AHP 방법에 의한 항만경쟁력 주역할자의 확인에 관한 연구- 부산항을 사례로 -
A Study on the Identification of Main Role Players in Enhancing Port Competitiveness by AHP Method
0
조회
0
다운로드
9
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The analytical hierarchy process (AHP) enables decision makers to represent the interaction of multiple factors in complex and unstructured situations. The research presented in this paper applies the AHP to identify key players in promoting port competitiveness. The literature survey revealed four major criteria and 15 sub-criteria. The four factors are cost, service quality, facility/capacity and economic- social variable. 200 questionnaires suitable for AHP analysis were made and 68 were returned. It is found that in terms of cost, the first key player identified was terminal operator and the second key player was shipping companies calling Busan Port. The first key player in terms of service quality was terminal operators, and the second key player was shipping companies calling Busan Port. The first key player in terms of facility/capacity was port authority and the second key player was terminal operator. The first key player in terms of economic-social variable was terminal operator, and the second key player was shipping companies calling Busan Port. This study conclusively suggests that each role player should play its own role in enhancing the competitiveness of Busan Port and all the efforts by the players should be synthesized to generate overall competitive synergy, which might be achieved by creating a new organization called ‘The Committee for Busan Port Competitiveness’.
Abstract
The analytical hierarchy process (AHP) enables decision makers to represent the interaction of multiple factors in complex and unstructured situations. The research presented in this paper applies the AHP to identify key players in promoting port competitiveness. The literature survey revealed four major criteria and 15 sub-criteria. The four factors are cost, service quality, facility/capacity and economic- social variable. 200 questionnaires suitable for AHP analysis were made and 68 were returned. It is found that in terms of cost, the first key player identified was terminal operator and the second key player was shipping companies calling Busan Port. The first key player in terms of service quality was terminal operators, and the second key player was shipping companies calling Busan Port. The first key player in terms of facility/capacity was port authority and the second key player was terminal operator. The first key player in terms of economic-social variable was terminal operator, and the second key player was shipping companies calling Busan Port. This study conclusively suggests that each role player should play its own role in enhancing the competitiveness of Busan Port and all the efforts by the players should be synthesized to generate overall competitive synergy, which might be achieved by creating a new organization called ‘The Committee for Busan Port Competitiveness’.
참고문헌 (16)
- Beynon,M, "An analysis of distributions of priority values from alternative comparison scales within AHP", European Journal of Operational Research, 140 (2002)
- Chou,T.Y., "Application of a fuzzy multi- criteria decision-making model for shipping company performance evaluation", Maritime Policy and Management, 28 (2001)
- Frankel,E., "Hierarchical logic in shipping policy and decision-making", Maritime Policy and Management, 19 (1992)
- Lirn,TC, "The job attractiveness of airlines to students in Taiwan: An AHP approach", Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 5 (2003)
- Lirn,TC, "An Application of AHP on Transshipment Port Selection: A Global Perspective", Transshipment Port Selection: A Global Perspective” Maritime Economics & Logistics, 6(1) (2004)
- Malchow,M, "A disaggregate analysis of factors influencing port selection", Maritime Policy and Management, 28 (2001)
- Mangan,J., "Modelling port", ferry choice in RoRo freight transportation, 2002, pp.1, ~
- Murphy,P.R., "Port Selection Criteria: An Application of a Transportation Research Framework", Logistics and Transportation Review, 28(3) (1992)
- Saaty,T.L., "Multicriteria Decision Making: the Analytic Hierarchy Rrocess" (1980), McGraw-Hill
- Saaty,T.L., "Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory" (2000), RWS Publications
- Saaty,T.L., "Models, Methods, Concepts and Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process" (2001), Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Slack,B., "Containerisation,inter-port competition and port selection", Maritime Policy and Management, 12 (1985)
- Song,D.W., "A Competitive Analysis of Chinese Container Ports Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process", Maritime Economics & Logistics, 6(1) (2004)
- Wedley,W, "Magnitude adjustment for AHP benefit", cost ratios, 2001, pp.133, ~
- Willingale,M.C., "The Port Routing of Short Sea Ship Operator; Theory and Practice", Maritime Policy and Management, 8 (1981)
- Yedla,S., "Multi-criteria approach for the selection of alternative options for environmentally sustainable transport system in Delhi", Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 37 (2003)