MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998899479 · doi:10.1080/17421772.2019.1708443

Seaport adaptation to climate change-related disasters: terminal operator market structure and inter- and intra-port coopetition

2020· article· en· W2998899479 on OpenAlexaff
Kun Wang, Hangjun Yang, Anming Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueSpatial Economic Analysis · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Ports and Logistics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersHumanities and Social Science Fund of Ministry of Education of China
KeywordsCoopetitionPort (circuit theory)Investment (military)Industrial organizationBusinessAdaptation (eye)Competition (biology)Operator (biology)BreakwaterEconomicsMicroeconomicsEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the prevalence of global terminal operators in port operation, the market structure of terminal operator companies (TOCs) becomes more important in shaping intra- and inter-port competition and cooperation (i.e., coopetition). The port adaptation investment to climate change-related disaster might also be affected by such TOC intra- and inter-port coopetition. This paper examines analytically how the TOC market structure could affect ports’ adaptation investment. More specifically, it considers two landlord-type ports within a region that compete with each other. The two ports are subject to uncertain disaster threats and have an asymmetric number of TOCs. The analytical and numerical results suggest that more TOCs at the own port and the competing port have opposite impacts on the port's adaptation investment. An inter-port TOC joint venture would decrease the adaptation at both ports. Moreover, the TOC market structure is found to moderate the effect of disaster uncertainty on port adaptation. That is, TOC intra- and inter-port coopetition can strengthen or weaken ports’ sensitivity to disaster occurrence uncertainty. Finally, the regional welfare is found to increase monotonely with the two ports’ total adaptation. It is suggested that the regulators encourage new TOC entries while restricting inter-port TOC joint ventures. The cases with heterogeneous disaster uncertainties at the two ports are also examined.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpatial Economic AnalysisSame topicMaritime Ports and LogisticsFrench-language works237,207