Submitted by: Submitted by walilei
Views: 66
Words: 250
Pages: 1
Category: Business and Industry
Date Submitted: 05/03/2014 07:42 AM
142
(Logistics Performance Index)
2009 11 APEC APEC APEC
(
(Logistics Performance Index,LPI) 2010 ) 1,000 1 5 1
5
2007 2009 (Turku School of Economics (TSE)) 5,000 155 LPI
(LPI)
5. 6.
)
) UPS LPI (International LPI) (Domestic LPI)
(
(
(
))
(
) (Level of Fees and Charges)
(Customs) competence) (Timeliness)
(Infrastructure) (Logistics (Tracking & tracing)
(Competence and Quality of Services) (Sources of Major Delays) 2005) (Efficiency of Processes) 2005
(Quality of Infrastructure)
(International shipments)
(Changes in the Logistics Environment Since
130
1,000
(
2007
25%) )
(LPI Survey)
(
1. 2. ) 3. 4. ( (
LPI Survey 2009
142
(1) 2005
6
( ( )
(2)
8
8
7
6
(4) 8 (8 ) ( a. )
7
(Efficiency of the clearance process )( )
(5) b.
of formalities by border control agencies) and transport related infrastructure)( ) c.
(p r e d i c t a b i l i t y
(Q u a l i t y o f t r a d e
priced shipments) ( f.
(Ease of arranging competitively d. (a u t o m a t e d r i s k
(Competence and quality of logistics services) (Ability to track and trace consignments) ) e.
assessment) Yes No N/A
2005
Do not know
4
(Inspector discretion)
is it easier or more complicated to comply with the cargo security requirements (i.e. screening, advance information)when arranging shipments to:) (reach the consignee ( g. 155 ( )
(Compared to the situation in year 2005,
within the scheduled or expected delivery time) ) (
7
)
6 tionnaire.pdf
(3)
INTTLF/Resources/Logistics_Performance_2009_Ques
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/