Home FleetWatch 2024 News Flash 2024 World Bank ‘excessively penalised’ SA container ports in ‘damning’ report says SAAFF

World Bank ‘excessively penalised’ SA container ports in ‘damning’ report says SAAFF

Trucks are an integral part of Durban port’s operations.
Trucks are an integral part of Durban port’s operations.

Metrics, indexes and reports emanating from the World Bank have significant impact on international investor sentiment and consequently, the growth potential of emerging economies. The operational efficiencies of South Africa’s ports play a critical role in the nation’s performance in global markets and despite historical inadequacies, have recently improved their vessel turnaround times. This fact has been onerously overlooked by the World Bank’s latest global port report, says the Southern African Association of Freight Forwarders.

According to Dr Juanita Maree, CEO of the Southern African Association of Freight Forwarders (SAAFF): “The recently released World Bank Container Port Performance Index report is damning – harming the reputation of our container terminals.”

The World Bank (WB) bases its Container Port Performance Index (CPPI) on datasets compiled by S&P Global Market Intelligence and defines its port report such: “The CPPI ranks 405 global container ports by efficiency, focusing on the duration of port stay for container vessels. Its primary aim is to identify areas for enhancement for the benefit of multiple stakeholders in the global trading system and supply chains, from ports to shipping lines, national governments, and consumers.” 

Southern Africa’s ports, including Durban, Port Elizabeth, Cape Town, Maputo and Walvis Bay all fell in the report’s bottom 100 ranked ports in the world, with Cape Town ranking #405.

Glaring omissions of current progress at SA ports 

“At the outset, it is important to mention that the WB reports on a 2023 period, which does not take into account corrective action taken since then, nor does it measure progress achieved since Transnet has been under new management as part of the recovery and transformation strategy,” Dr Maree explains.

The timing of the CPPI data gathering process and the subsequent report release date reflect inaccuracies, Dr Maree says: “Data was gathered during a period at the height of the port crisis. The timing of its release unjustifiably tarnishes today’s developments, casting doubt on the efficacy of robust corrective action underway and the hard work of the recovery teams and the leadership of the National Logistics Crisis Committee (NLCC)—a strong strategic public-private consultative initiative by the government that serves as the anchor. 

“At the same time, we must acknowledge that there are valid points in the report and we must not simply dismiss it but rather constructively use it as another building block and join hands to ensure that we improve our container port performance.

The report’s findings, Dr Maree states, “are based on an index or ranking of container port performance – not a score – and do not serve as a diagnostic tool to show where a port should improve. Improvement and corrective programmes is the lens that industry and Transnet – particularly Transnet Port Terminals – must continue to apply as a collective focus for our ports, and this is already well underway.” 

WB report has ‘unidimensional’ view 

Additional defects in the report arise due to the fact that, “the WB report uses rank aggregation, combining multiple rankings into a single ranking. This is a significant problem arising in many areas, and it is an overly simplified approach to providing a single ranking of a complex system that is a port call,” says Dr Maree.

“Furthermore, as the WB concedes, values are imputed when combinations of port calls and vessel call sizes are missing. The authors caution that the inherent risk with this approach is that poor or good performance within just one group will cascade across all call-size groups. Therefore, the CPPI is undoubtedly a unidimensional view of port performance. It attempts to examine the system’s performance and devise a single index to indicate whether it is good or bad.”

Dr Juanita Maree, CEO of the Southern African Association of Freight Forwarders: “Our port system needs to bring in specialisation and investment through private sector participation.”
Dr Juanita Maree, CEO of the Southern African Association of Freight Forwarders: “Our port system needs to bring in specialisation and investment through private sector participation.”

Despite its critique of the WB’s report methodology, the SAAFF believes “the report emphasised that South Africa lost time wasted at outer anchorages, which SAAFF and Transnet accepts. “Nevertheless, using a vessel’s stay duration as the sole measure of container port performance without considering other factors like throughput and handling rates highlights key obstacles to using the findings to measure container port performance accurately on a comparative basis,” Dr Maree says. 

“Furthermore,” she adds, “the WB concedes that ‘it is impossible to see from the data whether waiting time is voluntary or forced; it is difficult to find a suitable level at which to discount waiting time in this scenario.’ 

“The report also states that S&P Global uses tracking and observation tools to determine where vessels anchor and create zones accordingly. We must, therefore, conclude that South African ports were excessively penalised for time lost at anchorage.” 

Not the ‘worst in the world’

Close inspection of the report will reveal a slightly different picture of Southern African port performance, adds Dr Maree: “If we isolate port performance based on time and efficiency (as the WB sets out), we find that in Durban Pier 1, our GCH is around 15.8 moves per hour. At Durban Pier 2, our GCH was around 16.4 moves per hour. This is 33% and 30% below the global average, respectively, but by no means ‘the worst’ in the world. 

“Some examples show that the terminals reached 32 GCH in isolated cases, nearing global best practices. So, one might argue that a container terminal capable of sometimes achieving global best practices can certainly not be considered the worst in the world. But at the same time, South African port users come from a background where rates of around 25 were relatively common in the not-too-distant past, and this is what makes the current performance so worrying. 

“Furthermore, there is no mention of the volume or frequency of schedules. To look at some examples, regional ports included in the study, such as the Port of Maputo, only had 87 vessel calls and only serviced vessel sizes up to 5,000 TEUs. Another example is the Port of Nacala or Port Sudan, which only had 27 and 26 vessel calls, respectively and also serviced vessel sizes up to 5,000 TEUs. 

“According to the WB’s dataset, Cape Town and Durban had 196 and 499 vessel calls, respectively, and both handled larger Neo-Panamax vessels (8,501-13,500 TEU). So, to compare these examples to our ports when considering the volume or frequency of schedules is entirely invalid. 

“According to our analysis, vessel dwell time for Durban during the period was 83.2 hours at Pier 2 and 67.4 hours at Pier 1, respectively. This was against the global average of 40.5 hours. This shows that time spent at South African ports is too much, but arguably not the worst in the world.”

Entering a new era of private enterprise participation

“What is critical now – a reality that the report emphasises in somewhat crude terms – is that our port system needs to bring in specialisation and investment through private sector participation (PPP), allowing for competition between the ports and terminals within the ports (intra-port competition). 

“In our current landscape, whatever transpires politically is true for our logistics network. It is incumbent upon us to create a new dawn where the focus is on utilising trade, transport, and logistics as a critical driver for economic growth and development – especially for an open economy such as South Africa – at the dawn of a new multi-dimensional democracy,” Dr Maree concludes.

Clearly, the SAAFF response the WB CPPI report is valid and balanced. The valuable takeaways from the report are clear and neatly encapsulated in this quote from Turloch Mooney, head of Port Intelligence & Analytics at S&P Global Market Intelligence: “The highly interconnected nature of container shipping means the negative effect of poor performance in a port can extend beyond that port’s hinterland and disrupt entire schedules. This increases the cost of imports and exports, reduces competitiveness and hinders economic growth and poverty reduction.”

As our new Government of National Unity swings into collaborative action, FleetWatch congratulates the NLCC team for its transformational efforts and applauds the SAAFF members for bringing voice to an unfair WB appraisal of our current port performance status. Keep it up!
Ultimately FleetWatch expresses its full support for public-private initiatives that upgrade our region’s supply chain infrastructures and logistics corridors to a point where our economy generates true quality of life for all Southern Africans.

Related Images:


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here