xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2019404EN.01004401.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 29.11.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 404/44 |

---

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions — A new European agenda to speed up the development of maritime industries

(2019/C 404/09)

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Rapporteur | : | Christophe CLERGEAU (FR/PES), Member of the Pays-de-la-Loire Regional Council |

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

I)   Key policy recommendations to speed up the development of European maritime industries

Recognising the challenges and choosing a new, more proactive industrial policy

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 1. | calls for awareness both of the development opportunities for and the threats to European maritime industries, which need to rally together, with the support of the European, national and regional authorities, if they are to make a success of their environmental and energy transition, as well as their digital transformation and industrial revolution, and make careers in the sector attractive again. They are being confronted with these challenges at a time when they are also being exposed to new competition from Asia in the high-added-value vessel segments, where Europe is the current leader. This competition, which is aiming to capture European technologies, is an unfair form of competition characterised by social and environmental dumping, and is extensively funded by public aid, contrary to international trade rules. This is an issue that the European authorities need to address in the interest of establishing a level playing field. It should be noted that this unfair competition now also applies to the fisheries sector; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 2. | highlights the diversity of the sectors within the maritime industries, which is an asset in boosting the synergies between sectors and the territorial impact: civilian and military shipbuilding, repair and scrapping (from ocean liners to pleasure craft, and from fishing boats to service vessels and passenger ships, not to mention military fleets), marine renewable energies, oil and gas industries, port, coastal and offshore infrastructure, fisheries, aquaculture, shellfishing and the blue bioeconomy; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 3. | calls for continued commitment to the development of fishing, shellfishing and aquaculture, both in terms of balance and of environmental, social and economic sustainability; likewise stresses the need for generational renewal, the two core components of which would be training and improving on-board conditions. |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 4. | considers that the maritime industries, like the space and aeronautical industries, need an ambitious industrial strategy and a concrete implementation framework tailored to their specific characteristics: the issue of sovereignty, high capital intensity, short production runs, long cycles and high risk levels, and significant research, innovation and training needs; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 5. | points to the need to support the development of off-shore, deep water wind energy as a means of reducing the occupation of shallow coastal areas in favour of other specifically blue-economy activities; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 6. | points out that the maritime industries are the second-largest sector within the blue economy in terms of employment: in a context of global growth, Europe is in a leading position in a number of areas, and is creating many highly skilled, sustainable industrial jobs; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 7. | draws attention to the important role played by ports, which are strategic infrastructure elements that act not simply as trade and transport hubs but also, increasingly, as industrial and innovation platforms whose interface with neighbouring towns and cities could be better harnessed. It is therefore important to plan appropriate support for all onshore businesses [(1)](#ntr1-C_2019404EN.01004401-E0001) which are already related to the blue economy or which could develop such links through tried and tested methods of diversification; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 8. | points to the socioeconomic importance of fishing and maritime activities for providing safe, good quality food; notes the importance of their cultural and heritage-related dimension, which is fundamental to reinvigorating tourism; stresses the necessary synergies and complementary aspects between these traditional activities and new sectors to be developed, to the benefit of employment and sustainable development; |

| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | 9. | sees the maritime industries as one of the key levers in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set out in Europe, as their products, services and innovations make a crucial contribution to supporting the activities necessary for successful transitions, in particular: | | | | --- | --- | | — | ocean exploration, development of knowledge of the sea and the sea bed; | | | | | --- | --- | | — | doing more to combat climate change, in particular via maritime transport; | | | | | --- | --- | | — | developing marine renewable and offshore wind energy and electricity interconnections between EU countries in order to increase the weight of renewable energies in the electricity mix and their integration at European level; | | | | | --- | --- | | — | presence at sea, surveillance and security; ocean initiatives, including efforts to combat the presence of plastics; | | | | | --- | --- | | — | knowledge and development of marine bioresources, sustainable development of fisheries, aquaculture and the blue circular economy; | |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 10. | shares the conclusions of the assessment of the LeaderSHIP 2020 initiative adopted by the EESC in 2018 [(2)](#ntr2-C_2019404EN.01004401-E0002), which highlights the limitations encountered in its implementation and the lack of precise and quantifiable objectives; |

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | 11. | calls for the establishment of a new, thoroughly revised ‘LeaderSHIP 2030’ approach setting out a ‘European Blue New Deal’ incorporating three elements: a trade and competition policy aimed at safeguarding our interests and building European champions; mobilisation and adaptation of all European policies to meet the needs and characteristics of the maritime industries; and the adoption of six operational objectives around which to rally local, national and European players during the 2020-2027 period: | | | | --- | --- | | — | decarbonising maritime transport and building clean ships – zero emissions, zero discharge at sea, zero noise; | | | | | --- | --- | | — | eliminating ocean debris, in particular plastics; | | | | | --- | --- | | — | maritime industries 4.0, a cross-cutting approach to improving the performance and quality of jobs in all maritime industries; | | | | | --- | --- | | — | positioning Europe as a global leader in all marine renewable energy technologies; | | | | | --- | --- | | — | a European strategy for a new blue bioeconomy, boosting fisheries, aquaculture and exploitation of marine bioresources; | | | | | --- | --- | | — | launching a European ocean exploration mission to improve our knowledge of marine environments all around the world; | These six objectives entail specific challenges for industry and must also be taken into account in the open debate on a maritime mission under Horizon Europe; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 12. | encourages the adoption of strategies for the maritime industries in Europe’s outermost regions and islands, with a view to accelerating progress in three priority directions: ports, cheaper low-carbon energy autonomy, and the blue bioeconomy, including fisheries and aquaculture; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 13. | points out that it is important for the future of maritime industries that maritime issues be placed at the centre of future EU policies as well as at the centre of the deployment of regional policy funds; |

European Sea Tech: building European networks to link regional innovation ecosystems, mobilising the regions to develop industrial value chains

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 14. | takes the view that the maritime industries are primarily characterised by their local roots in maritime regions, which have developed regional excellence and innovation ecosystems devoted to these industries. National and European policies need to build first and foremost on these regional innovation ecosystems and their associated smart specialisation strategies if they are to be agile and effective; |

| | | | | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | 15. | suggests launching a ‘European Sea Tech’ scheme to link regional innovation ecosystems, by establishing a number of cooperation networks: | | | | --- | --- | | — | to invigorate sub-sectors and build European value chains; | | | | | --- | --- | | — | to better identify and support the challenges of industrial change, including with regard to the environment, energy and digitalisation; | | | | | --- | --- | | — | to develop new services, products and economic models that are more integrated and better equipped to face global competition. | The Commission would launch calls for expressions of interest in setting up thematic networks, and each regional (or inter-regional) ecosystem could apply to join a number of networks in line with the region’s smart specialisation strategies. Ecosystems combining multiple competences and bringing together several networks would form the ‘central ecosystems’ of the European Sea Tech scheme. Each network would aim to be as inclusive as possible, involving all the competences of the various European regions. Within the networks, the issues of sustainable development, R & D, industrial performance, financing and skills would be systematically addressed. These networks would be more effective than a centralised European platform in providing a foundation for developing intra-regional cooperation and for setting up operational projects of relevance to the EU’s various policies. The role of European Sea Tech would also be to boost the transfer of technology, experience and skills between the various networks and sectors of the maritime industries; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 16. | points out that European Sea Tech is key for a crosscutting approach in maritime industries and speeding up the transition towards green, digital maritime industries by mobilising all the technologies and skills of sectors across maritime industries to make them available to other sectors; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 17. | reiterates its support for the Marine Knowledge and Innovation Community, but notes that this project focuses on the sustainable management of marine resources and can therefore at best be just one of the networks making up the European Sea Tech scheme; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 18. | hopes that projects carried out by European Sea Tech’s innovative ecosystem networks can be supported by European partnerships and co-funded by Horizon Europe and other available funds. These projects must be able to include financing of pilot lines, prototypes and demonstrators; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 19. | also reiterates its request for a maritime roadmap under Horizon Europe, for the scientific and technological challenges facing maritime industries to be explicitly included in Pillar 2, and for 10 % of Horizon Europe’s budget to be set aside for funding projects with a significant impact on the blue economy and maritime industries; |

II)   Practical proposals for harnessing and adapting the European Union’s post-2020 policies in the interests of the maritime industries

International trade and competition

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 20. | stresses the need, with regard to the maritime industries and services, for a new ‘realistic’ and reciprocal trade policy to safeguard European sovereignty and jobs in response to the aggressive and unfair strategies pursued by major maritime countries, in particular in Asia. Wherever possible and effective, this policy should favour a stable, multilateral, rules-based trading system, based on rules which are fair and transparent so as to guarantee conditions of fair competition, seek beneficial agreements with trade partners and build on the role of the WTO; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 21. | considers, with regard to globalised world markets, that competition policy needs to enable the development of European champions, while always ensuring that there is fair and balanced competition within the EU, and reaffirms the added value of the guidelines on State aid to maritime transport and the need for a simple, stable and competitive tax framework to achieve this goal; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 22. | draws the Commission’s attention to the importance of improving controls on foreign investment flows and of limiting and reducing the potentially harmful effects that technology transfers can have on European industry, especially those included in major international contracts; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 23. | calls for precise commitments to be made in the management of civilian and military public procurement, with, for example, firm requirements for the supply of certain products and services identified in advance as strategic or particularly vulnerable to global competition; |

Project funding

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 24. | calls for the swift completion of the Blue Economy Investment Platform project, which must include both an assistance facility and a specific investment fund for innovative, high-risk projects. The platform should focus primarily on making financing available at preferential rates for projects deemed to be too high risk by traditional actors, and will therefore correct a gap in the market. This instrument will have to operate in close cooperation with the Member States and regions, in order to ensure complementarity between policy instruments and continuity in project support. This platform will need to draw on the networks and ‘central ecosystems’ in the European Sea Tech scheme; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 25. | calls, in addition, for the Commission to set an objective and method for harnessing European investment vehicles for the benefit of the blue economy and the maritime industries, to be launched under InvestEU, in connection with the Horizon Europe programme; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 26. | highlights the need for tools to reduce the financial cost of structural projects and to allow for efficient pre-financing of particularly expensive purchases and investments (ocean liners, LNG equipment, marine renewable energy, etc.); |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 27. | reiterates the need for specific funding for the outermost regions, taking account of their constraints and specific features. These regions give Europe an exceptional maritime and ocean dimension, thanks to their strategic position in the Atlantic Ocean, the Indian Ocean and the Caribbean Sea, and are unique natural assets, as the European Commission itself has recognised; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 28. | points out that it would be beneficial to support innovative procurement, which allows for more flexible rules on tenders when purchasing an emerging technology which is not yet available in a standardised form on the market. Innovative technologies could thus be placed on the market more speedily as companies providing new services and products could more rapidly identify their first clients; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 29. | emphasises that the regulatory constraints in place in the maritime sector and the time required to process applications are a major barrier to carrying out tests and trials at sea; suggests setting up a European working group bringing together the Commission, the Member States, the regions and economic actors to disseminate best practices and promote positive developments in national reference frameworks; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 30. | considers it worth envisaging going even further and ultimately setting up a ‘Maritime Advanced Research Projects Agency’, based on the US DARPA, and thus provide support for disruptive innovation by way of a dedicated funding framework, recognising the right to failure and giving full consideration to the development constraints faced by SMEs and mid-cap companies; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 31. | suggests that, in a post-Brexit context, stakeholders in the maritime industries should be granted some of the specific funding allocated to supporting the most heavily affected areas, in order to create new prospects for development and employment; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 32. | points to the importance of the European Sea Tech initiative in bringing a cross-cutting approach to the maritime industries and speeding up the transition to green and digital maritime industries by harnessing all the technologies and skills across all maritime industry sectors in order to make them available to other sectors. This cross-cutting approach must also be encouraged between maritime and coastal activities, and other industrial and digital sectors that bring innovations which can be directly harnessed or usefully adapted to the maritime world; |

Maritime industries 4.0

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 33. | draws attention to the challenges of Industry 4.0 in terms of the environmental and energy transition, industrial performance, digitalisation (including of production processes), and cooperation within local and European value chains; in this regard, supports the objective of Green Shipyard 2050 for exemplary shipyards in the environmental and energy transition; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 34. | also points out that lifelong learning, more and better jobs, working conditions, and harnessing employees’ experience and creativity are all intrinsic elements of this industrial transformation; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 35. | feels that productive investments and innovations in this field should be a priority for European policy to support maritime industries, and should focus particularly on SMEs; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 36. | stresses that cooperation between the civilian and military sectors provides shared leverage for progress, not least by facilitating transfers – in both directions – of technology and know-how along with mobility for skilled people; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 37. | highlights the benefits of encouraging offshore oil and gas companies to make the transition and to develop strategies for diversifying into other sectors within the blue economy; these companies have considerable maritime expertise, experience in dealing with long, complex projects, and valuable skills which can be useful for developing maritime industries (supply vessels, underwater robotics, anchoring systems, automated applications, etc.). They could usefully and collectively plough back part of the profits made from oil into blue economy investment funds and renewable sea-based energy; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 38. | notes that the technological revolution means that from being analogue units, ships are now becoming digitalised transport platforms, creating opportunities for greater integration and interconnection with different digital systems. Working methods in the sector are changing as a result, e.g. interaction between ships and land-based offices, contacts between ships and other ships, and between ships and the authorities. It is important in this regard for the European maritime industry and authorities to grasp the opportunities that digitalisation brings to international competition; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 39. | stresses the imperative need to allow for and support digitalisation and more broadly the new forms of artificial intelligence (AI) in maritime innovation; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 40. | suggests that support and funding programmes should take account of a range of subjects that are not purely technological in nature but also relate to the development of new services, such as autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs), maritime surveillance and predictive maintenance, where contractual commitments to results and performance are increasingly taking priority over commitment of funds. The creation of platforms to bring about the convergence of different surveillance technologies in use in the various Member States should be encouraged, so as to increase the interoperability of these activities, to increase the efficiency of operations at sea, to facilitate the implementation of EU legislation and policies in this area and, as a result, to promote better monitoring of the European maritime area; |

Employment, skills and training

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 41. | recognises the importance of stimulating sectoral social dialogue and of organising the relationship between employment and training in the maritime industries; calls for specific platforms to fulfil these tasks not only in marine transport and bioresources but also in the manufacturing industry and shipbuilding. Attention is drawn in particular to the need to promote tailored training for the maritime and fishing industries so as to support generational renewal in fishing, aquaculture and shellfishing, as well as to the need to promote tailored university-level courses relating to merchant shipping. Similarly, there is a need to set up a system to ensure that training programmes are efficient and trainers sufficiently qualified; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 42. | stresses that the growth of offshore activities involves mobilising employees with strong maritime skills or providing significant additional training to those who are not familiar with life at sea. In this respect, it is clearly necessary to conduct campaigns among young people in order attract talent and integrate new professionals into maritime industries, merchant shipping and fisheries, for operations both on land and at sea; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 43. | welcomes the progress made thanks to the adoption of the recent posted worker directives, which are highly relevant to the maritime sector, and calls for a system to be devised recognising professional qualifications (not just diplomas and certificates) in order to fully implement the principle of equal pay for equal work; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 44. | considers that worker mobility within the EU is a positive factor when it comes to structuring value chains in maritime industries as efficiently as possible and coping with developments in the various sectors. Efforts must be made to reach this goal while keeping up and bolstering the skills needed to meet companies’ needs, firstly at local level and then at European level; |

III)   An approach and specific proposals for the major sectors within the maritime industries

Digitalisation of maritime industries

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 45. | points out that it is paramount to allow for and support digitalisation and, more generally, new artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in maritime innovation; suggests that support and funding programmes should take account of a range of subjects that are not purely technological in nature but also relate to the development of new services, such as autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs), maritime surveillance and predictive maintenance; |

Blue bioeconomy

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 46. | highlights the promising, but as yet poorly realised, potential of the blue bioeconomy sector, which has numerous market applications (food and feed, pharmacology, cosmetics and energy) and significant local impact; stresses that priority must be given to the most developed and important economic sectors: fisheries, aquaculture and marine crops; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 47. | welcomes the mobilisation around this emerging sector, not least via the Blue Bioeconomy Forum led by DG MARE; takes the view that, following a major R & D investment phase, priority should be given to industrialising and marketing new processes that have been tried and tested on a small scale; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 48. | hopes that this sector will be given new priority through investment in the entire value chain from the extraction or controlled production of bioresources to the processing and use of the products; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 49. | suggests to this end building bridges with more mature maritime sectors such as fisheries and aquaculture, with a view to developing the downstream value chain for and processing of fishery products, generating the greatest added value; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 50. | highlights the importance of the maritime circular economy in supporting the development of the blue bioeconomy (implementation of zero discards in fisheries, recovery of drift line debris, seaweed processing residues, processing of waste and plastics, etc.); |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 51. | calls on the European Union to support the exploration of all of the world’s seas and oceans, particularly with a view to improving knowledge of the marine environment and climate science (carbon cycle and CO2 absorption, acidification and rising sea levels, etc.), and to identifying the various energy and non-energy deposits so as to better assess the potential uses of marine resources (geothermal energy, strategic minerals, etc.); |

Civilian and military shipbuilding

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 52. | highlights the strategic nature of European investment in differentiating factors in the shipbuilding sector, particularly in relation to digitalisation and the environmental and energy transition. By innovating, we can improve our competitiveness and regain market share. Financing issues are also hugely important in shipbuilding; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 53. | draws attention to the new markets linked to these transitions: integrating clean propulsion in ships, innovative carbon-free propulsion systems (new sailing concepts), fuelling vessels, electric ferries, short-haul freight vessels, port and coastal service vessels, etc.; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 54. | stresses that it is important to strengthen links and local cooperation between shipyards and their co-contracting chains in the framework of maritime clusters; also stresses the need to support shipbuilding and ship repair regions, where a large number of small and medium-sized enterprises operate; would like to see specific support for value chains in the parts manufacturing sector, which accounts for 50 % of global market share and has twice the turnover of shipbuilding itself. In its trade and financing policy, the EU must also promote the use of European parts in ships built outside the EU; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 55. | calls for systematic efforts to be made under European Sea Tech to include new actors in shipbuilding value chains which can help boost production capacity, mobilise skills and increase European competitiveness; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 56. | emphasises that the repair and construction of small vessels are strategic industries for the outermost regions, as the fleets and floating structures operating in their waters are subject to the constraints of their island location and remoteness from the European mainland. This has a crucial effect on the logistics, maintenance and repair of small vessels: consequently, specific support must be given to these industries in order to support efficient growth of maritime activity in these regions; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 57. | considers that maritime issues must be placed at the heart of new defence and security policies, which will require paying particular attention to military shipbuilding; to this end, suggests taking greater account of support for the development of dual technologies that can be used in both civilian and military sectors; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 58. | stresses the need to boost the capacity of the fleets performing sovereign surveillance and security tasks, believes that these sovereign tasks must be carried out by European-built ships, and takes the view that, especially in view of Brexit and migration challenges, the proper organisation of these tasks entails building on existing national fleets in close partnership with Frontex and requires European solidarity in supporting the countries most involved in these tasks of major common interest; |

Marine Renewable Energy (MRE)

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 59. | regards MRE as a sector with substantial potential to contribute significantly to renewable energy production while at the same time creating an industrial value chain that generates sustainable local jobs in multiple regions and delivering success in export markets, and stresses that it must be developed in an environmentally-friendly way that is compatible, or even in synergy, with pre-existing activities; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 60. | stresses that costs are being driven down particularly impressively in fixed-foundation offshore wind farms in Europe since the first farms were set up in 1991 and, most significantly, as a result of the efficient European industrial sector established over the last decade; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 61. | emphasises the importance of the repairs and checks to which vessels are subject, and the fact that they must be scrapped when their service life ends. Recommends in consequence that the Commission draw up a specific plan to equip the EU with suitable installations for these functions to be performed correctly, including the budget commitments required for this purpose; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 62. | points out that the further development of this sector will involve pursuing the efforts being made at European level, particularly in R & D (over EUR 3 billion of investment), but now requires clear policy choices that are primarily down to the Member States: setting ambitious volumes and timetables for calls for tender, not only for fixed-foundation wind power, which is currently the most developed sub-sector, but also for new technologies such as floating wind turbines, tidal power and wave power, which are in dire need of sufficient and guaranteed returns to trigger investment and start their industrialisation; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 63. | calls for dedicated investment support tools to be established at European level, along with project insurance and risk management tools. This could substantially reduce financing costs and thus more rapidly drive down the cost price of the electricity generated; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 64. | welcomes the significant progress made in recent years in testing prototypes and demonstrators for emerging technologies in real use conditions, particularly as regards tidal power. Costs are set to shrink as they are properly managed and become increasingly credible, which should enable the market to really open up thanks to adapted feed-in tariffs and European actors to remain strong global leaders; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 65. | insists that Europe must aim to become a global leader in the sector of floating wind turbines, and recommends that the Commission and the Member States look into coordinated or joint calls for tender in order to provide greater volume and higher visibility. A similar approach could be developed for tidal and wave power with regard to pre-commercial pilot farms; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 66. | highlights the importance of taking a specific approach in non-interconnected areas, especially in island regions, that will make it possible to offer general solutions for low-carbon energy autonomy that combine technologies – including MRE – in different ways depending on the characteristics of each territory; with this in mind, moves to develop mid-range powered machines must be stepped up; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 67. | proposes that these autonomous energy solutions should also be tested and proven effective in planned multi-use offshore facilities, as such facilities are a precursor to an increased maritime orientation of industrial operations and, in the long term, human life in the broader meaning of the phrase. It should be borne in mind that these longer-term perspectives will have to comply with strict criteria regarding sustainability and environmental impact management throughout the projects’ lifecycle; |

IV)   Ports – a key element for dynamic maritime industries

Port hubs and port, coastal and offshore infrastructure

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 68. | draws attention to the potential of ports as areas for developing Blue Growth projects, due to the combination of their activities and their potential. They can then serve as an example that can be extended to all coastal regions; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 69. | stresses that, regardless of their status, ports must continue to be regarded as strategic assets in which the public authorities have a responsibility to invest, and that competition and state aid rules must allow such investments; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 70. | stresses the need for the EU to provide financial support for port infrastructure in the outermost regions, given that they do not have alternatives for the transport of goods and the fact that their purely local nature means that state aid granted to such infrastructure does not lead to distortions in competition in the European internal market; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 71. | highlights that the function of a port is both to be a maritime transport hub and to house maritime industries and associated innovation and training activities; draws attention to the regional attractiveness factor that ports provide in attracting new industrial activities to their own land and the surrounding area; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 72. | stresses the importance of logistics and maritime services sectors in ports and the need to develop, in addition to innovative technologies, new business and service models within ports, based for example on gradual digitalisation (smart ports), and to develop the potential for process improvement and optimisation offered by data processing (big data); |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 73. | recommends encouraging better links between ports and their urban environment, while at the same time enhancing port communities’ decision-making autonomy and ensuring that port land is retained to allow for future development; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 74. | suggests creating, within the European Sea Tech scheme, a network of ports involved in growing the blue economy, building on the work of the European Ports Forum and its ‘ports as hubs for blue growth’ and ‘green ports’ sub-groups; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 75. | highlights the importance of the civil and environmental engineering sectors in ports and coastal areas in the development of sites and coastlines and in supporting climate change adaptation; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 76. | suggests making ports the incubators, and perhaps ultimately the operators, of new infrastructure projects at sea, whether they are offshore ports or, more generally, shared hubs for blue economy activities (transshipment, logistics hubs, MRE production, aquaculture, ship repair, science bases, etc.); |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 77. | proposes opening up a debate on the functional role of ‘secondary’ ports, focusing on specialising in low-volume markets and reinforcing/complementing major neighbouring industrial ports; |

Decarbonisation of ports and maritime transport

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 78. | considers that support for investment in ports for LNG bunkering and more broadly for infrastructure which helps reduce ships’ carbon footprint (power connection at quayside based on low-emission technology) needs to be stepped up as a matter of urgency; regards the transition to cleaner fuels and new energy vector as a priority with a view to meeting targets for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases and gases harmful to human health, and considers that shipowners should be supported in adapting and renewing their fleets; stresses that biogas produced from bioresources (plant, agricultural and food) can also contribute to the LNG value chain, reducing greenhouse gas emissions even more than current solutions; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 79. | proposes assessing the case for establishing a blue LNG corridor for European islands and outermost regions, in line with the European Parliament resolution of 25 October 2018 on the deployment of infrastructure for alternative fuels in the EU: time to act! (2018/2023(INI)); recalls, in this context, the need for suitable financial instruments to support these kinds of investment, which remain relatively high in these areas; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 80. | highlights the need to support research and development of off-shore aquaculture, combining current ocean engineering knowledge with that of industry 4.0, as a means of reducing the presence of aquaculture farms in coastal areas in favour of other specifically blue-economy activities that need to use the same marine areas; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 81. | indicates that R & D work opens up a possible path to liquid synthetic fuels produced using the carbon and renewable energy value chain; feels that this path should be explored with caution and that these technologies must prove that they are competitive compared to other alternatives, have a low environmental footprint and contribute to combating the greenhouse effect throughout the cycle. At this stage, this proof has not yet been provided; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 82. | recognises that the use of LNG can only be an interim solution, and calls for uses to be developed for on-shore power supply for ships, electric ships, for solar and wind power, to be exploited on ships, and for competitive production and use of renewable hydrogen in maritime transport to be sought (in conjunction with developing marine renewable energies, in particular those with high production potential such as fixed-foundation and floating offshore wind farms); |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 83. | calls for the smart network infrastructure needed to integrate distributed sources of electricity from renewable sources, deployment of quayside energy supply systems, electric mobility and all other technologies relating to smart networks to be put in place in ports. |

Brussels, 27 June 2019.

The President

of the European Committee of the Regions

Karl-Heinz LAMBERTZ

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2019404EN.01004401-E0001)  NAT-V-044 – ‘Innovation in the Blue Economy: Realising the potential of our seas and oceans for jobs and growth’, rapporteur Adam Banaszak.

[(2)](#ntc2-C_2019404EN.01004401-E0002)  https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/our-work/opinions-information-reports/opinions/leadership-2020-maritime-technology

---