Dry Port Network Model: Best Practices in the EU with Notes from the USA

Dry Port Network Model: Best Practices in the EU with Notes from the USA

Antonio Pratelli Ron Van Duin Reginald Souleyrette Beatrice Bianchini Danilo Marigo Lorenzo Brocchini Wang Teng

College of Engineering, University of Pisa, Italy

Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA

Polytechnic of Milan, Italy

S.I.TO spa, Interporto of Turin, Orbassano, Italy

Kentucky Transportation Center, University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA

Available online: 
| Citation



The modern distribution of goods is highly complex, as it supports a closely linked globalized world. In the development of port terminals, competition is no longer only at the level of services. The increase in maritime transport and demand/supply in the hinterlands, with ensuing problems of capacity, distribu- tion and movement, have called for renewed attention on adequate structures and infrastructures. This evolution, enabled by technology, commercial interests and public policies, can be considered as a stage in the ongoing development of containerization and intermodal transport. At this stage, it is important to consider port terminals and maritime navigation networks as a system, together with terrestrial goods transport. Increasingly, regions are developing so-called dry or inland ports, to better serve the demand. We set out to define a sustainable model for dry ports, beginning with a review of relevant literature focused on Italian, Dutch and selected USA examples. We first define dry port, in the context of intermodal transport, ports in general and inland ports. Our investigation led to the identification of management tools and best practices. We report on visits and interviews to selected inland ports and identify key dry port activities, applications of innovative technologies and implications for different modes of transport. For the three countries studied, we identify strengths and weaknesses related to infrastructure, structures, internal organization of yard, types of imported and exported goods, transport methods and related travel times and costs. In regards to resilience and sustainability, vulnerabilities such as congestion, climate issues and cyber-attacks are considered. Finally, a maturity model for as- sessing dry ports is proposed.


container traffic, dry ports, Europe, freight village, inland container terminal, Italy, maritime hinterland, The Netherlands


[1] Hayuth Y., Inland container terminal – function and rationale. Journal of Maritime Policy and Management, 7, pp. 283–289, 1980.

[2] Hayuth Y., The port-urban interface: an area in transition. Area, 14(3), pp. 219–24, 1982.

[3] Rodrigue, J.P. & Notteboom T., Dry ports and the maritime hinterland gaining momentum. Port Technology International, 50, pp. 21–24, 2011,

[4] Notteboom T. & Winkelmans W., Structural changes in logistics: how will port authorities face the challenge? Maritime Policy & Management, 28(1), pp. 71–89, 2001.

[5] Harrison A. & Van Hoek R., Logistics Management and Strategy – Competing through the Supply Chain, Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, 2002.

[6] Levinson P., The Box. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, 2006.

[7] Cullinane K. & Khanna. M., Economies of scale in large container ship. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 33(2), pp. 185–208, 2001.

[8] Roso V., Woxenius J. & Lumsden K., The dry port concept: connecting container seaports with the hinterland. Journal of Transport Geography, 17, pp. 338–345, 2009.

[9] Wiegmans B., Witte P., & Spit, T., Inland port performance: a statistical analysis of Dutch inland ports. Transportation Research Procedia, 8, pp. 145–154, 2015.

[10] Baxter, P. & Jack, S., Qualitative case study methodology: study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13, pp. 544–559, 2008.

[11] Yin, R.K., Case Study Research: Design and Methods, SAGE Inc.: Thousand Oaks, 2009.

[12] Long, S. & S.E. Grasman, A strategic decision model for evaluating inland freight hub locations. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 5, pp. 92–98, 2012.

[13] Crainic, T., Dell’Olmo, P., Ricciardi, N. & Sgalambro, A., CIRRELT Report 2014-47: modeling dry-port-based freight distribution planning. Montreal, 2014.

[14] Woxenius, J., Roso, V. & Lumsden, K., The dry port concept: connecting container seaports with the hinterland. Journal of Transport Geography, 17, pp. 338–345, 2009.

[15] Roso, V., Factors influencing implementation of a dry port. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 38, pp. 782–798, 2008.

[16] Roso, V., Russo D. & Rhoades, D., Diffusion of Innovation Assessment of Adoption of the Dry Port Concept. TOMS Transactions on Maritime Science, 3, pp. 26–36, 2019.

[17] Lupi, M., Pratelli, A., Canessa, M. & Farina, A., A study on contestable regions in Europe through the use of a new rail cost function: an application to the hinterland of the new container terminal of Leghorn Port. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 19, pp. 1–35, 2019.

[18] Lupi, M., Farina, A., Orsi, D. & Pratelli, A. The capability of Motorways of the Sea of being competitive against road transport. The case of the Italian mainland and Sicily. Journal of Transport Geography, 58, pp. 9–21, 2017.

[19] Corradini, S. & F. Morucci, Livorno between preserving port identity and future challenges. Portus Plus, 3, pp. 1–10, 2012.

[20] Jeevan, J., Salleh, N.H.M., Loke, K.B. & Saharuddin, A.H., Preparation of dry ports for a competitive environment in the container seaport system: a process benchmarking approach. International Journal of e-Navigation and Maritime Economy, 7, pp. 19–33, 2017.

[21] Jeevan. J., Chen, S.L. & Cahoon, S., The impact of dry port operations on container seaports competitiveness. Maritime Policy & Management, 46, pp. 4–23, 2019.

[22] Capineri, C. & Leinbach, T.R., Freight transport, seamlessness & competitive advantage in the global economy. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, 6, pp. 23–38, 2006.

[23] The Expanded Canal, Canal de Panamá, available at https://micanaldepanama.com/expansion/ (accessed 12 May 2021).

[24] Ken Roberts, Port Laredo Again No. 1 As Coronavirus Sends Port of Los Angeles Reeling, Forbes, available at https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenroberts/2020/04/07/port-laredo-again-no-1-as-coronavirus-sends-port-of-los-angeles-reeling, April 7, 2020 (accessed 12 May 2021).

[25] No.1 Inland Port Along US-Mexico Border. Laredo Economic Development Corporation, available at https://www.laredoedc.org/site-selection/international-trade/(accessed 12 May 2021).

[26] Virginia Inland Port (VIP), Virginia Port Authority, available at https://www. portofvirginia.com/facilities/virginia-inland-port-vip/ (accessed 12 May 2021.)

[27] Appalachian Regional Port, Georgia Ports Authority, available at https://gaports.com/facilities/inland-ports/appalachian-regional-port/ (accessed 12 May 2021).

[28] Rutten, B.C.M., The design of terminal network for intermodal transport. Transport Logistics, 1, pp. 279–298, 1998.