Uneven Transitions in Container Ship Capacity Across Indo-Pacific Economies (2010–2022): Integrating PCA, ANOVA, and Clustering Evidence

Ariyono Setiawan; Bambang Widjanarko  Otok; Wisnu  Handoko; Abdul Razak Abdul  Hadi; Choo Wou  Onn; Denni  Arli

doi:10.59395/ijadis.v7i1.1442

Authors

Ariyono Setiawan Politeknik Pelayaran Surabaya, Indonesia
Bambang Widjanarko Otok Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember (ITS) Surabaya, Indonesia
Wisnu Handoko Politeknik Ilmu Pelayaran Semarang, Indonesia
Abdul Razak Abdul Hadi University of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Choo Wou Onn INTI International University, Malaysia
Denni Arli University of Tasmania, Australia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59395/ijadis.v7i1.1442

Keywords:

Clustering Analysis, Indo-Pacific Shipping, Principal Component Analysis, TEU per Ship, Welch ANOVA

Abstract

We examine uneven transitions in container ship capacity (TEU per ship) across five Indo-Pacific economies China, Singapore, Australia, Vietnam, and Indonesia during 20102022 using an integrated statistical framework that combines ANOVA, Welch ANOVA, GamesHowell post-hoc tests, Principal Component Analysis (PCA), and clustering. Results reveal persistent divergence: China and Singapore maintain high-capacity fleets (>10,000 TEU/ship), Australia stabilizes in the mid-tier range (~7,000 TEU/ship), while Indonesia and Vietnam experience rapid but low-level growth (<6,000 TEU/ship). ANOVA confirms significant cross-country differences (F=28.33; p<0.001; 0.65), with Welch ANOVA yielding consistent results under unequal variances (p<0.01). PCA indicates one dominant component (PC199.5%) explaining most variance, forming three readiness clusters: high, medium, and low capacity economies. These patterns suggest that policy inertia, infrastructure bottlenecks, and green transition constraints drive the uneven capacity development. The study contributes by introducing TEU per ship as a cross-national indicator for maritime readiness, linking statistical divergence to SDG targets 8, 9, 10, 13, and 14, and offering empirical guidance for low-carbon fleet transition and port modernization in emerging economies..

923 493

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1]. X. Bai, Z. Ma, and Y. Zhou, “Does the traffic volume of a port determine connectivity? Revisiting port connectivity measures with high-frequency satellite data,” Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 102, 2022, Art. 103385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2022.103385 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2022.103385

[2]. L. Fan and S. Xie, “Larger ships or port investment? An empirical study on investment choice for port development,” Maritime Policy & Management, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 1–20, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2021.1971784 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2021.1971784

[3]. P. Jarumaneeroj, “Port productivity and connectivity: A systemic review and future research directions,” Maritime Economics & Logistics, vol. 25, pp. 523–548, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-022-00243-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-022-00243-9

[4]. Y.-S. Son, “Assessing the connectivity and vulnerability of global shipping networks with AIS: A network science approach,” Applied Sciences, vol. 12, no. 4, 2022, Art. 2115. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12042115 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app12042115

[5]. A. Veenstra and A. de Waal, “The impact of container call size—Evidence from simulation modelling,” Maritime Transport Research, vol. 5, 2024, Art. 100109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.martra.2024.100109 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.martra.2024.100109

[6]. P. N. Nguyen and S.-H. Woo, “Port connectivity and competition among container ports in Southeast Asia based on social network analysis and TOPSIS,” Maritime Policy & Management, vol. 49, no. 7, pp. 913–929, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2021.1908637 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2021.1908637

[7]. W. Y. Yap and D. Yang, “Hub port choice and shipping connectivity in Southeast Asia during the COVID-19 pandemic: Implications for the post-pandemic competition landscape,” Maritime Policy & Management, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2022.2135179 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2022.2135179

[8]. J. Li, H. Lin, J. Xu, and C. Xie, “Transport infrastructure expansion, maritime connectivity, and regional economic growth,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 176, 2023, Art. 103609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2023.103609 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2023.103609

[9]. L. Kang, W. Wu, H. Yu, and F. Su, “Global container port network linkages and topology in 2021,” Sensors, vol. 22, no. 15, 2022, Art. 5889. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22155889 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/s22155889

[10]. J.-J. Pan, Y.-F. Zhang, and B. Fan, “Strengthening container shipping network connectivity during COVID-19: A graph theory approach,” Ocean & Coastal Management, vol. 229, 2022, Art. 106338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106338 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106338

[11]. D. Tsiotas and C. Ducruet, “Measuring the effect of distance on the network topology of the global container shipping network,” Scientific Reports, vol. 11, 2021, Art. 21250. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-00387-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-00387-3

[12]. K.-F. Cheung, M. G. H. Bell, J.-J. Pan, and S. Perera, “An eigenvector centrality analysis of global container shipping network connectivity,” Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, vol. 140, 2020, Art. 101991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2020.101991 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2020.101991

[13]. X. Bai, H. Jia, and M. Xu, “Identifying port congestion and evaluating its impact on maritime logistics,” Maritime Policy & Management, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2022.2135036 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2022.2135036

[14]. J. Martínez-Moya, A. Mestre-Alcover, and R. Sala-Garrido, “Connectivity and competitiveness of the major Mediterranean container ports using ‘Benefit-of-the-Doubt’ and ‘Common Sets of Weights’ in DEA,” Maritime Economics & Logistics, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 261–282, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-023-00258-w DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-023-00258-w

[15]. J. Li, X. Li, H. J. Kim, and W.-X. Zhou, “Optimization of container shipping network considering complex networks under the RCEP,” Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, vol. 10, no. 7, 2022, Art. 873. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse10070873 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse10070873

[16]. UNCTAD, Review of Maritime Transport 2024 (Overview & Main Report). Geneva: United Nations, 2024. https://doi.org/10.18356/9789210049023

[17]. UNCTAD, “Launch of the Review of Maritime Transport 2024,” UNCTAD Event Page, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://unctad.org

[18]. HCSS, Maritime Security for Resilient Global Supply Chains in the Indo-Pacific. The Hague: HCSS, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://hcss.nl

[19]. T. Notteboom, A. Pallis, and J.-P. Rodrigue, Port Economics, Management and Policy. Routledge, 2022. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429318184 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429318184

[20]. Y. Cao et al., “Data-driven resilience analysis of the global container shipping network against cascading failures,” Transportation Research Part E, vol. 193, 2024, Art. 103857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2024.103857 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2024.103857

[21]. D. Zhang, C. Wan, and A. K. Y. Ng, “Resilience analysis of maritime transportation networks: A review,” Transportation Safety and Environment, vol. 6, no. 4, 2024, Art. tdae009. https://doi.org/10.1093/tse/tdae009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/tse/tdae009

[22]. A. S. Bergantino, M. Porcelli, and C. Porro, “Assessing transport network resilience: Empirical insights and methodological challenges,” Transport Reviews, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2024.2322434 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2024.2322434

[23]. J. Hoffmann, “Maritime chokepoints, impacts, and outlook: Key data from RMT 2024,” UNCTAD Presentation, Oct. 2024. [Online]. Available: https://unctad.org

[24]. L. Fan, R. Wang, and K. Xu, “Analysis of fleet deployment in the international container shipping market using simultaneous equations modelling,” Maritime Policy & Management, vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 963–980, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2024.2341326 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2023.2188267

[25]. T. Ueda and K. Tahara, “Predicting the maximum size of container vessels in the future,” Case Studies on Transport Policy, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2025.101275 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2025.101382

[26]. F. Er and Y. Yalman, “A PCA-driven layered attention approach for vessel trajectory prediction,” Applied Sciences, vol. 15, no. 16, 2025, Art. 8953. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15168953 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app15168953

[27]. F. Huang et al., “Vessel trajectory prediction based on AIS data: Dual-path spatial–temporal attention,” Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, vol. 12, no. 11, 2024, Art. 2031. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12112031 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12112031

[28]. J. Park, S. Kim, and J. Kim, “A K-means clustering algorithm to determine representative operational profiles using AIS,” Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, vol. 10, no. 9, 2022, Art. 1245. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse10091245 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse10091245

[29]. S. S. Sáenz, J. Fernández, and J. M. Blanco, “Analysis of the mooring effects of future ultra-large container ships,” Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, vol. 11, no. 4, 2023, Art. 856. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11040856 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11040856

[30]. D. Wilmsmeier, G. Monios, and P. Ng, “The evolution of regional port systems: Spatial dynamics and policy implications,” Maritime Economics & Logistics, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 385–406, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-019-00139-8