Mobile Edition
Print
Get the Mag
Weekly UpdatesAccording to the Eno Transportation Foundation, the meaning of intermodalism can vary greatly depending on the definer's perspective.(1) The importance and impact of these different perspectives has not been fully explored by researchers or most transportation practitioners. What is evident, however, for those currently engaged in the "logistically-linked" movement of freight in the most effective and efficient means possible is that the lack of a comprehensive intermodal definition has led to a much narrower scope of operational arrangements than necessary. Those who operate or maintain various parts of the transportation network are also calling for a re-evaluation of systems justifications, funding, and design and maintenance, which would result in an integrated freight movement strategy.
By having a definition, a term is understood to have a degree of exactness and clarity.(2) Yet, in the case of intermodalism, a large number of "definitions" are present in the research literature, suggesting that a fundamental interpretation of this term does not currently exist. This pattern has continued to the point that the Eno Foundation has concluded that intermodalism may be the transportation-related term with the greatest number of different definitions, especially when passenger transportation issues are included. What this means is that researchers, government bodies, and practitioners may wind up spending more time arguing over its definition than implementing its ideas.(3) This falls considerably short of the goal envisioned by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) to increase intermodal coordination.
The problem can be described most simply as a lack of agreement between those who are inclusive and those who are exclusive in their operational definition of intermodalism. As an example, Locklin, in his book Economics of Transportation, spent several chapters discussing transport coordination. More specifically, he describes the uses and advantages of multimodal transport coordination such as through routes and joint rates by water and rail lines, an idea he called "coordinated service."(4) Using a general inclusive definition, this is intermodalism. However, much of today's usage has limited it to applying to containers designed and used to move goods via different modes of transportation.
Martin, Daley, and Burdg emphasized the need for carriers to understand the mode selection process in order to stay competitive when they stated "identifying how shippers select a particular transportation mode is vital to a freight supplier."(5) Shippers have long been aware that the selection process can affect an entire operation or company. Today's move toward flexible manufacturing, customer responsiveness, and just-in-time (JIT) principles has put additional pressure on the present transportation infrastructure to maintain competitive price positioning while increasing service levels. Viable transportation strategies should make available every delivery combination suitable for the customer's needs. In order to achieve this a full understanding of each of the potential options is a prerequisite. Before this part of the research process can take place, it is essential that the activities or operations necessary to describe intermodalism be established; i.e., an operational definition should be constructed. This is a key part of scientific research in that operational definitions enable researchers to bridge between the theory-hypothesis-construct (concept) level and the level of observation.(6)
Constraining intermodalism to mean the "coordinated transport of goods in containers or trailers by a combination of truck and rail, with or without an ocean-going link"(7) limits the research conducted in this area, and ultimately the potential to create an integrated transportation system. To expand the current perspective of what constitutes an intermodal movement, a study was undertaken to examine multimodal non-containerized freight practices to determine their contribution and role in operationally defining the term. Carriers, shippers, and government entities can all benefit from understanding these practices and their future potential positioning in an expanded intermodal conceptualization.
TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS
When choosing transportation options, a buyer has traditionally thought of the five basic modes of transportation: water, air, highway, rail, and pipeline. Within each of these modes are several basic options such as carload versus less-than-carload or specialty versus general carriers. This decision has been further complicated of late by the various transportation deregulatory acts which have made it easier to enter and leave individual markets, or to offer more specialized services under different types of contracts or agreements. As an example, Jeff and Hills have defined nine distinct submodal categories just within rail and highway freight transport.(8)
The combination of all possible modal arrangements produces many feasible methods for moving freight. Yet, many in the transportation industry are defining an intermodal strategy to consist of a container or other device which can be transferred from one vehicle or mode to another without the contents of said device being reloaded or disturbed.(9) This practice can be described as the "multimodal single-container" strategy.
However, there are other examples of multimodal freight movements which do not meet this clean, simple definition of being intermodal. The method of intermodalism which involves "multimodal noncontainerized" freight reflects a more traditional method of freight movement which has received very little attention since deregulation. While this type of movement may be considered by some to be routine and reflect an older, less efficient way of doing business, carriers seem to be expanding their interest in the method.
This interest in non-containerized multimodal freight movements is not limited to shippers and carriers. Third party service providers have also long been involved in the practice and renewed interest is seen in some markets. It has been reported that Los Angeles warehouses in the South Bay area have been experiencing reduced demand due to JIT delivery practices.(10) One solution has been to attract new customers by incorporating multimodal transfer space into existing long-term warehousing facilities. This allows shippers to benefit from consolidation and warehousing practices and provides the warehousers new customers without any major investments.
Figure 1 illustrates the two possible intermodal strategies discussed above; in addition, a third transportation strategy of one mode from origin to destination is shown. Each option offers unique advantages and disadvantages for freight movement. Very little is known about the potential for non-containerized multimodal movements. Carrier and shipper strategies involving transportation needs, modal split, and logistical services can benefit from understanding this practice more fully, no matter if it is found to have positive or negative attributes.
RESEARCH DESIGN
Because of the differences between intermodal container movements and the non-containerized method, the latter type of transportation strategy has acquired its own terminology and name - transloading. This type of freight movement is the focus of this research. While the use of containers greatly advanced the practice of intermodality, it is important to be aware that modal interchanges are not solely dependent upon unitization of freight. The decision of whether or not to containerize should be based on tradeoffs which reflect constantly shifting circumstances. Based on the large amount of product that is transloaded, it can be concluded that a number of characteristics and reasons are analyzed and used to make this practice a viable freight transportation option. The reasons for the continued interest in this method of movement is a major part of the study.
Much has been written about methods to predict the transportation mode of choice for various situations. Stock and LaLonde, Cunningham, McGinnis, and Tyworth are a few of the many recognized scholars who have produced studies and recommendations in this area.(11) Within the field of transportation, the type of descriptive models used have ranged from the classical economic model of Meyer, Peck, Stenason, and Zwick to the inventory theoretic cost model of Baumol and Vinod and on to the behavioral model as proposed by Thomas Craig.(12) The results of these and other studies have followed a general trend of refinement over the years through additional theoretical research, field investigation, and testing. However, each of the designs has been intended to look at a mode selection based upon the individual mode or carrier characteristics.
A recent modal study reports that there are a number of previously unexplored reasons and characteristics related to transportation choice.(13) The inability to fully interpret certain phenomena, combined with the fact that little research has been conducted on the transload issue, led to the conclusion that an experimental approach would not sufficiently define what variables or characteristics should be investigated. Rather, this study, which is exploratory in nature, utilized interview-type case studies as the principle scientific method. The desire is to investigate a relatively large number of operating transload practices involving the four basic surface modes and a cross-section of commodities.
According to Marshall and Rossman (1989), interview-type case studies are ideal for this kind of exploratory research because they provide a unique mix of benefits.(14) These benefits include face-to-face encounters, which result in large amounts of quickly obtained contextual data, the facilitation of follow-up opportunities, the potential to discover complex interrelationships in the natural setting, the ability to better record the background relationship, and the potential to understand the issue from the participant's viewpoint. All of these benefits were important in the type of exploratory research conducted for this study.
FEED