38

A CAPABILITY ANALYSIS OF MARITIME TRANSPORTATION FOR

HUMANITARIAN LOGISTICS
Ayşenur Şahin-Arslan5, Mustafa Alp Ertem6

Abstract ⎯ Transporting relief supplies quickly to the disaster area is a crucial step of humanitarian logistics. Land
and air transportation are mostly used in responding to disasters. On the other hand, waterways are used in global
trade and have the advantage of transporting more weight while connecting to other transportation modes for the last
mile delivery. Using maritime transportation for humanitarian logistics is a vital topic, but has not been studied
thoroughly. In this study, we performed a capability analysis of maritime transportation for a successful humanitarian
operation. Maritime transportation is analyzed using the characteristics of port activities in terms of accessibility,
modal share, port structures, equipment, resources and coordination of national and international stakeholders. This
study presents maritime transportation capabilities and characteristics from the point of humanitarian logistics view
as a guide to future researchers and practitioners.

Keywords ⎯ Capability analysis, Humanitarian logistics, Intermodal transportation, Maritime transportation, Ports

INTRODUCTION

Either natural or man-made, disasters are a reality of human life. Regardless of the precautions taken, humanity will
continue to suffer from disasters exceeding the relief capacities. As one of the four phases of disaster operations
management (i.e., mitigation, preparedness, response, recovery), response phase relies on sound transportation
infrastructure. Unfortunately, transportation infrastructure is usually damaged by disasters. In order to reach disaster
victims, alternative means for transport is needed.

One alternative mode to land transportation and air transportation in humanitarian response is maritime transportation.
Maritime transportation is used heavily in today’s trade. Seaborne trade is reported to have a share about 75% of all
merchandise trade in the world [14]. Most of the long distance transportation is handled by some form of maritime
transportation, either from origin to destination solely by waterways or by a combination of other transportation
modes. Relief items handled in the preparedness phase of disaster operations management is not an exception to this
large share of maritime transportation in today’s trade. On the other hand, maritime transportation during response
phase requires more in-depth investigation because of the rapid and ad-hoc nature of humanitarian operations.

A few studies can be cited on using maritime transportation for humanitarian logistics. Tatham and Kovacs [15]
analyse ways to apply sea-basing concept of military applications to humanitarian logistics. Bemley et al. [16]
investigate secure port recovery after a natural disaster by repairing navigation aid tools. Wilberg and Olafsen [8]
developed a simulation model adapting the distribution network of a commercial logistics company to IFRC
(International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Society)’s relief item distribution network utilizing vessels
and ports.

Using maritime transportation for humanitarian logistics is a vital topic, but has not been studied thoroughly. The
objective of this study is to list the capabilities of maritime transportation for a successful humanitarian operation.
Turkey is a special case for using maritime transportation in humanitarian logistics, because of the geopolitical
location and vulnerability of our country. Therefore, we gathered statistics about Turkish ports reporting their area and
equipment capacities in responding to a disaster. The paper is organized as follows. Next section discusses the
components of maritime transportation. Later, we present a capability analysis for humanitarian logistics using
maritime transportation. Turkish port capacities are reported in the fourth section for their possible use in humanitarian
logistics. Finally, we conclude with our findings.

5
Abdullah Gül University, Department of Industrial Engineering, Kayseri Turkey, aysenursahinarslan@gmail.com
6
Çankaya University, Department of Industrial Engineering, Ankara, alpertem@gmail.com
© XIII. International Logistics and Supply Chain Congress
October 22-23, 2015, Izmir, TURKEY
 39

CHARACTERISTICS OF MARITIME TRANSPORTATION

Maritime transportation is a complex system with its stakeholder relationships and ongoing operational activities.
There are several self-reliant actors in this system including governmental and private organizations likely to have
distinct viewpoints. Therefore, the components of maritime transportation can be defined by using a "system of
systems engineering" approach [1]. Five components of this system are ships, ports, intermodal hubs, users, and
waterways ([2][3][4]). Each of these components are independent but interrelated horizontally or hierarchically.

Ships and vessels used in transportation are irreplaceable components of transferring freight from the port of origin to
the port of destination using mostly tanker, bulk and container ships. After the ships are manufactured, their regular
maintenance should be performed. The ships should be well organized to operate between the ports by planning of
their arrival to and departure from the ports. The organization and the operation planning of the ships are very
important in maritime transportation system due to its connectedness to the port and intermodal hub components.

Ports are the stations for all maritime activities related to ships taking on passengers and freight cargos. Container
loading and unloading, disposal of empty containers, stacking and maneuver activities are performed at the related
areas of ports. Moreover, construction of the ports, operation and maintenance of handling equipment, dredging,
terminal operations, and administrative activities are performed within the boundaries of a port [1]. The ports also hold
empty trucks to transfer the arriving cargo to destination points using intermodal hubs. Container line agents,
intermediary companies, customs companies are the main stakeholders at ports.

Intermodal hubs provide the transfer of freight from the port to the final destination via other transportation modes.
The capacity of ships for freight is more than the capacity of trains or trucks, therefore, trains or trucks should be
ready at the port terminals on time during the loading/unloading processes. If the ports have railway terminals, the
freight is transferred to trains since a block train can get up to 80 TEU having more transportation capacity than trucks
at once [5]. The warehousing, handling and transportation activities are provided by the intermodal connectors.
Railway and highway transportation companies, container manufacturers and owners of container fleets are the
primary stakeholders at intermodal hubs.

Transfer operations at intermodal hubs are easier with goods loaded to standardized containers. Generally speaking,
containers are defined as large boxes, which are used to transport goods from an origin to a destination. Compared to
conventional bulk transportation, the use of containers has several advantages, such as less product packaging, less
damage, and higher productivity. The dimensions of containers have been standardized throughout the years, and
transport over the sea is mostly carried out by containers on ships. Additionally, trucks or trains can be used to
transport containers over land [6]. The container handling and container transportation is used as a base for freights
throughout the study. In Figure 1 an example container network is given between an exporter warehouse and a port.

In Figure 1, three modes of containerized intermodal transportation (i.e., highway, railway, and waterway) are
depicted. Freight can follow alternative tracks at this network. The containers are first transported to rail terminal by
trucks. Then, the freight is placed into the containers and the containers are handled to trains in order to travel to the
transshipping port. The containers are transported to main loading port from the transshipping port with small size
ships. Lastly the containers are loaded to vessels for their final destination.

The service providers and receivers are the fourth component of maritime transportation system including shippers,
owners of ships and vessels, and owners of the freight, port terminal personnel, port handling personnel,
governmental, private and non-profit organizations, customs and administrative organizations, international
organizations and distributors. These are the users and also the stakeholders of maritime transportation.

The fifth component of maritime transportation system is waterways. Sea, ocean, lake and river transportation can be
considered as the types of waterways. River ways are not used much in international trade because of the cost and time
disadvantages. The river ways are not developed like the ocean and sea transshipment for the freights in many

© XIII. International Logistics and Supply Chain Congress

October 22-23, 2015, Izmir, TURKEY
 40

countries. Similarly, transportation via lakes mostly happens within countries and are not suitable for import/export
shipments.

Figure 1. An example intermodal container network, Source: [5]

A CAPABILITY ANALYSIS FOR HUMANITARIAN LOGISTICS

To come up with the capabilities needed for using maritime transportation in humanitarian logistics, we need to have
an understanding of the characteristics of humanitarian logistics when compared to commercial logistics. In
commercial logistics activities, intermodal transportation is used commonly in order to save time and cost. However,
commercial and humanitarian logistics have some main differences even if they may have the same intermodal
transportation network and equipment types. In commercial logistics the profit is maximized, on the other hand,
saving lives of beneficiaries is aimed in humanitarian logistics. The demand pattern can be forecasted in commercial
logistics, but the demand is unknown in humanitarian logistics since the time, quantity and place of the disaster is
unpredictable. The transported items in humanitarian logistics aims helping people and can be exemplified as food,
water, shelter and evacuating equipment. These products serve the immediate needs for survival and should be treated
differently than commercial products in the transportation network [7]. Once a disaster happens, these items are
needed immediately, so the desired lead time is almost zero. Therefore, prepositioning these items near possible
disaster areas helps in quickly transporting them to the affected areas.

The transportation network of humanitarian logistics is in ad-hoc structure since the network is determined after the
disaster and wiped out after the recovery phase of disaster. Disaster characteristics define the flow pattern of goods.
For instance, the roads may be destroyed and mostly waterways and airways should be utilized after a flood or an
earthquake. On the other hand, waterway and airway may not be used after a hurricane strike, since a hurricane will
impede most flights and sailings. Because of the dynamic structure of humanitarian logistics, the transportation
© XIII. International Logistics and Supply Chain Congress
October 22-23, 2015, Izmir, TURKEY
 41

network and the required equipment should be determined considering disaster characteristics. The supply network of
the goods should also be considered in terms of the intermodal connections. Most of the immediate relief item flow
will be from predetermined warehouse locations to disaster prone areas. The available transportation modes between
these prepositioned warehouses and possible disaster areas should be determined considering the disaster type.

The frequent use of containers in maritime transportation can be a capability that humanitarian logistics can benefit
from. In maritime transportation, when container ships arrive at ports, the containers are loaded/unloaded, handled and
stacked. Later, entry/exit and custom services are performed. The container ports can be operated by public or private
sectors and the port services are composed of five main operations, which are dock, container yard, container freight
station (CFS), gate and other operations processes [5]. The containers are loaded to and unloaded from container ships
with cranes at docks. The dock cranes can be gantry cranes moving on a permanent line or straddle carriers with
flexible lines. In container yards, the containers usually dwell in order to be handled after entry from gates or exit from
container ships. The containers are waited for loading process to ships for some period of time according to loading
plans. Moreover, the unloaded containers from landing ships are waited for transfer to terminals from the gates. In
container yards forklifts, stowing equipment and reach stackers are used to handle containers.

In container ports, sometimes the containers are opened and the freight is divided for different freight owners having
less than container load (LCL) and the empty containers are loaded with different freight owners’ goods in pallets.
Forklifts are used in CFCs to load or unload the pallets. The containers come to CFS in order to be loaded to ships and
unloaded containers use gates for entry/exit processes. The containers arrive at CFS with towing vehicles on a railway
where available. When the discharge process with handling equipment finishes, the entry is completed with the gate
operations. The handling equipment used in gate operations are semi-trailers and cranes. The other maritime
operations are customs and documents transactions during entry/exit operations.

The aforementioned operations are valid for maritime transportation in humanitarian logistics, too. However, the
stakeholders’ relations can change according to the degree of urgency and the place of a disaster. Some of the
humanitarian organizations store the relief items in predetermined warehouses close to intermodal hubs. These
warehouses have the relief items ready to send to the affected areas when they are needed. The supplier and
warehouse operations are performed in preparation phase in order to keep stocks available and up to date. When a
disaster strikes, the relief items at these warehouses are transferred immediately with effective transportation modes
providing fast response such as air cargos and helicopters. Since the demand is unknown beforehand, needs
assessment operations start and the flow of relief items continues with available transportation modes. Because of the
uncertainty in demand and the urgency of flows, humanitarian logistics prioritize responding fast to disasters and
saving human lives. There must be alternative route plans of other transportation modes against possibility of truck
breakdowns, highway destructions or other problems affected by disasters. As a viable alternative to other
transportation modes, maritime transportation can play a role in countries with long coastal lines and with high
capacity ports.

One type of maritime transportation that might be a capability for humanitarian logistics is Ro-Ro (Roll on-Roll of)
lines. This type of intermodal transportation uses highway and waterway and ensures the transportation of container
trucks on the vessels. In this type of transportation the time for handling is shortened using special handling
equipment. Ro-Ro can be useful in humanitarian logistics approach since it is concentrated on fast delivery of required
items to the affected areas. However, Ro-Ro has some disadvantages like requiring special vessels and port places,
determined freight type and consumes more fuel than the normal type of vessels.

It is a question for private sector either to be a resource provider of humanitarian logistics or not with its transportation
network capacities because of its differences between commercial logistics. This question is studied by Wilberg and
Olafsen [8] for the IFRC case. A maritime transportation company specialized in “factory-to-dealer” concept in
Sweden is investigated to be a part of the decentralized supply chain of humanitarian logistics using the company’s
ocean transportation, terminal and technical services as well as inland distribution. The authors studied replacing the
response system of IFRC utilizing aircrafts with on board vessels with determined sailing routes. They see that the
© XIII. International Logistics and Supply Chain Congress
October 22-23, 2015, Izmir, TURKEY
 42

company which gives commercial logistics services has the ability of serving also humanitarian organizations with its
“mobilized resources”. Moreover, established business processes of the company improve the response system as a
whole in the simulation model. It is found that the equipment required for humanitarian logistics are common with
commercial logistics, since commercial logistics use the equipment for a wide range of handling activities from small
to large loads.

The proposed system in Wilberg and Olafsen [8] has not been implemented in practice. The coordination of
relationships can be more complex than this simulation model, because of having more than one company providing
this service to other stakeholders (local and international governmental and non-governmental organizations (NGOs)).
Time might be a straining factor for the stakeholders to transfer the relief items effectively. The customs and
administrative operations between ports and other transportation modes take time if the call for aid is at the national
level, whereas it is more flexible if there is an international call for aid.

A CAPABILITY ANALYSIS FOR TURKEY

Turkey is surrounded by sea on three sides (i.e., Black Sea, Aegean Sea, Mediterranean Sea) providing strategic
export/import ports and several routes to connect Asia and Europe. “The main long distance container shipping lanes
between western Europe, the Middle East and the Far East pass through the Mediterranean very close to Turkish
ports” [9]. There are fifty ports in base of eighteen port presidencies in Turkey. It is seen that Ambarlı, Mersin, İzmir,
Gemlik and Haydarpaşa ports are in the top five of the total maritime transportation in Turkey when they are analyzed
according to export/import rates as given in Table 1 and Table 2.

Table 1. Total container handled as import/export in ports, Source: [10]

Port Import (TEU) Export (TEU) Share of export Share of Cumulative
in this port’s this port in Share
total handling total
Ambarlı 1,496,650.00 3,023,960.00 33.1% 42.2% 42.2%
Mersin 618,379.00 1,250,873.00 33.1% 17.5% 59.7%
Gemlik 347,142.00 686,245.00 33.6% 9.7% 69.3%
İzmir 335,265.00 695,798.00 32.5% 9.6% 79.0%
İzmit 318,878.00 630,152.00 33.6% 8.9% 87.8%
Aliağa 214,966.00 413,573.00 34.2% 5.9% 93.7%
Antalya 91,146.00 179,351.00 33.7% 2.5% 96.2%
Haydarpaşa 77,283.00 158,700.00 32.7% 2.2% 98.4%
İskenderun 40,341.00 83,207.00 32.7% 1.2% 99.6%
Trabzon 14,766.00 28,742.00 33.9% 0.4% 100.0%
TOTAL 3,554,816.00 7,150,601.00 100%

In Turkey there are thirteen ports having nineteen container terminals in eleven cities. In Table 1 the import and export
handling of containers are given for the top ten ports of Turkey having container terminals. The shares of export for
each port are very close to each other. The proportions show that top five ports constitute to the container handlings
with approximately 90% of all imports and exports. Table 2 also shows the container capacities of these five ports (in
TEUs) and the realized handlings (as loading + unloading). In the last column of Table 2, the capacity usage of the
ports are given and all of them are larger than 70%. The 25 logistic warehouses built by AFAD hold 40ft containers,
so the remainder of this capacity can be used for humanitarian logistic activities for these relief item containers. These
ports are usually used for export/imports so the handlings between ports in Turkey may not be suitable for container
transfers. In case of an international call for aid, these ports would be suitable to handle relief containers.

Table 2. Total container handled and the container capacity of top five ports, Source: [10]

Port Container Loading Unloading Capacity

© XIII. International Logistics and Supply Chain Congress
October 22-23, 2015, Izmir, TURKEY
 43

capacity (TEU) (TEU) (TEU) usage

Ambarlı 4,905,720.00 1,496,650.00 3,023,960.00 92%
Mersin 1,800,000.00 618,379.00 632,494.00 70%
Gemlik 700,000.00 347,142.00 339,103.00 98%
İzmir 750,000.00 335,265.00 360,534.00 93%
İzmit 900,800.00 318,878.00 311,275.00 70%

The ports are crucial parts of a possible international humanitarian response chain providing space for arriving
containers from international relief providers. However, ports should be supported with other transportation modes
(highways and railways) in order to make the last mile delivery to disaster areas. Wagons on the railway can handle up
to 80 TEU (1600 tons) with block trains as well as trucks also can be transported with their containers (i.e., Ro-La
system) at up to 120 km/hr velocity. The block trains are advantageous since they do not stop at intermediate stations.
A sample of the block train is given in Figure 2.

Figure 2. A Sample for a Block Train, Source: [11]

The connection between the port and railway is ensured between port of discharge and land terminals. Most of the
container ports in Turkey have railway connections (Figure 3). Only Antalya, Gemlik, Trabzon, Rize, Karabiga and
Bartın port presidencies do not have railway connections. Among these ports which are not connected by railway, only
Gemlik has a large capacity. On the other hand, most of Gemlik’s handling capacity is full with commercial logistics.

Figure 3. Railway Connections of Ports in Turkey, Source: [12]

Asyaport (Tekirdağ) and Çandarlı (İzmir) are the new ports having large container handling capacities. These new
ports also have railway connections and would be desired for humanitarian activities. Asyaport started its activities on

© XIII. International Logistics and Supply Chain Congress

October 22-23, 2015, Izmir, TURKEY
 44

1 July 2015, but the construction at Çandarlı port dock still continues as of the time this paper is written. A railway
connection for Kocaeli Derince port is given in Figure 4. As it is seen on the figure transfers are made to/from block
trains at the area between CFS and dock.

Figure 4. Railway connection in land terminal of Derince/Kocaeli port, Source: [13]

© XIII. International Logistics and Supply Chain Congress

October 22-23, 2015, Izmir, TURKEY
 45

Table 3. Capacity of Port Terminals in Turkey

AREA EQUIPMENT
Total
Terminal Stowage
Container CFS Stock Dock Mobil Straddle Container Tow Fork
PORT TERMINAL Capacity Capacity Spreader Stacker
Stock Area Area (m2) (m2) Crane Crane Crane Dock Crane Truck lift
(TEU) (TEU)
(m2)

10 5 41 18 92 8 12 -
Marport Terminal 340,000.0 1,900,000.0 17,425.0 4,477.0 24,685.0
Ambarlı
19 11 8 14 30 - - 14
Altaş Mardaş Terminal 330,000.0 1,305,720.0 197,107.0 4,161.0 25,110.0

7 8 20 32 51 25 10 21
Kumport Terminal 402,115.0 1,700,000.0 10,000.0 6,700.0 30,270.0
Haydarpaşa Haydarpaşa TCDD - - - 9 6 18 17 - 38 - -
TCDD Terminal 55,000.0 52,800.0

- - - 12 14 19 20 - - - 20
Nemport Terminal 88,300.0
Aliaağa
549,000.0
- - - - - - - - - - -
EgeGübreTerminal 283,000.0

İzmir TCDD Alsancak - - - - - 5 12 10 29 - 21 - -

Terminal

Antalya - - - - 9 - - - - - -
Ortadoğu Terminal 86,800.0 80,000.0

Bandırma - 9 - 3 5 5 - -
BandırmaTerminal 215,569.0 350,000.0 8,000.0 110,000.0 4,195.0

Gemlik - 14 7 - - 22 25 - 15
Gemlik Terminal 70,000.0 600,000.0 11,500.0

İskenderun - - - 3 - 17 - 25 - 5
Limak Port 1,300,000.0 3,600.0

© XIII. International Logistics and Supply Chain Congress

October 22-23, 2015, Izmir, TURKEY
 46

- - - 4 - 7 8 - 5 2
Assan Port 250,000.0 1,600.0 3,720.0

İzmit Derince TCDD - - - - 5 41 10 - - 21 - -

Terminal 800.0
Total
Terminal Stowage
Container CFS Area Stock Dock Mobil Straddle Container Tow Forklif
TERMINAL Capacity Capacity Spreader Stacker
PORT Stock Area (m2) (m2) Crane Crane Crane Dock Crane Truck t
(TEU) (TEU)
(m2)

- - - - - - - - - - - -
İzmit Evyap Terminal 450,000.0

- - - 6 - - - - - - -
Yılport Terminal 46,000.0 450,000.0

Mersin - - 7 7 - 25 84 67 12 18
Mersin Terminal 350,000.0 1,800,000.0 220,000.0

AsyaPort - - - - 11 - 33 - - - - -
AsyaPort Terminal 2,500,000.0

Trabzon - - - - - - - - - - - -
Alport Terminal 13,000.0

Samsun - 11 14 - 6 7 8 3 -
Samsun Terminal 100,000.0 250,000.0 7,000.0 50,000.0

© XIII. International Logistics and Supply Chain Congress

October 22-23, 2015, Izmir, TURKEY
 47

The information of equipment in ports for container handling and container stock is given in Table 3. The data
of Table 3 is obtained from the official websites of the ports so the dashes mean that type of information is not
available for that port. The obtained data were not standard and may not be up-to-date for some ports, since
several ports have different website layouts and many of them belong to private port operators. In the first
column, the port name is given along with the terminals of the port in the next column. In the third column,
the total container area is given in m2. The terminal capacity is given in the fourth column in TEUs for
containers. In the fifth and sixth columns the CFS and stock area capacities are given. In the seventh column,
the stowage capacity of the terminals are given for the terminals where data are available. In the last eight
columns, the equipment availability of the terminals are provided such as dock, mobile, straddle and container
dock cranes, tow trucks, forklifts, spreaders and stackers. As it is given in Table 3, the largest container port
capacity is on three terminals of Ambarlı Altaş Port with 37% of all Turkish ports’ capacity. The second
largest container capacity is on Mersin and İskenderun Port. Actually Asyaport has 2,500,000.00 TEU
container capacity but it has just started operation and has not realized its real demand yet.

CONCLUSION

This study aims to highlight the suitability of using maritime transportation for humanitarian logistics.
Maritime transportation is employed heavily in international trade and has established procedures for handling
all of the transport related activities. Components of maritime transportation are explained. Using these
components, a capability analysis of maritime transportation is accomplished. Turkish ports’ handling area
and equipment capability analysis is performed by gathering data from various port web sites. Use of
containers is emphasized in this study because of its speed and standardized operations. Using maritime
transportation is especially important for Turkey because of the recent investment of AFAD to 25 logistic
warehouses holding 40ft. containers. It can be concluded from this study that maritime transportation has the
capabilities that are required for use in humanitarian logistics. This study is a first step to highlight the
literature gap on using maritime transportation for humanitarian logistics and a humble start for future work.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This work was partially supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey
(TUBİTAK) under grant number 113M493.

REFERENCES

Mansouri M., Gorod A., Wakeman T. H., Sauser B., 2009, “Maritime Transportation System of Systems management
framework: a System of Systems Engineering approach”, Int. J. Ocean Systems Management, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp.
200-226.
National Strategy for Maritime Security (2005) [cited. Available from http://74.125.47.132/ search?q=cache:PO-
XbH4ScgcJ:www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/HSPD13_MaritimeSecurity
Strategy.pdf+national+strategy+for+maritime+security+recommendations&cd=2&hl=en&ct=
clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
Maritime Administration (2008) Marine Transportation Systems [cited 2008 November]; Available from:
http://www.marad.dot.gov/ports_landing_page/marine_transportation_system/MTS.htm
Slater R.E., 1999, “An Assessment of the US Marine Transportation System: A Report to Congress”, Washington DC.
Çakar I. A., 2009, “Türkiye’de Konteyner Taşımacılığının Yük Merkezi - Liman Aşaması İçin Alternatif Taşıma
Sistemleri: İzmir Limanı Örneği”, Phd Thesis, Istanbul Technical University.
Sahin A., Ertem M. A., Emur E., 2014, “Using containers as storage facilities in humanitarian logistics”, Journal of
Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 286-307.
Ertem M. A., Buyurgan N., Rossetti M. D., 2010, "Multiple buyer procurement auctions framework for humanitarian
supply chain management", International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 40 No. 3,
pp.202 – 227.
Wilberg K. H., Olafsen A. L., 2012, “Improving humanitarian response through an innovative pre-positioning concept:
an investigation of how commercial vessels can be used to store and transport relief items”, MSc Thesis, BI
Norwegian Business School.

© XIII. International Logistics and Supply Chain Congress

October 22-23, 2014, Izmir, TURKIYE
 48

Zeybek H., Kaynak M., 2007, “Ports in Turkey and Perspectives for Cooperation in the East Mediterranean Region
within Intermodal Supply Chain”, The 11th World Conference on Transport Research, University of California,
Berkeley.
URL 1, 2015. Retrieved from https://atlantis.udhb.gov.tr/istatistik/istatistik_filo.aspx
URL 2, 2015. Retrieved from http://avelana.ru/en/russian-railways-in-2014-a-half-year-results/
URL 3, 2015. Retrieved from http://tr.railturkey.org/2014/02/12/demiryolu-baglantili-limanlar/
URL 4, 2015. Retrieved from http://tr.railturkey.org/2014/06/09/derince-limani-ozellestirildi/
UNCTAD (2014). Review of Maritime Transport, 2014. United Nations Publications, UNCTAD/RMT/2014 New York
and Geneva.
Tatham P., Kovacs G. 2007. “An initial investigation into the application of the military sea-basing concept to the
provision of immediate relief in a rapid onset disaster,” In POMS 18th Annual Conference, Dallas, Texas, USA,
2007.
Bemley J.L., Davis L.B., Brock III L.G., 2013. “Pre-positioning commodities to repair maritime navigational aids,”
Journal of Humanitarian Logistics and Supply Chain Management, vol. 3, pp. 65-89.

© XIII. International Logistics and Supply Chain Congress

October 22-23, 2014, Izmir, TURKIYE