###### Abstract
Some of these factors include technological advancements in state-of-the-art handling equipment, physical expansion of storage areas, investments by private companies and major shipping lines as terminal operators, blockchain, terminal automation, or integrated management platforms for port operations, among others [5]. However, not all ports in LAC have adapted to these changes in the same way. As the LAC ports adapt and reconfigure in response to various challenges to become future Smart Ports, they must compete on an equal footing to maintain high productivity, efficiency, and consequently, competitiveness by utilizing all available resources. In this context, the resources available to all the analyzed terminals are similar and have been evaluated under the same conditions and methodologies. For this document, a review of articles published over the past 20 years was conducted, with particular emphasis on literature from 2010 onwards. There is a clear interest in analyzing container terminals globally, especially in Europe and Southeast Asia, focusing on evaluating efficiency and competitiveness. Most of the available methodologies are based on multi-criteria decision-making methods. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**LAC** & & & & **LAC** & \\
**Studied Ports** & **World \({}^{*}\)** & **Europe Union** & **China** & **Entire Port System** & **USA** \\ \hline
46,572,664 & 840,635,534 & 102,751,696 & 262,605,700 & 58,669,478 & 60,554,285 \\  & 5.13\% & 41.9\% & 16.41\% & & 71.3\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{*}\)The data were obtained from World Bank, ECLAC newsletter, and bulletins.  
\end{table} 
Table 1: Percentage comparison of container movements of the studied ports relative to other movements for the year 2022. In recent years, particularly over the last 20 years, multi-criteria decision-making models (MCDMs) have gained significant preference in the evaluation of various transportation systems and transport chains [6]. This growing preference is driven by the perspectives of exporters, importers, and users of transportation systems, for whom the characteristics of the terminals themselves have become more important than the costs associated with port activities [7]. To study the efficiency and productivity of terminals, optimization and simulation models have also been predominantly employed [8]. The use of MCDM is crucial because it allows for a comprehensive assessment and comparison of various aspects of transport logistics and transport chains [9]. Recent studies have focused on intermodal transport in Europe, aiming to analyze, define, and classify constraints related to logistics chains in intermodal transport. This enables a comparison of different logistics chain implementation alternatives to select the most suitable one [10]. In the selection of alternatives within transportation systems, MCDM provides a systematic approach for evaluating and selecting the most appropriate transport system. In Europe, MCDM aims to develop a decisive system with clear rules and standards for selecting the most suitable business partner in the freight railway market [11]. For evaluating the logistics and competitiveness of public and private transportation systems, MCDM examines the economic and technological factors influencing the competitiveness of public transport services in integrated transport systems [12]. In the case at hand, which involves the evaluation for port ranking and the selection of ports and container terminals [13], there are significant references. This evaluation focuses on the classification of constraints and the development of a multi-criteria assessment framework to improve the efficiency of logistics chains. Table 2 summarizes the most used methods and criteria for studying transport systems, the efficiency, and creating rankings of ports, particularly for container terminals in Asia and Europe.