A new governance perspective on port-hinterland relationships: the Port Hinterland Impact (PHI) matrix
Haezendonck, E.; Dooms, M.; Verbeke, A. (2014). A new governance perspective on port-hinterland relationships: the Port Hinterland Impact (PHI) matrix. Maritime Economics & Logistics 16(3): 229-249. https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/mel.2014.10
In: Maritime Economics & Logistics. Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke. ISSN 1479-2931; e-ISSN 1479-294X, meer
|  |
| Trefwoord |
|
| Author keywords |
governance; transaction cost economics; economic impact; porthinterland; geographic reach; dedicated traffic |
| Abstract |
We develop a new governance perspective on port–hinterland linkages and related port impacts. Many stakeholders in a port’s hinterland now demand tangible economic benefits from port activities, as a precondition for supporting port expansion and infrastructural investments. We use a governance lens to assess this farsighted contracting challenge. We find that most contemporary economic impact assessments of port investment projects pay scant attention to the contractual relationship challenges in port-hinterland relationships. In contrast, we focus explicitly on the spatial distribution of such impacts and the related contractual relationship issues facing port authorities or port users and their stakeholders in the port hinterland. We introduce a new concept, the Port Hinterland Impact (PHI) matrix, which focuses explicitly on the spatial distribution of port impacts and related contractual relationship challenges. The PHI matrix offers insight into port impacts using two dimensions: logistics dedicatedness, as an expression of Williamsonian asset specificity in the sphere of logistics contractual relationships, and geographic reach, with a longer reach typically reflecting the need for more complex contacting to overcome ‘distance’ challenges with external stakeholders. We use the PHI matrix in our empirical, governance-based analysis of contractual relationships between the port authorities in Antwerp and Zeebrugge, and their respective stakeholders. |
|
