Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Papers

No. 2 (2026)

Deconstructing the model, rethinking the port: Critical geographies of global logistics

  • Francesca Savoldi
  • Stefano Soriani
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/rgioa2-2026oa23044
Submitted
giugno 10, 2026
Published
2026-06-25

Abstract

With the introduction of the container, ports have become pivotal nodes of global logistics. Consequently, their development has followed a model based on the continuous spatial expansion of port areas, infrastructural gigantism, and inter-port competition. This model, which has come to constitute the dominant discursive framework for interpreting port development, now shows multiple fractures, stemming from ongoing transformations in globalisation, mounting environmental and territorial challenges, and increasingly frequent conflicts with local communities. These dynamics legitimate a critical reexamination of the relationship between ports, cities, and global logistics. Ports remain relevant infrastructures from a socio-economic standpoint. Yet their development must be re-situated within an urban-territorial perspective that conceives the port-city as a socio-ecological assemblage. The challenge is not merely infrastructural but ontological: to redefine what a port is, what purposes it serves, and for whom it should function.

References

  1. Apostolopoulou E., Pant H. (2022). ‘Silk Road here we come’: Infrastructural myths, postdisaster politics, and the shifting urban geographies of Nepal. Political Geography, 98: 102704. DOI: 10.1016/j.polgeo.2022.102704.
  2. Apostolopoulou E., Pizarro A. (2025). Contesting the anticipated infrastructural city: A grounded analysis of Silk Road urbanization in the multipurpose port terminal in Chancay, Peru. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 115(1): 223-241. DOI: 10.1080/24694452.2024.2415718.
  3. Armondi S., Di Vita S., Galimberti B. (2024). Geografie operazionali nel Nord Italia. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  4. Armondi S. (2025). Geografie delle crisi. Dati, logistica e urbanizzazione del mondo. Milano: Mimesis.
  5. Baker J. (2024, January 17). Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd put reliability at centre of new agreement. Lloyd’s List. Testo disponibile al sito www.lloydslist.com/LL1147966/Maersk-and-Hapag-Lloydput-reliability-at-centre-of-new-agreement (consultato 1/3/2025).
  6. Barbieri E., Ciabuschi F., Frattocchi L., Vignoli M. (2018). What do we know about
  7. manufacturing reshoring? Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, 11(1): 79-122. DOI: 10.1108/JGOSS-02-2017-0004.
  8. Benabed A., Moncea M. (2024). Slowbalization: Rising trends for the global economy and business. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Business Excellence/SCIENDO: 283-294. DOI: 10.2478/picbe-2024-0024.
  9. Bennet N., Lemoine G.J. (2014). What a difference a world makes: Understanding threats to performance in a VUCA world. Business Horizons, 1126: 1-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.bushor.2014.01.001.
  10. Bialasiewicz L., Soriani S. (2025). Le geografie dell’incertezza e quelle dell’insicurezza: ‘navigare’ il mondo di Trump. Documenti Geografici, 2: 591-596. DOI: 10.19246/DOCUGEO2281-7549/202501_52.
  11. Bird J. (1971). Seaports and Seaport Terminals. London: Hutchinson University Library.
  12. Bologna S. (2017). Tempesta perfetta sui mari. Il crack della finanza navale. Roma: DeriveApprodi.
  13. Borruso G. (2022). Port-city relationship in the era of hydridization. A development model. J-Reading, 2: 125-137. DOI: 10.4458/5598-12/dx.doi.org/10.4458/5598-12.
  14. Brakman S., van Marrewijk C. (2022). Tasks, occupations and slowbalisation: On the limits of fragmentation. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 15(2): 407-436. DOI: 10.1093/cjres/rsac014.
  15. Chua C., Danyluk M., Cowen D., Khalili L. (2018). Turbulent circulation: Building a critical engagement with logistics. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 36(4): 617-629. DOI: 10.1177/0263775818783101.
  16. Corriere del Veneto (2013, 24 luglio). Il Mastodonte dei mari a Venezia. Testo disponibile al sito https://corrieredelveneto.corriere.it/veneto/notizie/cronaca/2013/24-luglio-2013/mastodonte-mari-venezia-2222316062779.shtml (consultato 1/6/2025).
  17. Cowen D. (2014). The Deadly Life Of Logistics: Mapping violence in Global Trade. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  18. Danyluk M. (2021). Supply-chain urbanism: Constructing and contesting the logistics city. Annals of the American Association of eographers, 111(7): 2149-2164. DOI: 10.1080/24694452.2021.1889352.
  19. Danish Ship Finance (2024, maggio). Shipping Market Review. Testo disponibile al sito https://skibskredit.dk/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/shipping-market-review-may-2024. pdf (consultato 3/3/2025).
  20. Deaglio M. (2022). Il mondo post globale. Milano: Guerini.
  21. De Langen P.W., Pallis A. (2006). Analysis of the benefits of intra-port competition. International Journal of Transport Economics, 33(1): 69-86.
  22. Ducruet C., Lee S.W. (2006). Frontline soldiers of globalisation: Port-city evolution and regional competition. GeoJournal, 67: 107-122. DOI: 10.1007/s10708-006-9037-9.
  23. ESPO (European Sea Port Organisation) (2024). Priorities of Europe’s seaports for 2024-2029. Brussels: ESPO. Testo disponibile al sito www.espo.be/news/priorities-ofeuropes-seaports-for-2024-2029 (consultato 1/2/2025).
  24. Gallo A., Soriani S. (2025), The geopolitical crisis of the Red Sea - Maritime transport dynamics in the reorganisation of logistic chains. GeoProgress Journal, 11(2): 1-19. DOI: 10.20373/2384-9398/50.
  25. Gazzettino (2013, 25 luglio). Ecco la maxi portacontainer: ‘Marghera porto di serie A’. Gong H., Hassink R., Foster C., Hess M., Garretsen H. (2022). Globalisation in reverse? Reconfiguring the geographies of value chains and production networks. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 15(2): 165-181. DOI: 10.1093/cjres/rsac012.
  26. Hayuth Y. (1982). The port-urban interface: An area in transition. Area, 14(3): 219-224. www.jstor.org/stable/i20001810.
  27. Hein C. (2016). Port cityscapes: Conferences and research contributions on port cities. Planning Perspectives, 31(2): 313-326. DOI: 10.1080/02665433.2015.1119714.
  28. Hesse M. (2017). Approaching the relational nature of the port-city interface in Europe: Ties and tensions between seaports and the urban. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, 109(2): 210-223. DOI: 101111/tesg.12282.
  29. Hoyle B.S. (1989). The port-city interface: Trends, problems and examples. Geoforum, 20(4): 429-435.
  30. Huo W., Zhang W., Chen P.S.L. (2018). Recent development of Chinese port cooperation strategies. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 26: 67-75. DOI: 10.11648/j.ajtte.20220701.11.
  31. International Transport Forum (2018). The impact of alliances in container shipping. Testo disponibile al sito www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/impact-alliances-containershipping. pdf (consultato 10/2/2025).
  32. Laxe F.G. (2018). El transporte marítimo y los desarrollos portuarios. Estudios de Economía Aplicada, 36(3): 647-668. DOI: 10.25115/eea.v36i3.2546.
  33. Mah A. (2014). Port Cities and Global Legacies. Urban Identity, Waterfront Work, and Radicalism. Londra: Palgrave MacMillan.
  34. Matsuoka M., Hricko A., Gottlieb R.D. (2011). Global Trade Impacts: Addressing the Health, Social and Environmental Consequences of Moving International Freight Through Our Communities. Los Angeles: Occidental College and University of Southern California.
  35. Merk O. (2013). The competitiveness of global port-cities: Synthesis report. OECD Regional Development Working Papers, 2013/13. DOI: 10.1787/5k40hdhp6t8s-en.
  36. Mezzadra S., Neilson B. (2013). Border as Method, or, the Multiplication of Labor. Durham, US: Duke University Press.
  37. Miola A., Paccagnan V., Mannino I., Massarutto A., Parujo A., Turvani M. (2009). External costs of transport Case study: Maritime transport. European Commission Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability (EUR23837). DOI: 10.2788/18349.
  38. Musso E. (1996). Città portuali. L’economia e il territorio. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  39. Notteboom T., 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.
  40. Notteboom T. (2018). Towards a “Rotterdamisation” of the European container port system? PortEconomics. Testo disponibile al sito www.porteconomics.eu/portgraphic-towardsa-rotterdamisation-of-the-european-container-port-system/ (consultato 1/2/2025).
  41. Notteboom T., Pallis A., Rodrigue J.-P. (2022). Port Economics, Management and Policy. New York: Routledge.
  42. Savoldi F. (2024). Contested port cities: Logistical frictions and civic mobilization in Genoa and Venice. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 42(8), 1352-1369. DOI: 10.1177/23996544241231684.
  43. Savoldi F. (2025). Geographies and counter-geographies of global circulation in port cities - the case of Piraeus. Urban Geography, 46(8): 1757-1773. DOI: 10.1080/02723638.2025.2464561.
  44. Slack B. (1993). Pawns in the game: Ports in a global transportation system. Growth and Change, 24: 579-588.
  45. Slack B. (2002). Globalizzazione e trasporto marittimo: competizione incertezza e implicazioni per le strategie di sviluppo portuale. In: Soriani S., a cura di, Porti, città e territorio costiero. Le dinamiche della sostenibilità. Bologna: il Mulino.
  46. Soriani S. (2002). La transizione postindustriale della portualità tra dinamiche di mercato e vincoli-opportunità territoriali. In: Soriani S., a cura di, Porti, città e territorio costiero. Le dinamiche della sostenibilità. Bologna: il Mulino.
  47. Soriani S. (2004). Port development and implementation challenges in environmental management. The case of Venice. In: Pinder D., Slack B., a cura di, Shipping and Ports in the Twenty-first Century. Globalisation, Technological Change and the Environment. London: Routledge.
  48. SRM (2025). Italian Maritime Economy. Protezionismo e dazi: impatti su shipping globale e modelli portuali. Il Mediterraneo al centro degli scenari tra intermodalità e sostenibilità. Napoli: Giannini Editore.
  49. UNCTAD (2024). Lower economic growth and trade disruptions in 2024 to impact development. UNCTAD/PRESS/PR/2024/007. Testo disponibile al sito https://unctad.org/pressmaterial/lower-economic-growth-and-trade-disruptions-2024-impactdevelopment (consultato 1/3/2025).
  50. Vallega A. (1997). Geografia delle strategie marittime. Milano: Mursia.
  51. Van den Berghe K., Jacobs W., Boelens L. (2018). The relational geometry of the port-city interface: Case studies of Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and Ghent, Belgium. Journal of Transport Geography, 70(C): 55-63. DOI: 10.1016/J.JTRANGEO.2018.05.013.
  52. Vegliò S., Silver J., Pollio A., Governa F., Apostopoulou E. (2025). A dialogue on global infrastructure-led urbanization: Concepts and reorientations. Dialogues in Human Geography, 1-21. DOI: 10.1177/20438206251321093.
  53. Verhoeven P. (2009). European ports policy: Meeting contemporary governance challenges. Maritime Policy & Management, 36(1): 79-101. DOI: 10.1080/03088830802652320.
  54. Wilmsmeier G., Monios J., Pérez-Salas G. (2014). Port system evolution - The case of Latin America and the Caribbean. Journal of Transport Geography, 39: 208-221. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2014.07.007.
  55. WPSP (World Ports Sustainable Program) (2021). World Ports Sustainable Report 2020. IAPH. Testo disponibile al sito www.iaphworldports.org/n-iaph/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/IAPH_annual_report_2020-2021.pdf (consultato 10/4/2025).
  56. Ziadah R. (2018). Constructing a logistics space: Perspectives from the Gulf Cooperation Council. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 36(4): 666-682. DOI: 10.1177/0263775817742916.