FEATURES OF THE DIGITAL FREIGHT TRANSPORT ECOSYSTEM: COMPARISON OF THE EU AND UKRAINE EXPERIENCE

DOI:10.31673/2415-8089.2025.043801

Abstract

This article develops an integrated framework for systematizing the European and Ukrainian
experience of freight transport digitalization by articulating the complementarity of three layers: the
electronic consignment notes for road transport (eCMR) as the logistics layer, the electronic Freight
Transport Information (eFTI) as the regulatory channel, and customs/maritime Single Window as the
organizational node. The study sets out to establish a coherent model that aligns data interoperability
requirements with governance arrangements and operational performance indicators across ports
and road freight. The research design combines a protocolized systematic review (PRISMA‑2020),
comparative case analysis, and institutional reasoning about data stewardship in
business‑to‑government ecosystems. The evidence base consists of peer‑reviewed journal articles
published between 2020 and 2025 and indexed by Scopus or Web of Science, each assigned a DOI.
The proposed three‑layer model explains how eCMR provides the minimal data backbone for
transport execution, eFTI creates a legally binding channel for accepting regulatory information in
digital form across all transport modes, and Single Windows operate as multi‑agency gateways that
orchestrate submission, routing, and feedback. The article formalizes stewardship configurations
(public leadership, co‑leadership, and regulatory leadership) and clarifies their implications for
transaction costs, auditability, and incentives for voluntary information sharing by firms. Within
seaports, Port Community Systems are positioned as the operational integration layer interlinked
with Maritime Single Window/EMSWe; in road freight, platform typologies (marketplaces, visibility
services, planning optimizers, analytics) are mapped to the minimal eCMR/eFTI datasets to enable
event‑driven process reuse without redundant data entry. The article also delineates a KPI set that
connects data quality and event models with measurable improvements—such as vessel turnaround
time, slot accuracy, community acceptance, declaration processing time, and firm‑level efficiency—
showing their dependence on interoperable data profiles. The contribution lies in synthesizing data
governance mechanisms with semantic alignment of messages and identifying a phased
implementation pathway for countries harmonizing with EU acquis. For Ukraine, the paper
recommends a staged approach that prioritizes data profile mapping, event‑oriented processes, and
neutral data operators in ports, together with capacity‑building and targeted incentives. The
framework offers a replicable basis for policymakers and managers to orchestrate digital freight
ecosystems, align stakeholders around shared data assets, and monitor performance through a
compact yet meaningful KPI suite.
Keywords: digital ecosystem, logistics infrastructure, eCMR; eFTI; Single Window; Port
Community System; data interoperability; data management; logistics KPIs.

References
1. Balić, K., Stočko, D., & Delchev, D. (2022). The port system in addressing sustainability
issues—A systematic literature review. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 10(8), 1048.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse10081048
2. Brunila, O.-P., Inkinen, T., Tapaninen, U., Hämäläinen, E., & Saarikoski, J. (2021).
Hindrances in port digitalization? Identifying problems in the digitalization of Finnish ports.
European Transport Research Review, 13, 24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-021-00523-0
3. Caldeirinha, V., Felício, J., Dooms, M., & Carlan, V. (2022). Port Community Systems:
Accelerating the transition of the maritime supply chain. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering,
10(2), 152. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse10020152
4. Dasaklis, T. K., Kopanaki, E., Chountalas, P. T., Rachaniotis, N. P., Voutsinas, T. G.,
Giannakis, K., & Chondrokoukis, G. (2024). Exploring the implementation challenges of the
Electronic Freight Transport Information (eFTI) Regulation: An empirical perspective from Greece.
Logistics, 8(1), 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics8010030
5. Fahim, P. B. M., Nguyen, H. O., & Fahim, M. (2024). Alignment of port policy to the context
of the Physical Internet. Maritime Policy & Management.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2022.2147594
6. Felício, J. A., Batista, M., Dooms, M., & Caldeirinha, V. (2023). How do sustainable port
practices influence local communities’ perceptions of ports? Maritime Economics & Logistics.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-022-00237-7
7. Gavalas, D., Syriopoulos, T., & Roumpis, E. (2022). Digital adoption and efficiency in the
maritime industry. Journal of Shipping and Trade, 7, 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41072-022-00111-
y
8. Heikkilä, M., Kandjani, A., & Suominen, A. (2022). Innovation in Smart Ports: Future
directions of digitalization. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 10(12), 1925.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse10121925
9. Heinbach, C., Beinke, J. H., Kammler, F., & Thomas, O. (2022). Data-driven forwarding: A
typology of digital platforms for road freight transport management. Electronic Markets, 32(2), 807–
828. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00540-4
10. Iida, J., & Watanabe, D. (2023). Focal points for the development and operation of port
community system—A case study of development history in Japan. Asian Transport Studies, 9,
100116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eastsj.2023.100116
11. Inkinen, T., Helminen, R., & Saarikoski, J. (2021). Technological trajectories and scenarios
in seaport digitalization. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 41, 100633.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2021.100633
12. Ivanov, D. (2020). Predicting the impacts of epidemic outbreaks on global supply chains: A
simulation-based analysis on the coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2) case.
Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 136, 101922.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2020.101922
13. Jarumaneeroj, P., Mardani, A., & Kabir, G. (2024). An evolution of the Global Container
Shipping Network. Maritime Economics & Logistics. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-023-00273-x
14. Jović, M., Tijan, E., Aksentijević, S., & Pucihar, A. (2024). Assessing the digital
transformation in the maritime transport sector: A case study of Croatia. Journal of Marine Science
and Engineering, 12(4), 634. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12040634
15. Kervall, M., & Pålsson, H. (2022). Barriers to change in urban freight systems: A
technological-institutional perspective. European Transport Research Review, 14, 29.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00553-2
16. Lee, C., & Lee, S. (2024). Expanding IMO Compendium with NAVTEX messages for
Maritime Single Window. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 12(12), 2328.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12122328
17. Moros-Daza, A., Amaya-Mier, R., & Paternina-Arboleda, C. (2020). Port Community
Systems: A structured literature review. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 133,
27–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.12.021
18. Mthembu, S. E., & Chasomeris, M. G. (2022). A systems approach to developing a port
community system: A South African case. Journal of Shipping and Trade, 7, 26.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41072-022-00128-3
19. Orzechowski, S. C., van Hassel, E., & Sys, C. (2024). Regulatory scope of maritime
autonomous surface ships (MASS) in inland shipping: Implications for ports. Journal of Shipping and
Trade, 9, 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41072-023-00160-x
20. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ...
& Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic
reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
21. Pan, S., Trentesaux, D., Ballot, E., Huang, G. Q., & Lam, D. (2021). Smart city for sustainable
urban freight logistics: A review. International Journal of Production Research, 59(7), 2041–2063.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2021.1893970
22. Peynirci, E. (2021). The rise of emerging technologies: A quantitative-based research on
“maritime single window” in Turkey. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 46,
100770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2021.100770
23. Raza, Z., Woxenius, J., Vural, C. A., & Lind, M. (2023). Digital transformation of maritime
logistics: Exploring trends in the liner shipping segment. Computers in Industry, 145, 103811.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2022.103811
24. Rukanova, B., Henningsson, S., Henriksen, H. Z., & Tan, Y.-H. (2023). Public value creation
through voluntary business-to-government information sharing: Mechanisms and enabling
conditions. Government Information Quarterly, 40(1), 101786.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101786
25. Tijan, E., Jović, M., Panjako, A., & Žgaljić, D. (2021). The role of port authority in port
governance and Port Community System implementation. Sustainability, 13(5), 2795.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052795
26. Tomicová, J., Poliak, M., & Zhuravleva, N. (2021). Impact of using e-CMR on neutralization
of consignment note. Transportation Research Procedia, 55, 1278–1285.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2021.06.012
27. van Donge, W., Bharosa, N., & Janssen, M. (2022). Data-driven government: Cross-case
comparison of data stewardship in data ecosystems. Government Information Quarterly, 39(2),
101642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101642
28. Wen, X., Chen, Q., Yin, Y.-Q., Lau, Y.-Y., & Dulebenets, M. A. (2024). Multi-objective
optimization for ship scheduling with port congestion and environmental considerations. Journal of
Marine Science and Engineering, 12(1), 114. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12010114
29. Yap, W. Y., & Ho, J. (2023). Port strategy and performance: Empirical evidence from major
container ports and implications for the role of data analytics. Maritime Policy & Management, 50(5),
608–628. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2021.2017040
30. Čerin, P., Perić Hadžić, A., & Žgaljić, D. (2023). Digitalisation of the port community through
the development of advanced port communication systems (PCSs): A case study of the Port of Koper.
Sustainability, 16(1), 348. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010348