See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/281239453

The relationship between logistics performance and world competitiveness

Article · September 2015

CITATIONS READS

0 254

1 author:

Turkay Yildiz
Izmir Institute of Technology
99 PUBLICATIONS   105 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Tubitak-Turkish Science, Technology and Research Institution project on social sciences View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Turkay Yildiz on 25 August 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The relationship between logistics performance and world
competitiveness
Abstract. This paper presents an empirical study on the relationship between logistics
performance indicator and world competitiveness. This paper identifies the associations
between logistics performances and world competitiveness. The results indicate that some
variables in world competitiveness scores contribute much higher to the logistics
performances than the other variables through analysis. In this study, the variables that
contribute much higher than the other variables to the logistics performances are shown.

Keywords: logistics performance; world competitiveness; efficiency; IMD; infrastructure

1. Introduction

The world today is characterized by constant and rapid changes (Lee 2002). It is also an
increasingly global world, with high volumes of goods, services and information flowing
between countries (Lee 2002). The result is greater competition among countries, regions,
cities, industries and companies (Lee 2002). Therefore, effective logistics management should
be considered as an integral and critical success factor in differentiating competing
organizations and even competing supply chains in this increasingly global, competitive
economy (Barthorpe et al. 2010). Corporations, multinationals, and businesses of all sizes feel
the pressure of world competition and the need to reduce costs and produce products less
expensively (Cook 2006). A key to success and survival is managing that issue and
successfully operating an inbound global supply chain (Cook 2006).

In this regard, this research was undertaken to address the issue of how logistics
performances and world competitiveness relate to each other. Are there any significant
relationships between overall logistics performance and world competitiveness? Which
pillars of world competitiveness are highly correlated with the logistics performances? How
the pillars of global competitiveness influence overall logistics performance?

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the literature on
logistics and world competitiveness. Section 3 introduces the data and methods used for the
regression of the perceptions of countries’ logistics efficiencies and world competitiveness
variables by using various measures drawn from the World Bank and The Institute for
Management Development (IMD)’s World Competitiveness database. Section 4 presents and
discusses the empirical findings. The paper is concluded in Section 5.

2. Literature review

Dinu and Curea (2008) analyzed competitiveness in logistics. Brown (2008) studied logistics
costs and competitiveness.

Lei et al. (2007) researched trade competitiveness and logistics challenges in Asia. Liu et al.
(2013) investigated global impacts of the Asian logistics competitiveness and risk
management. Liu et al. (2011) investigated the competitiveness of logistics service providers
by examining cross-national management practices in China and the UK. Spillan et al. (2013)
performed a comparison of the effect of logistic strategy and logistics integration on firm
competitiveness in the USA and China. Liu et al. (2010) examined the contribution of
capabilities to the competitiveness of logistics service providers and presented a perspective
from China. Han et al. (2013) evaluated western China’s city logistics competitiveness.
Huang et al. (2008) explored the coupling relationship between Beijing logistics development
and urban competitiveness upgrade. Yun and Li (2011) explored the cultivation of job-
hunting competitiveness of students in logistics department.

Puertas et al. (2014) examined logistics performance and export competitiveness from the
European experience. Trupac (2008) researched competitiveness of Slovenia and its
companies through the Slovenian transport logistics cluster. Dylewski and Filipiak (2013)
examined the types of information used in shaping competitiveness of logistics companies in
Poland, Germany and Belorussia.

Huang et al. (2013) researched the evaluation of regional logistics competitiveness. Sheng
(2014) researched the evaluation of regional logistics competitiveness of agricultural
products in China and spatial analysis on the differences.

Li (2008) performed combinational evaluation on the competitiveness of logistics enterprise.

Liu et al. (2014) examined the contents and evolution of the composing factors of logistics
enterprise competitiveness. Zhang et al. (2010) studied evaluation of the competitiveness of
logistics enterprise based on niche. Yang et al. (2008) presented a study on multidimensional
diagnosis model of logistics enterprise's quality competitiveness. Piasecka-Gluszak (2013)
studied the use of selected management methods in logistics provided to improve the
competitiveness of polish enterprises on the international scene. Zhen (2008) examined the
method to improve enterprise core competitiveness. Ding et al. (2013) studied the analysis
and prediction of logistics enterprise competitiveness by using a real GA-based support
vector machine.

Zu and Hai (2008) performed studies on developing regional logistics industry to promote
regional economic competitiveness. Du et al. (2008) performed an empirical study on
regional logistics industry's competitiveness based on factor analysis. Du and Yan (2009)
presented an empirical study on the competitiveness of logistics industry in china's middle
region.

Zhu (2006) explored logistics impact competitiveness between industry clusters. Basile (2012)
evaluated effectiveness of airport logistics system as a driver of firm’s competitiveness and
presented empirical evidence for peripheral areas. Chen (2013) studied the competitiveness
of aviation logistics industry. Peng and Zhan (2011) studied the evaluation of airport logistics
competitiveness based on AHP. Alarcon et al. (2012) presented a theoretical approach and
some application in the central region of Mexico on logistics competitiveness in a
megapolitan network of cities. Li and Che (2013) evaluated competitiveness of urban
logistics using fuzzy logic.

Lim et al. (2012) presented studies on competitiveness securing plan for port logistics
industry in Busan area using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Liu (2012) applied fuzzy
theory and AHP to port urban logistics competitiveness evaluation. Liu et al. (2008) studied
the port logistics competitiveness based on FCE-AHP. Fan (2009) applied fuzzy theory and
AHP to port logistics competitiveness evaluation.

Mihi-Ramirez and Morales (2011) studied improving competitiveness trough creation of

knowledge and reverse logistics. Andrade et al. (2014) reviewed the relationship between
reverse logistics and competitiveness. Liu and Sun (2010) researched enhancing the
competitiveness model of railway transport in the perspective of environmental logistics.
Peng (2011) studied the evaluation on the competitiveness of logistics outsourcing in four
cities in Yangtze River Delta. Wang and Yu (2008) evaluated the competitiveness of port
logistics industry in Yangtze River Delta using hierarchical fuzzy process.

3. Data and methods

The Institute for Management Development in Lausanne, Switzerland publishes a World

Competitiveness Scoreboard each year that ―analyzes the factors and policies that shape the
ability of a nation to create and maintain an environment that sustains more value creation
for its enterprises and more prosperity for its people (Mensah 2010). The analysis divides the
national environments of 55 countries into four main factors (with 331 criteria): economic
performance, government efficiency, business efficiency, and infrastructure (Mensah 2010).

The World Competitiveness Yearbook is created by the IMD Business School. The World
Competitiveness Report was originally begun as a joint venture between the World
Economic Forum and the Institute of Management Development in the 1980s, but the two
organizations parted ways in the mid-1990s and each began publishing its own index and
report on competitiveness (Sagafi-Nejad et al. 2008). It measures 55 countries on the basis of
323 criteria and ranks countries by their ability to maintain a pro-free enterprise competitive
environment (Eicher 2009). This includes political, social, and cultural dimensions, as well as
productivity and income (Eicher 2009). The yearbook results include statistical data and an
executive opinion survey, which measures perceptions about management practices, labor
relations, environmental concerns, and corruption. These annual data are compiled into
scores for each country (Eicher 2009).

The procedures in the next subsections are designed to provide estimates of regression
coefficients when the independent variables are strongly correlated. By allowing for a small
amount of bias, the precision of the estimates can often be greatly increased. In this case, the
fitted regression model is shown in Tables. The current value of the ridge parameter is 0.1.
The ridge parameter is usually set between 0 and 1. In order to determine a good value for
the ridge parameter, the standardized regression coefficients or the variance inflation factors
should be examined.

3.1 Economic Performance

The R-Squared statistic indicates that the model as fitted explains 69% of the variability in
OVRL. The adjusted R-squared statistic, which is more suitable for comparing models with
different numbers of independent variables, is 47%.
Table 1. Ridge regression summary for dependent variable OVRL. (l=0.1, R=0.83, R²=0.69,
Adjusted R²=0.47, F(19,27)=3.1510)
Std.Err. Std.Err. Valid
Indicators Beta B t(27) p-level
- of Beta - of B -N
Intercept 3.40 0.05 68.83 0.00
EP 1.1.Size 1 -0.30 0.30 -0.14 0.14 -0.99 0.33 50
EP 1.1.Size 2 -0.03 0.26 -0.01 0.12 -0.12 0.90 50
EP 1.1.Size 3 0.18 0.20 0.08 0.09 0.91 0.37 50
EP 1.1.Growth 1 0.18 0.23 0.08 0.11 0.80 0.43 55
EP 1.1.Wealth 1 0.40 0.33 0.18 0.15 1.21 0.24 60
EP 1.2.International Trade 1 0.43 0.23 0.23 0.13 1.87 0.07 55
EP 1.2.International Trade 2 0.20 0.20 0.09 0.09 0.99 0.33 55
EP 1.2.International Trade 3 -0.01 0.16 0.00 0.07 -0.05 0.96 55
EP 1.2.International Trade 4 -0.24 0.19 -0.11 0.09 -1.31 0.20 55
EP 1.2.International Trade 5 -0.40 0.28 -0.18 0.13 -1.45 0.16 55
EP 1.2.International Trade 6 0.16 0.15 0.07 0.07 1.03 0.31 55
EP 1.2.International Trade 7 0.02 0.15 0.01 0.07 0.11 0.91 55
EP 1.3.Investment 1 -0.01 0.25 0.00 0.11 -0.03 0.98 59
EP 1.3.Investment 2 -0.07 0.21 -0.03 0.09 -0.36 0.72 59
EP 1.3.Investment 3 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.06 -0.02 0.98 59
EP 1.3.Investment 4 0.10 0.16 0.04 0.07 0.60 0.55 59
EP 1.3.Finance 1 -0.02 0.19 -0.01 0.09 -0.13 0.90 56
EP 1.4.Employment 1 0.03 0.15 0.01 0.07 0.22 0.83 55
EP 1.4.Employment 2 -0.12 0.14 -0.05 0.06 -0.86 0.40 55

Table 2. EP 1.2.International Trade 1

EP.35.Exports of goods ($bn) .981
EP.34.World exports contribution (%) .980
EP.42.Exports of goods & commercial s .979
EP.47.Imports of goods & commercial s .945
EP.39.Exports of commercial services .786

Table 3. EP 1.2.International Trade 5

EP.49.Imports of goods & commercia(2) .857
EP.41.Exports of commercial servic(2) .853
EP.38.Exports of goods – growth .784

3.2 Government Efficiency

The R-Squared statistic indicates that the model as fitted explains 68% of the variability in
OVRL. The adjusted R-squared statistic, which is more suitable for comparing models with
different numbers of independent variables, is 54%.
Table 4. Ridge regression summary for dependent variable OVRL. (l=0.1, R=0.83, R²=0.68,
Adjusted R²=0.54, F(15,33)=4.7130)
Std.Err. Std.Err. Valid
Indicators Beta B t(33) p-level
- of Beta - of B -N
Intercept 3.40 0.04 76.51 0.00
GE 2.1.Public Finance 1 0.15 0.20 0.07 0.09 0.74 0.46 59
GE 2.1.Public Finance 2 0.15 0.11 0.07 0.05 1.38 0.18 59
GE 2.1.Public Finance 3 -0.20 0.11 -0.09 0.05 -1.80 0.08 59
GE 2.2.Fiscal Policy 1 0.06 0.12 0.03 0.05 0.46 0.65 59
GE 2.2.Fiscal Policy 2 -0.12 0.13 -0.05 0.06 -0.88 0.38 59
GE 2.3.Central Bank 1 0.17 0.17 0.07 0.08 0.98 0.33 53
GE 2.3.Central Bank 2 -0.18 0.12 -0.08 0.05 -1.53 0.14 53
GE 2.3.State Efficiency 1 0.26 0.25 0.12 0.11 1.06 0.30 59
GE 2.4.Openess 1 0.02 0.21 0.01 0.09 0.09 0.93 55
GE 2.4.Competition Regulations 1 0.21 0.22 0.09 0.10 0.97 0.34 59
GE 2.4.Competition Regulations 2 0.05 0.14 0.02 0.06 0.39 0.70 59
GE 2.4.Labor Regulations 1 -0.18 0.14 -0.08 0.07 -1.24 0.22 58
GE 2.4.Labor Regulations 2 -0.04 0.11 -0.02 0.05 -0.35 0.73 58
GE 2.5.Societal Framework 1 -0.08 0.21 -0.04 0.09 -0.38 0.71 57
GE 2.5.Societal Framework 2 -0.24 0.14 -0.11 0.06 -1.72 0.10 57

Table 5. GE 2.1.Public Finance 2

GE.2.Government budget surplusdef(1) -.501
GE.3.Total general government debt ( .951
GE.1.Government budget surplusdefici -.918
GE.4.Total general government deb(1) .693

Table 6. GE 2.1.Public Finance 3

GE.5.Total general government debt-r .964

Table 7. GE 2.3.Central Bank 2

GE.28.Interest rate spread .860
GE.31.Foreign currency reserves ($bn) -.509

Table 8. GE 2.5.Societal Framework 2

GE.70.Gender inequality .874
GE.61.Ageing of society .806
GE.68.Females in parliament (%) -.546

3.3 Business Efficiency

The R-Squared statistic indicates that the model as fitted explains 69% of the variability in
OVRL. The adjusted R-squared statistic, which is more suitable for comparing models with
different numbers of independent variables, is 46%.
Table 9. Ridge regression summary for dependent variable OVRL. (l=0.1, R=0.83, R²=0.69,
Adjusted R²=0.46, F(20,28)=3.0452)
Std.Err. Std.Err. Valid
Indicators Beta B t(28) p-level
- of Beta - of B -N
Intercept 3.40 0.05 69.77 0.00
BE 3.1.Productivity Efficiency 1 0.18 0.26 0.08 0.12 0.68 0.50 59
BE 3.1.Productivity Efficiency 2 0.16 0.19 0.07 0.09 0.82 0.42 59
BE 3.1.Productivity Efficiency 3 -0.05 0.11 -0.02 0.05 -0.41 0.68 59
BE 3.2.Costs 1 0.24 0.18 0.11 0.08 1.33 0.19 55
BE 3.2.Costs 2 0.13 0.23 0.06 0.10 0.56 0.58 55
BE 3.2.Relations 1 0.07 0.20 0.03 0.09 0.35 0.73 59
BE 3.2.Relations 2 -0.07 0.16 -0.03 0.07 -0.46 0.65 59
BE 3.2.Availability of skills 1 -0.04 0.16 -0.02 0.07 -0.28 0.78 53
BE 3.2.Availability of skills 2 -0.04 0.20 -0.02 0.09 -0.20 0.84 53
BE 3.2.Availability of skills 3 -0.15 0.18 -0.07 0.09 -0.83 0.42 53
BE 3.2.Availability of skills 4 -0.05 0.13 -0.02 0.06 -0.41 0.69 53
BE 3.3.Bank Efficiency 1 0.06 0.20 0.03 0.09 0.31 0.76 54
BE 3.3.Bank Efficiency 2 0.06 0.24 0.03 0.11 0.26 0.79 54
BE 3.3.Stock Market Efficiency 1 0.26 0.18 0.12 0.08 1.44 0.16 59
BE 3.3.Stock Market Efficiency 2 0.19 0.15 0.09 0.07 1.31 0.20 59
BE 3.3.Stock Market Efficiency 3 -0.19 0.14 -0.08 0.06 -1.37 0.18 59
BE 3.3.Finance Man 1 -0.11 0.21 -0.05 0.10 -0.53 0.60 59
BE 3.4.Management Practices 1 0.04 0.20 0.02 0.09 0.19 0.85 59
BE 3.4.Management Practices 2 -0.03 0.17 -0.02 0.08 -0.20 0.85 59
BE 3.4.Attitudes Values 1 -0.04 0.21 -0.02 0.09 -0.18 0.86 59

Table 10. BE 3.2.Costs 1

BE.23.Remuneration of management Hum .944
BE.20.Remuneration of management CEO .928
BE.22.Remuneration of management Dir .897
BE.21.Remuneration of management Eng .828
BE.16.Remuneration in services profes .673

Table 11. BE 3.3.Stock Market Efficiency 1

BE.53.Stock market capitalization (%) .871
BE.51.Stock markets .848
BE.57.Shareholders' rights .812
BE.54.Value traded on stock markets .737

Table 12. BE 3.3.Stock Market Efficiency 2

BE.52.Stock market capitalization ($b .874
BE.55.Listed domestic companies .868

Table 13. BE 3.3.Stock Market Efficiency 3

BE.56.Stock market index (%) .947

3.4 Infrastructure

The R-Squared statistic indicates that the model as fitted explains 58% of the variability in
OVRL. The adjusted R-squared statistic, which is more suitable for comparing models with
different numbers of independent variables, is 45%.
Table 14. Ridge regression summary for dependent variable OVRL. (l=0.1, R=0.76, R²=0.58,
Adjusted R²=0.45, F(12,39)=4.4163)
Std.Err. Std.Err. Valid
Indicators Beta B t(39) p-level
- of Beta - of B -N
Intercept 3.40 0.05 71.57 0.00
INF 4.1.Basic Infrastructure 1 0.14 0.20 0.06 0.09 0.69 0.49 59
INF 4.1.Basic Infrastructure 2 0.24 0.16 0.11 0.07 1.48 0.15 59
INF 4.1.Basic Infrastructure 3 0.06 0.10 0.03 0.05 0.60 0.55 59
INF 4.1.Basic Infrastructure 4 -0.11 0.15 -0.05 0.07 -0.75 0.46 59
INF 4.2.Tech Infrastructure 1 -0.07 0.20 -0.03 0.09 -0.36 0.72 59
INF 4.2.Tech Infrastructure 2 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.09 0.02 0.98 59
INF 4.2.Tech Infrastructure 3 0.14 0.14 0.06 0.06 0.99 0.33 59
INF 4.3.Sci Infrastructure 1 0.45 0.20 0.21 0.09 2.28 0.03 59
INF 4.4.Health Environment 1 0.04 0.18 0.02 0.09 0.25 0.80 53
INF 4.4.Health Environment 2 0.03 0.15 0.01 0.07 0.22 0.83 53
INF 4.4.Health Environment 3 -0.03 0.13 -0.01 0.06 -0.26 0.80 53
INF 4.5.Education 1 0.05 0.19 0.02 0.09 0.28 0.78 59

Table 15. INF 4.1.Basic Infrastructure 2

Infra.9.Population over 65 years (%) .935
Infra.8.Population under 15 years (%) -.850
Infra.4.Access to water .676
Infra.5.Access to commodities .640

Table 16. INF 4.3.Sci Infrastructure 1

Infra.68.Scientific research legislation .961
Infra.67.Researchers and scientists .961
Infra.70.Knowledge transfer .958
Infra.66.Scientific research .956
Infra.71.Innovative capacity .937
Infra.69.Intellectual property rights .919
Infra.61.Nobel prizes per capita .701
Infra.60.Nobel prizes

4. Highlighted discussions

Statistically significant differences are shown in Tables 1 through 16. Tables show the
relationships between the world competitiveness index and the logistics performance
variables. Tables show that some pillars are significantly related to some of the logistics
performance variables. Some of the world competitiveness pillars significantly affect some of
logistics variables. For more details on the other relationships, see Tables 1 through 16, which
are self-explanatory.

In today’s global marketplace, all companies need to strive to gain competitive advantage
(Cook 2006). Companies now operate in a global market that, while offering opportunities, is
extremely competitive and demanding (Rushton and Walker 2007). A revolution took place
in the late 1990s and continues into the new millennium so that the logistics options in
corporate supply chains could easily make or break a company’s manufacturing and supply
chain model (Cook 2006). On the other hand, competitiveness is an often ill-defined concept
that is a key to economic success (Lawler and Hundley 2008).
Reducing costs or improving performance in any of the activities alone will not necessarily
guarantee a sustainable competitive edge as either a price cut or enhanced service alone can
easily be imitated by competitors (Lai and Cheng 2009). The goal of logistics, therefore, is to
optimize the performance of all the activities in this value chain, which is, delivering quality
products at low costs, to establish a sustainable competitive advantage (Lai and Cheng 2009).

Theoretically, competitiveness is the efficient use of resources, both human and natural, in
ways that should yield less expensive products, making them accessible to greater
percentages of the population (Wiley 2008). The concept is related to comparative advantage
theory, the classical economic trade theory suggesting that everyone benefits when each
country or region focuses on production of those goods for which its resources are best
suited, leading to efficient production in terms of cost (Wiley 2008). Efficient production
contributes to increased trade, with countries selling the goods that they produce most
efficiently and importing goods that their resources are not well suited to produce (Wiley
2008).

Increasing international competitiveness is important in enhancing trade performance and

raising incomes (Rana et al. 2009). Increased competitiveness means that policies to promote
exports, lower trade barriers, and open up the economy are helping to increase the ability of
South Asia to compete in international markets (Rana et al. 2009). Competitiveness is desired
only because it holds the key to sustain economic prosperity, jobs and a higher standard of
living (Lee 2002). The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
defines national competitiveness as “the degree to which a country can, under free and fair
market conditions, produce goods and services which meet the rest of the international
markets, while simultaneously maintaining and expanding the real incomes of its people
over the long term” (Lee 2002).

Economic integration brought about by vanishing global trade barriers has enabled firms to
creatively manage their value chain, identifying sources of competitive advantage in the
world stage to provide the best value for customers worldwide (Macher and Mowery 2008).
In their drive to be ever more efficient and competitive, companies have clearly focused on
their internal organization and processes and through vertical collaboration with supply
chain partners (Doukidis 2007). As pressure to become ever more competitive continues
companies are now looking externally beyond the boundaries of their own organizations and
value chains and transport as a mobile asset is arguably more versatile in being able to
achieve this concept (Doukidis 2007). Realizing that either price cuts or superior products
alone cannot guarantee a sustainable competitive edge, in the face of the ever-increasing
uncertainties in the market place, SCM has become the key to cope with these challenges (Lai
and Cheng 2009). SCM requires intermediaries or partners to engage in cooperative
relationships and to work in harmony to deliver quality products at low costs (Lai and
Cheng 2009).

5. Conclusion

In this paper, an empirical study on the relationship between indicators of logistics

performance and IMD variables was performed. This paper identified the relationships
between indicators of logistics performance and IMD scores. As evidenced by the analysis,
some variables in IMD indicators highly contribute to overall logistics performance. In this
regard, it is essential for policymakers in the logistics field to take account of those variables
that have higher contributions. By taking into the consideration of IMD indicators, the main
areas for improvement of the logistics performances include focusing more on the highly
contributing indicators to significantly improve outcomes.

6. References

Alarcon, R., Antun, J. P., & Lozano, A. (2012). Logistics competitiveness in a megapolitan
network of cities: A theoretical approach and some application in the Central Region of
Mexico. Seventh International Conference on City Logistics, 39, 739-752. doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.03.144
Andrade, R. P., Lucato, W. C., Vanalle, R. M., & Vieira, M. (2014). Review of the
Relationship between Reverse Logistics and Competitiveness. In D. Kurniawan (Ed.),
Materials, Industrial, and Manufacturing Engineering Research Advances 1.1 (Vol. 845,
pp. 614-617). Stafa-Zurich: Trans Tech Publications Ltd.
Barthorpe, Stephen; Robbins, Stephen; Sullivan, Gary (2010). Managing Construction
Logistics. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010. p 18.
Basile, A. (2012). Evaluating Effectiveness of Airport Logistics System As A Driver Of
Firm's Competitiveness: Empirical Evidence For Peripheral Areas. Transformations in
Business & Economics, 11(3), 90-108.
Brown, T. (2008). Logistics Costs and Competitiveness. Chemical Engineering Progress,
104(12), 4-4.
Chen, G. (2013). On the Competitiveness of Aviation Logistics Industry. 2013 Fourth
International Conference on Education and Sports Education (Ese 2013), Pt Ii, 12, 139-
143.
Cook, Thomas A. (2006). Global Sourcing Logistics: How to Manage Risk and Gain
Competitive Advantage in a Worldwide Marketplace. Saranac Lake, NY, USA:
AMACOM Books, 2006. p xvii-1.
Ding, N., Li, H. Q., & Wang, H. Q. (2013). Analysis and Prediction of Logistics Enterprise
Competitiveness by Using a Real GA-Based Support Vector Machine. Proceedings of
2nd Conference on Logistics, Informatics and Service Science (Liss 2012), Vols 1 and 2,
6. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-32054-5_40
Dinu, E., & Curea, C. (2008). Analysis and competitiveness in logistics. Amfiteatru
Economic, 10(24), 59-69.
Doukidis, Georgios I. (Editor) (2007). Collaboration: The Key to Responsive Supply
Chains. Bradford, GBR: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd, 2007. p 175-193.
Du, X. F., & Yan, X. F. (2009). Empirical Study on the Competitiveness of Logistics
Industry in China's Middle Region. Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Soc.
Du, X. F., Yan, X., & Soc, I. C. (2008). Empirical Study on Regional Logistics Industry's
Competitiveness Based on Factor Analysis. Los Alamitos: Ieee Computer Soc.
Dylewski, M., & Filipiak, B. (2013). Types Of Information Used In Shaping
Competitiveness Of Logistics Companies In Poland, Germany And Belorussia - Study
Results. Aktualne Problemy Podnikovej Sfery 2013, 102-108.
Eicher, Sharon (Editor) (2009). Corruption in International Business. Abingdon, Oxon,
GBR: Gower Publishing Limited, 2009. p 77.
Fan, X. Q., & IEEE. (2009). Fuzzy Theory and AHP Applied to Port Logistics
Competitiveness Evaluation. New York: IEEE.
Han, M., Chen, C., Han, Y. H., & Inc, D. E. P. (2013). Evaluation of Western China City
Logistics Competitiveness. 2013 International Conference on Industrial Engineering
and Management Science (Iciems 2013), 1259-1264.
Huang, J. Y., Ji, S. W., Liu, Y., & Wang, X. H. (2008). Study on coupling relationship
between Beijing logistics development and urban competitiveness upgrade. Nanjing:
Nanjing Univ Press.
Huang, Y. C., Han, Y. H., & Destech Publicat, I. (2013). Study on the Evaluation of
Regional Logistics Competitiveness. International Conference on Transportation (Ictr
2013), 280-286.
Lai, Kee-hung; Cheng, T.C.E. (2009). Just-in-Time Logistics. Abingdon, Oxon, GBR:
Ashgate Publishing Group, 2009. p 45.
Lawler, John J.; Hundley, Gregory S. (2008). Advances in International Management,
Volume 21: Global Diffusion of Human Resource Practices: Institutional and Cultural
Limits. Bradford, GBR: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd, 2008. p 20.
Lee, Stephen (Editor) (2002). Creating wealth in the connected economy. Bradford, GBR:
Emerald Group Publishing Ltd, 2002. p 48.
Lei, L., Goh, M., de Souza, R., Center for Supply Chain, M., & Logistics. (2007). Trade
Competitiveness and Logistics Challenges in Asia. Icoscm 2007 - International
Conference on Operations and Supply Chain Management in China, 1, 9.
Li, J. Y., & Che, Y. Q. (2013). Evaluating Competitiveness of Urban Logistics Using Fuzzy
Logic AHP. In H. Hou & L. Tian (Eds.), Architecture, Building Materials and
Engineering Management, Pts 1-4 (Vol. 357-360, pp. 2688-2691). Stafa-Zurich: Trans
Tech Publications Ltd.
Li, W. D., & Ieee. (2008). Combinational Evaluation on the Competitiveness of Logistics
Enterprise. New York: IEEE.
Lim, D. S., Kang, D. W., An, Y. M., Kwak, K. S., & Nam, K. C. (2012). Studies on
Competitiveness Securing Plan for Port Logistics Industry in Busan area using Analytic
Hierarchy Process(AHP). Newark: Information Engineering Research Inst, USA.
Liu, C. F., Kao, T. Y., Chang, Y. F., & Tsai, Y. R. (2013). Global Impacts of the Asian
Logistics Competitiveness and Risk Management. In L. Yu, W. P. Guo, M. Sun & J. He
(Eds.), Current Trends in the Development of Industry, Pts 1 and 2 (Vol. 785-786, pp.
1511-1515). Stafa-Zurich: Trans Tech Publications Ltd.
Liu, W. H., Liu, B. L., Tang, O., Chen, L. J., & Liu, X. Y. (2014). An empirical examination
of the contents and evolution of the composing factors of logistics enterprise
competitiveness: a perspective from China. International Journal of Logistics-Research
and Applications, 17(6), 459-484. doi: 10.1080/13675567.2014.913555
Liu, X. H. (2011). Competitiveness of logistics service providers: a cross-national
examination of management practices in China and the UK. International Journal of
Logistics-Research and Applications, 14(4), 251-269. doi: 10.1080/13675567.2011.636736
Liu, X. H., Grant, D. B., McKinnon, A. C., & Feng, Y. H. (2010). An empirical examination
of the contribution of capabilities to the competitiveness of logistics service providers A
perspective from China. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management, 40(10), 847-866. doi: 10.1108/09600031011093232
Liu, X. L. (2012). Fuzzy Theory and AHP Applied to Port Urban Logistics
Competitiveness Evaluation. In D. Sun, W. P. Sung & R. Chen (Eds.), Frontiers of
Manufacturing and Design Science Ii, Pts 1-6 (Vol. 121-126, pp. 2769-2773). Stafa-
Zurich: Trans Tech Publications Ltd.
Liu, X. L., Jiao, X. L., Ma, T. S., & Society, I. C. (2008). Empirical Study on Port Logistics
Competitiveness Based on FCE-AHP. Los Alamitos: Ieee Computer Soc.
Liu, Y. J., & Sun, Y. (2010). The Researches on Enhancing the Competitiveness Model of
Railway Transport in the Perspective of Environmental Logistics. Shanghai: Donghua
Univ Press.
Macher, Jeffrey T. (Editor); Mowery, David C. (Editor) (2008). Innovation in Global
Industries: U.S. Firms Competing in a New World (Collected Studies). Washington,
DC, USA: National Academies Press, 2008. p 297l.
Mensah, Solomon (2010). America in the 21st Century: Political and Economic Issues:
Globalized Supply Chains and U. S. Policy. New York, NY, USA: Nova Science
Publishers, Inc., 2010. p 55.
Mihi-Ramirez, A., & Morales, V. J. G. (2011). Improving Competitiveness Trough Creation
of Knowledge and Reverse Logistics. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics,
22(4), 443-450. doi: 10.5755/j01.ee.22.4.719
Peng, J. L. (2011). Evaluation on the competitiveness of logistics outsourcing based on
TOPSIS: 4 cities in Yangtze River Delta. In Q. Luo & D. Zeng (Eds.), Information
Technology for Manufacturing Systems Ii, Pts 1-3 (Vol. 58-60, pp. 7-12). Stafa-Zurich:
Trans Tech Publications Ltd.
Peng, J. L., & Zhan, C. X. (2011). A Case Study on Evaluation of Airport Logistics
Competitiveness Based on AHP. In D. H. Zeng (Ed.), Micro Nano Devices, Structure
and Computing Systems (Vol. 159, pp. 307-312). Stafa-Zurich: Trans Tech Publications
Ltd.
Piasecka-Gluszak, A. (2013). The Use Of Selected Management Methods In Logistics
Provided To Improve The Competitiveness Of Polish Enterprises On The International
Scene. Karvina: Silesian Univ Opava, School Business Administration Karvina.
Puertas, R., Marti, L., & Garcia, L. (2014). Logistics performance and export
competitiveness: European experience. Empirica, 41(3), 467-480. doi: 10.1007/s10663-
013-9241-z
Rana, Pradumna B.; Dowling, John Malcolm; Yah, Lim Chong (Foreword by) (2009).
South Asia : Rising to the Challenge of Globalization. SGP: World Scientific, 2009. p 40.
Rushton, Alan; Walker, Steve (2007). International Logistics Supply Chain Outsourcing.
London, GBR: Kogan Page Ltd., 2007. p 1-352.
Sagafi-Nejad, Tagi; Dunning, John H.; Perlmutter, Howard V. (Foreword by) (2008). UN
and Transnational Corporations: From Code of Conduct to Global Compact.
Bloomington, IN, USA: Indiana University Press, 2008. p 168-251.
Sheng, Z. (2014). The Evaluation of Regional Logistics Competitiveness Of Agricultural
Products In China And Spatial Analysis On The Differences. Pakistan Journal of
Statistics, 30(5), 683-702.
Spillan, J. E., McGinnis, M. A., Kara, A., & Yi, G. L. (2013). A comparison of the effect of
logistic strategy and logistics integration on firm competitiveness in the USA and
China. International Journal of Logistics Management, 24(2), 153-179. doi: 10.1108/ijlm-
06-2012-0045
Trupac, I. (2008). More competitiveness for Slovenia and its companies through the
Slovenian transport logistics cluster. Promet-Traffic & Transportation, 20(1), 19-30.
Wang, C. X., & Yu, Z. M. (2008). Evaluation of competitiveness of port logistics industry in
Yangtze River Delta using hierarchical fuzzy process. Marrickville: Orient Acad
Forum.
Wiley, James (2008). Banana: Empires, Trade Wars, and Globalization. Lincoln, NE, USA:
University of Nebraska Press, 2008. p 209.
Yang, X. O., He, K. T., Huang, K., & Icros/Komma. (2008). Study on multidimensional
diagnosis model of logistics enterprise's quality competitiveness (ICSMA 2008).
Piscataway: Ieee Service Ctr.
Yun, Z., & Li, L. (2011). On the Cultivation of job-hunting competitiveness of students in
logistics department -Chongqing Jiaotong university in case. Sham Shui Po: Int
Industrial Electronic Center.
Zhang, L. R., Li, Y. L., & Ma, Y. J. (2010). Evaluation of the Competitiveness of Logistics
Enterprise Based on Niche. Marrickville: Aussino Acad Publ House.
Zhen, X. (2008). The Method of Improve Enterprise Core Competitiveness -Based on the
Technological Innovation and Take the Example of Logistics Enterprise. London: Acad
Serv Group Ltd.
Zhu, F. L. (2006). How logistics impact competitiveness between industry clusters.
Marrickville: Orient Acad Forum.
Zu, D. W., & Hai, F. (2008). Developing Regional Logistics Industry to Promote Regional
Economic Competitiveness: Analysis and Suggestions on Logistics Industry
Competitiveness of Wuhan City. Allawah Nsw: M D Forum.
Appendix

Table A1. Economic Performance

1.1 Domestic Economy
Size
1.1.01 Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
1.1.02 GDP (PPP)
1.1.03 World GDP contribution (%)
1.1.04 Household consumption expenditure ($bn)
1.1.05 Household consumption expenditure (%)
1.1.06 Government consumption expenditure ($bn)
1.1.07 Government consumption expenditure (%)
1.1.08 Gross fixed capital formation ($bn)
1.1.09 Gross fixed capital formation (%)
1.1.10 Gross domestic savings ($bn)
1.1.11 Gross domestic savings (%)
1.1.12 Economic sectors
1.1.13 Diversification of the economy
Growth
1.1.14 Real GDP growth
1.1.15 Real GDP growth per capita
1.1.16 Household consumption expenditure - real growth
1.1.17 Government consumption expenditure - real growth
1.1.18 Gross fixed capital formation - real growth
1.1.19 Resilience of the economy
Wealth
1.1.20 GDP per capita
1.1.21 GDP (PPP) per capita
Forecasts
1.1.22 Forecast: Real GDP growth
1.1.23 Forecast: Inflation
1.1.24 Forecast: Unemployment
1.1.25 Forecast: Current account balance
1.2 International Trade
1.2.01 Current account balance ($bn)
1.2.02 Current account balance (%)
1.2.03 Balance of trade ($bn)
1.2.04 Balance of trade (%)
1.2.05 Balance of commercial services ($bn)
1.2.06 Balance of commercial services (%)
1.2.07 World exports contribution (%)
1.2.08 Exports of goods ($bn)
1.2.09 Exports of goods (%)
1.2.10 Exports of goods per capita
1.2.11 Exports of goods - growth
1.2.12 Exports of commercial services ($bn)
1.2.13 Exports of commercial services (%)
1.2.14 Exports of commercial services - growth
1.2.15 Exports of goods & commercial services ($bn)
1.2.16 Exports breakdown by economic sector
1.2.17 Export Concentration by Partner
1.2.18 Imports of goods & commercial services ($BN)
1.2.19 Imports of goods & commercial services (%)
1.2.20 Imports of goods & commercial services - growth
1.2.21 Imports breakdown by economic sector
1.2.22 Trade to GDP ratio
1.2.23 Terms of trade index
1.2.24 Tourism receipts (%)
1.2.25 Exchange rates
1.3 International Investment
Investment
1.3.01 Direct investment flows abroad ($bn)
1.3.02 Direct investment flows abroad (%)
1.3.03 Direct investment stocks abroad ($bn)
1.3.04 Direct investment stocks abroad (%)
1.3.05 Direct investment flows inward ($bn)
1.3.06 Direct investment flows inward (%)
1.3.07 Direct investment stocks inward ($bn)
1.3.08 Direct investment stocks inward (%)
1.3.09 Balance of direct investment flows ($bn)
1.3.10 Balance of direct investment flows (%)
1.3.11 Net position in direct investment stocks ($bn)
1.3.12 Net position in direct investment stocks (%)
1.3.13 Relocation threats of production
1.3.14 Relocation threats of R&D facilities
1.3.15 Relocation threats of services
Finance
1.3.16 Portfolio investment assets ($bn)
1.3.17 Portfolio investment liabilities ($bn)
1.4 Employment
1.4.01 Employment
1.4.02 Employment (%)
1.4.03 Employment - growth
1.4.04 Employment by sector
1.4.05 Employment in the public sector (%)
1.4.06 Unemployment rate
1.4.07 Long-term unemployment
1.4.08 Youth unemployment
1.5 Prices
1.5.01 Consumer price inflation
1.5.02 Cost-of-living index
1.5.03 Apartment rent
1.5.04 Office rent
Table A2. Government Efficiency
2.1 Public Finance Openess
2.1.01 Government budget surplus/deficit ($bn) 2.4.01 Tariff barriers
2.1.02 Government budget surplus/deficit (%) 2.4.02 Customs’ authorities
2.1.03 Total general government debt ($bn) 2.4.03 Protectionism
2.1.04 Total general government debt (%) 2.4.04 Public sector contracts
2.1.05 Total general government debt-real growth 2.4.05 Foreign investors
2.1.06 Central government domestic debt (%) 2.4.06 Capital markets
2.1.07 Central government foreign debt (%) 2.4.07 Investment incentives
2.1.08 Interest payment (%) Competition and Regulations
2.1.09 Public finances 2.4.08 Government subsidies (%)
2.1.10 Tax evasion 2.4.09 Subsidies
2.1.11 Pension funding 2.4.10 State ownership of enterprises
2.1.12 General government expenditure (%) 2.4.11 Competition legislation
2.2 Fiscal Policy 2.4.12 Parallel economy
2.2.01 Collected total tax revenues (%) 2.4.13 Ease of doing business
2.2.02 Collected personal income tax (%) 2.4.14 Creation of firms
2.2.03 Collected corporate taxes (%) 2.4.15 Start-up days
2.2.04 Collected indirect tax revenues (%) 2.4.16 Start-up procedures
2.2.05 Collected capital and property taxes (%) Labor Regulations
2.2.06 Collected social security contribution (%) 2.4.17 Labor regulations
2.2.07 Effective personal income tax rate 2.4.18 Unemployment legislation
2.2.08 Corporate tax rate on profit 2.4.19 Immigration laws
2.2.09 Consumption tax rate 2.4.20 Redundancy costs
2.2.10 Employee’s social security contribution rate 2.5 Societal Framework
2.2.11 Employer’s social security contribution rate 2.5.01 Justice
2.2.12 Real personal taxes 2.5.02 Personal security and private property rights
2.2.13 Real corporate taxes 2.5.03 Ageing of society
2.3 Institutional Framework 2.5.04 Risk of political instability
Central Bank 2.5.05 Social cohesion
2.3.01 Real short-term interest rate 2.5.06 Gini index
2.3.02 Cost of capital 2.5.07 Income distribution - lowest 10%
2.3.03 Interest rate spread 2.5.08 Income distribution - highest 10%
2.3.04 Country credit rating 2.5.09 Equal opportunity
2.3.05 Central bank policy 2.5.10 Females in parliament (%)
2.3.06 Foreign currency reserves ($bn) 2.5.11 Women on boards (%)
2.3.07 Exchange rate stability 2.5.12 Gender inequality
State Efficiency
2.3.08 Legal and regulatory framework
2.3.09 Adaptability of government policy
2.3.10 Government decisions
2.3.11 Transparency
2.3.12 Bureaucracy
2.3.13 Bribing and corruption
2.4 Business Legislation
Table A3. Business Efficiency
3.1 Productivity and Efficiency 3.3 Finance
3.1.01 Overall productivity (PPP) Bank Efficiency
3.1.02 Overall productivity 3.3.01 Banking sector assets (%)
3.1.03 Overall productivity - real growth 3.3.02 Financial cards in circulation
3.1.04 Labor productivity (PPP) 3.3.03 Financial card transactions
3.1.05 Labor productivity (PPP) growth 3.3.04 Investment risk
3.1.06 Agricultural productivity (PPP) 3.3.05 Banking and financial services
3.1.07 Productivity in industry (PPP) 3.3.06 Finance and banking regulation
3.1.08 Productivity in services (PPP) 3.3.07 Financial risk factor
3.1.09 Workforce productivity Stock Market Efficiency
3.1.10 Large corporations 3.3.08 Stock markets
3.1.11 Small and medium-size enterprises 3.3.09 Stock market capitalization ($bn)
3.1.12 Productivity of companies 3.3.10 Stock market capitalization (%)
3.2 Labor Market 3.3.11 Value traded on stock markets
Costs 3.3.12 Listed domestic companies
3.2.01 Compensation levels ($) 3.3.13 Stock market index (%)
3.2.02 Unit labor costs in the manufacturing sector (%) 3.3.14 Shareholders’ rights
3.2.03 Remuneration in services professions ($) 3.3.15 Initial public offerings
3.2.04 Remuneration of management ($) Finance Management
3.2.05 Remuneration spread 3.3.16 Credit
Relations 3.3.17 Venture capital
3.2.06 Working hours 3.3.18 M&A activity
3.2.07 Labor relations 3.3.19 Corporate debt
3.2.08 Worker motivation 3.4 Management Practices
3.2.09 Industrial disputes 3.4.01 Adaptability of companies
3.2.10 Apprenticeship 3.4.02 Ethical practices
3.2.11 Employee training 3.4.03 Credibility of managers
Availability of Skills 3.4.04 Corporate boards
3.2.12 Labor force 3.4.05 Auditing and accounting practices
3.2.13 Labor force (%) 3.4.06 Customer satisfaction
3.2.14 Labor force growth 3.4.07 Entrepreneurship
3.2.15 Part-time employment (%) 3.4.08 Social responsibility
3.2.16 Female labor force (%) 3.4.09 Health, safety & environmental concerns
3.2.17 Foreign labor force (%) 3.5 Attitudes and Values
3.2.18 Skilled labor 3.5.01 Attitudes toward globalization
3.2.19 Finance skills 3.5.02 Image abroad or branding
3.2.20 Attracting and retaining talents 3.5.03 National culture
3.2.21 Brain drain 3.5.04 Flexibility and adaptability
3.2.22 Foreign high-skilled people 3.5.05 Need for economic and social reforms
3.2.23 International experience 3.5.06 Value system
3.2.24 Competent senior managers
 Table A4. Infrastructure
4.1 Basic Infrastructure
4.1.01 Land area
4.1.02 Arable area
4.1.03 Water resources
4.1.04 Access to water
4.1.05 Access to commodities
4.1.06 Management of cities
4.1.07 Population - market size
4.1.08 Population under 15 years (%)
4.1.09 Population over 65 years (%)
4.1.10 Dependency ratio
4.1.11 Roads
4.1.12 Railroads
4.1.13 Air transportation
4.1.14 Quality of air transportation
4.1.15 Distribution infrastructure
4.1.16 Water transportation
4.1.17 Maintenance and development
4.1.18 Energy infrastructure
4.1.19 Future energy supply
4.1.20 Total indigenous energy production
4.1.21 Total indigenous energy production (%)
4.1.22 Total final energy consumption
4.1.23 Total final energy consumption per capita
4.1.24 Electricity costs for industrial clients
4.1.25 Gasoline prices
4.2 Technological Infrastructure
4.2.01 Investment in telecommunications (%)
4.2.02 Fixed telephone lines
4.2.03 Fixed telephone tariffs
4.2.04 Mobile telephone subscribers
4.2.05 Mobile telephone costs
4.2.06 Communications technology
4.2.07 Connectivity
4.2.08 Computers in use
4.2.09 Computers per capita
4.2.10 Internet users
4.2.11 Fixed broadband tariffs
4.2.12 Broadband subscribers
4.2.13 Internet bandwidth speed
4.2.14 Information technology skills
4.2.15 Qualified engineers
4.2.16 Technological cooperation
4.2.17 Public and private sector ventures
4.2.18 Development and application of technology
4.2.19 Funding for technological development
4.2.20 Technological regulation
4.2.21 High-tech exports ($)
4.2.22 High-tech exports (%)
4.2.23 Cyber security
4.3 Scientific Infrastructure
4.3.01 Total expenditure on R&D ($)
4.3.02 Total expenditure on R&D (%)
4.3.03 Total expenditure on R&D per capita ($)
4.3.04 Business expenditure on R&D ($)
4.3.05 Business expenditure on R&D (%)
4.3.06 Total R&D personnel nationwide
4.3.07 Total R&D personnel nationwide per capita
4.3.08 Total R&D personnel in business enterprise
4.3.09 Total R&D personnel in business per capita
4.3.10 Science degrees
4.3.11 Scientific articles
4.3.12 Nobel prizes
4.3.13 Nobel prizes per capita
View publication stats
4.4 Health and Environment
4.4.01 Total health expenditure (%)
4.4.02 Total health expenditure per capita
4.4.03 Public expenditure on health (%)
4.4.04 Health infrastructure
4.4.05 Life expectancy at birth
4.4.06 Healthy life expectancy
4.4.07 Infant mortality
4.4.08 Medical assistance
4.4.09 Urban population (%)
4.4.10 Human development index
4.4.11 Health problems
4.4.12 Energy intensity
4.4.13 Paper and cardboard recycling rate
4.4.14 Waste water treatment plants
4.4.15 Water consumption intensity
4.4.16 CO2 emissions
4.4.17 CO2 emissions intensity
4.4.18 Renewable energies (%)
4.4.19 Green technology solutions
4.4.20 Total biocapacity
4.4.21 Ecological footprint
4.4.22 Ecological balance (reserve/deficit)
4.4.23 Sustainable development
4.4.24 Pollution problems
4.4.25 Environmental laws
4.4.26 Quality of life
4.5 Education
4.5.01 Total public expenditure on education (%)
4.5.02 Total public expenditure on education per capita
4.5.03 Pupil-teacher ratio (primary education)
4.5.04 Pupil-teacher ratio (secondary education)
4.5.05 Secondary school enrollment (%)
4.5.06 Higher education achievement (%)
4.5.07 Student mobility inbound
4.5.08 Student mobility outbound
4.5.09 Educational assessment - PISA
4.5.10 English proficiency - TOEFL
4.5.11 Educational system
4.5.12 Science in schools
4.5.13 University education
4.5.14 Management education
4.5.15 Illiteracy (%)
4.5.16 Language skills
4.3 Scientific Infrastructure (Cont.d)
4.3.14 Patent applications
4.3.15 Patent applications per capita
4.3.16 Patents grants
4.3.17 Number of patents in force
4.3.18 Scientific research
4.3.19 Researchers and scientists
4.3.20 Scientific research legislation
4.3.21 Intellectual property rights
4.3.22 Knowledge transfer
4.3.23 Innovative capacity