Abstract
Maritime Economics includes Port, Shipbuilding and Shipping economics with two important, but unresolved so far, issues/questions: 1) Is the vessel the firm (?) and 2) Is the tanker market perfectly competitive? These issues were thoroughly analyzed. There is also the opinion of Professor Button K (2005), about maritime economists, which we considered it necessary to evaluate. A review of Prof. Goss’ paper on “early history of maritime economics” (2002), as well his entire contribution, is also carried-out as an obituary1 to his recent death. Reference is also made to Prof. Talley’s research (2013) on “maritime economics” (2001-2012) in order to show the progress of this relatively new science of applied economics. Finally, the state of the tanker market, after 1987, and till 2010, is presented to connect past with present.
Highlights
Goss argued that Maritime economics is the discipline “embracing seaports, and the activities of ships in seaports, and ships”... [6]
Button’s (2005) [21] paper, which, we thought, needed an answer. He looked into the “degree to which maritime economists really understood shipping economics”...! He argued that economic drivers behind shipping remained relatively poorly understood
18This argued first by Zannetos [2]. 19The “Blackwell’s companion to Maritime Economics”, edited by Talley, 735 pages... 20British first established a cartel in the liner sea transport between India and UK in 1875. 21Marris R argued in “Economic Journal” that “the firm is the unit of delegated authority in a decentralized productive system” (p. 321: in his “why economics needs a theory of the firm”, in Supplement, 1972). 22Marginal vessel is the one having the higher average cost—a threshold—and she is the first to exit in a shipping crisis
Summary
Goss argued that Maritime economics is the discipline “embracing seaports, and the activities of ships in seaports, and (of) ships”... He exploited economies of scale with tankers called “supertankers” for the first time (1938) (Goulielmos, (2017b) [11]) Recognizing this need, half dozen books on shipping finance published (e.g. Stokes P., (1992) [12]). Button’s (2005) [21] paper, which, we thought, needed an answer He looked into the “degree to which maritime economists really understood shipping economics” (italics added)...! He argued that economic drivers behind shipping remained relatively poorly understood He wanted to introduce Coase’s R (1910- ) (1998) [22] theory into shipping...He wrote that shipping economists (1985-2005) possessed a better understanding of many of the underlying relationships ... He wanted to introduce Coase’s R (1910- ) (1998) [22] theory into shipping...He wrote that shipping economists (1985-2005) possessed a better understanding of many of the underlying relationships ... than their colleagues before, but for Button persistent gaps remained, due to technological and institutional changes
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
