IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v102y2017icp202-211.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Encouraging intermodality: A stated preference analysis of freight mode choice in Rio Grande do Sul

Author

Listed:
  • Larranaga, Ana Margarita
  • Arellana, Julian
  • Senna, Luiz Afonso

Abstract

Brazil’s freight modal split is mainly focused on road transport. The imbalance between different transport modes suggests a need to promote alternative modalities to strengthen the competitiveness and provide a more sustainable economic development. The goal of this paper is to identify logistics managers’ preferences for freight transport service attributes for the case of Rio Grande do Sul in Brazil, and discuss which transport policies could encourage multimodality and more sustainable uses of available transport infrastructure. In this paper we used the stated preference (SP) technique for collecting data on respondents’ choices among hypothetical options. The experimental design was structured using an Efficient design. Discrete choice models were used to identify the preferences of respondents and discuss some possible sustainable policies that could increase the competitiveness of the region. The model structures studied were: multinomial logit; mixed logit as a special case of random coefficients; mixed logit error components- considering panel effect and mixed logit error components – including possible correlations between attributes of intermodal alternatives. Parameters estimated from the models were used to compute subjective value of time savings, which was Euro/t.h 0.34 (R$/t. h 1.088) for the selected model. The direct and cross elasticity values of the probability of choosing a transport mode for the different attributes studied show that the shippers significantly value the fulfilment of delivery time and cost, suggesting that those attributes are the most important ones in the choice of transport mode in this State of Brazil. Simulation results suggest investments for increasing the reliability of intermodal alternatives are more effective to encourage intermodality than cost reductions. Policies and investments to encourage multimodality should prioritize the increase of intermodal alternatives reliability and combined policies of cost reduction and reliability.

Suggested Citation

  • Larranaga, Ana Margarita & Arellana, Julian & Senna, Luiz Afonso, 2017. "Encouraging intermodality: A stated preference analysis of freight mode choice in Rio Grande do Sul," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 202-211.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:102:y:2017:i:c:p:202-211
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2016.10.028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856415301750
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2016.10.028?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simona Bolis & Rico Maggi, 2003. "Logistics Strategy and Transport Service Choices: An Adaptive Stated Preference Experiment," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 490-504, September.
    2. Tongzon, Jose L., 1995. "Determinants of port performance and efficiency," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 245-252, May.
    3. T C Lirn & H A Thanopoulou & M J Beynon & A K C Beresford, 2004. "An Application of AHP on Transhipment Port Selection: A Global Perspective," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 6(1), pages 70-91, March.
    4. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    5. Danielis, Romeo & Marcucci, Edoardo, 2007. "Attribute cut-offs in freight service selection," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 506-515, September.
    6. Malchow, Matthew B. & Kanafani, Adib, 2004. "A disaggregate analysis of port selection," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 317-337, July.
    7. Jose Tongzon & Lavina Sawant, 2007. "Port choice in a competitive environment: from the shipping lines' perspective," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(4), pages 477-492.
    8. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    9. Feo, María & Espino, Raquel & García, Leandro, 2011. "An stated preference analysis of Spanish freight forwarders modal choice on the south-west Europe Motorway of the Sea," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 60-67, January.
    10. An-Shuen Nir & Kuang Lin & Gin-Shuh Liang, 2003. "Port choice behaviour--from the perspective of the shipper," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 165-173, January.
    11. Shinghal, Nalin & Fowkes, Tony, 2002. "Freight mode choice and adaptive stated preferences," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 367-378, September.
    12. Steven, Adams B. & Corsi, Thomas M., 2012. "Choosing a port: An analysis of containerized imports into the US," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 881-895.
    13. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2010. "Construction of experimental designs for mixed logit models allowing for correlation across choice observations," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 720-734, July.
    14. Mary R Brooks & Sean M Puckett & David A Hensher & Adrian Sammons, 2012. "Understanding mode choice decisions: A study of Australian freight shippers," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 14(3), pages 274-299, September.
    15. Matthew Malchow & Adib Kanafani, 2001. "A disaggregate analysis of factors influencing port selection," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3), pages 265-277, July.
    16. John Rose & Michiel Bliemer, 2013. "Sample size requirements for stated choice experiments," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 1021-1041, September.
    17. Cullinane, Kevin & Toy, Neal, 2000. "Identifying influential attributes in freight route/mode choice decisions: a content analysis," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 41-53, March.
    18. McFadden, Daniel, 1974. "The measurement of urban travel demand," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 303-328, November.
    19. Piyush Tiwari & Hidekazu Itoh & Masayuki Doi, 2003. "Shippers' Port and Carrier Selection Behaviour in China: A Discrete Choice Analysis," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 5(1), pages 23-39, March.
    20. Emmanuel Guy & Bruno Urli, 2006. "Port Selection and Multicriteria Analysis: An Application to the Montreal-New York Alternative," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 8(2), pages 169-186, June.
    21. Martins, Ricardo Silveira & Lobo, Debora da Silva & Pereira, Sandra Mara, 2005. "Atributos relevantes no transporte de granéis agrícolas: preferência declarada pelos embarcadores," Revista de Economia e Agronegócio / Brazilian Review of Economics and Agribusiness, Federal University of Vicosa, Department of Agricultural Economics, vol. 3(2), pages 1-19.
    22. Fabiano Mezadre Pompermayer & Carlos Álvares da Silva Campos Neto & Jean Marlo Pepino de Paula, 2014. "Hidrovias no Brasil: Perspectiva Histórica Custos e Institucionalidade," Discussion Papers 1931, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
    23. M. Beuthe & Ch. Bouffioux, 2008. "Analysing Qualitative Attributes of Freight Transport from Stated Orders of Preference Experiment," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 42(1), pages 105-128, January.
    24. Tongzon, Jose L., 2009. "Port choice and freight forwarders," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 186-195, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tapia, Rodrigo Javier & dos Santos Senna, Luiz Afonso & Larranaga, Ana Margarita & Cybis, Helena Beatriz Bettella, 2019. "Joint mode and port choice for soy production in Buenos Aires province, Argentina," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 100-118.
    2. Flitsch, Verena & Brümmerstedt, Katrin, 2015. "Freight Transport Modelling of Container Hinterland Supply Chains," Chapters from the Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conference of Logistics (HICL), in: Blecker, Thorsten & Kersten, Wolfgang & Ringle, Christian M. (ed.), Operational Excellence in Logistics and Supply Chains: Optimization Methods, Data-driven Approaches and Security Insights. Proceedings of the Hamburg , volume 22, pages 233-266, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute of Business Logistics and General Management.
    3. Steven, Adams B. & Corsi, Thomas M., 2012. "Choosing a port: An analysis of containerized imports into the US," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 881-895.
    4. Vega, Laura & Cantillo, Víctor & Arellana, Julián, 2019. "Assessing the impact of major infrastructure projects on port choice decision: The Colombian case," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 132-148.
    5. Sedat Baştuğ & Hercules Haralambides & Soner Esmer & Enes Eminoğlu, 2021. "Port competitiveness: Do container terminal operators and liner shipping companies see eye to eye?," Post-Print hal-04046233, HAL.
    6. Julián Martínez Moya & María Feo Valero, 2017. "Port choice in container market: a literature review," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(3), pages 300-321, May.
    7. Martínez-Pardo, Ana & Orro, Alfonso & Garcia-Alonso, Lorena, 2020. "Analysis of port choice: A methodological proposal adjusted with public data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 178-193.
    8. Balci, Gökcay & Cetin, Ismail Bilge & Esmer, Soner, 2018. "An evaluation of competition and selection criteria between dry bulk terminals in Izmir," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 294-304.
    9. Vega, Amaya & Feo-Valero, Maria & Espino-Espino, Raquel, 2018. "The potential impact of Brexit on Ireland's demand for shipping services to continental Europe," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 1-13.
    10. Tavasszy, Lóránt & Minderhoud, Michiel & Perrin, Jean-François & Notteboom, Theo, 2011. "A strategic network choice model for global container flows: specification, estimation and application," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 1163-1172.
    11. Arencibia, Ana Isabel & Feo-Valero, María & García-Menéndez, Leandro & Román, Concepción, 2015. "Modelling mode choice for freight transport using advanced choice experiments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 252-267.
    12. Kashiha, Mona & Thill, Jean-Claude & Depken, Craig A., 2016. "Shipping route choice across geographies: Coastal vs. landlocked countries," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 1-14.
    13. Jiannan, Cheng & feng, Lian & Zhongzhen, Yang, 2020. "Impacts of the choice habits of port users on the effects and efficiencies of port investment," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 203-214.
    14. Sang-Yoon Lee & Hyunwoo Lim & Hwa-Joong Kim, 2017. "Forecasting container port volume: implications for dredging," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 19(2), pages 296-314, June.
    15. M. A. Mueller & B. Wiegmans & J. H. R. Duin, 2020. "The geography of container port choice: modelling the impact of hinterland changes on port choice," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 22(1), pages 26-52, March.
    16. Tapia, Rodrigo J. & de Jong, Gerard & Larranaga, Ana M. & Bettella Cybis, Helena B., 2020. "Application of MDCEV to infrastructure planning in regional freight transport," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 255-271.
    17. Zhang, Rong & Zhu, Lichao, 2019. "Threshold incorporating freight choice modeling for hinterland leg transportation chain of export containers," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 858-872.
    18. Hokey Min & Byung-In Park, 2020. "A two-dimensional approach to assessing the impact of port selection factors on port competitiveness using the Kano model," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 22(3), pages 353-382, September.
    19. Jasmine Siu Lee Lam & Jing Dai, 2012. "A decision support system for port selection," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 509-524, January.
    20. Martínez-Moya, Julián & Feo-Valero, María, 2022. "Do shippers’ characteristics influence port choice criteria? Capturing heterogeneity by using latent class models," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 96-105.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:102:y:2017:i:c:p:202-211. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.