1. Introduction
Indonesia is an archipelagic country that is geographically characterized by a group of islands stretching from west to east. The connectivity of these islands is limited by water areas, thereby requiring the support of the transportation sector. The goal is to bridge the economic distribution between the regions and boost population mobility [1]. One sector that actively supports sustainable economic growth is the ferry transportation system. It connects diverse areas, and these ferries can convey various types of cargo, including passengers and multiple types of vehicles [2]. The unique characteristics of this transport system make it an ideal choice because it supports the door-to-door mobility of the consignment it conveys [3]. The Sumatra and Java regions represent Indonesia’s economic corridor. Sumatra is perceived as the national plantation and processing industry, while Java is considered to be an innovative cyber technology and services center [4,5]. The high volume of logistics distributive activities between these two areas is boosted by the transport system operating on the Merak–Bakauheni crossing [6]. There are approximately 74 ferries of various sizes serving this route. Therefore, the innumerable ships and port facilities with only seven piers increase the waiting times for these ships because each pier must serve around 11 ships per day [7]. The quality of the infrastructural services is a factor that affects the logistics performance of the port [8]. Any delay at the port also causes the ships en-route to be extremely slow, resulting in a high-cost economy. This burden is not only borne by ship operators, but consumers are also affected by it because tariffs become expensive due to operating costs, longer sailing times, and the carrying capacity is not optimal [6].
The Ministry of Transportation issued law number 88 in 2014 concerning the regulation of the size of the ferry transport ships in the Merak–Bakauheni crossing trajectory. Its implication was that approximately 15 ships under 5000 Gross Tonnage (GT) were not allowed to operate on the Merak–Bakauheni route and had to move to another crossing no later than four years after the regulation was enforced [9]. From the entrepreneur’s point of view, this condition would have had an impact on the sustainability of their business. Most of the ships are owned by companies that joined the Inland Waterways and Ferry Transport Association (GAPASDAP). Furthermore, the Merak–Bakauheni route in Western Indonesia is characterized by commercial routes, namely, a crossing trajectory that is used to transport many cargoes. It enables the ships to sail with a significant load factor and does not require subsidies. On the other hand, in the eastern part of the country, where the economic potential is relatively poor, many people are still served by those using pioneer crossings with a low level of cargo transportation. The hubs in these regions are mainly served by government-owned ships at subsidized tariffs [10,11]. Some primary considerations used as preferences by ship owners include finance, infrastructure, and shipping safety. The financial factor is based on the operational costs incurred [12], while the infrastructural costs depend on the compatibility between the dimensions of the ships and port facilities. These are generally influenced by the ships’ size, port depth, and the pier’s capacity [13,14]. The shipping safety factor is the ships’ ability to sail all year round in waters, and it is regulated by the oceanographic conditions [15].
This present research analyzes the suitability of this transportation system based on the three main factors that were mentioned earlier. It enables the relocation of ships to a new route in the eastern part of the country and provides an opportunity for those banned from the Merak–Bakauheni crossing trajectory to operate. This also aims to increase the fleet of ferries, which are extremely dependent on the availability of sea transportation to support their economic activities.
This research is policy research that will improve the effectiveness of the ferry services in Indonesia. The innovation from this research is in the form of recommendations for rerouting ferries so that the transportation system services in the destination area improve. On the other hand, the problems that occur on the Merak–Bakauheni route can be resolved. The approach taken to justify ship rerouting is comprehensive, starting with a financial, technical, and safety approach related to the waves. This research can also be a reference for further research in determining the factors used in rerouting ferries.
2. Methods
This descriptive quantitative analysis utilized primary and secondary data sources. The research objects are MV Mutiara Persada II, MV Jatra II, MV Bahuga Pratama, MV Nusa Bahagia, MV SMS Mulawarman, MV Nusa Dharma, MV Trimas Laila, MV Caitlyn, MV Munic I, and MV Windu Karsa Dwitya [16]. The primary data source was based on stakeholders’ perceptions, and related information was collected during field interviews and focus group discussions [17]. These respondents were selected from several related agencies using non-probability sampling and are responsible for discharging the main tasks and functions. Furthermore, data were collected from the authorities of the port operational activities associated with ferry transport. Another form of primary data was user opinion to identify certain characteristics, journey motives, and financial aspects. The information related to stakeholders’ perceptions was collected through a survey carried out on as many as 120 respondents in East Nusa Tenggara and Maluku. Secondary data were collected with respect to port productivity and infrastructure profile, including oceanographic reports. In this present research, the analysis step comprised three main parts. Analysis of financial aspects consisted of several aspects, and the first is to identify the customers’ ability to pay (ATP) and willingness to pay (WTP). The operational aspect analyzed every ship to determine its yearly operative costs and various tariff schemes based on diverse load factors. This was realized using Ministerial Decree No. 66 of 2019 on the Procedure of Determination and Calculation Formula for Ferry Transport Tariff. As a follow-up, the tariff scheme generated from the previous analysis was then entered into a scenario of varying demand, usually between 30% to 100%, and compared to the ships’ operating costs to identify the potential income on one trajectory route. In a new one, the analysis step was repeated, as previously mentioned, with additional details relating to sensitivity towards each passenger and the type of cargo by using the what-if analysis. This research also proved whether or not the trajectory generates profit or losses [18,19]. The compatibility between ships and port infrastructures was analyzed using the under keel clearance method. This approach was used to compare ships’ draft and port turning basin depth. Comparative methods were also employed to identify the suitability between the tonnage of the ships and the capacity of the movable port bridge [20]. The ships’ safety was further analyzed using several steps that considered its dimensions and weather conditions to determine the capabilities to sail in east Indonesian water territory. Weather analysis involved hourly recording within 10 years of the data report. The direction and speed of the wind and wave were then examined to identify certain characteristics. These included wind and wave roses as the basis for determining the repeated periods alongside utilizing the Weibull method. The parallel analysis of the ships’ characteristics was also carried out using the dimension ratio method. The final stage of the analysis was the calculation procedure involving using the IMO Weather Criterion (IS Code 2008) method. This was a combination of data involving the ratio of ship dimensions to wave slope to determine the ships’ heel angle. As a correction value, supposing the heel angle of the ferry when sailing was below 25 degrees, it was considered safe [21]. The analysis output showed the ships’ suitability to the new trajectories based on three main aspects, usually considered by the stakeholders during policy making. The research method flowchart can be seen in Figure 1. This present research was carried out on the Merak– Bakauheni Ferry trajectories alongside a new route in Maluku and East Nusa Tenggara Provinces, as shown in Figure 2.
3. Results
3.1. Feasibility Analysis as Stakeholders’ Consideration
The feasibility of relocating ships to new crossings in Eastern Indonesia is assessed by three criteria, namely, financial, port infrastructure, and shipping safety aspects. Different preferences were identified based on the perspective of the main stakeholders, consisting of regulator, ship operators, and consumers. As a regulator, the Ministry of Transportation primarily considers the infrastructural aspect and ship suitability in the water area because it is related to the safety. Ship operators primarily prefer the financial aspect because it is associated with the company’s continuity. This is similar to consumers because it relates to the ATP for ferry services based on the applicable tariff [22,23]. The results of the analysis and discussion of each criterion are described as follows.
3.1.1. Financial Aspect of Ship Operation
The analyzed phase of the financial aspects was performed to identify the consumers’ and ship operators’ perspectives. The respondents’ opinions in respect to the use of ferry transport by the public were obtained through direct interviews and surveys at representative ports in each region. These include the ports of Bolok (Kupang-East Nusa Tenggara) and Hunimua (Ambon-Maluku). Based on the questionnaire recapitulation, it was discovered that most of the travel destinations by ferry are usually work-related and for family matters. Generally, the respondents are quite satisfied with the port facilities and services on board.
Assessment of the financial aspect starts with analyzing the ATP and WTP by the community as users of crossing transportation services. Figure 3 shows that, on the Bolok-Rote route (East Nusa Tenggara), the current tariff per sea mile is IDR 1700, which is still below the ability and willingness of passengers to pay, namely, IDR 1900. Likewise, on the Hunimua–Waipirit route (Maluku), the tariff per sea mile is IDR 3304, which is still below the ability and willingness of passengers to pay, namely, IDR 3350. This means that it is still possible to increase the current fare according to the passenger’s ability.
Both routes analyzed were commercial routes, so the ATP and WTP tariffs were obtained above the applicable tariffs. On several other routes, which were not included in this study, the ATP and WTP values were below the applicable tariffs. This indicated that the limited ability of the community to pay for transportation services resulted in a low potential to travel by ferry, which in turn affects the ships’ average load factor.
Port operational data showed that ships on ferry crossing routes in Maluku and East Nusa Tenggara have an average load factor between 68% and 100%. Each route is served by more than one ship to ensure the availability of transportation services. Ships tonnage on each route is the same and tends to be grouped into 500 GT, 750 GT, and 1100 GT. Simulations are carried out by adding two new ships with larger tonnage on each route to ascertain the changes in the average load factor. The results of the analysis are shown in the following—Table 1.
The analysis results in Table 1 implied that the inclusion of additional ships on the existing trajectory significantly decreased the productivity of all operators. This was because, during every trip, it sails with a deficient load factor of less than 60% as an ideal assumption for generating profit. In business competition, a possible decrease in revenue relating to existing crossings due to the addition of new ships potentially creates resistance from another ferry operator in this area. This is compatible with another case study related to competitive shipping companies’ stating that negative factors were influenced by cash flow conditions and the presence of competitors [17,24,25]. With several competitive shipping companies in an area, both existing and relocating ship operators must consider the operational costs. However, this enables the industry to maintain the business at a profitable level [26,27,28].
Analysis of the financial aspects for ship operators was carried out in several stages, starting with calculating the operational cost needs of these ships on all crossings, such as commercial and pioneering. This involved using empirical equations related to the Minister of Transportation Regulation Number PM 66 of 2019. It further encompassed an accumulation of direct operational, indirect costs, and taxes components without considering the profit margin [29,30]. Based on the analysis results, the operating cost needs of the relocating ship on each trajectory in the research area were discovered to be within the range of 32 to 90 billion Rupiah (IDR) per year. The most significant requirement for fuel was within the range of 56% to 61% of the total operational cost. This depended on several factors, namely, the number of main and auxiliary engines installed, engine power, operating hours, and fuel prices. The analyzed results of ship operational cost needs were adjusted to the production unit of each ship. It had a different loading configuration based on the ships’ dimensions, as well as the allocation and determination of the number of cargoes in certain classes. This led to the implementation of tariffs for specific units of the diverse cargo types on each trajectory. According to the search for information from GAPASDAP and the Directorate General of Land Transportation related to proposing ferry transport fares, 60% of the production unit was used as the basis. Tariffs at production units 30% (upper limit fare), 60% (medium fare), and 100% (lower limit fare) were an ideal scenario to analyze the potential for ship operating income on each trajectory with varying demands in terms of realizing a load factor between 30% to 100%.
Potential revenue for ships shown in Figure 4 is equivalent to the result of the analysis carried out on the Hunimua–Waipirit commercial crossing in the Maluku region. This can be considered representative of the overall data presentation because the distribution of potential income for all ships and examined routes show a similar pattern. Significant operating costs differ based on the potential income of these ships in several tariff scenarios. Furthermore, the realization of demands and the relocation of additional ships to existing routes leads to a decrease of less than 60% and even greater than 13% in the average load factor, as was initially interpreted in Table 1 and Figure 4. The potential to diminish ship revenue realization requires financial efforts from ship operators in order to maintain business continuity, such as increasing the medium class tariff to the upper limit. Although, this does not still cover the deficit in operational costs cumulatively. Increasing the tariffs for all cargo types tends to harm the public, as direct consumers will find it difficult to pay for crossing transportation services, as previously described in the ATP WTP analysis. Another impact is the possibility of decreasing interest in ferry service users, as well as forcing the public to switch to alternative modes of transportation. The questionnaire also analyzed this based on the experiences encountered during the respondent’s journey, specifically that of frequent users at that location. Other alternative modes include fast boats, PELNI’s passengers, pioneer ships, and airplanes. The representative data displayed is a commercial route with no subsidized tariffs and were in accordance with the same scenario. The impact was also highly felt by the pioneering trajectories and regulators who need to bear the burden of increasing tariff subsidies.
3.1.2. Ship Compatibility with Port Infrastructure
A port is a transportation node component that consolidates passengers, goods, roads, facilities, and operating systems [31]. The primary supporting facilities of this infrastructure are designed based on certain technical principles to accommodate various types and sizes of ships designed to serve the needs of passengers’ mobility and freight transport in the hinterland area [32,33]. One of the crucial factors in the operation of a port is its suitability with the dimensions and weight of the ships served in a cycle. This starts from the docking to the port channel, maneuvering, mooring, loading, and unloading activities, as well as leaving the infrastructure [34,35]. Analyzing the compatibility between ship and port facilities entails comparing the ships’ dimensions with the available infrastructure, such as depth and pier, as shown in Table 2.
The analysis of the suitability of ship drafts and some representative ports located in East Nusa Tenggara with respect to the basin depth (Figure 5) indicates that Naikliu, Teluk Gurita, Bakalang, Baranusa, Larantuka, Paluwe, Waingapu, Rote, and Nagakeo can be safely accessed by all ships. It is important to note that Bolok Port, which is highly productive and situated near East Nusa Tenggara’s capital, cannot be accessed by bigger ships.
Figure 6 shows that several representative ports in Maluku, such as Hunimua, Umehputih, Wahai, Waipirit, Inamarina, Namlea, Waesala, Airnanang, Kasui, Teor, Toyando, Dobo, Benjina, Lamerang, Saumlaki, Kisar Harbor, Moa, Dawelor, Letwurung, and Wonreli, are safely accessed by all ships. However, operations in these provinces, specifically on Ambon Island, need to consider using Hunimua ferry ports because the area is close to the economic center.
The depth of the port basin is an aspect of the ships’ safety that needs to be considered. Interestingly, its draft need not exceed the port’s depth to prevent it from running aground, damaging the ship, and disturbing its services. In circumstances where the reverse is the case, the ships need to be evacuated immediately with available supporting facilities, such as tugboats. However, this process is associated with additional costs, which the shipping company pays. The pier is a primary facility at the port for ships to berth and perform loading and unloading activities. It is built in several forms, from simple to mechanical mooring systems, such as movable bridges that can accommodate the ferry ship. Determination of the pier’s capacity and supporting equipment is installed based on the results of the analyzed construction. This is designed to serve the ships in normal and emergency conditions, for example, as temporary shelters from bad weather or when these ships are damaged. The results of the initial comparison showed that the new ship is much bigger than the port bridge’s maximum capacity of 1500 GT. The weight of the new ship is between 2553 GT and 3965 GT, and any attempt to berth it more than the maximum capacity would damage the port facility. Generally, the reliability of the installed movable bridge facilities in some ports requires special attention. This is because there are several damages to this machinery due to lack of maintenance, thereby making it unable to change the elevation to adjust with the ships’ ramp door. The results of the earlier analysis stated that the East Nusa Tenggara and Maluku regions are not ready to serve the relocated ships. This is because these ships are only able to access the port up to its turning basin area coordinates. They are unable to berth on the pier due to the limited capacity of its construction.
3.1.3. Ship Compatibility with Water Territory
The ships must comply with various technical requirements related to shipping safety to operate for a long time and provide economic benefits to the company [36]. Its design, construction, and operation are realized by adhering to various strict requirements on a global scale, regulated by the mandated bodies. One of the engineering criteria is the ships’ ability to maintain their stability due to the effect of waves on the operational area based on the International Maritime Organization (IMO) weather principle [37]. Referring to the general rules of ship design and construction, the stability condition tends to be analyzed with the oceanographic data of the proposed route. It can be moved to a new route as a substitute for another ship. The owner and crews require the initial oceanographic data, which is an aspect of shipping safety that needs to be considered. Existing maps of ferry routes in East Nusa Tenggara and Maluku can be seen in Figure 7, and the location points for taking oceanographic data are shown in Figure 8.
The analysis of the suitability of the ships to be relocated is limited to the angle of its slope. This is due to the sloping waves’ influence in the country’s eastern part, specifically around East Nusa Tenggara and Maluku. The analyzed phase starts with determining the measurement points in the territorial waters based on the identified crossing trajectory map that has been mostly traversed by ferry ships connecting regions within the same or to another province. Furthermore, weather data collection is usually in the form of daily wind and wave conditions measured hourly for 10 years. This is realized through weather informative sources that have been verified globally and can be accessed online [38]. The analyzed wave slopes are used to compare the characteristics of the Eastern Indonesia water territory with the ideal wave criteria set by IMO. The process of examining wind and wave data was performed using repeat periods of 25 years, 50 years, and 100 years. The results of the wave slope analysis are shown in Figure 9.
The wave slope at all measurement points is smaller than that used by the IMO. The most significant and effective one in Maluku’s waters, as shown in Figure 9, has a slope of 0.057 at a wave period of 8.9 s. A similar wave slope of 0.09 was used in the IMO weather criteria. The same condition was also encountered in the East Nusa Tenggara waters, with a slope of 0.069, realized at a wave period of 7.81 s. Figure 10 shows an adequate wave slope of 1.0, followed by a critical analysis of the ships.
The heel angles of the ships due to waves when operating in the Maluku and East Nusa Tenggara waters are 21.8 degrees and 24 degrees, respectively. In Figure 9, the heel angle is calculated using 1.0 as the value of the effective slope. Assuming the formula of the weather criteria is used, the effective slope coefficient of the waves is more significant than 1.0 due to the high center of gravity. Another research carried out a similar test on ro-ro ferries in other parts of Indonesia, and it was proven that the maximum effective slope for these ships was 1.0. Most ships have width and draft ratios greater than 3.5, meaning that the damping factor is relatively the same even when operating in another territory. With a large ratio, Indonesian ro-ro ferries generally have a higher metacenter point than other ships. An example is an inclination due to the wind, which tends to be less than 250, which is the maximum slope required by IMO.
Calculating heel angle requires certain relevant data, such as general arrangement drawing plans and the ships’ stability arm or booklet, according to the loading conditions. With the state of the ships operating on the Merak–Bakauheni crossing, the ships tend to meet the stability criteria, which is one of the requirements for obtaining a sailing permit. Based on the hydrodynamic information relating to specific water conditions and ships’ data previously described, the wave slope, attenuation factor due to the ratio of ships width and draft, as well as damping caused by block and effective wave slope coefficient, generally, do not exceed the value of the weather criteria. Therefore, the ships to be relocated are feasibly allowed to operate in all service location plans. The angle of inclination due to the wave effect is 24 degrees, less than the maximum stability arm of 25 degrees allowed by IMO. The down-flooding angle of ferries operating in the country is generally greater than 30 degrees. It is presumed that the area under the curve of the stability arm from the angle of static inclination caused by the wind to the down-flooding angle is more significant than the one starting from the angle of static slope to the angle of inclination due to waves in the opposite direction. In accordance with the initial analysis on stability, which is dependent on ships data and oceanography conditions, the ships to be relocated can operate safely in the eastern part of Indonesia. Although, there is a need to pay attention to the weather data provided by the Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysics Agency (BMKG) because even though, from a stability perspective, it has met the criteria, at certain wave conditions, the ships are not allowed to operate for the safety of that of the cargo and passengers.
3.2. Find a New Home: Rerouting
According to the Ministry of Transportation Regulation Number 88 of 2014, the ships that do not meet the requirements to operate on the Merak–Bakauheni route must move to another crossing trajectory no later than four years after the enactment of this policy. It is crucial to enforce regulations that mandate the immediate relocation of each ship to other routes. Based on the results of the analysis and interpretation of the data in the previous section, the relocation of ships that were banned from Merak–Bakauheni to the trajectories in Eastern Indonesia by serving existing crossing routes, was declared feasible from the aspect of shipping safety, although not in terms of finance and infrastructure.
To discuss this problem, a focus group discussion was held with representatives from each of the main stakeholders, namely the Directorate General of Sea Transportation, the Directorate General of Land Transportation, and GAPASDAP. The criteria for potential crossings are formulated externally, leading to the following.
-
Connectivity between the main tourism destination.
-
Long-distance trajectory route.
-
High potential demand from passengers and vehicles.
-
Target market share with other water transportation companies, such as PELNI’s passenger and cargo ships.
-
Product differentiation is centered on the fact that no ferry ship is operating on this route yet.
Based on the aforementioned criteria, Benoa–Labuan Bajo is proposed as a potential route, with the justification that it connects two prioritized tourist destinations in Indonesia, namely, Bali and Labuan Bajo Islands. It is expected to accommodate passengers and vehicle transportation needs in these regions. Therefore, from a sustainable aspect, the ships’ operation is feasible because passengers would always visit these tourist locations. This route is a long-range trajectory (±289 nautical miles) in terms of voyage distance, and it has the potential to obtain higher profits. There are no ferry competitors on this trajectory, only cargoes, as well as PELNI’s passengers’ ship. Based on the operating pattern of this passengers’ ship, it was identified that one round of voyage is quite lengthy. This is because it stops at several ports, in contrast to the shorter ferry, which serves only two of them [39].
Benoa–Labuan Bajo trajectory is a conceptual framework for potential routes based on the proposals in the previous discussion. In these two areas, no market potential or origin–destination surveys have been performed. Therefore, the potential movement of these regions is yet to be mapped with precision. For this reason, and as a basis for justification, a minimum demand scenario of 30% was used in the analysis. The evaluation process of potential routes starts with determining and adjusting the boundary conditions to suit the port’s characteristics. This enables only the analyzed ships to have constructive side access to vehicle loads, based on the identification of only seven out of 10 ships that meet the criterion. Trajectory feasibility and sensitivity analyses focused on the financial aspect with the same series and formula as was initially mentioned. The analysis for the infrastructural suitability aspect was not carried out because the depth of the port basin is considered safe with respect to the ship’s dimensions and involves the use of a seaport dock with a portside mooring system. The oceanography in the previous analysis already covered the Benoa–Labuan Bajo trajectory and was also declared safe. The evaluation of the potential ship’s income partially details the sensitivity of each cargo type with a scenario of a 60% unit production tariff and potential demand at 30% and 60% load factor realization. In this analysis, each ship was perceived as the sole operator in this trajectory, and the results are shown in Table 3 and Figure 11.
Partial sensitivity analysis provides a detailed description of the contribution of each cargo type to cover the ship’s operational costs. This is divided according to the percentage of the unit production. Each ship has the same fundamental value as the production units per cargo type. Although, cumulatively, this tends to be different because it depends on the configuration of the cargo, which is arranged according to the ship’s dimensions. The analyzed results are shown in Table 4, while Figure 11 implies that the type of ferry cargo with high sensitivity is vehicles, and its output in the form of financial income is directly proportional to increased productivity. In conditions of low demand realization, the group of passengers plays a vital role in covering operational costs. This is because, cumulatively, the production unit is large, thereby providing profit with a value greater than the target percentage of operational costs dependents. The data in Table 4 show the same conditions for all ships. On the other hand, in conditions of low demand realization, vehicle loads in various categories exhibit the opposite. Cumulatively, this type of cargo is unable to meet the target percentage of dependents for its operational costs, except for the MV Mutiara Persada II, MV Windu Karsa Dwitya, and MV Caitlyn, which were able to make a profit. An increase in the number of cargoes also has a significant impact on ship income, and when the regular demand realization is 60%, all ships are bound to benefit from this route.
ATP WTP is an indicator that needs to be considered by the main stakeholders, especially operators and regulators. The operator may consider increasing ticket prices to cover operational costs and seek profit. However, when the proposed price is unaffordable by the public, the regulator needs to supervise, intervene, and make certain acceptable recommendations to all parties. The determination of high tariffs undoubtedly makes prospective service users select for alternative modes of transportation. For example, the price of the ferry passengers’ fare is almost the same as that of an airplane ticket on the same route, as well as the vehicle load rate. This is higher than other ships, forcing users to sacrifice bringing their vehicle from Bali to Labuan. Bajo passes through several existing crossings starting from Padangbai–Lembar then continues the road trip eastward to the Kayangan–Pototano crossing and again to the Sape ferry port to cross to the destination of Labuan Bajo. Interestingly, other ships that can earn cumulative profits on this route are MV Caitlyn and MV Windu Karsa Dwitya at a cheaper rate per unit of cargo than the MV Mutiara Persada II.
The characteristics of ships on the trajectory were discovered by comparing several with specific criteria. The comparison of two ships, MV Mutiara Persada II and MV Caitlyn, represent the most significant and least profitable potential conditions, respectively. It is based on the operational cost indicator, which proved they had absolute dissimilarity. MV Mutiara Persada II (3965 GT) is larger than MV Caitlyn (2846 GT), although based on the loading arrangements, it can carry more various types of cargo. The ship capacity of MV Caitlyn is a distinct advantage because the tariff scenario is cheaper for all types of cargo than the MV Mutiara Persada II. Another comparison was made on one of the ships that suffered losses, namely, MV Jatra II (3902 GT). Based on the loading characteristics, it was identified that the MV Caitlyn ship contained more passengers than the MV Jatra II. For vehicle loading, both have similarities with increases in the load for those in class IV. MV Jatra II allocates more resources to class VI vehicle loads, as shown in Table 4. Due to this condition, it was discovered that the cargo classes with high sensitivity are four to seven. At a demand of 30%, when no cargo of this type is transported, the ship experiences a significant deficit because the income from passengers’ tariffs is unable to cover the operating costs. On the contrary, at a demand of 60%, the availability of vehicle classes four to seven generates profit.
3.3. Assembling the Puzzle
One of the problems encountered in transferring these ships from Merak–Bakauheni directly to the trajectories in Eastern Indonesia is the unusual pattern of ships’ relocation. Initially, when relocating a ship from the Western Indonesia trajectories, it is first moved to the central region and then to the eastern part. Because of its relatively small size, it can still be accommodated by the port in that area. A basic idea tends to be developed into various forms to support a policy implementation solution framework. In the aforementioned discussion, this was put forward to support the relocation of ships to Eastern Indonesia by providing recommendations for Benoa–Labuan Bajo’s potential routes that serve ferry transportation but are operated at seaports. This is not new, and several seaports ensure the constructed pier accommodates ferries. For example, this involves the construction of a mooring dolphin at the end of the pier or additional infrastructure, such as an elevated side ramp. Procurement of port infrastructure is a bureaucratic process that requires several stages of planning, feasibility testing, technical surveys, engineering design, proposal, and approval. This occasionally takes years to be realized and requires large amounts of funds.
To initiate the implementation of the relocation program, the shipping company needs to modify its ramp door, which was initially at the stern, to the port side. This enables the ship to be berthing in a position parallel to the pier. Previously, it could only berth in a longitudinal position when the ramp door was still located on the stern. With this modification, the port can serve the ferry ship at a regular pier, and on the other hand, they no longer need to add new infrastructure. The implication of this modification is the additional cost that has to be covered by the shipping company or ship owner and the potential for losing the ships’ effective operational time due to work at the dockyard. The ships’ operational costs, including the ramp door modification, will be charged to the ticket price, likely greater than the tariff concept from the previous analysis. However, this can be reduced by proportionally dividing the costs into several years, while its timing can be streamlined by making the ramp door modifications along with the annual ship docking period.
The regulator’s role is the central figure in formulating the “financial dispensation” in this scenario. Meanwhile, one concept needs to be applied in the provision of subsidies. Several applicable methods include tariff and operational cost subsidies. In the 30% demand scenario, approximately five ships have the potential to suffer losses within the range of 13.6 to 25.3 billion IDR, as shown in Table 4. Overall, it is necessary to formulate appropriate financial policy recommendations in the form of subsidies or other binding regulations for the entire ship. The determination of the method needs to consider appropriate financial indicators because each ship has different characteristics and outputs. In addition, it is necessary to determine the type of Benoa–Labuan Bajo, with the option of being set as a commercial route without subsidies or pioneer route with subsidies. As a commercial route, it is suitable for ships that can earn profits on the realization of reduced demand at low rates. When designated as a pioneering trajectory, then two types of subsidies can be applied, namely, tariff and operational cost. Tariff subsidies can be given to other financially viable ships but must have a high scheme. With these methods, the applicable tariff is expected to adhere to the people’s purchasing ability.
Another type of subsidy applied to pioneering routes is operational cost. In this circumstance, the government provides funds to cover the ship’s operational costs and potential losses at a certain percentage. However, another form of this procedure is indirect subsidies. The government does not need to provide direct funds to shipping companies but issue a permit to use subsidized fuel specifically for this route. The implementation of this policy was made possible according to the Presidential Regulation of Indonesia Number 191 of 2014 concerning the supply, distribution, and retail selling price of oil fuel. Article 17 states that ferry ships are included in the criteria for obtaining this subsidy according to the quota set by the regulatory agency. This permit application is issued after a route permit, and the ship is ready to serve this route. The granting of a license to use subsidized fuel is limited in the trial period.
The implementation of a new regulation limiting the tonnage of ships on the Merak–Bakauheni ferry route will always have consequences, and the elimination of several ships from the Merak–Bakauheni ferry route will have a negative effect on the economic sustainability of shipping companies. These ships can no longer operate on the largest commercial crossing routes in Indonesia. In addition, shipping companies are one of the worst affected by the disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020–2021, and due to social distancing, the productivity of ferry passenger transportation has also decreased. To restore the economy in the shipping sector, ferry ships need to operate on new productive routes.
4. Conclusions
Implementation of the PM 88 of 2014 states that ships with sizes less than 5000 GT are no longer allowed to serve the Merak–Bakauheni crossing, therefore, they are forced to move to routes in Eastern Indonesia, namely, the East Nusa Tenggara and Maluku regions. The analysis results showed that these ships are only feasible regarding shipping safety, rather than the financial or infrastructural aspect. The long-distance crossing from Benoa to Labuan Bajo is a proposed route scenario that fulfills the financial feasibility of several ships with low fares and the potential to benefit from lesser demand. It is safer from a safety standpoint. It is recommended that the ramp door should be moved to its port side to adapt the ships to the existing port infrastructure.
This research did not consider tariff flexibility due to rising fuel prices. In the future, there is a need for the government to analyze the subsidy scheme to attract operators to move their ships in low load factor conditions. This includes tariff and fuel as well as overall operational cost subsidies.
There are several companies that have had more than one ship eliminated from the Merak–Bakauheni route, resulting in a negative impact on the sustainability of their business processes. This is a cumulative impact of the non-operation of ships as the main production unit of shipping companies. Ferry productivity is highly dependent on the production of cargo (passengers and vehicles). By rerouting ships to new potential crossing routes according to the recommendations of this research, there are several positive multiplier effects: increasing the availability of ships in Eastern Indonesia, providing a new route to increase connectivity between the west and the east of Indonesia, and cumulatively contributing to reducing ship exhaust emissions around the Banten and Lampung areas.
Conceptualization, A.K., G.H., W.P.H. and C.P.; methodology, A.K., C.P., W.P.H. and D.P.; validation, G.H., S.H., I.K.S. and A.Y.; formal analysis, A.K., W.P.H., C.P. and D.P.; investigation, W.J.S., T.P.P. and K.H.; resources, S.H., I.K.S., W.J.S. and K.H.; data curation, A.K., C.P., W.P.H., G.H. and A.Y.; writing—original draft preparation, A.K., C.P., W.P.H. and D.P.; writing—review and editing, S.H., I.K.S., T.P.P., W.J.S. and A.Y.; visualization, A.Y. and K.H.; supervision, A.K. and G.H.; project administration, A.Y. and T.P.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
The data presented in this current research are available upon request from the corresponding author.
The authors are grateful to the Directorate General of Land Transportation, Directorate General of Sea Transportation, PT, ASDP, GAPASDAP, and the Center of Technology, Hasanuddin University, Makassar.
The authors declared no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Enlarge this image.Figure 2. Research location (ship rerouting from ferry Merak–Bakauheni to Maluku and East Nusa Tenggara).
Enlarge this image.Figure 3. ATP WTP ferry transportation services in the regions of East Nusa Tenggara (a) and Maluku (b).
Enlarge this image.Figure 5. The suitability of the ships’ draft with the depth of the port basin in East Nusa Tenggara.
Enlarge this image.Figure 6. The suitability of the ship’s draft with the depth of the port basin in Maluku.
Enlarge this image.Figure 7. Map of existing ferry crossing trajectories in East Nusa Tenggara and Maluku.
Enlarge this image.Figure 8. Measurement points of oceanographic condition in East Nusa Tenggara (a) and Maluku (b).
Enlarge this image.Figure 11. Sensitivity of each cargo type to the ship’s income in scenario demand 30% (a) and 60% (b).
Load factors change.
| Province | Ferry Route | Tonnage of Existing Ships (GT) | Available Ships (Unit) | Average Tonnage of the New Ships (GT) | Existing Ferry Route Average Load Factor (%) | Impact of Adding Ship-To-Load Factor Change (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (+1 Ship) | (+2 Ships) | ||||||
| Maluku | Hunimua-Waipirit | 750 | 5 | 3000 | 84 | 21 | 15 |
| Galala-Namlea | 1100 | 2 | 3000 | 68 | 25 | 15 | |
| East Nusa Tenggara | Kupang-Larantuka | 750 | 8 | 3000 | 90 | 23 | 13 |
| Kupang-Rote | 500 | 2 | 3000 | 100 | 25 | 14 | |
Ships and ports characteristics.
| Ships Draft (Meter) | Port Basin Draft (Meter) | Ship Capacity (GT) | Pier Capacity (GT) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3.25–4.50 | 3.58–4.95 | 2553–3965 | 500–1500 |
Tariff scenario for each cargo type on Benoa–Labuan Bajo trajectory STOP.
| Ship Name | Passenger | Class 2 | Class 4 | Class 5 | Class 6 | Class 7 | Class 8 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bahuga Pratama | Capacity (unit) | 520 | 0 | 30 | 17 | 13 | 0 | 0 |
| Tariff (IDR.000) | 212 | 427 | 3530 | 6532 | 10,951 | 14,349 | 19,287 | |
| Caitlyn | Capacity (unit) | 600 | 0 | 30 | 17 | 9 | 6 | 1 |
| Tariff (IDR.000) | 330 | 663 | 5482 | 10,144 | 17,007 | 22,285 | 31,109 | |
| Jatra II | Capacity (unit) | 498 | 6 | 33 | 9 | 11 | 5 | 0 |
| Tariff (IDR.000) | 193 | 388 | 3210 | 5941 | 9960 | 13,050 | 18,218 | |
| Nusa Bahagia | Capacity (unit) | 300 | 0 | 23 | 6 | 9 | 4 | 0 |
| Tariff (IDR.000) | 394 | 792 | 6549 | 12,120 | 20,319 | 26,624 | 37,166 | |
| Nusa Dharma | Capacity (unit) | 344 | 3 | 28 | 8 | 12 | 3 | 0 |
| Tariff (IDR.000) | 226 | 454 | 3757 | 6952 | 11,656 | 15,272 | 21,320 | |
| Mutiara Persada II | Capacity (unit) | 200 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 7 | 10 | 0 |
| Tariff (IDR.000) | 847 | 1703 | 14,086 | 26,067 | 43,702 | 57,263 | 79,938 | |
| Windu Karsa Dwitya | Capacity (unit) | 378 | 6 | 32 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 1 |
| Tariff (IDR.000) | 566 | 1138 | 9414 | 17,422 | 29,208 | 38,271 | 53,425 | |
Ships’ income in scenario of 60% unit production.
| Ship Name | Total Operation Cost (IDR.108) | Deficit/Profit in Demand 30% (IDR.108) | Deficit/Profit in Demand 60% (IDR.108) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bahuga Pratama | 61.3 | −25.3 | 10.6 |
| Caitlyn | 49.2 | 7.4 | 81.4 |
| Jatra II | 46.8 | −13.6 | 19.4 |
| Nusa Bahagia | 68.7 | −20.3 | 28.0 |
| Nusa Dharma | 50.1 | −17.5 | 15.1 |
| Mutiara Persada II | 82.0 | 11.1 | 104.4 |
| Windu Karsa Dwitya | 90.0 | 4.5 | 99.0 |
References
1. Humang, W.P.; Hadiwardoyo, S.P.; Nahry,
2. Chuah, L.F.; Mohd Salleh, N.H.; Osnin, N.A.; Alcaide, J.I.; Abdul Majid, M.H.; Abdullah, A.A.; Bokhari, A.; Jalil, E.E.A.; Klemeš, J.J. Profiling Malaysian ship registration and seafarers for streamlining future Malaysian shipping governance. Aust. J. Marit. Ocean. Aff.; 2021; 13, pp. 225-261. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2021.1878981]
3. Heryandri, K. The Importance of Ferry Ro-Ro Transportation in Indonesia and Its Contrary to the Lack of Attention on Ferry Ro-Ro Safety, Which Cause High Rate of Accidents and Fatalities. Adv. Transp. Logist. Res.; 2018; 1, pp. 641-651.
4. Berawi, M.A.; Miraj, P.; Sidqi, H. Economic corridor of industrial development in Indonesia. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci.; 2017; 109, 012032. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/109/1/012032]
5. Sinaga, R.; Humang, W.P.; Kurniawan, A. Potential cargo demand of Kuala Tanjung Port as international hub port in Western Indonesia. MATEC Web Conf.; 2018; 181, 09001. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201818109001]
6. Arianto, D.; Marpaung, E.; Malisan, J.; Humang, W.P.; Puriningsih, F.S.; Mardiana, T.S.; Siahaan, W.J.; Pairunan, T.; Kurniawan, A. Cost Efficiency and CO2 Emission Reduction in Short Sea Shipping: Evidence from Ciwandan Port–Panjang Port Routes, Indonesia. Sustainability; 2022; 14, 6016. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su14106016]
7. Utami, T.K. Kajian Evaluasi Lintas Penyeberangan Merak–Bakauheni. War. Penelit. Perhub.; 2020; 32, pp. 43-52. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.25104/warlit.v32i1.1543]
8. Munim, Z.H.; Schramm, H.J. The impacts of port infrastructure and logistics performance on economic growth: The mediating role of seaborne trade. J. Shipp. Trade; 2018; 3, 1. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41072-018-0027-0]
9. Ministerial Decree No 88 of 2014 on Regulation of the Size of the Ferry Transport Vessel in the Merak-Bakauheni Crossing Trajectory. 2014; Available online: https://jdih.dephub.go.id/assets/uudocs/permen/2014/PM_88_Tahun_2014.pdf (accessed on 24 June 2021).
10. Humang, W.P.; Hadiwardoyo, S.P.; Nahry,
11. Humang, W.P.; Hadiwardoyo, S.P.; Nahry,
12. Kurdin, M.A.; Nuhun, R.S.; Welendo, L. Operational Management Marine Transportation on Shipping Lanes Wangiwangi–Kaledupa, Wakatobi-Indonesia. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci.; 2015; 211, pp. 184-191. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.027]
13. Asri, S.; Mustafa, W.; Firmansyah, M.R.; Lage, F.F. Clustering ferry ports class-I based on the ferry ro-ro tonnages and main dimensions. MATEC Web Conf.; 2018; 181, 12001. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201818112001]
14. Humang, W.P.; Hadiwardoyo, S.P.; Nahry,
15. Gucma, S. Conditions of safe ship operation in sea waterway systems. Zesz. Nauk. Akad. Morska Szczec.; 2013; 36, pp. 55-58.
16. B.K. Indonesia. BKI Reliable: Homepage. Ship Register Is Vessels Hold Permanent Certificate and Have Registered Number Listed in the BKI Class Fleet. Available online: https://www.bki.co.id/shipregister.html (accessed on 4 March 2022).
17. Škurić, M.; Maraš, V.; Davidović, T.; Radonjić, A. Optimal allocating and sizing of passenger ferry fleet in maritime transport. Res. Transp. Econ.; 2021; 90, 100868. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2020.100868]
18. Raga, P.; Aksa, S.K.; Herdian, T.; Samosir, F.; Ponto, K.N.A. Pengukuran Indeks Daya Beli Jasa Transportasi Laut Dan Penyeberangan Pada Wilayah Tertinggal. J. Sist. Transp. Logist.; 2021; 1, pp. 1-6.
19. Ministerial Decree No 66 of 2019 on Procedure of Determination and Calculation Formula for Ferry Transport Rates. 2019; Available online: https://jdih.dephub.go.id/assets/uudocs/permen/2019/PM_66_TAHUN_2019_rev.pdf (accessed on 18 June 2021).
20. Gucma, S. Conditions of safe ship operation in seaports–optimization of port waterway parameters. Pol. Marit. Res.; 2019; 26, pp. 22-29. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2478/pomr-2019-0042]
21. Paroka, D.; Muhammad, A.H.; Rahman, S. Estimation of Effective Wave Slope Coefficient of Ships with Large Breadth and Draught Ratio. Kapal J. Ilmu Pengetah. Teknol. Kelaut.; 2020; 17, pp. 40-49. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.14710/kapal.v17i1.28399]
22. Wang, D.Z.; Lo, H.K. Multi-fleet ferry service network design with passenger preferences for differential services. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol.; 2008; 42, pp. 798-822. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2008.01.008]
23. Díez-Gutiérrez, M.; Tørset, T. Perception of inconvenience costs: Evidence from seven ferry services in Norway. Transp. Policy; 2019; 77, pp. 58-67. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.03.002]
24. Setiawati, R. Competitive Strategy of Shipping and Shipyard Companies as a Result of Declining Coal Industry in Indonesia. J. Manaj. Transp. Logist.; 2017; 4, pp. 287-302. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.54324/j.mtl.v4i3.171]
25. Andersen, S.N.; Tørset, T. Waiting time for ferry services: Empirical evidence from Norway. Case Stud. Transp. Policy; 2019; 7, pp. 667-676. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2019.04.006]
26. Španja, S.; Krajnović, A.; Bosna, J. Competitiveness and business strategies of shipping companies. Bus. Excell.; 2017; 11, 123. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.22598/pi-be/2017.11.1.123]
27. Hanssen, T.E.S.; Larsen, B. The influence of waiting time on the value of headway time on a ferry service in Norway. Res. Transp. Econ.; 2020; 82, 100879. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2020.100879]
28. Park, S.H.; Pham, T.Y.; Yeo, G.T. The impact of ferry disasters on operational efficiency of the South Korean coastal ferry industry: A DEA-window analysis. Asian J. Shipp. Logist.; 2018; 34, pp. 248-255. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2018.09.009]
29. Morales-Fusco, P.; Saurí, S.; Lago, A. Potential freight distribution improvements using motorways of the sea. J. Transp. Geogr.; 2012; 24, pp. 1-11. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.05.007]
30. Odeck, J. Efficiency measurement of ferries serving road networks in Norway: A stochastic frontier approach. Marit. Econ. Logist.; 2008; 10, pp. 409-428. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1057/mel.2008.14]
31. Hatziioannidu, F.; Polydoropoulou, A. Identifying passenger preferences for alternative ferry transport hubs. Res. Transp. Econ.; 2022; 96, 101221. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2022.101221]
32. Jørgensen, F.; Solvoll, G. Designing capacity and service level at ferry crossings. Transp. Res. Procedia; 2017; 26, pp. 215-223. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.07.022]
33. Karapetyan, D.; Punnen, A.P. A reduced integer programming model for the ferry scheduling problem. Public Transp.; 2013; 4, pp. 151-163. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12469-012-0058-0]
34. Wang, Y.; Yeo, G.T.; Ng, A.K. Choosing optimal bunkering ports for liner shipping companies: A hybrid Fuzzy-Delphi–TOPSIS approach. Transp. Policy; 2014; 35, pp. 358-365. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.04.009]
35. Lawson, C.T.; Weisbrod, R.E. Ferry transport: The realm of responsibility for ferry disasters in developing nations. J. Public Transp.; 2005; 8, 2. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.8.4.2]
36. Chuah, L.F.; Mokhtar, K.; Bakar, A.A.; Othman, M.R.; Osman, N.H.; Bokhari, A.; Mubashir, M.; Abdullah, M.A.; Hasan, M. Marine environment and maritime safety assessment using Port State Control database. Chemosphere; 2022; 304, 135245. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.135245] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35691404]
37. IMO. Interim Guidelines for Alternative Assessment of Weather Criterion. Document MSCA/Circ.1200; IMO: London, UK, 2006.
38. ECMWF. Advancing Global NWP through International Collaboration. 28 August 2021. Available online: https://www.ecmwf.int/ (accessed on 12 September 2021).
39. Focus Group Discussion. Studi Relokasi Kapal Penyeberangan ke Wilayah Lintasan Penyeberangan Indonesia Bagian Timur, Zoom Video Communications. Available online: https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/TyKLlKOv4C9WCxft4mZuiCnKEXTR2FDZ6bs0BpLpmlOpE3D8cysER6Lk8MJAcJxO.ZKvhHg583YxAAm2W (accessed on 4 March 2022).
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Hutapea, Gunung 1 ; Hardianto, Sri 1 ; Suhartana, I Ketut 1 ; Apri Yuliani 1 ; Teguh Pairunan Putra 1 ; Siahaan, Wilmar Jonris 1 ; Hidayat, Kamarul 1 ; Windra Priatna Humang 2
; Paotonan, Chairul 3 ; Paroka, Daeng 3 1 Transport Policy Agency, Ministry of Transportation, Jakarta Pusat 10110, Indonesia
2 Research Center for Transportation Technology, National Research and Innovation Agency, Tangerang Selatan 15314, Indonesia
3 Department of Ocean Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Hasanuddin University, Gowa 92119, Indonesia