Freight transport system that minimizes costs, increase conveniences, and environmentally safe has become the agenda worldwide since long before. This study was made with the main objective of assessing intermodal termed as “multimodal” freight transport service in Ethiopia. Data was collected by using structured questionnaire from randomly selected customers and multimodal freight transport section employees of Ethiopian Shipping and Logistics Service Enterprise. The study was made in two stages using customers: first, they were asked to evaluate their satisfaction with the multimodal freight transport system; second, to evaluate their comparative satisfaction with the segmented/“uni-modal” freight transport system against five major freight transport performance indicators. Customers were also asked to identify and rank top ten problems of freight transport logistics in Ethiopia. Data were analyzed using SPSS and excel sheets with descriptive statistics and the results were depicted using charts and tables. The study indicated that majority of customers were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with many of the performance indicators. The employees evaluated their organization as well performing relatively on more performance indicators. Both customers and employees evaluated the documentation performances as satisfying but cost and convenience as dissatisfying performances. Customers identified repetitive custom checking and waste of time in custom inspections process as the most severe problem in freight transport logistics in Ethiopia. The implementation of intermodal freight transport system to bring better change in import-export freight transport logistics of Ethiopia was in bitter challenge for customers due to a number of problems, except documentation performance that showed betterment.
Ethiopia being one of the developing countries needs to be integrated with global economy and that can only be possible through efficient and effective flows of goods to and from the country in international trade. To this end, the country needs to adopt or develop an efficient intermodal transport system for freight transport. With the aim of improving the flow of goods between Djibouti port and dry ports in Ethiopia, Ethiopia implemented “multimodal” transport system since January 2011. The directive set by the government of Ethiopia [
Ethiopia is a developing country in east Africa, which has a land area of about 1.1 million sq∙km and population of about 91.73 million [
Today, households in many parts of the world use internet marketing on diverse commodities including fresh food items regardless of the season, which demands fast and reliable deliveries. These products may be produced thousands of miles away in other countries and continent. Central to these is the implementation of effective freight transport and logistics practice. According to [
These terms are related and used by different sources sometimes in an overlapping way. [
Definition 1: “Intermodal transport is the movement of goods (in one and the same loading unit or vehicle), which uses successively several modes of transport without handling of the goods themselves in transshipment between the modes”.
Definition 2: “Combined transport is a transport in which the major part of the European journey is carried out by rail inland waterways or sea and in which any initial and/or final leg carried out by road are as short as possible”.
Definition 3: “Multi-modal transport is a carriage of goods by at least two different transport modes”.
[
From these definitions, it is clear that these terms are used by different people at different contexts. The terms involve many concepts in common though lesser differences in definition exist among authors, particularly on “multimodal” versus “intermodal”. The involvement of at least two modes of transport, concern for environment, single billing, single liability and integration among the modes are major issues and features that were discussed. Though, terms can be used based on the definition given for each situation, for integrated movement of freight that involve at least two modes of transport under a single billing and liability, authors believe the term “inter- modal” is better used for the prefix “inter” in “inter-modal” stands to show the integration among modes but the prefix “multi” in “multi-modal” only shows the existence of more than one mode of transport but not an integration among the modes.
The common objectives of integrated transport arrangements are efficient and effective goods flow from one point to the other. These are key arrangements to development as no country can develop without trade and transportation is central gravity of effective and efficient trade. Intermodal transport service gives collected responsibility for transport activities under one operator. Then it is the responsibility of operator to manage and coordinate the total activities from shippers’ door to buyers’ door.
The rise of international intermodal transport service is the result of its benefit over the separate mode arrangements. Many studies showed that intermodal transportation of goods saves both money and time. [
Efficient transitions between modes, flexibility and possibilities for door-to-door service, environmental advantage, and the possibilities of combining the advantages from separate modes are noted to be advantages of intermodal transport system by [
[
Intermodal transport concept is just at its infant stage in Ethiopia. The system was started on January, 2011 by Ethiopian Shipping and Logistics Service Enterprise. The term “multimodal” was used instead of intermodal but with the same meaning of intermodal, i.e., to provide seamless transport under one billing and liability on the whole movement from origin to destination. The “multimodal” transport system was introduced with the aim of easily moving freight from port Djibouti on time. The system was started after the issuance of Multimodal Transport Implementation Directive on July 2010 by Ethiopian government. The directive defined the multimodal transport system as “a system whereby transportation of goods is under a single contract but performed by more than two means of transportation; the carrier is liable for the entire journey including the shipment’s delivery at final destination; the transportation can be made by sea, rail, and trucks (roads).” This definition is the same with what is given for intermodal transport system.
[
In case of Ethiopia, the challenge of intermodal system is presently two fold. First, the country’s capacity to provide intermodal transport service that is reliable and cost effective is dependent on the use of advanced technology and infrastructure. In this regard, Ethiopia’s challenge may be more severe than elsewhere because the country presently has no operational rail transport system and the transport infrastructure in road sector is also not developed to the required level. Second, Ethiopia began the service very recently (2011) and the experience of the system to the country is new phenomenon. As the intermodal transport system is implemented recently its performance needs to be evaluated for possible solutions. In general, the five challenges mentioned by [
This study was made to address the second challenge of Ethiopian multimodal freight transport. The system which was intended for reliable, efficient, maximum customer convenient transport system under one billing and liability was evaluated by customers and employees. The study identified problem areas that need further research and interventions to overcome the challenges if Ethiopia has to get benefits from integrated freight transport system.
The main objective of this study was to evaluate the intermodal freight transport service performance of Ethiopian Shipping and Logistics Service Enterprise (ESLSE)* by its customers and employees. The specific objectives were to evaluate the ESLSE’s:
o delivery performance,
o transportation documentation performance,
o performance on liability and insurance during damage or loss of goods while in transit,
o transport service cost and associated costs & convenience,
o administrative support service provided,
o comparative customers’ satisfaction on the above five performance indicators on “multi-modal” versus “uni- modal” (with different billings of the same goods) approaches, and
o To identify major problems in fright transport logistics of Ethiopia.
The total numbers of ESLSE’s customers were not known because it has no registered customers. Therefore, sampling formula was not applied. Instead, the data was collected from customers coming for service to ESLSE over an extended period of time in two stages. The first phase of data collection, which was made during May to September 2013, was to evaluate their satisfaction on the “multimodal” transport service. The second phase was conducted between June-September/2014 on the comparative analysis between “multi-modal” versus “uni-mo- dal” freight transport service. ESLSE calls “uni-modal” approach to segmented freight transport system with multiple bills and liability. Totally, 102 customers who have used both “multi-modal” and “uni-modal” freight transport service from ESLSE have responded to the survey. The data from employees was collected in first phase period from all employees (22) of multimodal transport section of Ethiopian Sipping and Logistics Service Enterprise at enterprise’s head quarter, Addis Ababa.
Both primary and secondary data were used in this study. For primary data collection purpose, survey questionnaire was used. Both customers and employees were approached personally and asked to fill the questionnaire; explanations were given to the respondents where they need.
Satisfaction was measured through a psychometric 5-point Likert scale. The five categories of response were: 1, Very dissatisfied; 2, Dissatisfied; 3, Neutral; 4, Satisfied; and 5, Very satisfied. This scale was used to measure strength of opinion of selected service attributes. The use of a 5-point Likert scale allows for the balanced collection of respondent opinion through an equal number of positive and negative categories [
Customer satisfaction as performance measure has many benefits. For instance, [
tions can evaluate their performance by how much they satisfy their customers with greater efficiency and effectiveness than their competitors. [
[
The delivery performance was assessed on five performance indicators namely: departure accuracy, the accuracy of time promised for the shipment to reach the destination, instructional clarity on delivery, tracking information, and overall delivery performance. The result is presented in
From
The result of “multimodal” transport documentation performance is presented in
The result presented in
The assessment for this section were made for four performance indicators: accident reporting, claim presentation to insurer in case of loss, the follow up of the company on claims to the insurer, and finally how customers feel that they are safe for their cargo in terms of loss or damage. The results on these indicators were presented on
The result presented in
The assessments were made on customers’ satisfaction on clarity of cost, fairness of the transportation cost, fairness of other associated costs, loading unloading place convenience, and loading unloading infrastructure conveniences.
According to
The assessment for this performance was made in terms of satisfaction on support provided through simplification of procedures and formalities with different organizations through information sharing by Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), cooperation in customs automation and efficient tariff arrangement, and banking facilitation. The results were presented in
According to
Employees were asked to evaluate Ethiopian Shipping and Logistics Service Enterprise’s performance in relation to the same delivery performance indicators with section 4.1. The results of the assessment were presented in
As presented in
Performance indicators under section 4.2 were also assessed by employees in relation to multimodal transport documents. The results of assessment were presented in
According to
The assessments under this section were made in respect of four major points of evaluation and the results were presented in
From
The results of the employee assessment which were made in terms of five criteria related to cost and convenience were presented in
The results in
The evaluation results which were made on three evaluations points were presented in
Results presented in
The result of comparative analysis which was assessed by customers who have already used services of ESLSE under both segmented and integrated approaches was presented in
According to the result, presented in
The respondent, customers were given with a lists of possible constraints and asked to rank top ten problems from top severe to least severe as 1 to 10 (1 top severe and 10 least severe). Customers were also given the possibility to add and give rank to any other constraints they know which were not in the list. The result of this was presented in
From
S. N | Percentage of Respondent who ranked the problems | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Prolems: | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th | 6th | 7th | 8th | 9th | 10th | Total | ||
1 | Repetitive custom check and high time waste during custom checking process | 47 | 22 | 26 | 5 | 100 | |||||||
2 | Monopoly of Freight Transport service by ESLSE | 22 | 26 | 35 | 9 | 4 | 4 | 100 | |||||
3 | Complete dependence on Djibouti port for multimodal system | 17 | 22 | 26 | 18 | 17 | 100 | ||||||
4 | Basic Infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc.) | 4 | 21 | 4 | 22 | 18 | 9 | 18 | 4 | 100 | |||
5 | Fragmented Management of Freight Logistics Sector | 10 | 9 | 4 | 22 | 22 | 13 | 7 | 13 | 100 | |||
6 | Traffic Accidents | 13 | 13 | 17 | 18 | 26 | 9 | 4 | 100 | ||||
7 | Problems at Dry Ports | 4 | 17 | 26 | 9 | 26 | 13 | 5 | 100 | ||||
8 | Transistors’ problems | 5 | 9 | 35 | 17 | 30 | 4 | 100 | |||||
9 | Transporters’ problems | 7 | 31 | 9 | 18 | 26 | 9 | 100 | |||||
10 | Other service providers’ problems (insurance, banks, etc.) banks, etc.) | 4 | 18 | 78 | 100 | ||||||||
Total | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | |||
In most cases, customers were not satisfied with performances under the “multimodal” freight transport service. However, employees evaluated some points as well performing contrary to customers’ evaluation. This may emanate from two reasons: first, employees as the service providers may not really feel the hassle customers were facing; second, method used in this study, had joint focus group discussion was made with customers and employees, both customers and employees could have been near to each other on evaluation. Regardless of this, the organization has to review its service performances particularly in terms of cost and convenience where both customers and employees evaluated the company negatively. The result of customer evaluation was also same with other news sources [
From this study, it is evident that ESLSE faced challenges in implementation of multimodal freight transport system in the country. However, desired intention of the “multimodal” transport system for Ethiopia is not an option rather a must to proceed if Ethiopia has to benefit from international trade and development. To this end, the role of every stakeholder in the sector has to be further investigated and detail and planned work is required in terms of alleviating problems identified in this study and also the role of research studies to identify knowledge gap and solutions to the problems are critical & timely issues. In this regard the following points are believed for further study:
1) An assessment of custom terminal checking procedure and process at port Djibouti, Ethiopia boarder terminal, and all the ways to dry ports in Ethiopia: what can be done in this regard?
2) Why costs of “multimodal” freight transport in Ethiopia is high?
3) Is it possible to think of privatization of the “multimodal” freight transport system in Ethiopia to improve the implementation of system?
4) To what extent can the planned railways in Ethiopia contribute to improvement of freight transport in Ethiopia?
5) Alternative analysis of possible ports that Ethiopia can use to avoid complete dependence on Djibouti port.
This study was made on customer satisfaction and employee evaluation of the “multimodal” transport service performance of ESLSE. The result indicated that majority of the customers were not satisfied with many of the service performances. In contrast, employees evaluated their organization positively on many performance indicators. The comparative analysis made with “uni-modal” approach for customers indicated that the “multimodal” system which was supposed to improve the service performance did not even satisfied customers as much as the “uni-modal” approaches on majority of the performance indicators used in this study. Customers also listed top ten problems of freight transport logistics in Ethiopia where repetitive custom checks and high waste of time during custom checking process were ranked as the most severe constraint.