1. What Makes Green Port and Shipping Initiatives Work or ... Not
Xishu Li, Rob Zuidwijk, René de Koster, Rommert Dekker
Erasmus University Rotterdam
1 Introduction
An increasing number of studies, projects, management tools and policy measures that attempt to make port and shipping
more "green"
These efforts have had varying levels of success in terms of environmental benefits and economic growth
Green initiatives in the shipping sector are different from those in other fields due to:
large variety in problem structures and operating environments
high mobility of ships
shipping regulations usually cross many conventional jurisdictional boundaries
… 2025 … 2030 …20202009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 201920082003 2004 2005 2006 2007
MARPOL Annex VI
(1.5% ECA SOx limit; 4.5% global SOx
limit; prohibitions of deliberate
emissions of ODS, shipboard
incineration, and emissions of VOC)
1.0% ECA
SOx limit
3.5% global
SOx limit 0.1%
ECA SOx
limit
0.5% global SOx
limit (may be
postponed to
2025)
North American area
joined the ECAs
US Caribbean Sea area
joined the ECAs
Prohibition
of HCFCs
A feasibility review
for 0.5% global SOx
limit
NOx Tier II
NOx Tier III (could
be delayed)
A technical review
for NOx Tier III
The Energy Efficiency
Design Index (phase 0)
The Ship Energy Efficiency
Management Plan
The EEDI phase 2
(20% CO2
reduction)
The EEDI phase 3
(30% CO2
reduction)
The EU Emissions
Trading Scheme
(under discussion)
The BWM Convention (ratified by 40 States,
expected to enter into force after 12 months)
Highly restrictive limits for operational
discharges of tank washings
The International Convention
on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil
Pollution Damage
The International Convention
on Control of Harmful Anti-
fouling System on Ships
Regulations for the
prevention of
pollution by sewage
from ships
Prohibition of dumping
of wastes at sea
To come: HONG KONG Convention on
ship recycling and HNS Convention
relating to the carriage of hazardous
and noxious substances by sea
The EEDI phase 1
(10% CO2
reduction)
Recent major developments of environmental regulations by the IMO MARPOL ratifying states
2 Research questions and Objectives
Question 1:
Which configurations of
factors drive success of an
initiative and what are the
barriers prohibiting success?
Question 2:
What are the basic factors &
the relations between them?
How can the factors be
classified? (Question 2.1)
How to classify initiatives
based on a framework of
factors? (Question 2.2)
Question 3:
How to evaluate the existing
initiatives?
Objective 1:
To build theory on
initiative’s key success
factors and barriers
To provide insights into the
potential success of a
future green initiative
Objective 2:
To develop a framework for
structuring the field of
green port and shipping
Objective 3:
To evaluate green port and
shipping initiatives
3 Overview of our approach and set-up
Identify the basic
factors of the
framework
(Question 2)
 Put forward classifications
for each factor and
elements for each class
(Question 2.1)
 Classify green initiatives
based on some factors
(Question 2.2)
 Evaluate each type of green
initiatives with the
framework (Question 3)
 Diagnose the necessary
success conditions for green
initiatives (Question 1)
Interactive process
Outputs:
 The success factors
and barriers for a
green initiative
(Objective 1)
 A framework for
structuring the field
(Objective 2)
 The evaluation
results
(Objective 3)
Semi-structured
interviews with
the experts in
the shipping
industry
Literature review
Green port and
shipping initiatives
Add our own typologies
 Delphi surveys to
validate the
framework and the
evaluation results
 Cross validation to
test our findings on
the success factors
and barriers
4 Framework for evaluating green initiatives
A rich framework that we use in a parsimonious
way for evaluating green initiatives
WHAT PROBLEM
WHY INITIATIVE
HOW
WHO WHY INVOLVED
WHERE
GEOGRAPHICAL
CHARACTERISTICS
WHAT
RESULTS
WHAT
ECONOMIC
CHARACTERISTICS
WHAT
POLITICAL
CHARACTERISTICS
WHAT INITIATIVE
Pollution
type
Source of
Pollution
Control
area
Initiative
type
Description
of initiative
Sustainability
type
Sustainability
level
Actors
Roles
Impact
on actor
Influence
of actor
Reason of
involvement
Incentive Monitoring
Penalty
TechnologyCommunication
Alternative
options
Vessel
composition
Fuel price
scenario
Shipping
route
Goods
grouped by
commodity
Port governance
model
Environmental
policy regime
Hinterland
accessibility
Strategic
importance
of location
Evaluation
method
Reported
results
Perceived
success
Issue
salience
Waiver
Verification
5 Examples of initiative’s evaluation
WHAT PROBLEM
WHY INITIATIVE
HOW
WHO WHY INVOLVED
WHAT
RESULTS
WHAT
POLITICAL
CHARACTERISTICS
WHAT INITIATIVE
CO2
emission
Ship
specific
Ship
specific
Legislative
instrument
Global
Environmental Level 2
Ship owner -> Organizing & Executing -> Degree 2
Ship builder -> Executing & Accommodating -> Degree 2
Shipper -> Using -> Degree 1
Legislation and Profits
Profits
Several proposed Market-
based measures focusing
on the same area
Theoretical
models
Medium
salience
Non-prescriptive
mechanism that leaves
the choice of which
technologies to use to the
stakeholders
Clear
requirement
& Complex
verification
process
Waiver up
to 4 years
Existing
technologies
Effective in
reducing CO2;
Reduced fuel
cost; Easy
implementation
Safety &
efficiency
impaired
Harmonization with
other regulations
Three phases
tightening the
requirement
The Energy Efficiency Design Index
WHAT PROBLEM
WHY INITIATIVE
HOW
WHO WHY INVOLVED
WHAT
RESULTS
WHAT
ECONOMIC
CHARACTERISTICS
WHAT INITIATIVE
SOx
emission
Heavy
fuel oil
Ship
operations
Legislative
instrument
SECAs
Environmental Level 3
Difficult to tell the roles of ship
owners and ship operators with
respect to who should invest
Legislation
Agricultural
products take
a large portion
of transport
volume
Theoretical
models &
interviews
High
salience
Few incentives
with highly
bureaucratic and
competitive
application process
Monitoring not clear
Penalty not clear
No waiver Scrubber technology
not mature
Negatively affect short
sea shipping business
and a potential shift
from shipping to road
and rail
Severe impacts on: fuel intensive
types of ships; short sea shipping;
metal and agricultural products
WHERE
GEOGRAPHICAL
CHARACTERISTICS
WHAT
POLITICAL
CHARACTERISTICS
Two SECAs are located
within the EU and the EU’s
top exporter & importer
countries are included
Price difference between HFO
and LFO fluctuates heavily
(between 30% and 250%) and
it is difficult to predict.
Short sea
shipping critical
to the countries
bordering these
areas
Difficult to
channel the
cost increase
to shipper
EU Directive
already requires
0.1% sulphur
while at berth in
EU ports
Scrubber
standards
conflict with
local regulations
in certain ports
Use of scrubber
conflict with CO2
regulations
Crosses many
jurisdictional
boundaries
Not all ships suitable for
LNG propulsion & LNG
not generally available
for bunkering
Uncertainty in
requirement’s
next phase
Five fuel options
& scrubber
The SECAs 0.1% Sulphur Limit
International Association of Maritime Economists 2014