Multimodal supply chains: iron ore from

Australia to China
Anthony Beresford, Stephen Pettit and Yukuan Liu
Transport and Shipping Research Group, Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK

Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to analyse available multimodal transport route variations for iron ore shipments from northwest Australia to northeast
China, focusing on a major iron and steel manufacturer.
Design/methodology/approach – The research is focused on a case study and uses an established cost model as a framework, for the first time, in
the context of heavy bulk cargo shipments. Field interviews and a questionnaire form the principal methods of primary data collection. The
characteristics of bulk iron ore transport flow are analysed against traditional criteria and an appraisal of the transport infrastructure in north east China
is made, considering both road and rail options, and various possible combinations for transport being evaluated. All factors affecting modal choice in
the region are examined, including cargo volume, weight, and value, transport distance, transit time, transport costs and schedule reliability.
Findings – The volumes of iron ore moved are large, with a high weight-to-volume ratio, and shipments are regular. The research initially confirms that
sea and rail transport combinations are the most appropriate for the movement of iron ore. However, where rail transport corridors are congested,
provided that the transport distances are not too great, road haulage appears to be an effective substitute and the most competitive multimodal
transport route, at least in the short to medium term, is found to be a rail-sea-road combination via Port Bayuquan in China.
Research limitations/implications – The research focuses on the delivery of iron ore to one major steel manufacturer in northeast China; so findings
may not be transferable to other companies or circumstances.
Practical implications – The paper first demonstrates that, for heavy, high volume cargoes concentration of flows on to one corridor, perhaps under
the control of one service provider, maximises scale economies, but works against competition and route/mode choice. Second, it demonstrates that, for
long haul shipments of iron ore, port variations and modal differences for inland transport yield only marginal differences in overall logistics costs.
Originality/value – An assessment of high volume/heavy/low value cargoes such as iron ore has not previously been undertaken using this cost
model. This paper therefore provides an original analysis of such supply chains.

Keywords Transportation, Australia, China, Costs, Iron

Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction success of the chain. Gentry (1996) confirmed this by

The multidimensional nature of supply chains is widely
recognised and there has been increased discussion of the
relationships between shippers and carriers, shippers and
consignees and consignees and carriers. These together form
the well established logistics triad, first suggested by Beier
(1989), and subsequently developed by, for example, Bask
(2001). Within a given supply chain, relationships between
the service providers, cargo owners and shippers can be
critical, but are not easy to measure scientifically. There have
been a number of attempts to improve the understanding of
the processes within logistics chains by taking a systems
approach (Christopher, 1992; Mason and Lalwani, 2006;
Mason et al., 2007). As supply chains increasingly compete
with each other, the interdependence of elements within the
chains becomes ever more critical. Depending on the
commodity concerned, or on specific delivery requirements,
consistency of arrival times, price, risk of loss or damage and
other services factors become critical in determining the
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1359-8546.htm
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
16/1 (2011) 32– 42
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1359-8546]
[DOI 10.1108/13598541111103485]
suggesting that, within a given chain “critical elements of
successful collaborative arrangements are sustained service
performance on behalf of the carrier”. Further, Lalonde and
Cooper (1989) suggest, in the longer term both the shipper
and carrier “must have a vision of a partnering relationship
and the objective of developing such a relationship for it to
work”.
Central to the modern view of supply chain structures and
the business relationships within them is the identification of
activities which add value to the product or the process. Stank
and Goldsby (2000) present the generic supply chain as a
series of “gears”, each of which is dependent upon the other
to keep the “machine” in full operation; should any one
“gear” fail the whole machine will fail. Similarly, if transport is
managed independently from other elements in the supply
chain, it becomes disconnected from other components
increasing the likelihood of system failure. A more
sophisticated model is then suggested which incorporates a
decision-making dimension, extending from the micro to the
macro level, with a return flow of decision implementation
cascading from strategy to operations. Consistent with this
approach, the authors outline a traditional three-step model of
mode and carrier selection as a basis for the development of a
refined integrated model, incorporating simultaneous
consideration of: customer service, transit time, market/
product characteristics, transport costs and carrier capability.
Carrier selection is the outcome but it is suggested that
carriers themselves should reduce emphasis on price and

32
 Multimodal supply chains: iron ore from Australia to China
Anthony Beresford, Stephen Pettit and Yukuan Liu
elevate the importance of value addition; at the same time, it
is suggested that a more expansive view of outsourcing of
segments of the supply chain should be taken. A parallel study
by Selviaridis et al. (2008) confirms these findings and
suggests that risk related issues represent a key part of the
decision making process concerning logistics outsourcing and
carrier selection.
Christopher (2005) states that there is a need to analyse
specific supply chains in terms of the consumption of time by
non-value adding and value adding activities. For clarity, he
suggests a graphical approach that captures movement, value
addition, processing and storage. As a consignment progresses
along the chain, both cost and value accumulate and
possibilities for locations for inventory holding and other
activities are identified. This approach resembles the
multimodal transport model first suggested by Beresford
and Dubey (1990) and refined by Beresford (1999). This
model focuses on long supply chains and highlights the
interrelationships between the respective modes of transport,
without specifically identifying value addition opportunities.
Common to both approaches is time based competition and
service-cost trade-offs. The work of Beresford (1999) was
focused on high-value, low inventory cargo, but the model can
be applied to the full range of freight classes in order to
examine combinations of transport modes which are
potentially best able to satisfy critical service criteria (Zheng
et al., 2006).
This cost-focused approach offers a valuable tool which
may be used for auditing both the individual components and
the complete supply chain which typically consists of non-
movement (handling/storage) elements, and movement
activities which involve one or more transport forms
(Beresford et al., 2006). A critical advantage can be derived
either from the non-movement elements in a chain or from
efficient transport, or from a combination of the two. The
model is flexible enough to simultaneously accommodate
variations in value density, distance, volume, time and other
variables.
In the case of an iron ore supply chain that is a high volume,
low geared single commodity flow, the critical success factor is
pipeline management. In this paper, the case of iron ore
shipments from Northwest Australia to Northeast China is
taken (see Figure 1). Multimodal transport is well established
in the general cargo and container sectors, where cargo value,
shipper numbers and the diverse cargo mix allow for
imaginative combinations of routes, modes and methods.
Even iron ore, however, can present opportunities for
multimodal transport although realistically it cannot be
unitised and the weight of the ore mitigates against multiple
handling. Nonetheless, iron ore transport operations share the
same logistics imperatives as many other cargoes, with steel
companies under pressure to reduce costs and seek
opportunities to employ just-in-time concepts to supply
their highly automated production sites (Christopher, 2005;
Smith, 2000).
By 2007, annual Chinese steel production had risen to 489
million metric tones (mmt), a 350 per cent increase in ten
years. In 2008, total production by the end of August had
reached 351 mmt, an increase of 8.6 per cent on 2007. Such
production levels mean that the Chinese steel industry is
easily the biggest consumer of iron ore in the world (Stopford,
2008; World Steel Association, 2008). Rapid growth in iron
ore imports has created serious logistics problems. Inland
33
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 16 · Number 1 · 2011 · 32 –42
transport bottlenecks and rail capacity shortages are driving
up supply chain costs for the Chinese iron and steel industry
forcing producers to review the structure of their supply
channels. The scale of import volumes also amplifies any
small supply chain inefficiency and puts further pressure on
participants in the triad (Mason et al., 2007).
2. Research framework and methodology
2.1 Multimodal transport cost model
The choice of transport mode or combination of transport
modes has a direct impact on the efficiency of a multimodal
transport system. If a particular segment is inefficient, the
overall performance of the system will be adversely affected
(Liberatore and Miller, 1995). Simple cost-distance models of
road versus rail exist for both national and international
routes (Banomyong and Beresford, 2001; Jung, 1996;
Hayuth, 1992; Marlow and Boerne, 1992; Fowkes et al.,
1989). As multimodal transport is especially important in
international trade, various models have also been devised to
aid transport decision makers in choosing the most effective
transport mode or combination of transport modes
(Christopher, 2005; Yan et al., 1995; Barnhart and Ratliff,
1993; Minh, 1991). These attempt to minimise cost or risk
and satisfy various on-time service requirements.
The aim of this paper is to assess the various multimodal
transport routes currently being utilised, or that could be
utilised, for the movement of iron ore into northeast China
from Australian iron ore mines. Account is taken of
infrastructure and other constraints. For this purpose the
cost model proposed by Beresford (1999) is used to analyse
the route cost structures. The model includes transport (road,
rail, inland waterway and sea) and intermodal transfer (ports,
rail freight terminals, inland clearance depots) and it makes
use of cost, time and distance components. It has been
adopted globally as a standard methodology for analysing
supply chain effectiveness in a range of operational and
commercial circumstances for general cargo (UNESCAP,
2003, 2006), but is used here in the context of dry bulk
freight for the first time.
2.2 Multimodal transport of bulk freight
The supply chain principles embodied within a multimodal
transport system need to be supported by appropriate
facilitation measures to attain efficiencies in trade
transaction (Banomyong and Beresford, 2001). Many bulk
operations share the same logistics imperatives as container
transport (Fawcett and Mangan, 2002), with energy and steel
companies relying more and more on just-in-time deliveries to
their highly automated production sites. Multimodal
transport system approaches can therefore be adopted in
bulk cargo transport in terms of both hard components or
“hardware”: transport modes including rail, road, inland
waterways and coastal sea routes, and soft components or
“software”: information systems, electronic data interchange,
data flow, through bills of lading, through rates, and
standardised procedures (Banomyong et al., 2008). There
are, however, some limitations imposed on multimodal
transport options for bulk cargoes. Iron ore flows can be
characterised as high volume – high weight – low value and
transhipment is time consuming, energy intensive and
expensive and it is not therefore practical to have several
modes of transport or a large number of transhipment points.
 Multimodal supply chains: iron ore from Australia to China
Anthony Beresford, Stephen Pettit and Yukuan Liu
Figure 1 Iron ore transport, Australia to China
Ultimately, it is most appropriate to use sea transport for the
longest possible distance, and rail or truck for the shortest
distance (McKinnon, 1989). This in turn encourages the
pursuit of scale economies that is consistent with a risk
minimisation strategy on the part of the carriers (Ashenbaum
et al., 2005).
2.3 Methodology
In China, dry bulk cargo used to be transported under the
control of central government, and the costs of transport were
not a major issue when choosing transport modes. However,
as China’s economy has become market oriented, most
manufacturers now have to control the costs of their raw
material supply chain more carefully than before. The
literature relating to bulk cargo transport in such situations
is sparse and there is a need to understand the dynamics of an
individual company that forms part of a wider industry (Yin,
1994; Eisenhart, 1989). There are several hundred Chinese
steelmakers but only around 15 have crude steel output of
more than 15 mmt per annum (Iron and Steel Statistics
Bureau, 2008). In such circumstances, the case study
approach was deemed the most appropriate method both to
obtain background information and to highlight the
alternative options available. This research focuses on the
iron ore transport chain of one major steel producer. Primary
data were collected through observation and a series of
interviews with transport and financial managers of a major
steel corporation and with senior officers of government
departments. Original data were collected during spring 2005
and, where appropriate, data were updated during 2008.
While “multiple sources of evidence” were used, it is accepted
34
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 16 · Number 1 · 2011 · 32 –42
that individual case studies do not provide enough evidence
for generalisable conclusions (Yin, 1994; Ellram, 1996),
although the findings generally reflect the situation in the
industry at large.
3. Current bulk transport options in China
One of the key problems in China is the inadequacy of
infrastructure. Currently the rail system is generally the only
viable means of transporting goods over long distances. The
lack of investment in hinterland infrastructure badly affects
the productivity at China’s bulk terminals, which is clear from
the delays seen at ports along the coast of China. The Chinese
government has acknowledged the problem, but has yet to
provide the correct remedy. It has moved to add rail capacity
but, according to King (2004), the ports will suffer from rail
track and terminal bottlenecks for many years to come. The
government has stipulated the building of an extra 20,000 km
of rail tracks nationwide by 2010, though observers have
warned too little attention is being paid to much needed
exclusive rail links to ports – both container and bulk – with
municipal governments by and large favouring road links
(Norfolk, 2005). The rail network is already overloaded by the
volume of passenger traffic so there is little room left for
cargo. Most manufacturing plants in China lack rail sidings,
and the country has neither an intermodal rail system, which
would allow truck-borne containers to be loaded onto rail
wagons, nor modern trucking networks, such as less-than-
truckload systems, to ship consumer goods efficiently. Railway
construction has not kept up with the rapid economic
 Multimodal supply chains: iron ore from Australia to China
Anthony Beresford, Stephen Pettit and Yukuan Liu
development and the system has been under heavy strain as
demand has surged (China Daily, 2008).
Although China is the only major world economy where rail
transport accounts for a significantly higher proportion of
freight movement than road transport by tonne/km, a number
of major road-building projects promise to make long-
distance trucking a more tenable prospect once they are
completed. According to Xinhua (2005), by 2004 the total
length of highways had surpassed 1.4 million km, of which
240,000 km were newly built, and the total mileage of
expressways open to traffic had reached 16,000 km including
13,000 km newly-built. The entire Beijing-Shenyang and
Beijing-Shanghai expressway system has come into operation
in the last few years.
China’s inland waterways are among the most important in
the world, but the government has invested less in the sector
than other forms of transport. The Chinese government has
recognised this problem, and is encouraging investment in the
regional river transport networks as an alternative to rail and
road. The state is dredging and widening the Yangtze River to
allow Panamax vessels to penetrate further up river where
many steel mills are located. During the period 2001 to 2005
development of inland waterways and coastal ports was
significant with 4,267 km of inland waterways re-engineered,
340 new berths constructed along inland rivers and 96 new
deepwater berths built. Furthermore, dredging to allow
Capesize vessels to access China’s eastern coastal ports has
been undertaken. Draught problems have meant that some
ships have to offload some of their cargo before berthing in
China, however, and this process accounts for a third of all
lost time (Liu, 2006).
4. Multimodal transport of iron ore – Australia to
China
The massive rise in Chinese steel production has been largely
underpinned by strong domestic demand and Chinese steel
companies continue to invest in new capacity to meet
expanding consumption. In 2005 Chinese iron ore imports
stood at 275 mmt, with imports from Australia being
112 mmt. By 2007 China’s iron ore imports had increased
to 375 mmt (Wall Street Pit, 2008). In the first nine months of
2007, China imported over 108 mmt of iron ore from
Australia, 72 mmt from Brazil and 61 mmt from India
(Callick, 2007; Evraz, 2008). Global crude steel output in
2006 was 1,176 mmt and by 2007 it had reached 1,334 mmt
(Forbes, 2006, 2008; World Steel Association, 2008). China
now produces more than one-third of all crude steel in the
world compared to only 12 per cent in 1995 (Iron and Steel
Statistics Bureau, 2008; King, 2005). However, with such
high volumes of iron ore being imported, inland movements
cannot keep up with those through the ports, which have had
more money spent on them than their hinterland links. All of
these problems have increased the Chinese steel industry’s
desire to control supplies and costs. Chinese steel mills, facing
abnormally high Capesize freight rates, recognised the value
of controlling every link of the supply chain – from the mine
to finished product, from sea transport to hinterland links.
Therefore, controlling the supply chain of iron ore in a cost
and time effective way has become one of the top priorities for
China’s steel companies, exemplified in the recent past by
their seeking to invest in Australian iron ore producers such as
Fortescue mining (China Economic Review, 2008).
35
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 16 · Number 1 · 2011 · 32 –42
The steel company at the centre of this research has been
operating a complex supply chain for iron ore import and is
typical of companies in this region of China. The company is
located in Liaoning Province which borders the Qianshan
Mountain range and the Liaohe Plain. The Changchun –
Dalian Railway Line and the Shenyang – Dalian Express
Highway are in close proximity and to the south are the
seaports of Dalian, Yingkou and Bayuquan. Such
infrastructure contributes to effective communications and
transportation. There are some limitations in transport terms
as there is no key waterway that can be used to transport iron
ore. Railway transport is primarily utilised for passenger
transport and road transport is therefore potentially the first
choice for inland heavy haulage.
The driving leg of the supply chain is the sea transport leg
that is performed by vessels typically of 250,000 tonnes
deadweight. Feeding the ships is a “merry-go-round” system of
ultra large trains of up to 40,000 tonnes capacity. These are
themselves kept supplied by a continuous excavation system,
which in some mines elsewhere in Australia (e.g. Granites and
Groundrush mines), employ six-trailer road trains of up to 400
tonnes (275 tonnes payload) each for intermediate carriage
(Brooks, 2004). In all cases the methods employed approach
the current vehicle capacity limits and maximise both vehicle
and labour productivity. At the import region of north China
both road and rail transport are available with the reserve truck
option operating at 35 tonnes payload with convoys effectively
making up a road based inbound “merry-go-round”.
The current logistics system for iron ore import is
structured in a traditional way and no integrated transport
or multimodal transport arrangements are in place. However,
there are various multimodal transport corridors available for
the transport of iron ore. Existing alternative routes and
modal combinations from West Australia to northeast China
are summarised in Table I. It can be seen that there are two
segments in the supply chain, and the main difference
between these routes is on the import side in the China
segment; these are separated by a long (3,700-3,900 nm) sea
leg. The distance between Port Hedland and Dampier is only
118 nautical miles, so there is almost no difference between
the sea transport costs and transit time respectively from the
two ports into China. Therefore, significant differences
between routeing options can be identified only on the
inland segments of the routes.
The steel company primarily imports iron ore from two
mining complexes in northwest Australia owned by BHP
Billiton and Hamersley Iron (a subsidiary of Rio Tinto). The
export ports are, respectively, Port Hedland and Dampier.
Each year the manufacturer decides the volume of iron ore to
be imported from each mine according both to the price of
iron ore and the freight rate of shipping company. For
example, in 2004, over 1.5 mmt of iron ore were imported,
almost equally divided between the two mines.
Rio Tinto, through its Hamersley Iron subsidiary, has
increased its iron ore production capacity substantially and,
like BHP Billiton, has entered into long-term deals with
Chinese steelmakers. Annual capacity at Rio Tinto’s Yandi
mines has been expanded rapidly to 52 mmt per annum
(Pilbara Iron, 2008). BHP Billiton has annual production
capacity of around 134 mmt across six sites (BHP Billiton,
2008b) implying that supply chain organisation for both
companies is primarily capacity driven with considerable unit
cost sensitivity.
 Multimodal supply chains: iron ore from Australia to China
Anthony Beresford, Stephen Pettit and Yukuan Liu
Table I Routeing alternatives for iron ore, Northwest Australia-Northeast China
Route Origin Mode Transhipment
1 BHP Train Port Hedland
2 BHP Train Port Hedland
3 BHP Train Port Hedland
4 Hamersley Train Dampier
5 Hamersley Train Dampier
6 Hamersley Train Dampier
Note: *Locomotive transfer in the district of Lingshan, with the iron ore railed directly from Lingshan to the steel plant
4.1 Hamersley to Port Dampier
Hamersley Iron operates two iron ore export terminals at Port
Dampier, bringing in ore by heavy gauge rail from mines
320 km inland. Intermodal transfer is comparatively
cumbersome: from the trains, ore is first transferred to
rotary car dumpers, then to conveyors for transport to the
stockpile area, where blending takes place. Automatic bucket
wheel reclaimers are then deployed to reclaim the ore for
delivery to ships.
There are several dedicated private railways located in the
Australian northwest coastal area, owned and operated by the
main iron ore producers. These provide some of the most
efficient mine-to-port heavy-haul operations in the world and
include the BHP Iron Ore Railroad, the Hamersley Iron Ore
Railway, and the Pilbara Rail Company (BHP Billiton, 2008c;
Railway Technology.com, 2008). The Pilbara Rail Company
was formed in 2002 to effectively integrate the rail
distribution of Hamersley Iron and Robe River into a single
operation. While both mining companies retain ownership of
their respective assets, including track, locomotives and
rolling stock, Pilbara Rail operates and maintains the system
on their behalf, delivering ore from the inland mines to the
ports. Standard ore trains consist of up to 230 ore wagons,
each having a load capacity of 106 tonnes of ore (Pilbara Iron,
2008). A trainload, therefore, can commonly reach 20,000 þ
freight tonnes.
4.2 BHP to Port Hedland
BHP Billiton dominates traffic at Port Hedland, with a
throughput of 68.5 mmt of iron ore and hot briquette iron.
There are two separate port operations located on opposite
sides of the harbour, at Nelson Point and Finucane Island.
Ore from Mount Whaleback, the other Newman mines and
Yandi is sent to Nelson Point. The Area C and Yarrie mines
send ore to Finucane Island. The port can handle up to four
ships at a time, each up to 335 metres long and carrying up to
300,000 tonnes of ore (BHP Billiton, 2008a). The ore is
unloaded from the trains and after processing is transferred to
a conveyor system, which carries it to the shiploaders which
transfer around 10,000 tonnes an hour. On average, it takes
about 30 hours to load a ship and around 800 ships are loaded
each year at Port Hedland.
The ore is railed in from the mines for export (Norfolk,
2005). BHP operates two heavy haulage railroads to Port
Hedland, one running 426 km from Newman, Yandi and Area
C mines, and the other 210 km from the Yarrie mine. The
Newman railway runs the longest and heaviest trains in the
world: they are up to 3.75 km long, typically comprising 208
ore wagons, and powered by six 6,000 horsepower
locomotives; they carry up to 40,000 tonnes per delivery
36
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 16 · Number 1 · 2011 · 32 –42
Mode Transhipment Mode Destination
Sea Qinhuangdao Rail Steel Co.
Sea Dalian Rail * Steel Co.
Sea Bayuquan Road Steel Co.
Sea Qinhuangdao Rail Steel Co.
Sea Dalian Rail * Steel Co.
Sea Bayuquan Road Steel Co.
(BHP Billiton, 2008a). Trains on the Yarrie line are smaller,
consisting of up to 90 ore wagons and one locomotive.
The sea leg dominates in terms of distance, being between
3,700 and 3,900 nautical miles. The Chinese steel
manufacturer does not control the sea leg of its iron ore
imports, primarily depending on specialist freight forwarders
to arrange this segment. The cost of transport from Australian
mines to Chinese ports was around $20 US per tonne based
on an average figure for July, 2005 when the core of the field
survey was undertaken. The distances and total transit times
from the two mines to the Australian ports, then onward to
the three Chinese ports that are nearest to the steel
manufacturing facilities, are summarised in Table II.
4.3 Routeing via Qinhuangdao
There are six main routeing options available for the
movement of iron ore from northwest Australia to the steel
manufacturing plants. The options essentially involve
combinations of one of the two Australian ports (dependant
on from which company iron ore has been purchased) and the
three Chinese ports detailed in the previous section. The
route via the Port of Qinghuangdao represents the traditional
route for raw material supplies for the steel manufacturer, for
both iron ore and coal. This route had been operating for
more than 30 years, but since China began opening up
alternative supply chains, this route has gradually reduced in
importance. As the largest dry-bulk port in China,
Qinhuangdao plays an important role of transshipping iron
ore from south-eastern China to the north-east. Also,
Qinhuangdao is the most important cargo pivot centre in
east China.
As China’s economy has become market-oriented, so state-
owned companies have had to consider more careful cost
control. Qinhuangdao is too far from Anshan, where the steel
company is located, to be a transhipment point for iron ore as
the distance by rail is 520 km with a transit time of eight hours
and transport costs of up to $US10/tonne (including port
charges and rail freightage). The port of Qinhuangdao is
linked by dedicated railway to Anshan. After discharge at the
port, the ore is loaded on to National Railway Bureau trains
and once the trains arrive in the District of Lingshan, the
wagons are re-coupled to steel company locomotives and
railed on a dedicated railway to the steel mills. This is a
relatively cumbersome procedure and, in terms of the cost
model used here, it is represented by a high “step” in the cost
curve, implying that the route is potentially vulnerable to
more efficient chains with more direct intermodal operations.
Table III and Figure 2 present the specific data for the route
via Qinghuangdao.
 Multimodal supply chains: iron ore from Australia to China Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Anthony Beresford, Stephen Pettit and Yukuan Liu Volume 16 · Number 1 · 2011 · 32 –42

Table II Distance and transit time of each Australian segment

Route Origin Distance (km) Transit time (hours) Australian port Distance (nm/km) Transit time (days/hrs) * Chinese port
1 BHP 426 4 Port Hedland 3,811/7,058 13-6 Qinhuangdao
2 BHP 426 4 Port Hedland 3,706/6,864 12-21 Dalian
3 BHP 426 4 Port Hedland 3,856/7,141 13-9 Bayuquan
4 Hamersley 320 3 Dampier 3,810/7,058 13-5 Qinhuangdao
5 Hamersley 320 3 Dampier 3,705/6,864 12-21 Dalian
6 Hamersley 320 3 Dampier 3,855/7,141 13-9 Bayuquan
Note: *Average speed 12 nautical miles/hour

Table III Segments from Qinhuangdao to steel company (routes 1 and 4)

Leg Transport/handling Transit time (hours) Distance (km) Cost ($US tonne)
Qinhuangdao Port (discharge) 3,000 tonnes/hour 0 0 4
Qinhuangdao-Lingshan Train * 8 520 6
Lingshan (Change loco) 1 0 0
Lingshan-steel plant Train * * 0.3 14 1.4
Total 9.3 534 11.4
Notes: *Trains owned by National Railway Bureau; * *trains owned by steel company

Figure 2 Indicative costs via Qinhuangdao (route 1 and route 4)

There are also further issues to be considered. First of all, as
the biggest coal and iron ore port in China, Qinhuangdao is
also the busiest and port congestion and cargo accumulation
occurs frequently. Furthermore, the railway connecting
Qinhuangdao to north-eastern China is already overloaded
by passenger traffic with little room left for cargo. Current rail
system network capacity for moving coal is only one-third of
demand, according to Chinese media reports (Xinhua, 2005).
Therefore, routeing via Qinhuangdao is more expensive, less
reliable and more challenging for iron ore import. However, it
is an essential route for the supply of coal and the transport of
finished products to the west.
4.4 Routeing via Dalian
The Port of Dalian is situated at the south end of Liaodong
Peninsula; it is a hub port and the largest multi-purpose port
in northeast China. It is the closest hub port to Anshan, and is
preferred by the steel company as a transhipment point for its
iron ore imports. The steel company imports 4-500,000
tonnes of iron ore through the Port of Dalian annually. As for
the route via Qinhuangdao, the iron ore discharged at Dalian
is reloaded onto nationally owned trains, before being moved
to the District of Lingshan. After one hour’s transshipment,
the wagons are transferred to steel company locomotives and
moved on to the steel mills. The rail distance from Dalian to

37
 Multimodal supply chains: iron ore from Australia to China
Anthony Beresford, Stephen Pettit and Yukuan Liu
the steel mill is shorter than the route via Qinhuangdao:
319 km compared to 520 km, and the transport time is also
shorter: eight hours compared to 12 hours via Qinhuangdao.
The total transport cost from Dalian to the steel mill is
US$7.35 per tonne, including the port charges at Dalian.
Table IV and Figure 3 present the specific data on the route
via Dalian.
As for routeing via Qinhuangdao, there is a port congestion
problem in the port of Dalian. The railway segment from
Dalian to Lingshan is also almost saturated with passenger
transport. However, the situation on this route is better,
Dalian and Anshan are in the same province: Liaoning.
Therefore, the officers from all parties are in regular contact,
and the steel company is able to obtain priority scheduling
from the National Railway Bureau. This “soft” aspect, also
highlighted in Banomyong and Beresford (2001), can be
extremely important in determining the overall effectiveness
of a specific supply chain and it can be critical to choice of
route or mode (Cave, 2007).
4.5 Routeing via Bayuquan
The Port of Bayuquan is located 130 km south west of
Anshan. It was built in 1984, and is now the second largest
port in northeast China. The transport infrastructure of the
port itself is well established with excellent road and rail
connections; links to the Shenyang-Dalian Expressway are
also good. Iron ore, after being unloaded at the port, is
directly reloaded onto trucks. The truck company is owned by
the steel company and transport capacity is therefore flexible
Table IV Segment from Dalian to steel company (routes 2 and 5)
Leg Transport/handling
Dalian Port (discharge) 3,000 tonnes/hour
Dalian-Lingshan Train *
Lingshan (Change loco)
Lingshan-Steel Company Train * *
Total
Notes: *Trains owned by National Railway Bureau; * *trains owned by steel company
Figure 3 Indicative costs via Dalian (route 2 and route 5)
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 16 · Number 1 · 2011 · 32 –42
and reliable. Via a short highway journey, the truck team can
drive onto the most modern expressway in China, the
Shenyang-Dalian Expressway, which is directly connected to
the steel mills. The total transport journey takes two hours,
and the freight rate is US$4 per tonne.
Compared with the first two routes, this route is the most
competitive, as it has the shortest transport distance, as well
as the cheapest freight rate and shortest transit time. But
compared with Dalian, the efficiency of discharge is lower,
and the port charge is a little more expensive, at US$3.15 per
tonne. As the steel company is a major customer of Bayuquan
port, discharging iron ore from their own ships is given
priority, which means that the incoming ships do not have to
wait outside the port. Table V and Figure 4 present specific
data on the route via Bayuquan.
Since January 2004, the Chinese government has increased
control over overloading in road transport. Though this has
contributed to a reduction in accidents, it has raised road
haulage rates. However, on the route from Bayuquan to the
steel company, the trucking is done in-house and vehicle
utilisation is high, keeping per tonne transport costs down.
There is a further advantage in using this route. One of the
biggest problems for dry bulk cargo carriage is that most
trucks and trains are empty as they return from their delivery
trips, and therefore, the average transport costs increase.
However, the problem is reduced on this route as the steel
company takes advantage of the return journey from Anshan
to Bayuquan by loading the trucks with finished iron and steel
Transit time (hours) Distance (km) Cost (US$/tonne)
0 2.65
5.5 319 3.3
1 0 0
0.3 14 1.4
6.8 333 7.35
38
 Multimodal supply chains: iron ore from Australia to China
Anthony Beresford, Stephen Pettit and Yukuan Liu
Table V Segment from Bayuquan to steel company (routes 3 and 6)
Leg Mode
Bayuquan Port (discharge) 3,000 tonnes/hour
Bayuquan-steel company Truck
Total
Figure 4 Indicative costs via Bayuquan (route 3 and route 6)
products, such as wire rods and tubes. These products are
then shipped from Bayuquan to global markets.
One of the disadvantages of this route is that, because of the
limited cargo handling capability at the port (lack of dedicated
equipment and insufficient storage space), only ships of less
than 50,000 tons capacity can be handled, which significantly
increases the costs for those steel manufacturers using the
port. Nevertheless, this route is currently the steel company’s
preferred route for iron ore imports, and they import over 1
million tonnes via this port, accounting for two-thirds to three
quarters of the average annual total of 1.5 million tonnes.
5. Interpretation
This case study has applied an established multimodal
transport cost model to route selection for the iron ore import
for a major Chinese steel manufacturer. The route selection is
based on the two key components of movement by alternative
modes, and transfer between modes. The characteristics of
iron ore mean that the cargo is important in terms of its
volume and weight rather than for its value. The
competitiveness of existing and proposed intermodal routes,
including road, rail and shipping services, has been examined
and the strengths and weaknesses of each alternative route
have been highlighted. Of all the alternative routes for iron ore
import, the routes via Bayuquan achieve the shortest distance,
the cheapest cost and the shortest transit time (see Table VI).
Although sea freight rates and cargo handling speeds are
variable, as they are often vulnerable to external or
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 16 · Number 1 · 2011 · 32 –42
Transit time (hours) Distance (km) Cost ($US/tonne)
0 3.15
2 130 4
2 130 7.15
uncontrollable factors, the results presented here are valid
and potentially helpful for transport decision makers.
As expected, sea transport is the cheapest per tonne/km, rail
is intermediate and road transport is the most expensive (see
Table VII). However, for the reasons discussed, the service
provided by rail transport in China is poor in terms of
capacity and schedule reliability, and the freight rate for sea
transport fluctuates constantly. The reliability of road
transport in China and rail transport in Australia is good.
The case study appears to demonstrate a mix of simultaneous
trade-offs on the part of the steel producers. The optimum
solution for high-volume iron ore import would be the use of
the largest possible ships into the ports with the greatest
handling capacity. However smaller ships operating through
the draught-restricted port of Bayuquan with onward
distribution by road appear to offer a competitive
alternative, implying that supply chain effectiveness is not as
simple as a direct capacity-cost trade-off. For all routes time
schedules are less critical than transport and port terminal
availability.
6. Conclusions
It can be seen that, even for a high volume, bulky and heavy
commodity such as iron ore, several alternate routes, modal
combinations and handling methods may successfully co-
exist. Some of the findings, such as the principle of “sea
maximising and land minimising” for heavy cargo fit
comfortably with logistics theory, but on the margins there
can be room for alternative solutions.
39
 Multimodal supply chains: iron ore from Australia to China Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Anthony Beresford, Stephen Pettit and Yukuan Liu Volume 16 · Number 1 · 2011 · 32 –42

Table VI Total transport costs and transit times

Route Total distance (km) Total transport cost ($US/tonne) Total transit time
1. Via Qinhuangdao (from BHP) 8,018 31.4 16 days 13.5 hours
2. Via Dalian (from BHP) 7,623 27.35 16 days 8 hours
3. Via Bayuquan (from BHP) 7,697 27.15 15 days 15 hours
4. Via Qinhuangdao (from Hamersley) 7,912 31.4 16 days 12.5 hours
5. Via Dalian (from Hamersley) 7,517 27.35 16 days 8 hours
6. Via Bayuquan (from Hamersley) 7,591 27.15 15 days 15 hours

Table VII Logistics costs by route and mode of transport

Route Mode Cost/tonne/km ($US) Transfer ($US/tonne)
(1) BHP – Port Hedland Rail 0.0164 3.0
Port Hedland – Qinhuangdao Sea 0.0014 4.0
Qinhuangdao – District of Lingshan Rail 0.0115
District of Lingshan – Steel Company Rail 0.1000
(2) BHP – Port Hedland Rail 0.0164 3.0
Port Hedland – Dalian Sea 0.0015 2.65
Dalian – District of Lingshan Rail 0.0103
District of Lingshan – Steel Company Rail 0.1000
(3) BHP – Port Hedland Rail 0.0164 3.0
Port Hedland – Bayuquan Sea 0.0014 3.15
Bayuquan – Steel Company Road 0.0307
(4) Hamersley – Dampier Rail 0.0219 3.0
Dampier – Qinhuangdao Sea 0.0014 4.0
Qinhuangdao – District of Lingshan Rail 0.0115
District of Lingshan – Steel Company Rail 0.1000
(5) Hamersley – Dampier Rail 0.0219 3.0
Dampier – Dalian Sea 0.0015 2.65
Dalian – District of Lingshan Rail 0.0103
District of Lingshan – Steel Company Rail 0.1000
(6) Hamersley – Dampier Rail 0.0219 3.0
Dampier – Bayuquan Sea 0.0014 3.15
Bayuquan – Steel Company Road 0.0307

In contrast with container transport, the movement of bulk
cargo has its own peculiarities. As mentioned previously, the
haulage volume of bulk cargo transport is large, the supply
chain is always long, and this kind of cargo cannot be held in
standard packing units, like containers. So the volume capacity
of transport modes for this kind of cargo needs to be very large.
On the other hand, a cargo like iron ore is comparatively cheap,
so it cannot bear very expensive freight rates or intermodal
handling techniques. In normal circumstances clearly rail-sea-
rail transport is the most appropriate modal combination for
bulk cargo. Under the circumstances pervading in China,
however, where rail capacity is mainly allocated to passenger
transport, road transport has to be utilised as a substitute to rail;
this can be effective as long as the transport distance is not too
great. The most important advantage of adopting road
transport in the movement of iron ore is flexibility, which
means that the return journey can be utilised for other
compatible cargoes such as steel products. In this way, the main
disadvantage of road haulage, its high cost, can be partly offset.
The transhipment process for bulk cargo is time consuming,
energy intensive and costly, forcing producers and service
providers to concentrate their volume, and pursue economies of
scale as far as possible. As the bulk cargo market is vulnerable to
changes in global economic conditions, and the price of bulk
cargoes changes regularly, complete control of the supply chain
by one company is probably the best solution. From a transport
point of view, sea transport is widely accepted as the cheapest
and most appropriate mode for iron ore transport. Therefore,
the sea segment should be proportionately as long as possible.
Inland, if hauls are of a significant length, rail transport is the
most appropriate mode if transport costs per tonne are
considered, especially where large volumes are moved.
However, where rail transport capacity is constrained, road
haulage is a good alternative option if the inland leg is not very
long. Although road transport is shown here to be a little more
expensive, it can be the quickest and most reliable mode
available for inland iron ore transport.
Although all major quantifiable factors affecting the supply
chain structure were examined here, a critical issue in the case
of iron ore imports is clearly supply chain ownership; this is
not easily embraced by the cost model. Nonetheless, the most
competitive route, at least in the short to medium term, is
shown to be a rail-sea-road combination via Dampier or Port
Hedland in Australia and Port Bayuquan in China. In order
to gain the maximum economies, this should be under the full
control of one owner.

40
 Multimodal supply chains: iron ore from Australia to China
Anthony Beresford, Stephen Pettit and Yukuan Liu
References
Ashenbaum, B., Maltz, A.B. and Rabinovich, E. (2005),
“Studies of trends in third-party logistics usage: what can
we conclude?”, Transportation Journal, Vol. 44, pp. 39-50.
Banomyong, R. and Beresford, A.K.C. (2001), “Multimodal
transport corridors in South East Asia: a case study
approach”, International Journal of Physical Distribution &
Logistics Management, Vol. 31 No. 9, pp. 651-73.
Banomyong, R., Cook, P. and Kent, R. (2008), “Formulating
regional logistics development policy: the case of ASEAN”,
International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications,
Vol. 11 No. 5, pp. 359-79.
Barnhart, C. and Ratliff, D.H. (1993), “Modeling intermodal
routing”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 14 No. 1,
pp. 205-23.
Bask, A.H. (2001), “Relationships between 3PL providers
and members of supply chains – a strategic perspective”,
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 16,
pp. 470-86.
Beier, F.J. (1989), “Transportation contracts and the
experience effect: a framework for future research”,
Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 73-89.
Beresford, A.K.C. (1999), “Modeling freight transport costs:
a case study of the UK-Greece corridor”, International
Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 2 No. 3,
pp. 229-46.
Beresford, A.K.C. and Dubey, R.C. (1990), Handbook on the
Management and Operation of Dry Ports, UNCTAD,
Geneva, UNCTAD RDP/LDC/7.
Beresford, A.K.C., Ma, P.-P. and Pettit, S.J. (2006),
“Multimodal transport utilising the maritime mode: a case
study of freight transport from Ireland to China”, Proceedings
of Maritime Transport 2006, Barcelona, May, pp. 567-75.
BHP Billiton (2008a), “Ports”, available at: www.bhpbilliton.
com/bb/ourBusinesses/ironOre/ports.jsp (accessed October
2008).
BHP Billiton (2008b), “Mining and processing”, available at:
www.bhpbilliton.com/bb/ourBusinesses/ironOre/mining
AndProcessing.jsp (accessed October 2008).
BHP Billiton (2008c), “Rail”, available at: www.bhpbilliton.
com/bb/ourBusinesses/ironOre/rail.jsp (accessed October
2008).
Brooks, S. (2004), “The big pull and push”, Commercial
Motor, January, pp. 40-3.
Callick, R. (2007), “China sends warning to BHP Billiton”,
Rio Tinto, available at: www.news.com.au/business/story/
0,23636,22678201-462,00.html (accessed October 2008).
Cave, P. (2007), “Freight transportation between the United
Kingdom and Western Russia: modal choice”, unpublished
PhD thesis, Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University,
Cardiff.
China Daily (2008), “Railway capacity lags behind coal
demand”, available at: www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/
2008-09/08/content_7008350.htm (accessed October
2008).
China Economic Review (2008), “China wants Australian iron
ore and its mining companies too”, available at: www.china
economicreview.com/cer/2008_07/China_wants_Australia
s_iron_ore_%E2%80%93_and_its_mining_companies_too.
html (accessed October 2008).
Christopher, M. (1992), Logistics and Supply Chain
Management, Pitman, London.
41
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 16 · Number 1 · 2011 · 32 –42
Christopher, M. (2005), Logistics and Supply Chain
Management: Creating Value-adding Networks, 3rd ed.,
Prentice-Hall, Harlow.
Eisenhart, K.M. (1989), “Building theories from case study
research”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4,
pp. 532-50.
Ellram, L.M. (1996), “The use of the case study method in
logistics research”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 17
No. 2, pp. 93-138.
Evraz (2008), “World steel production”, available at: www.
evraz.com/business/steel/world_steel_production (accessed
October 2008).
Fawcett, S.E. and Mangan, G.M. (2002), “The rhetoric and
reality of supply chain integration”, International Journal of
Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 32,
pp. 339-61.
Forbes (2006), “Global crude steel production set to rise by
4.1 pct in 2006”, available at: www.forbes.com/home/
feeds/afx/2006/05/09/afx2731322.html (accessed October
2008).
Forbes (2008), “Global steel output to grow 3-4 pct/year,
consolidation to continue”, available at: www.forbes.com/
markets/feeds/afx/2007/05/29/afx3764047.html (accessed
October 2008).
Fowkes, A.S., Nash, C.A. and Tweddle, G. (1989), “Valuing
the attributes for freight transport quality”, working paper
276, Institute of Transport Studies, Leeds University,
Leeds.
Gentry, J.J. (1996), “The role of carriers in buyer-supplier
strategic partnerships: a supply chain management
approach”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 17 No. 2,
pp. 35-55.
Hayuth, Y. (1992), “Multimodal freight transport”,
in Hoyle, B.S. and Knowles, R.D. (Eds), Modern
Transport Geography, Belhaven, London.
Iron and Steel Statistics Bureau (2008), “World crude steel
production”, available at: www.issb.co.uk/issb/files/image/
jpeg/key_worldcrude.jpg (accessed October 2008).
Jung, T.Y. (1996), “China as an intermodal link between the
Far East and Europe”, unpublished PhD thesis,
Department of Maritime Studies and International
Transport, Cardiff University, Cardiff.
King, M. (2004), “Slow train coming”, International Bulk
Journal, No. 2, p. 10.
King, M. (2005), “Comment”, International Bulk Journal,
No. 1, p. 1.
Lalonde, B.J. and Cooper, M.C. (1989), Partnerships in
Providing Customer Service: A Third Party Perspective,
Council of Logistics Management, Oakbrook, IL.
Liberatore, M.J. and Miller, T. (1995), “A decision support
approach for transport carrier and mode selection”, Journal
of Business Logistics, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 85-111.
Liu, Y. (2006), “Multimodal transport of iron ore in north
east China: a case study approach”, unpublished MSc.
thesis, Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University, Cardiff.
McKinnon, A. (1989), Physical Distribution Systems,
Routledge, London.
Marlow, P.B. and Boerne, G.L. (1992), “The case for
intermodalism in freight transport”, occasional paper no. 3,
Department of Maritime Studies and International
Transport, Cardiff University, Cardiff.
 Multimodal supply chains: iron ore from Australia to China
Anthony Beresford, Stephen Pettit and Yukuan Liu
Mason, R. and Lalwani, C. (2006), “Transport integration
tools for supply chain management”, International Journal of
Logistics: Research and Applications, Vol. 9, pp. 57-74.
Mason, R., Potter, A., Naim, M.M. and Aryee, G. (2007),
“Aligning relationship goals and measures within a logistics
triad”, Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on
Logistics, Budapest, July, pp. 17-24.
Minh, H. (1991), “International intermodal choices via
chance-constrained goal programming”, Transportation
Research A, Vol. 25A No. 6, pp. 351-62.
Norfolk, P. (2005), “Iron ore imports to China curtailed by
the introduction of new government license system”,
International Bulk Journal, No. 2, p. 48.
Pilbara Iron (2008), “Expansion projects – mining”, available
at: www.pilbarairon.com/SiteContent/projects/proj-mining.
asp (accessed October 2008).
Railway Technology.com (2008), “Hamersley Freight Line,
Australia”, available at: www.railway-technology.com/pro
jects/hamersley
Selviaridis, K., Spring, M., Profillidis, V. and Botzoris, G.
(2008), “Benefits, risks, selection criteria and success
factors for third-party logistics services”, Maritime
Economics and Logistics, Vol. 10, pp. 380-92.
Smith, N. (2000), “The ‘L’ word comes to bulk”,
International Bulk Journal, July, p. 33.
Stank, T.P. and Goldsby, T.J. (2000), “A framework for
transportation decision making in an integrated supply
chain”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal,
Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 71-7.
Stopford, M. (2008), Maritime Economics, Routledge,
London.
UNESCAP (2003), Transit Transport Issues in Land-locked and
Transit Developing Countries, UNESCAP, Bangkok.
UNESCAP (2006), Integrated International Transport and
Logistic System for Northeast Asia, UNESCAP, New York,
NY.
Wall Street Pit (2008), “China’s iron ore imports likely up by
15% this year”, available at: http://wallstreetpit.comfor
ums/wall-street-news/893-china-s-iron-ore-imports-likely-
up-5-year.html (accessed October 2008).
World Steel Association (2008), “World crude steel output
increases by 7.5% in 2007”, available at: www.worldsteel.or
g/?action¼newsdetail&id¼228 (accessed October 2008).
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
42
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
Volume 16 · Number 1 · 2011 · 32 –42
Xinhua (2005), “China embarks on massive upgrade of
transportation”, Business Source Premier, 29 March.
Yan, S., Bernstein, D. and Sheffi, Y. (1995), “International
pricing using network flow techniques”, Transportation
Research B, Vol. 29B No. 3, pp. 171-80.
Yin, R.K. (1994), Case Study Research: Design and Methods,
Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
Zheng, C., Beresford, A.K.C. and Pettit, S.J. (2006),
“Multimodal transport: a case study of the Taiwan-
Mainland China corridor”, Proceedings of the International
Association of Maritime Economists Conference 2006,
Melbourne, July.
About the authors
Anthony Beresford graduated with a BA Honours degree in
Geography from Manchester University in 1977. He was
subsequently awarded a PhD from the University of East
Anglia in 1982 before becoming a lecturer, then Senior
Lecturer, at Cardiff University. His research has focused on
logistics and supply chain effectiveness, and his Cost Model
for multimodal transport has become a standard methodology
for comparing logistics chains in terms of their operational
efficiency. The model demonstrates time-cost tradeoffs,
taking account of cargo characteristics, transport capabilities
and aspects of the wider business environment. Anthony
Beresford is the corresponding author and can be contacted
at: beresford@cardiff.ac.uk
Stephen Pettit graduated with a BSc Honours degree in
Maritime Geography from Cardiff University in 1989 and in
1993 he was awarded a PhD from the University of Wales. He
has been involved in a range of transport-related research
projects including a number of projects for EU DGTREN
including research into: the economic value of shipping to the
UK economy; an analysis of the cost structure of the main ten
ports, and Work Organisation in Ports. His broad research
interests currently include port development, port policy and
international logistics.
Yukuan Liu graduated from Cardiff University with a
Master of Science degree in 2006. His research focused
chiefly on multimodal transport in supply chains with
particular reference to the Chinese steel industry and
involved data collection from a wide range of businesses and
trade organisations in China, Australia and elsewhere.