THE
term "economies of scale" is so ubiquitous in container shipping
today that its perceived merits are virtually axiomatic. Vessels are getting
larger to support greater economies of scale. Ocean carriers are consolidating
and collaborating in unprecedented ways in pursuit of greater economies of
scale.
Ports
too are expanding and collaborating as never before in order to achieve greater
economies of scale. However, rates are low, growth is tepid and lots of capital
has already been spent both on water and on land.
It
would be difficult to argue that the current trend toward scale at all levels
has changed the container shipping industry for the better. Ocean carriers are
less profitable, large load-centre ports are more congested, roads and highways
are more crowded, and shippers are less satisfied. Yet the next few years
portend a doubling down on the current "bigger is better" strategy,
even though it seems highly unlikely that doing more of what already is not
working will make things better.
Increasingly,
activity at large US ports is characterized by higher volumes of inbound
non-local cargo whose final destination may be hundreds of miles away,
sometimes even in another port city. This trend is predicted to intensify in
coming years in conjunction not only with the continued deployment of larger
container ships in both east-west and north-south trades, but with the
perceived inevitability of service consolidation that is expected to follow the
current round of ocean carrier merger and acquisition activity and alliance
reshuffling.
The
problem with this strategy from a shipper perspective is that rather than offer
more options and more flexibility it offers fewer options and less flexibility,
the American Journal of Transportation reported.
Worse
still, rather than distributing millions of containers across multiple gateways
so as to minimise landside choke points and mitigate risks associated with
single-point failures, the funnelling of more cargo through fewer gateways
leads to highly localised congestion, equipment imbalances, and stress on other
resources, all of which have downstream and upstream impacts not just on
shippers, but on the entire supply chain as well as the general public. In
effect, rather than eliminate cost this strategy at best shifts cost from the
waterside to the landside, and at worst adds cost as a result of congestion,
thereby amplifying not just logistics challenges but environmental challenges
and community tension as well.
Big
ships are here to stay. So too are the nation's large intermodal gateway ports
that are so critical to the international flow of goods. But for large ports to
continue to be successful, they must resolve the many challenges that have
resulted from the very scale that created those challenges and stop trying to
be everything to everyone.
In
some cases the answer to the challenges that large ports face may be to concede
a certain amount of local volume to niche ports within the region in order to
focus on improving the quality of their core non-local intermodal business.
Ports
of all sizes are acutely aware of the near-term challenges that larger vessels
represent and, large or small, all ports must continue to make the necessary
capital investments, including both dredging and landside improvements, to meet
those challenges.
Sacrificing
service in pursuit of scale is a false choice and a race to the bottom, not a
blueprint for future success. Cargo, like water, will always follow the path of
least resistance. By focusing on service over scale, productivity over price and
overall customer experience over bragging rights, niche ports eliminate many of
the unintended negative consequences that economies of scale have forced upon
larger ports.
Source
: HKSG.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar