The Role of Private Off Dock Terminals On Port Efficiency (A Study of Sifax Off Dock Nig, LTD.)

International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962
Volume- 9, Issue- 5 (October 2019)

www.ijemr.net https://doi.org/10.31033/ijemr.9.5.14
The Role of Private Off Dock Terminals on Port Efficiency (A Study of

Sifax Off Dock Nig, Ltd.)
Ibiama Kenneth Adonye1, OgolaDeniel, B2 and AkpufuImorataria Dogood3
1
Lecturer, Transport and Logistic Department, Federal Polytechnic of Oil and Gas Bonny, Rivers State, NIGERIA
2
Lecturer, Port Management Department, Nigerian Maritime University, Okerenkoko, Delta State, NIGERIA
3
Lecturer, Port Management Department, Nigerian Maritime University, Okerenkoko, Delta State, NIGERIA
1
Corresponding Author: [email protected]
ABSTRACT problem in its implementation in Nigeria such as the

This study examines the role of private off dock availability of railway connectivity and inadequate finance
terminal in enhancing port efficiency in Nigeria; the and also the inconsistencies of government policies in line
purpose of the study is to examine the extent to which with off dock operations. The findings also reveals that the
private off-dock terminals have contributed to the efficiency cost of clearing cargo at terminal is high compared to main
of ports in Nigeria with respect to cargo clearance and ports. To this end the study recommended that reductions
forwarding, questionnaires were administered and review of chargers on cargo clearance and terminal handling of
has been carried out to obtain primary data collection. A cargoes should be looked into by private off dock owners,
total of 100 questionnaires were administered to government should ensure railway connectivity form port to
respondents and related literatures have been used for off dock terminals, policies should be enacted, which will
secondary data. A survey design method was adopted for ensure efficient operations of private off dock terminal in
the study. The statistical tools employed in analyzing the Nigeria.
analysis are simple percentage; tables and hypothesis were
tested using chi-square. Based on the findings, private off Keywords-- Inland Container Depots, Cargo Volume,
dock terminal has not really impacted on Lagos port over Cargo Pricing, Port Efficiency
the last five years based on the cargo volume handled by
them. It also reveals that private off dock terminal is facing
I. INTRODUCTION The primary functions of private off-dock

terminals include receipt and dispatch of cargo, stuffing
Private off-dock terminals also known as Inland and stripping of containers and general cargoes, customs
Customs Clearance Depots or Bonded Terminals may be clearance, consolidation and disaggregation of less than
generally seen as facilities located inland or remote from container load (LCL) cargo and temporal storage of
port(s) which offer services for the handling, temporal cargo and containers. Some of the advantages derived
storage and customs clearance of containers and general from these terminals include better customs checking
cargo as well as empties (Maduka, 2004). Containers are clearance, better cargo management, cargo storage in
transferred between land vehicles, typically between train sheds and open areas, reefer point’s availability for reefer
and truck or truck and truck. Private off-dock terminals containers in most locations and quicker processing of
tend to be located in or near major cities. Most of the documents. Computerization, human resource
terminals are well connected by road and rail which developments, and better cargo handling equipment have
facilitates the transfer of containers and general cargoes helped improved off dock terminals container operations
from the terminals to the sea ports and vice versa. in developing countries.
According to Branch (1998), private off-dock The strategic importance of private off-dock
terminals have been the best way to decongest ports in terminals to ports efficiency and to shipping and trade in
many parts of the world as they serve as storage facilities general makes it desirable to sustain their activities at an
for both laden and empty containers for relatively short optimum level. In countries with congested city ports like
or long periods. Their primary purpose is to allow the that of Lagos Nigeria, more private off-dock terminals
benefits of containerization to be realized on the inland than presently available are perhaps needed. However,
transport leg of international cargo movements. various challenges threaten the existence of these
Economic activities have increased as a result of the terminals. Tackling such challenges for better
introduction of these terminals and the time spent for performance of their complementary role to the ports
loading containers have decreased considerably leading provide the impetus for this study.
to time and optimum efficiency.
93 This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
1.2 Statement of the Problem the operators of the off-dock terminals believe that they
As earlier inferred, government granted licenses have aided port decongestion, albeit with challenges, not
to a number of private off-dock terminal operators as a so the users of the facilities who complain that private
means to decongest the main ports especially in the Lagos off-dock terminals are inefficient and costly for handling
area. These off-dock terminals are also bonded, from their cargo. These extreme positions being canvassed by
which they derive their appellation “bonded terminals”. both the operators and the users of private off-dock
This means they have the full presence of customs and terminals pose a difficulty to observers to be able to
ports authorities to aid shippers and freight forwarders in objectively assess the true roles of private off-dock
cargo clearing and forwarding, just as are obtainable in terminals as agents of ports decongestion and efficiency.
the main ports. To put these contentious claims in proper perspective
Judging by the number of years that some of the therefore, this study seeks to examine the role of off dock
private off-dock terminals have been in existence, one private terminals and their impact on cargo clearance vis-
would presume that their users – freight forwarders and à-vis the extent to which shippers and freight forwarders
shippers – would have come to acknowledge their make use of the terminals. Sifax Off-Dock Terminal
usefulness as full complements of our port system. While Nigeria Ltd is to be used as the case study.
1.3 Purpose of the Study ii. To evaluate the causes of port inefficiency
The overall purpose of the study is to examine towards cargo handling of freight forwarders.
the extent to which private off-dock terminals have iii. Examine the level and extent of assistance
contributed to the efficiency of ports in Nigeria with received by off dock terminals from government
respect to cargo clearance and forwarding. and other authorities to enhanced port efficiency.
In addressing the above overall purpose, the iv. Determine how efficient (in terms of cost
study specifically seeks to: savings and time) it is for freight forwarders and
i. To examine the relationship of cargo volume shippers to handle cargo through the off-dock
handled by private off-dock terminals over last private terminals compared to the main ports.
five years.
1.4 Research Hypothesis iii. H0 The level and extent of assistance received
i. H0 There is no significant relationship of cargo by off dock terminals from government and
volume handled by private off dock terminal other authorities has no impact on port
over the last five years. efficiency.
ii. H0The causes of port inefficiency have no iv. H0 There is no significant difference in cost-
significance towards cargo handling freight effectiveness and turnaround time of handling
forwarders. cargo at private off- dock terminals and at the
main port.
II. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS like average waiting time of ships, average queuing
length, average number of ships in the port and average
2.1 Queuing Theory berth utilization factor closer to the actual values.
Adedayo et al. (2006) stressed that many The system of operation at Tin Can Island Port
situation in life requires one to line up or queue before can be model as a queuing process. Ships come to the
being attended to. These lines formed are referred to as port as customers to get service and the facilities at the
waiting lines or queues. According to them queue occurs port render services to ships as servers. Here, services
when the capacity of service provided fall short of the refer to handling of cargoes and use of facilities at Tin
demand for the service. Sanish (2007) in his article on Can Island Port for berthing of ships. A large portion of
application of queuing to the traffic at New Mangalore the solution of waiting line problem encountered at the
Port refers to queuing theory as an analytical technique ports involves making decisions in one or a combination
accepted as valuable tool for solving congestion of the following.
problems. According to him the primary inputs to the (i) Number of berths that are needed to serve the arriving
models are the arrival and service patterns. These patterns ships.
are generally described by suitable random distribution. (ii) Delay of loading/unloading of cargo/container
He observed that the arrival rate of ships follows (iii) Future expansion of the port facilities considering the
exponential distribution while the service time follows future expected port congestion at ports; an attempt is
Erlang or Poisson distribution. He observed that queuing made in this study to find solution to the incidence of port
theory can be used to predict some important parameters congestion in Nigeria with
particular reference to Tin Can Island Port. The problem supply in the case of a tax-funded public good provided
can be modeled as a multi-server queue problem with no free at the point of usage.
system limit, arrival can be from a theoretically infinite According to the economic theory behind
source and the service is on first-come-first-serve priority congestion pricing, the objective of this policy is the use
rule. of the price mechanism to make users more aware of the
costs that they impose upon one another when consuming
III. THE CONCEPTUALIZATION during the peak demand, and that they should pay for the
additional congestion they create, thus encouraging the
3.1 Concept of Congestion Pricing redistribution of the demand in space or in time, or
Congestion pricing is a system of surcharging shifting it to the consumption of a substitute public good;
users of public goods that are subject to congestion for example, switching from private transport to public
through excess demand such as higher peak charges for transport.
use of bus services, electricity, metros, railways, This pricing mechanism has been used in several
telephones and road pricing to reduce traffic public utilities and public services for setting higher
congestion; airlines and shipping companies may be prices during congested periods, as a means to better
charged higher fees for slots at airports and through manage the demand for the service, and whether to avoid
canals at busy times. This pricing strategy regulates expensive new investments just to satisfy peak demand,
demand, making it possible to manage congestion without or because it is not economically or financially feasible to
increasing supply. Market theory, which encompasses the provide additional capacity to the service. Congestion
congestion pricing concept, postulates that users will be pricing has been widely used by telephone and electric
forced to pay for the negative they create, making them utilities, metros, railways and autobus services, and has
conscious of the costs they impose upon each other when been proposed for charging internet access. It also has
consuming during the peak demand, and more aware of been extensively studied and advocated by mainstream
their impact on the environment. transport economists
Implementation of congestion pricing has for ports, waterways, airports and road pricing, though
reduced congestion in urban areas, but has also sparked actual implementation is rather limited due to the
criticism and public discontent. Critics maintain that controversial issues subject to debate regarding this
congestion pricing is not equitable, places an economic policy, particularly for urban roads, such as undesirable
burden on neighboring communities, has a negative effect distribution effects, the disposition of the revenues raised,
on retail businesses and on economic activity in general, and the social and political acceptability of the congestion
and represents another tax levy. charge.
A survey of economic literature on the subject, Congestion pricing is one of a number of
however, finds that most economists agree that some alternative demand side (as opposed to supply side)
form of road pricing to reduce congestion is economically strategies offered by economists to address traffic
viable; although there is disagreement on what form road congestion. Congestion is considered a
pricing should take. Economists disagree over how to set negative externality by economists. An externality occurs
tolls, how to cover common costs, what to do with any when a transaction causes costs or benefits to a third
excess revenues, whether and how “losers” from tolling party, often, although not necessarily, from the use of a
previously free roads should be compensated, and public good: for example, if manufacturing or
whether to privatize highways. Also, concerns transportation cause air pollution imposing costs on
regarding fossil fuel supply and urban transport high others when making use of public air. Congestion pricing
emissions of greenhouse gases in the context of climate is an efficiency pricing strategy that requires the users to
change have renewed interest in congestion pricing, as it pay more for that public good, thus increasing the welfare
is considered one of the demand-side mechanisms that gain or net benefit for society.
may reduce oil consumption. Viewed from the foregoing explanations,
Congestion pricing is a concept from market charging of demurrage on unclear containers at the ports
economics regarding the use of pricing mechanisms to and at the private off-dock terminals may be interpreted
charge the users of public goods for the negative as some form of congestion pricing. The fact that shippers
externalities generated by the peak demand in excess of and freight forwarders allegedly pay higher demurrage at
available supply. Its economic rationale is that, at a price private off-dock terminals may be due to the need of the
of zero, demand exceeds supply, causing a shortage, and operators to offset storage costs and retain some profit as
that the shortage should be corrected by charging commercial operators.
the equilibrium price rather than shifting it down by 3.2 Concept of Inland Container Depot (ICD)
increasing the supply. Usually this means Maduka (2004) observes that the concept of
increasing prices during certain periods of time or at the inland container /dry ports over the years was a reflection
places where congestion occurs; or introducing a new of government policy inconsistencies and undefined
usage tax or charge when peak demand exceeds available port’s management situational conditions. The write up
examines the concepts of inland container dry ports
(ICDs) as a reflection of government unconcerned, non
regulations and also a result of the complications and a decongestion committee, which was headed by Alhaji
problems of the 2001 port congestion in Nigerian port’s- Aliko Dangote, with the mandate to resolve the problems.
maritime industry, due largely to government policy The committee, after a comprehensive appraisal and
inconsistencies with regard to maritime operations. It is analysis of the pending problems, made recommendations
seen that, the historic development of the establishment to government for the establishment of bonded
of ICDs as a panacea to port congestion problem, which warehouses and inland container dry ports in some
had overwhelmed port operations, thereby leading to selected areas of the six geopolitical zones of the
reduced productivity and underutilization of the port country.
system. It is also seen that, there is a clear-cut socio- It is expected therefore, that these two concepts,
economic justification for the establishment of bonded if so established, would drastically reduce the hydra-
warehouses and ICDs, in terms of increased productivity, headed problem and complication of port congestion and
cargo throughput and the economic development of the hence increase port productivity and performance. It is
general society and the national economy at large. pertinent to note that, a container freight stations (CFS) or
According to Ndikom (2004) the development of inland container dry ports (ICDs) is also referred to as a
inland container dry ports (ICDs) in ports located in the dry port, as they provide various services for handling
six geopolitical zones of the country is part of the current containers outside the port.
port reform agenda of government. It could be noted that, Maduka (2006) explain the terms ICDs and CFS
the collapse of such a port system would mean the are often used interchangeably, as there is not much
collapse of the entire economy. The Nigerian port’s difference in their operational modalities and functioning.
system has been in dire need of reforms. The problems Mainly, CFSs are off dock terminals located near
and complications of the 2001 congestion saw the ports at servicing ports and which are used as means of port
an operational standstill, calling for urgent attention with decongestion, as cargo and customs- related activities are
regard to resolving the problems caused by government moved out of the port area (that is to CFS). CFS largely
policy inconsistencies. deal with break bulk cargo originating/ terminating in the
According to Sekibo (2005), government in a immediate hinterland of a port and which may also deal
bid to find a lasting solution to the problems inaugurated with rail- borne traffic to and from inland locations.
3.3 Developments in Off-Dock Terminals facilities. From then on, container terminals have
The ever-increasing volume of import cargo in enormously increased the ease and some level of
marine containers has resulted in growing pressure on flexibility of movement of goods on land-sea intermodal
North American terminal capacity as well as other journeys.
developing nations that have most of their port systems According to Branch (1998), the role and
congested. Existing major ports are facing significant significance of ports in maritime and intermodal trade has
challenges in expanding on-dock capacity due to changed dramatically in the past decades in the sense that
constraints on land availability in the vicinity of existing they have attained a higher economic and technical
terminal and Harbour facilities; environmental issues, and profile. Writing on Maritime Economic: Management
local community concerns over traffic congestion and and Marketing, Branch indicated a number of the
quality of life impacts. These factors have generated circumstances or rationales that constitute the historical
growing interest in the concept of off-dock terminals as a drive behind the development of ports including issues
means of boosting capacity, through potential reductions such as:
in container dwell time at on-dock terminals and the • Political events in North America, Europe and Asia; the
transfer of non-essential terminal activity to inland rapid development of
locations. East Asia and the enhancement of regional economic co-
Off-dock terminals are an essential part of the operation.
total intermodal system at the point of interface where • The emergence of larger container vessels, which have
containers are transferred from port operation quay to affected the pattern of trade routes and rationalization of
inland terminals. ports of call. Thus, ports have had to be strategically
Muller and Gerhardt (1998) stated that, the positioned to attract larger container vessels.
sophistication and complexity of an off-dock terminal • Fostering of links among governments and international
layout is dependent on diverse factors. These include trading blocs give priority to the development of ports
volume, size of vessel, available property, capital • Emergence of free trade zones, which offer benefits to
available and a host of other factors. the entrepreneur.
The rise in containerization begins to emerge as Furthermore, Branch noted that the strategic
advantageous over break bulk shipping of loose cargo. location of ports and the extent of its development play a
Growth in the freight trucking industry spurred the significant role in the ship operator’s strategic plan for
development of containerization in 1956 and in that year formulating sailing schedules, which mostly hinder on
the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey financial options for ports of call when reviewing sailing
approved development of a container port in New Jersey. schedules in terms of cost and revenue generation, and
In 1958, Matson Navigation deployed the concept on the market opportunities. Moreover, containerization system,
West Coast and began development of container port
which enhances the distribution of cargoes globally, is A good communication system and
efficient and adds value to the shipper/user/consumer. computerization and EDI connectivity is essential.
Being an organic growth industry, the share of Following Infrastructure should be available at the off
containerized cargo trade increased from 35 percent of dock terminal.
total global trading in 1990 to 48 percent in 1997, v. Provision of standard pavement for heavy duty
(Branch 1998). In 2000, however, Branch (1998), stated equipment for use in the operational and
that, the share of container trade was 55 percent and has stacking area of the terminal. In cases where
since continued to grow in volumes and significances. only chassis operation is to be performed, the
Most ports in the world have therefore taken extreme pavement standard could be limited to that of a
advantage of the emergence of this system to attract highway.
increasing volumes of cargoes for both revenue vi. Office building for off dock terminal, Customs
generation and international recognition. Instrumentally, office and a separate block for user agencies
this has propelled the port of Apapa or Tincan to equipped with basic facilities.
decongest port quays and operational area to facilitate vii. Warehousing facility, separately for exports and
shipping operations as well as distribution of cargoes imports and long term storage of bonded cargo.
inland. A significant inventiveness is the establishment of viii. Gate Complex with separate entry and exit.
off-dock terminals. ix. Adequate parking space for vehicles awaiting
According to Ndikom (2006) the maritime entry to the terminal.
industry is highly technical, competitive and complex x. Boundary wall according to standards specified
industry, which over the year has been bedevil by Customs.
These include: xi. Internal roads for service and circulating areas.
i. Seaport problems culminating in congestion, xii. Electronic weighbridge.
cargo clearance delays, high demurrage, sharp 3.5 Operations of Off-Dock Terminals in Nigeria
practices resulting in increased cost of ship According to Maduka (2004), the establishment
business operation. of off dock terminal in the geopolitical zones of the
ii. High rate of government policy inconsistencies, country is, no doubt, a welcome development. Off dock
especially on banned imported items, which terminals are transit facilities located in the hinterland and
often lead to port congestion and allied equipped with fixed and movable installations for
problems. handling and storage of cargo; they have public authority
iii. The fact that Nigeria is a coastal country with a status and are operated under the landlord port
large hinterland and expanse of inland management model, such as is practiced at the Tincan
waterways. Island Port and Apapa Port Complex in Lagos State.
iv. Multiplicity of agencies at the ports, leading to However, for off-dock terminal to achieve the desired
tollage extortions and corruption. objectives, government must provide integrated
3.4 Design and Lay-Out of Off Dock Terminal intermodal transport facilities in the country. As
Ndikom (2004) said that the design and layout mentioned earlier, the Nigerian government is involving
should be the most modern state-of-art equipped with the Nigerian Railways Corporation in the project
mechanical/electrical facilities of international standards. alongside the Nigeria Port Authority (NPA), Nigerian
Key to a good lay-out is the smooth flow of containers, Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA),
cargo and vehicles through the terminal. The design and and the Nigerian Shippers Council (NSC).
lay-out should take into account initial volume of Without an effective integrated transport system, the
business, estimated volume in 10 years’ horizon and the project would fail, as rail transport is pivot to off dock
type of facilities exporters would require. The initial lay terminal operations. The operation involves large and
out should be capable of adaptation to changing extra-large containers and other equipment being
circumstances. The design broadly should encompass conveyed from ports to off dock terminal areas through
features like (rail) siding, container yard, gate house and rail lines.
security features, boundary wall (fencing), roads, However, considering the current condition to
pavements, office building and public amenities. The Nigerian Railways Corporation, one doubts if it has the
track length and number of tracks should be adequate to capacity to meet up with its obligation towards the
handle rakes and for stabling trains where relevant. smooth takeoff of off-dock terminals across the country.
The perimeter fencing and lighting must meet This is where the government should come in, to put
the standards required by Customs authorities. The gate infrastructure in place; it should provide rail tracks,
being the focal point of site security should be properly rolling stocks, terminals marshaling yards, running sheds/
planned. The administration building is the focal point of mechanical workshops, etc. Moreover, the existing rail
production and processing of all documentation relating lines at various ports must be rehabilitated.
to handling of cargo and containers and its size will be Maduka (2004) observes that an effective off
determined by the needs of potential occupants. Fixed dock terminal project needs efficient rolling stocks,
provisions should be made for sanitation facilities and wagons, coaches and locomotive with other modern units
possibly a food service facility. like piggybacks, double stacking wagons and so on. After
the railways are fully developed and equipped by Cargo handling includes stuffing/ de- stuffing the same
government, we can then confidently say that off dock into/ from containers to cargo sheds/ trucks, placement/
terminals have commenced operation and, thus have removal of cargo into/ from a warehouse, shifting of
come to stay. cargo within the terminal, loading/ unloading of cargo on/
Besides, the government must ensure that there from road vehicles with or without mechanical
is good road network linking the off dock terminal with equipment, using computer- automated operation system
major federal highways. This will make it easier for to maximize terminal productivity and vessel stowage
trucks to take imported/ exported goods to their final planning and also to increase quality of service.
destinations, in a seamless manner and safety too.
3.6 Significance of Off-Dock Terminals they reduce the amount of time and money that
The modern conception of sea container would otherwise have spent travelling all the
terminals development means fulfilling functions - way to the Port to clear or forward cargo.
container transshipment and temporary storage of 3.7 Economic Justification for the Establishment Off-
containers. In order to arrange stuffing/ unstuffing of Dock Terminals
containers and their prolonged storage it was necessary to Afenikhe (2004) highlighted the economic
establish off-dock terminals connected with the sea benefits of off dock terminal and bonded warehouses are
terminal, railways and roads. The deep-sea terminals are enormous on the society and national development. This
the focal points for the network of facilities that make up can be aptly demonstrated by the fact that warehouses are
the container transportation system in the lower mainland. needed to handle the flow of goods (Import and Export)
Off-dock container facilities engage in a variety of and to promote domestic and international trade and
activities related to the handling of freight transported in business cooperation. Hence, the socioeconomic benefits
international marine containers, including unloading, of off dock terminal, container freight stations and
consolidation and forwarding of import shipments, and bonded warehouses cannot be overemphasized.
reloading of containers for export. In the last two years, Moreover, the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.
they have taken on a larger role in the storage of empty The relevance of these maritime infrastructure cuts across
containers as a means of maintaining the productivity of a board spectrum of national development indicators and
the deep-sea terminals. These are key activities in their establishment is justified not only for socioeconomic
maintaining the competitiveness of the other smaller ports considerations but also for social as well as political
as a link in firms' supply chains, and greatly increase the reasons.
local economic impact of international container traffic. For instance, these national infrastructure have
According to the OT African Lines (2003), indeed increased job opportunities for the teeming
shipping formalities can be completed in Off-dock Nigeria population and also opened up new areas of
terminals for containerized cargoes instead of at the exit opportunity for maritime trade, marketing and domestic
gateway port. Off-dock terminals are therefore a manufacturing, especially where trade are located. They
convenient shipping alternative extending port services have also led to the establishment of certain cottage
closer to hinterland customers. These Off-dock terminals industries; and this has a multiplier effect on the
are basically aimed at: socioeconomic wellbeing of the people and the economic
i. Enhancing decongestion of container terminals viability of the nation, especially with regard to maritime
at port by reducing container dwell time through productivity and accessibility. They have also led to
enhanced take-off of import containerized cargo large-scale urbanization of the places of location of
for clearance at the Off-dock terminal. operations and increased revenue to government, mostly
Additionally, the depots also facilitate swift at the local government level.
dispatch of export containers thereby increasing Over the years the traffic through the Nigeria
container turnaround time creating more space at Ports are increasing along with the economic
the container terminals inside ports. development of the country. It is frequently observed that
ii. Minimizing road damage and carnage – Off- a queue of arriving ships is formed and sometimes ships
dock terminals facilitates the diversion of heavy have to wait for a longer time before berthing. This can
container traffic from the road to rail. This in be attributed firstly, to the mobility of the existing port
turn minimizes road damage caused by heavy facilities to match the ever increasing global trade and
trucking thus ensuring smoother roads while secondly, some obnoxious government policies and
giving them more life. regulations. This incessant congestion in our ports has
iii. Providing safety and security for cargo – thus, resulted in diversion of ships meant for Nigeria Ports to
cargo transported by rail is safer and more other neighboring country ports. In the reforms and
secure therefore ensuring the safe transport of concessioning of 2006, Tin Can Island Port was
cargo to and from the port. concessional to four different private organizations to
iv. Saving customer costs – customers also derive manage.
enormous benefit from off-dock terminals as
Maduka (2004) defined Port Congestion as The long queue of cargo at the nation’s sea ports
massive un-cleared Cargo in the Port, resulting in delay has been identified as the cause of port congestions in the
of ships in the seaport. According to him, this occurs country. Investigations round the ports in Lagos axis
when ships spend longer time at berth than usual before show that importers and agents normally take up to 21
being worked on or before berth. Onwumere (2008) days before clearing their containers from the port. They
refers to port congestion as a situation where in a port; attributed this problem to two major factors such as high
ships on arrival spend more time waiting to berth. In this dwell time of cargo including poor clearing process,
context, more ships will queue at the channels and the nonchalant attitude and low storage charges by the
outside bar waiting to get space at the terminal for terminal operators. They said because of low charges,
berthage. According to him, this waiting time is many importers and agents were no longer worried when
calculated using the service time of vessels which is one their containers stayed long at the terminals as they were
of the ways of measuring port efficiency. In his view, this always ready to pay the charges.
is a situation where cargoes coming into the port are more Commenting on the issue, Frank Aliakor, in
than the storage facilities can handle. maritime journal (2011), suggested that the terminal
3.8 The Incidence of Port Congestion in Nigeria operators should discourage this act by imposing heavy
Port Congestion is a global phenomenon not sanctions on operators who left their containers for too
limited to only Nigeria. In 2005 global map of congestion long at the terminals. He also listed poor transport
around the world the entire Africa was there, the West infrastructure such as narrow exit gates and multiple
Coast of Africa including Nigeria was there, the Eastern agencies at the port as other hiccups causing long dwell
part of Africa, around Kenya, Southern Africa even the time of cargo.According to him, some port users
West Coast of the United States of America was there. deliberately use port terminals as warehouse pending the
This was as a result of so many factors (Zhang et al, time they would complete their long and unending
2008). clearing process with Customs.
Maduaka, (2004) highlighted the factors Guttenberg Port, Sweden grants free storage
responsible for port congestion in Nigeria and suggested charge for the first three days of container arrival and
ways to control congestion at the Ports. According to places storage charges of $15 for another three days;
him, there are advantages and disadvantages in port while Port Elizabeth, New Jersey in America has the first
congestion. He stated that Port congestion brought about four days of arrival as storage free and charges $136 per
realization for better planning, port expansion and day. Sydney Port, Australia, charges $80 per day after an
development. He cited loss of revenue, unemployment initial rent free period of three days.
and bad image to the country as its major disadvantages. Alfred Egbu (2006), further noted that importers
Classic transport magazine, a logistic, shipping and multi- and agents abandoned their containers at the ports for a
modal transport stated that Port Congestion is inimical to long period because they start sourcing for funds to clear
the economic growth (volume 1 of 2009). their goods at the port when their cargoes had arrived. He
According to the maritime journal (2011), port noted that cumbersome clearing process at the port
congestion has a negative implication on the economic coupled with alleged extortion by government agencies
resources, wastage of time and space as well as increase made it impossible for importers to clear their goods early
in the cost of operations and cost to the society. from the ports.
Tom (2009) posited that Nigeria should be warned about He, however, advised the Federal Government to
reoccurrence of congestion in our port. According to him investigate reasons why some importers and agents prefer
in spite of the various waivers conceded by the to leave goods at the terminals which ordinarily are
government the dwell time of consignment in the port is supposed to be transit facilities. “I can tell you without
gradually jacking up against expected time. He cited the any fear that the agents and port users have discovered
use of Manual Clearing Process as one of the major that it is cheaper for them to use the terminals. I want use
factors responsible for the reoccurrence of the looming this opportunity to call on the Nigerian Ports Authority
congestion. (NPA) to transfer every long staying containers Customs
bonded facilities for auction” he added.
IV. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY systematically study the area which is Sifax Off-Dock
Nigeria Limited in Lagos in order to generalize the
4.1 Design findings for the remaining off dock terminals in Nigeria.
For the purpose of this research work a 4.2 Sampling and Sample Techniques
descriptive research design is used. The type of For statistical airiness, convenience and proper
descriptive research design employed in this study is analysis, a sample size of 100 respondents was selected
survey design because it involves the study of small or and used for the study.
large population by selecting and studying a sample In order to cater for those selected respondents
chosen from the population. The researchers who may for one reason or the other fail to complete their
questionnaires, a total of 150 respondents were chosen
and questionnaires sent to them. 100 completed and Sampling technique employed is simple random
returned their questionnaires in which they were used for sampling to select sample of 100 respondents. This was
this study. employed in order to give respondent in the target
population equal chance of being selected.
4.3 Statistical Treatment of the Data Formula for chi- square X2 test
Data for the study were presented using FE
frequency distribution tables, the simple percentages were X2 = F0 –Fe
used to analyze them. Where; X2= chi- square, F0= observed frequency, Fe=
Also inferential statistical data used to test the Expected frequency,
hypothesis is chi- square x2 test which enables the Ho= Null hypothesis, H1= Alternative hypothesis
decision maker accept or reject the already stated The degree of freedom (df) = (C-1) (R-1)
hypothesis. To find Fe= total of column x total of row
It is mathematically express thus below Grand total
Formula for Simple Percentage The decision rules there that:
F/N* 100  When the calculated chi- square X2 is greater
Where; F= Total frequency of responses than the table value we reject the null hypothesis
N= Total number of responses and accept the alternative.
 When the calculated chi- square X2 is less than
the table value we accept the null hypothesis.
The hypothesis tested at 0.05 alfa significant level.In

4.4 Tests for Hypothesis order to arrive at decision in the hypothesis, the
This section is devoted to the testing of researcher considered 5 %( 0.05) level of significance
hypothesis stated above so as to validate the guesses. i.e. (95% confidence) at degree of freedom 4.
4.4.1 Summary of Responses obtained from Questionnaire
Responses Cargo Causes of Government Cost and GRAND
volume port and other time TOTAL
handled inefficiency authorities effectiveness
contribution of off dock
terminals
YES 53 53 37 34 177
NO 47 47 63 66 223
TOTAL 100 100 100 100 400
(Source: This study 2018)
Fe (YES) = 100x177 =44.25 Hypothesis I

400 H0 There is no significant relationship of cargo volume
Fe (NO) = 100x 223 = 55.75 handled by private off dock terminal over the last five
400 years.
Hi There is significant relationship of cargo volume
handled by private off dock terminal over the last five
years.
Table 4.4.2
RESPONS Fo Fe Fo– Fe (Fo– Fe)2
ES
YES 53 44.25 8.75 76.56 1.73

NO 47 55.75 -8.75 76.56 1.37
TOTAL 100 100 0 153.12 3.10
The table above reveals that the calculated X2 cargo volume handled by private off dock terminal over
value is 3.10; the significance level is 5% (0.05) with a the last five years and reject the alternative hypothesis
degree of freedom of 3, the value of X 2 as traced on the that there is significant relationship of cargo volume
chi-square table is 7.82. As such the table value is greater handled by private off dock terminal over the last five
than the calculated value; we accept the null hypothesis years.
which states that there is no significant relationship of
Hypothesis II Hi The causes of port inefficiency have significance

H0 The causes of port inefficiency have no significance towards cargo handling of freight forwarders.
towards cargo handling freight forwarders.
Table 4.4.3
RESPONSES Fo Fe Fo– (Fo–
Fe Fe)2
YES 53 44.25 8.75 76.56 1.73

NO 47 55.75 -8.75 76.56 1.37
TOTAL 100 100 0 153.12 3.10
Decisional Rule causes of port inefficiency have significance towards

The table above reveals that the calculated X2 cargo handling of freight forwarders.
value is 3.10; the significance level is 5% (0.05) with a Hypothesis III
degree of freedom of 3, the value of X 2 as traced on the H0 The level and extent of assistance received by off dock
chi-square table is 7.82. As such the table value is greater terminals from government and other authorities has no
than the calculated value, we accept the null hypothesis impact on port efficiency.
which states that, the causes of port inefficiency have no Hi The level and extent of assistance received by off dock
significance towards cargo handling freight forwarders terminals from government and ot.er authorities has
and reject the alternative hypothesis which state that, the impact on port efficiency.
Table 4.4.4
RESPONSES Fo Fe Fo– Fe (Fo–
Fe)2
YES 37 55.5 -18.5 342.25 6.17

NO 63 44.5 18.5 342.25 7.69
TOTAL 100 100 0 684.5 13.86
Decision Rule government and other authorities has impact on port

The table above reveals that the calculated X2 efficiency
value is 13.86; the significance level is 5% (0.05) with a Hypothesis IV
degree of freedom of 3, the value of X 2 as traced on the H0 There is no significant difference in cost-
chi-square table is 7.82. As such the table value is lesser effectiveness and time of handling cargo at private off-
than the calculated value so we reject the null hypothesis dock terminals compared to the main port.
and accept the alternative hypothesis that the level and Hi There is significant difference in cost-
extent of assistance received by off dock terminals from effectiveness and turnaround time of handling cargo at
private off- dock terminals compared to the main port.
Table 4.4.5
RESPONSES Fo Fe Fo– (Fo–
Fe Fe)2
YES 34 55.5 - 462.25 8.33

21.5
NO 66 44.5 21.5 462.25 10.39
TOTAL 100 100 0 924.75 18.72
(Source: this study 2015)
Decisional Rule than the calculated value so we reject the null hypothesis
The table above reveals that the calculated X2 and accept the alternative hypothesis that there is
value is 18.72; the significance level is 5% (0.05) with a significant difference in cost-effectiveness and
degree of freedom of 3, the value of X 2 as traced on the turnaround time of handling cargo at private off- dock
chi-square table is 7.82. As such the table value is lesser terminals compared to the main port.
4.5 Discussion of Findings 5.2 Recommendations

From the hypotheses tested and the results The primary objectives of the study was spell
obtained it is believed that the relationship of cargo out in chapter one, the researcher made useful
volume handled by private off dock terminal has no recommendations for the resolution of those problems
significance over the last five years and as such it has not identified in the study which reflect strictly the summary
enhanced port efficiency over the last five years. And also of the study and conclusions drawn for the study.
it was found out that the causes of port inefficiency have Sequel to this study, the following
no significance towards cargo handling freight recommendations were made by the researcher:
forwarders. That mismanagement of port and lack of 1. Government should sponsor seminars and
infrastructure do not affect the handling of cargo of workshops, which contribute to orientate and
freight forwarders at the port. Also the findings and sensitize Nigerians on the needs to facilitate the
hypothesis tested indicate that the level and extent of proper shipping development through off dock
assistance received by off dock terminals from terminals in Nigeria.
government and other authorities have impact on port 2. Government should ensure railway connectivity
efficiency. That if adequate assistance like finance and from port to off dock terminals.
equipment are granted to private off dock terminals, it 3. Policies should be enacted, which will ensure
will aid port efficiency by handling large volume for efficient operations of private off dock terminal
freight forwarders thereby port efficiency is enhanced. in Nigeria.
Lastly from the findings there is significant difference in 5.3 Suggestions for Further Research
cost effectiveness and turnaround time of cargo handling The following suggestions for further research
at private off-dock terminals compared to the main ports, were made by the researcher:
because most shippers or freight forwarder agreed to the 1. The contribution of off dock terminal to freight
fact that it is not cheaper for them to clear their cargoes at forwarders and shippers
off dock terminals and equally it takes more days to clear 2. The impact of railway connectivity to ease off
containers at private off-dock terminals compared to the dock terminal operations.
main ports in Nigeria. 3. The need for effective operation of off dock
terminal
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 4. A critical appraisal of the strategies for
improving offdock terminals performance/
5.1 Conclusion productivity in Nigeria environment.
Based on the involvement of the respondents in 5. The impact of private off dock terminal in
key sectors in shipping in Lagos, the researcher Nigeria transportation system.
concluded that the data collected and analyzed in the
study from within the scope is worthwhile for the REFERENCES
research and that the generalizations made from there are
realistically applicable. [1] Afenikhe, O. (1996). Port reforms strategy: A survival
On the primary objectives of this study which battle. In. 6th Conference of the National Freight
entails on, to examine the extent to which private off- Committee Association of Nigeria, Airport Hotel, Lagos.
dock terminals haves contributed to the efficiency of [2] Alreck, P & R. B. Settle. (1985). The survey research
ports in Nigeria with respect to cargo clearance and handbook. Homewood, Illinois: Irwin.
forwarding, the following conclusion were drawn by the [3] Fraenkel, J. R. & N. E. Wallen. (2002). How to design
researcher. and evaluate research in education. (4th ed.). Boston:
If government makes adequate funds available, Allyn & Bacon.
provides infrastructure like railway to private off dock [4] Iannone, Fedele, Thore, Sten A., & Forte Ennio.
from port, customs and port authority’s activities are (2008). Inland container logistics and interports. goals
checkmated and also reduction of cost of clearance and and features of an ongoing applied research. Available
time of cargo at private off dock time, it is believed that at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1149723.
private off dock terminal will contribute more to [5] Maduka, J.O. (2004). Port safety and environment
enhancement of port efficiency in Nigeria. management. Lagos: Publication concept.
[6] Minor, J. (2005). Protecting supply chains against [9] Ndikom, O.B. (2008). Elements of transport
political risks. Aon political risk service. Available from: management. Lagos: Bunmico Publishers.
http://www.aon.com/about/publications/pdf/issues/. [10] Notteboom T. & Rodrigue J. P. (2004). Inland
[6] Ndikom, O.B. (2006). A critical assessment of freight distribution and the sub harborization of port
operational performance of bondedware house and inland terminals. In Proceedings of the First International
container terminal. Journal of Research in National Conference on Logistics Strategy for Ports, 22-26
Development. Available at: September, Dalian.
https://www.ajol.info/index.php/jorind. [11] Notteboom T. (2004). Container shipping and ports:
[7] Ndikom, O.B. (2004). The essential of port reforms: An overview. Review of Network Economics, 3(2), 86-
The Nigerian experience, Lagos: Bunmico Publishers. 106.
[8] Ndikom, O.B. (2006). The kernel concepts of shipping [12] Sekibo, P.A. (2005). Government new strategies and
operations, policies and strategies: The industry regulations to decongest the port. First Sensitization
overview. Lagos: Bunmicao Publishers. Workshop on Presidential Committee on Ports
Decongestion, Abuja.

The Role of Private Off Dock Terminals On Port Efficiency (A Study of Sifax Off Dock Nig, LTD.)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Role of Private Off Dock Terminals On Port Efficiency (A Study of Sifax Off Dock Nig, LTD.)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Role of Private Off Dock Terminals On Port Efficiency (A Study of Sifax Off Dock Nig, LTD.)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Engineering and Management Research e-ISSN: 2250-0758 | p-ISSN: 2394-6962

Volume- 9, Issue- 5 (October 2019)

The Role of Private Off Dock Terminals on Port Efficiency (A Study of

ABSTRACT problem in its implementation in Nigeria such as the

I. INTRODUCTION The primary functions of private off-dock

The hypothesis tested at 0.05 alfa significant level.In

TOTAL 100 100 100 100 400

(Source: This study 2018)

Fe (YES) = 100x177 =44.25 Hypothesis I

YES 53 44.25 8.75 76.56 1.73

Hypothesis II Hi The causes of port inefficiency have significance

YES 53 44.25 8.75 76.56 1.73

Decisional Rule causes of port inefficiency have significance towards

YES 37 55.5 -18.5 342.25 6.17

Decision Rule government and other authorities has impact on port

YES 34 55.5 - 462.25 8.33

4.5 Discussion of Findings 5.2 Recommendations

You might also like