Assessment of the economic security of Baltic port cities’ competitiveness
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.21(4).2023.34
-
Article InfoVolume 21 2023, Issue #4, pp. 443-453
- Cited by
- 242 Views
-
56 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
City competitiveness is a complex product of local and international conditions, local characteristics, social and economic superstructure, and the actions of individual companies. Although many scientific studies have examined the country’s and urban competitiveness, the competitiveness of port cities still needs to be assessed comprehensively, taking into account their crucial economic role. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the competitiveness and economic security of the Baltic port cities (Klaipėda, Riga, and Tallinn). Statistical processing and multi-criteria evaluation methods (SAW, COPRAS, and TOPSIS) were chosen to achieve this goal. The comparative analysis showed that the population change in port cities is not significant for the final result of the competitiveness assessment, and the unemployment rate in port cities is lower than in the country. The assessment of the competitiveness of port cities from the point of view of economic security shows (after checking such indicators as unemployment rate, company income, and infrastructure) that Tallinn is the most competitive port city according to the three multi-criteria evaluation methods, while Klaipėda is the least competitive. The assessment was carried out in three stages to monitor changes in the situation of port cities, compared to changes in a certain indicator and the costs of timely solutions or the improvement of the city’s position in relation to other cities.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)P25, R11, O10
-
References41
-
Tables9
-
Figures1
-
- Figure 1. Distribution of cargo flows in Baltic Sea ports (2019)
-
- Table 1. Factors and indicators representing the competitiveness of port cities
- Table 2. Population dynamics in target port cities over the 2015–2020 period
- Table 3. Unemployment rates in the target port cities during the 2015–2020 period, percent
- Table 4. Employment by activities (2020)
- Table 5. Assessment of the baseline economic environment in the target port cities by employing the COPRAS method
- Table 6. Assessment of the economic development environment in the target port cities by employing the SAW method
- Table 7. Assessment of the economic interoperability environment in the target port cities by employing the COPRAS method
- Table 8. Evaluation of the competitiveness of the economic environment in the target port cities in terms of economic security by employing the TOPSIS method
- Table 9. Average annual results representing economic evaluation of the competitiveness of target port cities based on different methods
-
- Balioti, V., Tzimopoulos, C., & Evangelides, C. (2018). Multi-criteria decision making using TOPSIS method under fuzzy environment. Application in spillway selection. Proceedings, 2(11), 637.
- Brooks, K., & Cullinane, M. (2007). Devolution, port governance and port performance (1st ed.). JAI Press.
- Bruneckiene, J., Guzavicius, A., & Cincikaite, R. (2010). Measurement of urban competitiveness in Lithuania. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 21(5), 493-508.
- Capobianco-Uriarte, M.d.l.M., Casado-Belmonte, M.d.P., Marín-Carrillo, G. M., & Terán-Yépez, E. (2019). A bibliometric analysis of international competitiveness (1983–2017). Sustainability, 11(7), 1877.
- Činčikaitė, R., & Meidute-Kavaliauskiene, I. (2021). An integrated competitiveness assessment of the Baltic capitals based on the principles of sustainable development. Sustainability, 13(7), 3764.
- Činčikaitė, R., & Paliulis, N. (2013). Assessing competitiveness of Lithuanian cities. Economics and Management, 18(3), 490-500.
- Eurostat. (n.d.). Database.
- Ferrari, C., Merk, O., Bottasso, A., Conti, M., & Tei, A. (2012). Ports and regional development: A European perspective (OECD Regional Development Working Papers). Paris: OECD Publishing.
- Freeport Riga. (n.d.). Port Location.
- Gao, T., Na, S., Dang, X., & Zhang, Y. (2018). Study of the competitiveness of Quanzhou Port on the Belt and Road in China based on a Fuzzy-AHP and ELECTRE III model. Sustainability, 10(4), 1253.
- Ginevičius, R., & Podvezko, V. (2008). The problem of compatibility of various multiple criteria evaluation methods. Business: Theory and Practice, 9(1), 73-80.
- Ginevičius, R., Podvezko, V., & Mikelis, D. (2004). Quantitative evaluation of economic and social development of Lithuanian regions. Ekonomika, 65, 67-81.
- Govoni, N. (2004). Dictionary of marketing communications. SAGE Publications, Inc.
- Hoyle, D., & Hilling, B. S. (1984). Seaport system and spatial change: Technology, industry and development strategies. John Wiley & Sons Inc.
- Kahler, M. (2004). Economic security in an era of globalization: Definition and provision. The Pacific Review, 17(4), 485-502.
- Krośnicka, K. A. (2018). Spatial evolution of the European container ports’ system in perspective of the location theory. SHS Web of Conferences, 58, 01016.
- Krośnicka, K. A., Lorens, P., & Michałowska E. (2021). Port cities within port regions: Shaping complex urban environments in Gdańsk Bay, Poland. Urban Planning, 6(3), 27-42.
- Lazauskas, M., Zavadskas, E. K., & Šaparauskas, J. (2015). Ranking of priorities among the Baltic capital cities for the development of sustainable construction. E+M, 18(2), 15-24.
- Liebuvienė, J., & Čižiūnienė, K. (2021). Comparative analysis of ports on the Eastern Baltic Sea Coast. Logistics, 6(1), 1.
- Lorens, P. (2014). Urban waterfront regeneration: Origins of the issue. In Ş. G. Dündar, N. Karataş, H. E. Erdin, & P. Lorens (Eds.), W: New Faces of Harbour Cities (pp. 3-18). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
- Meidutė-Kavaliauskienė I., Dudzevičiūtė, G., & Maknickienė, N. (2020). Military and demographic inter-linkages in the context of the Lithuanian sustainability. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 21(6), 1508-1524.
- Munim, Z. H., & Schramm H.-J. (2018). The impacts of port infrastructure and logistics performance on economic growth: The mediating role of seaborne trade. Journal of Shipping and Trade, 3, 1.
- Musso, E., Benacchio, M., & Ferrari, C. (2000). Ports and employment in port cities. International Journal of Maritime Economics, 2(4), 283-311.
- Nevado Gil, M. T., Carvalho, L., & Paiva, I. (2020). Determining factors in becoming a sustainable smart city: An empirical study in Europe. Economics & Sociology, 13(1), 24-39.
- Ni, P., Kresl, P., & Li, X. (2014). China urban competitiveness in industrialization: Based on the panel data of 25 cities in China from 1990 to 2009. Urban Studies, 51(13), 2787-2805.
- Notteboom T. E., & Rodrigue, J.-P. (2005). Port regionalization: Towards a new phase in port development. Maritime Policy & Management, 32(3), 297-313.
- Notteboom, P., Ducruet T., & de Langen C. (2009). Ports in proximity: Competition and coordination among adjacent seaports (1st ed.). Routledge.
- Nyga-Łukaszewska, H., & Napiórkowski, T. M. (2022). Does energy demand security affect international competitiveness? Case of selected energy-exporting OECD countries. Energies, 15(6), 1991.
- OECD. (2014). The competitiveness of global port-cities. Paris: OECD Publishing.
- Park, J. S., & Seo, Y.-J. (2016). The impact of seaports on the regional economies in South Korea: Panel evidence from the augmented Solow model. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 85, 107-119.
- Podvezko, V. (2011). The comparative analysis of MCDA methods SAW and COPRAS. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 22(2), 134-146.
- Port of Klaipeda. (n.d.). About the Port of Klaipėda.
- Port of Tallinn. (n.d.). Our Ports.
- Rogerson, R. J. (1999). Quality of life and city competitiveness. Urban Studies, 36(5-6), 969-985.
- Stanković, J., Džunić, M., Džunić, Ž., & Marinković, S. (2017). A multi-criteria evaluation of the European cities’ smart performance: Economic, social and environmental aspects. Zbornik radova Ekonomskog fakulteta Rijeka, 35(2), 519-550.
- Statista Research Department. (2023, October 24). Distribution of cargo traffic in Baltic Sea ports in Central and Eastern Europe in 2019, by country. Statista.
- Vasiliauskas, A., & Misiūnas, A. (2000). The estimation of the expansion of Klaipėda Seaport from the economic point of view. Ekonomika, 50.
- Verhetsel, A., & Sel, S. (2009). World maritime cities: From which cities do container shipping companies make decisions? Transport Policy, 16(5), 240-250.
- World Bank Group. (2021). Transport global practice: The container port performance index 2021.
- Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2011). Multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics: An overview. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 17(2), 397-427.
- Zhu, H., Su, D., & Yao, F. (2022). Spatio-temporal differences in economic security of the prefecture-level cities in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau Region of China: Based on a triple-dimension analytical framework of economic geography. International Journal of Environmental Resources and Public Health, 19(17), 10605.