Ports are critical in global supply chains, and quay walls form one of their most expensive and durable assets. The design and renewal of these structures involve complex decisions in which technical, financial, and other considerations must be balanced against one another. In current practice, such decisions are commonly supported by a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), yet the methodology is often applied in a qualitative and project-specific manner that leaves the derivation of weights and the treatment of soft criteria unstandardized. Moreover, the design process tends to evaluate a limited set of predefined alternatives and to minimize cost and material use, which does not guarantee that a design is either fit-for-purpose or economically optimal. This thesis therefore develops a two-part decision-support framework that is verified and validated through two case studies at the Port of Rotterdam (PoR).

Part I improves the evaluation process through the application of the Preference Function Modelling (PFM) methodology (Barzilai, 2010) within the Tetra software. Three weighting scenarios were constructed for case study I, in which equal weights, standardized survey weights, and project-specific weights were applied to nine decision criteria. The project-specific scenario reproduced the real-world decision, whereas the equal-weight and standardized survey scenarios did not. These results suggest that the standardized survey weights may serve as an organizational reference, but that they cannot replace project-specific input without critical evaluation.

Part II addresses the generative design stage through a single-objective model that maximizes value quantitatively by means of the Net Present Value (NPV). The model was implemented in Python, which combined a differential evolution algorithm with a Monte Carlo simulation of 500 iterations to account for demand uncertainty. Application to case study II yielded a near-optimal configuration of three berths of 360 m and a modal NPV of approximately EUR 303 M. The model identified the Very Large Bulk Carrier (VLBC) as the design vessel class, whereas the real-world quay wall accommodates the Valemax class. This divergence appears to be driven by the locational quay length constraint and by the dominance of cumulative seaport dues over the operational period.

These two parts together suggest that the framework can improve both the transparency and the economic justification of quay wall design decisions. The PFM-based tool provides a traceable and mathematically consistent evaluation process for quay wall projects, while the optimization model reframes the design problem in terms of value generation rather than cost minimization. Both tools were validated through semi-structured interviews with practitioners, who confirmed their added value as decision support instruments rather than as prescriptive design tools. One limitation is that the optimization adopts a single financial objective from the perspective of the PoR Authority, whereas the conventional process also involves other stakeholders. Future research could therefore extend the model towards a multi-objective optimization, for example through the Preferendus methodology by Wolfert (2023), which would broaden its applicability within the port industry. ... Read more