# Knowledge Mapping Analysis of Intelligent Ports: Research Facing Global Value Chain Challenges
## 3 Results
### Intellectual Structure
#### 3.1.4 Latest Work Continuing the Intellectual Legacy  
Several related papers were published in 2022, although with a low LCS and GCS due to the short time available to receive citations, revealing how the intellectual legacy of the past was carried in 2022. They have been published in _Maritime Policy & Management_[73; 75], _Maritime Economics & Logistics_[86], _Sustainability_[72; 87], and _Computer Standards & Interfaces_[88], and are discussed below. Continuing the intellectual legacy in strategic decision-making, a paper by [PERSON] et al. [73] proposed a strategic policy tool, illustrated by a case study, for the digitalization of smart ports to optimize the \"in-, intra- and outbound flow of goods and information.\" This definition can facilitate the capabilities of the extended port community of practice, using enabling technologies to achieve sustainable development and ensure resilient, secure, and safe operations. Adding further value to the research on quality decision-making, a paper by [PERSON] et al. [75] on digital empowerment for shipping proposeda smart shipping index system, based on a combination of a literature review and the Delphi method. In this system, the domain of smart ports is categorized as one of the four main domains, along with smart waterways, smart ships, and maritime intelligence. The decision-making processes can be empowered by digital systems if the stakeholders are involved in making decisions that increase efficiency, minimize costs, and reduce environmental footprints. According to the expert opinions reported in this paper, among the four domains considered, the smart ports domain is critical to achieve smart shipping. Both papers indicate the continuous push for greener, more reliable, and sustainable activities surrounding smart port development in the broader community of practice concerning the logistics information and smart shipping. Succeeding on the legacy of the IoT [58] and Industry 4.0 [34] perspectives, the 2022 review work by [PERSON] [86] further developed a smart port architecture. By filling the gap in specifying the underlying architecture, this paper synthesized core concepts, designs, and specific monitoring milestones using content analysis. It argued that successful smart ports must improve asset utilization, reduce response time, and enhance logistics visibility. Five key factors were proposed for the successful project management of smart ports, with the additional consideration of contextualizing smart port development in global supply chains. Moreover, this paper highlighted the digital integration of end-to-end operations as key for meaningful transformation, without the need for constant intervention by human operators. Adding to the intellectual legacy by [PERSON] et al. [59] on the consideration of carbon emissions and environmental impact, two papers published in _Sustainability_[72; 87] continued the discussion on governance and sustainability issues of smart ports. By looking at the impact of port governance on smart port development, [87] compared Taiwan's and Spanish smart ports based on a set of evaluation criteria and key indicators. The findings show the existence of distinct differences, revealing Taiwan's focus on maritime safety in comparison to Spain's focus on operational economics, and the importance of incorporating the private sector in legislation. Similarly, the smart port index proposed by [PERSON] et al. [72] integrated both sustainability and human resources indicators, highlighting the mutual impacts between port sustainability and human resources aspects. Both papers contributed to the intellectual development by enriching the system requirements for smart ports, especially through measurable indicators on the aspects of sustainability, governance, and human resources of smart port operations, development, and management, often at different integration levels.