Presentation on theme: "Dryport Conference: Intermodal Strategies for Integrating Ports & Hinterlands, Edinburgh, Oct 21-22 2010 Inland Ports and Freight Regionalization in North."— Presentation transcript:
Dryport Conference: Intermodal Strategies for Integrating Ports & Hinterlands, Edinburgh, Oct 21-22 2010 Inland Ports and Freight Regionalization in North America Jean-Paul Rodrigue Associate Professor, Dept. of Global Studies & Geography, Hofstra University, New York, USA
What Drives Supply Chain Management? Control Freaks… Offshoring Costs / time / reliability Internalize efficiency
North American Intermodal Transportation: Emerging Paradoxes Geographical and functional diffusion of containerization. Massive investments. Rationalisation (corridors and sites). New standards, practices and technologies. Increasing returns. Incremental changes. Decreasing returns. Consolidation (maritime, rail and trucking). Emergence of large operators. PPP. Supply chain control. Added- value-capture.
The Insertion of Inland Ports in North America: Basic Requirements Intermodal Rail Terminal Rail Corridor to the Gateway Logistics Activities
Northwest Ohio Intermodal Terminal, CSX 2011; An Inland Port
The Complexities of Inland Logistics: The Last Mile in Freight Distribution Gateway Inland Terminal DistributionCenter Capacity Frequency Corridor Customer Last Mile Segment GLOBAL HINTERLAND REGIONALLOCAL Shipping Network MassificationAtomization 2 2 1 1 2 2 Inventory in transit 1 1 Inventory at terminal
Functional Relations between Inland Terminals and their Hinterland Inland Terminal Logistics activities Retailing and manufacturing activities IIIIII FLOWS & INTEGRATION Logistics Pole Freight Region
American Foreign Trade by Maritime Containers, 2009 (in TEUs)
Asymmetries between Import and Export Containerized Logistics Many Customers Function of population density. Geographical spread. Incites transloading. High priority (revenue). Few Suppliers Function of resource density. Geographical concentration. Lower priority. Depends on repositioning opportunities. Gateway Inland Terminal DistributionCenter Customer Supplier Repositioning Import-Based Export-Based
Distribution Network Configurations for Containerized Import Cargo TypeSupply Chain Gateway-based Few mass market goods (economies of scale in distribution). Few very specialized goods (economies of scale in warehousing). Little if any transformations. Transloading. Tiered-based Mix of retail goods coming through a few gateways. Some customization. Large suppliers and large retailers (Big Box). Transloading, Postponement and Cross-docking. Regional distribution centers Complex set of goods coming from numerous suppliers (e.g. automotive parts). Regional variation of the nature and extent of demand. Local distribution centers Time sensitive bulky cargo (e.g. perishables). Low lead times. City logistics.
Distribution based on RDCs Distribution based on two gateways Distribution based on tiered system Distribution based on local DCs
Optimal Location and Throughput by Number of Freight Distribution Centers
Intermodal Terminals and Recent Co-Located Logistic Zones Projects Every rail operator involved. Partnership with a major real estate developer.
Main Advantages of Co-location FactorAdvantages Real estate Lower land acquisition costs. Higher acquisition capital. Joint land use planning. Specialization Rail company; terminal development and operations. Real estate promoter; logistic zone development and management. Cargo interdependency Respective customers. Joint marketing. Drayage Priority gate access. Shorter distances. More delivery trips. Higher reliability. Asset utilization Better usage level of containers and chassis. Chassis pools. Empty container depots. Information technologies Integration of terminal management systems with inventory management systems.
The North-American Container Port System and its Multi-Port Gateway Regions 1 2 6 5 4 3 7 Multi-port gateway regions 1. San Pedro Bay 2. Northeastern Seaboard 3. Southwestern Seaboard 4. Puget Sound 5. Southern Florida 6. Gulf Coast 7. Pacific Mexican Coast BNSF Logistics Park CenterPoint-KCS Intermodal Center Rickenbacker Global Logistics Park
BNSF Logistics Park, Chicago (Extended Gateway of LA / LB) BNSF Intermodal Yard Distribution Centers Wal-Mart Maersk California Cartage Chicago (60km) Chicago (60km)
CenterPoint-KCS Intermodal Center, Kansas City (Extended Gateway of Lazaro Cardenas) KCS Intermodal Yard Retail Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Kansas City (25 km) Kansas City (25 km)
Rickenbacker Global Logistics Park, Columbus Ohio (Extended Gateway of Hampton Roads) NS Intermodal Terminal Columbus ( 15km ) Rickenbacker International Airport Intermodal Campus Rail Campus Air Cargo Campus North Campus Gateway Campus
Share of the Northeast Asia – U.S. East Coast Route by Option
Transit Times from Shanghai and North American Routing Options (in Days) 28 25 26 25 19 13 14 12 13 22 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 4 4 8 8 8 8 5 5 Vancouver Seattle / Tacoma Prince Rupert Oakland Los Angeles Lazaro Cardenas Panama Houston Savannah/Charleston Norfolk New York Chicago Dallas Atlanta Toronto Lower aggregate demand. The curse of economies of scale. Response from West Coast ports. Response from railways (East vs. West). New gateways (Canada: CN, Mexico: KCS). Response from terminal operators. Response from Caribbean transshipment hubs. Costs (fuel prices and Panama Canal toll rates). Competition from Suez and the Mediterranean. Regionalization of production.
Extending the Gateways and Inland Ports 1- Functional Integration of Supply Chains (Gateway + Corridor + Inland Port) 2- Regional Division of Distribution (Asymmetries + Co-location as a filter) 3- Challenges (Competing gateways + Corridors)