Indicators on logistics, socio-economic impact, port governance and environmental management
During ESPO’s annual conference (10th edition), ESPO presented the second edition of itsport performance dashboard, which reports on indicators in the field of market trends, logistics, socio-economic impact, port governance and environmental management.
In line with its commitment to increase transparency in the port sector, ESPO undertookthis year a port performance data collection exercise, the “ESPO Port Performance Review2013”. The outcomes of the exercise contribute to this second edition of the PortPerformance Dashboard. With the current edition, ESPO takes the momentum and buildson the PPRISM data collection and reporting in order to identify and demonstrate trendsregarding the performance of the European port sector in selected areas.
The reporting onthose trends gives credibility to the sector and provides evidence of the progress that canbe achieved through the European port authorities’ commitment to voluntary selfregulation
The top-10 environmental priorities of European Ports for 2013
As part of the Environmental Performance Review, the environmental priorities of thesector have been redefined. The table below demonstrates changes in port environmentalpriorities from 1996 to 2013. Many of these reflect prevailing political drivers.Priority issues change their ranking with time but certain components retain theirsignificance for the sector. Environmental issues that consistently appear over time aremapped with the same colour
Table – Top-10 environmental priorities of the European port sector over time
Air quality is pointed out as the current top environmental priority by the European portsector as a whole. This reflects the priority given to issues related to the health of peopleworking or living around ports, and is in line with the international and European policyagenda, through the ongoing review of the EU Air Quality policy but also the severalongoing initiatives that aim to control the exhaust emissions of air pollutants by vessels.
The management of garbage/port waste remains high within the environmental prioritiesof the sector, while that ship waste enters the top-10 of priorities for the first time,probably as a result of the ongoing review of the port reception facilities directive and thewhole debate over the adequacy of port reception facilities to accommodate for new typesof ship waste and increased volumes (e.g. scrubber generated).
Energy consumption, that 12was a new entry in 2009, gains significance within the port priorities, while that noisemanagement maintains a high ranking. Some environmental issues, namely dredgingoperations, dust and port development, appear consistently within the top 10 of prioritiesin Europe in the last 17-18 years. Finally, water quality appears again within the 2013 top-10.
Selected benchmark of performance (Environmental Management).
Key components of any credible Environmental Management System (EMS) are recognisedas appropriate and significant indicators of a port authority’s ability and competence todeliver compliance with legislation, environmental protection and sustainabledevelopment.
Continuing on the 2011 exercise, ports were asked to update the dataregarding the performance of their environmental management.
Comparisons between theinitial ESPO Dashboard and the 2013 data collection confirm the general maintenance oftrends and the positive enhancement of considerations related to awareness of significantaspects and implementation of monitoring programmes.
Further to the environmental management, the PPRISM project developed factualindicators addressing priority issues such as carbon footprint, waste management andwater consumption. In 2011 the ports were asked to provide data regarding thoseindicators though a specifically designed excel tool. Taking the feedback received by theports into account, within the 2013 data collection, ports were instead asked to providelinks to publicly available information on those 3 priority issues.
Trends on selected performance indicators
The analysis of the outcomes highlights that publicly available data on carbon footprint,waste management and water consumption is still relatively restricted.
Nevertheless, 25%of the respondent ports provided the reference to their annual environmental report orreview. Out of the 79 participant ports, 11 provided data on carbon footprint, 10 provideddata on waste management and 8 provided data on water consumption. Indicative trendsof benchmark performance for the selected Environmental Performance Indicators werecompiled from the data provided by European ports.
The average results have beencalculated and included in the 2013 Dashboard building on the previous PPRISM data.Within the constraints and cautions associated with variations in sample size andcomposition, the indicative trends of performance are positive in terms of the sector’sawareness of significance, appropriate activity profile, and overall trend of impact.
Find further analysis of indicators at ESPO- Port Performance Dashport (May 2013)