港口物流系统竞合体系构建研究——以山东半岛为例

通过分析山东半岛港口群港口发展现状与竞合环境,提出了纵横竞合和竞合平衡态的概念,架构了山东半岛港口群纵横竞合体系.     

蓝色经济区框架下山东半岛港口群的SWOT分析

随着打造山东半岛蓝色经济区的步伐的推进,出现了一些新情况、新问题。文章首先分析了山东半岛港口群的状况,然后对山东半岛港口群进行SWOT分析,最后在SWOT分析结果之上,提出了四种发展战略即SO、ST、WO和WT战略。     

珠三角港口群及长三角港口群的分析与对比

阐述了珠三角港口群和长三角港口群的区位特征和区内竞争合作机制,并应用GIS空间分析技术,从两个港口群的货物吞吐量、集装箱吞吐量、港口腹地GDP和港口腹地工业产值等微观经济指标对比分析了长珠港口群及其腹地发展状况和竞争力强弱.并综合分析结论,提出宏观调控港口的竞合战略,对港口群发展具有指导意义.     

港口物流系统竞合发展策略研究

在对港口物流系统竞合主体进行分析的基础上,提出港口物流系统竞合发展的指导策略,包括港口物流合作联盟策略、港口物流系统整合策略、港口物流信息协同策略与港口物流支持保障策略。     

山东半岛港口物流资源整合策略研究

指出山东半岛港口物流资源的整合仍存在缺乏统一规划,港口业务同质,物流资源不足与过剩并存等诸多问题,提出要促进山东半岛港口物流资源的整合,应建立省级港口管理机构,对现有港口企业进行整合,建设大型陆上干港,构建完整的腹地货源体系,整合航线资源,加强港口与其他物流节点的合作.     

基于竞合博弈的长三角港口关系探讨

长三角港口具有相同的区位和交叉的腹地,文化相似,经济互补性强,有着一定的合作基础。近年来,长三角港口得到了长足的发展,但港口间的竞争也异常激烈。在分析长三角港口发展面临的新形势以及港口竞合的必要性的基础上,运用竞合博弈理论,指出上海国际航运中心的建设是长三角港口由非合作博弈向合作博弈转变的一个契机,有利于长三角港口合作博弈的形成,从而在良性竞争的基础上,形成长三角港口有效的合作关系,促进港口的互动发展,更好地发挥区域港口的整体优势,形成长三角港口共赢的局面。     

推进西江港口合作的思考

目前,沿江城市建港积极性空前高涨,港口竞争日趋激烈,竞合是当今世界港口的发展趋势。在当前两广共建西江黄金水道背景下,沿江城市建港积极性空前高涨,港口竞争日趋激烈,港口业也面临着从竞争走向合作的关键时期。如何整合港口资源,推进沿江港口合作共赢发展是本文探讨的内容。     

珠三角港口群发展现代物流的探讨

结合珠三角港口群的发展概况,分析了珠三角港口群发展现代物流的层次,探讨了群内港口发展现代物流的模式选择,对珠三角港口群发展现代物流提出了新的要求。     

福建“十二五”三大港口群建设探讨

十二五期间,福建港口发展迎来机遇期。文中分析了福建三大港口群构成及定位,总结国内外港口群建设经验,最后提出了福建三大港口群发展的对策。     

港口群的发展趋势与发展战略研究

根据港口群的出现越来越成为推动区域发展的重要推动力的形势,从港口群概念出发,通过分析当前港口群发展的现状,研究了港口群未来的发展趋势和需要制定的发展战略。     

Does size matter for port coopetition strategy? Concept,motivation and implication

Coopetition is one of the emerging strategies for ports to react towards the rapidly changing market environment. Having this strategy in action, ports will simultaneously compete and cooperate to achieve commonly interesting goals among players involved. Several ports in the Hamburg–Le Havre range have already decided to use such coopetitive strategies. The literature, however, shows that there exist a number of case-specific motivations for having employed this strategy. The aim of this paper is to investigate the motivations for the ports of Flanders (Antwerp, Zeebrugge, Ghent and Ostend) to choose coopetition. These four Flemish ports recently agreed to collaborate after several years of negotiations. It was known that the large port of Antwerp was more reluctant to collaborate with the smaller ports: Zeebrugge, Ghent and Ostend. This fact does naturally lead us to consider whether the size of port is a factor having an impact on the coopetitive strategy. The current paper attempts to examine the possible impact of size difference on the motivations for ports to opt for coopetition, within a framework of coopetition motivations based on a literature review. From a qualitative analysis on the matter, the paper concludes that size is not an important factor for the motivations to establish coopetition since ports are mainly aimed at achieving a win–win situation. Other factors, such as similarities in the services offered and competition level, look more influential. Nevertheless, the size difference among the ports seems to have an impact on the choice of the type of coopetition and on the willingness of the ports to adopt this strategy. Finally, the paper indicates that it is beneficial for all the ports to investigate the use of coopetition as a way of expanding the network of logistics services.     

Coopetition as a Potential Strategy for Corporate Sustainability

The paper is among the first to consider coopetition strategy in the context of corporate level sustainability. Through examination of literature and an example of an actual coopetitive agreement in wine industry logistics, consideration is given to the potential benefits of and problems with sustainability‐based coopetition strategies. The research, based on publicly available information, leads to suggestions for future study into specific theoretical, methodological and pragmatic aspects of sustainability‐related coopetition strategies. At a theoretical level, research into the dynamics of coopetition strategies and relationships between win–win and trade‐offs within economic, environmental and social performance settings is suggested. As the field of study continues to emerge, a broader set of exploratory case studies involving collaborative engagement and participation of practitioners is needed. Attention is also drawn to a broad range of settings available for further research into the design and implementation of sustainability‐related coopetitive strategies exploring advantages for corporations and society. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment     

Government intervention on cooperation,competition, and coopetition of humanitarian supply chains

We considered a humanitarian environment composed of donors and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that the non-profits may adopt competitive or coopetitive inter-organizational interaction for managing the disasters. We also assumed that the government intervenes in the relief operations by applying one of its two policies; social welfare maximization (SWM) or budget consumption minimization (BCM). Using game theory (GT) approach, we develop 4 scenarios and, as a result, 4 mathematical programming models for examining the effect of the NGOs interactions and the government policies on the performance of donors, NGOs and government. We find that coopetition of NGOs facilitates the achievement of the government's objectives, and it also helps the non-profits to become more successful in providing relief. The government prefers to provide the indirect relief to the nonprofits to manage emergency operations successfully, and the financial aids are given only in the condition of reducing the level of NGOs cooperation. We also conclude that the cooperation of NGOs increases the donors' utility. A numerical example is conducted to test the findings of the models.     

Coopetition for sustainability: Between organizational benefit and societal good

Sustainable development requires coopetition, that is, the cooperation of organizations that compete at the same time. Research on coopetition for sustainability is sparse. From a sustainability perspective, coopetition contributes to sustainability when it makes a positive contribution on the societal level. Existing research on coopetition however focuses on organizational outcomes. In this paper, we link organizational and societal outcomes of coopetition. We show that for the simple case of two coopting firms and an economic and an environmental dimension, there are 51 different combinations that make a positive contribution to sustainability. All but one of these combinations consist of a mix of positive and negative outcomes. We identify four types of trade‐offs that can occur in coopetition for sustainability and that point to different pathways of achieving sustainability.     

基于港口空间结构的港市物流发展战略研究

以港口空间结构为切入点，对山东沿海港口进行实证研究，运用Lorenz曲线和移动-分享模型定量分析其集聚程度和差距变动态势。并加以定性讨论，提出了沿海港市物流发展战略。     

What's in it for me? Creating and appropriating value in innovation-related coopetition

There has been a substantial increase in collaboration with external stakeholders in R&D and innovation activities in modern economies. In particular, collaborating with competitors (coopetition) has been found to be an effective way of creating both incremental and radical innovations, especially in high-tech industries. However, coopetition also includes some major risks and disadvantages, which makes it undesirable in certain cases. The focus in this study is on the factors that distinguish coopetition from collaboration. We propose that the ability of a firm to reap benefits in innovation-related coopetition is contingent on factors that enable collective value creation, and on those that facilitate the individual isolation of the innovations and any subsequent profits. Further, we suggest that the effectiveness of these factors depends on the novelty of the innovation with respect to current markets and technology. In explicitly analyzing such issues we aim to expand current understanding of how firms can create and appropriate value in collaborative R&D and innovation with competitors as specific partners.     

A multilevel perspective on organizational buying behavior in coopetition–an exploratory case study

This article offers a new and interesting perspective on organizational buying behavior by focusing on the simultaneous existence of both cooperation and competition, that is, coopetition. Coopetition may bring undesired knowledge leaks, opportunism, and weakened competitive advantage, and it is therefore important to understand how coopetition develops over time through interrelated activities on multiple levels. The article aims to improve our understanding of the development of organizational buying behavior through adopting a multilevel perspective on coopetition. The empirical study is based on exploratory case study research involving a single case from the manufacturing sector featuring a large multinational buyer and its supplier. The findings of the study show that organizational buying behavior in coopetition develops through interrelated activities on the individual, the organizational, and the relational level. Over time, dominating activities evolve from being ambivalent on an individual level to become authoritative on a company level and finally to being opportunistic on a relational level. Theoretically, this study contributes to organizational buying behavior literature by examining coopetition from a multilevel perspective. From a managerial perspective, the findings establish the importance of recognizing individual-, and organizational-level activities.     

Coopetitive games for environmental sustainability: Climate change and decision global policies

In this work, we propose and analyze a coopetitive model for the Climate Change environmental sustainability: a global duopoly type game structure, involving a generic type of green technological good. Our model allows to select certain strategy profile solutions within a continuous horizon of possible global scenarios, in the context of the Paris agreement COP21 and after Trump’s decision to abandon the agreement itself. More specifically, we construct a parametric coopetitive game with two great actors, US and the group of countries which still agree to COP21. The two actors of our duopoly game compete on the global market by producing and selling green technological goods (for example: electric cars, electric airplanes, hydrogen cars, solar panels, low impact batteries for smart houses, electric cars or self phones, and so on). Our multi-dimensional coopetitive model suggests possible cooperative strategies in order to improve the efficiency and strength of the actions enforced by the countries to mitigate the Climate Change catastrophic risk at the level of its causes and effects.     

中外城市群发展经验及其对山东半岛城市群的启示

城市群(带)是在工业化基础上而产生的一种城市高级化的空间组织形式,是区域参与国际竞争的战略支点。本文从解析城市群(带)研究的相关理论入手,着重分析了中外城市群发展的一般特征和形成的经验,提出了良好的区位和基础设施是城市群(带)发展的条件,工业化是其动力,产业转移是其发展的机遇,产业联系是其成功的关键。并以此为基础,对山东半岛建设城市群的路径和措施进行了对比分析,提出了对策建议。