Ports — Business Case

The case for a port adopting verifiable trade documents — but first, which kind of port?

Two kinds of “port” — only one owns value levers. A cargo-terminal / port operator handles containers and cargo and runs a port community system; verifiable upstream documents cut dwell time, re-keying, and disputes, so it owns levers ① and ⑥. A port authority / navigation-safety regulator (vessel traffic services, pilotage, channel management) handles no cargo and issues no trade documents — it owns no value lever. For one of those, the honest case is to re-target to the cargo-terminal operators, logistics providers, and customs that actually capture the value (see the wrong-entity rule in the Assessment Methodology).

Where the value comes from (cargo-terminal operator)

Cost of trade ① — less documentary friction and faster cargo throughput (Transport & Logistics).
Operational efficiency ⑥ — verified data flows into the port community system without re-keying.
National productivity ⑤ (contributes) — feeds the country roll-up; the operator captures no revenue lever of its own.

A port authority / navigation-safety body owns none of these directly — its value is the national throughput it enables, counted at the operators it serves.

What it costs

A one-time verifier integration into port community systems. Decentralised model — no platform membership or per-transaction fees.

Payback

An operational case: a modest integration cost against recurring throughput and handling-cost gains. Framed as public competitiveness rather than P&L.

Generate your business case

Light — attach your port throughput / dwell-time statistics or the port authority annual report, then paste the prompt below into a browsing-capable frontier model (ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini). It fetches the UNVTD method and returns a 4–8 page draft; ask it to convert to Word.

Full — for exact, data-grounded figures, clone the repository and run Claude over the per-country data. See the generation guide.

Copy the Light prompt


You are preparing a first-draft UNVTD business case for the port whose document(s) are attached. First determine which kind of port it is (see METHOD) — a cargo-terminal operator or a navigation/safety authority — because only the former owns value levers.

INPUTS
1. Attached document(s) — extract cargo volumes (TEU / tonnes), average dwell/clearance times, handling costs, and any digitisation context. Where a figure is absent, use the benchmark defaults on the methodology page and say so.
   No document? Paste the port's website — WEBSITE: __________ (e.g. https://exampleport.com). The model looks up the port's country, throughput, and operator type, then produces an illustrative estimate from the country's context (Evidence section: https://unvtd.unece.org/evidence/) and typical assumptions for a port of that size — clearly flagged as indicative. If neither a document nor a website is given, ask the user.
2. Fetch these UNVTD pages (and follow their links):
   - Method: https://unvtd.unece.org/business-cases/assessment-methodology/
   - This stakeholder's case: https://unvtd.unece.org/business-cases/ports/
   - Scenario: https://unvtd.unece.org/use-cases/transport-logistics/

METHOD
First determine the port type. A CARGO-TERMINAL / PORT OPERATOR (handles cargo, runs a port community system) owns levers ① cost of trade (throughput, dwell time) and ⑥ operational efficiency — apply the Assessment Methodology attribution chain, UNVTD/GRID share (45%, range 30–60%), adoption scenarios, and cost model. A PORT AUTHORITY / NAVIGATION-SAFETY REGULATOR (vessel traffic, pilotage, channel management — no cargo, no documents) owns NO value lever: do NOT fabricate throughput figures. Instead state plainly that the value accrues to the cargo-terminal operators, logistics providers, and customs it serves, and RE-TARGET the business case to them (per the wrong-entity rule in the methodology).

RULES
- Be conservative — lower end of every range unless the attached document justifies higher.
- Show your working; every monetary figure is a range.
- Confidence (High/Medium/Low) per benefit; conservative / base / optimistic scenarios.
- Assess ecosystem readiness — port community system, carrier/forwarder digitisation.
- Plain markdown; end by telling the reader to convert to Word.

OUTPUT — a 4–8 page business case: 1) Executive summary; 2) Port profile; 3) Why verifiable trade matters to the port; 4) Estimated benefits (cost of trade, efficiency, with confidence + scenarios); 5) Estimated cost (verifier integration into port community systems); 6) Payback, NPV, ROI; 7) Implementation roadmap (Discovery → Alpha → Beta → Live); 8) Assumptions, methodology & references; 9) Next steps.

If you cannot browse the web, use Full mode instead (clone the repository; the full method and per-country data are local).

Learn more

Assessment Methodology · Transport & Logistics scenario · Implementation Model · related: Country