Outline the Important Features of Utilitarianism Essay Example for Free

Outline the Important Features of Utilitarianism Essay The word Utilitarianism comes from the Latin word ‘utilitis’ meaning useful. This traditional ethical theory stemmed from the late 18th and 19th centuries. The Principle of Utility is a teological theory popularised by the late British philosopher, Jeremy Bentham. Its basic meaning suggests it’s the total consequences of an action which determine how morally right or wrong an action is. If the amount of happiness produced in an action overrides the unhappiness produced by an action, the action is determined right. An example of this would be an abortion. Jeremy Bentham was a man of extraordinary intellectual gifts; at the age three he began to study Latin and at the age of sixteen he took his degree at Oxford University. He introduced Act Utilitarianism; every act is evaluated on whether it does or does not produce happiness/pleasure. ‘The greatest happiness for the greatest number’. This insinuates that the amount of people made happy through an act is more important than the quality of their happiness, regardless of the consequences. However, there could be problems with this theory as Phillip Pettit indicated in the quote ‘so long as they promised the best consequences†¦ it would forbid absolutely nothing: not rape, not torture, not even murder. ’ Indicating that Act Utilitarianism could be an excuse to commit dreadful crimes such as murder it may create happiness for the person that committed the murder. It is also difficult to measure the quantity of pleasure or pain in an action. Yet, this theory is still a vital feature of Utilitarianism because it encourages people to think about the consequences of their actions before they perform the act. See more: essay apa format Consequently, Bentham introduced the Hedonic Calculus. The Hedonic Calculus proposes the idea that human pleasures and pains are measurable and that actions can be judged on whether they are considered right or wrong. There are seven factors that are considered when making this decision; it’s intensity (how pleasurable or painful the action is); the duration (how long the pleasure or pain will last); certainty (how sure of the pleasure of pain you are); propinquity/ remoteness (how near the pleasure or pain is); fecundity (the chance of being followed by similar sensations); purity (the chance of it not being followed by sensations of the opposite kind); and extent (the number of individuals affected by it). Nevertheless, John Stuart Mill stated that (happiness is) ‘much too complex and indefinite’ (to be the measure of the moral worth of an action). Connoting, the amount of happiness/pleasure in an action is an individual process. It’s subjective not objective. However the Hedonic Calculus is no doubt an essential feature of Utilitarianism as it is important to consider what makes an action morally right or wrong. Furthermore, Bentham’s disciple and friend, John Stuart Mill introduced Rule Utilitarianism. Rule Utilitarianism measures the consequences of the act repeated over and over again through time, to be followed as a rule whenever certain circumstances arise. It is assesses how morally right or wrong an act is. Mill stressed the importance of ‘The Greatest happiness for the greatest principle’ and the significance of quality over quantity. Implying the extent of the happiness is more important than how many people the happiness affects. He argued that it is the promotion of pleasures and the prevention of pain that determine our moral decisions. However what Mill failed to recognise was that it goes against human rights. So crimes as awful as murder may be considered acceptable in some cases. It could also be argued that Rule Utilitarianism ignores the consequences of the act. Rule Utilitarianism is still a very important theory as it aims to provide the most happiness/ pleasure for people as possible. Leading on, Mill introduced the idea of higher and lower pleasures. Namely those of the mind (intellectual pleasures such as learning a language) are higher pleasures. Whilst body pleasures such as eating are lower pleasures. The higher pleasures are considered more prime and important than lower pleasures. Mill declared ‘it is better to be a human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied. ’ Implying humans are capable of experiencing much higher pleasures than animals. Mill ‘on Liberty’ stated ‘the only part of conduct of anyone, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others’. Suggesting that individuals should care and be concerned by how others think and feel. Conversely, the problem with this theory is that it is difficult to measure the amount of pleasure someone feels. In conclusion, although Utilitarianism is very useful when evaluating the consequences of an action, this theory does not consider the moral righteousness of an action. It is also very difficult to measure the amount of pleasure produced from action. The amount of pleasure can also differ depending on the individual.

What do Thomas Hardys short stories reveal about his society? :: English Literature

What do Thomas Hardy's short stories reveal about his society? Thomas Hardy was born 1840 and died 1924. He composed most of his writings between 1871 and 1912. From 1912 till death he wrote poetry. Hardy enjoyed writing short stories because he had realised that with the pressures and busy lifestyles of modern day life there was little time to sit down and read a novel. One difficulty of a short story is that it can't give in depth character analyses but they can gradually allow someone to make their own analyses judging by Hardy's content in his stories. They are succinct which made them successful. What is a short story? For Hardy a short story wasn't a tale that explained the details in two sentences and left the reader blank looking for clues as to where the story was going, the background of the story and who everyone was. Hardy's short stories gave as much detail as possible and if something was missing, it appeared later on, he consistently made sure the reader would keep up with the story and never rushed his stories, making sure the reader got the full jist of the story. A very simple example of this is in "The Superstitious Mans Story" where during the story Hardy includes a short paragraph which is told by the narrator of the story, it provides both the listener in and out of the story with a piece of missing information which we need to understand it fully, because in "The Superstitious Mans Story" there are two listeners, ourselves and Hardy's metaphorical Alias Mr. Lackland. Hardy's stories have a personal feel to them, when you read them he is talking to you, explaining and saying everything to you. For example "The Superstitious Mans Story" and "Old Andrey's Experience as a Musician" Hardy uses a conversational tone, he writes his stories in the way they would be told person-to-person, face-to-face as maybe travellers stories. Society has changed greatly since the time of Thomas Hardy, we no longer have the closeness and reliability that everyone had then. Hardy lived in a community and describes a community in his short stories where every member of the community knows everyone else, knows past and present members and they are able to tell stories about each of them. In this community everyone can rely on someone else, be it a friend or neighbour. A community like this is not found in cities as Hardy discovers when he moves to London in his early years, London was one of the first megalopolises. He was introduced to the city which he seen as a

Sustainable road policy?

1. Introduction1.1.Definition and DescriptionTransport is a primary factor in environmental, social and economic development due to its association with aspects of accessibility levels, goods and people’s mobility. An investigation into the development of transport necessitates implementing a regular systematic efficient plan, which will look to improve the whole transportation system for the long term. Sustainable transport is strictly needed to change the quality of life for the better. Consequently, sustainable transport is considered to be founded upon a set of interrelated instructions which aims to improve people’s mobility based on the criteria of safety, social equality, minimum land use, recycling materials and lower impacts on the environment (Marks, 2002).1.2. Versions1.2.1 Green Highway VisionThe Highway Agency (HA) suggested the version 2030 project in 2003. The main objective of this project is to enhance the mobility of goods and people in the UK over t hirty years and to predict, estimate and meet what the mobility needs in the future by considering three scenarios: global economy, sustainable lifestyle, and control and plan. Twelve visions have been proposed from this process, each depending on the aforementioned scenarios with a particular vision behind each one. The Green Highway is one of these visions and indicates to an interactive future with progressed sustainable principles such as: constructing sustainable roads and operating maintenance through using resources efficiently; â€Å"Green† materials application; high use of waste product recycling; and the re-assessing of highway design codes, considering the implications of climate change. In addition to this, noise-impact reduction and keeping biodiversity are taken into account through using eco-environment designs (HA, 2003).1.2.2 Mobility VisionThe second is vision 2050 which was proposed by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development in 2010. This vi sion imagines the sustainable future in a wider scope and attributes a longer period to make governance and business sustainable. This will be achieved by following a pathway which requires essential changes in lifestyle and policy. This pathway is supported by nine elements that link the present and the sustainable future in 2050. For instance, Mobility vision aims to improve the access provision universally for the insurance of safety and low impact mobility in order to make the best sustainable economy. In this context, to make reductions of the high volume of transportation and the information and communication technologies (ICT) it will use. Vehicle efficiency has improved through using sophisticated new technology and the alternative energy source, such as electricity, resulting in a significant decrease in the adverse impacts on the environment. Moreover, the intelligent transportation system (ITS) provides active enforcement and comprehensive mobility management which leads to safety improvement (WBCSD, 2009).1.2.3 Vision TwoThese visions relate to walking and cycling in the UK in 2030. It aims to introduce cycling and walking as an eco-friendly mode for getting rid of the current negative transportation impacts by considering three sustainable visions. This also looks at the future through the concept of social building, by concentrating on five locations in the UK to imagine these impacts on a typical city. For example, a car-free, public transport oriented future encourages the use of mass transport, walking and cycling, meaning a lower volume of cars which is the main mode currently used. The significant factors that share in this vision are exploitation sophisticated technology for cars design, electric cycles, improving walking path and bicycle lanes, and small electric modes for freightage goods. These will make a city have improved sociability, a high level of safety, reduce pollution and noise due to transport, and generate high accessibility (Tight et al., 2011). 2. Discussion2.1. Addressing Sustainability Dimensions2.1.1 Green Highway VisionUndoubtedly, there are three important dimensions that should be concurrently taken into consideration within implementing any sustainable future transport system: environment, social, and economic (Transport Policy Advisory Services, 2010). The Green Highway vision considered the creation of sustainable environments through reducing noise nuisance, keeping biodiversity, recycling and using resources effectively. However there are other environmental aspects, such as land use and air pollution, which are not presented and impact on health more than noise. The social sustainable is presented in this vision but without clarifying how it will improve the transport sector and reduce its impacts on environment or cause an improvement in the community (Colantonio, 2007). Furthermore, the life quality enhancement results from the social sustainability (Polese and Stren, 2005). Moreover the lifestyle scenario enc ourages local communities to work together to achieve sustainability for life and to enhance life quality through improved technologies and lifestyle dependence that will reduce energy use and reliance on cars. The people’s tendency to choose sustainable areas to work and live is encouraged by taking land use plan into consideration (HA, 2003). Also the concept of road construction and maintenance operations with new advanced technique are viewed without indicating to its economic dimension. As well as these processes of road infrastructure, enhancements will promote the economy through revenues from tolls and taxes (Marks, 2002).2.1.2. Mobility VisionComprehensively depending on the exploitation of advanced technology is the main principle of the mobility vision practicability. The environmental sustainable dimension is favourably addressed in this vision through implementing different measures, such as: reducing environment impacts; road congestion; accidents in terms of (n umber and cost). This will lead to a decrease in greenhouse gases and improving traffic by applying Intelligent Transportation System (ITS). Furthermore, the economic sustainable dimension is directly addressed through a concern with active transport accessibility which can enhance people’s mobility. This also includes goods freightage, inventing new vehicles, efficient alternative fuels, such as biofuels, high-efficient fuel aircraft, providing interactive transport infrastructure and new transportation means. Overall, this vision vastly considers most economic aspects. However, because of the high cost of biofuel production due to its dependence on feedstock, such as sugarcane, ethanol can be better for use in a commercial viability (Kojima and Johnson, 2006). However, new transport costs are considered as an important target in the transport sustainability, but it is not obviously addressed (Schwaab and Thielmann, 2001). The social sustainable dimension is also addressed in this vision: through the provision of equal mobility for all; safer road networks and decreasing accident numbers close to zero (zero vision); cooperation between transportation companies with other relevant agencies; incorporation of the socio-economic environment with â€Å"integration transport system† (ITS) (WBCSD, 2009). However, the usefulness of non-motorised modes, such as cycling and walking, that improve social community and the environment are not mentioned (Tight et al., 2011). The poor class contribution is also not addressed in this vision, which is considered a key element in the social sustainability dimension. The vision addressed the environmental sustainable dimension through the efforts to reduce noise and greenhouse gases. This was achieved through the use of sophisticated transportation technology such as alternative electrical energy vehicles and â€Å"superior aerodynamic† vehicle quality improvement. However, the addressing of biodiversity and land use impacts are neglected. Nevertheless, the manufacture process of electric cars can also impact adversely on the environment due to the fact that the battery is constructed from harmful materials and uses fossil fuels for its power (Anair and Mahmassani, 2012). According to Calle et al. (2012) the use of biofuels can impact negatively on the environment because it increases greenhouse emissions in other ways, such as non-carbon aircraft emissions and the feedstock production process. Furthermore, this could lead to a potential increase in the price of foodstuffs due to this process using a greater amount of land to produce bioje tfuel (Tietenberg, 2000). 2.1.3. Vision Two This vision for walking and cycling concentrated on urban areas. The economic dimension is clearly addressed so that it considers the enhancement of mobility through improving mass transport, increasing freightage transport efficiency, and constructing separate routes for both bicycles and pedestrians. This also includes supporting and encouraging commercial markets to provide pedestrian electronic tools, and electric-powered bikes and vans. Despite the benefit to human’s health and fitness, walking and cycling causes a significant reduction in travel and congestion costs which leads to an increase in productivity by reducing wastage time. Additionally, a massive reduction in road accident costs can be noticed by allocating dedicated routes for pedestrian and bicycles, based on a reduction in conflict points between bicycles, pedestrians and cars; each conflict point is responsible of the occurrence of a crash in any time and, thus, economic improvement (BCBC, 2009). Social sustainability is vastly addressed in this vision. These will be achieved by applying the equality principle, social consolidation enhancement, public health promotion, and providing high social insurance within that future city which is espoused by this vision. However, it provides the typical social environment inclusion of required needs such as a higher socialised, better communicated, polite and cooperative people which is associated with highest safety levels and health quality. This also suggests roads which have lower car use, dedicate more space for children, and supply all required facilities for walking and cycling. In addition to this is the use of advanced technology in traffic systems, such as automatic vehicle speed reduction system (Tight et al., 2011). This vision addresses the environment dimension by making a reduction in air pollution which leads to a reduction in CO2 emission as well as less transportation noise due to low car use and a greater dependence on walking and cycling. This also includes less land use, the use of eco-friendly cars and imposing strong car use restrictions. As well as this, the walking and cycling and other non-motorized modes are defined as environmental modes due to their compatibility with clean air and that they generate no noise pollution (COUNCIL, 2007).2.2. Transport problems Area2.2.1. Developing CountriesAccording to Gwilliam (2003), developing countries differ from developed countries with respect to of transportation. These differences are characterised by faster population growth, fast urban growth, car ownership, traffic congestion, environmental problems, and road accident and security issues. Movement problems added to the lack of road network quality and traffic management make it very d ifficult to compare and examine. The Green Highway and Vision Two for walking and cycling were placed to the UK situation to address the majority of the above-mentioned issues with a high efficiency, although it cannot be applied in the developing countries with the same efficiency. However, the â€Å"holistic approach [to] improving overall transport† has appeared as a global vision and can address the mobility of urban areas in developing countries. In this vision, the cities are categorized to four kinds, for instance, for addressing finance issues it suggests the participating of both private and public sectors.2.2.2 Climate ChangeThe greenhouse emissions which are from transportation sectors are estimated about 24% globally, and it will increase 2.1% annually (Wright and Fulton, 2005). The CO2 emission was separately estimated to be about 22% in 2012 and was recognized as a main cause of climate change (IEA, 2012). However, addressing climate change can be seen in all th ree visions in different approaches, but vision two is the more effective because of its preference of the non-motorised modes such as walking, cycling and using eco-friendly mass transportation modes. The Green Highway vision aims to adopt the highway design code with the impacts of climate change instead of carbon cutting. Furthermore, the Mobility vision tends to reduce future greenhouse gas emission depending on the technology use with the presence of all transport modes.2.2.3. Equity, social impacts and inclusionThe equity is considered to be a significant aspect due to its extensive influence by any transportation planning decision. However, it can be more effectively addressed through vision two, rather than other visions, because it is focused on increasing the concept of social sustainability (BCDC, 2009). Moreover, public transport accessibility, cycling and walking is crucial to make society more active, but in the mobility vision the economic improvement is taken into co nsideration depending on the sophisticated transportation mode technology. In addition to this, the equity improvement can be achieved by providing equal mobility.2.2.4. Resource use, waste and global pollutionResource use is a potential option in vision two through low car use as well as greater dependence on walking and cycling. In turn this makes a significant reduction in the consumption and use of resources, such as car manufacturing or backup materials, and this leads to the reduction of waste resulting from scrap. However, the Green Highway vision addresses this issue through the high efficiency resources consumption and full attention to recycling concept application. Moreover, the Mobility vision encourages aircrafts and vehicles markets to depend on alternative fuel and observe that this may lead to an increase in resource consumption, such as compound materials which are used in the aircraft manufacturing. However, the potential for recycling carbon fibre has been was fo und (Job, 2010). Conversely, other modes need mass use of resources as well as the technological advancement, and ultimately, global pollution is inevitable.2.2.5. BiodiversityThe Green Highway vision concerns the addressing of biodiversity conservation through constructing of wild movement green bridges and tunnels, and water ponds. However, the Mobility vision has an adverse impact on biodiversity due to its dependence on using the largest land area to provide biojetfuel as an alternative future energy (Kojima and Johnson, 2006). Furthermore, biodiversity has not been influenced by the vision two for concentration on improving road network infrastructure in urban areas.2.2.6. Energy SecurityAccording to DECC (2012), the transport sector contributed about 38% of total energy consumption in 2011. The Green Highway vision can impact positively in the reduction of energy consumption to some extent through focusing on road infrastructure improvement and implementing recycling materials interns to reduce energy consumption by implementing recycling and minimizing the road distance. However, in the Mobility vision, the energy security is addressed efficiently by introducing alternative fuels such as biofuel to replace fossil fuel which leads to energy security effectively (Kojima and Johnson, 2006). In the scope of foodstuffs and climate change, decreasing it seems not compatible and the increasing desire and the biofuel’s wide spread will pose a risk to food security and climate change (Field et al., 2008). Additionally, in vision two the focus on walking and cycling as well as lower car use plays a significant role in energy security; moreover, the aircraft and electric bicycle manufacturing require energy.2.2.7. SafetySafety is an issue that is directly related to public life. However, this issue has not been considered in the Green Highway vision. Nevertheless, the safety is addressed in vision two through the use of alternative biofuels which are charac terised by low carbon emission as well as zero vision which address safety through reducing the accidents number to close to zero. Furthermore, safety is addressed more efficiently through the use of technology that reduces vehicle speed automatically and allocates segregated lanes for pedestrians and cyclists.2.2.8. Landscape and heritageThe Green Highway vision damages landscape and heritage because of their adversely influence on the transportation infrastructure improvement process (Seiler, 2001). Though, in the Mobility vision the largest land use is to provide the requiring energy and may adversely impact the landscape. However, in vision two, improving the transportation infrastructure is based on the existing reality; therefore it does not impact on the landscape.2.2.9. NoiseThe Green Highway vision addresses noise through the use of noise barriers and a defeatist road surface. However, the Mobility vision addresses noise reduction through the use electric vehicles, hybrid vehicles and aircraft with superior aerodynamics deployment. Furthermore, vision two contributes to the reduction of noise through low car use, walking and cycling and using electric modes.2.2.10. Air pollutionThe Green Highway vision addresses air pollution to some degree, but not directly. However, the Mobility vision addresses this issue interactively through low carbon emission from transportation, using electric vehicles, hybrids, eco-friendly ships and aircrafts. In addition to this, it is significantly addressed by vision two through low car use, depending on walking and cycling.2.2.11. Severance and pedestrian issuesThe Green Highway vision does not address severance and pedestrian safety. However, there is full attention given to public safety in the Mobility vision through pollution reduction and low carbon mobility. Moreover, vision two addresses this issue more effectively through improving pedestrian and cyclist’s mobility by allocating separate lanes for their m ovement and low car use.2.3. Feasibility, global transportation issues, barriers2.3.1. Green Highway VisionUndoubtedly, the Green Highway vision introduces an eco-design to be applied to enhance the transportation infrastructure, but it is not active to the high degree of addressing all sustainable dimensions. Good road quality brings more car use which causes environment deterioration. However, the role of advanced technology in the road performance improvement is also not considered in this vision. For example, using connected vehicles which provide the driver with all information about weather, traffic volume, road, and alerting in case the existence of problems as well as electric priority lane that charges moving vehicles automatically (Krick, 2011). In addition to this, a number of Green Highway projects with additional principles to the environmental aspect are applied in some countries such as Sweden and Norway. Consequently, until 2030 the effectiveness of this vision will expire and will not be feasible.2.3.2 Mobility VisionDue to the presence of some features, this vision seems infeasible. However, it relies on incorporating advanced technology in transportation modes which causes a significant reduction in greenhouse emissions and requires a multi-energy source to improve the environment dimension. Moreover, the encouraging travel, car ownership, results in urbanisation, increasing congestion, increasing resource consumption and land take. Furthermore, greater battery energy consumption results in pollution in the stations and reduces the importance of eco-friendly car use. Nevertheless, technology is considered as a barrier in front of relevant authorities to decide on other dimensions (Banister, 2005). However biofuel seems inefficient due to its expected adverse impacts on the security of food and the hydrogen energy cost is estimated to be four times as much as current fuel (ibid, 2005). Albeit, due to dealing with sustainability dimensions lo psidedly as well as developing countries drawbacks in terms of their understanding and point of view towards sustainability concept countries issues, this shows unfeasibility of the vision.2.3.3. Vision TwoThere is an intensive relationship between urban transportation and its impacts on the environment due to it being directly related to life quality. The main target of vision two is life quality improvement through car use avoidance, in contrast to walking and cycling prominent. Currently, the car is a common travel mode, and the average distance travelled in a car has risen by 75% between 1980 and 2008 (DfT, 2009). Accordingly, to achieve a reduction in car use is very difficult and there are a lot of barriers because it relates to the citizens’ freedoms. Therefore it is not easy to accept and to digest such a step and to give-up car ownership. However, the contradiction and non-cooperation between the institutions related to the case and difficulties in legal measures ap plication would be another significant barrier (Banister, 2005). Moreover, causing scandalous damage to car manufacture would only serve to increase the rate of people without jobs as well as the walking and cycling leads to space strictures, and cities extension because of long distance and the lack of network quality, with harsh weather. Even though there is potential to dispose of these barriers by using technological means and strictly roads policies applying, this vision seems more efficient and applicable than others; foregoing the drawbacks, due to its compatibility to improve the tree mentioned sustainability dimensions in cities and towns. References Anair, D., & Mahmassani, A. (2012) State of charge: electric vehicles’ global warming emissions and fuel-cost savings across the United States. Union of Concerned Scientists Report. [Online] www. ucsusa. org/assets/ documents/clean_vehicles/electric-carglobal-warming-emissions-report. pdf. [Accessed November 22nd 2013] Banister, D. (2005) Unsustainable transport: City transport in the new century. Oxfordshire: Routledge publication. BCBC (2009) Walking and Cycling Strategy. Borough:Bridgend County Borough Council. [online] www. Bridgend.gov.uk [Accessed November 29th 2013]. Calle, F. R. Teelucksingh, S. Thran, D. and Seiffert, M. (2012)The potential and role of biofuels in commercial air transport-biojetfuel. London: Imperial College London IEA Bioenergy. [online] www.bioenergytrade.org/†¦/T40-Biojetfuel-Report-Sept2012.pdf [Accessed November 27th 2013]. Colantonio, A. (2007) Social Sustainability: An Exploratory Analysis of its Definition, Assessment. Methods, Metrics and Tools Measuring Social Sustainability: Best Practice from Urban Renewal in the EU. 2007/01: EIBURS Working Paper Series. Oxford Brookes University. [online] oisd.brookes.ac.uk/sustainable†¦/Social Sustainability_Metrics_and_T†¦ [Accessed November 26th 2013]. COUNCIL, P. D. (2007) Walking and Cycling Strategy. [online] http://www.hume.vic.gov.au/files/82cb922e-849b-432b-b4d1-9e0e00afba15/CW225WalkingandCyclingStrategy.pdf [Accessed November 26th 2013] DECC (2012) Overall energy consumption in the UK since 1970. Department of Energy and Climate Change. URN Publication: 12D/289. [online] www.decc.gov.uk/†¦/decc/†¦/energy-consumption/2324-overall-ener [Accessed November 26th 2013]. DfT (2009) Transport trends. London: Department for Transport. [online] http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100406130654/dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/datatablespublications/trends/current/ [Accessed November 24th 2013]. Field, C. B. Campbell, E. and Lobell, D. B. (2008) Biomass energy: the scale of the potential resource. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Volume 23, Issue 2, 65-72. [online] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169534708000098 [Accessed November 30th 2012]. Gwilliam, K. (2003) Urban transport in developing countries. [online] Transport Reviews, 23(2), 197-216. [online] http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01441640309893#.Umwm7XCb55g [Accessed November 20th 2013] HA (2003) Vision 2030 – Final report: An investigation into the long-term challenges and opportunities for the UK’s strategic highway network. Highways agency. WSP Civils. [online] Ltd.http://www.transportvisions.org.uk/documents/documents.htm [Accessed December 5th 2013]. IEA Statistics (2012) CO2 emissions from fuel consumption: Highlights. Paris: International Energy Agency, 2011 Edition. [online] www.iea.org/†¦/CO2emissionfromfuelcombustionHIGHLIGHTS.pdf [Accessed December 2nd 2012]. Job, S. (2010) Composite recycling: summary of recent research and development. Materials KTN Reports. [online] www.compositesuk.co.uk/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=LXN†¦ [Accessed December 4th2012]. Kirk, B., & Eng, P. (2011) Connected vehicles: an executive overview of the status and trends. Globis Consulting, November, 21. [online] http://www.globisconsulting.ca/Connected_Vehicles_Globis_rpt.pdf [Accessed November 24th2013] Kojima, M., & Johnson, T. (2005) Potential for biofuels for transport in developing countries. [online]http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/20093014861.html;jsessionid=25D728151573397D1B099BB26B4D6DF1 [Accessed November 23rd 2013] Marks, D. H. (2002) The Evolving Role of Systems Analysis in Process and Methods in Large-Scale Public Socio-Technical Systems. In Proceedings of the Engineering Systems Division (ESD) Internal Symposium (pp. 251-266). [online] http://esd.mit.edu/WPS/internal-symposium/esd-wp-2003-01.08.pdf Polese, M. and Stren, R,. (Eds.), (2000) The Social Sustainability of Cities: Diversity and the Management of Change. Toronto:University of Toronto Press. Schwaab, J.A. and Thielmann, S. (2001) Economic instruments for sustainable road transport: an overview for policy makers in developing countries. Eschborn: GTZ publication. [online] lnweb90.worldbank.org/†¦/Economic_Instruments_for_Sustainable_†¦[Accessed December 2nd 2013]. Seiler, A. (2001) Ecological effects of roads: A review. Riddarhyttan: University of Agricultural Sciences, S-73091. [online] idd00s4z.eresmas.net/doc/transp/ecoeffectsonroads.pdf [Accessed December 2rd December 2013]. Tietenberg, T. H., & Lewis, L. (2000) Environmental and natural resource economics (pp. 86-98). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. [online] http://www.dandelon.com/servlet/download/attachments/dandelon/ids/AT00182C23C6746888AE0C12570840044C6CE.pdf Tight, M. Timms, P. Banister, D. Bowmaker, J. Copas, J. Day, A. Drinkwater, D. Givoni, M. Guhnemann, A. Lawler, M. Macmillen, J. Miles, A. Moore, N. Newton, R. Ngoduy, D. Ormerod, M. O’Sullivan, M. Watling, D. (2011). Visions for a walking and cycling focussed urban transport system. Journal of Transport Geography 19, 1580–1589. Transport Policy Advisory Services, (2010) Challenges of urban transport in developing countries- a summary. [online] http://www.sutp.org/ins-pol-supporting-docs?download=391:challenges-of-urban-transport-in-developing-countries-a-summary [accessed November 20th 2013] WBCDE (2009) Vision 2050: The new Agenda for Business. Geneva: World Business Council on Sustainable Development. [online] http://www.wbcsd.org/vision2050.aspx. Wright, L., & Fulton, L. (2005). Climate change mitigation and transport in developing nations. Transport Reviews, 25(6), pp. 691-717. [online] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/messages/downloadsexceeded.html [Accessed November 26th 2013]

The Profitablity Marketing And Economic Impact Of Port Investment Finance Essay - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 15 Words: 4532 Downloads: 10 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Economics Essay Type Narrative essay Did you like this example? As far as investing in port assets is concerned, there are two ways, almost in contrast with one another, of regarding the port: The port may be considered a public service that is generally useful to the economy, justifying the tax system being utilized for the purpose of funding the investments required. The port may be considered a business system that operates within a highly competitive market and requires investment projects to be selected with efficiency. The line drawn between these two functions changes, depending on the country, environment, business, social and political culture, period and political trends. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "The Profitablity Marketing And Economic Impact Of Port Investment Finance Essay" essay for you Create order In most institutional models, the large infrastructures that either provide access to a port or are used for general purposes attract public investments, while terminal superstructures are instead invested in by the terminal company itself. The port of Durres is located in the heart of Durres city, which is approximately 39 from Tirana. The port of Durres is Albanias largest sea port. Durres is one of Albanias oldest cities and was founded as a Greek colony in 627 B.C. Since then, the city has grown and expanded while preserving monuments of the ancient city. Now Durres is the second largest and one of the most economically developed cities in Albany due to the large port that allows trading in the Adriatic Sea. The recent construction of a motorway that links Durres with Tirana has cut down the traveling time to the capital to only 30 minutes. Tirana is also accessible by train, between Durres and Tirana there is a frequent and cheap rail service. Also the construction of the motorway that links Durres and Prishtina will cut down the traveling time and cost between Albania and Kosova. The port of Durres, beyond its physical dimensions, is historical, and certainly the reality is that in the future it will be an important actor in the lives of not only this city of our country but also throughout the region. Always important strategic point in the eastern Adriatic coast, the port has been developed in years as a privileged institution that has enjoyed particular attention. Thousands of people, workers, managers, leaders and important personalities have given their contribution to its development. Financing of investment in the Port of Durres is one of the main priorities for the Albanian Government and foreign financial institutions as the World Bank, European Union and the European Investment Bank. World Bank with an investment of $ 23 million has completed the rehabilitation project for the Port of Durres which includes rehabilitation of the pi ers, warehouses and buildings. European Union Fare Program with an investment of ÃÆ' ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã… ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¬ 4.4 million, has completed the project which includes rehabilitation of the Ferry Terminal, pier reconstruction of 120 ml and 60 ml of building the new pier. TDA Trade and Development Agency (USA) $ 9.1 million. This project involves studying the feasibility of new container terminal and its equipment at the Port of Durres. TDA has also given a grant of $ 1.4 million to purchase two reach stacker, a spreader plumber and some other assets. The project has been completed. European Investment Bank (IEB) with investment of ÃÆ' ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã… ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¬ 17 million. The project includes financing the construction of Container Terminal, drainage systems, emergency excavation for the entrance channel and the aquarium, and the purchase of a mobile crane for the Port of Durres. Infrastructure Rehabilitation Project. The project started its implementation. Now it i s buying mobile crane with a capacity of processing 120 tons of containers and continues the implementation of two other components of the project: Laying asphalt, drainage works worth about ÃÆ' ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã… ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¬ 10.4 million. Digging for emergency and incoming channel port aquarium worth ÃÆ' ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã… ¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ¬ 3.3 million. In early 2006 there was inaugurated the completion of paving works on the sites after the piers, which was conducted by the Croatian company Montmontaza. II. PROFITABILITY, SOCIAL DESIRABILITY AND PORT INVESTMENTS Investment is a variation of the total stock of capital goods used in productive activities. In the port sector this is necessarily a variation in instrumental assets, as the product the throughput is a service and therefore cannot be stocked. Investment is carried out by a port business in order to have the desired level of throughput capacity at its disposal. Investing in ports, therefore, has a direct impact on overall port capacity and supply. Neoclassical production theory expresses investment as a variation over time of the level of capital used by a business. It usually hypothesizes a standard (Cobb-Douglas) production function as; (1) where L and K are, respectively, the amounts of labor and capital employed over a period of time, investment is the variation in capital levels ÃÆ' ¢Ãƒâ€¹Ã¢â‚¬  Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  K, which takes place between one period and the next. According to neoclassical economists, the investment decision is a direct function of the amount o f capital needed to produce the level of output Q deemed optimal by a business (for example, the amount needed to maximize its profits), and an inverse function of the interest rate, which is the cost of the investment. The investment, as a variation in the level of capital, will be equal to; (2) According to Keynesian theory, investment takes place if the marginal efficiency of capital is higher than the market interest rate, which represents the return of the other possible uses of the resources employed. It is also normally considered that the rate of profit expected from the investment should be greater than the interest rate plus a spread (to reward the risk of the profit achieved proving to be lower than that originally expected). Since the potential investor will rank possible investment projects starting from those with the highest marginal efficiency, the well-known inverse relationship results between (cumulated) investment and the market interest rate. In the port industry, the product is throughput, and the investment is the creation of throughput capacity. Port investments are those increases in capital goods that allow greater throughput via an increased efficiency in using the production factors. These include the following: infrastructures, such as breakwaters, dams and lock systems that enable access along canals and rivers, the excavation or dredging of riverbeds and the construction of new piers, wharfs, yards, etc.; terminal superstructures (cranes, means of transport, buildings used for storage or port services); and other assets useful for the production of port services. Most port investments particularly infrastructural investments bear the following features: their profitability is at least in part indirect, since they are part of collective capital, which acts as a location factor for business activities and generates positive externalities; they also generate environmental costs and negative externalit ies; the construction of infrastructures brings with it significant indivisibilities, owing to economies of scale, financial requirements and network economies; they require considerable time to be accomplished, including a lengthy planning and design period, and subsequently boast an extremely long economic life. As a result, there is a hefty time lag between costs (incurred primarily before the port comes into operation) and revenues, and a long payback period for the investment itself; high risk and high uncertainty of expected profit, due in part to the difficulty of estimating costs; in the case of general purpose assets (such as dams, canals and basins) cost cannot be imputed to individual users, while the benefit for each user cannot be quantified either; and infrastructure costs are sunk (i.e. lost whenever the investor decides to withdraw from the market), and therefore act as exit barriers that jeopardize the markets contestability and create the risk of a m onopoly. Comparing direct usefulness (profitability), be it positive or negative, with external usefulness (be it positive or negative) produces four possible combinations, shown in Fig. 1 as a Cartesian graph, where direct profitability (profit forecast) is shown along the abscissa and social utility (net benefit) is shown along the ordinate. Fig. 1. Direct Profitability and Social Utility of Investment. Assuming that the coordinates at the origin of the axes are, respectively, market interest rate (to which a risk premium may be added), and 0 (or, alternatively, the above-mentioned standard socioeconomic internal rate of return), the bisector of quadrants II-IV separates the situations bearing total (direct+external) positive utility, above the bisector, from those bearing total negative utility, below the bisector. Private profitability normally stems from the private nature of benefits (port services or assets are private goods, featuring excludability and rivalry be tween users): in the port arena, this can be the case for services (both to goods or to ships), superstructures (cranes) and, to a lesser extent, terminal infrastructure. Public profitability stems from the existence of long-term external benefits, such as hinterland accessibility, public or club goods such as nautical assets (dredging, breakwaters, locks, etc.), land based networks and general local accessibility. Fig. 1 shows the situations that may then arise. Quadrant I contains those situations where investment is driven by private profitability and also implies a public benefit. It is promoted by the market and there is no reason for it to be halted by the public administration (although it may be regulated in order to enhance public benefit). On the opposite side, quadrant III clearly shows investment projects that appear neither profitable nor socially desirable and, therefore, should never be promoted. Quadrant II features investments deemed socially useful (external economies, accessibility, etc.) but with little or no direct profitability. If the balance is positive (i.e. above the bisector), investments should be promoted by adopting the appropriate policies, which might include grants and public-private partnerships (PPPs), capable to shift profitability (as represented by vector b) even if the offsetting costs reduces overall utility, and therefore moves the point closer to the bisector. What is an unprofitable investment for private capital may, nevertheless, be regarded as socially desirable (for example, as a driver of regional economic development). Ports have often been regarded, be it rightly or wrongly, as drivers of regional development as well as a source of considerable external benefits. Nowadays the local net external benefit is less certain, although ports are regarded more than before as essential gateways for the competitiveness of the hinterland. This may drive forward an investment even with no private profitability. T he investment can be entirely public, or (if public resources are scarce) publicly co-financed in order to supplement private profitability and push it above the threshold that is critical for the private investor (i.e. interest rate+risk premium). Yet, the risk is to promote investments that are actually below the bisector. If we assume that any compensation policy shifting benefits/costs from one sector to another does have a cost, then no policy can make the point shift from below to above the bisector. Quadrant IV shows investments that are profitable for the investor, but a source of net external costs. This situation is common nowadays, and increases in port capacity required by terminal and logistics companies often gives rise to conflict and opposition at a local level, due to there being no (or very few) external benefits in comparison with external costs. An investment should nevertheless be encouraged for projects placed above the bisector, through the offsetting an d reduction of external costs to shift the investment towards quadrant I, as represented by vector a (even if offsetting costs reduces the investments overall utility, and again it moves the point closer to the bisector). Investments where social disutility of external costs exceeds direct profitability (below the bisector) must instead be prevented by way of appropriate bans and restrictions, etc. A pure market economy would promote all and only investments in quadrants I and IV (where direct profitability is higher than the market interest rate), while a centralized economy should promote all and only investments in quadrants I and II. If market failures are taken into account instead, the focus should be on promoting investments ranging above bisector II-IV. Indeed, area A of quadrant IV shows situations where the social effect of directly profitable investments needs to be mitigated through reductions and restrictions (even at the risk of limiting their profitability). In area B of quadrant II, private investment that would otherwise be uneconomical needs to be encouraged through incentives or through funding that is seen to stem directly from public investment. Only in quadrant I, are investments privately and socially profitable, although regulations and governance-oriented measures may be taken to amend the profitability mix. III. HOW TO CREATE A PORT INVESTMENT MODEL The port capacity installed by the investor (be it public or private) may be exploited by the investor itself, if it acts as the assets manager and charges the carrier for use. Alternatively, it may be leased to a stevedore, which manages it and charges the carrier. Moreover, the carrier and the terminal operator may be vertically integrated (the so-called dedicated terminals) and in some cases, the carrier may also overlap with the shipper, which may manage its own ships and sometimes its own terminal(s) as well. However, if only business functions are considered, the port investment chain involves the following players: (i) the investor investing in the port facility; (ii) the terminal operator; (iii) the carrier using the port, or its representatives; and (iv) the shipper, or its representatives. The investments return is determined by the stevedoring industrys profits, which in turn influence those of the shipping industry, logistics and eventually the profits of the manu facturers/shippers and the utility of consumers. This section investigates the effects generated by the port investment, so as to highlight significant relationships between players, as well as the implications for investment decisions and for the funding of investments. It focuses on the microeconomic effects of an investment, disregarding any macroeconomic benefits to employment, earnings and their distribution, any environmental benefits-costs (both direct environmental impact and the balance between the environmental impact of maritime transport and that of alternative transport). These macroeconomic effects are rather difficult to measure, while the environmental effects are uncertain, since the development of maritime transport through port investments leads to an increase in the environmental costs associated with a port and maritime transport, but on the other side it encourages a modal split with a more sustainable environmental impact. A port investment may be extens ive, if its aim is to increase productive capacity while average costs remain unchanged, or intensive, if its aim is to increase productivity and reduce unitary costs. From a theoretical perspective, the notion of a purely extensive investment may be viable when, for example, a terminal operator having to meet sharp rises in demand decides to increase its throughput capacity by adding new infrastructures that offer the same productivity as those already in use. When, on the other hand, demand is stagnant or competition from other operators is already fierce or on the rise, a terminal operator may well plump for a purely intensive investment, aimed at increasing productivity. Actually, though, it is very likely that in the former situation the new assets would be more productive than those already in place, thanks to technological improvements that are likely to have been introduced. As a result, an increase in quantity also translates into an increase in average productivity. I n the latter situation, a rise in productivity is normally achieved, thanks to the reduced time per unit of throughput, and the consequent increase in throughput per unit of time. It is therefore very realistic to assume that between these two theoretical extremes, the effects of the investment will, in practice, be distributed between an increase in quantity and a reduction in costs. In a market of perfect competition this cost reduction would turn into a correspondent reduction in price (or in generalized cost) without increase in profit. On the other hand, in a monopoly situation, or if demand is extremely inelastic, it could lead purely to a rise in profit, without any benefit being enjoyed by the user (with a reduction in price approaching or equal to zero). In any intermediate situation, the effect will be distributed, depending upon the elasticity of demand and the position of the cost curves, between an increase in profit and a reduction in price, accompanied by an increa se in throughput. From a microeconomic viewpoint, then, an investment in a port asset normally causes an increase in the level of throughput (total and per unit of time) as well as an improvement in the level of service. This causes a reduction in the generalized cost Cg of the port service (equivalent to a reduction in price) and/or an increase in the profits of the stevedore. The decrease in generalized cost will cause throughput to increase, at a rate that will be directly correlated to the degree of competition within the port services market: the greater the competition, the greater the reduction in price and the increase in throughput; the lower the competition, the greater the profits netted by the manager (unless demand is completely inelastic). The increase in throughput leads in turn to an increase in the stevedores profits, and usually to increasing returns to scale as well, thereby triggering a further fall in the cost of production, generalized cost, price and potentially a further increase in profits. Moreover, this reduction in generalized cost/price leads to a decrease in the generalized cost (price) of the whole transport cycle, triggering within the transport industry the same kind of effects: lower prices, higher volumes and higher profits. Again, an increasing return to scale is likely to occur, and these effects can therefore build up to become stronger. Finally, the same kind of effect will also be seen for shippers (and possibly for intermediate operators such as logistic operators, forwarders, etc.,): a lower generalized cost causes both volumes and profits to rise, with possible further increases due to economies of scale. The final decrease in prices for transported goods can eventually benefit final consumers. There is therefore a chain running from port investors, to port operators, carriers, forwarders or logistic operators, all the way through to shippers and consumers, as shown in Fig. 2. Fig. 2. Port Investment and its Microeconomic and Macroeconomic Consequences. Note: Inv = investment, C = cost, GC = generalized cost, s.l. = service level, P = price, Th = throughput, ÃÆ' Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬ = profit. Assuming a linear demand function, such as; p = a bq (3) for every possible position that may be taken by E, then: US = q [a (a bq)]/2 = 1/2 bq2 (4) This is a parabola on an ever-upward slope in the first quadrant. The revenue function is then TR = aq bq2 (5) and the function of the long-run average cost (LRAC) is straight, expressed that is to say by the function TC = cq (6) and, total profit can therefore be expressed as; TÃÆ'Ã… ½Ãƒâ€šÃ‚   = TR TC = (a c)q bq2 (7) The profit-maximising quantity is given by d TÃÆ'Ã… ½Ãƒâ€šÃ‚   / dq = 0 (8) from which we obtain a c 2bq = 0 (9) q = (a c)/2b (10) The quantity that maximizes the sum of profit and consumers surplus, considering thus both direct and external profitability, i s then d (TÃÆ'Ã… ½Ãƒâ€šÃ‚   + US)/dq = 0 (11) from which we obtain a c 2bq + bq = 0 (12) with the optimal quantity emerging thus q = (a c)/b (13) As a result, the quantity that maximizes the sum of profit and consumer surplus Equation (13) is double the quantity that maximizes profit Equation (10). IV. INVESTMENT, PROFITABILITY, PRICING, PRIVATE AND PUBLIC FINANCING These results suggest some remarks on the financing of port investment. Port investment may produce both direct and indirect benefits. Direct benefits provide a funding channel by way of the pricing applied for the use of infrastructure, revenues and the consequent profit for the company that builds and/or manages the terminal (if two different companies are involved, the profit of the terminal operator will be used to pay the charge to the company that owns the port facility). Net public benefits justify the utilization of fiscal resources instead. So far, port investments have very often attracted public investment, due to the very features of the infrastructures and systems associated with ports. However, there has been no proper criterion in place to determine if only theoretically the extent to which the public taxation system should be involved in a port infrastructure. This particular issue is closely linked to the price charged for using infrastructure, for two r easons: (i) the pricing applied to, and the payment made for, the utilization of a port asset generates a level of private profit that is complementary to the public taxation system (the greater the resources obtainable from pricing, the lower the resources required from taxation, and vice versa); and (ii) the pricing criterion itself may reflect not only the port operators profit-maximizing strategies (or just its market strategies), but also the purpose of maximizing the welfare generated by the investment. V. BUSINESS STRATEGIES AND MARKET FORMS OF INVESTMENTS Two attributes of the investments that characterize even if not exclusively companies operating within ports are the degree to which investments are reversible and uncertainty, which is typical of every decision that has anything to do with the future. The first of these two attributes would appear to be of considerable importance in our case, since a growing number of private firms are being asked to invest not only in port superstructures, but also in actual infrastructures. Suffice it to consider, for example, the many dedicated terminals typical of the container transport sector, and similarly the cruise transport sector in which the transport company is vertically integrated to become a terminal company as well, thereby participating in the cost of the terminal investment proportionally to its share in the venture. In these situations, it is clear how at least part of the investment should be regarded as irreversible, making it interesting therefore to ascertain how this circumstance, together with the uncertainty as to how the operating environment will evolve, may cause the company to accumulate surplus, or insufficient, capital. According to authors irreversibility and uncertainty of investments involve two types of effect; the so-called user-cost effect, which leads firms to under-invest. This is because entrepreneurs are more reluctant to invest, given that their inability to disinvest results in a higher user-cost of capital in relation to current investment decisions; and the so-called hangover effect, indicating the reliance of current capital stock on past behavior, which leads firms to over-invest in the presence of irreversibility and uncertainty. 5.1. Stackelberg Equilibrium It is worthwhile remembering that the Stackelberg duopoly considers two firms known as L and F (leader and follower) that need to decide (not at the same time) how much capital to employ. The function of profits for these two firms may be expressed as; ÃÆ'Ã… ½Ãƒâ€šÃ‚  L(KL, KF) = KL(1 KL KF) ÃÆ'Ã… ½Ãƒâ€šÃ‚  F(KL, KF) = KF(1 KL KF) (14) This situation leads firm L (the firm to decide first, since it is the first to introduce a new technology or to enter a particular market) to select the amount of capital in such a way as to maximize its own profit function, while taking into account the reaction curve of firm F. This means that where; KF = RF(KL) = (1 KL)/2 (15) the equilibrium which is different from the Cournot equilibrium, based on companies making their choices at the same time makes the levels of capital employed equal to; KL = 1/2 KF = 1/4 (16) Profits and the ratio between them therefore emerge as; ÃÆ'Ã… ½Ãƒâ€šÃ‚  L = 1/8 ÃÆ'Ã… ½Ãƒâ €šÃ‚  F = 1/16 (17) ÃÆ'Ã… ½Ãƒâ€šÃ‚  L/ÃÆ'Ã… ½Ãƒâ€šÃ‚  F = 2 The firm investing first therefore accumulates twice as much capital as the other, while also netting a profit that is double that realized by the follower. If at a later stage a rise in demand is expected, the model shows how both firms will increase their productive capacity to a similar extent, so that the ratio between the respective profits of the two firms remains unchanged. We are thus witnessing a game that repeats itself by the same procedures. In other words, this duopoly leads the firms to cover three-quarters of the amount that would be exchanged in a market of perfect competition, leaving unchanged their respective market share as leader and follower, with one twice that of the other. Compared with monopolistic equilibrium, this model guarantees that a higher amount is exchanged (50% more in fact). This gives rise to the capacity surplus seen in these types of oligopoly. VI. CONCLUSION Port investment is a key issue in modern port economics with regard to planning port development, financing and assessing the return on investment. In the literature, the topic of infrastructure investment has been historically tackled either from a pure macro-economic perspective or from the mere firms point of view (the managerial decision process related to port investment). These approaches focus mainly on the macro-economic costs and benefits of the port industry and, on the other side, on the economic efficiency of the port function for port users. This paper overcomes that kind of segmentation. It addresses some of the features related to port investment starting from the evaluation of the main paradigms that characterize the port industry from a global point of view, and focuses on the relations, synergies and conflicts between the numerous stakeholders actually involved. Profitability, economic impact and financing are seen as the most critical nodes in the complex c hain of port investment decisions. Port investment has been described as the result of the equilibrium of several interactions between different forces and interests, where the most relevant aspects are (i) the public/private combination, which imprints the port industry and (ii) the geographical scale of evaluation. The mix between public and private interests, and the specific role of public bodies, may in fact be seen as the core of a specific port investment theory, which evaluates direct and indirect effects as well as uncertainty in returns. The different perspectives of evaluating the impact of port investment can lead to a different evaluation of the costs and benefits involved, and their desirability. The framework of the paper has been primarily based on the description and critical evaluation of the public/private and local/global tradeoffs, which in turn affect the assessment of port impacts, the development of funding, pricing and tax systems, the competitive scen ario and distortions, which are likely to occur in inter-port and intra-port competitions. The main contribution of the paper may be seen in the effort of building up a comprehensive scenario where single aspects and variables related to port investments can fit into a general scheme of interrelationships, which identify feasible outcomes. The foreseeable outputs in terms of demand and supply provide insights for possible incentives to efficiency to be improved by decision-makers at different levels, promoting the reduction of conflicts and the synergies of interests. Although the topic has clearly practical implications, the work follows a theoretical approach rather than an empirical one. The proposal is, in fact, to develop an overall framework of analysis with a certain degree of originality in comparison with consolidated fields of the past literature, limiting at the same time the risk of a rapidly non-updated decision-support tool. The implementation of a number of o utlined policy guidelines can be considered as an implicit agenda for future research. SYMBOLS C = cost EIB = European Investment Bank EU = European Union GC = Generalized Cost Inv = Investment P = Price PPP = Public Private Partnerships s.l. = service level, TDA = Trade and Development Agency Th = Throughput US = Users Surplus WB = World Bank, ÃÆ' Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬ = Profit