Submitted:
14 September 2024
Posted:
16 September 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
- What challenges within the POE resilience framework can be identified, and what are their factors and impacts?
- What managerial interventions can be utilized to withstand external uncertainties affecting the POE, and how can these interventions be managed?
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- 2023 IMO GHG Strategy. Available online: https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/2023-IMO-Strategy-on-Reduction-of-GHG-Emissions-from-Ships.aspx (assessed on 11 May 2024).
- Behdami, B. Port 4.0: a conceptual model for smart ort digitalization. Transp. Res. Proceedia 2023, 74, 345–353. [Google Scholar]
- Reducing emissions from the shipping, EU Action. Available online: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/transport/reducing-emissions-shipping-sector_en (assessed on 30 April 2024).
- Review of maritime transport, 2022. Available online: https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/rmt2022_en.pdf (assessed on 23 May 2024).
- Sustainable development goals. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/goals (assessed on 30 April 2024).
- Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Available online https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda (assessed on 30 May 2024).
- Building capacity to manage risks and enhance resilience: guidebook for ports. Available online: https://unctad.org/publication/building-capacity-manage-risks-and-enhance-resilience-guidebook-ports.
- Resilience4Ports: gateway to a resilient future. Available online: https://resiliencerisingglobal.org/publication/resilience4ports-gateways-to-a-resilient-future/ (assessed on 2024-05-15).
- Port resilience framework for action. Available online: https://www.arup.com/insights/port-resilience-framework-for-action/ (assessed on 30 April 2024).
- Damman, S.; Steen, M. A socio-technical perspective on the scope for ports to enable energy transition. Transp. Res. Part D: Transp. Environ. 2021, 91, 102691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oloruntobi, O.; Mokhtar, K.; Gohari,A. ; Asif, S. ; Chuah, L.F. Sustainable transition towards greener and cleaner seaborne shipping industry: Challenges and opportunities. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 2023, 13, 100628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsvetkova, A.; Hellström, M.; Schwartz, H.; Rabetino, R.; Syed, H. A transition towards clean propulsion in shipping: The role of PESTLE drivers and implications for policy. Marine Policy 2024, 161, 106002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valionienė, E.; Župerkienė, E. Exploring the factors that affect the resilience of port organizational ecosystems through a survey of common uncertainties. Int. J. Mar. Navig. Saf. Sea Transp. TRANSNAV 2024, 18, 185–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valionienė, E.; Kalvaitienė, G. Theoretical Modelling of Maritime Business’ Resilience Enhancement Possibilities in a Volatile, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous Environment. Proceedings of 13th International Scientific Conference “Business and Management 2023, 52–61. [CrossRef]
- Nguyen, T; Dung, T.M.T.; Truong, T.H.D.; Vinh, V.T. Managing Disruptions in the Maritime Industry – A Systematic Literature Review. Maritime Business Review, 2021; 2397–3757.
- Tsvetkova, A.; Gustafsson, M.; Wikstrom, K. The digitization of port infrastructure. Network industrial quarterly, 2020, 22, 7–10. [Google Scholar]
- Koukaki, Th.; Tei, A. Innovations and maritime transport: a systematic review. Case studies on transport policy, 2020, 8, 700–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marikka, H. ; Saarni,J. ; Saurama, A. Innovation in Smart Ports: Future Directions of Digitalization in Container Ports. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 2022, 10, 1925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mudrona, G.; Aksentijevič, E.; Jugovič, A. An overview of innovations and technology for sustainable development of seaports. In Conference paper. In Proceedings of the MT’22. 9th International Conference on Maritime Transport Barcelona, 27-28 June 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Dilshad, R.M.; Latif, M.I. Focus group interviews as a tool for qualitative research: an analysis. Pak. J. Soc. Sci. 2013, 33, 191–198. [Google Scholar]
- Uwamusi, C.B.; Ajisebiyawo, A. Participatory observation as research methodology: assessing the defects of qualitative observational data as research tools. Asian Journal of social sciences and management technology, 2023, 5, 19–32. [Google Scholar]
- Makwana, D.; Engineer, P.; Dabhi, A.; Chudasama, H. Sampling methods in research: a review. International journal of trends in scientific research and development 2023, 7, 762–768. [Google Scholar]
- Ibrahimi, K. A theoretical framework for conceptualizing seaport as institutional and operational clusters. Transportation research proceedia 2017, 25, 261–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lagoudis, I.N.; Madentzogolou, E.M.; Theotokas, I.N.; Yip, T.L. Maritime cluster attractiveness index. Maritime business review 2019, 4, 169–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valionienė, E. Assessment of the Maritime Transport Sector Attractiveness on the Basis of Theoretical Seaport Governance Model. Doctoral thesis., Mykolas Romeris University, Vilnius, 2020.
- Daudet, B.; Loubet, L. ; Alix, Y; Serry, A. Gouvernance portuaire par le compromis : réflexions managériales et stratégiques. Logistique & Management 2024, 32, 82–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bolevics, V. The impact of governance of the efficiency of the Baltic states’ major ports. Journal of business and management 2023, 17, 7–26. [Google Scholar]
- Valionienė, E.; Plačienė, B. Resilience of Seaport Ecosystem: Theoretical Approach and Future Research. Transport Means 2022 - proceedings of the 26th international scientific conference, 2022; 688–693. [Google Scholar]


| a) classification by PESTEL, summarized frequency 63, length of interval 4, number of categories k=6 | b) classification by components of POE resilience, summarized frequency 63, length of interval 5, number of categories k=4 | c) classification by negative impact, summarized frequency 35, length of interval 5, number of categories k=3 | ||||||||||||||||
| Challenges | ≤4 | (4;8] | (8;12] | (12;16] | (16;20) | Challenges | ≤9 | (9;14] | (14;19] | (19;24] | Negative Impact | ≤4 | (4;9] | (9;14] | (14;19] | |||
| Political | 4 | Culture & behaviour | 9 | Stopped transitions | 4 | |||||||||||||
| Legislative | 6 | Human Resources | 11 | Disruptions | 12 | |||||||||||||
| Social | 9 | Critical infrastructure & technologies | 19 | Economical loses | 19 | |||||||||||||
| Environmental | 9 | Management | 24 | |||||||||||||||
| Economical | 15 | |||||||||||||||||
| Technological | 20 | |||||||||||||||||
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).