Logistics solutions based on the case of Hamburg

Gunnar Prause, Professor

TalTech & Wismar University

Paldiski, 28.08.2019

Some charateristics

• Founded: 7. May 1189

• Operators • Hamburg Port Authority

• Hamburg Hafen und Logistik AG (HHLA)

• Infrastructure• port area: 73.99 km² (64.80 km²

usable)

• Where 43.31 km² (34.12 km²) are land areas.

• Historically there existed an extensive free port • Enabling duty-free storing of imported goods and

also importing of materials which were processed, re-packaged, used in manufacturing and then re-exported without incurring customs duties.

• The free port was abandoned in 2013.

• Member of North Range Ports (NRP)• 50% of European container traffic

• #3 in Europe

Case study: Hamburg port

Some logistics figures

• Passengers: • 900.562 (2018)• 810.000 (2017)• 722.000 (2016)• 525.000 (2015)

• Total cargo handling (sea side)• 135,1 Mio. t (2018)• 136,5 Mio. t (2017)• 138,2 Mio. t (2016)• 137,8 Mio. t (2015)

• Containers (TEU) • 8,73 Mio. TEU (2018)• 8,82 Mio. TEU (2017)• 8,91 Mio. TEU (2016)• 8,82 Mio. TEU (2015

21%

11%66%

2%cargo type

dry bulk

liquid bulk

container

others

Hamburg Port Business Model

Hinterland connections

• All successful ports enjoy good transshipment infrastructure and have their own business model

• Rotterdam, Antwerp

• Blue Banana

• Rhine river, trains, feeder

• Inland hub: Duisburg port

• Hamburg• Scandinavia, CEE,

Russia

• Shuttle trains, feeder

• Inland hub: Prague

• Singapur

• Maritime transshipment

Port, Gateways & Hinterland

GatewayInland

TerminalDistribution

Center

Capacity

Frequency

CorridorCustomer

“Last Mile”

Segment

GLOBAL HINTERLAND REGIONAL LOCAL

Shipping Network

Massification Atomization

Source: Rodriguez

Modal split & transhipment

Modal Split in Container Traffic 2017 / 2018 In the Port of Hamburg’s modal split, rail further increased its share of containers transported from 41,5 percent to 45,2 percent. Linking Hamburg with all hinterland economic centres, more than 200 freight trains reach or leave Europe’s largest rail port every day.

Cargo train hub: South Hamburg

Hinterland – Shuttle Train

Maschen Marshalling Yard

HHLA Sustainability Report 2018according Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) http://report.hhla.de/annual-report-2018/sustainability/gri-content-index.htm

Dangerous goods at HHLA

Dangerous goods corridor

• Positive Network (greenareas) allowed corridor https://www.gegis.net/gefahr

gutstrassenkarte_hh.html

• Restricted Network (redareas) Driving bans

Risk management approach for GTC- State of the art -

Management variables Operative management Strategical management

ObjectivesMeasures of risk control(Romeike/Hager)

Evaluation activities based ontri-partite modelling set-up

Actuating variable risk elements accordingISO 31000

PESTLE analysis

Control variable Risk evaluation according Huth/Düerkop/Romeike

Risk analysis value

(1= low risk, 5 = high risk)

present

situation

variant A

(north)

Variant B

(south)

P - political 2 2 1

E - economical 4 3 2

S - social 2 1 1

T - technological 4 2 2

L - legal 3 2 1

E - ecological 3 2 1

total 18 12 8

main transport corridorsSource: transpordi arengukava 2014 -2020

Proposed ring railway bypassing of Tallinn. Source: Harju County Plan 2030+

PESTLE analysis of Corridor variantsSource: Kitzmann, Falko, Prause (2020). RISK ASSESSMENT OF LOGISTICS HUB DEVELOPMENT ALONG GREEN TRANSPORT CORRIDORS: THE CASE OF PALDISKI PORT, forthcoming.

W-O Railroad transit Corridor in Estonia

Contact

Gunnar Prause, Prof. Dr.Tallinn University of Technology

School of Business and Governance

Akadeemia tee 3

12618 Tallinn, Estonia

gunnar.prause@taltech.ee

Mobile: +372 5305 9488

Wismar University

Wismar Business School

Philipp-Müller-Str. 14

23966 Wismar, Germany

gunnar.prause@hs-wismar.de

Mobile: +49 178 280 4882