearly defined in-
terfaces with corresponding protocols. Therefore, only a precisely timed and media-break free
design of all information flows can meet the requirements on the (internal and external) infor-
mation management within the logistical monitoring which are increasingly growing due to work-
sharing structures.
2.5 Design framework
(Technical) principles on the efficient management and the customer-oriented implementation
of (transport) logistical tasks discussed in the previous four sections have to be understood as a
long-term objective. In order to implement this objective through appropriate measures it is es-
sential to ensure the consistent development of existing transport infrastructure and logistics facil-
ities as well as of the administrative and legislative framework in particular. Only if these condi-
tions are achieved timely and spatially adjusted on the European and national level, particular
prerequisites are satisfied enabling to form a suitable (largely meshed) network structure which
makes it possible to determine efficient connections in the multimodal transport.
Beyond that, different objective functions are considered to be essential too, also with regard
to the issue of sustainability in transport processes. In addition to the three classic criteria,
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
12
transport distances, transport times and transport costs, the issue of modal-related pollution sub-
ject to often debates needs to be involved into consideration as well, especially in terms of CO2
emissions. The problematic nature of the issue concerned became increasingly dealt with in the
traffic-policy discussions in recent years as well by analyzing practical applications, primarily
associated with the objective to develop and implement the concepts of a Green Logistics (see i. a.
Woodburn / Whiteing 2010). However, in practice, it can be seen again and again that the cost
aspect continues to dominate the logistical planning, unless a customer, for example, in case of
taking appropriate decisions on energy procurement, consciously accepts higher transport costs
with the clear purpose to convey a positive image of the company to the public. For such primarily
marketing-based decisions, it has been often ignored that an efficient logistics per se involves both
economic and ecological aspects. For example, a reduction in mileage needed to handle a given
order volume does not only save money but, at the same time, implies a lower resource
consumption thus reducing traffic-related emissions.
Based on the selected examples, the next chapter presents and compares possibilities of
multimodal transport in the North and Baltic Sea Region by taking into account the Central Eastern
and Eastern European Region as well. The focus of the following discussion is the problematic na-
ture of multi-criteria objective structures and how do they result in the course of the implementa-
tion of transport-logistic tasks. Starting from a (meshed) network structure, possible links between
the locations of shippers and customers are considered which involve different modes of transport
and in different combinations. The objective here is not to analyze and evaluate different
transport processes from general aspects (see i. a. Winebrake et al. 2008) but, in turn, to scrutinize
specific transport demands in terms of operational planning by bearing on existing infrastructure.
However, it cannot be excluded that inefficiencies observed are not discussed in detail due to
structural shortcomings and no measures adopted.
3. MULTIMODAL TRANSPORT CHAINS ON THE BASIS OF
CORRIDORS
Within the European transport policy, as discussed above, the development of transport
corridors along with multimodal transport chains is of great importance, especially with regard to
the integration of TEN-T structures as well as Pan-European corridors. This is particularly the case
in the North Sea and the Baltic Sea regions and the neighboring Central Eastern and Eastern Euro-
pean and Scandinavian hinterland transport processes. This concerns the railway projects going
beyond these regions, such as the connection between the Baltic and the Black Sea (Viking Train
Project) (see i. a. Beifert / Prause 2011) or the direction towards Moscow (Mercury Train Project)
and further into the Asian region (see i. a. Prause / Beifert 2007; Emerson / Vinokurov, 2009).
Intensively discussed approaches concerning the realization of a shift from time-consuming sea
transports due to a direct European-Asian rail link appear to be irrelevant in respective discus-
sions, since in terms of low capacities these have (and will have in the future) a comparatively
poor impact (see i. a. Vinukurov et al. 2009). Currently, a capacity of up to 300.000 TEU has been
recorded and in the medium term can be expanded to 1.000,000 TEU. Despite this fact it does only
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
13
constitute a fraction of the most important SCT container throughput on the Northern Range (see
i. a. Daduna 2011).
The core element of the corridor formation is therefore the maritime transport (see i. a. Baird
2007; Paulaukas / Bentzen 2008), including some areas of the TEN-T Priority Projects No. 21
(Motorways of the Sea) (see i. a. Parantainen / Meriläinen 2007) and the SCT of the Northern
Range which are seen as inter- and transcontinental gateways to the Baltic Sea. Additionally,
terrestrial TEN-T projects (11, 12, 20, 23, 25, 27) and Pan-European corridors (I - III, VI, IX) relevant
to the hinterland of the Baltic Sea Region need to be considered.
As a starting point in these particular studies (see also Daduna / Prause 2011) serves a basic
structure with ten port regions or locations and logistics facilities in the eight hinterland corridors
(see Figure 4). Logistics facilities and (modal) infrastructure available constitute the foundation for
a cross-border network structure within the area in question. In order to plan the transport pro-
cesses the core element has been expanded by relevant locations of shippers and customers. Con-
sequently, the potential transport routes between the point of origin and the destination can be
described in order to undertake their analysis and evaluation. This is done (in a coarse structure)
based on the criteria already mentioned: distance, time and costs as well as the CO2 emissions as a
result of transport execution. A central question here is to what extent a varying choice of
transport is possible depending on various criteria. Besides, the analysis deals with the extent to
which diverse transport chains differ in terms of individual criteria.
Figure 4 Basic structure of multimodal networks in North and Baltic Sea Region
In order to investigate the following two routes from Leeds (GB) to Jonava (LT) and from
Neumarkt / Upper Palatinate (D) to Tampere (SF) are analyzed. According to the available modes
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
14
of transport and logistics facilities the different multimodal transport chains can be designed (see
Figure 5 and Figure 6 as well as Table 2 and Table 3). The calculation is made for the transport of a
40-feet standard container.
Leeds
Ham-
burg
3
Hull
1
Jonava
Es-
bjerg
5
Karls-
hamn
6Klei-
peda
8
Kau-
nas
15
Railway
Railway
Rail-
way
Truck
Truck / Ro-Ro-ferry
Vessel
Vessel Vessel
Truck
Truck
Truck
Vessel
Figure 5 Network of route 1 (Leeds (GB) - Jonava (LT))
Table 2 Transport chains of route 1 (Leeds (GB) - Jonava (LT))
(Multimodal) transportation chains
(1.1)
Leeds - (Truck / RoRo-ferry) - Jonava
(1.2) Leeds - (Truck) - Hull - (Sea going vessel) - Hamburg - (Truck) - Jonava
(1.3)
Leeds - (Truck) - Hull - (Sea going vessel) - Hamburg - (Railway) - Kaunas - (Truck) - Jonava
(1.4) Leeds - (Truck) - Hull - (Sea going vessel) - Klaipeda - (Truck) - Jonava
(1.5)
Leeds - (Truck) - Hull - (Sea going vessel) - Klaipeda - (Railway) - Kaunas - (Truck) - Jonava
(1.6) Leeds - (Truck) - Hull - (Sea going vessel) - Esbjerg - (Railway) - Karlshamn - (Sea going ves-
sel) - Klaipeda - (Truck) - Jonava
(1.7)
Leeds - (Truck) - Hull - (Sea going vessel) - Esbjerg - (Railway) - Karlshamn - (Sea going ves-
sel) - Klaipeda - (Railway) - Kaunas - (Truck) - Jonava
Neu-
markt /
Ober-
pfalz
Ham-
burg
3
Rotter-
dam
2
Lübeck
4Karls-
hamn
6
Tallinn
8
Railway
Truck
Truck
Truck / Ro-Ro-ferry
Truck
Truck
Barge
Vessel
Vessel
Tam-
pere
Nürn-
berg
5
11
Hel-
sinki
9
Rail-
way
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Rail-
way
Rail-
way
Figure 6 Network of route 2 (Neumarkt (D) - Tampere (SF))
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
15
Table 3 Transport chains of route 2 (Neumarkt (D) - Tampere (SF))
In order to compare diverse alternatives on the routes concerned, first, particular distances
have to be determined based on distance data in the existing network structures. Consequently,
on the basis of these data (by taking into account infrastructure-based restrictions and legal condi-
tions, for instance, permitted work time, driving and rest times) transport times have been deter-
mined in terms of the distance-dependent average speed (based on information gathered from
transport companies and forwarders), as long as there no precise timetable data are available.
Cost factors used for calculations are likewise based on requests and constitute average values. In
addition to these ones, times and costs of operations within the transshipment nodes are included
as well, where a period of 24 hours and costs of € 150.00 have been applied. An exception applies
in case of rail / road transshipment with six hours or € 25.00 is used.
Regarding the discussion about the (negative) environmental impacts of (freight) transport a
CO2 emission factor is calculated for the diverse transport chains, provided that the road freight
transport accounts for 0.065 kg / tkm, the rail freight transport for 0.023 kg / tkm, the transport on
inland waterways for 0.015 kg / tkm and the SSS for 0.018 kg / tkm. These particular values are
referred to as average values, since a precise calculation of energy consumption (see e.g. Lortz et
al. 2010; Kranke et al. 2011: 126pp) depends on diverse influencing factors. Primarily these are
topography of routes, status of infrastructural development, vehicles used and cargo that, in turn,
may vary within the transport process. The values employed are based on data published by
PLANCO, bfg (2007: 249, 262, 278), Lortz et al. (2010) and Kranke et al. (2011: 307pp). The results
of calculations are presented in Table 4 and 5.
Table 4 Results of route 1 (Leeds (GB) - Jonava (LT))
Distances (km) Duration
(h) Costs (€) CO2 e-
missions1
Truck Railway Barge
Sea going
vessel Total
1.1
2.270
150
2.420
110
3.320
150.25
(Multimodal) transportation chains
(2.1) Neumarkt - (Truck / RoRo-ferry) - Tampere
(2.2)
Neumarkt - (Truck) - Hamburg - (Sea going vessel) - Helsinki - (Truck) - Tampere
(2.3) Neumarkt - (Truck) - Lübeck - (Sea going vessel) - Helsinki - (Truck) - Tampere
(2.4)
Neumarkt - (Truck) - Nürnberg - (Barge) - Rotterdam - (Sea going vessel) - Helsinki - (Truck) -
Tampere
(2.5) Neumarkt - (Truck) - Nürnberg - (Railway) - Hamburg - (Sea going vessel) - Helsinki - (Truck) -
Tampere
(2.6)
Neumarkt - (Truck) - Nürnberg - (Railway) - Lübeck - (Sea going vessel) - Helsinki - (Truck) -
Tampere
(2.7) Neumarkt - (Truck) - Nürnberg - (Railway) - Karlshamn- (Sea going vessel) - Helsinki - (Truck)
- Tampere
(2.8)
Neumarkt - (Truck) - Nürnberg - (Railway) - Tallinn - (Sea going vessel) - Helsinki - (Truck) -
Tampere
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
16
1.2 1.410 710 2.120 137 1.880 104.43
1.3 130 1.320 710 2.160 205 2.200 51.59
1.4 340 1.710 2.050 119 1.130 52.88
1.5 130 320 1.710 2.160 136 1.250 46.59
1.6 340 500 1.020 1.880 168 1.870 51.96
1.7 130 820 1.020 1.970 185 1.990 45.67
1 kg per t/km
Table 5 Results of route 2 (Neumarkt (D) - Tampere (SF))
Distances (km)
Duration
(h) Costs (€) CO2 e-
missions1
Truck Railway Barge
Sea going
vessel Total
2.1
1.880
90
1.970
110
2.600
123.82
2.2
810
1.395
2.205
113
1.820
77.76
2.3
900
1.150
2.050
106
1.840
79.20
2.4
220
960
2.145
3.325
252
1.700
67.31
2.5
220
600
1.395
2.215
138
1.465
53.21
2.6
220
650
1.150
2.020
131
1.445
49.95
2.7
220
1.250
830
2.300
141
2.365
57.99
2.8
220
2.050
90
2.360
202
2.535
63.07
1 kg per t/km
The calculations are undertaken based on average values as well as in terms of time and cost of
the transport modes. Respective values might be lower in case of an appropriate synchronization
of the processes (for example, by coordinating the arrival and departure times in schedule-based
transshipment terminals). In unfavorable constellations, however, there can be observed the rise
of transport duration. Additionally, the arising actual costs of transportation and handling have to
be considered as well, since these are dependent on the extent of services requested and are
widely treated as the result of (bilateral) negotiations.
The results gathered imply that in both cases there is no clear best solution having generated
the lowest values regarding the essential parameters of transportation time, transportation costs
and CO2 emissions. In detail, the following picture has been observed:
° Costs: The lowest cost constellations emerge in case of a high proportion of the SSS, whereas
the transport by road (and rail) tends to result in higher costs. The rationale behind this result is
the bundling effects in the SSS as well as the disadvantages of road and rail freight transport in-
herent in the particular system.
° Transport duration: A high proportion of transportation services by truck leads to the most fa-
vorable solution, while the rail freight appears to generate significant disadvantages. The per-
formance indicators of these two transport modes comply with this result as well. A very good
infrastructure for a (mono-modal) road transport is available and allows a high flexibility in op-
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
17
erations, whereas the rail system is more fixed and therefore unveils some inefficiency, espe-
cially in single wagonload transport.
° CO2 emissions: A large proportion of the SSS in the transport execution also compared to the
rail freight transport (apart from the version 2.4 which shows unfavorable values deriving from
the total length of transportation distance) is considered as an advantageous one. A propor-
tionate increase of the road freight transport operations, however, yields clearly less favorable
values (as to be seen in versions 1.1, 1.2 and 2.1). Nevertheless, new regulations like the subse-
quent stages of the EURO-X-norm for diesel engines will lead to significant changes regarding
pollution emissions thus changing the prevailing relations.
In general, it becomes obvious that the rail freight possesses only comparatively little favorable
values, although, by taking into account the performance characteristics, quite different results
should be expected. Besides the lack of (technical) interoperability (see i. a. Hauner / Jänsch 2008;
Tsamboulas 2008; de Ceuster et al. 2010. 55 pp.) in the cross-border traffic, the rationale behind
this statement can be traced back to different gauges, different power supplies and not or only
partially compliant control and safety technology. In addition, there are (still existing) inefficiencies
in the organizational processes (see i. a. Schnieder 2007) along with the lack of or an
underdeveloped competition derived from the not consistently enforced deregulation. One im-
portant aspect in this respect is the missing (or less regarded) separation of responsibilities for the
rail network infrastructure and the (operative) transport services.
The decision making process is based on the analysis of the results regarding three criteria: du-
ration of transportation processes, transportation costs and transport-related CO2 emissions. The
results are set in relation to the accordingly best value of each indicator (basic value). Subsequent-
ly, the percentage deviation from the basic value was calculated for each alternative (in accord-
ance with the Savage-Niehans rule (see e.g. Klein / Scholl 2004: 396)) in order to get a standard-
ized basis for the all three criteria concerned. By applying this particular scaling the diverse dimen-
sions of the criteria are neutralized allowing a possible comparability. The objective of this proce-
dure is to find sufficient results in the sense of Pareto-optimal solutions. The following Tables 6
and 7 present the results for both examples.
Table 6 Assessment of the results for route 1 (Leeds (GB) - Jonava (LT))
Duration
Costs
CO2-emissions
Score
1.1
0.000
1.938
2.290
4.228
1.2
0.245
0.664
1.287
2.196
1.3
0.864
0.947
0.130
1.941
1.4
0.082
0.000
0.158
0.240
1.5
0.236
0.106
0.020
0.362
1.6
0.527
0.655
0.138
1.320
1.7
0.682
0.761
0.000
1.443
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
18
Table 7 Assessment of the results for route 2 (Neumarkt (D) - Tampere (SF))
Duration
Costs
CO2-emissions
Score
2.1
0.038
0.799
1.479
2.316
2.2
0.066
0.260
0.557
0.883
2.3
0.000
0.273
0.586
0.859
2.4
1.377
0.176
0.348
1.901
2.5
0.302
0.014
0.065
0.381
2.6
0.236
0.000
0.000
0.236
2.7
0.330
0.637
0.161
1.128
2.8
0.906
0.754
0.263
1.923
Five solutions in the first example yield very bad results and are therefore not recommended
for application. Only solution 1.4 and 1.5 should be realized. Although solution 1.4 appears to be
the best result in this context, solution 1.5 is worth to be discussed. Nevertheless, solution 1.4 has
significant advantages with regard to transport duration and transport costs but, in turn, yields
very bad values regarding emissions. Since the only disadvantage of the solution 1.5 is the
transport duration, it can be considered to improve the transport processes and handling times
due to better planning. Therefore, if only the transportation costs and the emissions are taken into
account, there cannot be any definite decision. The second example, on the contrary, delivers a
very clear result. Solution 2.6 generated for this example seems to be not the best one only in
terms of the transport duration, whereas regarding the transportation costs and emissions it defi-
nitely proves to be the best alternative. Here as well, a possible improvement of transport pro-
cesses would compensate the disadvantage concerned.
4. CONCLUSIONS AND OUTLOOK
The design of multimodal transport chains within the freight transport does not yield any (in a
mathematical sense) optimal solution, since the cases examined imply multi-criteria decision prob-
lems that always result in a compromise solution. Crucial in this light is the (transport-) technical
and administrative framework on the one hand and the time- and quality-related requirements on
the part of the shippers on the other. In addition, traffic and environmental issues play an increas-
ing role which under the aspects of competition (i. e. in terms of cost situation) appears to be ra-
ther of secondary importance, provided that no legal requirements apply. These ones will remain,
unless any other aspects regarding the image profiling measures will change these priorities.
The implementation of the politically desired prioritization of multimodal transport
presupposes the use of appropriate measures taken by the responsible (political) institutions as
well as by the providers of logistics services. In addition to the targeted (to the corridor structures
oriented) development of transport infrastructure, the transshipment facilities (as intermodal
links) must be covered to a sufficient extent as well. This applies mainly to the rail transport. Ac-
cordingly, significant improvement potential was created for the rail transport by implementing
respective measures (e. g. the creation of MegaHubs) (see i. a. Tsamboulas 2008; Limbourg / Jour-
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
19
quin 2009). Restructuring and expanding initiatives as well as development activities within the
field of infrastructure are the most important steps in order to achieve a supply-oriented design of
transport chains thus ensuring sustainable development of logistics structures.
As the results of the two examples examined indicate, solutions can be achieved due to suitable
infrastructural requirements (and associated service offerings), where the criteria for solutions are
not considered to be totally opposite. In other words, there are acceptable compromise solutions,
especially with respect to transport costs and CO2 emissions. However, these results must always
be understood as a decision option, i. e. which transport process is being executed is an opera-
tional decision considering the case-specific requirements. The information about available alter-
natives may influence decisions, even with a view to better integration of environmental effects
(at a corresponding cost situation).
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
20
REFERENCES
1. Aberle, G (2009): Transportwirtschaft. 5., überarb. u. erg. Aufl. (Oldenbourg) München / Wien
2. Alicke, K. (2002): Modelling and optimization of the intermodal terminal Mega Hub. In: OR Spectrum 24, 1–17
3. Allen, J. / Browne, M. (2010): Sustainable strategies for city logistics. In: McKinnon, A. / Cullinana, S. / Browne,
M. / Whiteing, A. (eds.): Green logistics - Improving the environmental sustainability of logistics. (KoganPage)
London et al., 282–305
4. Baird, A. J. (2007): The economics of Motorways of the Sea. In: Maritime Policies & Management 34, 287–310
5. Ballis, A. / Mavrotas, G. (2007): Freight villages design using the multicriteria method PROMETHEE. In: Opera-
tional Research 17, 213–232
6. Becker, T. / Dünnbier, S. (2002): Cargo Domino - Effizienter Bahnverkehr mit und ohne Anschlussgleis. In:
ZEVrail Glasers Annalen 126, 168–175
7. Beifert, A. / Prause, G. (2011): Logistic innovation networks in South Baltic Sea region. In: Prause, G. (eds.) Baltic
business and socio economic development 2009. (Berliner Wissenschafts-Verlag) Berlin, 3–17
8. Bruckmann, D. (2006): Containerisierung des Einzelwagenverkehrs - Entwicklung einer Methode zur Abschätzung
des containerisierbaren Aufkommens im Einzelwagenverkehr und Optimierung der Produktionsstruktur. PhD Thesis
Universität Duisburg-Essen
9. Crainic, T. G. / Gendreau, M. / Potvin, J.-Y. (2009): Intelligent freight-transportation systems - Assessment and the
contribution of operations research. In: Transportation Research (Part C) 17, 541–557
10. Daduna, J. R. (2005): Einsatz von Flottenmanagementsystemen zur Überwachung und Steuerung logistischer
Prozesse. In: logistik management 7 (4), 45–63
11. Daduna, J. R. (2009): Verkehrsträgerwettbewerb im Güterverkehr - Eine Scheindiskussion? In: Voss, S. / Pahl, J.
Schwarze, S. (Hrsg.): Logistik Management - Systeme, Methoden, Integration. (Physica / Springer) Berlin / Heidel-
berg, 247–260
12. Daduna, J. R. (2011): Importance of hinterland transport networks for operational efficiency in seaport container
terminals. In: Böse, J.W. (ed.): Handbook of Terminal Planning. (Springer) New York et al., 381–397
13. Daduna, J. R. (2011): Short sea shipping and river-sea shipping in the multi-modal transport of containers. (erscheint
in: International Journal of Industrial Engineering - Theory, Applications and Practice)
14. Daduna, J. R. / Prause, G. (2011): Korridorbildung als Grundlage leistungsfähiger Transportketten im
Ladungsverkehr. In: Ivanov, D. / Kopfer, H. / Haasis, H.-D. / Schönberger, J. (eds.): Dynamics and sustainability in
international logistics and supply chain management. (Cuvillier) Göttingen, 28–40
15. Daduna, J. R. / Voß, S. (2000): Informationsmanagement im Verkehr. In: Daduna, J. R. / Voß, S. (Hrsg.): Infor-
mationsmanagement im Verkehr. (Physika) Heidelberg 1–21
16. Dalla Chiara, B. / Deflorio, F. P. / Spione, D. (2008): The rolling road between the Italian and the French Alps -
Modelling the modal split. In: Transportation Research (Part E) 44, 1162–1174
17. de Ceuster, G. / Voge, T. / Chen, M. / de Kievit, M. / Laird, J. / Koh, A. / Sessa, C. / Enei, R. Mascellaro, R. (2010):
Trans-European transport network planning methodology - Final report. Report for European Commission DG
MOVE; TREN/R1/350-2008 lot2
18. den Hengst, M. (2008): Interorganizational coordination - The role of information technology. In: Konings, R. /
Priemus, H. / Nijkamp, P. (eds.): The future of intermodal freight transport. (Elgar) Cheltenham / Northhampto,
MA, 252–270
19. Deutsch, A. (2007): ModaLohr - Neue Alternative im Kombinierten Verkehr? In: Internationales Verkehrswesen 59,
284 - 287
20. Dionelis, C. / Giaoutzi, M. (2008): The enlargement of the European Union and the emerging new TEN transport
patterns. In: Giaoutzi, M. / Nijkamp, P. (eds.): Network strategies in Europe - Developing the future for transport
and ICT. (Ashgate) Aldershot / Burlington, 119–132
21. Eisenkopf, A. (2005): Public Private Partnerships - Zur Rolle öffentlich-privater Kooperationen bei der Versorgung
mit Verkehrsinfrastruktur in Deutschland. In: Hartwig, K.-H. / Knorr, A. (Hrsg.): Neuere Entwicklungen in der In-
frastrukturpolitik. (Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht) Göttingen, 155–173
22. Eisenkopf, A. / Hahn, C. / Schnöbel, C. (2008): Intermodale Wettbewerbsbeziehungen im Verkehr und Wettbew-
erbsverzerrungen. In: Eisenkopf, A. / Knorr, A. (Hrsg.): Neue Entwicklungen in der Eisenbahnpolitik. (Duncker &
Humblot) Berlin, 9–138
23. Emerson, M. / Vinokurov, E. (2009): Optimisation of central Asian and Eurasian trans-continental land transport
corridors. EU-Central Asia Monitoring (EUCAM) Working Paper 07
24. Ewert, U. C. / Selzer, S. (2007): Netzwerkorganisation im Fernhandel des Mittelalters - Wettbewerbsvorteile oder
Wachstumshemmnis. In: Berghoff, H. /Sydow, J. (Hrsg.): Unternehmerische Netzwerke - Eine historische Organisa-
tionsform mit Zukunft. (Kohlhammer) Stuttgart, 45–70
25. Goel, A. (2008): Fleet telematics - Real-time management and planning of commercial vehicle operations. (Spring-
er) New York
26. Gouvernal, E. / Lavaud-Letilleul, V. / Slack, B. (2011): Transport and logistics hubs - Separating fact from fiction.
In: Hall, P. / McCalla, R. J. / Comtois, C. / Slack, B. (eds.): Integrating seaports and trade corridors. (Ashgate) Farn-
ham / Burlington
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
21
27. Grundey, D. / Rimiené, K. (2007): Logistic centre concept through evolution and definition. In: Engineering Eco-
nomics 54 (4), 87–95
28. Gutiérrez, J. / Condeço-Melhorado, A. / López, E. / Monzón, A. (2011): Evaluating the European added value of
TEN-T projects - A methodological proposal based on spatial spillovers, accessibility and GIS. In: Journal of
Transport Geography 19, 840–850
29. Hauner, M. / Jänsch, E. (2008): Interoperabilität des Transeuropäischen Bahnsystems. In: Hecht, M. / Jänsch, E. /
Lang, H. P. / Lübke, D. / Mayer, J. / Mittmann, W. /Pachl, J. / Siegmann, J. / Weigand, W. (Hrsg.): Das System
Bahn. (EurailPress) Hamburg, 557–592
30. HB-Verkehrsconsult GmbH / VTT Technical Research Center of Finland (2005): Pan-European transport corridors
and areas status report. Project N° TREN/B2/26/2004 European Commission DG Energy & Transport (Final Re-
port)
31. Jaržemskis, A. (2007): Research on public logistics centre as a tool for cooperation. In: Transport 23(3), 202–207
32. Kaup, M. (2008): Functional model of river-sea ships operating in European system of transport corridors - Part II.
In: Polish Maritime Research 15 (4): 3–11
33. Klein, R. / Scholl, A. (2004): Planung und Entscheidung. (Vahlen) München
34. Knorr, A. (2005): Gemeinwohl und Daseinsvorsorge in der Infrastruktur. In: Hartwig, K.-H. / Knorr, A. (Hrsg.):
Neuere Entwicklungen in der Infrastrukturpolitik. (Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht) Göttingen, 31–53
35. Kranke, A. / Schmied, M. / Schön, D.A. (2011): CO2-Berechnung in der Logistik - Datenquellen, Formeln, Stand-
ards. (Vogel) München
36. Kühltreiber, N. / Jandrisits, M. / Pfliegl, R. / Hofmann-Wellendorf, B. (2007): Value-added services for river infor-
mation systems. In: Vermessung & Geoinformation 95,186–194
37. Limbourg, S. / Jourquin, B. (2009): Optimal rail-road container terminal locations on the European network. In:
Transportation Research (Part E) 45, 551–563
38. Lortz, A. / Rausch, A. / Rogge, D. / Spahl, T. (2010): CO2-Bilanzierung zur Gestaltung klimafreundlicher
Transportketten bei BASF. In: Schönberger, R. / Elbert, R. (Hrsg.): Dimensionen der Logistik - Funktionen, Institu-
tionen und Handlungsebenen. (Gabler) Wiesbaden, 211–243
39. Nathanail, E. (2007): Developing an integrated logistics terminal network in the CADES. In: Transition Studies
Review 14, 125–146
40. Ng, A. K. Y. (2009): Competitiveness of short sea shipping and the role of port - The case of North Europe. In:
Maritime Policies & Management 36, 337–352
41. Nobel, T. (2004): Entwicklung der Güterverkehrszentren in Deutschland. Diss., Institut für Seeverkehrswirtschaft
und Logistik (ISL) Bremen
42. Notteboom, T. E. (2007): Inland waterway transport of containerised cargo - From infancy to a fully-fledged
transport mode. In: Journal of Maritime Research 4 (2), 63–80
43. Notteboom, T. (2008): Bundling of freight flows and hinterland network developments. In: Konings, R. / Priemus,
H. / Nijkamp, P. (eds.): The future of intermodal freight transport - Operations, design and policy. (Elgar) Chelten-
ham / Northhampton, MA, 66–88
44. Nuzzolo, A. / Crisalli, U. / Comi, A. (2008): Metropolitan freight distribution by railways. In: Taniguchi, E. /
Thompson, R.G. (eds.): Recent advances in city logistics. (Elsevier) Amsterdam et al., 351–367
45. Paixão Casaca, A. C. and Marlow, P. B. (2009): Logistics strategies for short sea shipping operating as part of mul-
timodal transport chains. In: Maritime Policy & Management 36, 1–19
46. Panayides, P. M. / Song, D.-W. (2008): Evaluating the integration of seaport container terminals in supply chains.
In: International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management 38, 562–584
47. Parantainen, J. / Meriläinen, A. (2007): The Baltic sea motorway - Recent developments and outlook for the future.
In: Journal of Maritime Research 4, 21–30
48. Paulauskas, V. / Bentzen, K. (2008): Sea motorways as a part of the logistics chain. In: Transport 23 (3), 202–207
49. Peters, D. (2003): Cohesion, policentricity, missing links and bottlenecks - Conflicting spatial storylines for Pan-
European transport investments. In: European Planning Studies 11, 317–339
50. PLANCO Consulting GmbH / Bundesanstalt für Gewässerkunde (bfg) (2007): Verkehrswirtschaftlicher und
ökologischer Vergleich der Verkehrsträger Straße, Schiene und Wasserstraße (Teil A: Verkehrsträgervergleich). Gu-
tachten im Auftrag der Wasser- und Schifffahrtsverwaltung des Bundes / WSD Ost
51. Prause, G. / Beifert, A. (2007): Logistics in the Baltic Sea region. In: Kersten, W. / Blecker, Th. / Herstatt, C. (eds.)
Innovative logistics management. (Erich Schmidt) Göttingen, 327–342
52. Proost, S. / Dunkerley, F. / de Borger, B. / Gühnemann, A. / Koskenoja, P. / Mackie, P. / van der Loo, S. (2011):
When are subsidies to trans-European network projects justified? Transportation Research (Part A) 45, 161–170
53. Quak, H.J. / Tavasszy, L. A. (2011): Customized solutions for sustainable city logistics - The viability of urban
freight consolidation centres. In: van Nunen, J. A. E. E. / Huijbregts, P. / Rietveld, P. (eds.): Transitions towards sus-
tainable mobility - New solutions and approaches for sustainable transport systems. (Springer) Heidelberg et al.,
213–233
54. Radmilović, Z. / Zobenica, R. / Maraš, V. (2011): River-sea shipping – Competitiveness of various transport tech-
nologies. In: Journal of Transport Geography (article in press)
55. Rall, B. (2008): Güterverkehrszentren. In: Arnold, D. / Isermann, H. / Kuhn, A. / Tempelmeier, H. / Furmans, K.
(Hrsg.): Handbuch Logistik. 3., neu bearb. Aufl. (Springer) Berlin et al., 778–781
Logistics Corridors and Short Sea Shipping in the Baltic Sea Area
Joachim R. DADUNA, Kristina HUNKE and Gunnar PRAUSE
22
56. Reynaud, C. (2003): The concept of corridors and networks in developing Pan-European infrastructure. Paper pre-
sented at the seminar Transport Infrastructure Development for a Wider Europe (Paris, November, 27–28 2003)
(http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/untc/unpan013027.pdf / 19 sep 2011)
57. Rodrigue, J.-P. (2008): The Thruport concept and transmodal rail freight distribution in North America. In: Journal
of Transport Geography 16, 233–246
58. Rodrigue, J.-P. / Debrie, J. / Fremont, A. / Gouvernal, E. (2010): Functions and actors of inland ports - European
and North American dynamics. In: Journal of Transport Geography 18, 519–529
59. Rodrigue, J.-P. / Notteboom, T. (2009): The terminalization of supply chains - Reassessing the role of terminals in
port / hinterland logistical relationships. In: Maritime Policy & Management 36, 165–183
60. Rodrigue, J.-P. / Notteboom, T. (2010): Comparative North American and European gateway logistics - The region-
alism of freight distribution. In: Journal of Transport Geography 18, 497–507
61. Rohács, J. / Simongáti, G. (2007): The role of inland waterway navigation in a sustainable transport system. In:
Transport 22, 148–153
62. Roso, V. / Woxenius, J. / Lumsden, K. (2009): The dry port concept - Connecting container seaports with the hinter-
land. In: Journal of Transport Geography 17, 338–345
63. Schnieder, E. (2007): Modal-Split-Management. In: Schnieder, E. (Hrsg.): Verkehrsleittechnik - Automatisierung
des Straßen- und Schienenverkehrs. (Springer) Berlin / Heidelberg, 439–469
64. Stratigea, A. / Giaoutzi, M. / Koutsopoulos, C. (2008): European policy aspects of network integration in the TEN
transport. In: Giaoutzi, M. / Nijkamp, P. (eds.): Network strategies in Europe - Developing the future for transport
and ICT. (Ashgate) Aldershot / Burlington, 169–187
65. Styhre, L. (2009): Strategies for capacity utilization in short sea shipping. In: Maritime Economics & Logistics 11,
418–437
66. Taniguchi, E. / Noritake, M. / Yamada, T. / Izumitani, T. (1999): Optimal size and location planning of public logis-
tics terminals. In: Transportation Research (Part E) 35, 207–222
67. Tsamboulas, D. (2008): Development strategies for intermodal transport in Europe. In: Konings, R. / Priemus, H. /
Nijkamp, P. (eds.): The future of intermodal freight transport. (Elgar) Cheltenham / Northhampto, MA, 271–301
68. van der Lugt, L. M. / de Langen, P. W. (2005): The changing role of ports as locations for logistics activities. In:
Journal of International Logistics and Trade 3, 59–72
69. van der Lugt, L. M. / Nijdam, M. / Dumay, B. (2007): Distriparks in Seaports - Case studies on logistics centres in
Rotterdam. Paper EC Interreg IIIB North Sea Programme / SUTRANET project (Work Package 3: Transport and
Logistics Centres)
70. van Duin, J. H. R. / Quack, H. / Muñuzuri, J. (2010): New challenges for urban consolidation centers - A case study
in the Hague. In: Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2, 6177–6188
71. Vinokurov, E. / Dzhaddraliyev, M. / Shcherbanin, Y. (2009): The EurAsEC transport corridors. MPRA-Paper No.
20908 (http://mpra.ub-uni-muenchen.de/20908)
72. Wermuth, M. / Wirth, R. (2005): Modelle und Strategien des Güterverkehrs. In: Steierwald, G. / Künne, H. D.
/ Vogt, W. (Hrsg.): Stadtverkehrsplanung - Grundlagen, Methoden, Ziele. 2., neu bearb. u. erw. Aufl. (Springer)
Berlin et al., 296–326
73. Winebrake, J. J. / Corbett, J. J. / Falzarano, A. / Hawker, J. S. / Korfmacher, K. / Ketha, S. / Zilora, S. (2008): As-
sessing energy, environmental, and economic tradeoffs in intermodal freight transportation. In: Journal of the Air &
Waste Management Association 58, 1004–1013
74. Woodburn, A. / Whiteing, A. (2010): Transferring freight to 'greener' transport modes. In: McKinnon, A. / Culli-
nana, S. / Browne, M. / Whiteing, A. (eds.): Green logistics - Improving the environmental sustainability of logis-
tics. (KoganPage) London et al., 124–139
75. Woxenius, J. (2007): Alternative transport network designs and their implications for intermodal transhipment tech-
nologies. In: European Transport 35, 27–45
76. Yang, Z. / Liu, C. / Song, X. (2005): Optimizing the scale and spatial location of city logistics terminals. In: Journal
of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies 6, 2937–2946
77. Zentralkommission für die Rheinschifffahrt (ZKR) (Hrsg.) (2004): Richtlinien und Empfehlungen für Binnen-
schifffahrtsinformationsdienste. (RIS-Richtlinien Edition 2.0 / 05.02.04)