PPI Mexico

PORT INDICATORS SYSTEM:
Methodology
Department of Transportation Integration

Mexican Institute of Transport
Secretariat of Communications and Transportation
Sanfandila, Quintana Roo, 2016

Port Indicators System: Methodology
SECRETARIAT OF COMMUNICATIONS AND
TRANSPORTATION
MEXICAN INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT
Sanfandila, Quintana Roo, 2016

Table of Contents
Background 1
1. Introduction 3
2. Indicators for Ship-Port Interface 5
3. Indicators for Port Operations Interface in Terminals 23
4. Indicators for Port-Hinterland Interface 41
5. Conclusions 55
ii
Background
Mexico boasts a prime location, with 11,500 km of coastline and a total of 117 ports
and authorized terminals. However, 67% of cargo movements are concentrated in
just 16 commercial ports, the most important of which are Manzanillo, Lázaro
Cárdenas, Altamira, and Veracruz, which operate 96% of containerized cargo.
Prior to the economic liberalization in 1993, Mexican ports were organizations

operating under different sets of restrictions. This led to quality and productivity
lagging behind international standards, in addition to insufficient public investment.
As a response to the challenges arising from opening the Mexican economy to

global markets in 1993, Mexican ports have sought to boost their competitiveness,
i.e. their capacity as organizations to systematically develop and maintain
advantages to secure a dominant position in the markets in which they operate.
The Communications and Transportation Sector Program, in keeping with the

National Development Plan, aims to enhance international competitiveness and
improve port performance through various lines of action, including: improving
domestic connectivity with ports; streamlining customs, tax, and port authority
administration; promoting cabotage; among other activities.
The current-day efficient container operations of Mexico’s ports allow them to

compete with leading ports around the world. Despite the improvements made thus
far to Mexican ports, they are still far from being recognized as benchmarks in terms
of infrastructure for moving goods; an example of this is the Global Enabling Trade
Report that ranks Mexican ports 57th out of 138 in terms of infrastructure. A series of
efforts have been undertaken to improve ports and competitiveness in Mexico.
These efforts require data analysis and evaluation mechanisms to standardize

information gathering in the sector, identify areas of greater opportunity, and
establish factors that can be regularly measured to determine whether goals are
being met.
1
1 Introduction
As part of developing instruments and mechanisms to reduce the lag in the port
logistics sector, the Mexican Institute of Transport (IMT in Spanish) is developing a
National Observatory for Transport and Logistics as a strategic tool to collect,
analyze, and disseminate the country’s logistical information and generate
indicators and a quantitative model to facilitate efficient public policy decision-
making, as well as prioritize public and private investments to improve Mexico’s
competitiveness.
Given the importance of the port sector and that need for specific indicators, the
Observatory has created a Port Indicators System. The system enables
identifying the areas of opportunity showing the greatest set-backs in comparison
to other international benchmark ports. It will also allow for determining the impact
of implemented improvements. These elements will enhance competitiveness and
work to reduce the areas in which the National Port System (SPN in Spanish) is
lagging.
The IMT seeks to contribute to and support authorities to improve SPN

competitiveness by developing a series of methodology-based strategic
performance indicators, such that the Secretariat of Communications and
Transportation, the General Coordination for Ports and Merchant Shipping, and the
Mexican Institute of Transport (known by its Spanish acronym SCT-CGPyMM-IMT)
can identify areas of opportunity to boost SPN competitiveness. The IMT also
contributes to elements necessary for:
- The evaluation of port plans and policies,
- The prioritization of actions and investments,
- A discussion with actors based on hard data,
- Trend analysis required for prospective planning,
- Valuable information for users, service providers, and investors, and
- Information quality and maintenance over time.
The Port Indicators System is organized based on an intermodal approach for the
Maritime-Port Logistics Chain. The indicators are divided into three operational
segments:
- Indicators for Ship-Port Interface
- Indicators for Port Operations Interface in Terminals
- Indicators for Port-Hinterland Interface
3
Based on these three proposed interfaces, 20 methodology-backed strategic
performance indicators are proposed for the Port Indicators System, to ensure that
the system functions as a strategic tool to collect, analyze, and disseminate the
port-specific information impacting the country’s logistics and which facilitate
efficient public policy decision-making, as well as prioritize public and private
investments to improve Mexico’s competitiveness.
Twenty indicators were defined for the Port Indicators System; these were then
divided into three interfaces throughout the maritime-port logistics chain.
Proposed Interfaces
Identification and assessment of the use of dock
infrastructure and productivity, as well as the liner
1. Ship-Port
shipping connectivity index, port dues, and time at
berths.
Identification and assessment of terminal efficiency,

2. Port Operations in turnaround time, and inspections prior to customs, as
Terminals well as the full-empty container ratio.
Intensity of infrastructure use for truck and rail

delivery/receipt, as well as the modal distribution of
3. Port-Hinterland land transport systems (rail and truck) and the
efficiency of port connectivity with the hinterland.
Source: Prepared by IMT

Indicators for Ship-Port Interface

The Ship-Port Interface is broken into eight indicators to identify and assess the
use of dock infrastructure and productivity, as well as the liner shipping connectivity
index, port dues, and berth times for container ships in the National Port System.
Proposed indicators for the Port Indicators System

Ship-Port Interface
No. Name Objective
Determine the efficiency of cargo movements by

Intensity of dock
length of docks built for specialized terminals, in order
1. infrastructure use
to determine the degree to which port infrastructure is
leveraged.
Dock Evaluate how loading/unloading performance goals

2. loading/unloading are met with respect to real terminal operations.
productivity
Dock occupancy rate in Determine the dock occupancy and/or saturation rate in
terms of terms of loading/unloading productivity. This is useful
3. for planning infrastructure and improving port
loading/unloading
productivity operations.
Liner shipping Determine how connected the country is to the rest of

4. the world through maritime routes with ports of call in
connectivity index
Mexico. Based on the UN-UNCTAD Liner Shipping
Connectivity Index.
Determine the time at berth for ships in terms of dock

Time at berth occupancy rate, by line of business. This is useful for
5.
planning infrastructure and improving port operations.
Determine the percentage of time a ship is operating

Ship operating time while at port to order corrective actions and reduce
6.
inactive periods or delays (entrance, free practique,
and exit of ships).
Total cost covered by the shipping company to call into

Port dues port, including the rights to the use of infrastructure and
7.
port services. This is useful to update and streamline
fees.
Capacity to Determine the maximum vessel dimensions the port

8. accommodate ships, can accommodate, depending on infrastructure and
depending on their size available services.
5
1. Intensity of dock infrastructure use
Calculation methodology
Indicator
1. Intensity of dock infrastructure use
This indicator is measured by dividing the units moved (for both
Objective Determine the efficiency of cargo movements by imports and exports) by linear meters of berth per terminal. For
length of docks built for specialized terminals, in
containerized cargo, the movements are expressed as TEUs;
order to determine the degree to which port
infrastructure is leveraged. other types of lines of business are expressed in tons.
This indicator measures cargo movements by linear meter Containerized Cargo:

of berth per specialized terminal. High efficiency in Mc = U ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n
t
leveraging terminal infrastructure enables maximizing the
Description performance of port investments and bolstering loading and
Other lines of business:
unloading capacity, thus improving the competitiveness of
the terminals, ports, and the country.
U
Mll,t = ɏt = 1,2,3 ...
Disaggregation of data Family
- Port l = (vehicles, general cargo, agriculture bulk, liquids)

- Terminal
Data Unit Source

Availability
Units Moved per Terminal [Ult] Tons APIs
YES  NO PARTIAL Units Moved per Terminal [Uct] TEUs APIs
Linear meters of berth per terminal [Lt] Meters APIs
Original source Publishing source
Observations
API SCT
Does not include petroleum or its derivative products
Data is available on a monthly basis
Frequency Monthly Last period 2015

Example of the intensity of dock infrastructure use, 2014
Intensity of dock infrastructure use, 2014
Source: IMT-IDOM. 2016, based on Port Authority data
8
2. Loading/unloading dock productivity

Indicator 2. Loading/unloading dock productivity Calculation methodology
Determine the efficiency of cargo movements in container These indicators represent the division of units moved in loading/unloading the ship, both in
terms of time the ship is in operation (from the initiation to conclusion of ship operations
Objective terminals to determine the degree to which port
(Containers/Hour/Ship/Operation, or CHBO as per the Spanish acronym)) and total time the ship
infrastructure is leveraged. is docked (from berthing to unberthing (Containers/Hour/Ship/Dock, or CHBM as per the Spanish
acronym)). For containerized cargo, the movements are expressed as containers/hour; other
This indicator measures the loading/unloading productivity types of lines of business are expressed in tons or units/hour.
of container terminals for both
Containers/Hour/Ship/Operation and
Containers/Hours/Ship/Dock. High efficiency in leveraging Containerized Cargo:
terminal operations enables maximizing performance and
Description measuring port efficiency as compares to other ports and to
the goals proposed in the Port Operations Programs, which
monitor compliance with objectives, strategies, and Port
Development Goals, as well as terminal concession titles.
Port Operational Goals Program
Disaggregation of data Family R

P = X 100% ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n ɏP = 1,2,3,4
tp R
- Port
- Terminal
Data Unit Source

Availability
Units Moved per Terminal [Rrt] CHBO & CHBM Terminal
YES  NO PARTIAL Units Moved per Port [Urp] CHBO & CHBM Terminal
Port Operational Goals Program Performance [Rpp] CHBO & CHBM APIs
Observations
Port Authorities General Coordination for
Ports and Merchant Shipping Does not include petroleum or its derivative products
Terminals Data is available on a monthly basis
Frequency Quarterly Last period 2015

Example of loading/unloading dock productivity for the 10 major ports in the

Americas, 2014 (CHSD, Containers/Hour/Ship/Dock)
CHSD
Port Country
2014
1. Balboa Panama 99
2. Baltimore United States 84
3. Lázaro Cárdenas Mexico 82
4. Pointe-à-Pitre Guadalupe 80
5. Los Angeles United States 76
6. Prince Rupert Canada 74
7. Long Beach United States 74
8. Mobile United States 70
9. Charleston United States 68
10. Savannah United States 66
Veracruz Mexico 61
Manzanillo Mexico 53
Altamira Mexico 42
Loading/unloading dock productivity
Source: Prepared with JOC 2015 data and Port Authority data
10
3. Dock occupancy rate in terms of loading/unloading productivity
Indicator 3. Dock occupancy rate in terms of loading/unloading productivity Calculation methodology
Determine dock occupancy rate to plan This indicator is measured by dividing the units moved per terminal per year by the product
infrastructure development, new concessions, and of number of berth positions per terminal, the distribution of 20" and 40" containers per port,
Objective the product of the operational hours per year and the percentage of time a ship is in
port operational improvements operation, and throughput for each type of terminal.
This indicator measures dock occupancy rates in a year, based For real throughput for each type of terminal:
U
on the potential capacity of the infrastructure, as well as a Srt = x 100% ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n
tp
comparison to the throughput proposed in the port's Operational R
Goals Program and current capacity based on real throughput
Description for each terminal. Evaluating the infrastructure and current For throughput proposed in the Goals Program:
operations allows for developing improvement strategies. U
Srp = x 100% ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n
tp
R
Disaggregation of data Family Data Unit Source

Units Moved per Terminal [Ut] TEUs APIs
- Port
Current throughput per terminal [Rrt] CHBO APIs
- Terminal
AOP Throughput per port [RpP] CHBO APIs
- Current/Potential
Number of hours in operation per year [Hop] Hours APIs
Availability Number of hours the port is closed [Hcp] Hours APIs
Ship operating time [Pt] Percentage APIs

YES  NO PARTIAL Percentage of 20" containers per port [Cvt] Percentage APIs
Original source Publishing source Percentage of 40" containers per port [Cct] Percentage APIs
Number of berths per terminal [At] Unit APIs
APIs SCT
Observations
SCT
Terminal
Example of dock occupancy rate in terms of loading/unloading productivity, 2014

TEUs Berths Real Dock occupancy
Throughput (%)
(CHSO)
Altamira 609,678 3 50 57
Lázaro Cárdenas 1,044,687 3 111 38

Mexico
Manzanillo 2,037,279 6 62 75
Veracruz 687,001 1.5 84 81
Barcelona 1,893,299 9 93 32
Spain
Algeciras 4,556,465 11 112 55
Balboa 3,236,355 7 80 72
Manzanillo
Panama Internationa 2,071,342 5 90 64
l Terminal
PSA 231,928 1 90 37
Houston 1,951,088 7 83 50
USA
Los Angeles 8,340,065 21 96 54
Note: The semi-specialized ports in Manzanillo and Veracruz are not considered
CHSO: Containers/Hour/Ship/Operation
Dock occupancy rate in terms of loading/unloading productivity, 2014
Source: Prepared based on IMT-IDOM, 2016 and Port Authority data
12
4. Liner shipping connectivity index

Indicator 4. Liner shipping connectivity index Calculation methodology
Determine how connected the country is to the rest of the This indicator is calculated by the UNCTAD Conference based on five components of the
maritime transport sector: number of ships, their container-carrying capacity, maximum
world through maritime routes with ports of call in Mexico.
Objective vessel size, number of services, and number of companies that deploy container ships in a
Based on the UN-UNCTAD Liner Shipping Connectivity country's ports. For each component, a country's value is divided by the maximum value
Index. for each component in 2004; the five components are averaged for each country, and the
average is divided by the maximum average for 2004 and multiplied by 100. The index
This indicator is based on the UN-UNCTAD Liner Shipping generates a value of 100 for the country with the highest average index in 2004. The
Connectivity Index and captures the degree to which underlying data come from Containerisation International Online.
countries are connected to global shipping networks. High
Description connectivity entails cost reductions, better access to
shipping services, and positively impacts the
competitiveness of the ports and the country.
Port Data Unit Source
Maximum container ship size TEUs Ports

Number of container ships Unit Ports
Number of companies that deploy Unit Ports

Availability
container ships
YES  NO PARTIAL Container-carrying capacity of container ships TEUs Shipping
companie
Number of services Unit Shipping
s
Original source Publishing source companies
Observations
UNCTAD UNCTAD
Indicator based on the UN-UNCTAD Liner Shipping Connectivity Index.
The companies cannot be operated by domestic companies.
Frequency Yearly Last period 2015

Example of Liner Shipping Connectivity Index, 2016
Liner Shipping Connectivity Index, 2016
Source: Prepared based on UNCTAD data. 2016
14
5. Time at berth
Indicator 5. Time at berth
Determine the time at berth based on dock occupancy This indicator is measured by obtaining the annual average time vessels
Objective rate for each line of business (type of cargo) entering and exiting the port spend at berth by subtracting the time at
which the ship crosses the breakwater to the time it enters the berth.
This indicator measures the average time ships are n = ship per port ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n
berthed at port. Shortening time spent on activities that do Tfp
not add value to the cargo reduces loss of capital and
Description market and lowers delays in moving goods. Reducing
bottlenecks drives economic growth in the port and the
country.
- Port
Availability Data Unit Source
YES  NO PARTIAL Time the ship crosses the entrance

breakwaters [Hcb]
Date and time APIs
Publishing source Time it enters the berth [Hfb] Date and time APIs
Original source
Observations
APIs N/A No comments
Frequency Yearly Last period N/A

Example of ship time at berth, 2014

Relation ship Berth media Total berth time Berth cause
and berth / total (2014; hours) (2014; hours) (2014;
(2014; ships) percentage)
Occupied dock Holiday

Berth No Berth Client request Restoration
Closure of port Berth turn
Ship time at berth–hours, 2014
Source: IMT-IDOM. 2015, based on Port Authority

data.
16
6. Ship operational time

Indicator 6. Ship operational time Calculation methodology
Determine the percentage of operational time per ship in This indicator is measured by dividing the average annual operational time by
port, not counting time at berth, to determine corrective the sum of the total port stay time, not counting time at berth. This is multiplied
Objective by 100%, such that the indicator is expressed as a percentage. The total port
actions to reduce non-productive time (entrance, free
stay time is calculated by adding the average time for ships to enter, conduct
practique, and exit of ships)
free practique and operations, and exit. Each port is scored.
This indicator measures the percentage of a ship's

operational time as compared to the entrance, exit, and
free practique times. Shortening the time spent on Top
Description activities that add no value to the cargo will prevent
operational delays and reduce capital losses. Reducing
bottlenecks drives economic growth in the port and the
country.
n: ships per port ɏP = 1,2,3,4
Port
Data Unit Source
Time ship crosses entrance breakwaters [Hcb] Date and Time APIs
Time first lines are moored [Hab] Date and Time APIs
Availability Time operations are initiated [Hib] Date and Time APIs
Time operations are completed [Hfb] Date and Time APIs
YES  NO PARTIAL
Time last line is unmoored [Hdb] Date and Time APIs
Original source Publishing source Time ship crosses breakwaters upon exit [Hsb] Date and Time APIs
APIs SCT Observations
Includes times for containerized cargo movements Does

not apply to other types of cargo

Example of ship operational time, 2014
Total Average TEUs

Altamira 65 101 683 103 31 Time per ship
983 854
Lázaro
46 49 560 71 59 785 1,674
Cárdenas
Manzanillo 36 98 1,170 116 134 1.554 1,869
Veracruz 45 112 742 117 61 1,076 1,344
Breakwaters - Berth Berth - Initiation of Operations Beginning - End of Operations
End of Operations - Unmooring Unmooring - Breakwaters
Ship Operational Time, 2014 (minutes)

Note: This does not include any rearrangement of vessels carried out by the shipping
companies. No information is available.
18
7. Port dues
Indicator 7. Port dues Calculation methodology
This indicator is measured by dividing the average annual operational time by the
Determine the total costs incurred by the shipping
sum of the total port stay time, not counting time at berth. This is multiplied by
company to call a port, including the costs paid to the 100%, such that the indicator is expressed as a percentage. The total port stay
Objective
API (Integral Port Administration) and port services to time is calculated by adding the average time for ships to enter, conduct free
update and streamline rates practique and operations, and exit. Each port is scored.
This indicator is obtained by adding the infrastructure rates

or dues for entering port and additional services provided to
the vessel. Lowering prices could significantly increase
Description Top
movement volumes and cargo transport and provide
incentives for shipping companies to establish hubs. Thus,
n : number of companies offering lightering services in each port
growing the port and the country. j : ships per port
ɏP = 1,2,3,4
Disaggregation of data Family Data Unit Source

Units moved per ship [Ubb] TEUs APIs
- Port
Lightering dues [TIC] $/Hour SCT
Mooring and unmooring rate [TaP] $/Service SCT

Pilotage dues [TIP] $/GRT SCT
Availability
GRT for container ships [Trbb] GRT APIs
YES NO PARTIAL  SCT
Towage [TrP] $/service-hr
Original source Publishing source Berthing dues [TqP] $/MLT* SCT
MLT for container ships [Mehb] $ APIs
APIs SCT
Variable port dues [TvP] $/GRT SCT
SCT Fixed port dues [TpP] Date & Time SCT
Observations
Frequency Yearly Last period Variable
Includes containerized cargo rates. Does not apply to other lines of business. *MLT
= meter/length/time
Example of port dues, 2014

Port dues in main ports
(Thousands of pesos)
Port dues, 2014 - (in thousands of MEX pesos)
20
8. Capacity to accommodate ships, depending on their size

Indicator 8. Capacity to accommodate ships, depending on their size Calculation methodology
Determine the maximum ship dimensions the port can This indicator determines the depth and maximum length of
Objective accommodate, depending on infrastructure and available vessels able to berth for each line of business at the port.
services.
Containerized Cargo:
Emaxp = max(Est)p Cmaxp = max(cat)p
This indicator determines the depth and maximum length of e: number of container terminals ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n ɏp = 1,2,3,4
vessels moving through each port. Companies operating at
Description the highest capacities typically are in a position to offer
cheaper services. This indicator is, thus, a measure of the Vehicles:
maximum economies of scale that each port may attain.
e: number of vehicle terminals ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n ɏp = 1,2,3,4
Other types of cargo:
- Port e: number of other types of cargo terminals ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n ɏp = 1,2,3,4
Data Unit Source

Depth of berth per terminal [Cat] Meters APIs
Availability
Meters APIs
Vessel length per berth per terminal [Est]

Observations
APIs SCT Does not include ships moving petroleum or its derivative products
SCT

22
3 Indicators for Port Operations Interface in Terminals
The Indicators for the Port Operations Interface in Terminals is broken down into
seven indicators to identify and assess the use of terminal infrastructure,
productivity, and efficiency, as well as turnaround time, and inspections prior to
customs, and the full/empty container ratio in the National Port System.

Port Operations Interface in Terminals
No. Name Objective
Determine the efficiency of the volume moved, based

Intensity of port
on the concession area licensed to each terminal, in
9. concessions use
order to evaluate the degree to which infrastructure is
leveraged.
Measure the supply of specialized terminals for the

Availability of
various lines of business, in order to evaluate the
10. specialized terminals
number of competitors and the need for building new
terminals.
Determine the occupancy rate of terminals and ports to

Intensity of terminal
plan and develop infrastructure and port operational
11. and port occupancy
improvements.
Measure the time the goods are at port, identifying

Stay time of goods at possible delays so as to increase the dynamic
12. port warehousing capacity and reduce saturation.
Measure the percentage of goods inspected before

Inspections prior to
13. customs
reaching customs, thus incurring additional cargo
inspection costs.
Determine the amount of refrigerated cargo in each

Distribution of
14. port in order to provide infrastructure and equipment
refrigerated cargo
necessary for this type of cargo.
Empty container Determine the percentage of empty container

15. movements and the movements, which result in increased shipping costs.
full/empty ratio
23
9. Intensity of port concessions use

Indicator 9. Intensity of port concessions use Calculation methodology
This indicator is measured by dividing the units moved (for both import and
Determine the efficiency of the volume moved, based on export) by the concession area licensed to each terminal in a given year. For
Objective the concession area licensed to each terminal, in order to containerized cargo, the movements are expressed as TEUs; other types of lines
evaluate the degree to which infrastructure is leveraged. of business are expressed in tons.
Containerized
This indicator measures the cargo movements per hectare
Cargo:
subject to concessions in each terminal. High efficiency in U
Sc
t = ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n
leveraging terminal infrastructure enables maximizing the
Description performance of port investments and bolstering their dynamic
capacity, thus improving the competitiveness of the
terminals, ports, and the country.
Other lines of business:
Disaggregation of data Family Sll,t = U ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n
- Port l = (vehicles, general cargo, agriculture bulk, liquids)

- Terminal
Data Unit Source

Availability
Units Moved per Terminal [Ult] Tons APIs
YES  NO PARTIAL Units Moved per Terminal [Uct] TEUs APIs
Area subject to concessions per terminal [At] Hectares APIs
Observations
Does not include petroleum or its

APIs SCT derivative products

Intensity of port concessions use, 2014
Concession
area
Intensity of port concessions use
25
10. Availability of specialized terminals.

Indicator 10. Availability of specialized terminals. Calculation methodology
Measure the supply of specialized terminals for the This indicator is measured by identifying the number of specialized terminals
Objective different lines of business to assess the number of and non-specialized terminals at each port. Such that:
competitors and the need for developing new terminals.
This indicator is measured by identifying the number of

Tel,p = "Specialized Terminals" in Pn ɏP = 1,2,3,4
specialized terminals and non-specialized terminals at
each port. A broad offering of specialized terminals
Description enables improving service quality and lowering rates for
freight movements. It also allows for identifying the need Tm l,p = "Non-specialized Terminals" in Pn ɏP = 1,2,3,4
for developing markets for specific goods and freight.

l = (containers, vehicles, general cargo, agriculture bulk, liquids)
- Port
- Terminal
Data Unit Source
Number of specialized terminals, by type of
Availability Unit APIs
cargo [TeP]
YES  NO PARTIAL Number of non-specialized terminals, by
Unit APIs
type of cargo [TnP]
APIs SCT / API Observations

(Master Programs for
Port Development)
Frequency Every 5 yrs Last period Variable
Example of the availability of specialized terminals, 2014
Specialized Non-specialized
Berths Berths
Port Ports Ports TEUs Total
Altamira 0 0 2 3 0 609,678
609,678
Lázaro Cárdenas 1 3 0 0 1,044,687 0
1,044,687
Manzanillo 2 6 2 2-4 2,001,701 353,448
2,355,149
Veracruz 1 1.5 1 2 687,001 151,004
838,005
Specialized Non-specialized
Availability of specialized terminals, 2014
Source: Prepared based on Port Authority data. 2015

Note: Up to 4 berths can be used at the non-specialized terminals at the Manzanillo port,
depending on the freight movements and vessel size.
27
11. Intensity of terminal and port occupancy rate.

Indicator 11. Intensity of terminal and port occupancy rate. Calculation methodology
This indicator is measured by dividing the units moved per terminal each year by
Determine the intensity of terminal occupancy rate the dynamic capacity. Dynamic capacity is obtained from the product of dividing
Objective
at the port to plan infrastructure development and the static capacity of each terminal and the stay time of the goods by the number
of days in a year (365) and multiplying this by 100%, such that the indicator is
port operations improvements.
expressed as a percentage.
This indicator compares the units moved per terminal with

the terminal's dynamic capacity. Lowering the warehouse
saturation allows for occasional terminal productivity
U
Description boosts, lower prices, and improved leveraging of available
space. Reducing bottlenecks drives economic growth in
Sat x 100% ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n ɏp = 1,2,3,4
the port and the country.
- Port
- Terminal
Data Unit Source
Availability Static capacity per terminal [Cet] TEUs APIs
Stay time of goods at port. [TeP] Days APIs
YES NO PARTIAL  Units moved per terminal [Ut] TEUs APIs
Observations
APIs SCT Indicator is calculated for container terminals
TERMINAL Stay time of goods is measured in calendar days

Example of intensity of terminal and port occupancy rate, 2014 - Comparison

of Mexican ports vs. ports in the USA, Panama, and Spain
Static Stay times Occupancy rate

TEUs Capacity (days) in the port
(TEUs) (%)
Altamira 609,678 37,000 8.5 38
Lázaro Cárdenas 1,044,687 59,280 6.9 33

Mexico
Manzanillo 2,001,701 39,144 7.1 81
Veracruz 687,001 20.592 6.1 54
Barcelona 1,893,299 42.466 5.0 61

Spain
Algeciras 4,100,000 109.263 7.5 77
Balboa 3,236,355 78.000 7.0 72

Manzanillo
Panama Internationa 2,071,342 66.100 7.0 59
l Terminal
PSA 231,928 6,465 3.5 34
Houston 1,951,088 48,000 5.0 61

USA
Los Angeles 8,340,065 134,781 4.0 71
Source: Prepared based on IMT-IDOM data. 2015, based on Port Authority data
Note: For the ports in Manzanillo and Veracruz, semi-specialized ports are not taken into
consideration.
29
12. Stay time of goods at port.

Indicator 12. Stay time of goods at port Calculation methodology
Measure the time the goods are at port, identifying This indicator is measured by adding the stay times for containers moved for each
Objective possible delays so as to increase the dynamic terminal. Such that:
warehousing capacity and reduce saturation.
This indicator measures the average stay time of goods at

port. Shortening the stay time enables maximizing the use of Tep ɏP = 1,2,3,4
port infrastructure, reducing saturation at ports, and
Description preventing delayed operations. This indicator assesses the
impact of port initiatives to increase the port's dynamic
capacity and reduce saturation in the National Port System. c: containers moved by terminals
Disaggregation of data Family i: port terminals
- Port
- Terminal
Data Unit Source
Availability Stay time of containers [Tc] Hours APIs

Total containers moved per terminal [Ct] Containers APIs
YES NO  PARTIAL
Total containers moved per port [CP] Containers APIs
Observations
APIs N/A
Only the stay time of containerized cargo is analyzed.
Terminal
The calculation is based on containers, not TEUs.

Example of stay time of containers at port (days), 2014 - Comparison of

Mexican ports vs. ports in the USA, Panama, and Spain
Note: For the ports in Manzanillo and Veracruz, semi-specialized ports are not taken into
consideration.
31
13. Inspections prior to customs.

Indicator 13. Inspections prior to customs. Calculation methodology
Measure the percentage of goods inspected before reaching This indicator is measured by dividing the total number of annual containers
Objective customs, which are subject to additional cargo inspection inspected at port terminals by the number of total containers moved in port every year, then
costs.
multiplying by 100%, such that the indicator is expressed as a percentage.
This indicator measures the percentage of (prior)
inspections performed by customs agents and by customs, Inspections prior to customs.
as compared to the total number of container movements
Description in the port. Reducing the percentage of inspections
reduces additional costs and delays in moving freight. Ipp ɏP = 1,2,3,4
This will, thus, improve port operations and drive port
growth. It only applies to countries in which inspections n: number of container terminals per port
are carried out prior to reaching customs.
Disaggregation of data Family Customs inspections:
- Port
Iap ɏP = 1,2,3,4
- Terminal
- Type of inspection n: number of container terminals per port
Data Unit Source
Availability
Number of containers inspected (prior) [Npt] TEUs Terminal
YES NO PARTIAL  Number of containers inspected by customs [Nat] TEUs Terminal
Original source Publishing source Containers moved per port [CP] TEUs APIs
Observations
APIs SCT
Due to the lack of information on container inspections performed by customs, the
Terminal first phase will only consider prior inspections performed by customs agents.

Example of inspections prior to customs, 2014
Import Inspection % of prior

Port (prior)
Containers
Altamira 99,895 31,669 32%
Lázaro
226,959 59,223 26%
Cárdenas
Manzanillo * 75,221 29,072 39%
Veracruz N/A N/A N/A
Inspections prior to customs, 2014
Source: Prepared based on IMT-IDOM, 2015 and Port Operator data. Note: *The information
corresponds exclusively to a Port Operator
It bears noting that many of the region's countries do not perform inspections prior to
reaching customs; this indicator will not apply to them.
33
14. Distribution of refrigerated cargo

Indicator 14. Distribution of refrigerated cargo This indicator is measured for each port by dividing the annual number or
Determine the amount of refrigerated cargo in each port in order refrigerated containers by the total number of containers moved in a year,
to provide the infrastructure and equipment necessary for this multiplied by 100%, excluding petroleum and its derivative products. Units
Objective type of cargo. moved are expressed in TEUs, such that the share is expressed as a
percentage for each type of product.
This indicator measures the percentage of refrigerated

cargo passing through a port, as compared to the total
number of containers moved. Identifying an increase in R
Rr = x 100% ɏP = 1,2,3,4
the transport of perishable products allows for providing
Description p
services, technology, and facilities to effectively
accommodate refrigerated cargo. This will enhance the
port's, and in turn, the country's competitiveness.
- Port
- Terminal Data Unit Source
Refrigerated containers moved per port [RP] TEUs APIs
Availability Total containers moved per terminal [CP] TEUs APIs
YES NO PARTIAL 
Observations
Does not include petroleum or its derivative
APIs SCT products. Only includes containerized cargo.

Example of distribution of refrigerated container cargo, 2014
Refrigera Connecti TEUs /

Port ted TEUs ons refri Connecti
(2014) gerated ons
Dry Cargo
Refrigerated Cargo
Distribution of refrigerated container cargo, 2014
35
15. Empty container movements and the full/empty ratio.

Indicator 15. Empty container movements and the full/empty ratio Calculation methodology
Determine the percentage of empty container This indicator is measured by dividing the total number of empty containers
Objective moved per year by the total number of containers moved per year,
movements, which result in increased shipping costs. excluding petroleum and its derivative products. Units moved are
expressed in tons, such that movements are expressed as a percentage.
This indicator measures the movement of empty containers in For each port:
relation to the total yearly movements of containers in a port.
A high percentage of empty containers involves repositioning
Description costs, increases warehousing costs, and, in general,
increases freight costs. The percentage of empty containers
is a measure of a port's imbalance between imports and V
exports. Rv = x 100% ɏP = 1,2,3,4
p
- Port
- Terminal
Data Unit Source

Availability
Empty containers moved per port [VP] TEUs APIs
Total containers moved per port [CP] TEUs APIs


Example of the full/empty container ratio, 2014 (%) - Comparison of Mexican

ports vs. ports in the USA, Panama, and Spain
Percentage of empty containers Percentage of full containers
Note: This does not include any rearrangement of vessels carried out by the shipping
companies. No information is available.
37
4 Indicators for Port-Hinterland
Interface
The Port-Hinterland Interface defines five indicators to identify and assess the use
of infrastructure, productivity, and efficiency of the port's land connectivity, based
on the intensity of infrastructure use for truck and rail delivery/receipt, as well as
the modal distribution of land transport systems (rail and truck) and the efficiency of
the port-hinterland connectivity.

Port-Hinterland Interface
No. Name Objective
Determine the time from when a truck enters the port

Truck-Turn Time
until it leaves, in order to enhance the efficiency of truck
16.
delivery/receipt in ports.
Intensity of Measure the supply of specialized terminals for the

infrastructure use for various lines of business, in order to evaluate the
17. rail delivery/receipt number of competitors and the need for building new
terminals.
Intensity of Determine the occupancy rate of terminals and ports to

infrastructure use for plan and develop infrastructure and port operational
18. truck delivery/receipt improvements.
Measure the time the goods are at port, identifying

Efficiency of the port-
possible delays so as to increase the dynamic
19. hinterland connectivity
warehousing capacity and reduce saturation.
Modal distribution of Measure the percentage of goods inspected before

20. land transport systems reaching customs, which are subject to additional
cargo inspection costs.
39
16. Truck-Turn Time

Indicator 16. Truck-Turn Time Calculation methodology
Determine the time from when a truck enters the port until it This indicator is measured by dividing the time a container truck is at port by the
leaves, in order to enhance the efficiency of truck number of container trucks entering the port. This indicator may also be used to
Objective measure the efficiency of truck delivery/receipt for other types of freight.
delivery/receipt in ports.
Containerized Cargo:
This indicator measures the stay time of a truck at port,
from the time it enters until it leaves the port.
The less time a truck spends at port, the better the efficiency
Description in leveraging infrastructure, thus allowing for increased Pct ɏP = 1,2,3,4 ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n
trucking capacity; this, in turn, improves the competitiveness
of the terminals, ports, and the country.
- Port
- Terminal
Data Unit Source
Container truck stay time at port [Pct] Hours APIs
Availability Units entering and transporting containers [Uct] Unit APIs
Observations
APIS N/A Data is available on a monthly basis
Frequency Monthly Last period N/A

Example of stay time of trucks at port (truck-turn time), 2014 - Comparison of

Mexican ports vs. ports in the USA, Panama, and Spain
Operation Exit
Truck-Turn Time, 2014
42
17. Intensity of infrastructure use for rail delivery/receipt.

17. Intensity of infrastructure use for rail delivery/receipt
Indicator This indicator is measured by dividing rail movement by the rail
Determine the intensity of infrastructure use for offloading delivery/receipt capacity. Rail movements are obtained by multiplying the
modal share by the number of containers moved per terminal each year.
freight onto rail to plan infrastructure development and port
Capacity is obtained from the product of the number of tracks, number of
Objective operations improvements. platforms per track, number of TEUs per platform, number of positions, ratio
of platform re-use, and rail operating days. Such that:
This indicator compares current rail freight movement to rail R U
delivery/receipt capacity. The efficient use of rail Sft = x 100% ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n
infrastructure reduces operational delays in freight shipping,
Description R
lowers prices, and better leverages rail infrastructure.
Data Unit Source

Number of tracks [Nvt] Tracks APIs
Number of platforms / track [Pvt] Platforms/track APIs
- Port
Number of TEUs per platform [Tpt] TEUs/Platform Terminal
- Terminal
Number of positions [Npt] Positions/day Terminal
Availability Platform use ratio [Rut] % used Rail
Rail operating days [Dft] Days Terminal

Rail modal share [Rft] % per railway APIs
Original source Publishing source Units Moved per Terminal [Uct] TEUs APIs

Terminal Given the lack of information on the platform use ratios (as they are not
currently measured), a value of 1.5 is assigned.
Railway Companies Rail operations are defined as 6 days a week, as freight movements are
Frequency Monthly Last period 2015 occasionally limited due to customs scheduling
Example of the intensity of infrastructure use for rail delivery/receipt, 2014.
TEUs by Railway Intensity of

Port
rail equipment infrastructure use
on tracks (%)
Altamira 21,644 44 41%
Lázaro Cárdenas 352,051 120 82%
Manzanillo 271.078 252 50%
Veracruz 86,821 181 43%
Intensity of infrastructure use for rail delivery/receipt, 2014
Source: Prepared based on IMT-IDOM, 2015 and Port Operator data.

Note: A positioning ratio of 1.5 is assumed.
44
18. Intensity of infrastructure use for truck delivery/receipt.

18. Intensity of infrastructure use for truck Calculation methodology
Indicator delivery/receipt
This indicator is obtained by dividing truck movement by the sum of the truck
Determine the intensity of infrastructure use for delivery/receipt capacity and the entry/exit capacity of trucks. Truck movements are
Objective measured by multiplying the modal share and units moved per terminal each year.
offloading freight onto trucks to plan infrastructure
Port capacity is either the terminal's capacity to accommodate trucks or the port's
development and port operations improvements.
restricted route, (ruta fiscal), whichever is lower. The annual delivery/receipt
capacity for trucks in terminals is obtained from the product of the truck cargo
capacity per hour, the average TEUs per truck, and the hours of operations per
This indicator compares current freight movement by road year. The annual entry/exit capacity for trucks in terminals is obtained from the
Description transport to the terminal's truck delivery/receipt capacity. An capacity of customs to accommodate trucks, the average TEUs per truck, and the
efficient use of rail infrastructure would reduce congestion at hours of operations per year.
the trucking exit from the port, lower wait times, and cut R U
St = x 100% ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n
costs along the logistics chain, as well as reduce port-city
t
problems.

Data Unit Source
- Port
Average TEUs per truck [Tct] Tons APIs
- Terminal
Number of hours per year in operation [Hop] Hours Terminal
Capacity of restricted routes to accommodate trucks/hr
TEUs/truck Terminal
Availability [CrP]
Truck modal share [Rct] % truck APIs
Units moved per terminal [Uct] TEUs APIs
Original source Publishing source Truck cargo capacity per hour [Cct] Trucks/hour Terminal

Terminal The capacity of restricted routes to accommodate trucks has not
been established or recorded.

Example of intensity of infrastructure use for truck delivery/receipt, 2014.
Port
TEUs by truck 2 Intensity of
Port cargo/hour infrastructure use
(trucks) (%)
Altamira 588,034 120 60%
Lázaro Cárdenas 235,910 60 55%
Manzanillo 1,087,292 146 88%
Veracruz 760,392 110 97%
Intensity of infrastructure use for truck delivery/receipt, 2014.
Source: Prepared based on IMT-IDOM, 2015 and Port Operator data.
Note: 1) Based on an assumed 2.5 TEUs/truck and 285 operating days per year
2. Terminal cargo/hour estimates the optimal terminal capacity.
46
19. Efficiency of the port-hinterland connectivity

Indicator 19. Efficiency of the port-hinterland connectivity Calculation methodology
Objective Determine the port's zone of influence (hinterland) This indicator is measured by identifying the annual containerized cargo
movements of the five main exporting entities in Mexico, as well as the five
This indicator enables identifying the main points of origin main importing destination entities, excluding petroleum and its derivatives.
for exports and destination for imports in the port. Such that, for each hinterland:
Identifying the port's hinterland enables developing
markets to leverage geographic advantages, as well as
Description meet shipping and distribution demands for the primary
land markets. This will enhance the competitiveness of the
port and the country.
Co,d = Containers moved, by main origins and destinations {Entity, C o,d }
ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n
- Port
- Type of product
Data Unit Source

Availability Containers moved, by origin/destination [Co,d] TEUs APIs
Observations
Does not include petroleum or its derivative products.
APIs SCT Information is available on a monthly basis.
According to available information, the origin/destination of freight is
defined as the domicile of the importer/exporter, which reduces the
reliability of the information currently available.
Example of efficiency of port connectivity with the hinterland, 2014
Destination
Stay time of goods at port, 2014 (days)
48
20. Modal distribution of land transport systems.

Indicator 20. Modal distribution of land transport systems. Calculation methodology
Determine the efficiency of intermodal land transport to This indicator is measured by dividing the number of units moved by both rail
Objective establish the degree to which the economies of scale and truck by the total number of units moved in a terminal or port.
and land infrastructure are leveraged.
This indicator measures the modal distribution of land

transport systems. High efficiency in leveraging land
Description infrastructure enables maximizing sea-land connectivity and Dmp = x 100% ɏt = 1,2,3 ... n
leveraging of economies of scale, thus improving the
competitiveness of the ports and the country.
- Port
- Terminal
Data Unit Source

Availability
Units Moved by Truck [Ca] TEUs APIs
YES NO PARTIAL  Units Moved by Rail [Cf] TEUs APIs
Original source Publishing source Total Units in the Port [Co] TEUs APIs

Information is available on a monthly basis
Example of modal distribution of land transport systems, 2014
TEUs by % share of rail

Port
rail
Altamira 21,644 4%
Lázaro Cárdenas 352,051 60%
Manzanillo 271,078 20%
Veracruz 86,821 10%
Modal distribution of land transport systems,

2014
Source: Prepared based on operator and Port Authority data. 2015.
51
5 Conclusions
Defining sources of information and the availability of required data were key to the
process for creating the Port Indicators System. The process also included
identifying the main actors with whom agreements would be made to supply
regular data to conduct the follow-up to the Port Performance Indicators in
subsequent years.
The Integral Port Authorities (APIs) were among the main actors providing
information to establish the Mexican Port Indicators System. The APIs oversee the
management and administration of each of the nation's primary ports. They collect
regular information on operations, infrastructure, and equipment for terminals
under private concession for each port area.
The General Coordination for Ports and Merchant Shipping (CGPMM, in Spanish),
under the Secretariat of Communications and Transportation (SCT), is the
governing body responsible for the development of Mexican ports. Its primary
function is to promote the modernization and consolidation of the National Port
System (SPN), by designing and implementing policies, strategies, and initiatives
that enhance the use of infrastructure, improve services, and bolster port
competitiveness, while simultaneously overseeing the corporate rights of the
Integral Port Administrators (APIs), as applied to the federal government.
As such, it is recommended that the CGPMM serve as a liaison for the entities
generating seaport data and statistics, such as the APIs, port authorities, customs,
maritime agencies, among others; as well as for the civil associations representing
these actors. The Mexican Institute of Transport (IMT)—as a decentralized body of
the SCT and the main research and development center in the Mexican transport
and logistics sector—may assign scientific staff to gather, update, and analyze the
yearly performance indicators for the port system. Based on this information, it will
prepare reports containing key information enabling the government and private
decision makers to access substantial, sufficient tools to support the
implementation of policies, strategies, and initiatives that enhance the use of
infrastructure, improve services, and bolster port competitiveness.
Currently, Mexican and Latin American ports are subject to global scrutiny based
on analysis of a series of indexes and indicators implemented by international
organizations, like the World Bank and the World Economic Forum, among others;
however, all these instruments are based on qualitative analyses centered on the
perception of the various actors along the logistics chain relating to the shipping
and distribution of goods. This proposed methodology is substantially different from
53
other international indexes, given that is based on developing a corpus of inter-
related quantitative indicators, which include the various links along the seaport
and intermodal logistics chain; it allows for objective—not just perceptive—
monitoring of how services, operations, and infrastructure change at Mexican
ports, thus distinguishing the links that are making progress on compliance with
international standards from those showing signs of deficiencies, stagnation, or
opportunities for improvements. This enables decision makers to implement
policies, plans, and/or programs to foster greater productivity, efficiency, and
competitiveness in this sector.
Lastly, it bears noting that a key element required for the port indicators system to
be effective is ensuring an uninterrupted flow of the necessary data and
information each year to populate this tool. Therefore, an institutional mechanism
should be created to collect and provide data to guarantee the long-term viability of
the project, without relying on the good intentions of whoever may be in charge at
the time. Indeed, continuity over time makes it possible to study progress made on
meeting efficiency, productivity, and competitiveness standards throughout the
seaport and intermodal logistics chain.
Bibliography
Coordination for Ports (2015). Información del Informe Estadístico Mensual del
Movimiento de Carga, Buques y Pasajeros [Information from the Monthly
Statistics Report on Cargo, Ship, and Passenger Movements], 2015. General
Coordination for Ports and Merchant Shipping. SCT, Mexico.
Coordination for Ports (2016). Información del Informe Estadístico Mensual del
Movimiento de Carga, Buques y Pasajeros [Information from the Monthly
Statistics Report on Cargo, Ship, and Passenger Movements], 2016. General
Coordination for Ports and Merchant Shipping. SCT, Mexico.
Coordination for Ports (2015). Información del Anuario Estadístico del Movimiento
Portuario [Information from the Statistical Yearbook of Port Movements, 2015],
2015. General Coordination for Ports and Merchant Shipping. SCT, Mexico.
Coordination for Ports (2016). Información del Anuario Estadístico del Movimiento
Portuario [Information from the Statistical Yearbook of Port Movements, 2016],
2015. General Coordination for Ports and Merchant Shipping. SCT, Mexico.
IMT-IDOM. Implementation of a System of Port Performance Indicators: The

Creation of a National Logistics Observatory in Mexico. Internal Document. 2015
IMT-IDOM. Port Indicators Benchmark Comparative analysis of the port indicator

model in Mexico and benchmark ports. Internal Document. 2016.
IMT. National Observatory for Transport and Logistics Port Indicators System,
2016.
55
Carretera Querétaro-Galindo km 12+000
CP 76700, Sanfandila
Pedro Escobedo, Querétaro, México
Tel +52 (442) 216 9777 ext. 2610
Fax +52 (442) 216 9671
[email protected]
http://www.imt.mx/

PPI Mexico

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PPI Mexico

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PPI Mexico

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PORT INDICATORS SYSTEM:

Department of Transportation Integration

Sanfandila, Quintana Roo, 2016

SECRETARIAT OF COMMUNICATIONS AND

MEXICAN INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT

Port Indicators System: Methodology

Sanfandila, Quintana Roo, 2016

2. Indicators for Ship-Port Interface 5

3. Indicators for Port Operations Interface in Terminals 23

4. Indicators for Port-Hinterland Interface 41

Prior to the economic liberalization in 1993, Mexican ports were organizations

As a response to the challenges arising from opening the Mexican economy to

The Communications and Transportation Sector Program, in keeping with the

The current-day efficient container operations of Mexico’s ports allow them to

These efforts require data analysis and evaluation mechanisms to standardize

The IMT seeks to contribute to and support authorities to improve SPN

Identification and assessment of terminal efficiency,

Intensity of infrastructure use for truck and rail

Source: Prepared by IMT

Indicators for Ship-Port Interface

Proposed indicators for the Port Indicators System

Determine the efficiency of cargo movements by

Dock Evaluate how loading/unloading performance goals

Liner shipping Determine how connected the country is to the rest of

Determine the time at berth for ships in terms of dock

Determine the percentage of time a ship is operating

Total cost covered by the shipping company to call into

Capacity to Determine the maximum vessel dimensions the port

Source: Prepared by IMT

1. Intensity of dock infrastructure use

This indicator measures cargo movements by linear meter Containerized Cargo:

- Port l = (vehicles, general cargo, agriculture bulk, liquids)

Data Unit Source

Frequency Monthly Last period 2015

Example of the intensity of dock infrastructure use, 2014

Intensity of dock infrastructure use, 2014

Source: IMT-IDOM. 2016, based on Port Authority data

2. Loading/unloading dock productivity

Disaggregation of data Family R

Data Unit Source

Frequency Quarterly Last period 2015

Example of loading/unloading dock productivity for the 10 major ports in the

Loading/unloading dock productivity

3. Dock occupancy rate in terms of loading/unloading productivity

Indicator 3. Dock occupancy rate in terms of loading/unloading productivity Calculation methodology

Disaggregation of data Family Data Unit Source

Ship operating time [Pt] Percentage APIs

Example of dock occupancy rate in terms of loading/unloading productivity, 2014

Lázaro Cárdenas 1,044,687 3 111 38

Veracruz 687,001 1.5 84 81

Dock occupancy rate in terms of loading/unloading productivity, 2014

Source: Prepared based on IMT-IDOM, 2016 and Port Authority data

4. Liner shipping connectivity index

Disaggregation of data Family

Port Data Unit Source

Maximum container ship size TEUs Ports

Number of companies that deploy Unit Ports

Frequency Yearly Last period 2015

Example of Liner Shipping Connectivity Index, 2016

Liner Shipping Connectivity Index, 2016