Gulf Coast Port Selection Using Multiple-Objective Decision Analysis
Published Online:2 May 2019https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2018.0381
References
- (2016) Panama Canal expansion and its impact on East and Gulf coast ports of USA. Maritime Policy Management 43(8):928–944.Crossref, Google Scholar
- Bureau of Transportation Statistics (2016) State summaries: 2012 commodity flow survey. Report, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC. Available at https://www.bts.dot.gov/sites/bts.dot.gov/files/legacy/2012%20CFS%20State%20Summary%20Report_5-26-16_FINAL.pdf.Google Scholar
- (2006) Using attributes to predict objectives in preference models. Decision Anal. 3(2):100–116.Link, Google Scholar
- (2010) The Panama Canal expansion and SLC state ports. Special series report, Southern Office of the Council of State Governments, Atlanta.Google Scholar
- (2010) AHP model for the container port choice in the multiple-ports region. J. Marine Sci. Tech. 18(2):221–232.Google Scholar
- (2017) Decision support system for container port selection using multiple-objective decision analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville.Google Scholar
- (2017) Port selection analysis: Trends and gaps. PhD dissertation, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville.Google Scholar
- (2015) Multi-criteria evaluation of port competitiveness in West Africa using analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Amer. J. Indust. Bus. Management 5(6):432–446.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (1979) Measurable multiattribute value functions. Oper. Res. 27(4):810–822.Link, Google Scholar
- (2009) Development of a green building decision support tool: A collaborative process. Decision Anal. 6(3):172–185.Link, Google Scholar
- (2015) The attractiveness of ports in West Africa: Some lessons from shipping lines’ port selection. Growth Change 47(3):416–426.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2009) Relevant strategic criteria when choosing a container port—The case of the Port of Genoa. Özay Özaydın, ed. Proc. Internat. Conf. Prospects Res. Transport Logist. Regional–Global Perspect. (Dogus University Publications, Istanbul), 299–306.Google Scholar
- (2015) Evaluating the effectiveness of the global nuclear detection architecture using multiobjective decision analysis. Systems Engrg. 18(5):441–452.Crossref, Google Scholar
- JOC (2016). Trans-Pacific trade. JOC.com (December 2), http://www.joc.com/special-topics/trans-pacific-trade.Google Scholar
- (1992) Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decisionmaking (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
- (1993) Creativity in MS/OR: Value-focused thinking—Creativity directed toward decision making. Interfaces 23(3):62–67.Link, Google Scholar
- (1994) Creativity in decision making with value-focused thinking. Sloan Management Rev. 35(4):33–41.Google Scholar
- (2005) Selecting attributes to measure the achievement of objectives. Oper. Res. 53(1):1–11.Link, Google Scholar
- (1976) Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
- (2011) A value model for evaluating homeland security decisions. Risk Anal. 31(9):1470–1487.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2014) Port user typology and representations of port choice behavior: A Q-methodological study. Maritime Econom. Logist. 16(2):165–187.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (1997) Strategic Decision Making Multiobjective Decision Analysis with Spreadsheets (Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, CA).Google Scholar
- (2012) A decision support system for port selection. Transportation Planning Tech. 35(4):509–524.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2015) Management of disruptions by seaports: Preliminary findings. Asia Pacific J. Marketing Logist. 27(1):146–162.Crossref, Google Scholar
- National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) (2015a) Billion-dollar weather and climate disasters: Mapping. Accessed October 5, 2016, https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/mapping.Google Scholar
- National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) (2015b) National temperature and precipitation maps. Accessed October 10, 2016, https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/us-maps/.Google Scholar
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2010) U.S. tornado climatology. Accessed August 15, 2016, https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/climate-information/extreme-events/us-tornado-climatology.Google Scholar
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2015) Severe weather data inventory. Accessed August 20, 2016, https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/swdi/#TileSearch.Google Scholar
- (2016) Global box trade forecast to grow 4.1% in 2016. Lloyd's Loading List (April 6), http://www.lloydsloadinglist.com/freight-directory/news/Global-box-trade-forecast-to-grow-4.1-in-2016/66061.htm.Google Scholar
- Palisade Corporation (2016) @RISK 7.5. Computer software, Palisade Corporation, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
- (2012) Determinants of users’ port choice. Talley WK, ed. The Blackwell Companion to Maritime Economics (Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA), 599–622.Google Scholar
- (2009) Using the swing weight matrix to weight multiple objectives. INCOSE Internat. Sympos. 19(1):283–298.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2013) Handbook of Decision Analysis, vol. 6 (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2010) Factors impacting North American freight distribution in view of the Panama Canal expansion. Report, Van Horne Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.Google Scholar
- (2011) Port selection factors and attractiveness: The service providers’ perspective. Transportation J. 50(2):141–161.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2015) 2015 urban mobility scorecard. Report, Texas A&M Transportation Institute/INRIX, College Station, TX/Kirkland, WA.Google Scholar
- (2013) Container terminal and cargo-handling cost analysis toolkit. Report, Center for Transportation Research, University of Texas at Austin, Austin.Google Scholar
- (2014) A value-focused approach to energy transformation in the United States Department of Defense. Decision Anal. 11(2):117–132.Link, Google Scholar
- (2012) Choosing a port: An analysis of containerized imports into the US. Transportation Res. Part E 48(4):881–895.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2011) Understanding port choice behavior—A network perspective. Networks Spatial Econom. 11(1):65–82.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2009) Port choice and freight forwarders. Transportation Res. Part E 45(1):186–195.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2006) An analytic hierarchy process (AHP) approach to port selection decisions—Empirical evidence from Nigerian ports. Maritime Econom. Logist. 8(3):251–266.Crossref, Google Scholar
- United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (2015) Review of Maritime Transport 2015 (United Nations, Geneva).Crossref, Google Scholar
- United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (2016) Review of Maritime Transport 2016 (United Nations, Geneva).Crossref, Google Scholar
- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2014) U.S. waterborne container traffic by port. Accessed August 23, 2016, http://www.navigationdatacenter.us/wcsc/by_porttons14.html.Google Scholar
- U.S. Department of Transportation/U.S. Maritime Administration (DOT-MARAD) (2013) Panama Canal expansion study—Phase I report: Developments in trade and national and global economies. Report, Economic Development Research Group, Boston.Google Scholar
- U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) (2015) Maritime data and statistics. 2015 container ship capacities calling at U.S. container ports. Accessed October 25, 2016, https://www.marad.dot.gov/resources/data-statistics/#trade-stats.Google Scholar
- (2011) Determinants of container port choice in Spain. Maritime Policy Management 38(5):509–522.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (1987) Decision Synthesis: The Principles and Practice of Decision Analysis (Cambridge University Press, New York).Google Scholar
- (2014) Analysis of port and inland transport mode selection. Proc. 11th Internat. Conf. Service Systems Service Management (ICSSSM) (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 1–6.Google Scholar

