Evaluating the Environmental Performance and Operational Efficiency of Container Ports: An Application to the Maritime Silk Road
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A major goal for port authorities, operators, and investors is to achieve efficient operations and effective environmental protection. This is because the environmental performance of a container port is important for its competitiveness and sustainable development. However, the container ports along the Maritime Silk Road (MSR) have caused numerous problems with the rapid development, among which the most significant problem is environmental pollution. In this paper, we aim to measure and compare the environmental performance and operational efficiency of ten major container ports along the MSR, including the ports of Shanghai, Hong Kong, Singapore, Kelang, Laem Chabang, Colombo, Dubai, Barcelona, Antwerp, and Hamburg. We develop an improved, inseparable data envelopment analysis (DEA) model with slack-based measures (SBMs) to evaluate and compare the environmental performance and operational efficiency, and we incorporate the desirable output of container throughput as well as the undesirable output of CO2 emission. Our results show that. Overall. these container ports perform better in terms of operational efficiency than environmental performance. We also provide insights for management and policy makers for container ports with different levels of operational efficiency and environmental performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".