Next Article in Journal
Innovative Strategies for Sustainable Dairy Farming in Canada amidst Climate Change
Next Article in Special Issue
Factors Affecting Supply Chain Integration in Omni-Channel Retailing
Previous Article in Journal
Grain Production in Turkey and Its Environmental Drivers Using ARDL in the Age of Climate Change
Previous Article in Special Issue
Enhancing Circular Business Model Implementation in Pulp and Paper Industry (PPI): A Phase-Based Implementation Guide to Waste Valorisation Strategies
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 1
10.3390/su16010263
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Research Trends in Dry Port Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis

by
Zellalem Tadesse Beyene
1,*,
Simon Peter Nadeem
2,
Matiwos Ensermu Jaleta
1 and
Andre Kreie
3
1
School of Commerce, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa P.O. Box 1176, Ethiopia
2
Centre for Supply Chain Improvement, University of Derby, Derby DE221GB, UK
3
Logistics Education—Emerging & Developing Countries (LEED), Kühne Foundation, Dorfstrasse 50, 8834 Schindellegi, Switzerland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(1), 263; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010263
Submission received: 13 October 2023 / Revised: 18 December 2023 / Accepted: 22 December 2023 / Published: 27 December 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Supply Chain Management, Operation, and Optimization)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study consolidates research on operational sustainability in dry ports. A total of 232 papers published in the last 23 years (2000–2023) are reviewed to assess the breadth of research perspectives in dry port sustainable operations. Additionally, the findings summarize current research trends, identify flaws in the body of knowledge, and suggest potential research areas. A bibliographic analysis approach is deployed to explore the existing body of knowledge, review the concepts in depth, and narrow the focus on potential research areas. Within this context, a content analysis technique has been utilized to explore and understand the conceptual underpinnings of specific themes, typically involving trending subjects like sustainability, dry ports, inland ports, economic sustainability, social sustainability, and environmental sustainability. Tools such as BibExcel and VOSviewer were utilized to assist in conducting the bibliometric analysis. The majority of dry port research has concentrated on the definition, functions, policy and governance, location analysis, ownership, and dry port-seaport interaction. Less attention is paid to dry port sustainability in line with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the interaction of internal and external collaboration with dry port sustainability, dry port social sustainability, dry port economic sustainability, dry port environment sustainability, and dry port service quality. Specifically, there has been limited research output on the sustainability of dry ports within the context of landlocked nations. This study will raise awareness of unexplored areas for further research by focusing on critical issues that are not generally covered by scholars in existing literature, such as dry port internal sustainability management and external collaboration.

1. Introduction

Dry ports are the essential nodes that connect the production base with the seaport [1,2]. The surge in containerization has led to congestion at seaports, prompting the integration of dry ports as a strategic measure to relieve congestion at seaports [2,3]. The concept of a dry port is focused on shifting intermodal terminals away from the seaport into the hinterland to reduce traffic congestion and facilitate the construction of storage facilities [4,5]. Designing a dry port is a major challenge for governments and operators to create an effective trade supply chain sustainably [5,6]. Conservatively, establishing a dry port system contributes to the consolidation of container movements from and to seaports, integrating nearby road and rail transportation modes, and thereby improving the overall sustainability of the trade logistics system [7]. To overcome the global sustainability challenges of trade logistics, efficient intermodal transportation via dry ports is necessary [8].
Dry ports ensure higher levels of land connectivity, cut demurrage costs, and reduce congestion and delays in the trade supply chain network [9]. Within the broader network of trade logistics operations, dry ports facilitate better integration with the various actors in the supply chain [10]. The ports serve to facilitate customs clearance activities at distant inland sites, especially for landlocked countries to handle seaport functions in their own territory [11]. Khaslavskaya and Roso [12] emphasize that dry ports enable the reduction of risks related to trade, customs, and roads. Jeevan et al. [13] argued that dry ports function as internal intermodal terminals, providing high-capacity transport services that directly connect to seaports, thereby ensuring a seamless cargo chain when operated sustainably.
While effective dry ports are critical for a country’s growth, their operations must take into account the economic, social, and environmental aspects for long-term sustainability [14]. The implementation of dry ports, which serve as a bridge between the road and railroad networks, is a potential solution and would also present a chance to develop intermodal solutions as a component of an integrated and more sustainable trade supply chain [15]. A dry port, as a link in the chain, could assist in addressing the issue of lowering environmental consequences in the area and easing traffic congestion [16].
The majority of dry port studies primarily focus on the concept’s definition and function [5]. A substantial amount of research published over the last two decades indicates that the trends of dry ports vary across diverse geographical and institutional contexts [17]. The concept of dry port is undeniably richer and more diverse than merely being a continuation of port logistics and sea ports. However, the concept of dry ports has proven to be particularly challenging, as most of the literature is heavily reliant on narratives and specific case studies [11,16,17]. In most studies, location analysis, characteristics, services, ownership, and maturity level are the primary research focuses [18]. Khaslavskaya and Roso [12] argue that even though the research subject is relatively new and scattered, studies on dry ports predominantly consist of optimization and qualitative case studies. The authors highlight that the primary points of debate revolve around the economic impact, environmental impact, and role of dry ports in developing a seamless supply chain network. Nevertheless, there are very few studies that focus on the role of dry ports in sustaining trade logistics, particularly in terms of reducing negative environmental impacts and increasing economic and social benefits [19,20,21]. Alamoush et al. [22] emphasize that sustainability research is fast evolving and is primarily concerned with environmental issues; however, the data is scattered, making it difficult to draw comprehensive conclusions. This study aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the concepts discussing sustainable dry port operations, identify the most prevalent sustainability research areas within dry port operations, and identify gaps in the existing literature to highlight future research directions and lay the groundwork for sustainable dry port improvements. To address this aim, the following research questions are defined:
1.
How does the dispersion of studies across time, authors, geographies, and topic areas provide insights into the development of the body of knowledge on dry port sustainability operations?
2.
What do the most-cited studies on sustainable dry port suggest about significant subjects, conceptual themes, and multidisciplinary collaboration?
3.
What are the research gaps in the sustainable dry port studies?
This report is divided into five sections: Section 1 provides the background and scope of this research; Section 2 examines the dry port sustainability literature to highlight the need for additional research; Section 3 discusses the process of the bibilometric analysis; Section 4 presents the results and discussions; and finally, Section 5 provides conclusions, future research directions, and limitations of this research.

2. Literature Review

Dry port is an integral part of a large transportation network, involving numerous stakeholders with diverse interests and ambitions [23]. To meet the rising demand for trade logistics, greater operational flexibility in ports and terminals is required [24]. Wilmsmeier and Monios [11] highlight that dry ports play a pivotal role in influencing seaport usage and enhancing the accessibility of inland areas. They are established to support port development and improve the efficiency of the trade logistics sector.
Research on dry ports is still in its infancy; the majority of publications concentrate on the conceptualization and definition of the activities, which vary depending on the viewpoints of the authors and the applications in different nations [23]. Rodrigues et al. [25] highlight that the investigation of the dry port establishment outside of Asia and Europe is lacking. They also emphasized the significance of developing decision-making models that consider the perspectives of a wide range of trade logistics stakeholders rather than focusing mainly on dry port locational issues. Furthermore, Muravev et al. [26] asserted that theoretical and practical research on intermodal terminals had significantly influenced the growth of dry ports around the world. Researchers focused on numerous criteria, such as operational efficiencies, to address various challenges associated with the operations of dry ports. However, the majority of studies focused on the key dry port parameters lack adequate systematization. Most research either focuses on a particular parameter or looks into how factors interact to affect the performance of dry ports [27].
Muravev et al. [26] argued that one of the key factors affecting the operational effectiveness and sustainability of dry ports is the possibility that such an unsystematic approach may raise overall logistics costs. As a result, it is crucial to systematically and thoroughly research the interrelations of parameters to improve a dry port’s operational efficiency and reduce overall expenses. At the same time, Khaslavskaya and Roso [12] emphasize that dry ports can provide significant advantages to inter-land transport operators by enhancing distribution systems, lowering logistics costs, encouraging regional development, and minimizing transportation emissions.
The concept of the dry port has gained significant attention from scholars worldwide, owing to its potential to improve hinterland multimodal transportation, generate economic and social advantages, reduce environmental impacts, and improve trade logistics performance. Various studies addressed the general concepts of dry port development and performance [21]. In terms of approaches to studies, quantitative modeling and qualitative case studies predominate the research [18], with a very few publications based on surveys of shippers, freight forwarders, transportation operators, customs and dry port operators, manufacturing enterprises, and other trade supply chain participants [18]. Khaslavskaya and Roso [28] advise that more research is needed in the areas of the dry port networks by including the perspectives of multiple actors. In line with this, sustainable dry port operations are becoming one of the most promising research subjects due to the need to address global concerns (economic, environmental, and social) as part of academics’ contribution to establishing a sustainable future for all [29].
There is a scarcity of research on the impact of internal sustainability management issues, such as sustainability leadership, employee sustainability behavior, participation, sustainability policy, sustainability training, and sustainability practices in line with dry port sustainability [24,29,30,31]. Moreover, the implications of external sustainability collaboration issues, such as government support, logistics service provider collaboration, and supplier collaboration, on sustainability performance have not been studied and supported with empirical studies [23,30,31,32]. It is crucial to have a comprehensive perspective on sustainability that takes economic, environmental, and social issues into account [33]. Over time, companies have acquired increased knowledge about sustainability concepts in response to the growing relevance and significance of sustainable development. Many port sustainability principles are applied and developed within the context of the broader triple bottom line sustainability paradigm, which includes economic, social, and environmental considerations [34]. Table 1 outlines a list of major theoretical developments in sustainability.
As described in Table 1, researchers’ perspectives are expanding steadily. The emphasis on each aspect of sustainability is advanced and contextualized in order to use it in various sectors. Businesses cannot thrive without financial gains, and since the economic realm arises from society, it is directly linked to the social dimension. The social dimension is embedded within the environment since society would not exist without the natural world. Beside the aforesaid theoretical basis, Black et al. [41] explored the factors (see Table 2) that impact the operations of dry ports and, consequently, their success from a sustainability perspective:
Given the increasing awareness of public engagement, stakeholders’ attitudes have become a fundamental concern in the development of a dry port. Therefore, all three categories of sustainability (economic, social, and environmental) must be assessed concurrently when analyzing the sustainability performance [42] of dry ports. Environmental factors include pollutants in the air, emissions of greenhouse gases, utilization of land and soil, debris, noise and light issues, and water and climate change, all of which must be considered [43]. Economic dimensions include benefits to port users, fair competition, employment, local area economic development, tourism, and port investment [44]. Social dimensions consist of population growth, port area availability, security and safety, and neighboring relationships [37]. Despite technological growth, new management strategies, and the adoption of IT systems, the congestion issue persists in many container terminals. The lack of a proper maneuvering area, space in the container stacking area, and the operational area often significantly reduce the terminal efficency/productivity (measured as the number of containers handled per working hour), resulting in the delay of trucks at gates. In such cases, the only solution is the increase of the seaport capacity by means of a physical expansion and/or a (re)building of logistic infrastructure. However, this requires considerable capital investments, planning, and efforts and is often not feasible due to the proximity of built-up areas [45].
Despite the fact that the field of study is still developing and fragmented, five key theme areas have been identified: concept development, environmental effects, economic effects, performance of dry ports, and network effects [12]. Jeevan et al. [46] indicated that the dry port research has focused on six thematic areas: port governance and policy, port management, performance and competition, planning and development, dry port operation, and spatial analysis. Therefore, acquiring a comprehensive understanding of the existing literature through bibliometric analysis is important to track research developments in dry port sustainability, identify research gaps to serve as a springboard for subsequent studies, and mitigate disparities in defining thematic areas of studies in dry port sustainability.

3. Research Methodology

The study utilizes a bibliometric analysis approach to analyze the literature and identify any theoretical gaps. Bibliometric analysis employs a quantitative method that utilizes bibliometric data [47]. Bibliometric analysis approaches can be categorized into performance analysis and science mapping. Performance analysis primarily considers the contributions of research constituents, whereas science mapping focuses on the links between research constituents [48]. In general, these methods enable us to locate, organize, and analyze key topics in certain study areas [49]. Sustainability and dry ports are currently important subjects in academic research. While these two concepts are complementary, their relationship has not been well defined in the scientific literature. This study looks at the literature on dry ports and sustainability in an effort to close this gap [49,50].
The study assists in identifying and reviewing the literature related to the establishment of sustainable dry port operations. Within this scope, a content analysis approach has been adopted to uncover the intellectual structures of particular themes, frequently-involved hot topics, and key terms that have drawn interest from both evolutionary theory and academic research [48]. The researchers conducted a comprehensive bibliometric analysis using the open-source software BibExcel 2016–02-20 and VOSviewer 1.6.18 [49,51]. VOSviewer is widely utilized, offering a robust user interface and geographical visual capabilities [51]. It helps to identify keywords and trending issues, thematic evolution, and research focus. Bibexcel was chosen because it facilitates the analysis of diverse data retrieved from various databases and seamlessly works with a variety of network analysis tools, including VOSviewer [52,53].
An online search was conducted using keywords: sustainability, dry port, inland port, terminals, economic sustainability, social sustainability, environmental sustainability, dry port sustainability, and port sustainability framework. Academic journal articles were retrieved from electronic databases such as Emerald Insight, Science Direct, Taylor & Francis, Google Scholar, and from resources available at Kuehne Logistics University and Addis Ababa University libraries. The study utilized the Web of Science and Scopus databases, using the titles, abstracts, and keywords’ search options to search and download the articles. These databases were selected as they provide the most comprehensive reference database of peer-reviewed articles, offering a vast collection of international research across a broad spectrum of academic disciplines [54,55,56,57].
Data mining was carried out between April 2022 and March 2023. The research articles containing “sustainability* dry port” in the title and abstract, with the earliest publication occurring in 2000 and the most current in 2023, were the primary subject of this study. Prior to the year 2000, the United Nations regarded the social, economic, and environmental components of sustainability separately; however, with the adoption of the ‘Millennium Declaration’ in 2000, things changed dramatically. The researchers noticed that since then, scholars have initiated integrated studies in the field of sustainability [58]. The search code was (TITLE-ABS KEY ((“sustainability*dry port”)) AND ((“environmental sustainability * dry port) OR (“social sustainability * dry port) OR (“economic sustainability * dry port) OR (“Green * dry port”)). The result of the search was 232 journal articles, which were then included for further analysis. Figure 1 below, adapted from [49], depicts the logical sequence followed to address the methodological approach.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Dispersion of Studies across Time, Authors, Geographies, and Topic Areas

4.1.1. Mapping the Article Distribution

Using conjunction phrases to extend the search has helped to broaden the scope of mapping dry port research, despite the fact that there have been a limited number of articles published focusing solely on dry port sustainability. Figure 2 shows the number of articles found utilizing the combination terms, as well as the year they were published. To understand the priority that the researchers placed on sustainable dry port operations, the distribution of studies throughout different time periods was examined. Studies on dry ports did not garner much attention before 2010. From 2010 to 2022, there was a considerable increase in publications focusing on sustainability and dry ports. Statistical analysis highlights that the notable increase in the number of articles published is between 2016 and 2020. Three factors are of significance in Figure 2: (1) Of the 64 sources indicated in Table 3, 25 provided more articles in 2016 than the previous year; (2) curiously, 64 outlets had many publications during that time; and (3) sustainability has gained importance since the introduction of the Sustainable Development Goals in 2015. It is anticipated that research and publications in the field of sustainable dry port operations will continue to increase to accelerate the adoption of the SDGs. For instance, as highlighted by Hwang and Kim [59] the need for green technology is essential to mitigate pollution and foster an environmentally friendly trade supply chain. Therefore, it is critical to develop emission control methods for dry ports and maintain a strategic agenda for future improvements and research. Furthermore, Awad-Núñez et al. [60] emphasized that the most essential variables for attaining sustainability in the dry port are those related to environmental protection. Therefore, the sustainability of the location demands a high respect for the natural environment. Researchers are expected to define parameters and tools that determine the most ideal locations for dry ports, recognizing it as a geographic and multidisciplinary problem with environmental, economic, and social ramifications that demands further research.
For future research on this issue, a fitting curve and a formula for trend changes in publications were developed, as shown in Figure 2:
y = 11.604x − 23253
where “y” denotes the total number of publications in each year and x denotes the year. The R-squared (R2) value was 0.8881, indicating that the model was an excellent fit; the input variables (years) explained 88% of the variation in the publications (y). This implies that the number of publications has increased over time, indicating that there are more areas that need to be investigated.

4.1.2. Most Productive Journals

Table 3 provides a list of the top 25 journals with the highest publication rates. According to the findings, researchers primarily published their research work in Sustainability, Maritime Economics and Logistics, Maritime Policy and Management, Research in Transportation Business and Management, Journal of Transport Geography, World Review of Intermodal Transportation Research, Transactions on Maritime Science, and the Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics. The remaining papers were published in a variety of journals. The majority of research outputs being published in the Sustainability journal, as indicated by Table 3, may be attributed to the journal’s emphasis on sustainability and its thematic approach. As the number of journals grows, researchers will have more opportunities to publish their findings in a variety of journals. Following that, the Scimago Journal Rank (SJR) and h-index are used to assess the quality of the journals. SJR is a size-independent indicator of journal evaluation in which citations from high-quality journals carry more weight than citations from low-quality journals, and h-index, which was originally developed as a measure of author impact, is used for journal evaluation in major citation databases such as Google Scholar, Scopus, and others [61]. In comparison to the number of publications, the h-index and SJR values of the Journal of Transport Geography and the International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management are both high, as indicated in Table 4.
To gain a comprehensive understanding of the connections between authors and publications in dry port sustainable operations, we used the Hirsch index (h-index). Appendix A is a list of the twenty h-index intercept articles with at least 26 citations. This implies that the most frequently cited articles on dry port operations help to advance knowledge of sustainability (economic, social, and environmental).

4.1.3. Distribution of Articles by Country

The distribution of publications by country and institution (see Figure 3 and Figure 4) was examined to detect academic interest in different countries. According to the findings, research in Asia, particularly in China, is more numerous, with a considerable number of publications in Europe (specifically Spain and Sweden) and insignificant numbers in Africa. More research is needed in developing countries in Africa to understand the context, challenges, and scientific solutions. Because landlocked developing nations rely on land transit routes across adjacent countries’ territories to transport goods through their dry ports [58].

4.2. Conceptual Themes and Multidisciplinary Collaboration in Dry Port Sustainability

4.2.1. Key Word Frequency Analysis

This section details a keyword frequency analysis performed using VOSviewer. The analysis explores the evolutionary trend of dry port research, identifies critical relationships, and highlights both current and emerging themes in this field. The VOSviewer program was utilized to generate bibliometric maps by importing 232 journal articles along with authors, keywords, and citations. A stronger link is indicated by a higher value, reflected as a positive numerical value when there is a link between these pairs of items. In VOSviewer, the minimum occurrences of a keyword were identified, and an overlay visualization approach was chosen to display the average publications per year, the link strength of keywords, and the number of occurrences. Figure 5 illustrates the most commonly used terms in dry port sustainability studies.
From the total of 232 articles analyzed on dry port sustainability in the period between 2000 and March 2023, a total of 500 keywords have been identified. The keywords are clustered into different thematic areas: dry port, inland port, sustainability, sustainable development, and intermodal transport. The researchers discovered that “dry port” and “intermodal” are highly emphasized concepts, as they appear in 118 research papers (31% of the total) and 54 (14%), respectively. In contrast, elements of the triple bottom line, such as social, environmental, and economic dimensions, did not appear frequently in the articles. Moreover, within the “intermodal” cluster, trends mainly focus on dry port location selection criteria, the analytical hierarchy process, Delphi, and simulation. Concerning "sustainability," the main research trends include corporate sustainability, decision-making, and logistics networks. On the other hand, in the dry port cluster, sea port competitiveness, dry port competitiveness, and port supply chain exhibit strong links. Finally, there are no study trends directly related to the “triple bottom-line,’’ such as economic sustainability, social sustainability, and environmental sustainability.

4.2.2. Key Authors in Dry Port Sustainability Operation Research

This section aims to identify authors with higher productivity and illustrate their collaboration based on the co-authorship indicator. The most productive author is Roso, Violeta, who published 29 articles between 2000 and 2023, followed by Jeevan, Jagan, with a total of 17 research articles. Figure 6 shows the collaboration map among the main authors who have contributed publications on dry port and sustainability, as derived from the co-authorship analysis. The colors show the working groups, while the size of the circle varies according to the number of articles published by each author. The network shows a great dispersion, potentially favoring the rapid growth of the research area. Among the most productive authors, only Violeta Roso seems to have a stable international network of collaboration. As for the rest of the most productive authors, Jagan Javean, Gordon Wilmsmeier, Jason Monios, and Theo Notteboom also developed an international collaboration network on dry port and sustainability research (see Figure 6).

4.2.3. Relevance Analysis

Noun phrases with high relevance (or noun phrases with a specific meaning), such as "visualization," “text mining," and “natural language processing," have a co-occurrence distribution that is highly biased towards certain other noun phrases. As a result, it is hypothesized that in a co-occurrence network, noun phrases with high significance are clustered together. Each cluster can be thought of as a topic [62]. or the analysis, the minimum number of occurrences of a term was set at 5 in the abstracts. A total of 39 of the 846 words reached the required level. A relevance score was assigned to each of the 39 terms, and the most pertinent terms were selected based on this score. The default selection comprised the top 60% of the most pertinent terms. The most pertinent terms were chosen, and these 39 terms were grouped into six major clusters, as shown in Figure 7. Each cluster in the visualization has a color that represents the density of terms at that position.
Research on sustainability has expanded in focus from individual companies to supply chains, where firms rely on the environmental and social performance of others, such as their suppliers. Environmental performance can involve resource use and waste minimization, and social performance can involve workers’ health and safety in supply chains [63]. A relevance score is computed by VOSviewer. Terms that have a high relevance score typically correspond to certain themes that are addressed in the text data, whereas terms that have a low relevance score are typically more generic in nature and are not exhaustively addressed in the text. Regional development and sustainability have a minimum score of one out of the ten important scores in dry port research, as indicated in the figure below (Figure 8).

4.2.4. Methods of Data Analysis

Research on dry port sustainability is mostly qualitative case studies based on individual experiences and observations, as previously noted by researchers [17]. This section categorized the papers based on the type of methodology used, as depicted in Figure 9. A significant number of studies were analyzed by multi-actor multi-criteria, Delphi method and linear ranking, simulation, systematic literature review, AHP, analytical, and other techniques. The utilization of diverse analysis methodologies demonstrates the depth of the analysis conducted on the subject under consideration. However, recent research on dry port sustainability tends to be more quantitative in nature. Numerous scholars have used multi-actor multi-criteria analysis as location analysis, is an increasingly important topic of research for dry port sustainability [64,65].

4.2.5. Factors Influencing Sustainable Performance

Hui et al. [66] argued that selecting a dry port poses a geographical multi-disciplinary dilemma with substantial economic, social, and environmental ramifications. Several factors influencing dry port sustainability are presented in Table 5.

4.2.6. Empirical Perspectives

Dry ports encounter implementation and development issues. These are influenced by the existing political, social, environmental, and financial regulations, as well as technical and technological development, land and infrastructure use, location and optimization issues, infrastructure development and availability, stakeholder interests and investments, and a competitive business environment [12]. Countries that have fully implemented dry ports are benefiting from improved cargo movement, reduced environmental congestion, and economic benefits [69]. The logistics terminal of Saint Petersburg Seaport is deemed a pilot of the dry port concept under Russian Act No. 510. Russia saw significant improvements in the development of dry ports to serve seaports such as Saint Petersburg, Novorossiysk, and Vladivostok. There are three options for increasing seaport productivity: physical expansion, modifying container yard management, or constructing hinterland terminals. It is noteworthy that when a dry port is built, the seaport capacity is raised by 2.5 times, as opposed to 1.5 when the seaport is physically expanded [70].
The use of Free Trade Zones (FTZ) is also a prevalent postponement and added value technique in American inland ports. Inland ports follow the landlord model, in which a real estate promoter seeks revenue production through a relationship with a rail operator, creating logistical activities in co-location with the rail terminal [71]. Hui et al. [66] introduced a multi-criteria decision analysis method for rating the sustainability of dry ports based on the fact that the economic, social, and environmental ramifications are inextricably linked to the dry port’s geographic location. Major dry ports and their sustainability initiatives [66] are presented in Table 6.

4.3. Gaps in the Sustainable Dry Port Studies

4.3.1. Patterns of Research in Dry Port Sustainability

A dry port was traditionally characterized as an inland terminal where shipping companies could issue bills of lading to and from [25]. Subsequently, it has been demonstrated that cooperation among dry ports in supply chains improves prospects for cargo flow processing by redirecting cargo shipments from overburdened dry port terminals to those with reserves and processing capacity [72]. The majority of dry port research findings are represented by qualitative cases and optimization studies that cover many areas of dry ports and are focused on location, functions, services, ownership, and maturity level difficulties [12]. Despite the fact that the research subject is new and distinct, considerable research is needed on dry port development, environmental impact, economic impact, social impact, performance impact, and dry ports from a network perspective [11,61].

4.3.2. Research Themes and Level of Analysis

Considerable scientific attention has been directed towards inland port research, with many publications influenced by an outside-in paradigm where the seaport is frequently considered the leader and the inland port the follower. However, there is growing scientific interest in inside-out techniques, where inland ports take the lead [73,74].
Sustainable dry port studies address broad issues related to economics, social, and environmental concerns, contributing to the development of dry ports. Following the bibliometric analysis, the researchers explored the potential research direction for the future. The structure and development trends of the journals were investigated through a comprehensive examination.
The analysis and mapping revealed that most of the themes covered several regions, including Asia, North America, Europe, Latin America, Australia, and Africa, although with varying degrees of exposure in each country. The research shows an increase in publications, a growing interest in dry port studies, and a more extensive array of authors. The findings highlight that the majority of articles are published in China and Europe.
The majority of dry port research focuses on dry port location analysis using multi-actor multi-criteria, the Delphi method, linear ranking, simulation, and related issues, despite the fact that dry ports are essential for connecting both industries and seaports, especially for landlocked countries. There is less emphasis on the sustainability of dry ports, the relationship between internal sustainability, external collaboration, and the quality of port services [13,28]. Limited attention has been directed towards these areas, which should cover a broader scope of research on sustainability management. Consequently, this study presents a distinct theoretical and methodological contribution to dry port investigations. A bibliometric review/analysis of dry port literature revealed that scholars mostly concentrated on theoretical issues like dry port sustainability and often lacked comprehensive empirical data. This research contributes to the body of knowledge by highlighting significant topics that are rarely discussed by academics, such as the sustainability of dry ports in the context of landlocked nations.

5. Conclusions

This study conducts a bibliometric analysis of sustainable dry port operations from 2000 to 2023 using VOSviewer and BibExcel. The analysis primarily focuses on research dispersion over time, authors, locations, and scientific mapping. Notably, the number of publications has been continuously increasing since 2005. Asia is the leading contributor to research on this topic, with China contributing the most publications. Some of the well-known authors in this field are Roso Violeta, Jeveevan Jagan, Wilmsmeier Gordon, Monis Jason, and Notteboom Theo.
The connections between dry ports and sustainability were analyzed. The findings revealed that sustainability issues were not well contextualized within the dry port. The distance (link) between dry port and sustainability in the VOSviewer is too far, and it is not well researched together.
Dry port research has predominantly focused on various distinct topical areas, discussing the definitions, functions, policy and governance, ownership, dry port-seaport interaction, dry port performance, dry port location, and multimodal transportation [24,28,71]. Researchers do acknowledge that issues such as sustainable dry port operations, internal dry port sustainability, trade supply chain networks, stakeholder collaboration, and service quality have not been thoroughly researched nor given priority [46]. Nonetheless, these issues play a significant role in ensuring dry port sustainability. Despite the relatively recent attention to dry port sustainability issues, they remain among the most crucial areas of study in the context of sustainability due to the nature of the sector.
Dry ports are vital linkages between producers, transporters, clearing agents, and seaports [75]. Dry ports’ contribution to the economy is significant, and their selection is critical to improving the performance of a company and their trade supply chain. Therefore, evaluating its effectiveness from all relevant perspectives, such as economic sustainability, social sustainability, and environmental sustainability, is critical for shippers, logistics service providers, modal carriers, and legislators [76]. Dry ports have the potential to improve the sustainability of transportation and warehouse systems, but the realization of this potential demands significant adjustments to the logistics chain. Researchers have identified sustainability indicators and scored them using multi-criteria decision-making for location analysis. However, addressing sustainability concerns requires numerous indicators from diverse stakeholders in the dry ports, with each variable needing rigorous scientific testing and measurement [66].
The number of studies on dry port sustainability issues is limited compared to topics like “sustainable supply chain management” or “green sea port”. This study highlights a significant gap in research on dry port sustainability issues, emphasizing the need to prioritize studies connecting port sustainability with sustainable development goals. There is a need to focus research on the sustainability of dry ports, the connection between internal sustainability and external collaboration, dry port sustainability, and the quality of dry port operations.

5.1. Future Research Directions

Through a comprehensive bibliometric and network analysis, the study presents fresh insights into research themes in dry port sustainability, thereby broadening coverage of sustainability-related issues. Although academics and practitioners are becoming more interested in the area of dry port, research incorporating structured analysis and a thorough evaluation of relevant literature in sustainability metrics remains limited. More specifically, in the context of land-locked countries, there is a significant lack of the scientific community’s effort to connect internal sustainability, external stakeholder collaboration, sustainability performance, and port service quality with dry port sustainable performance. The study identifies these as current research interests as well as potential future study areas.

5.2. Limitations

The researchers attempted to gather research studies from the Scopus, Web of Science, and university databases. They gathered research studies and exported them to Mendeley before conducting bibliometric analysis with VOSviewer and BibExcel. It is acknowledged that other published research that is not indexed in the Web of Science and/or Scopus is not included. Moreover, some research works published by publishers with indexes in Web of Science and/or Scopus might have slipped through due to the keyword criteria employed in the study.

Author Contributions

Writing—original draft and editing, Z.T.B.; Writing—review and editing, S.P.N., M.E.J. and A.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

AHPAnalytic Hierarchy Process
BNsBayesian Networks
CO2Carbon dioxide
CODASCombinative Distance-based Assessment
HVACHeating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning
LEEDLeadership in Energy and Environmental Design
LPGLiquefied Petroleum Gas
MCDAMulti-Criteria Decision Analysis
MGhMegawatt Hour
NSWNew South Wales
R2R-squared
SDSustainable Development
SDGsSustainable Development Goals
SEMStructural Equation Modeling
SJRScimago Journal Rank
SLRSystematic Literature Review
TBLTriple Bottom Line
TOPSISTechnique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution
USAUnited States of America
USGBCUnited States Green Building Council

Appendix A. H-Index Documents (26 or More Citations)

AuthorsJournalPublication YearCitationsAreas
Woxenius et al. [77]Journal of Transport Geography2009771Intermodal Transport
Rodrigue and Notteboom [78]Maritime Policy & Management2009480Terminalisation of Supply Chains
Wilmsmeier, Monios, and Lambert [79]Journal of Transport Geography2011240Intermodal corridor
Roso [80]Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment2007232Seaport Inland Access
Roso and Lumsden [18]Maritime Economics & Logistics2010222Dry Port Concept
Roso [4]International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management2008218Intermodal Terminal
Monios [81]Research in Transportation Economics2011125Inland Terminal Development
Bask, Roso, Andersson, and Hämäläinen [82]Journal of Transport Geography2014120Seaport–Dry Port Dyad
Jeevan, Chen, and Lee [6]The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics201594Container Seaports
Roso [83]World Review of Intermodal Transportation Research201381Intermodal Transport
Khaslavskaya and Roso [12]Maritime Economics & Logistics202066Intermodal Transportation
Nguyen and Notteboom [84]Maritime Policy & Management201965InlandTerminal
Roso [85]World Review of Intermodal Transportation Research200959Environment; Intermodal Terminal
Tadic, Krstic, Roso, and Brnjac [86]Sustainability202058Dry Port Location
Roso, Brnjac, and Abramovic [87]Transportation journal201558Intermodal Terminal
Khaslavskaya and Roso [28]Sustainability201950Supply Chain Outcomes (SCO)
Awad-Núñez, González-Cancelas, Soler-Flores, and Camarero-Orive [88]Transport201544Dry Ports Location
Chen and Notteboom [89]Journal of International Logistics and Trade201242Distribution Center; Value-Added Logistics
Nguyen and Notteboom [90]Journal of International Logistics and Trade201636Intermodality; SWOT Analysis
Awad-Núñez, González-Cancelas, Soler-Flores, and Camarero-Orive [68]Transportation Research Procedia201626Dry Ports Location

References

  1. Božičević, J.; Lovrić, I.; Bartulović, D.; Steiner, S.; Roso, V.; Škrinjar, J.P. Determining optimal dry port location for seaport rijeka using AHP decision-making methodology. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Wei, H.; Sheng, Z.; Lee, P.T.W. The role of dry port in hub-and-spoke network under Belt and Road Initiative. Marit. Policy Manag. 2018, 45, 370–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Mohan, V.G.; Naseer, M.A. Dry Port Location Factor Determination using Delphi in Peninsular Region. Trans. Marit. Sci. 2022, 11, 169–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Roso, V. Factors influencing implementation of a dry port. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2008, 38, 782–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Jaržemskis, A.; Vasiliauskas, A.V. Research on dry port concept as intermodal node. Transport 2007, 22, 207–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Jeevan, J.; Chen, S.L.; Lee, E.S. The challenges of Malaysian dry ports development. Asian J. Shipp. Logist. 2015, 31, 109–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Kovac, M.; Tadic, S.; Krstic, M.; Roso, V. Modelling Dry Port Systems in the Framework of Inland Waterway Container Terminals Modelling Dry Port Systems in the Framework of Inland Waterway Container. Comput. Model. Eng. Sci. 2023, 137, 1019–1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Roso, V.; Russell, D.; Ruamsook, K.; Stefansson, G. Seaport-inland port dyad dynamics: An investigation of service provisions and intermodal transportation linkages. World Rev. Intermodal Transp. Res. 2015, 5, 263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Rodrigues, T.d.A.; Mota, C.M.d.M.; Ojiako, U.; Dweiri, F. Assessing the objectives of dry ports: Main issues, challenges and opportunities in Brazil. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2021, 32, 237–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Panayides, P.M.; Song, D.W. Evaluating the integration of seaport container terminals in supply chains. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2008, 38, 562–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wilmsmeier, G.; Monios, J. Dry Ports. In International Encyclopedia of Transportation; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021; pp. 344–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Khaslavskaya, A.; Roso, V. Dry ports: Research outcomes, trends, and future implications. Marit. Econ. Logist. 2020, 22, 265–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Jeevan, J.; Rahadi, R.A.; Zaideen, I.M.M.; Salleh, N.H.M.; Othman, M.R. Reconnoitering the contributions of dry ports on the regional development in Malaysia. Aust. J. Marit. Ocean Aff. 2022, 14, 171–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Lu, C.S.; Shang, K.C.; Lin, C.C. Examining sustainability performance at ports: Port managers’ perspectives on developing sustainable supply chains. Marit. Policy Manag. 2016, 43, 909–927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Varese, E.; Bux, C.; Amicarelli, V.; Lombardi, M. Assessing Dry Ports’ Environmental Sustainability. Environments 2022, 9, 117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Awad-Núñez, S.; Soler-Flores, F.; González-Cancelas, N.; Camarero-Orive, A. How should the Sustainability of the Location of Dry Ports be Measured? Transp. Res. Procedia 2016, 14, 936–944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Witte, P.; Wiegmans, B.; Ng, A.K.Y. A critical review on the evolution and development of inland port research. J. Transp. Geogr. 2019, 74, 53–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Roso, V.; Lumsden, K. A review of dry ports. Marit. Econ. Logist. 2010, 12, 196–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Khaslavskaya, A. Dry Ports—Research Outcomes and Applications. Licentiate Thesis, Report No. L2019:116. Chalmers Reproservice, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2019. Available online: https://research.chalmers.se/publication/512898/file/512898 (accessed on 19 August 2022).
  20. Carboni, A.; Orsini, F. Dry ports and related environmental benefits: A case study in Italy. Case Stud. Transp. Policy 2020, 8, 416–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Khaslavskaya, A.; Roso, V.; Sanchez-Diaz, I.; Vural, C.A. Value-added services at dry ports: Balancing the perspectives of different stakeholders. Transp. J. 2021, 60, 406–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Alamoush, A.; Ballini, F.; Dalaklis, D. Port supply chain management framework: Contributing to the United Nations’ sustainable development goals. Marit. Technol. Res. 2021, 3, 137–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Lamii, N.; Bentaleb, F.; Fri, M.; Douaioui, K.; Mabrouki, C.; Semma, E.A. Systematic review of literature on dry port—Concept evolution. Trans. Marit. Sci. 2020, 9, 248–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Hammad, D.A.; El-gazzar, S.; El-dine, M.S. Linking Dry port with Intermodal Transport: Opportunities and Challenges. Res Mil. 2022, 12, 996–1006. [Google Scholar]
  25. Rodrigues, T.d.A.; Mota, C.M.d.M.; Ojiako, G.U. Exploratory evaluation of dry ports in northeast of Brazil. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 10–12 March 2020; Available online: https://www.ieomsociety.org/ieom2020/papers/169.pdf (accessed on 12 November 2021).
  26. Muravev, D.; Hu, H.; Rakhmangulov, A.; Dai, L. Multi-agent simulation of the balanced main parameters of the logistics centers. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2019, 52, 1057–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Li, Q.; Yan, R.; Zhang, L.; Yan, B. Empirical study on improving international dry port competitiveness based on logistics supply chain integration: Evidence from China. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 2022, 33, 1040–1068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Khaslavskaya, A.; Roso, V. Outcome-Driven Supply Chain Perspectives on Dry Ports. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Miraj, P.; Berawi, M.A.; Zagloel, T.Y.; Sari, M.; Saroji, G. Research trend of dry port studies: A two-decade systematic review. Marit. Policy Manag. 2021, 48, 563–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Tsai, H.L.; Lu, C.S. Port institutional responses and sustainability performance: A moderated mediation model. Marit. Policy Manag. 2021, 49, 1075–1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Vejvar, M.; Lai, K.H.; Lo, C.K.Y.; Fürst, E.W.M. Strategic responses to institutional forces pressuring sustainability practice adoption: Case-based evidence from inland port operations. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2018, 61, 274–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kuncoro, E.A.; Syahchari, D.H.; Saroso, H.; Sudrajat, D.; Jordaan, H.K.W. The effect of stakeholder’s commitment and government regulations on dry port firm performance. Accounting 2021, 7, 1569–1574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chang, R.D.; Zuo, J.; Zhao, Z.Y.; Zillante, G.; Gan, X.L.; Soebarto, V. Evolving theories of sustainability and firms: History, future directions and implications for renewable energy research. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 72, 48–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Katuwawala, H.C.; Bandara, Y.M. System-based barriers for seaports in contributing to Sustainable Development Goals. Marit. Bus. Rev. 2022, 7, 255–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Acquier, A.; Gond, J.P.; Pasquero, J. Rediscovering howard r. bowen’s legacy: The unachieved agenda and continuing relevance of social responsibilities of the businessman. Bus. Soc. 2011, 50, 607–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Carroll, A.B. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Corp. Soc. Responsib. 2017, 4, 37–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Freeman, R.E.E.; McVea, J. A Stakeholder Approach to Strategic Management. SSRN Electron. J. 2005, 13, 183–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Elkington, J. Enter the triple bottom line. In Triple Bottom Line Does It All Add Up; Routledge: London, UK, 2013; Volume 1, pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Theeraworawit, M.; Suriyankietkaew, S.; Hallinger, P. Sustainable Supply Chain Management in a Circular Economy: A Bibliometric Review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Shi, L.; Han, L.; Yang, F.; Gao, L. The Evolution of Sustainable Development Theory: Types, Goals, and Research Prospects. Sustainability 2019, 11, 7158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Black, J.; Kyu, T.; Roso, V.; Tara, K. Critical evaluation of Mandalay dry port, Myanmar. In Proceedings of the ICLT 2013, The 5th International Conference on Logistics and Transportation, Kyoto, Japan, 5–8 November 2013; Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/278678017 (accessed on 2 June 2022).
  42. Muravev, D.; Rakhmangulov, A.; Hu, H.; Zhou, H. The introduction to system dynamics approach to operational efficiency and sustainability of dry port’s main parameters. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Van den Berg, R.; De Langen, P.W. Environmental sustainability in container transport: The attitudes of shippers and forwarders. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 2017, 20, 146–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Basiago, A.D. Economic, social, and environmental sustainability in development theory and urban planning practice. Environmentalist 1998, 19, 145–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Facchini, F.; Digiesi, S.; Mossa, G. Optimal dry port configuration for container terminals: A non-linear model for sustainable decision making. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2020, 219, 164–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Jeevan, J.; Othman, R.; Harun, M. Incorporation of Dry Ports into the National Transport Policy: A Proposal for International Trade Acceleration. Trans. Marit. Sci. 2023, 12, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Donthu, N.; Kumar, S.; Mukherjee, D.; Pandey, N.; Lim, W.M. How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 133, 285–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Merigó, J.M.; Yang, J.B. A bibliometric analysis of operations research and management science. Omega 2017, 73, 37–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Meseguer-Sánchez, V.; Gálvez-Sánchez, F.J.; López-Martínez, G.; Molina-Moreno, V. Corporate social responsibility and sustainability. A bibliometric analysis of their interrelations. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Xia, Q.; Yan, S.; Li, H.; Duan, K. A Bibliometric Analysis of Knowledge-Hiding Research. Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Lee, D.H. Implementation of collaborative activities for sustainable supply chain innovation: An analysis of the firm size effect. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Tanudjaja, I.; Kow, G.Y. Exploring Bibliometric Mapping in NUS Using BibExcel and VOSviewer. IFLA WLIC Kuala Lumpur. 2018, pp. 1–9. Available online: http://library.ifla.org/2190/1/163-tanudjaja-en.pdf (accessed on 29 June 2023).
  53. Tang, M.; Liao, H.; Wan, Z.; Herrera-Viedma, E.; Rosen, M.A. Ten years of Sustainability (2009 to 2018): A bibliometric overview. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Manual de VOSviewer. Univeristeit Leiden, No. July 2021. Available online: http://www.vosviewer.com/documentation/Manual_VOSviewer_1.6.1.pdf (accessed on 22 December 2022).
  55. Rohila, N.S. Manual on Bibexcel: A Tool for Bibliometrics Analysis by National Library in Dairying; ICAR—National Dairy Research Institute: Karnal, Haryana, 2022. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360809327 (accessed on 22 December 2022).
  56. Archambault, É.; Campbell, D.; Gingras, Y.; Larivière, V. Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the web of science and Scopus. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2009, 60, 1320–1326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Zhu, J.; Liu, W. A tale of two databases: The use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers. Scientometrics 2020, 123, 321–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Sabato, S.; Mandelli, M. Chapter 6 Integrating the Sustainable Development Goals into the European Semester: A governance conundrum for the von der Leyen Commission? The evolution of the UN discourse on sustainability: From the Brundtland report to the Millennium Development G. 2020, pp. 113–132. Available online: https://www.etui.org/sites/default/files/2021-01/08-Chapter6-Integrating%20the%20Sustainable%20Development%20Goals%20into%20the.pdf (accessed on 21 November 2023).
  59. Hwang, J.; Kim, S. Fine dust and sustainable supply chain management in port operations: Focus on the major cargo handled at the dry bulk port. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Awad-Núñez, S.; González-Cancelas, N.; Camarero-Orive, A. Application of a Model based on the Use of DELPHI Methodology and Multicriteria Analysis for the Assessment of the Quality of the Spanish Dry Ports Location. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014, 162, 42–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Kalita, D.; Baba, M.S.; Deka, D. An Empirical Study on the Asymmetric Behavior of Scientometric Indicator for Journal: A Comparative Evaluation of SJR and H-Index. SRELS J. Inf. Manag. 2018, 55, 128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Vallois, C. A Tutorial for Vosviewer. 2017, pp. 1–15. Available online: https://seinecle.github.io/vosviewer-tutorials/generated-html/importing-en.html (accessed on 3 July 2023).
  63. Forslund, H.; Björklund, M.; Ülgen, V.S. Challenges in extending sustainability across a transport supply chain. Supply Chain Manag. 2022, 27, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Wang, C.; Li, L. A two-phase model for sustainable location of dry ports: A case of Ningbo-Zhoushan Port in China. Transp. Plan. Technol. 2023, 46, 304–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Nguyen, L.C.; Notteboom, T. A Multi-Criteria Approach to Dry Port Location in Developing Economies with Application to Vietnam. Asian J. Shipp. Logist. 2016, 32, 23–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Hui, F.K.P.; Aye, L.; Duffield, C.F. Engaging employees with good sustainability: Key performance indicators for dry ports. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Haralambides, H.; Gujar, G. On balancing supply chain efficiency and environmental impacts: An eco-DEA model applied to the dry port sector of India. Marit. Econ. Logist. 2012, 14, 122–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Awad-Núñez, S.; González-Cancelas, N.; Soler-Flores, F.; Camarero-Orive, A. A Methodology for Measuring Sustainability of Dry Ports Location Based on Bayesian Networks and Multi-criteria Decision Analysis. Transp. Res. Procedia 2016, 13, 124–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Dadvar, E.; Ganji, S.R.S.; Tanzifi, M. Feasibility of establishment of ‘Dry Ports’ in the developing countries-the case of Iran. J. Transp. Secur. 2011, 4, 19–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Korovyakovsky, E.; Panova, Y. Dynamics of Russian dry ports. Res. Transp. Econ. 2011, 33, 25–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Rodrigue, J.P.; Debrie, J.; Fremont, A.; Gouvernal, E. Functions and actors of inland ports: European and North American dynamics. J. Transp. Geogr. 2010, 18, 519–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Plotnikov, E.; Rakhmangulov, A. Modeling China’s dry port cooperation in supply chains. Transp. Probl. 2021, 16, 89–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Wiegmans, B.; Witte, P.; Roso, V. Directional inland port development: Powerful strategies for inland ports beyond the inside-out/outside-in dichotomy. Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 2020, 35, 100415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Bentaleb, F.; Mabrouki, C.; Semma, A. Dry Port Development: A Systematic Review. J. ETA Marit. Sci. 2015, 3, 75–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Nasab, S.H.H.; Sanayei, A.; Aghdaei, S.F.A.; Kazemi, A. Using Dry Ports to Facilitate International Trade in Iran; A Model of Success Factors for Implementation of Dry Ports. Mod. Appl. Sci. 2016, 10, 155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Sinha, D.; Chakrabartty, S.N. Performance index of dry ports. World Rev. Intermodal Transp. Res. 2022, 11, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Woxenius, J.; Roso, V.; Lumsden, K. The Dry Port Concept—Connecting Seaports with their Hinterland by Rail. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Logistics Strategy for Ports, Dalian, China, 22–26 September 2004; pp. 22–26. [Google Scholar]
  78. Rodrigue, J.P.; Notteboom, T. The terminalization of supply chains: Reassessing the role of terminals in port/hinterland logistical relationships. Marit. Policy Manag. 2009, 36, 165–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Wilmsmeier, G.; Monios, J.; Lambert, B. The directional development of intermodal freight corridors in relation to inland terminals. J. Transp. Geogr. 2011, 19, 1379–1386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Roso, V. Evaluation of the dry port concept from an environmental perspective: A note. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2007, 12, 523–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Monios, J. The role of inland terminal development in the hinterland access strategies of Spanish ports. Res. Transp. Econ. 2011, 33, 59–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Bask, A.; Roso, V.; Andersson, D.; Hämäläinen, E. Development of seaport-dry port dyads: Two cases from Northern Europe. J. Transp. Geogr. 2014, 39, 85–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Roso, V. Sustainable intermodal transport via dry ports—Importance of directional development. World Rev. Intermodal Transp. Res. 2013, 4, 140–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Nguyen, L.C.; Notteboom, T. The relations between dry port characteristics and regional port-hinterland settings: Findings for a global sample of dry ports. Marit. Policy Manag. 2019, 46, 24–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Roso, V. The emergence and significance of dry ports: The case of the Port of Goteborg. World Rev. Intermodal Transp. Res. 2009, 2, 296–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Tadic, S.; Krstic, M.; Roso, V.; Brnjac, N. Dry port terminal location selection by applying the hybrid grey MCDM model. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Roso, V.; Brnjac, N.; Abramovic, B. Inland Intermodal Terminals Location Criteria Evaluation: The Case of Croatia Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article. Transp. J. 2016, 54, 496–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Awad-Núñez, S.; González-Cancelas, N.; Soler-Flores, F.; Camarero-Orive, A. How should the sustainability of the location of dry ports be measured? A proposed methodology using Bayesian networks and multi-criteria decision analysis. Transport 2015, 30, 312–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Chen, L.; Notteboom, T. Determinants for Assigning Value-added Logistics Services to Logistics Centers within A Supply Chain Configuration. J. Int. Logist. Trade 2012, 10, 3–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Nguyen, C.L.; Notteboom, T. Dry Ports as Extensions of Maritime Deep-Sea Ports: A Case Study of Vietnam. J. Int. Logist. Trade 2016, 14, 65–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 16 00263 g001
Figure 1. The Methodological Flow Chart for Bibliometric Analysis.(The asterisk is a common wildcard symbol that broadens a search by checking for words that begin with the same letters).
Figure 1. The Methodological Flow Chart for Bibliometric Analysis.(The asterisk is a common wildcard symbol that broadens a search by checking for words that begin with the same letters).
Sustainability 16 00263 g001
Sustainability 16 00263 g002
Figure 2. Publication patterns in relation to dry port sustainability from 2000 to March 2023.
Figure 2. Publication patterns in relation to dry port sustainability from 2000 to March 2023.
Sustainability 16 00263 g002
Sustainability 16 00263 g003
Figure 3. Distributions of articles by country.
Figure 3. Distributions of articles by country.
Sustainability 16 00263 g003
Sustainability 16 00263 g004
Figure 4. Distributions of articles by institutions.
Figure 4. Distributions of articles by institutions.
Sustainability 16 00263 g004
Sustainability 16 00263 g005
Figure 5. A network map highlighting the relationships between dry port sustainability and important topics between 2000 and March 2023.
Figure 5. A network map highlighting the relationships between dry port sustainability and important topics between 2000 and March 2023.
Sustainability 16 00263 g005
Sustainability 16 00263 g006
Figure 6. Key Authors in Dry Port Sustainability Operations Research.
Figure 6. Key Authors in Dry Port Sustainability Operations Research.
Sustainability 16 00263 g006
Sustainability 16 00263 g007
Figure 7. Relevance Analysis.
Figure 7. Relevance Analysis.
Sustainability 16 00263 g007
Sustainability 16 00263 g008
Figure 8. Relevance Score.
Figure 8. Relevance Score.
Sustainability 16 00263 g008
Sustainability 16 00263 g009
Figure 9. Methods of Data Analysis.
Figure 9. Methods of Data Analysis.
Sustainability 16 00263 g009
Table 1. List of Major Theories in Sustainability.
Table 1. List of Major Theories in Sustainability.
No.TheoriesKey IssuesDeveloped byReferences
1.Social responsibilities of business people.Educating business people about their social responsibilitiesHoward Bowen in 1953[35]
2.A new rationale for corporate social policy. Relating economic performance to social responsibility Committee for economic development in 1970[35]
3.A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Theoretical models of corporate social responsibility Archie Carroll in 1979[36]
4.Strategic management stakeholder approach.Theoretical models of corporate social responsibilityEdward Freeman in 1984[37]
5.The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Triple bottom line (economic, social, and economic sustainability)John Elkington, 1987[38]
6.The management of material, information, and capital flows as well as cooperation among companies along the supply chain while integrating goals from all three dimensions of sustainable development.Sustainable supply chain managementSeuring and Müller, 2008[39]
7.Sustainable development (SD) has become a fundamental strategy to guide the world’s social and economic transformation.Sustainable development goalUnited Nations Sustainable Development Summit, 2015[40]
Table 2. Factors Influencing Dry Ports Operations.
Table 2. Factors Influencing Dry Ports Operations.
  • Advanced information systems
Expanding or reinforcing hinterland
  • Better usage of regional transport infrastructure
Government logistics policies and support
  • Capacity problems in seaport reduced
Institutional and regulatory systems streaming
  • Collaboration among transport system actors
Lower cost of living to attract distribution centers into area
  • Container tracking
Lower land costs and taxes
  • Coordination of government agencies
Market-driven development
  • Development of supporting infrastructure
Marketing support by local economic agencies and state
  • Development of value-added services
Public-private ownership or government
  • Double-stack trains
Temporary warehousing facility
  • Emission reductions
Table 3. List of the top 25 publishing journals contributions to the areas of dry port sustainability.
Table 3. List of the top 25 publishing journals contributions to the areas of dry port sustainability.
SourceNumber of Publications
Sustainability 31
Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics15
Maritime Policy and Management14
Maritime Economics and Logistics11
Journal of Transport Geography8
Transactions on Maritime Science8
Maritime Business Review7
International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management7
Research in Transportation Economics6
Research in Transportation Business and Management5
International Journal of Logistics Management5
World Review of Intermodal Transportation Research5
International Journal of Operations and Production Management4
Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review3
Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment3
Transportation Research Procedia3
Journal of Transportation Technologies3
Journal of Cleaner Production3
Journal of Shipping and Trade3
Transportation Journal3
European Business Review3
Journal of Marine Science and Engineering3
International Journal of Production Economics3
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences3
Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies3
Table 4. Ten publishing journals based on journal quality metrics.
Table 4. Ten publishing journals based on journal quality metrics.
No.Journal TypeImpact Scoreh-IndexRankSJRCoverage HistoryBest Quartile
1Sustainability—MDPI4.3913676130.6642009–20221
2Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics3.633178600.6472009–20222
3Maritime Policy and Management3.836759300.8041976–20221
4Journal of Transport Geography6.613215001.8521993–20221
5Maritime Economics and Logistics4.885948940.9121999–20221
6Transactions on Maritime Science0.9817,9560.2252017–20222
7Maritime Business Review2.551410,0190.5182016–20222
8International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management7.0912815771.7951990–20221
9Research in Transportation Economics4.255840271.031994–20221
10Research in Transportation Business and Management5.054543750.9762011–20221
Table 5. Factors Influencing Sustainable Performance.
Table 5. Factors Influencing Sustainable Performance.
No.FactorsReferences
1.Economic
Economic development[67]
Land price[68]
Regional development[12]
Transport emission costs[66]
Investments[12]
Accident cost[66]
Feasibility of implementation[12]
Profitability[12]
2.Social
Number of accidents[15]
Fatalities and injuries of traffic accidents per capita[66]
Accessibility to facilities and public transport[66]
Satisfaction of citizens and variety and quality of transport options[66]
Fatality and injuries resulted from air pollution[66]
3.Environment
CO2 emissions and atmospheric pollutants[15]
Distance to natural spaces[12]
Less traffic congestion[12]
Energy use Population[66]
Population exposed to noise[66]
Land consumption for transport[66]
Table 6. Sustainability Initiatives.
Table 6. Sustainability Initiatives.
NoDry PortSustainable InitiativesKPIs’
1.Moorebank (NSW)Renewable energy installation
The application of passive design techniques
HVAC system that is extremely efficient
Electricity rather than LPG
Rainwater harvesting
Basins for on-site detection
Air conditioning equipment that is cooled by air
Materials with low toxicity
Dedicated space for garbage recycling
Complete garbage recycling
Facilities for cyclists
Criteria for sustainability		Produce 50,000 MWh per year from renewable sources.
110,000 tones of CO2 emissions are reduced.
Sydney’s heavy truck movements have been reduced by around 3000.
2.Somerton (VIC)Climate change and energy
Water
Biodiversity		Reduce energy intensity by 39%.
Cut CO2 emissions by 57%
Increase recycling from 29% to 40%
44% reduction in water intensity
3.Duisburg (Germany)Sustainability
Noise
Water and Light protection
Frugal use of raw materials
Reduction of pollutants
Modern waste management
Own solar facility
Reduction of consumption of fossil fuels		Reduce no. of trucks by 100,000 a year
Traffic management system that reduces emissions by 30%
4.Centrepoint (USA)Energy efficiency
Roof retrofits
Warehouse lot light fixture replacement
Solar panels
Hydrogen fuel cells
Brownfield development
Previously contaminated properties USGBC-LEED-certified buildings		Not applicable
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Beyene, Z.T.; Nadeem, S.P.; Jaleta, M.E.; Kreie, A. Research Trends in Dry Port Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability 2024, 16, 263. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010263

AMA Style

Beyene ZT, Nadeem SP, Jaleta ME, Kreie A. Research Trends in Dry Port Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability. 2024; 16(1):263. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010263

Chicago/Turabian Style

Beyene, Zellalem Tadesse, Simon Peter Nadeem, Matiwos Ensermu Jaleta, and Andre Kreie. 2024. "Research Trends in Dry Port Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis" Sustainability 16, no. 1: 263. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010263

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop