Multidimensional cost analysis of Europe–Asia container transport routes

In this article, we propose a 3-dimensional framework for evaluating the costs of transporting goods between Europe and Asia, including direct transport, time, and Environmental Costs (ECs). We estimate the costs of alternative container transport routes, including direct sea transport via the Suez Canal Route (SCR) and the Northern Sea Route (NSR); direct rail connections via the Trans-Siberian Rail (TSR) and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and intermodal transport options consisting of rail and sea transport legs. When considering environmental and Inventory Carrying Costs (ICs), the NSR is viable at least seasonally, whereas rail and intermodal alternatives remain more expensive. The results provide a robust estimate of the potential of alternative transport routes and modes. The inclusion of ECs in our analysis provides valuable new information to stakeholders on how to achieve the ambitious environmental goals while also considering the economic viability of different route options in Europe–Asia container trade.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Transport
Published
2025-11-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3846/transport.2025.22874
Primary Topic
Maritime Ports and Logistics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Multidimensional cost analysis of Europe–Asia container transport routes

Tuomas Kiiski, Tomi Solakivi, Jarmo Malmsten, Vesa Kilpi et al.
Transport
Maritime Ports and Logistics
article

Multidimensional cost analysis of Europe–Asia container transport routes

Tuomas Kiiski, Tomi Solakivi, Jarmo Malmsten, Vesa Kilpi, Aleksi Paimander, Lauri Ojala
article en

Abstract

In this article, we propose a 3-dimensional framework for evaluating the costs of transporting goods between Europe and Asia, including direct transport, time, and Environmental Costs (ECs). We estimate the costs of alternative container transport routes, including direct sea transport via the Suez Canal Route (SCR) and the Northern Sea Route (NSR); direct rail connections via the Trans-Siberian Rail (TSR) and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and intermodal transport options consisting of rail and sea transport legs. When considering environmental and Inventory Carrying Costs (ICs), the NSR is viable at least seasonally, whereas rail and intermodal alternatives remain more expensive. The results provide a robust estimate of the potential of alternative transport routes and modes. The inclusion of ECs in our analysis provides valuable new information to stakeholders on how to achieve the ambitious environmental goals while also considering the economic viability of different route options in Europe–Asia container trade.

TransportVol. 40(2)
University of Turku (FI), Turku University of Applied Sciences (FI), University of International Business (KZ), Finnish Transport Safety Agency (FI)
National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency
Openalex Percentile: Top 55%
Maritime Ports and Logistics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.