Dynamism Patterns of Western Mediterranean Cruise Ports and the Coopetition Relationships Between Major Cruise Ports

Open access


The Mediterranean Sea has seen an increase of ports hosting cruise ships during the first fifteen years of the 21st century. The increase in cruise ship presence in Mediterranean ports is associated with the dynamism of cruise traffic in recent years, with an average annual growth of 7.45% for cruise passengers worldwide during the period of 1990-2015. Cruise traffic is a maritime business that is primarily composed of two elements, maritime affairs and tourism. This article focuses on the maritime component. With the growth of the cruise industry, cruise lines have been forced to seek new ports to meet demand in an attempt to create differentiated products based on the ports that compose the itinerary. The itinerary system of cruise traffic makes the cruise ports depend on one another to design an itinerary. This feature results in both complex geographic relationships in the design of a cruise itinerary and complex competitive/cooperative relationships between ports. The aim of this article is to present the hierarchic picture of a sample of 29 cruise ports in the Western Mediterranean region during the period of 2000-2015. To achieve this goal, a port size classification is proposed and a shift-share analysis at the inter- and intra-group size level is applied. Moreover, concentration measures are used to determine the changes in the levels of market concentration. Furthermore, a dynamic model is proposed to determine the competitive or cooperative relationships between cruise ports. The proposed model is applied to the largest ports with data from the 2001-2015 period.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Bagis O.; Dooms M.: Turkey’s potential on becoming a cruise hub for the East Mediterranean Region: The case of Istanbul. Research in Transportation Business & Management vol. 13 pp. 6-15 2014.

  • 2. Branderburger A.; Nalebuff B.: Co-opetition. Doubleday New York 1996.

  • 3. Castillo-Manzano J.I.; Fageda X.; Gonzalez-Laxe F.: An analysis of the determinants of cruise traffic: An empirical application to the Spanish port system. Transportation Research Part E vol. 66 pp. 115–125 2014.

  • 4. CLIA (Cruise Lines International Association): 2016 cruise industry outlook. CLIA Washington 2016.

  • 5. Cruise Market Watch: Growth of the Cruise Line Industry [online]. Available from: http://www.cruisemarketwatch.com/growth/. [Accessed 31 May 2016].

  • 6. Esteve-Perez J.; Garcia-Sanchez A.: Cruise market: Stakeholders and the role of ports and tourist hinterlands. Maritime Economics & Logistics vol. 17(3) pp. 371–388 2015.

  • 7. Esteve-Perez J.; Garcia-Sanchez A.: La industria de cruceros: características agentes y sus funciones. Fundación Valenciaport Valencia 2015.

  • 8. Hamel G.; Doz Y; Prahalad C.: Collaborate with your competitors—and win. Harvard Business Review vol. 67 pp. 133–139 1989.

  • 9. Lau Y.; Tam K.; Ng A.K.Y.; Pallis A.A.: Cruise terminals site selection process: An institutional analysis of the Kai Tak Cruise Terminal in Hong Kong. Research in Transportation Business & Management vol. 13 pp. 16–23 2014.

  • 10. Lekakou M.B.; Pallis A.A.; Vaggelas G.K.: An analysis of cruise industry’s selection criteria. Paper presented at the International Association of Maritime Economists Annual Conference June 24-26. Copenhagen Denmark 2009.

  • 11. Marti B.E.: Geography and the cruise ship port selection process. Maritime Policy & Management vol. 17(3) pp. 157–164 1990.

  • 12. McCalla R.J.: An Investigation into Site and Situation: Cruise Ship Ports. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie vol. 89(1) pp. 44-55 1998.

  • 13. MedCruise: The New Medcruise Statistic Report. MedCruise Barcelona 2011.

  • 14. MedCruise: Cruise activities in MedCruise ports: Statistics 2013. MedCruise Piraeus 2014.

  • 15. MedCruise: Cruise activities in MedCruise ports: Statistics 2014. MedCruise Piraeus 2015.

  • 16. MedCruise: Cruise activities in MedCruise ports: Statistics 2015. MedCruise Piraeus 2016.

  • 17. MedCruise: French Riviera Ports-Ports facts [online]. Available from: http://www.medcruise.com/port/488/french-riviera-ports/information. [Accesed 27 June 2016].

  • 18. Notteboom T.E.: Concentration and load centre development in the European container port system. Journal of Transport Geography vol. 5(2) pp. 99-115 1997.

  • 19. Pallis A.A.: Cruise Shipping and Urban Development: State of the Art of the Industry and Cruise Ports. International Transport Forum Paris 2015.

  • 20. Pallis A.A.; Arapi K.P.: A Multi-Port Cruise Region: Dynamics and Hierarchies in the Med. Tourismos vol. 11(2) pp. 168–201 2016.

  • 21. Rodrigue J.P.; Notteboom T.: The geography of cruises: Itineraries not destinations. Applied Geography vol. 38 pp. 31–42 2013.

  • 22. Rodrigue J.P.; Comtois C.; Slack B.: The geography of transport systems (3rd ed.). Routledge Abingdon 2013.

  • 23. Song D.W.: Port co-opetition in concept and practice. Maritime Policy and Management vol. 30(1) pp. 29-44 2003.

  • 24. Song D.W.: Regional container port competition and co-operation: the case of Hong Kong and South China. Journal of Transport Geography vol. 10 pp. 99–110 2002.

  • 25. Twrdy E.; Batista M.: Competition between container ports in the Northern Adriatic. International Journal for Traffic and Transport Engineering vol. 4(4) pp. 363–371 2014.

  • 26. UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade And Development): Review of Maritime Transport 2015. UNCTAD Geneva 2015.

  • 27. Wang G.W.Y.; Pallis A.A.; Notteboom T.E.: Incentives in cruise terminal concession contracts. Research in Transportation Business & Management vol. 13 pp. 36–42 2014.

  • 28. Wilson P.; Chern T.S.; Ping T.S.; Robinson E.: A Dynamic Shift-Share Analysis of the Electronics Export Market 1988-2001: Can the NIEs Compete with China?. SCAPE Working Paper Series Paper No. 2005/07 May 2005.

Journal information
Impact Factor

IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 1.214
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.086

CiteScore 2018: 1.48

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.391
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 1.141

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 557 164 14
PDF Downloads 261 127 8