1 / 14

Comparative Logistics Capabilities: Insights from Europe and Asia

This study examines the logistics capabilities of Europe and Asia, focusing on Chinese coastal and inland zones compared to Central and Eastern Europe. It discusses effective policy recommendations for governments to enhance regional development and the importance of industrial and logistics parks in economic growth. The research highlights best practices from companies and analyzes the role of ports within the supply chain. It addresses transportation modes, infrastructure challenges, and innovative strategies like dynamic inventory management and terminal integration to improve logistics efficiency.

orpah
Télécharger la présentation

Comparative Logistics Capabilities: Insights from Europe and Asia

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Comparative logistics capabilities between Europe and Asia Jan C. Fransoo Technische Universiteit Eindhoven

  2. Asia comparison • learnings across developing regions: Chinese coastal zones with Central-Europe, Chinese inland zones with Eastern Europe, what are good policies for national/provincial governments to boost development • role of industrial and logistics parks both: governments as "client" or "problem-owner" rather than industry as such • best practices of companies • study on ports with Chung-Yee Lee, HKUST

  3. Supply Chain Management and the Transportation Infrastructure in Europe Jan C. Fransoo Technische Universiteit Eindhoven

  4. Position of CE (not: CEE)? • CE as a source • CE as a postponement center • CE as a market in all scenarios: component sourcing from Far East

  5. Transportation perspective in Europe

  6. European Commission (2001) • White paper: European Transport Policy in 2010 • Congestion: • 10% of road network: 7,500 km • 20% of rail network: 16,000 km • Costs: 0.5% of GDP (1.0% by 2010) • Forecast 50% increase of goods traffic by road in 2010

  7. Use of transport modes (EU-15; Gtkm)

  8. Road • Road carries 44% of freight • (and also 79% of passenger transport) • Each day 10 hectares are covered by road infrastructure • Car fleet expands by 3 million cars every year

  9. Rail • From 1970 to 1998: from 21% to 8% freight marketshare • Average speeds of international rail freight: 18km/h • 600 km of track closed every year • EU: investments to stimulate rail • Industry: no confidence in rail (strikes, no single operator, unreliable, …)

  10. Water • Growth in short sea shipping matches road growth • Administrative (customs) difficulties largely resolved • Huge growth potential • Inland waterways largely unused • 9% of freight in Rhine/Main/Danube network • 1 barge = 110 trucks • Slower modes require smarter networks: joint operations of sea and inland terminals

  11. Research questions & opportunities (1) • Operation of joint terminals network as single virtual terminal • dynamic inventory positioning in network • inventory allocation and reallocation while in transit • queuing effects at terminals • service concepts • How independent are SC structures from transportation infrastructures, or does road always provide the option to execute any sc structure? What about other sectors than electronics?

  12. Research questions & opportunities (2) • Industrial / logistics parks strategy strongly dependent on role: • source: manufacturing and capability driven, must be reachable for components in efficient way, taxes; industrial parks and logistics parks can develop separately; example: Philips campus in Poland • postponement center: closer to market, more supply chain / logistics driven, likely to be positioned aligned with terminals in network,; industrial parks (postponement center) and logistics parks aligned. Customization in Prague • market: supply chain design very strongly based on transportation network and shifting center of gravity within Europe. Network role of Constanta – Vienna axis

  13. Research questions and opportunities (3) • your input

More Related