Abstract

The hinterland connection in the food supply chain is important for ensuring efficient and sustainable food distribution. This study aims to analyze and determine the best route for hinterland connection in the food supply chain on Bangka Island using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). By identifying evaluation criteria such as road geometry, road performance, land use, and social conditions, as well as paired assessments by experts and stakeholders, the relative weight for each criterion is then determined. Based on the results, alternative routes are evaluated and ranked to choose the best route. The findings highlight that the primary route choice is the Palembang-Mentok-Puding Besar-Petaling-Pangkalpinang route, with a score of 34.8%. Road performance shows a strong correlation with road geometry and land use, while safety criteria hold the highest score at 0.884, emphasizing their critical importance in the food supply chain. This research provides valuable insights for decision-makers in planning and developing transportation infrastructure to support food supply chains on Bangka Island.

Keywords

Hinterland connection, Food supply chain, Analytical hierarchy process, Transportation infrastructure, Bangka Island.

References

[1] Lubag M, Bonifacio J, Tan JM, Concepcion R, Mababangloob GR, Galang JG, et al. Diversified impacts of enabling a technology-intensified agricultural supply chain on the quality of life in hinterland communities. Sustainability. 2023; 15(17):1-26.

[2] Akbar MF, Fahria I. Study on identification and projection of food commodity price cycles during the COVID-19 pandemic period as a study of supervision aspects of food product marketing in Bangka Belitung. Society. 2022; 10(1):45-64.

[3] Acciaro M, Bardi A, Cusano MI, Ferrari C, Tei A. Contested port hinterlands: an empirical survey on Adriatic seaports. Case Studies on Transport Policy. 2017; 5(2):342-50.

[4] Humang WP. Performance of access road transportation network from Hinterland to Tanjung Ringgit port, Palopo city. Transportation Research News. 2018; 30(1):35-42.

[5] Sulistyorini R. Multi criteria analysis as a method for selecting alternative road sections in lampung province. Journal of Civil Engineering, University of Lampung. 2010; 14(3):147-56.

[6] Bergqvist R, Macharis C, Meers D, Woxenius J. Making hinterland transport more sustainable a multi actor multi criteria analysis. Research in Transportation Business & Management. 2015; 14:80-9.

[7] Marcelino P, Antunes MD, Fortunato E, Gomes MC. Development of a multi criteria decision analysis model for pavement maintenance at the network level: application of the MACBETH approach. Frontiers in Built Environment. 2019; 5(6):1-10.

[8] Octaviansyah D, Buchari E, Arliansyah J, Nawawi N. Multi-criteria analysis as a method for selecting the best route of Hinterland connections: case study in south Sumatra, Indonesia. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics. 2024; 40(1):22-9.

[9] Kambey SF, Kawet L, Sumarauw JS. Analysis of cabbage supply chain in Rurukan sub-district, Tomohon city. EMBA Journal: Journal of Economic, Management, Business and Accounting Research. 2016; 4(3):303-409.

[10] Lupi M, Pratelli A, Campi F, Ceccotti A, Farina A. The “Island formation” within the Hinterland of a port system: the case of the Padan plain in Italy. Sustainability. 2021; 13(9):1-28.

[11] Dadashpoor H, Arasteh M. Core-port connectivity: towards shaping a national Hinterland in a West Asia country. Transport Policy. 2020; 88:57-68.

[12] Anang A, Jeevan J. The classification of seaport-Hinterland in Johor port and port of Tanjung Pelepas. Advances in Transportation and Logistics Research. 2018; 1:959-74.

[13] Nguyen LC, Thai VV, Nguyen DM, Tran MD. Evaluating the role of dry ports in the port-Hinterland settings: conceptual framework and the case of Vietnam. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics. 2021; 37(4):307-20.

[14] Ortega J, Moslem S, Palaguachi J, Ortega M, Campisi T, Torrisi V. An integrated multi criteria decision making model for evaluating park-and-ride facility location issue: a case study for Cuenca city in Ecuador. Sustainability. 2021; 13(13):1-16.

[15] Sameer YM, Abed AN, Sayl KN. Highway route selection using GIS and analytical hierarchy process case study Ramadi Heet rural highway. In journal of physics: conference series 2021 (pp. 1-14). IOP Publishing.

[16] Behdani B, Wiegmans B, Roso V, Haralambides H. Port-hinterland transport and logistics: emerging trends and frontier research. Maritime Economics & Logistics. 2020; 22:1-25.

[17] Bouchery Y, Woxenius J, Fransoo JC. Identifying the market areas of port-centric logistics and Hinterland intermodal transportation. European Journal of Operational Research. 2020; 285(2):599-611.

[18] Vilke S, Krpan L, Milković M. Application of the multi-criteria analysis in the process of road route evaluation. Tehnički vjesnik. 2018; 25(6):1851-9.

[19] Broniewicz E, Ogrodnik K. Multi-criteria analysis of transport infrastructure projects. Transportation Research part D: Transport and Environment. 2020; 83:1-15.

[20] Zhao H, Yu N, Zhu S. International land-sea trade corridor for sustainable transportation: a review of recent literature. Cleaner Logistics and Supply Chain. 2023; 6:1-11.

[21] Caballini C, Benzi M. Fast corridors: innovative customs processes and technology to increase supply chain competitiveness. the case of IKEA Italy. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives. 2023; 21:1-16.

[22] Malisan J, Marpaung E, Hutapea G, Puriningsih FS, Arianto D. Development of short sea shipping in the north coast of Java Island, Indonesia as a potential market. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives. 2023; 18:1-10.

[23] Park Y, Dossani R. Port infrastructure and supply chain integration under the belt and road initiative: role of Colombo port in the apparel industry in South Asia. Transportation Research Procedia. 2020; 48:307-26.

[24] De ART, De MMC, Ojiako U, Chipulu M, Marshall A, Dweiri F. A flexible cost model for seaport-hinterland decisions in container shipping. Research in Transportation Business & Management. 2023; 49:101016.

[25] Saeed N, Hoff A, Larsen OI. Analysis of hinterland transport strategies when exporting perishable products. Research in Transportation Business & Management. 2022; 43:1-9.

[26] Shi X, Li H. Developing the port hinterland: different perspectives and their application to Shenzhen port, China. Research in Transportation Business & Management. 2016; 19:42-50.

[27] Raimbault N. From regional planning to port regionalization and urban logistics. the Inland port and the governance of logistics development in the Paris region. Journal of Transport Geography. 2019; 78:205-13.

[28] Frémont A, Franc P. Hinterland transportation in Europe: combined transport versus road transport. Journal of Transport Geography. 2010; 18(4):548-56.

[29] Guo T, Liu P, Wang C, Xie J, Du J, Lim MK. Toward sustainable port-Hinterland transportation: a holistic approach to design modal shift policy mixes. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2023; 174:1-15.

[30] Gao T, Tian J, Huang C, Wu H, Xu X, Liu C. The impact of new western land and sea corridor development on port deep Hinterland transport service and route selection. Ocean & Coastal Management. 2024; 247:106910.

[31] Yu J, Voß S, Cammin P. Cruise passenger-oriented evaluation system for the public transport of Hinterland destinations. Transportation Research Procedia. 2022; 62:615-23.

[32] Urbanyi-popiołek I. Cruise industry in the Baltic sea region, the challenges for ports in the context of sustainable logistics and ecological aspects. Transportation Research Procedia. 2019; 39:544-53.

[33] Garg CP, Kashav V. Assessment of sustainable initiatives in the containerized freight railways of India using fuzzy AHP framework. Transportation Research Procedia. 2020; 48:522-39.

[34] https://babel.bps.go.id/id/publication/2024/02/28/7b80421df62e24a5f2b66c73/provinsi-kepulauan-bangka-belitung-dalam-angka-2024.html. Accessed 20 December 2024.

[35] https://digi-lib.stekom.ac.id/assets/dokumen/ebook/feb_35efe6a47227d6031a75569c2f3f39d44fe2db43_1652079047.pdf. Accessed 20 December 2024.

[36] Saaty TL. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences. 2008; 1(1):83-98.

[37] Saaty TL, Sodenkamp M. The analytic hierarchy and analytic network measurement processes: the measurement of intangibles: decision making under benefits, opportunities, costs and risks. In Handbook of multicriteria analysis 2010 (pp. 91-166). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[38] Tabucanon MT, Lee HM. Multiple criteria evaluation of transportation system improvement projects: the case of Korea. Journal of Advanced Transportation. 1995; 29(1):127-43.

[39] Majstorović A, Jajac N. Maintenance management model for nonurban road network. Infrastructures. 2022; 7(6):1-16.

Cite this article