Review Reports - A Review of Port Initiatives to Promote Freight Modal Shifts in Europe: Evidence from Port Governance Systems

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The theme of manuscript is very interesting and actual in the context of sustainable transport and problematic of movements of the modal split on green friendly kind of transport. Presented results are usable for next research of this problematic.

But I think the manuscript must be improved before publishing. In the article miss chapter about methods which have been used. I recommend to authors add chapter about used scientific method. Also I recommend more broadly characterize the individual examined attributes. In my opinion, it is insufficient to make a reference to the annex (line 233) and not to give a closer look at it.

In the text is some formal mistakes:

Line 99: bad numbering of chapter

Line 222: miss name of author by the link on the references

Line 579: miss reference

Please check journal template, because I am not sure that the links on the literature in text is in the right form.

Author Response

First of all, we would like to thank you for the attention given to the paper. Your comments have been really useful and have helped us to improve the paper. We have now revised the paper in a thorough way. Here are the specific responses to your comments:

But I think the manuscript must be improved before publishing. In the article miss chapter about methods which have been used. I recommend to authors add chapter about used scientific method. Also I recommend more broadly characterize the individual examined attributes. In my opinion, it is insufficient to make a reference to the annex (line 233) and not to give a closer look at it.

Thank you for this comment. We have now added a longer description of the methodological approach (see lines: 236 to 241). Furthermore, in response to your second comment, we have added a more detailed description of the port attributes (see lines: 243 to 245).

In the text is some formal mistakes:

Line 99: bad numbering of chapter

Line 222: miss name of author by the link on the references

Line 579: miss reference

Please check journal template, because I am not sure that the links on the literature in text is in the right form.

Thank you for these comments. We have now revised all the links on the references and made them more clearly.

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

Thanks a lot for the submission of an impressive study. The article you submitted investigates the influences of EU port governance systems on the modal shift towards more sustainable freight transportation across Europe. Broadly, the manuscript is very well-written. However, I would like to suggest some minor issues which should be addressed to increase the quality of your article.

Please see my suggestions to improve the quality of your paper below;

1- What do you anticipate by referring to “private firms” in figure 1? Do you mean freight forwarders/Logistics service providers? Or shipper-Consignee? Or all? Do they all have a common interest in modal shifting of freight transportation policies? Any differences? Please explain a bit.

2- Why Eastern ports such as Greek ports are not included in your analysis? Any explanation?

3- It is clear that why ports are promoting modal shift for hinterland connection. However, it is not very apparent how they will persuade shippers/consignees. What do these initiatives in the EU particularly aim to do for the aspects that road transport is more competitive as a transport mode choice?

4- The discussion part and conclusion part could be separated and the discussion of the results could be further extended. Especially, the originality of the paper and differences in findings compared to similar works in the literature should be further justified.

5- Any changes after Brexit for the trade with The Republic of Ireland?

6- What about cases for EU -Non-EU hinterland connection? Any policies for transit connection from an EU port to Turkey, the UK, Ukraine, Moldova, Bosnia, etc.?

Author Response

1- What do you anticipate by referring to “private firms” in figure 1? Do you mean freight forwarders/Logistics service providers? Or shipper-Consignee? Or all? Do they all have a common interest in modal shifting of freight transportation policies? Any differences? Please explain a bit.

Thank you for your comment. We have now included, as a footnote in the section 2.1 (line: 166) a more specific explanation of private firms in our analysis.

2- Why Eastern ports such as Greek ports are not included in your analysis? Any explanation?

Thank you for this relevant comment. The paper aims to investigate how distinct port governance systems influence the enforcement of port programs deployed to promote freight modal shifts in its hinterland. Because we wanted to connect specific port governance systems with ports’ individual initiatives, we focused our study on ports’ initiatives. At times, however, ports have required external support from other institutions and thus conducted initiatives in collaboration with those organizations (e.g. national government, European Union or private firms). To control port individual initiatives, we excluded collaborative projects between projects in different regions and with different port governance systems. We have now included a better explanation into the paper (lines: 79-81).

In the case of Greek ports, the Ports of Piraeus and Thessaloniki have been involved in several initiatives to promote modal shift for freight in their hinterlands. However, all of those initiatives have been programs with consortia with other European ports. Consequently, it is difficult to determinate the effect of the initiative in the region. We have now revised our study of all of the initiatives and updated our results.

3- It is clear that why ports are promoting modal shift for hinterland connection. However, it is not very apparent how they will persuade shippers/consignees. What do these initiatives in the EU particularly aim to do for the aspects that road transport is more competitive as a transport mode choice?

Thank you for this very important point. We have now included a better explanation on port collaboration in the discussion section (see lines: 400-401).

4- The discussion part and conclusion part could be separated and the discussion of the results could be further extended. Especially, the originality of the paper and differences in findings compared to similar works in the literature should be further justified.

Thank you for your suggestion. We have now included a discussion section into the paper (see lines: 382-4412)

5- Any changes after Brexit for the trade with The Republic of Ireland?

Thank you for your comment. Our study has considered transport strategies implemented by the European Commission before the Brexit. We have now included this as further research in the last section (see lines: 430-432).

6- What about cases for EU -Non-EU hinterland connection? Any policies for transit connection from an EU port to Turkey, the UK, Ukraine, Moldova, Bosnia, etc.?

Thank you for your suggestion. The study mainly focuses on initiatives implemented within the EU region. We agree that it is important to consider hinterland and port connections between EU and non-EU regions. We have added a clarification (lines: 245-246) as well as in the conclusion section as future research (lines: 424-427).

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper is interesting. The large number of European ports presented in study help the authors to make a correct evaluation for influence of European and local initiatives in promoting modal shifts for freight transportation. The authors use good sources and conclusions help the reader to have own idea about the subject.

Author Response

Thank you for the attention given to the paper.