Development of Russian Ports in The Gulf of Finland

Russia has been one of the fastest developing economic areas in the world. Based on the GDP, the Russian economy grew evenly since the crisis in 1998 up till 2008. The growth in the gross domestic product has annually been some 5–10%. In 2007, the growth reached 8.1%, which is the highest figure after the 10% growth in 2000. Due to the growth of the economy and wage levels, purchasing power and consumption have been strongly increasing. The growing consumption has especially increased the imports of durables, such as passenger cars, domestic appliances and electronics. The Russian ports and infrastructure have not been able to satisfy the growing needs of exports and imports, which is why quite a large share of Russian foreign trade is going through third countries as transit transports. Finnish ports play a major role in transit transports to and from Russia. About 15% of the total value of Russian imports was transported through Finland in 2008. The economic recession that started in autumn 2008 and continues to date has had an impact on the economic development of Russia. The export income has decreased, mainly due to the reduced world market prices of energy products (oil and gas) and raw minerals. Investments have been postponed, getting credit is more difficult than before, and the ruble has weakened in relation to the euro and the dollar. The imports are decreasing remarkably, and are not forecast to reach the 2008 volumes even in 2012. The economic crisis is reflected in Finland's transit traffic. The volume of goods transported through Finland to and from Russia has decreased almost in the same proportion as the imports of goods to Russia. The biggest risk threatening the development of the Russian economy over long term is its dependence on export income from oil, gas, metals, minerals and forest products, as well as the trends of the world market prices of these products. Nevertheless, it is expected that the GDP of Russia will start to grow again in the forthcoming years due to the increased demand for energy products and raw minerals in the world. At the same time, it is obvious that the world market prices of these products will go up with the increasing demand. The increased income from exports will lead to a growth of imports, especially those of consumer goods, as the living standard of Russian citizens rises. The forecasts produced by the Russian Government concerning the economic development of Russia up till 2030 also indicate a shift in exported goods from raw materials to processed products, which together with energy products will become the main export goods of Russia. As a consequence, Russia may need export routes through third countries, which can be seen as an opportunity for increased transit transports through the ports of Finland. The ports competing with the ports of Finland for Russian foreign trade traffic are the Russian Baltic Sea ports and the ports of the Baltic countries. The strongest competitors are the Baltic Sea ports handling containers. On the Russian Baltic Sea, these ports include Saint Petersburg, Kaliningrad and, in the near future, the ports of Ust-Luga and possibly Vyborg. There are plans to develop Ust-Luga and Vyborg as modern container ports, which would become serious competitors to the Finnish ports. Russia is aiming to redirect as large a share as possible of foreign trade traffic to its own ports. The ports of Russia and the infrastructure associated with them are under constant development. On the other hand, the logistic capacity of Russia is not able to satisfy the continually growing needs of the Russian foreign trade. The capacity problem is emphasized by a structural incompatibility between the exports and imports in the Russian foreign trade. Russian exports can only use a small part of the containers brought in with imports. Problems are also caused by the difficult ice conditions and narrow waterways leading to the ports. It is predicted that Finland will maintain its position as a transit route for the Russian foreign trade, at least in the near future. The Russian foreign trade is increasing, and Russia will not be able to develop its ports in proportion with the increasing foreign trade. With the development of port capacity, cargo flows through the ports of Russia will grow. Structural changes in transit traffic are already visible. Firms are more and more relocating their production to Russia, for example as regards the assembly of cars and warehousing services. Simultaneously, an increasing part of transit cargoes are sent directly to Russia without unloading and reloading in Finland. New product groups have nevertheless been transported through Finland (textile products and tools), replacing the lost cargos. The global recession that started in autumn 2008 has influenced the volume of Russian imports and, consequently, the transit volumes of Finland, but the recession is not expected to be of long duration, and will thus only have a short-term impact on transit volumes. The Finnish infrastructure and services offered by the logistic chain should also be ready to react to the changes in imported product groups as well as to the change in Russian export products in the future. If the development plans of the Russian economy are realized, export products will be more refined, and the share of energy and raw material products will decrease. The other notable factor to be taken into consideration is the extremely fast-changing business environment in Russia. Operators in the logistic chain should be flexible enough to adapt to all kinds of changes to capitalise on business opportunities offered by the Russian foreign trade for the companies and for the transit volumes of Finnish ports, also in the future.

Driver of Demand in Cargo and Passenger Traffic Between Penta Ports

Maritime transport moves around 6 billion tonnes of freight every year. The freight consists of liquid bulks (45%), dry bulks (23%) and general cargo (32%). Freight traffic and transports chains vary according to region, commodity and the origin and the destination of freight. In the European Union the ports sector handles over 90% of the trade with third countries. The share of intra-EU trade is approximately 30% of the total transportation and the number of passengers is over 200 million every year. The Baltic Sea has more than 50,000 vessels a year pass the Skaw at the northernmost tip of Denmark on their way into or out of the Baltic. Roughly 60% to 70% of these vessels are cargo vessels and 17% to 25% tankers. Ports and maritime transport play a crucial role in global commerce today. Today’s business environment is changing rapidly, and the constant changes create challenges for the transport industry and maritime traffic. Ports have to adapt to continuous changes in economic structures, logistics demands, and people’s travel and leisure patterns. In order to ensure the competitiveness of sea connections, the ports need to fully enhance multilateral cross-border understanding and cooperation. In this report the focus is on liner traffic between five ports in the Central Baltic Region: Stockholm, Tallinn, Helsinki Turku and Naantali. The report defines the drivers of the demand for cargo and passenger traffic and highlights the most important factors. The economic situation and foreign trade of each county are elaborated on with detailed information about the flows of traffic between the five ports. Based on expert interviews, the main characteristics of each port, including strengths and weaknesses, are presented. The report is based on primary and secondary data. Primary data was received through interviews and mail surveys. Secondary data was attained through a literature research, statistics, data given by the PENTA ports and webpages. The report is divided into two main parts: the drivers creating the demand for transport and the results of current cargo and passenger flows between PENTA ports.

Scenario-based traffic forecasts for the routes between the PENTA ports in 2020

Maritime transport is the foundation for trade in the Baltic Sea area. It represents over 15% of the world’s cargo traffic and it is predicted to increase by over 100% in the future. There are currently over 2,000 ships sailing on the Baltic Sea and both the number and the size of ships have been growing in recent years. Due to the importance of maritime traffic in the Baltic Sea Region, ports have to be ready to face future challenges and adapt to the changing operational environment. The companies within the transportation industry – in this context ports, shipowners and logistics companies – compete continuously and although the number of companies in the business is not particularly substantial because the products offered are very similar, other motives for managing the supply chain arise. The factors creating competitive advantage are often financial and related to cost efficiency, but geographical location, road infrastructure in the hinterland and vessel connections are among the most important factors. The PENTA project focuses on adding openness, transparency and sharing knowledge and information, so that the challenges of the future can be better addressed with regard to cooperation. This report presents three scenario-based traffic forecasts for routes between the PENTA ports in 2020. The chosen methodology is PESTE, in which the focus in on economic factors affecting future traffic flows. The report further analyses the findings and results of the first PENTA WP2 report “Drivers of demand in cargo and passenger traffic between PENTA ports” and utilises the same material, which was obtained through interviews and mail surveys.

Five Baltic Ports Togehter: Forecasts, Trends and Recommendations

The ports of Stockholm, Tallinn, Helsinki, Naantali and Turku play key roles in making the Central Baltic region accessible. Effective, competitive, eco-friendly and safe port procedures and solutions for the transportation of goods are of major importance for trade in the Baltic Sea region. This report presents the most essential results and recommendations of the PENTA project, which focused on how ports could better comprehend and face current and future challenges facing carriage of goods by sea. Each of the four work packages (WPs) of the PENTA project analysed the changes from a different perspective. WP2 focused on traffic flows between the PENTA ports. Its main emphasis was on the ports, shipowners, and logistics companies that are the key parties in freight transport and on the changes affecting the economy of those ports. In WP3 noise as an environmental challenge for ports was investigated and the analysis also shed light on the relationship between the port and the city. In WP4 procedures related to safety, security and administrative procedures were researched. The main emphasis was on identifying the requirements for the harmonisation of those procedures. Collaboration is highlighted throughout this report. In order to prepare for the future, it was found that ports need to respond to growing competition, increasing costs and shifts in customer demand by strengthening their existing partnerships with other actors in the maritime cluster. Cargo and passenger transport are the main sources of income for most ports. Cargo traffic between the PENTA ports is expected to grow steadily in the future and the outlook for passenger traffic is positive. However, to prepare for the future, ports should not only secure the core activities which generate revenue but also seek alternative ways to make profit. In order to gain more transit traffic, it is suggested that ports conduct a more thorough study of the future requirements for doing business with Russia. The investigation of noise at ports revealed two specific dilemmas that ports cannot solve alone. Firstly, the noise made by vessels and, secondly, the relationship between the port and the surrounding city. Vessels are the most important single noise source in the PENTA ports and also one of the hardest noise sources to handle. Nevertheless, port authorities in Finland and Sweden are held responsible for all noise in the port area, including noise produced by vessels, which is noise the port authority can only influence indirectly. Building housing by waterfront areas close to ports may also initiate disagreements because inhabitants may want quiet areas, whereas port activities always produce some noise from their traffic. The qualitative aspects of the noise question, cooperating with the stakeholders and the communicating of issues related to noise are just as important. We propose that ports should follow the logic of continuous improvement in their noise management. The administrative barriers discussed in this report are mainly caused by differences in international and national legislation, variations in the customs procedures of each country, the incompatibility of the IT systems used in maritime transport, noncompliance with regulations regarding dangerous goods, and difficulties in applying Schengen regulations to vessels from non-EU countries. Improving the situation is out of the hands of the ports to do alone and requires joint action on a variety of levels, including the EU, national authorities and across administrative borders.

Carte très curieuse de la Mer du Sud, contenant des remarques nouvelles et très utiles non seulement sur les ports et îles de cette mer, mais aussy sur les principaux pays de l'Amérique tant septentrionale que méridionale, avec les noms et la route des voyageurs par qui la découverte en a été faite

Kartta kuuluu A. E. Nordenskiöldin kokoelmaan

Tracing Innovation Practices in Seaports: the Ports of Klaipeda and Stockholm as Case Studies

This study explores variegated means through which ports have become increasingly entangled in the planning logic of neoliberal innovation-driven economy. The research topic belongs to the academic disciplines of economics and human geography. The aim of the thesis is to analyse how the notion of innovation, adopted in a variety of supranational and national port policy documents, is deployed in operational port environment in two different ports of the Baltic Sea Region: the port of Stockholm, Sweden, and the port of Klaipeda, Lithuania. This novel innovation agenda is visible in several topics I examine in the study, that is, port governance, environmental issues, and seaport – port-city interface. The gathered primary source material on port policy documents, strategies, development planning documents and reports is analysed by utilizing the qualitative content analysis research method. Moreover, the empirical part of the case study, that is, tracing innovation practices in mundane port activities is based on collected qualitative semi-structured interviews with port authorities in Klaipeda and Stockholm, researchers and other port experts. I examine the interview material by employing the theoretical reading research method. In my analysis, I have reframed port-related policy development by tracing and identifying the port transformation from “functional terminals” to “engines for growth”. My results show that this novel innovation-oriented rhetoric imprinted in the narrative “engines for growth” is often contested in daily port practices. In other words, my analysis reveals that the port authorities’ and other port actors’ attitudes towards innovations do not necessarily correspond to the new narrative of innovation and do not always “fit” within a framework of neoliberal economic thinking that glorifies the “culture of innovations”. I argue that the ability to develop innovative initiatives in the ports of Klaipeda and Stockholm is strongly predetermined by local conditions, a port’s governance model, the way port actors perceive the importance of innovations per se, demand factors and new regulations.

Public-private partnership investments in dry ports – Russian logistics markets and risks

The investments have always been considered as an essential backbone and so-called ‘locomotive’ for the competitive economies. However, in various countries, the state has been put under tight budget constraints for the investments in capital intensive projects. In response to this situation, the cooperation between public and private sector has grown based on public-private mechanism. The promotion of favorable arrangement for collaboration between public and private sectors for the provision of policies, services, and infrastructure in Russia can help to address the problems of dry ports development that neither municipalities nor the private sector can solve alone. Especially, the stimulation of public-private collaboration is significant under the exposure to externalities that affect the magnitude of the risks during all phases of project realization. In these circumstances, the risk in the projects also is becoming increasingly a part of joint research and risk management practice, which is viewed as a key approach, aiming to take active actions on existing global and specific factors of uncertainties. Meanwhile, a relatively little progress has been made on the inclusion of the resilience aspects into the planning process of a dry ports construction that would instruct the capacity planner, on how to mitigate the occurrence of disruptions that may lead to million dollars of losses due to the deviation of the future cash flows from the expected financial flows on the project. The current experience shows that the existing methodological base is developed fragmentary within separate steps of supply chain risk management (SCRM) processes: risk identification, risk evaluation, risk mitigation, risk monitoring and control phases. The lack of the systematic approach hinders the solution of the problem of risk management processes of dry port implementation. Therefore, management of various risks during the investments phases of dry port projects still presents a considerable challenge from the practical and theoretical points of view. In this regard, the given research became a logical continuation of fundamental research, existing in the financial models and theories (e.g., capital asset pricing model and real option theory), as well as provided a complementation for the portfolio theory. The goal of the current study is in the design of methods and models for the facilitation of dry port implementation through the mechanism of public-private partnership on the national market that implies the necessity to mitigate, first and foremost, the shortage of the investments and consequences of risks. The problem of the research was formulated on the ground of the identified contradictions. They rose as a continuation of the trade-off between the opportunities that the investors can gain from the development of terminal business in Russia (i.e. dry port implementation) and risks. As a rule, the higher the investment risk, the greater should be their expected return. However, investors have a different tolerance for the risks. That is why it would be advisable to find an optimum investment. In the given study, the optimum relates to the search for the efficient portfolio, which can provide satisfaction to the investor, depending on its degree of risk aversion. There are many theories and methods in finance, concerning investment choices. Nevertheless, the appropriateness and effectiveness of particular methods should be considered with the allowance of the specifics of the investment projects. For example, the investments in dry ports imply not only the lump sum of financial inflows, but also the long-term payback periods. As a result, capital intensity and longevity of their construction determine the necessity from investors to ensure the return on investment (profitability), along with the rapid return on investment (liquidity), without precluding the fact that the stochastic nature of the project environment is hardly described by the formula-based approach. The current theoretical base for the economic appraisals of the dry port projects more often perceives net present value (NPV) as a technique superior to other decision-making criteria. For example, the portfolio theory, which considers different risk preference of an investor and structures of utility, defines net present value as a better criterion of project appraisal than discounted payback period (DPP). Meanwhile, in business practice, the DPP is more popular. Knowing that the NPV is based on the assumptions of certainty of project life, it cannot be an accurate appraisal approach alone to determine whether or not the project should be accepted for the approval in the environment that is not without of uncertainties. In order to reflect the period or the project’s useful life that is exposed to risks due to changes in political, operational, and financial factors, the second capital budgeting criterion – discounted payback period is profoundly important, particularly for the Russian environment. Those statements represent contradictions that exist in the theory and practice of the applied science. Therefore, it would be desirable to relax the assumptions of portfolio theory and regard DPP as not fewer relevant appraisal approach for the assessment of the investment and risk measure. At the same time, the rationality of the use of both project performance criteria depends on the methods and models, with the help of which these appraisal approaches are calculated in feasibility studies. The deterministic methods cannot ensure the required precision of the results, while the stochastic models guarantee the sufficient level of the accuracy and reliability of the obtained results, providing that the risks are properly identified, evaluated, and mitigated. Otherwise, the project performance indicators may not be confirmed during the phase of project realization. For instance, the economic and political instability can result in the undoing of hard-earned gains, leading to the need for the attraction of the additional finances for the project. The sources of the alternative investments, as well as supportive mitigation strategies, can be studied during the initial phases of project development. During this period, the effectiveness of the investments undertakings can also be improved by the inclusion of the various investors, e.g. Russian Railways’ enterprises and other private companies in the dry port projects. However, the evaluation of the effectiveness of the participation of different investors in the project lack the methods and models that would permit doing the particular feasibility study, foreseeing the quantitative characteristics of risks and their mitigation strategies, which can meet the tolerance of the investors to the risks. For this reason, the research proposes a combination of Monte Carlo method, discounted cash flow technique, the theory of real options, and portfolio theory via a system dynamics simulation approach. The use of this methodology allows for comprehensive risk management process of dry port development to cover all aspects of risk identification, risk evaluation, risk mitigation, risk monitoring, and control phases. A designed system dynamics model can be recommended for the decision-makers on the dry port projects that are financed via a public-private partnership. It permits investors to make a decision appraisal based on random variables of net present value and discounted payback period, depending on different risks factors, e.g. revenue risks, land acquisition risks, traffic volume risks, construction hazards, and political risks. In this case, the statistical mean is used for the explication of the expected value of the DPP and NPV; the standard deviation is proposed as a characteristic of risks, while the elasticity coefficient is applied for rating of risks. Additionally, the risk of failure of project investments and guaranteed recoupment of capital investment can be considered with the help of the model. On the whole, the application of these modern methods of simulation creates preconditions for the controlling of the process of dry port development, i.e. making managerial changes and identifying the most stable parameters that contribute to the optimal alternative scenarios of the project realization in the uncertain environment. System dynamics model allows analyzing the interactions in the most complex mechanism of risk management process of the dry ports development and making proposals for the improvement of the effectiveness of the investments via an estimation of different risk management strategies. For the comparison and ranking of these alternatives in their order of preference to the investor, the proposed indicators of the efficiency of the investments, concerning the NPV, DPP, and coefficient of variation, can be used. Thus, rational investors, who averse to taking increased risks unless they are compensated by the commensurate increase in the expected utility of a risky prospect of dry port development, can be guided by the deduced marginal utility of investments. It is computed on the ground of the results from the system dynamics model. In conclusion, the outlined theoretical and practical implications for the management of risks, which are the key characteristics of public-private partnerships, can help analysts and planning managers in budget decision-making, substantially alleviating the effect from various risks and avoiding unnecessary cost overruns in dry port projects.

A map or chart of the Gulfs of Finland and Livonia with their respective ports and harbours, together with a large Plan of Kroonstad and St. Petersburg, taken from an original drawing lately sent from St. Petersburg

Sold by M. Senex at the Globe over against St. Dunstans Church in Fleetstreet London.