Analysis of the effectiveness of seaports in the Far Eastern basin based on a stakeholder approach

Martinov Dmitrii Valer'evich ORCID: 0009-0004-8414-7743 Postgraduate Student; Department of Mathematics and Modeling; Vladivostok State University 41 Gogol St., room 1443, Primorsky Krai, 690014, Russia graduate-2023@bk.ru

Mazelis Lev Solomonovich ORCID: 0000-0001-7346-3960 Doctor of Economics Professor; Department of Mathematics and Modeling; Vladivostok State University 41 Gogol St., room 1443, Primorsky Krai, 690014, Russia lev.mazelis@vvsu.ru

1. Introduction

Throughout modern history, ports have been the most important hubs of transport infrastructure, through which significant volumes of cargo pass both inside and outside the country, while their effectiveness directly affects the socio-economic development of the territory and the country as a whole.

The importance of seaports for the country is widely represented in the Strategy for the Development of the Russian Seaport Infrastructure until 2030, which emphasizes the key importance of seaports for the Russian Federation. The Strategy is aimed at increasing port capacity, improving public administration of this industry, increasing the competitiveness of Russian ports, and ensuring their safe operation and development. It is worth noting that in modern political and economic conditions, it is the ports of the Far East and the Far East itself that acquire special strategic importance for the state. In turn, when evaluating the port's activities, it is necessary to take into account the requests and expectations of all major stakeholders, whose successful interaction ensures its successful development based on sustainability and balanced interaction with them.

Thus, the relevance of this study is due to the need to develop a tool that will allow assessing the effectiveness of a seaport based on an integrated approach, taking into account economic, social and environmental factors that model the needs of each group of stakeholders.

The object of the study is the functioning of a seaport, and the subject is a methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of seaports in the Far Eastern basin using a stakeholder approach.

2. Literature review

As a result of the analysis of scientific papers by Russian and foreign scientists devoted to assessing the effectiveness of the seaport and its impact on the territory, the authors identified the research groups presented below, which consider several approaches to assessing the port's activities.:

- an economic approach that evaluates the economic activity of the port and its impact on the socio-economic indicators of the territory;

– a logistic approach aimed at assessing cargo flows and improving transportation processes;

– an ecological approach focused on environmental impact assessment;

– a social approach that takes into account the impact of the port on the local community and the quality of life of the population;

– an integrated approach that takes into account several of the above approaches.

2.1. Economic approach to port efficiency assessment

Most often in the scientific literature, researchers focus on the economic importance of the port as an essential element of the regional economy, affecting trade, logistics and the development of the territory. At the same time, the ports' performance is assessed through their contribution to GDP, attracting investment and ensuring economic growth.

In ^[1] Lee S.W. et al. They consider the evolution of Asian world ports and their impact on improving the well-being of adjacent regions.

Zaostrovskikh E.A. ^{[2, 3]} substantiates the possibility of considering the assessment of the port's development both from the point of view of profitability and from the point of view of its impact on the economic well-being of the region. For the assessment, it is proposed to use indicators of the port's revenue volume, estimates of the port's contribution to GRP, cost share, etc.

Nikolaeva N.K. and others. In ^[4], the economic activity of the port is assessed by using an integral assessment — the efficiency coefficient of the seaport, which makes it possible to assess the financial stability of the port's activities and its liquidity.

Ksenzova N.N. ^[5] examines the dependence of product profitability, as the main characteristic of the port's efficiency, on the efficiency indicators of the use of production and financial resources based on the construction of an econometric model based on a small sample, which affects the accuracy of the results obtained.

D.S. Khasanov ^[6] suggests calculating the efficiency coefficient of the port complex in the form of geometric averages that characterize the use of fixed assets, the degree of utilization of productive capacity, the average age of port equipment and its compliance with standards. The proposed efficiency coefficient is easy to calculate, quantifiable, and can be used in predicting development.

It should be noted that considering only the economic impact of the port significantly narrows the assessment of its importance for the region, since the port is a significant factor not only in the economic, but also in the social development of the territory.

2.2. Logistic approach to port efficiency assessment

A number of authors focus on the role of the port in supply chains and its ability to ensure efficient movement of goods. Here, the relevance of the port is determined by its ability to cope with the growing volume of cargo turnover, the speed of ship handling and the quality of services provided.

The work of Eglit Ya. Ya. et al. ^[7] reflects the main goal of this approach – to ensure maximum speed, reliability and cost minimization when moving goods through port terminals.

Notteboom T. et al. The article ^[8] discusses the possible impact of changes in the port's logistics processes on the development of the region.

In the work of Timoshina A. S. et al. ^[9], it is proposed to use the indicator of the duration of the logistics cycle to assess logistics processes and it is proved that its reduction leads to cost reduction and increased profitability of the port.

In the article by Baburin V. A. et al. ^[10], the authors propose a methodology for assessing the environmental and economic efficiency of the port through indicators of reducing the standing time of ships and increasing the capacity of the port.

Zhelezkova P. E. ^[11] considers a broader approach by comparing logistics processes and the financial efficiency of the port. The results of the assessment are proposed to be used to accelerate cargo turnover, improve the technology of cargo operations and the use of transshipment facilities.

Beatriz T. et al. In ^[12], they consider the assessment of port connectivity and propose evaluating the effectiveness of their relative specialization based on the consideration of the impact of cargo maintenance costs (including labor, intermediate consumption costs, and capital asset service costs) on the structure of its cargo turnover and determining to what extent each of the factors affects different types of cargo. This approach allows you to determine which resources in a port can bring the greatest effect based on its specialization.

Thus, researchers whose work can be attributed to the logistics approach, as a rule, focus on the following issues: optimization of cargo flows, inventory management, integration of information systems, control of delivery times.

The main disadvantage of this approach is that, while focusing on optimizing logistics processes, the authors pay little attention to assessing the port's impact on the region's economy, despite the fact that such optimization involves the construction of large hubs or the expansion of the port's infrastructure.

2.3. Environmental approach to port efficiency assessment

In recent years, more and more attention has been paid to the issues of ecology and sustainable development, and an ecological approach is being developed. The authors who adhere to this approach assess the relevance of ports through the prism of their environmental impact and the ability to minimize the negative consequences of their activities.

In the work of Acciaro M. et al. ^[13] analyzes the environmental actions carried out by the port authorities and evaluates the effectiveness of the port through the prism of achieving "green goals".

In an article by Taljaard S. et al. ^[14] the concept of "green ports" is considered, and it is proposed to evaluate the compliance of ports with this concept as a justification for port stability. This study has developed a method for assessing port sustainability indicators, which correlates technical indicators with locally correlated contexts showing the environmental friendliness of the seaport.

The authors of the studies ^[15] Ivanova M. S. et al. and Li J. et al. ^[16] it is indicated that the main types of negative impact of the seaport on the environment include: 1) emissions of pollutants and other substances into the atmospheric air; 2) discharges of pollutants, other substances and microorganisms into surface water bodies, underground water bodies and catchment areas; 4) pollution of the subsoil, soils; 5) disposal of production and consumption waste; 6) environmental pollution by noise, heat, electromagnetic, ionizing and other types of physical effects. This, in turn, requires mandatory accounting and assessment in order to take effective measures to protect the territory. This requires consideration and assessment as a negative factor in the development of the territory.

In the work of Taehwee L. et al. ^[17] It is proposed to assess the complex impact on the environmental condition of not only the port, but also the port cities using the data coverage analysis (DEA) approach.

The works devoted to environmental performance assessment provide insight into the current state and prospects of the environmental approach, as well as help to better understand what measures need to be taken to minimize the negative impact of port activities on the environment and ensure the sustainable development of the industry. At the same time, it is not advisable to reduce the work of the port only to this aspect, since the port provides a synergistic effect for the development of territories and the environmental effect is not decisive.

2.4. Social approach to port efficiency assessment

Much less often, the authors use a social approach in which they consider the port not only as an economic object, but also as an important part of the social structure of the region. They are interested in issues of employment, the standard of living of port workers and the social well-being of local communities.

Vanelslander T. ^[18] examines the social responsibility of seaports from the point of view of stakeholders and their contribution to the public good, the results of the study determine which socially significant goals of the port's operation need public support and which initiatives should be stimulated.

The authors of the article, V.G. Syachin and others ^[19], analyze how the presence of an implemented corporate social responsibility system in the port affects the port's activities, and compare the practices of large Chinese companies.

The papers recognize the key role of ports as important elements of the social infrastructure of adjacent territories.

2.5. An integrated approach to port efficiency assessment

At the same time, a number of researchers note that a comprehensive assessment of the port's operation will be the most accurate, which includes consideration of several of the above aspects in order to give a more complete picture of the effectiveness of its operation. This approach will make it possible to identify strengths and weaknesses in different areas, identify areas for improvement and ensure the sustainable development of the port in the future.

One example of this approach ^[20] is presented in an article by Kitzmann H. and others . "Analysis of the effectiveness of the seaports of the Baltic basin of Russia". At the first stage, the authors identify all the parties that are part of the structure of interaction between the seaport and the external environment. For each group, the effectiveness of the port depends on different indicators, so the next step is to determine a set of characteristics that are suitable for everyone. To do this, the authors propose to use indicators reflecting economic, social and environmental efficiency. At the same time, each effectiveness is considered only with the help of one of the indicators and is not correlated with the stakeholders.

In the work of Dariusz B. et al. ^[21] when assessing the sustainable effects resulting from the implementation of projects in ports or ports, it is assumed to assess the economic (logistical), environmental and social effects that arise, which are determined in monetary terms in the form of costs, and cost savings contribute to the overall sustainable growth expected as a result of the project. Economic and logistical) sustainable growth consists of benefits for transport users,

Despite the fact that Bodrovtseva N. Y. ^[22] suggests using classical indicators of competitiveness, namely quantitative and qualitative, but disclosed in relation to the assessment of the nature of their activities, they relate to logistical efficiency, and cost to economic.

Ivatanova N. P. and others ^[23] suggest using the principles of balanced economic activity when assessing the port's activities, assessing socio-ecological and economic regional risks from the port's activities. The stages of possible risk analysis are proposed, including verification, dynamics analysis, assessment of the likelihood of occurrence, the procedure for choosing preventive measures and the possibility of risk redistribution. The work is purely conceptual in nature and does not contain a specification of each stage.

At the same time, the analysis of the sources presented showed that there is no assessment methodology that allows analyzing the degree of satisfaction with the ports of requests and expectations of all groups of stakeholders. This can negatively affect the decisions taken in terms of ensuring the development of ports, as well as reduce the success of the interaction of all stakeholders, which can provide the necessary synergetic effect.

Considering the above, we can conclude that there is a shortage of tools that allow us to take into account the requests and expectations of each of the stakeholders when analyzing the dynamics of the port.

A hypothesis is put forward about the possibility of developing a tool that allows a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of the seaport, taking into account various aspects: economic, social, environmental.

The purpose of the study is to develop a methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of seaports, taking into account the requests and expectations of all groups of stakeholders.

To achieve this goal, it is necessary to solve the following tasks::

— create a list of indicators grouped by type of effectiveness and including the most relevant for each of the stakeholders;

— to propose an algorithm for finding an integral performance indicator based on the convolution of stakeholder performance indicators.

3. Methods and materials

To date, five marine basins have been identified in the Russian Federation: the Azov-Black Sea, the Arctic, the Baltic, the Far East, and the Caspian, in which 67 ports operate. Table 1 and Figure 1 show data on the total cargo turnover of seaports for five basins.

Table 1 — Total cargo turnover of Russian ports by marine basins, 2015-2023, million tons^[1]

Figure 1 — Total cargo turnover of Russian ports by sea basins, 2015-2023, million tons^[2]

As can be seen from Table 1, Figure 1, the largest volume of traffic falls on the ports of the Baltic and Azov-Black Sea basins, however, the importance of the ports of the Far Eastern basin is significantly increasing: over the period 2015-2023, cargo turnover increased by almost 70 billion tons. It is worth noting that in the current geopolitical conditions, the role of the Far Eastern Basin will continue to increase.

The Russian Far Eastern basin includes the following ports: Vladivostok, Vostochny, Zarubino, Nakhodka, Olga, Posyet, Vanino, De Kastri, Nikolaevsk-on-Amur, Okhotsk, Sovetskaya Gavan, Korsakov, Nevelsk, Prigorodnoye, Kholmsk, Shakhtersk, Magadan, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky. All of these ports are located on the coast of the Pacific Ocean, which has significant transport potential.

The cargo turnover of the ports of the Far Eastern basin is shown in Table 2, which shows that by the scale of activity, all the many ports can be divided into several groups based on the total cargo turnover of the port. Based on the data in Table 2, it is logical to divide the many ports of the Far Eastern basin into 3 clusters: large — the volume of cargo turnover of more than 25 million tons per year, medium — the volume of cargo turnover from 5 to 25 million tons per year, small — the volume of cargo turnover of less than 5 million tons per year.

Table 2 — Cargo turnover of ports of the Far East, 2015-2023, million tons^[3]

The "large" cluster will include the ports of Vladivostok, Vostochny, Vanino and Nakhodka, which occupy leading positions and provide the overwhelming share (more than 75%) of international and interregional cargo turnover.

The Sredniye cluster includes the ports of Posiet, De Kastri, Prigorodnoye, and Shakhtersk, which serve a limited cargo flow (18%), which indirectly indicates their regional importance.

Ports belonging to the "small" cluster, with a cargo turnover share of about 5%, play a local role and provide a limited contribution to the overall logistics of the region.

3.1 Methodology for conducting a comprehensive analysis of the port's performance

The issue of analyzing the performance of seaports is particularly relevant in the light of the modern challenges faced by the Russian economy. Accurate results of the port performance assessment will allow us to identify bottlenecks in time and apply adequate ways to eliminate them.

In the current market conditions, any business entity has certain relationships with various groups of stakeholders (government, owners, employees, partners, customers, society, etc.) that influence the exchange of resources with them, and, consequently, the effectiveness of activities. In this regard, when assessing the activities of ports, it makes sense to adhere to the concept of stakeholder management ^{[24, 25]}, which will allow, along with economic efficiency indicators, to take into account social and state significance, since the main condition for existence is the ability to meet the needs of a wide range of stakeholders.

In the proposed methodology, when assessing the port's activities, we will consider and take into account the requests and interests of the main stakeholders, which are:

a) "state" — government bodies at the federal and regional levels,

b) "society" — the population living directly on the territory of the port's influence,

c) the owners,

d) company staff,

e) partners.

Using this approach allows us to identify six areas of assessment of the port's performance: federal, regional, social, environmental, economic, and the port's effectiveness as an employer. Note that several types of efficiency may correspond to the needs of an individual stakeholder, for example, social and environmental efficiency are important to the "society" stakeholder. A comparison of the types of effectiveness and stakeholders is shown in Table 3. The set of types of effectiveness partially differs from the classification of research types given in the Literature Review section, which is not directly focused on the needs of stakeholders.

Using open data provided by Rosstat and reports from the Federal State Budgetary Institution Administration of Seaports of Primorsky Krai and the Eastern Arctic, Federal State Budgetary Institution AMP of the Sea of Okhotsk and the Tatar Strait, Federal State Budgetary Institution Administration of Seaports of Sakhalin, Kuril Islands and Kamchatka, as well as the online publication Center for Corporate Information Disclosure, we will determine a set of indicators for the assessment. presented in Table 3.

Table 3 — Comparison of efficiency types with indicators and stakeholders

The integral efficiency of the seaport at time t will be determined as follows:

(1)

where is the value of the indicator reflecting the efficiency of the port according to the jth type of significance. A power-law dependence on variables of significance models the saturation effect of efficiency on these variables.

Ratio (1) shows that the integral efficiency of a port is determined by its importance to all major stakeholders and takes into account synergetic effects. At the same time, the role of weighting coefficients of the importance of stakeholders is played by indicators of degrees aj. The importance of the port's activities for each stakeholder is determined in terms of influencing the interests of the stakeholder and satisfying his requests.

The value of each indicator is defined as a weighted average of the indicators corresponding to the indicator:

(2)

where is the normalized value of the i—th indicator of the j-th efficiency in the year t, is the importance of the i-th indicator from the point of view of the stakeholder, determined by the expert method.

To determine the weights of the indicators, their expert ranking is carried out in terms of significance in the jth type of effectiveness corresponding to a specific stakeholder, and the weights are calculated using the Fishburne formula.:

(3)

where m is the indicator number in descending order; Mj is the number of indicators for the jth type of effectiveness.

The normalization of the values of the indicators is carried out as follows:

(4)

where is the normalized value of the indicator per year t; j is the indicator number, j = 1, 2....J; i is the indicator number, i = 1,2......

4. Results

Based on the proposed author's methodology, the results for evaluating the effectiveness of ports were obtained, presented in tables 4-9 below. Due to the lack of data, the following ports were excluded from the general calculation: Olga, Nevelsk, Shakhtersk, Prigorodnoye.

Also, due to the fact that there are no environmental indicators for most ports, the first stage of testing was carried out for all ports without taking into account environmental efficiency.

For most types of efficiency, indicators are used in absolute units, and thus related to the scale of port activity, rather than reduced to relative units of measurement – per unit of cargo turnover, unit of personnel, etc. This is due to the need to consider the contribution of each port to meeting the needs of stakeholders, for whom absolute values are important. However, for a comparative analysis of ports, it makes sense to conduct it separately for large, medium and small ports.

Indicators of each type of efficiency are calculated according to (2) using the values of indicators normalized according to the formula (4) corresponding to this type of efficiency (see Table 3). The procedure for normalizing the values of the indicators according to (4) ensures correct comparability of the data. In order to take into account the different significance of individual indicators, the weighting coefficients were calculated according to formula (3) based on the results of the expert ranking of indicators.

Analyzing the dynamics of the federal efficiency of ports (Table 4), it can be noted:

– The Vostochny port demonstrates consistently high indicators, ranging from 0.553–0.993. The leadership is due to the consistently high volume of cargo turnover and significant tax deductions;

– strong growth in the performance of the port of Vladivostok in 2023: up to 0.693 after several years of stability at ~ 0.2. This is due to a significant increase in income tax compared to other ports in the Far East;

– the reduction of the federal income tax in the port of Vanino has led to a sharp decrease in the efficiency indicator, which has been at a fairly high level for a long time;

– The ports of Nakhodka and Posiet are stable in their performance, while both demonstrate positive dynamics in 2023 related to improved financial performance.

Table 4 – Federal efficiency of ports in the Far East

For the large ports group, it should be noted that the sharp increase in the federal efficiency indicator of the port of Vladivostok in 2023, with stable cargo turnover, is associated with a significant increase in the federal income tax. This requires additional analysis. A possible explanation is a change in the structure of cargo turnover. Vostochny Port also demonstrates a higher rate of profit growth compared to the growth rate of cargo turnover. The stable high performance of the port of Vanino until 2022 decreased sharply in 2023, due to a reduction in the federal income tax with stable cargo turnover.

In the "medium ports" group, the port of Poset shows the best performance. Its efficiency indicator has increased almost 2 times in 5 years, which is due to the growing deductions of the federal income tax and possibly due to the increase in labor productivity.

Thus:

– large ports (Vostochny, Vladivostok, Vanino, Nakhodka) provide the bulk of the federal efficiency of the region due to their cargo turnover and financial contribution;

– medium-sized ports demonstrate stability, but their contribution is limited compared to large ports;

– Small ports need strategic support to increase their efficiency, especially in terms of attracting cargo turnover and tax deductions.

Table 5 – Regional efficiency of ports in the Far East

An analysis of table 5 shows that the port of Vostochny has consistently high values in terms of regional efficiency. The port of Vladivostok has a failure in the range of 2020-2022 and an increase of about 15% in 2023 alone. This growth is associated with a significant increase in tax deductions to the regional budget – by about 2 times.

It should be noted that despite the fact that the cargo turnover of the port of Vladivostok is significantly less than the cargo turnover of the port of Vostochny (almost 3 times), due to the high level of contribution to the GRP of the region, the port of Vladivostok was able to practically approach the port of Vostochny in terms of regional efficiency. Apparently, this is due to the significant difference in the ratio between the export and import components of cargo turnover in these ports in 2023.

Comparing the regional efficiency of the ports of Vladivostok, Nakhodka and Vanino, we see that with a comparable cargo turnover, the regional efficiency of the port of Vladivostok is more than 2 times greater. This is due to the fact that the pre-tax profit of the port of Vladivostok in 2023 is almost 3 times higher, which is due to a significant difference in the structure of cargo turnover and activities. The drop in the indicator at the port of Nakhodka in 2022 is due to a sharp decrease in regional taxes.

In the "medium ports" group, the port of Poset shows the best performance. Its efficiency indicator grew steadily until 2022, the drop in the last year under study was associated with a decrease of about 10% in all indicators of this type of efficiency.

Table 6 – Social efficiency of ports in the Far East

Based on the data on social efficiency presented in table 6, the following conclusions can be drawn about the development of the Territory's social infrastructure and partnerships with society:

– The port of Vladivostok is a stable leader both in general and in the large ports group. This is due to the high level of the average salary and, consequently, significant contributions to social funds.;

– the high importance of the social efficiency of the port of Magadan (at the level of the port of Vladivostok) is explained by the rather high salary of the staff, as well as the information openness of information about charity expenses;

– a decrease in the social efficiency of the port of Nakhodka is associated with a low growth rate of the average PO;

– the ports of De-Kastri and Nikolaevsk-on-Amur have extremely low values, which indicates insufficient attention to the welfare of personnel and the development needs of adjacent territories.

Table 7 – Economic efficiency of the ports of the Far East

An analysis of the values of the economic efficiency indicator presented in Table 7 shows that the group of "large" ports of Vostochny and Vladivostok are the leaders by a wide margin. This is due to both the large net profit and the high level of profitability. The profitability level of the ports of Nakhodka and Vanino is 1.5 times lower, which affects economic efficiency. The failure of the port of Nakhodka in 2022 is explained by the low level of profit and profitability of only 4%.

The medium-sized ports of Posiet and De Kastri have stable averages, which indicates stability and potential for growth.

In the "small" group, the ports of Nikolaevsk-on-Amur, Okhotsk, and Sovetskaya Gavan have been teetering on the brink of loss from activity throughout the entire period under review, which determines near-zero values of economic efficiency. The rest of the ports in this group have a low level of profit related to the volume of their cargo turnover, however, they are quite financially stable.

Table 8 – Efficiency of the ports of the Far East as an employer

The leaders in terms of efficiency as an employer (Table 8) by a significant margin are the ports of Vladivostok and Vostochny, which have consistently high rates throughout the period. The low rates of the ports of Nakhodka and Vanino are explained by a significantly lower staff salary (approximately 1.5 times). Moderate values were recorded in the ports of Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Korsakov and Kholmsk. All of these ports have the potential to grow as employers. The ports of Sovetskaya Gavan, Nikolaevsk-on-Amur, De-Kastri and Okhotsk have minimal values, which indicates a low level of personnel policy of the enterprise.

Based on the data presented in Tables 4-8, the values of the integral efficiency indicator are calculated. The results are shown in table 9.

Table 9 — Integral indicator of the efficiency of ports in the Far East

The integral indicator combines various aspects of the port's activities (federal, regional, social, environmental, economic, as an employer), which allows us to draw conclusions about its integrated effectiveness.:

– Vladivostok and Vostochny are the leaders in the integral indicator among the major ports. The leadership of the port of Vladivostok is due to the high results in all categories, especially in terms of social and federal effectiveness. Vostochny Port stands out in the categories of federal and regional efficiency. The port of Nakhodka demonstrates average performance, which indicates the need for the port's top management to pay much more attention to the development strategy. The port of Vanino has a rather low value in 2023, which may be due to a change in the structure of cargo turnover and a focus on the domestic market.;

– among the "medium" and "small" ports, the maximum indicators are demonstrated by the ports of Posiet and Magadan, which are actively improving their financial and personnel policies, which indicates the potential for their development and increasing importance for stakeholders.;

– the remaining ports show low values in the integrated efficiency indicator. In this regard, the management of these ports requires additional analysis to develop the necessary strategic solutions.

For the ports of Vladivostok, Posyet, Vanino, Magadan, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky in the period 2018-2023, there are data necessary for calculating environmental efficiency. Table 10 shows the environmental performance results for these ports over the specified time interval.

The normalization of the environmental efficiency indicator is carried out according to the formula:

(5)

Table 10 — Environmental efficiency of some ports in the Far Eastern basin

The ports of Magadan and Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky show the highest rates. Such indicators have been achieved due to relatively low CO2 emissions compared to other ports. The remaining three ports show average results associated with high levels of CO2 emissions, which requires additional measures to reduce them.

Table 11 shows the adjusted results of the consolidated integrated efficiency indicator for these 5 ports, taking into account the environmental component.

Table 11 — Integral indicator of the efficiency of the ports of the Far East, taking into account environmental efficiency

The least noticeable changes occurred at the Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky port, for which consideration of environmental indicators did not significantly reduce the integral indicator. This is due to the low values of the carbon footprint, which positively influenced the final assessment. At the same time, for the remaining ports, the inclusion of environmental efficiency has led to a more significant deterioration in their overall results, which underscores the importance of an integrated approach to port performance assessment.

In general, it should be noted that the use of the stakeholder approach and the proposed methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of the seaport allows for a comprehensive understanding of their importance for the socio-economic development of the region and the country as a whole. This approach helps to identify the key success factors of the port, take into account the interests of all stakeholder groups and identify areas for further improvement of port management methods for their balanced development, including taking into account the ESG concept.

5. Discussion

In most of the works devoted to the study of the effectiveness of the seaport, the authors separately consider approaches corresponding to economic, logistical, environmental and social areas, each of which has its own indicators and characteristics. A very small number of papers simultaneously consider two areas.

Works considering the economic approach ^{[1, 2, 3, 4]}, They focus on the port's contribution to GRP, attracting investments and ensuring economic growth. At the same time, the assessment of the port's functioning only taking into account the economic effect is not broad enough and does not take into account other important aspects.

The authors, who adhere to the logistic approach, focus on optimizing cargo flows, increasing maritime connectivity, managing the degree of specialization and inventory, and integrating information systems.

Recently, the ecological approach has become widespread. The researchers studying it ^{[11, 12, 13, 14]} emphasize the importance of achieving "green goals", focus on assessing the environmental impact of ports and the ability to minimize the negative consequences of their activities. The authors of ^[12] propose the concept of "green ports" and a method for assessing port sustainability, linking technical parameters with environmental indicators. However, the environmental factor should not be the only criterion for evaluating efficiency, as ports play an important role in the socio-economic development of territories.

Another approach that can be highlighted is the social one, which draws attention to the social responsibility of the port, its contribution to providing employment for the working-age population and improving the quality of life of local communities. The social approach to assessing the port's activities is rarely used, but it is no less important, as it recognizes as one of the key roles of the port not only as an economic facility, but also as an important element of the social infrastructure of the region.

At the same time, the authors usually consider one approach that allows them to take into account the satisfaction of the requests of one particular group of port stakeholders, which can affect the decisions made and the interaction of participants, as well as lead to negative consequences in essential areas.

In this regard, the most promising, in our opinion, is an integrated approach that combines all the many aspects of evaluating the port's activities, and, considering the requests of the main stakeholders, allows us to get a better understanding of the effectiveness of work based on an analysis of relationships with stakeholders that determine the quality of resource exchange with them. An integrated approach takes into account economic, environmental and social aspects, which allows, firstly, to take into account synergetic effects, and secondly, based on the identification of strengths and weaknesses, to identify areas for sustainable port development, taking into account the impact on the environment and public benefit.

It should be noted that the federal and regional authorities have their own differing interests in the development of port activities in the region. This means that the division of the "state" stakeholder into two groups is justified: "federal government" and "regional government", the degree of satisfaction of which is given by federal and regional efficiency.

Thus, this work is based on the theoretical basis of previous research, but it is aimed at developing a new tool that allows taking into account the interests of all stakeholders, taking into account their importance, comprehensively assessing the impact of the port on the surrounding area and developing strategic and tactical management decisions that lead to balanced satisfaction of stakeholders' expectations.

The proposed methodology was tested at the ports of the Far Eastern basin and allowed us to gain a detailed understanding of the importance of seaports for the socio-economic development of the regions, identify the main success factors of the port infrastructure, take into account the interests of all participants in the process and outline ways for further improvement and sustainable growth.

Based on the above, we can conclude that the proposed method is a functional tool that allows us to take into account the main aspects of the influence of ports on the territory. Therefore, it can be considered that the formed hypothesis is confirmed.

Conclusions

This article is a study aimed at developing a methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of seaports using a stakeholder approach. In the modern world, ports play a key role in global supply chains and have a significant impact on the socio-economic development of regions. On the other hand, seaports not only ensure economic growth and attract investment, but also affect the environmental situation and social well-being of the local population. Therefore, the traditional approach based solely on economic indicators can no longer fully reflect the complexity and variety of functions performed by modern ports, and there is a need to create comprehensive methods for evaluating their activities.

The indicators proposed in the article for assessing the effectiveness of ports cover a wide range of parameters, ranging from social and regional efficiency to the effectiveness of ports as employers and their environmental impact. This makes the methodology universal and applicable to different types of ports, regardless of their size and specifics of activity.

An important innovation of the methodology is the calculation of an integral performance indicator that takes into account the interests of all stakeholders. This approach avoids a one-sided assessment and ensures that all stakeholders are taken into account when making decisions regarding the development of ports. This is especially important in the context of sustainable development, when it is necessary to find a balance between economic interests, environmental safety and social well-being.

Thus, the proposed methodology is an important tool for evaluating and improving the operation of seaports. It promotes their sustainable development and positive impact on the environment and the public good. The implementation of this methodology will help ports adapt to modern challenges and remain competitive in a rapidly changing world.

^[1] Source: compiled by the authors according to Portnews.

^[2] Source: compiled by the authors according to Portnews.

^[3] Source: compiled by the authors according to Portnews.