Hierarchical modelling of volatility spillovers in ship demolition markets


  • Abdullah Açik Dokuz Eylül University, Maritime Faculty, Department of Maritime Business Administration, Buca, İzmir, Turkey




ship demolition, price behaviour, volatility spillover, hierarchic structure


he offered demolition prices are as important as the freight rates in the market in shipowners' decisions to send their ships for demolition. This study aims to determine the most affected and the most affecting countries in the ship demolition market by examining the hierarchical price movements among the prices offered for demolition in major centres around the world. In this direction, integrated causality in variance, Interpretative Structural Modeling (ISM) and MICMAC (Matrices d’Impacts cross-multiplication appliqúe a classmate) analysis are used. According to the obtained results, the price dependence on Turkey is the lowest, while the price dependence in Bangladesh is the highest. Volatility in the market is spreading to other markets from Turkey. These results are thought to be useful in understanding price behaviour in the ship demolition industry, which is a relatively small market.


Açık, A., Baran, E., 2019, The Reflection of Ship Demolition Prices to Construction Costs in Turkey, Marine Science and Technology Bulletin, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 23–29.

2. Açık, A., Başer, S.Ö., 2017, The Relationship Between Freight Revenues and Vessel Disposal Decisions, Ekonomi, Politika & Finans Araştırmaları Dergisi, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 96–112.

3. Açık, A., Başer, S.Ö., 2018a, The Impact of Freight Rates on the Second-Hand Ship Price Bubbles: An Application on the Panamax Market, İzmir International Congress on Economics and Administrative Sciences, pp. 629–643, İzmir, Turkey.

4. Açık, A., Başer, S.Ö., 2018b, Market Efficiency in Ship Demolition Prices, International Conference on Empirical Economics and Social Sciences, pp. 780–792, Bandırma, Turkey.

5. Açık, A., Başer, S.Ö., 2019, Price Volatility Spillover in Ship Demolition Markets, Optimum: Journal of Economics & Management Sciences, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 311–322.

6. Açık, A., Kesiktaş, H.H.İ., Başer, S.Ö., 2020, Role of Interest Rates on Fleet Capacity Adjustment Decisions of Shipowners, Ekonomi Politika ve Finans Araştırmaları Dergisi, vol. 5, no, 1, pp. 66–80.

7. Alizadeh, A., Nomikos, N., 2009, Shipping Derivatives and Risk Management, Macmillian, London.

8. Başer, S.Ö., Açık, A., 2018, The Response of Shipbuilding Activities to Freight Rates, Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 120–136.

9. Bayat, T., Nazlioglu, S., Kayhan, S., 2015, Exchange Rate and Oil Price Interactions in Transition Economies: Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland, Panoeconomicus, vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 267–285.

10. Buxton, I.L., 1991, The Market for Ship Demolition, Maritime Policy & Management, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 105–112.

11. Cheung, Y.W., Ng, L.K., 1996, A Causality-In-Variance Test and Its Application to Financial Market Prices, Journal of Econometrics, vol. 72, no. 1–2, pp. 33–48.

12. Chuang, H.M., Lin, C.K., Chen, D.R., Chen, Y.S., 2013, Evolving MCDM Applications Using Hybrid Expert-Based ISM and DEMATEL Models: An Example of Sustainable Ecotourism, The Scientific World Journal, pp. 1–18.

13. Granger, C.W., 1969, Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Models and Cross-Spectral Methods, Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 424–438.

14. Hafner, C.M., Herwartz, H., 2006, A Lagrange Multiplier Test for Causality in Variance, Economics Letters, vol. 93, no. 1, pp. 137–141.

15. Harwood, S., 2008, Shipping Finance (3rd Ed), Euromoney Books, London.

16. Kagkarakis, N.D., Merikas, A.G., Merika, A., 2016, Modelling and Forecasting the Demolition Market in Shipping, Maritime Policy Management, vol. 43, no. 8, pp. 1021–1035.

17. Knapp, S., Kumar, S.N., Remijn, A.B., 2008, Econometric Analysis of the Ship Demolition Market, Maritime Policy&Management, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 1023–1036.

18. Koopmans, T.C., 1939, Tanker Freight Rates and Tankship Building: An Analysis of Cyclical Fluctuations, De Erven F. Bohn nv.

19. Koseoglu, S.D., Cevik, E.I., 2013, Testing for Causality in Mean and Variance Between the Stock Market and the Foreign Exchange Market: An Application to the Major Central and Eastern European Countries, Finance a Uver, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 65–86.

20. Luthra, S., Garg, D., Haleem, A., 2015, An Analysis of Interactions Among Critical Success Factors to Implement Green Supply Chain Management Towards Sustainability: An Indian Perspective, Resources Policy, vol. 46, pp. 37–50.

21. Nazlioglu, S., Erdem, C., Soytas, U., 2013, Volatility Spillover Between Oil and Agricultural Commodity Markets, Energy Economics, vol. 36, pp. 658–665.

22. Nazlioglu, S., Gormuş, A., Soytas, U., 2016, Oil Prices and Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs): Gradual-Shift Causality and Volatility Transmission Analysis, Energy Economics, vol. 60, pp. 168–175.

23. Nouira R., Amor T.H., Rault C., 2019, Oil Price Fluctuations and Exchange Rate Dynamics in the MENA Region: Evidence from Non-Causality-In-Variance and Asymmetric Non-Causality Tests, Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, vol. 73, pp. 159–171.

24. Randers, J., Göluke, U., 2007, Forecasting Turning Points in Shipping Freight Rates: Lessons from 30 Years of Practical Effort, System Dynamics Review, vol. 23, no. 2-3, pp. 253–284.

25. Rodrigue, J.P., 2013, Transport and Globalization, [in:] Rodrigue, J.P., Notteboom, T., Shaw, J. (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Transport Studies, pp. 17–30, Sage, London.

26. Sage, A.P., 1977, Interpretive Structural Modeling: Methodology for Large-scale Systems, McGraw-Hill, New York.

27. Saraf, M., Stuer-Lauridsen, F., Dyoulgerov, M., Bloch, R., Wingfield, S., Watkinson, R., 2010, Ship Breaking and Recycling Industry in Bangladesh and Pakistan, The World Bank Washington.

28. Stopford, M., 2009, Maritime Economics, Routledge, London – New York.

29. Sun, X., Haralambides, H., Liu, H., 2019, Dynamic Spillover Effects Among Derivative Markets in Tanker Shipping, Transportation Research Part E, vol. 122, pp. 384–409.

30. Taylor, A.J., 1974, The Dynamics of Supply and Demand in Shipping, Dynamica, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 62–71.

31. Tunç, M., Açik, A., 2019, The Impact of Steel Price on Ship Demolition Prices: Evidence from Heterogeneous Panel of Developing Countries, Sosyoekonomi, vol. 27, no. 42, pp. 227–240.

32. Wilmsmeier, G., 2014, International Maritime Transport Costs: Market Structures and Network Configurations, Ashgate, UK.

33. Yin, J., Fan, L., 2018, Survival Analysis of the World Ship Demolition Market, Transport Policy, vol. 63, pp. 141–156.

34. Yudatama, U.K.Y., Hidayanto, A.N., Nazief, B.A.A., 2018, Approach Using Interpretive Structural Model (ISM) to Determine Key Sub-Factors at Factors: Benefits, Risk Reductions, Opportunities and Obstacles in Awareness IT Governance, Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, vol. 96, no. 16, pp. 5537–5549.

35. Athenian Shipbrokers S.A., 2020, Demolition Prices by Country, https://www.atheniansa.gr/ (20.04.2020).

36. UNCTAD, 2020, Ship Scrapping by Country of Demolition, httpshttps://unctadstat.unctad.org/wds/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=89492 (08.10.2020).




How to Cite

Açik, A. (2021). Hierarchical modelling of volatility spillovers in ship demolition markets. Scientific Journal of Gdynia Maritime University, 1(117), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.26408/117.01