Abstract

Inland Container Depots (ICDs) extend seaport capacity but often shift congestion inland. This study investigates how port-to-ICD logistical bottlenecks prolong customs-clearance at EX NASACO ICD in Dar es Salaam. Using a convergent mixed-methods design, 80 stakeholders (customs officers, freight forwarders, depot managers, traders) completed a five-item logistical-inefficiency survey (Cronbach’s α = .82). Descriptive statistics showed high means for arrival-pattern variability (µ = 4.16) and coordination gaps (µ = 4.03). Pearson’s correlation linked inefficiency to clearance time (r = .66, p < .01), and an OLS regression found each one-point inefficiency increase adds 0.28 days (~6.7 hours) to dwell time (β = .28, p = .001; adjusted R² = .56). Fifteen semi-structured interviews revealed fragmented scheduling, agency silos, and yard under-utilization as key delay drivers. Triangulation confirms that asynchronous release-note uploads and misaligned truck-slot assignments generate systemic delays that equipment investments alone cannot solve. The study recommends implementing a shared digital slot-booking dashboard, establishing a joint operations centre for real-time coordination, and adopting a port community system to synchronize workflows measures projected to cut average clearance by one-third and enhance regional trade facilitation.

Keywords

  • Port-to-ICD Linkage
  • Logistical Inefficiency
  • Customs Clearance Delays
  • Slot-Booking System
  • EX NASACO ICD

References

  1. Arvis, J.-F., Ojala, L., & Shepherd, B. (2018). Connectivity for international trade: A review of key issues. World Bank.
  2. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE.
  3. Denzin, N. K. (2012). Triangulation 2.0. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 80–88.
  4. Eliakunda, E., Kachwamba, O., & Luhanga, J. (2018). Customs clearance and trade facilitation in Tanzania. Journal of Transport and Supply Chain Management, 12(1), 1–10.
  5. Heaver, T. D., Meersman, H., & Van de Voorde, E. (2000). Co-operation and competition in international container transport: Research directions. Maritime Policy & Management, 27(3), 235–245.
  6. KenTrade. (2022). Mombasa ICD slot-booking pilot report. Kenya Trade Network Agency.
  7. Kothari, C. R. (2014). Research methodology: Methods and techniques (3rd ed.). New Age International.
  8. Mlinga, J., & Mahembe, B. (2014). Inland container depots and port performance: Evidence from Tanzania. African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, 5(2), 200–213.
  9. Mugisha, E. J. (2025). Assessment on the challenges facing effective customs clearance of goods at inland container depot (ICD): A case of EX NASACO ICD (Unpublished master’s thesis). Dar es Salaam Maritime Institute.
  10. Notteboom, T., & Rodrigue, J.-P. (2005). Port regionalization: Towards a new phase in port development. Maritime Policy & Management, 32(3), 297–313.
  11. Oduro, R., & Boateng, E. (2020). Institutional barriers to port competitiveness: Lessons from Ghana. Journal of Transport Economics, 16(1), 45–62.
  12. Saghafian, S., & Fu, M. C. (2016). Dynamics of multiple-server queue with working vacations. Queueing Systems, 82(1), 1–24.
  13. Saghafian, S., & Oh, H. (2020). Scheduling and rescheduling of port operations. European Journal of Operational Research, 284(3), 993–1003.
  14. Suykens, F., & Van de Voorde, E. (1998). Container terminal performance: Does the academic literature reflect industry priorities? Maritime Policy & Management, 25(1), 43–53.
  15. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. SAGE.
  16. World Bank. (2023). Logistics performance index 2023. World Bank Group.
  17. Zhang, A., & Marlow, P. B. (2022). Evaluating the impact of port slot booking systems on container terminal efficiency. Maritime Economics & Logistics, 24(4), 562–585.