WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs (2021) 20:41–61

https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-020-00225-9
ARTICLE

The emergence of very large container vessel (VLCV)

in maritime trade: implications on the Malaysian
seaport operations

Nurul Haqimin Mohd Salleh 1 & Norliyana Zulkifli 1 & Jagan Jeevan 1

Received: 26 April 2020 / Accepted: 10 December 2020 / Published online: 7 January 2021
# World Maritime University 2021

Abstract
Revolution in containerization has caused an impressive advancement in container
shipping and significant developments have been witnessed in this industry, including
infrastructure expansions, modern system design, technological advancement, emer-
gence of multimodalism, and introduction of co-modality, as well as improvement in
the mechanism of interoperability. Owing to a significant dynamism in maritime
logistics, it is projected that the amplification of vessel capacity will continue and
achieve up to 24,000 TEUs in coming years and even larger in order to cope with the
demand of economies of scale (EOS). The increasing trend of throughput at container
terminals to which the very large container vessels (VLCVs) have contributed has
challenged seaport decision makers to carry out immense infrastructure improvements
and make massive investments in current seaport terminals. Predicated on the previous
issues, a question has been raised about the benefits and equality between seaports and
liner shipping operators due to the emergence of VLCVs. As a result, this paper has
identified, analyzed, and evaluated the impact of VLCVs on Malaysian seaport oper-
ations and infrastructures from the sustainability management perspectives. In order to
achieve the research objectives, two mathematical methods are employed: the analyt-
ical hierarchical process and evidential reasoning. Three major seaports in Malaysia are
selected, the Port of Tanjung Pelepas, Northport, and Westport, as case studies in this
paper. The result obtained from this paper will assist seaport operators to develop their
substantial strategies for adapting to the emergence of VLCVs.

Keywords Maritime trade . Container shipping industry . Very large container vessel .
Seaport operations . Maritime trade

* Nurul Haqimin Mohd Salleh

haqimin@umt.edu.my

Extended author information available on the last page of the article

42 Salleh N.H.M. et al.

1 Introduction

The container liner shipping industry (CLSI) has undergone significant change aligned
with the revolution in containerization. This revolution has caused a magnificent
advancement in container shipping and significant developments have been witnessed
in the industry, including infrastructure expansions, modern system design, technolog-
ical advancement, emergence of multimodalism, and introduction of co-modality as
well as improvement in the mechanism of interoperability. It is noteworthy to mention
that the CLSI today has become more complex with the phenomena of ship upsizing
and cascading of capacity, which have greatly affected containerized trade (Munim and
Schramm 2020). This has been driven by the globalization of the world’s economy and
the rise of China as the world’s manufacturing hub (Hung et al. 2010).
The container seaport industry has received growing attention in recent years, as
global trade is increasingly dependent on containerized transportation (Cullinane et al.
2006). Malaysia is also experiencing a tremendous development in the industry.
Malaysian ports are among the most efficient in the world with the capability to fulfil
the requirements of shipping lines at very competitive charges. Moreover, cargo
volumes are anticipated to surge with the setting up of regional distribution centres to
support the cargo supply chain. However, with the current trend that containerships are
becoming larger, Malaysian ports need to evaluate their readiness to provide the best
services to the shipping lines.
Since 1956, containership size has passed six phases of evolution, from a capacity of
500 TEUs towards 18,000 TEUs. The first generation of containerships was composed of
modified bulk vessels or tankers with a capacity up to 1000 TEUs; they have now evolved
to Triple E or Post Panamax III that can transport up to 18,000 TEUs (Rodrigue 2017).
Owing to a significant dynamism in maritime logistics, it is projected that the amplifica-
tion of vessel capacity will increase and achieve up to 24,000 TEUs in coming years and
even larger in order to cope with the demand of economies of scale (EOS) (King 2017).
In 2018, the number of VLCVs with a maximum capacity of up to 18,000 TEUs had
increased to 79 units as major shipping lines received their orders and deployed them in
service (Fig. 1). As shown in Fig. 1, the capacity of VLCVs ranged from 18,270 to
21,143 TEUs. Moreover, 105 VLCVs with range capacities of 14,000–17,859 TEUs
have already been deployed. Although liner shipping operators (LSOs) are pleased with
the EOS recorded as a result of the VLCV deployment, this deployment may have a
strategic impact on seaport operations and infrastructures as a whole. The increasing
trend of throughput at container terminals, to which the VLCVs contribute, has
challenged seaport decision makers to carry out immense infrastructure improvements
to and make massive investments in current seaport terminals.
The question that has arisen in this research concerns the implications for the future
sustainability of Malaysian seaport operations due to the emergence of VLCVs in the
maritime trade. For example, in 2014, Hamburg’s port witnessed significant delays and
congestion every time a VLCV called into the port (Marle 2014). Based on the same
source, VLCVs were arriving at the port around 3 to 4 days late on average, and, in
some cases, as many as 5 or 6 days behind the expected time of arrival (ETA).
Additionally, the congestion had a huge impact on feeder services which were unable
to dock as late VLCVs occupied the berths. Although no serious delay issue associated
with VLCVs has been reported at Malaysian seaports, they have been advised to
The emergence of very large container vessel (VLCV) in maritime... 43

21,413 6
20,776 1
20,568 10
20,244 1
Maxium Capacity (in TEUs)

20,182 2
20,170 4
20,119 2
19,870 6
19,462 6
19,437 6
19,368 2
19,273 2
19,224 6
18,982 5
18,270 20
0 5 10 15 20 25

VLCV Numbers

Fig. 1 The number of very large container vessels based on TEU capacity in 2018. Source: compiled by the
authors

elevate their port capacity and infrastructure in order to accommodate VLCVs after
shipping companies take delivery of these mega ships (Ascutia 2015). Henceforth,
several operational risks are expected to transpire such as low shipping frequency,
which will affect the schedule reliability; depth issues in seaports which require
dredging; maintenance issues due to heavy use of machinery and cranes; short-term
congestion; and security as well as customs inspection issues (Rodrigue 2015). Pred-
icated on the previous issues, a question has arisen on the benefits and equality between
seaports and LSOs due to the emergence of VLCVs.
As a result, this paper aims to identify, analyze, and evaluate the impact of VLCVs
on Malaysian seaport operations and infrastructures from the sustainability manage-
ment perspectives. In order to achieve the research objectives, two mathematical
methods will be employed: analytical hierarchical process (AHP) and evidential rea-
soning (ER). Since VLCVs are designed to facilitate trade between hubs or major
seaports, three major seaports in Malaysia will be selected, the Port of Tanjung Pelepas,
Northport, and Westport, as case studies in this paper.

2 Literature review

It expected that the emergence of VLCVs will potentially cause several problems
including reduction in operational efficiency, congestion, limited capacity and infra-
structure support, effects on current seaport policy for seaport development, and
requirements for additional investment for spatial development, as well as the need to
restructure personnel training (Jeevan and Roso 2019). There are only a few seaports
able to handle VLCVs. Currently, just over 20 seaports worldwide are able to accom-
modate VLCVs over 19,000 TEU 10, and over half of these ports are in Asia, such as
Singapore Port, Tanjung Pelepas in Malaysia, Jebel Ali in Dubai, and Hambantota in
Sri Lanka, and the majority are located in China and South Korea (Iyer 2019).
44 Salleh N.H.M. et al.

Several researchers have conducted research on the implications of VLCVs or by

using different terms such as mega vessels on port operations, hinterland transportation,
specific container terminal, and maritime shipping and supply chain (Widjaja 2012;
Rodrigue 2015; World Shipping Council 2015; International Transport Forum 2015;
Merk 2015; Global Shippers Forum 2016; Helmy and Shrabi 2016; Meng et al. 2017,
Jeevan and Roso 2019; Ismail et al. 2019). Widjaja (2012) identified the impact that
VLCVs pose to the Port of Singapore from the management aspect. He discussed that
the VLCV has a significant impact on the planning and provision of new port facilities.
Some requirements relate to navigational access (e.g. channel width and depth and air
draft issues), and requirements further extend to the hinterland operations and space
requirements within the port area.
Rodrigue (2015) claimed the diseconomies of scale of VLCVs in maritime shipping
cover three dimensions, which are port of call issues, terminal operations, and supply
chain constraint. Within this, the application of economies of scale (by deploying larger
vessels) is that the LSO is internalizing its benefits since they have a positive impact on
its operations, while externalizing many costs to other entities along the maritime
transport chain. These entities, particularly terminal operators, trucking companies,
railways, and distributors, are then facing the challenge of mitigating these externalities,
often with capital investment projects (Rodrigue 2015). Concerning the port operation,
huge investments are required to enhance their infrastructures, such as deep-water
terminal, taller and more modern quay crane, lengthy berth, efficient port prime
movers, and bigger yard space.
Despite the diseconomies of scales that seaports may face, LSOs will continue to
deploy the most efficient size of ships that their customers’ cargo volumes require
(World Shipping Council 2015). The economic, structural, and regulatory concerns are
the reasons why LSOs must pursue all available efficiencies. It seems likely that
VLCVs will be used in the future, and LSOs, port facilities, and others should plan
for their increased deployment. The International Transport Forum (2015) and Merk
(2015) agreed that VLCVs have generated cost savings for LSOs and decreased
maritime transport costs, and as such facilitated global trade in the past. However,
VLCVs require adaptations of infrastructure and equipment and cause larger peaks in
container traffic in ports, which have increased the total transport costs. Those VLCVs
and the associated commercial practices which they promote (e.g. the growth of global
alliances and mergers) may impair service users of the shipping industry, including
ultimately end consumers, by reducing supply chain efficiency (Global Shippers Forum
2016). Moreover, the frequency of sailings will be reduced (as smaller mother vessels
are replaced by one VLCV) and “slow steaming”, whereby spare capacity and fuel
costs are reduced by running ships at slow speeds, will be promoted. As a result,
shippers are highly dependent on a smaller number of vessels, which also make fewer
and slower voyages. This raises issues as to the reliability, predictability, and security of
the supply chain.
Helmy and Shrabi (2016) explained that there are four types of major challenges for
port facilities when dealing with VLCVs. Firstly, the water depth is a common obstacle
because most hub ports do not have enough draft for VLCVs to berth easily without
any draft limitation. As a result, a dredging operation is needed to deepen the fairway,
which adds to the total cost of port operations. Other major challenges are lack of crane
capacity, which can escalate the inefficiency of port facilities; limited berth size is a
The emergence of very large container vessel (VLCV) in maritime... 45

drawback for mega ships; and less developed hinterland facilities are another drawback
for VLCVs in port. All these issues need strategic planning by port operators and
authorities, where a lot of investment is required to offer a high-quality service to
maximize the utilization rate and minimize time in port, where diseconomies of scale
happen (Helmy and Shrabi 2016). Moreover, the challenges faced by seaport operators
to meet the seaport infrastructure expansion requirements are navigation aspect follow-
ed by berth expansion, terminal, yard, and gate operations (Ismail et al. 2019).
Recently, Meng et al. (2017) investigated the impact of VLCVs on container
terminal operations. The case analysis comprises 10 scenarios that represent current
and possible future situations regarding the utilization of more VLCVs. The results
suggested that the current port facilities may not be enough to accommodate more
VLCVs. Focusing on the dry ports sector, Jeevan and Roso (2019) investigated the
ramifications of vessel upsizing on seaports’ competitive advantage and examined the
dyadic coordination among seaports and dry ports to address extraordinary vessel size
enlargement in the Malaysian seaport system. The incorporation of dry ports in the
seaport framework to manage vessel size enlargement is relied upon to improve seaport
efficiency through improved facility and service quality as well as expanded limit and
effectiveness.
Due to the different results shown in the previous studies, it is clear that the body of
knowledge on the impact of VLCVs is still limited. While many of the previous studies
have only discussed the issue in general, the current research attempts to conduct a
mathematical model to evaluate the impact of VLCVs on Malaysian seaport operations
and infrastructures from the sustainability management perspectives. It is hoped that the
outcome of this paper will assist the Malaysian major seaports in facing the challenges
to their strategic management in dealing with the emergence of the VLCVs in the
maritime trade.

2.1 The implications of VLCVs for seaport operations

Market consolidation in the container shipping industry has changed its market struc-
ture to be more oligopolistic. Oligopolistic structures have negatively impacted on the
harmonization in the region as shipping lines impose their standards on the wider
transport chains (Iyer 2019). It has been witnessed that shipping companies are buying
feeder vessel operators to pool cargo to fill up their 18,000-plus TEU ships; terminal
operators are consolidating themselves by investing across new geographies and
providing alternatives to their clients. The shipping lines and terminal operators may
thus exert undue market power, limit supply, and distort fair competition (Iyer 2019).
Direct call trade-offs due to change in trade lanes to accommodate mega ships can
make countries lose their distinct competitive advantage and bargaining position. In this
paper, three main implication aspects are classified based on the previous research,
which are port of call issues, terminal operations, and supply chain constraints. These
aspects are further discussed as follows:

2.1.1 Port of call issues

Rodrigue (2015) mentioned that most of the vessels that enter port limits require a
specific draft. Many ports can receive Panamax vessels or smaller; however, not all
46 Salleh N.H.M. et al.

ports are able to receive VLCVs (i.e. more than 18,000 TEU capacity) due to a number
of reasons, especially berth and channel depths. According to Imai et al. (2006), the
main difficulties confronted by seaports in accommodating VLCVs are their drafts, i.e.
channels are not deep or wide enough (Prokopowicz and Berg 2016). Ports located
along rivers are more prone to these obstacles due to shallow water. This means that
some ports rarely receive calls from VLCVs and has led to the limited demand in the
market.
Seaports face blockage because of a flood of inward and outer traffic (Tran and
Haasis 2015), and this clog may create a “knock-on effect”. For instance, a delay
brought about by blockage can thus cause the lay time to expire, which in the long
run results in a delay in arriving at the following port of call (Jiang et al. 2017). To avoid
this, most seaport terminals must adjust their landside infrastructure in a reactive
manner, as ships get longer, wider, higher, and deeper (Iyer 2019). Moreover, terminal
operators and authorities are forced into spending money on equipment and nautical
accessibility in view of reducing or eliminating potential diseconomies of scale associ-
ated with having such large units in the port (Notteboom et al. 2017; Jeevan and Roso
2019). In addition, some ports are under pressure to improve their infrastructure to cater
for the new ships. As a result, there is a high cost involved in meeting the needs of
VLCVs. On the other hand, many ports in the world face problems with a lack of space
(Notteboom and Winkelmans 2001). Rodrigue (2015) suggested that there are several
port of call issues, such as fewer ports able to accommodate the larger ships, pressure for
expensive infrastructure upgrading, lower vessel frequency, which will affect schedule
reliability, and depth issues in port limits. These port of call issues will be used to assess
whether they will affect the sustainability of the Malaysian seaport operation.

2.1.2 Terminal operations

Rodrigue (2013) mentioned that VLCVs need more space at the terminal and larger
drafts at the port. VLCVs also require larger terminal due to the larger amount of cargo
carried. According to Wilson and Roach (2000), the capacity of the ship and the
demand and supply of containers at each port depend on the size of the container
stowage problem. In the meantime, Sys et al. (2008) discussed the impact of vessel
enlargement is noticeable in trade patterns, cargo handling methods, and shipping
routes, in short operations. This impact has six perspectives, which are port authorities,
shipper, customer, terminal operations, carrier, and market. One of the impacts is vessel
bunching, where it is straining the ability of the seaports and their terminal operators to
muster enough labour and equipment on peak days. This bunching effect can last for 2
or 3 days because of the increasing size of the cargo surges (Mongelluzzo 2016). Based
on Rodrigue (2015), higher throughput equipment and yard maintenance issues, gate
access and hinterland connection, security and customs inspection issues, and short-
term congestion are among the impacts of VLCVs on Malaysian seaport operations
which will be assessed in this research.

2.1.3 Supply chain constraints

Rodrigue (2013) mentioned that the cargo owners are indirectly receiving the impact of
VLCVs as they are also an entity in the maritime supply chain. However, with the
The emergence of very large container vessel (VLCV) in maritime... 47

lower frequency of port calls, cargo owners need to maintain their higher inventory
volume in between ports and in transit. Rodrigue (2013) also stated that a higher
volume of inventory in yards will cause multiple cargo loads and unloads at the facility.
Container stevedoring in yards would cause short-term congestion for transport modes.
It is argued that the increase in transshipment is not favourable, as it takes longer and
leads to an unreliable performance. Moreover, lack of infrastructure in the port
hinterland will lead to cargos having to be placed outside the warehouses due to
overcapacity. Banomyong (2005) stated that the time taken for cargo transit in the port
hinterland is important. If the transit time can be reduced, the cost of shipping can also
be reduced. On the other hand, if VLCVs enter the port with larger volumes, lead time
will ultimately increase. Othman et al. (2016) mentioned that the supply chain will be
congested at the port hinterland if infrastructures and equipment are not sufficient to
handle the cargo loading and unloading. As a result, the maritime supply chain is
exposed to higher risk, such as overcapacity. The container handling is more
constrained and congested; for example, more trucks are needed to carry more con-
tainers in a shorter period of time. Big ships, with containers stowed 10 rows or more
high on deck, add a complicating factor when measuring vessel-at-berth productivity,
and these mega-ships are creating huge demands on certain types of labour
(Mongelluzzo 2016).
A summary of the identified implications of VLCVs on the seaport operations is
shown in Table 1.

3 Research methodology

This section explains the outline of the research methodology and how data are
collected and analyzed, as illustrated in Fig. 2. As shown in Fig. 2, firstly, the impacts
of VLCVs on Malaysian seaport operations and infrastructures from the sustainability
management perspectives will be obtained from the literature review and further
discussion with domain experts. Based on expert discussions, the identified factors
were revised, as three factors were removed due to repetition. As a result, the 12 impact
criteria as listed in Table 1 are used for further steps.
Secondly, the generic model is developed in a hierarchical structure based on the
literature review (Fig. 3). As shown in Fig. 3, the impact criteria as listed in Table 1 are
used to develop this generic model. It is noteworthy to mention that the purpose of
generic model development in a hierarchical structure is to enhance the visual of the
identified implications based on the three categories.
Thirdly, an Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) will be used for weight assignment
for each implication (Saaty 1977, 1980, 2008; Song and Yeo 2004; Salleh and Abdul
Halim 2018; Bin et al. 2020; Anuar et al. 2020; Munim et al. 2020). A weight
assignment is purposely used to determine the prominence level of implications on
Malaysian seaport operations and infrastructures. A structured survey is used by
employing the standard pair-wise comparison questionnaire proposed by Saaty. In this
step, pair-wise comparison is conducted to obtain the weight estimation by using the
AHP. To ensure that the judgements made by the experts are consistent, Consistency
Ratio (CR) is calculated and should be less than or equal to 0.1. If the CR is more than
0.1, it shows inconsistencies in the expert judgements and it needs to be repeated with

Table 1 Impact of mega ships on port hinterland operations
Main criteria
Port of call issues
Terminal operation
Supply chain constraints
Sub-criteria
• Fewer ports able to accommodate larger ship
• Pressure for expensive port infrastructure improvement
• Lower frequency: Risks to schedule reliability
• Depth issues in port limits
• Higher throughput equipment and yard maintenance issues
• Gate access and hinterland connections
• Security and custom inspection issues
• Short-term congestion
• Lead time issues
• Higher inventory levels
• Cargo risks
• Risk of overcapacity in supply chain network
48
References
Rodrigue (2013, 2015), Tran and Haasis (2015), Prokopowicz and
Berg (2016), Notteboom et al. (2017), Jeevan and Roso (2019),
Moon and Woo (2014), Wilmsmeier et al. (2006), Rodrigue and
Notteboom (2009), Notteboom and Winkelmans (2001), Imai et al.
(2009), Clark et al. (2004), Kontovas and Psaraftis (2011), Wilson
and Roach (2000), Widjaja (2012), World Shipping Council
(2015), International Transport Forum (2015), Merk (2015), Helmy
and Shrabi (2016), Meng et al. (2017).
Mongelluzzo (2016), Rodrigue (2013, 2015), Notteboom (2004),
Rodrigue and Notteboom (2009), Sys et al. (2008), Song and
Panayides (2012), Widjaja (2012), Global Shippers Forum (2016),
Helmy and Shrabi (2016), Meng et al. (2017).
Mongelluzzo (2016), Rodrigue and Notteboom (2009), Banomyong
(2005), Rodrigue (2015), Rodrigue (2013), International Transport
Forum (2015), Merk (2015), Global Shippers Forum (2016).
Salleh N.H.M. et al.
The emergence of very large container vessel (VLCV) in maritime... 49

Fig. 2 Research methodology

more careful judgements. Another method that can be used is the analytic network
process (ANP) also developed by Saaty. Both AHP and ANP methods are multi-criteria
methods employed in decision-making, dealing with more than one criterion or
parameter. In addition, the two methods of multi-criteria decision-making have differ-
ent advantages: the AHP method is simple, which makes it applicable in management
practice, while ANP is complex, which makes it capable of dealing with the complex
structures of real interconnections during the weight assignment. Since the objective in
this paper is to purposely assign the weight for each factor prior to assessment, without
focusing on the interdependencies between factors, the use of AHP is relevant.
A weight can be obtained using a scale of relative importance based on a pair-wise
comparison (Salleh et al. 2014; Salleh and Abdul Halim 2018).
The pair-wise comparison matrix can be constructed by setting up n criteria in the
row and column of an n × n matrix. Then, the pair-wise comparison is performed using
the scale stated in Table 2. To quantify judgements on pairs of attributes, Ai and Aj are
presented by an n × n matrix A. The entries aij are defined by entry rules as follows:

– Rule 1: If aij = α, then aij = 1/α, α ≠ 0.

– Rule 2: If Ai is judged to be of equal relative importance as Aj, then aij = aij = 1

Using the above rule, the matrix A is presented as follows:

2 3

1 a12 ⋯ a1n
61 1 ⋯ a2n 7
A ¼ aij ¼ 6
4
a12
∙ 5
7 ð1Þ

∙
∙ ⋯
1
a1n
1
a2n
⋯ 1
50 Salleh N.H.M. et al.

Fig. 3 Generic model development

A weight value, wk, can be calculated as follows:

 
1 akj
wk ¼ ∑nj¼1 ðk ¼ 1; 2; 3; …; nÞ ð2Þ
n ∑ni¼1 aij
The emergence of very large container vessel (VLCV) in maritime... 51

Table 2 Comparison scale

Numerical assessment (scale) Meaning

1 Equally important
3 Weakly important
5 Strongly important
7 Very strongly important
9 Extremely important
2, 4, 6, 8 Intermediate value in between the values

To check the consistency of the judgements, a Consistency Ratio (CR) is computed by

using Eqs. 3–5 (Salleh, 2018).
CI
CI ¼ ð3Þ
RI

λmax−n
CI ¼ ð4Þ
n−1
2 n 3
n 6
∑ w a
k jk
7
∑ 6 7
k¼1
j¼1
4 w j
5

ð5Þ
n

where CI is the inconsistency index, RI is an average random index (Table 3), n is the
number of items that are compared, and λ max is the max weight value of the n × n
comparison matrix A.
Fourthly, an assessment on the critical level of implications will be conducted prior
to the synthesis operation by using an evidential reasoning (ER) algorithm) in step 5
(Yang and Xu 2002; Salleh et al. 2014). Finally, a utility value calculation will be
performed to obtain a single result for benchmarking and comparison purposes in step 6
(Yang 2001). Steps 3–6 can be performed by IDS (Intelligent Decisions System)
software (Xu and Yang 2005). The use of this hybrid method has been employed in
previous studies such as Salleh et al. (2014), Salleh and Abdul Halim (2018), Salleh
et al. (2019), Anuar et al. (2020), and Bin et al. (2020).
In order to analyze the impacts of VLCVs on Malaysian seaport operations and
infrastructures, three major seaports in Malaysia are selected, the Port of Tanjung
Pelepas, Northport, and Westport. Port Klang and Port of Tanjung Pelepas are the
two major ports in Malaysia, while Port Klang is divided into Northport and Westport

Table 3 Value of average random index versus matrix order

n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
RI 0 0 0.58 0.9 1.12 1.24 1.32 1.41 1.45 1.49
52 Salleh N.H.M. et al.

(i.e. Southpoint is not counted as it does not serve as a major port). A structured
questionnaire was designed and provided during the interview session to guide the
experts on the issues. Thirteen experts were invited to participate in this research, and
they were selected based on qualifications, year of experience, and position (Table 4).
Most of them are port managers, pilots, ship superintendents, technical executives, and
marine services personnel, who are currently working, with 10 years’ experience and
above. In order to avoid any prejudgement, all the experts are assigned equal weight.
Their profiles are listed as follows:
In order to test this model, the experts have been selected to be interviewed and
answer the questionnaire based on their education, qualification, and working experi-
ence. The questionnaire was divided into three parts, A, B, and C. Part A is designed to
obtain the demographic data of the selected experts. Part B is aimed at conducting pair-
wise comparison (i.e. AHP method) where experts need to compare each factor in a
given attribute. For example, between port of call issues and terminal operation, which
implication is more critical due to the emergence of VLCVs, according to the scales
provided. Firstly, the expert can choose which implication is dominant or if the two have
the same importance. Then, the expert can scale how important the dominant factor is
compared to the submissive one from 2 (least important) to 9 (extremely important).
Lastly, part C is designed to assess the impact level for each implication by using the
belief degrees under fuzzy environment (Salleh et al. 2019; Anuar et al. 2020; Lee et al.
2020). Under fuzzy environments, a qualitative scale can be presented by linguistic
variables (i.e. linguistic terms and their corresponding belief degrees) (Salleh et al.
2014). In this paper, all impact levels are presented by five linguistic terms, which are
“very low”, “low”, “medium”, “high”, and “very high”. Overall, the interview sessions
guided with the structured questionnaire took about 4 months, from December 2018
until April 2019.

Table 4 Experts’ profiles

Expert no. Position Years of Expert area

experience

1 Executive manager 15 years Maritime industry (Port of Tanjung Pelepas)

2 Marine officer 15 years Maritime industry (Port Klang)
3 Senior officer 13 years Maritime industry (Port Klang Authority)
4 Ship superintendent (captain) 16 years Maritime industry (Port Klang)
5 Senior manager 10 years Maritime industry (Port Klang)
6 Technical executive 10 years Maritime industry (Port Klang)
7 Ship Superintendent (Captain) 16 years Maritime industry (Port Klang)
8 Senior Manager 14 years Maritime industry (Port Klang)
9 Technical executive 14 years Maritime industry (Port Klang)
10 Fellow researcher (captain) 20 years Academic and Industry
11 Senior officer 10 years Maritime industry (Port of Tanjung Pelepas)
12 Senior manager 10 years Maritime industry (Port of Tanjung Pelepas)
13 Senior lecturer (captain) 20 years Academic and industry
The emergence of very large container vessel (VLCV) in maritime... 53

To conduct the weight calculation by using an AHP, the experts’ judgements will be
aggregated by using geometric mean (GM). As an example, PTS is a matric for
comparing the relative priority of the port of call issues, terminal operation, and supply
chain constraints (main criteria). For example, the judgements to calculate the GM of
comparisons between port of call issues “P” and supply chain constraints “S”, using Eq.
6, the data obtained from 13 expert judgements, can be calculated as follows:
 1
GMzh ¼ e1zh: e2zh: e3zh: …: enzh n ð6Þ

where n is the number of experts and enzh stands for the nth expert opinion for relative
importance of the zth criterion to the hth criterion. As a result, the importance of “P0”
compared to “S” is calculated as follows:
 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13
GM ¼ 5 1   333    ¼ 0:6120
5 5 5 4 5 2 4 4

The same calculation technique is used for all pair-wise comparison for the aggregation
process. Based on Eqs. 1–2, the azhvalues can be calculated as follows. Matrix A (PTS)
for main criteria (i.e. port of call issues, terminal operation and supply chain con-
straints) is shown below.
2 3
1 0:6593 1:6341
PTS ¼ 4 1:5168 1 1:5949 5
0:6120 0:6270 1

Based on matrix A, the weight calculation for each main impact is demonstrated as
follows:
ωp¼ 1 ð
3 1þ1:5168þ0:6120 Þþð 0:6593þ1þ0:6270 Þþð 1:6341þ1:5949þ1 Þ¼0:3315
1 0:6593 1:6341

ωT¼ 1 ð 1:5168 Þþð

0:6593þ1þ0:6270 Þ ð 1:6341þ1:5949þ1 Þ¼0:4331
þ
1 1:5949
3 1þ1:5168þ0:6120
ωS¼ 1 ð 0:6120 Þþð 0:6270 Þþð 1
Þ¼0:2355
3 1þ1:5168þ0:6120 0:6593þ1þ0:6270 1:6341þ1:5949þ1

As a result,WP, WT, and WS are evaluated as 0.3315, 0.4331, and 0.2355. Another step
is to calculate and check the consistency ratio (CR) of the pair-wise comparisons.
Firstly, λmax is calculated in order to lead the random index (RI) and consistency ratio
(CR). The CR is calculated as follows:
P ¼ ð1  0:3315Þ þ ð0:6593  0:4331Þ þ ð1:6341  0:2355Þ ¼ 1:0019
T ¼ ð1:5168  0:3315Þ þ ð1  0:4331Þ þ ð1:5949  0:2355Þ ¼ 1:3115
S ¼ ð0:6120  0:3315Þ þ ð0:6270  0:4331Þ þ ð1  0:2355Þ ¼ 0:71

2     3
1:0019 1:3115 0:71
þ þ
6 0:3315 0:4331 0:2355 7
λmax ¼ 6
4
7 ¼ 3:0218
5
3

λmax−n 3:0218−3
CI ¼ ¼ ¼ 0:0109
n−1 3−1
54 Salleh N.H.M. et al.

Based on Table 3, the random index (RI) for the three main criteria is 0.58. As a result,
CR is calculated as follows:
CI 0:0109
CR ¼ ¼ ¼ 0:0188
RI 0:58

The CR value must be 0.1 or less, and the judgement is considered as acceptable (Saaty
1980). Based on the result, the CR shown for the main criteria is 0.0188, where the
calculation is below 0.1; therefore, the result is acceptable. The same calculation will be
applied to the sub-impacts of bigger ship and the weight of sub-impacts is shown in Table 5.
In steps 4 and 5, an assessment on the critical level of implications will be conducted
prior to the synthesis operation by using an ER algorithm. Since the IDS software is
used to perform the assessment, no manual mathematical calculation is demonstrated in
this paper. However, the comprehensive use of ER algorithms can be found in Lee and
Yang (2018).
The results of assessment from IDS are represented by five linguistic terms (i.e. very
low, low, medium, high, and very high). From the assessment, a single value can be
used by professional decision makers for ranking the alternatives and for comparison
purposes (Mohd Salleh et al. 2014). Consequently, a utility value concept developed by
Xu and Yang (2001) will be used to obtain a single numerical score (Eqs. 7-8).
V n −V min
uð H n Þ ¼ ð7Þ
V max −V min

N
U v ¼ ∑ β n uð H n Þ ð8Þ
n¼1

where u(Hn) denotes the utility value of each linguistic term (i.e. Hn) and can be
estimated using Eq. 7. Vn is the ranking value of the linguistic term that has been
considered (Hn); Vmax is the ranking value of the highest-risk linguistic term (HN); and
Vmin is the ranking value of the lowest-risk linguistic term (H1). In Eq. 8, the utility of
the specific criterion (i.e. goal) is denoted by Uv, and βn stands for the belief degree
associated with the nth linguistic term of the specific criterion.
To demonstrate the utility value calculation, based on Eqs. 7–8, the utility value of
the “cargo risk” is evaluated as follows:

Hn Very low Low Medium High Very high

Vn 1 2 3 4 5
u(Hn) 1−1
5−1 ¼0 2−1
5−1 ¼ 0:25 3−1
5−1 ¼ 0:5 4−1
5−1 ¼ 0:75 5−1
5−1 ¼1
βn 0.2107 0.3148 0.4273 0.0472 0
5
∑ βn ¼ 0:2107 þ 0:3148 þ 0:4273 þ 0:0472 þ 0 ¼ 1−β H ¼ 0
n¼1
βn × u(Hn) 0 0.0787 0.2137 0.0354 0
5
U v ¼ ∑ β n  uðH n Þ ¼ 0:3278
n¼1
Table 5 Weights (prominence level of impacts) and Consistency Ratio (CR)

Main impacts Weights of main impacts Sub-impacts Local weight of sub-impacts Global weight

Port of call issues 0.3315 Fewer ports able to accommodate larger ship 0.1485 0.0492
Pressure for expensive port infrastructure improvement 0.2620 0.0869
Lower frequency: Risks to schedule reliability 0.1439 0.0477
Depth issues in port limits 0.4456 0.1477
CR: 0.0194
Terminal operation 0.4330 Higher throughput equipment and yard maintenance issues 0.3121 0.1351
Gate access and hinterland connections 0.2467 0.1068
Security and customs inspection issues 0.2957 0.1280
The emergence of very large container vessel (VLCV) in maritime...

Short-term congestion 0.1455 0.0630

CR: 0.0633
Supply chain constraints 0.2355 Lead time issues 0.2678 0.0631
CR: 0.0188 Higher inventory level 0.2530 0.0596
Cargo risks 0.2082 0.0490
Risks of overcapacity in supply chain network 0.2710 0.0638
CR: 0.0073
55
56 Salleh N.H.M. et al.

By using the same calculation, all utility values for main and sub-impacts are
calculated.

4 Result and discussion

4.1 Result

This section provides the result of the research after the obtained data have been
analyzed based on the research methodology as explained in Section 3. For establishing
the weight for each impact to determine the prominence level of implications on
Malaysian seaport operations and infrastructures, the AHP approach is used in step 3.
As shown in Table 5, the result has shown that the most prominent main impact is
found to be the terminal operation (0.4330), followed by the port of call issues (0.3315)
and supply chain constraints (0.2355). Depth issues in port limits is the most prominent
sub-impact in port of call issues with a weight of 0.4456. For the sub-impacts of
terminal operation, the issues of higher throughput equipment and yard maintenance
are more prominent compared to other sub-impacts in the same criterion (i.e. 0.3121).
The most prominent sub-impact in the supply chain category is found to be risk of
overcapacity (0.2710).
In order to determine the most prominent impact across the model, the local weight
of each sub-impact is multiplied with the weight of its main impact. As a result, looking
at the sub-impact order, the depth issues in port limit is the most prominent impact (1st
rank) compared to the other 12 sub-impacts. This result indicates that the most critical
issue for ports to cater for VLCVs is ultimately water depth in port limits. It is
noteworthy to mention that, in order to cater for VLCVs, the minimum water depth
in the port must be at least 16 m to pass the under-keel clearance (UKC).
After the weights have been calculated, the next step (step 4) is to assess each sub-
impact (lowest-level criterion in the model). This assessment considers the impact level
of sub-impacts based on Malaysian seaport conditions. As a result, each sub-impact is
assessed by using belief degrees, as shown in Table 6. The result indicates that the
highest-level implication is depth issues in port limits, which requires dredging oper-
ations in the port (0.8201). The second and third highest implications are fewer
Malaysian seaports can accommodate VLCVs (0.6413) and pressure for port infra-
structure improvement (0.6334). Cargo risk is assessed as the lowest implication
(0.3277), as it is expected to be at the same level regardless of the emergence of
VLCVs.
After all the sub-impacts have been assessed, these assessment values will be
synthesized to their main impacts in step 5. For examples, the assessment values for
lead time issues, higher inventory level, cargo risk, and risk of overcapacity in supply
chain network are synthesized to obtain the impact value of supply chain constraints.
By using the synthesis operation on subsets, the utility values of the main impacts are
calculated (step 6), as shown in Fig. 4. By considering the impact value of 0 as very
low, 0.25 as low, 0.5 as medium, 0.75 as high, and 1 as very high, Fig. 4 shows the
most profound impact of the emergence of VLCVs on Malaysian seaport operations
and infrastructures at the main level is port of call issues, assessed as fairly high
(0.6434), followed by terminal operations (0.4794) and supply chain constraints
The emergence of very large container vessel (VLCV) in maritime... 57

Table 6 Assessment values for sub-impacts and their utility values

Sub-impacts Assessment values (belief degrees) Utility

value
Very Low Medium High Very
low high

Fewer ports able to accommodate larger ship 0 0.1853 0.2903 0.2984 0.2260 0.6413
Pressure for expensive port infrastructure 0.0350 0.1887 0.2566 0.2470 0.2727 0.6334
improvement
Lower frequency: risks to schedule reliability 0.0126 0.2941 0.5634 0.0655 0.0642 0.4685
Depth issues in port limits 0 0 0.0623 0.5949 0.3428 0.8201
Higher throughput equipment and 0.0679 0.1812 0.4555 0.2261 0.0693 0.5119
yard maintenance issues
Gate assess and hinterland connections 0 0.2366 0.4303 0.2646 0.0685 0.5413
Security and customs inspection issues 0.0666 0.4162 0.3798 0.1041 0.0333 0.4053
Short-term congestion 0.0688 0.2750 0.3922 0.2640 0 0.4629
Lead time issues 0.06 0.4972 0.3422 0.1006 0 0.3708
Higher inventory level 0.0256 0.4750 0.4360 0.0634 0 0.3843
Cargo risks 0.2107 0.3148 0.4273 0.0472 0 0.3278
Risks of overcapacity in supply chain network 0.1775 0.1370 0.5450 0.1388 0 0.4113

(0.3772). These values indicate that the emergence of VLCVs has more impact on port
of call issues (fairly high) than on terminal operations and supply chain constraints.
Overall, the emergence of VLCVs is expected to have an impact level of 46.45%,
which can be considered to be a fairly medium impact on the Malaysian seaport
operations and infrastructures.

4.2 Discussion

Based on the discussion with domain experts, major seaports such as Northport,
Westport, and Port of Tanjung Pelepas have the capacity to cater for VLCVs up to

Overall Impact Level 0.4645

Supply Chain Constraints 0.3772

Terminal Operation 0.4794

Port of Call Issues 0.6436

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Fig. 4 Utility values for main impacts and overall impact of VLCVs on Malaysian seaport operations and
infrastructures
58 Salleh N.H.M. et al.

20,000 TEUs. These major seaports are already in good condition to receive VLCVs as
they have all the equipment and facilities needed to operate. Furthermore, the experts
expressed that the infrastructure investments are the crucial issue at the terminal and
seaport. Expansion and upgrading such as dredging, installing bigger and taller quay
cranes, lengthening the wharfs, and installing fully automated operations are necessary
in order to enhance the readiness of Malaysian seaports to cater for the VLCVs. As a
result, the future sustainability of Malaysian seaports can be enhanced.
The emergence of VLCVs in Malaysian seaports may cause several problems,
including reduction in operational efficiency, congestion, limited capacity and infra-
structure support, effects on current seaport policy for seaport development, and
requirements for additional investment for spatial development, as well as the need to
restructure personnel training (Jeevan and Roso 2019). It is also unclear whether a
balance exists between state control and markets to remove conflicts and mutually
reinforce the ultimate desired outcomes of human development, economic develop-
ment, and environment protection (Iyer 2019). Therefore, Jeevan and Roso (2019)
proposed the implementation of dry ports to reduce the negative effects of larger
vessels on the Malaysian seaport system.

5 Conclusion

As a conclusion, this paper studied the implications of the emergence of VLCVs on the
sustainability of Malaysian seaport operations. The implications of the VLCVs are
divided into three criteria, which are port of call issues, terminal operation, and supply
chain constraints. All these impacts were investigated in this research. Firstly, the
impacts of VLCVs on Malaysian seaport operations and infrastructures from the
sustainability management perspectives were gained from the literature review and
further discussion with domain experts. Secondly, a generic model was developed in a
hierarchical structure based on the literature review. Thirdly, the AHP was employed
for weight assignment for each implication. Fourthly, an assessment on the critical level
of implications was conducted prior to the synthesis operation by using an ER
algorithm. Finally, utility value calculation was conducted to obtain a single result
for benchmarking. The result has shown the most profound impact is the shallow depth
in some seaports which require dredging. As dredging operations incur high cost to the
port operators, it creates pressures for them. Due to this issue, only a few ports are able
to accommodate VLCVs. Expansion and upgrading such as dredging, installing bigger
and taller quay cranes, lengthening the wharfs, and installing fully automated opera-
tions are necessary in order to enhance the readiness of Malaysian seaports to cater for
the VLCVs. In addition, it is suggested that dry ports can assist in reducing the negative
effects of larger vessels on the Malaysian seaport system. The result obtained from this
paper will assist seaport operators to develop substantial strategies for adapting to the
emergence of VLCVs. In addition, policy makers at a government level including the
Malaysian Ministry of Transport will also benefit from this paper in ensuring the
readiness of Malaysian seaports for the presence of VLCVs.
In the future, extended research will be conducted based on the current result.
Firstly, an operational sustainability framework due to the VLCVs’ emergence will
be developed. This framework will cover the operational perspective on the
The emergence of very large container vessel (VLCV) in maritime... 59

investigation of dredging requirements and the necessity of expansion and upgrading

works. In addition, the potential industrial revolution IR4.0 technologies’ implementa-
tion to enhance seaport efficiency and effectiveness will also be considered. Secondly,
by using the same or a modified calculation, port readiness for VLCVs can be assessed
and indexed. As a result, seaport readiness for mega vessels can be benchmarked.

References

Anuar MAH, Salleh NHM, Jeevan J (2020) Developing dive site risk assessment model (DSRAM) to enhance
tourism safety and sustainability in Perhentian Island. J Sustain Sci Manag 15(1):125–135
Ascutia R (2015) Malaysia needs to retrofit ports for arrival of mega ships. Port Call Asia, July 22, 2015.
Retrieved from https://www.portcalls.com/malaysia-needs-to-retrofit-ports-for-arrival-of-mega-ships/
Banomyong R (2005) The impact of port and trade security initiatives on maritime supply-chain management.
Marit Policy Manag 32(1):3–13
Bin LC, Salleh NHM, Bin LK (2020) The evaluation model for coral reef restoration from management
perspective for ensuring marine tourism sustainability. J Sustain Sci Manag 15(1):93–104
Clark X, Dollar D, Micco A (2004) Port efficiency, maritime transport costs and bilateral trade. Working
Paper 10353. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge
Cullinane K, Wang TF, Song DW, Ji P (2006) The technical efficiency of container ports: comparing data
envelopment analysis and stochastic frontier analysis. Transp Res A Policy Pract 40(4):354–374
Helmy S, Shrabi A (2016) Mega container ships, pros, cons and its implication recession. J Shipp Ocean Eng
6(2016):284–290
Hung SW, Lu WM, Wang TP (2010) Benchmarking the operating efficiency of Asia container ports. Eur J
Oper Res 203(3):706–713
Global Shippers Forum (2016) The implication of mega-ships and alliances for competition and total supply
chain efficiency: an economic perspective. Retrieved from https://globalshippersforum.com
Imai A, Nishimura E, Papadimitriou S, Liu M (2006) The economic viability of container mega-ships. Transp
Res E Logist Transp Rev 42(1):21–41
Imai A, Shintani K, Papadimitriou S (2009) Multi-port vs. hub-and-spoke port calls by containerships. Transp
Res E Logist Transp Rev 45(1):740–757
International Transport Forum (2015) The impact of mega-ships. International Transport Forum, Paris
Ismail NA, Salleh NHM, Jeevan J (2019) Emergence of mega vessels and their influence on future Malaysian
seaport expansion requirements, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu. J Undergrad Res 1(1):58–67
Iyer G (2019) Mega-ships in the Indian Ocean: evaluating the impact and exploring littoral cooperation. ORF
Occasional Paper No. 204, July 2019, Observer Research Foundation
Jeevan J, Roso V (2019) Exploring seaport - dry ports dyadic integration to meet the increase in container
vessels size. J Shipp Trade 4(8):1–18
Jiang C, Wan Y, Zhang A (2017) Internalization of port congestion: strategic effect behind shipping line
delays and implications for terminal charges and investment. Marit Policy Manag 44(1):112–130
King M (2017) Asia-Europe trade set for 24,000 TEU ships from 2019. Lloyd’s Loading List. Retrieved from
https://www.lloydsloadinglist.com. Accessed 2 June 2019
Kontovas C, Psaraftis HN (2011) Reduction of emissions along the maritime intermodal container chain:
operational models and policies. Marit Policy Manag 38(4):451–469
Lee PT-W, Yang Z (eds) (2018) Multi-criteria decision making in maritime studies and logistics: applications
and cases. Springer International Publishing
Lee CB, Salleh NHM, Loke KB (2020) The evaluation model for coral reef restoration from management
perspective for ensuring marine tourism sustainability. J Sustain Sci Manag 15(1):93–104
Marle GV (2014) Congestion in Hamburg highlights the impact of mega-ships and bad weather. The Load
Star. Retrieved from https://theloadstar.co.uk/congestion-hamburg-highlights-dangers-mega-vessels/.
Accessed 5 June 2019
Meng Q, Weng J, Suyi L (2017) Impact analysis of mega vessels on container terminal operations. Transp Res
Procedia 25(2017):187–204
Merk O (2015) The impact of mega-ships. SRM Maritime Economy, Naples
60 Salleh N.H.M. et al.

Mongelluzzo B (2016) Impacts of mega-ships on US ports spread unevenly. Retrieved from https://www.joc.
com/port-news/port-productivity/impacts-mega-ships-us-ports-spread-unevenly_20161024.html.
Accessed 5 June 2019
Moon DSH, Woo JK (2014) The impact of port operations on efficient ship operation from both economic and
environmental perspectives. Marit Policy Manag 41(5):444–461
Munim ZH, Schramm HJ (2020) Forecasting container freight rates for major trade routes: a comparison of
artificial neural networks and conventional models. Marit Econ Logist:1–18
Munim ZH, Sornn-Friese H, Dushenko M (2020) Identifying the appropriate governance model for green port
management: applying analytic network process and best-worst methods to ports in the Indian Ocean
Rim. J Clean Prod 268(2020):122156
Notteboom TE (2004) Container shipping and ports: an overview. Rev Netw Econ 3(2):86–106
Notteboom TE, Winkelmans W (2001) Structural changes in logistics: how will port authorities face the
challenge. Marit Policy Manag 28(1):71–89
Notteboom TE, Parola F, Satta G, Pallis AA (2017) The relationship between port choice and terminal
involvement of alliance members in container shipping. J Transp Geogr 64:158–173
Othman MR, Jeevan J, Rizal S (2016) The Malaysian intermodal terminal system: the implication on the
Malaysian maritime cluster. Int J e-Navig Marit Econ 4:46–61
Prokopowicz AK, Berg J (2016) An evaluation of current trends in container shipping industry, very large
container ships (VLCSs), and port capacities to accommodate TTIP increased trade. Transp Res Procedia
14:2910–2919
Rodrigue J-P (2015) The disadvantages of scale in maritime shipping. Port Economics. Retrieved from http://
www.porteconomics.eu/2015/06/11/1065/. Accessed 22 June 2019
Rodrigue J-P (2017) The Geography of Transport Systems, 4th edn. Routledge, New York
Rodrigue J-P, Notteboom T (2009) The terminalization of supply chains: reassessing the role of terminals in
port/hinterland logistical relationships. Marit Policy Manag 36(2):165–183
Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15(3):234–281
Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York
Saaty TL (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1(1):83–98
Salleh, NHM, Abdul Halim MA (2018) Enhancing environmental sustainability over fisheries industry
through proactive risk evaluation: a case of Tok Bali fishing port. J Sustain Sci Manag 13 (Special
Issue No. 4): The Role of Transparency and Management Integrity in Organisational Sustainability 51–63
Salleh NHM, Riahi R, Yang Z, Wang J (2014) Risk assessment of liner shipping from a business environment
perspective. In Vulnerability, Uncertainty, and Risk: Quantification, Mitigation, and Management -
Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Vulnerability and Risk Analysis and Management,
ICVRAM 2014 and the 6th International Symposium on Uncertainty Modeling and Analysis, ISUMA
2014 (pp. 2320–2329). American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
Salleh NHM, Hanafiah RM, Ngah AH, Jeevan J, Abdullah L (2019) A framework proposal for evaluating the
organizational reliability and capability of a liner shipping operator in a fuzzy context. Int J Eng Adv
Technol 8(6S3):327–341
Song DW, Panayides PM eds (2012) Logistics performance of supply chain-oriented ports In Song DW,
Panayides P M (eds), Maritime Logistics: A Complete Guide to Effective Shipping and Port
Management, 271-302. London: Kogan Page
Song DW, Yeo KT (2004) A competitive analysis of Chinese container ports using the analytic hierarchy
process. Marit Econ Logist 6(1):34–52
Sys C, Blauwens G, Omey E, Voorde E, Witlox F (2008) In search of the link between ship size and
operations. Transp Plan Technol 31(4):435–463
Tran NK, Haasis HD (2015) An empirical study of fleet expansion and growth of ship size in container liner
shipping. Int J Prod Econ 159:241–253
Widjaja L (2012) Mega container ships: implications to Port of Singapore. Master’s thesis, City University,
London
Wilmsmeier G, Hoffmann J, Sanchez RJ (2006) The impact of port characteristics on international maritime
transport costs. Res Transp Econ 16:117–140
Wilson ID, Roach PA (2000) Container stowage planning: a methodology for generating computerized
solutions. J Oper Res Soc 51(2000):1248–1255
World Shipping Council (2015) Some observations on port congestions, vessel size and vessel sharing
agreements. World Shipping Council, Brussels
Xu L, Yang JB (2001) Introduction to multi-criteria decision making and the evidential reasoning approach.
Manchester School of Management, Manchester
The emergence of very large container vessel (VLCV) in maritime... 61

Xu D, Yang J (2005) Intelligent Decision System Based on the Evidential Reasoning Approach and its
Applications. Journal of Telecommunications and Information Technology. 3:73–80
Yang JB (2001) Rule and Utility Based Evidential Reasoning Approach for Multiple Attribute Decision
Making Analysis under Uncertainties. European Journal of Operational Research. 131:31–61
Yang JB, Xu DL (2002) On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiple attribute decision analysis under
uncertainty. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum 32(3):289–304

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.

Affiliations

Nurul Haqimin Mohd Salleh 1 & Norliyana Zulkifli 1 & Jagan Jeevan 1

Norliyana Zulkifli
norliyanazulkifli@gmail.com
Jagan Jeevan
jagan@umt.edu.my

1
Faculty of Maritime Studies, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, 21030 Kuala Nerus,
Terengganu, Malaysia