Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Transportation Research Part A journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tra Modeling incentive strategies for landside integration in multimodal transport chains Chenrui Qu a , Qingcheng Zeng a, ⁎ , Kevin X. Li b , Kun-Chin Lin c a School of Maritime Economics and Management, Dalian Maritime University, No. 1 Linghai Road, Dalian 116026, China b Ocean College, Zhejiang University, No. 1 Zheda Road, Zhoushan 316021, China c Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Cambridge, Alison Richard Building, 7 West Road, Cambridge CB39DT, United Kingdom ARTICLEINFO Keywords: Port competition Multimodal transport chain Incentive strategy Inland port ABSTRACT A significant bottleneck in port regionalization through multimodal transport chains is expensive and time-consuming inland transport. To be competitive, it is crucial for a port authority to build an effective transport system and develop collection-distribution abilities. Considering shipper preferences, this study proposes a pricing model to describe the markets of competing seaports and discusses several incentive strategies that may or may not bring mutual benefits for shippers and port authorities in the multimodal transport chain, such as the corridor investment strategy, subsidy strategy, and combinational strategy. Based on two adjacent ports in China, a com- parative analysis is carried out for evaluating the effects of different strategies. The results show that the corridor investment strategy depends on unit investment capital for improving transport convenience. It is necessary to adopt a differentiated subsidy strategy based on transport distance when considering the subsidy strategy; however, there is a constraint on the subsidy level. In the combinational strategy, shippers’ preferences for transport convenience and low inland transport cost have a significant impact on a port authority’s total revenue. 1. Introduction The inland port is a fundamental component of the port-oriented multimodal transport system and is closer to hinterland markets. Inland ports also become more active over time and support port development (Notteboom and Rodrigue, 2005). The geographical and functional expansion of inland ports is the outcome of the vertical integration of the intermodal chain (Monios and Wilmsmeier, 2012) to meet the increasing the demands of shippers for door-to-door service. The concept of a captive market is gradually weakening, with the increasing use of contestable hinterland. For example, it is common to see a shipper choosing Los Angeles as the discharge port and delivering container cargos to the destination by truck, although there is a direct shipping route from the de- parture port to New York. To maintain competitive advantage in a contestable hinterland, it is vital for a port authority to make inland ports easily accessible to port terminals. The inland port concept (dry port, inland terminal, inland container depot, etc.) is a logistics zone of seaports connected with roads and railways and plays a leading role in the regional system (Witte et al., 2019). The inland port transfers the distribution function of ports to inland areas and relieves port congestion (Ng and Gujar, 2009; Wang and Cheng, 2010; Rodrigue et al., 2010; Qiu et al., 2015; Crainic et al., 2015). However, serious inland congestion and limited capacity problems restrict the development of a https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2020.04.012 Received 19 March 2019; Received in revised form 5 February 2020; Accepted 13 April 2020 ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: quchenrui@dlmu.edu.cn (C. Qu), qzeng@dlmu.edu.cn (Q. Zeng), kxli@zju.edu.cn (K.X. Li), kcl35@cam.ac.uk (K.-C. Lin). Transportation Research Part A 137 (2020) 47–64 0965-8564/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. T