Evaluating Connectivity of Kocaeli Port In Regional Maritime Networks

Year 2025, Volume: 21 Issue: 2, 199 - 220

Firat Bolat

https://doi.org/10.56850/jnse.1704487

Abstract

This study investigates the dual role of the Kocaeli Port within regional maritime networks by disaggregating its participation into trade-based (active) and transit (pass-through) vessel flows. The aim is to assess the port's functional and structural centrality across interconnected maritime corridors. The research employs directed graph modeling and four centrality metrics -Degree, Betweenness, Eigenvector, and Network Influence Rank (NIR)- to evaluate Kocaeli Port’s nodal influence. United Nations Statistical Division (UNSD) M49 regional classifications are used to globally frame the port’s connectivity and to differentiate the economic versus structural dimensions of its network presence. The results reveal that Kocaeli Port exhibits strong centrality within targeted bilateral and multilateral trade corridors, reflecting its industrial and logistical prominence. However, its positioning in the transit subnetwork demonstrates broader structural embeddedness without proportional economic interaction. This divergence underscores the necessity of distinguishing between structural integration and functional engagement when evaluating port connectivity. By introducing a dual-dimensional framework for analyzing port roles, the study contributes to the evolving discourse on maritime network analysis. This study makes an explicit distinction between trade-driven port centrality and transit-based port centrality in a regional context. It contests the longstanding dependence on throughput measures and puts forward a methodological way of working that is pertinent to hybrid-function ports in analogous geo-economic contexts. The findings yield actionable insights for port authorities, regional planners, and transportation policymakers that may help them to align infrastructural investments with functional performance of the ports.

Keywords

Trade , Logistics , Maritime networks , Connectivity , Kocaeli port

References

• Celik, M., Cebi, S., Kahraman, C., & Er, I. D. (2009). Application of axiomatic design and Topsis methodologies under Fuzzy Environment for proposing competitive strategies on Turkish container ports in maritime transportation network. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), 4541–4557. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2008.05.033.
• Deng, P., Song, L., Xiao, R., & Huang, C. (2022). Evaluation of logistics and Port connectivity in the Yangtze River Economic Belt of China. Transport Policy, 126, 249–267. doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2022.07.019.
• Ducruet, C., & Notteboom, T. (2012). The Worldwide Maritime Network of Container Shipping: Spatial Structure and Regional Dynamics. Global Networks, 12(3), 395–423. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0374.2011.00355.x.
• Ducruet, C., & Zaidi, F. (2012). Maritime constellations: A complex network approach to shipping and Ports. Maritime Policy and Management, 39(2), 151–168. doi: 10.1080/03088839.2011.650718.
• Elmezain, M., Othman, E. A., & Ibrahim, H. M. (2021). Temporal degree-degree and closeness-closeness: A new centrality metrics for social network analysis. Mathematics, 9(22), 2850. doi: 10.3390/math9222850.
• Emiroglu, C., & Ozer Caylan, D. (2014). The importance of strategic leadership for port management: A delphi research on top managers of Turkish private ports. Journal of Global Strategic Management, 2(8), 5–5. doi: 10.20460/jgsm.2014815637.
• İnanli, H., & Yorulmaz, M. (2021). Konteyner Lı̇manlarinda Dijital Dönüşüm: Kocaelı̇ Lı̇manlarinda Bı̇r İnceleme. The Journal of Social Science, 5(10), 462–473. doi: 10.30520/tjsosci.886442.
• Liu, Q., Yang, Y., Ke, L., & Ng, A. K. Y. (2022). Structures of port connectivity, competition, and shipping networks in Europe. Journal of Transport Geography, 102, 103360. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2022.103360.
• Notteboom, T. E., & Rodrigue, J. P. (2005). Port regionalization: Towards a new phase in port development. Maritime Policy and Management, 32(3), 297–313. doi: 10.1080/03088830500139885.
• Raj, S., Brinkley, C., & Ulimwengu, J. (2022). Connected and extracted: Understanding how centrality in the global wheat supply chain affects global hunger using a network approach. PLOS One, 17(6). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0269891
• Teker, D., Teker, S., & Orman, I. (2024). Turkiye as a regional hub. Pressacademia. doi: 10.17261/pressacademia.2023.1866.
• UNSD. (2025). UNSD. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs Statistics Division. https://unstats.un.org/UNSDWebsite/.
• Usluer, H. B., & Alkan, G. B., (2015). Liman Planlama ve Geliştirmede Deniz Bilimlerinin Önemi. II. Ulusal Liman Kongresi, 330–343.
• Wang, C., Dou, X., & Haralambides, H. (2022). Port centrality and the composite connectivity index: Introducing a new concept in assessing the attractiveness of Hub Ports. Maritime Economics and Logistics, 24(1), 67–91. doi: 10.1057/s41278-022-00220-2.
• Wang, P., Hu, Q., Xu, Y., Mei, Q., & Wang, F. (2021). Evaluation methods of port dominance: A critical review. Ocean & Coastal Management, 215, 105954. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2021.105954.
• Zhang, L., Zhao, Y., Chen, D., & Zhang, X. (2021). Analysis of network robustness in weighted and unweighted approaches: A case study of the air transport network in the Belt and Road Region. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2021, 1–13. doi: 10.1155/2021/8810254.