m it it 
•it -it 
•it * COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 05.07.1995 
COM(95) 317 final 
Communication from the Commission to the European 
Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee 
and the Committee of the Regions 
The Development of Short Sea Shipping in Europe: 
Prospects and Challenges 
fl#» 

R-2 
I. Introduction 3 
II. The potential for short sea shipping 4 
A. Improving the quality and efficiency of short sea shipping 
services 6 
B. Improving port infrastructure and port efficiency 6 
C Preparing Short Sea Shipping for a wider Europe .... 8 
III. Conclusion 8 
IV. Action programme 9 
A. Commission action programme 9 
B. General action programme - summary chart 12 
ANNEXES 
ANNEX I: THE ADVANTAGES OF SHORT SEA SHIPPING 
ANNEX II: GROWTH POTENTIAL OF SHORT SEA SHIPPING 
ANNEX III: CHALLENGES FOR SHORT SEA SHIPPING IN EUROPE 
ANNEX IV: AN INTEGRATED POLICY APPROACH FOR SHORT SEA SHIPPING 
IN EUROPE 
ANNEX V: STATISTICAL DATA: A STATISTICAL OVERVIEW OF SHORT SEA 
SHIPPING 
f\-3 
!. Introduction 
In its White Paper on "The Future Development of the Common Transport Policy" of 
December 19921, the Commission outlined future priorities based on the need to 
reconcile the demand for mobility with the requirements of the environment, in line 
with the principle of "sustainable mobility". 
This Communication examines the potential contribution of short sea shipping to the 
achievement of sustainable mobility. It includes a series of recommendations 
addressed to Member States, their regional and local authorities as well as the 
maritime industries themselves. It also includes ideas for actions which can most 
appropriately be undertaken at Union level. It is intended to seek the political support 
of the Council for these recommendations. 
For the purposes of this Communication, short sea shipping is understood to cover 
maritime transport services which do not involve an ocean crossing. It includes 
maritime transport along the coast and between the mainland coasts and islands of 
the European Union. It covers purely national transport (cabotage) and cross border 
services, as well as sea-river transport by coastal vessels to and from ports in the 
hinterland. The notion of short sea shipping also extends to maritime transport 
between the Member States of the Union and Norway and Iceland, other States in the 
Baltic Sea, the Black Sea and the Mediterranean areas. This definition will be 
reviewed following the debate on this Communication which will take place. 
At first glance, the main emphasis of this Communication appears primarily to be on 
promoting the shift, where appropriate, of transport of goods from road to sea. The 
achievement of sustainable mobility necessarily targets, in the first place, the 
transport of goods. Nevertheless, the measures proposed are designed to cover both 
goods and passengers. It is certain that the implementation of some or all of the 
measures put forward for transport of goods in the action programme will have an 
accompanying positive effect on the quality and efficiency of seaborne passenger 
services. 
COM (92) 494 final, 2 December 1992. 
R-4 
Short sea shipping has the potential to contribute to easing congestion faced at 
present in land transport. Increasing demand for transport services in recent years 
has created serious traffic congestion on land routes in regions at the heart of the 
Union. The Community's transport system is subject to imbalances and inefficiencies. 
One of the main reasons for these imbalances and inefficiencies is that transport 
users have not been adequately charged the full costs of the transport services they 
use. The balance between transport demand and supply has therefore been distorted, 
both between and within modes." As in particular road traffic costs do not reflect the 
full social and environmental cost of transport, demand has been artificially high. This 
has led to a clear distortion of the competitive position of more environmentally 
friendly modes of transport such as short sea shipping. The more general question 
of the internalisation of the external costs of transport will be the subject of a 
Commission Green Paper to be published next year. 
The Communication is not a legal instrument and does not accompany a legal 
instrument. It is a political document outlining general policy guidelines. In presenting 
this Communication before the submission of specific legislative proposals for the 
promotion of short sea shipping, the Commission wishes to stimulate a general 
political and public debate on the various ideas raised in this Communication. The 
Commission has already announced its intention to launch this debate in its Work 
Programme for 1995. The outcome of the political debate as well as the results of the 
consultation with the industry will be of use to the Commission in the preparation, 
where appropriate, of proposals. 
The Maritime Industries Forum (MIF)2, established by the Commission in 1992, sees 
the developfnent of short sea shipping as a high priority and has consistently 
emphasized the role this mode of transport could play within the Community transport 
system. 
II. The potential for short sea shipping 
The demand for transport services is likely to increase further in the future as a 
consequence of economic growth in general. The creation of the internal market will 
also result in more trade between Member States. The recent accession of Austria, 
Finland and Sweden to the Union will enhance this trend. 
The Maritime Industries Forum, set up in 1992, examines the problems faced by the 
maritime industries and makes recommendations to the Member States, the 
Commission and to the industry itself. The Forum brings together representatives of 
industry, trade unions, research institutes, governments and EC institutions. 
ft-5 
Short sea shipping has certain advantages compared to land transport. Europe is a 
large peninsula penetrated by inland seas, important rivers and canals. It has a 
favourable geographical configuration which makes it particularly well suited for 
waterborne transport. In terms of infrastructural requirements and energy and 
environmental performance, short sea shipping compares well with other modes of 
transport. It can contribute to the economic development of the islands and peripheral 
regions of the Union through cost-effective transport services. It also has a relatively 
good safety record. Already prior to the accession of Sweden and Finland to the 
Union approximately 30% of all goods transported between Member States of the 
Union were carried by short sea transport. It can also contribute significantly to the 
development of European shipbuilding as roughly 50% of the vessels constructed in 
European Union shipyards are vessel types mainly used in short sea shipping. 
A study, co-financed by the Commission, examined the competitive position of short 
sea shipping on eight important trade corridors in the Union, three of which went 
beyond its external borders. The survey shows that there are growth opportunities for 
short sea shipping in at least six of the eight corridors analyzed, including in particular 
Spain/Portugal to Germany, Spain/Portugal to The United Kingdom, Benelux/Germany 
to the Nordic countries and Benelux to the Northern region of The United Kingdom. 
It estimated, for example, that short sea shipping could, on the Spain/Portugal to 
Germany corridor, capture from road transport another 20% of the total traffic volume 
in the short and medium term and a further 13% in the long term. This study is 
discussed in detail in Annex 2. 
Despite its advantages Short Sea Shipping faces a number of obstacles which 
discourage its use. There are a number of problems in some ports which create 
delays. They include the lack of infrastructure and connecting links to the hinterland, 
cumbersome documentary and procedural requirements and restrictive labour 
practices and labour disputes. Port charges are quite high in some ports,-particularly 
in southern Europe. Short sea shipping is also insufficiently integrated with other 
modes in the transport chain and can have difficulty in meeting "just-in-time" 
requirements. Transit times tend to be longer than those of other modes. It also 
suffers from a somewhat old-fashioned image as shippers are often not aware of the 
full range of services available. 
Sustainable mobility requires multimodal transport networks in which the advantages 
of the individual modes are combined in a way which increases efficiency, reduces 
pressure on the environment and makes best use of existing resources. Short sea 
shipping is not yet contributing to these objectives. 
This communication, which has the intention of bringing short sea shipping to an 
equal footing with the other modes of transport, focuses on three areas to be 
addressed: 
A. Improving the quality and efficiency of short sea shipping services. 
B. Improving port infrastructure and port efficiency 
C. Preparing short sea shipping for a wider Europe 
A~6 
A. Improving the quality and efficiency of short sea shipping services. 
The first area, concerning the improvement of the quality and efficiency of short sea 
shipping services, concentrates on the role of the Community's 4th Framework 
Programme in Research and Development and its impact on short sea shipping. The 
specific transport programme, will contribute to the development of new shipping 
technologies and strengthen the competitiveness of the European maritime industries. 
It will focus, inter alia, on fast waterborne transport systems and technology such as 
fast-cargo ships, self-unloading bulk carriers, automated unit-load ships and sea-river 
vessels. Research activities in these fields should help to integrate short sea shipping 
better into multimodal transport chains. Other areas of the waterborne transport work 
programme, particularly the ports and logistics sections, will also have a major impact 
on the future development of short sea shipping. 
Other specific programmes (e.g. those concerning Marine science and Technology, 
Environment and Climate, and Material and Industrial Technologies), as well as the 
remote sensing activities of the Joint Research Centre, are also relevant in this 
context as they cover areas such as the state of the sea and water level surveying 
and prediction, the development of instrumentation and materials, coastal engineering 
etc. 
Another focus in this context involves the full implementation in short sea shipping of 
Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) in order to overcome the cumbersome traditional 
documentation systems which inhibit efficient cooperation, increase the possibility of 
error and raise administrative costs. EDI will enhance the smooth flow of cargo, 
promote the efficiency, safety and reliability of short sea shipping and furthermore 
improve its links with other modes of transport. 
B. -Improving port infrastructure and port efficiency 
Actions to improve the short sea transport product must be combined with actions to 
improve port efficiency in order to substantially increase the competitiveness of short 
sea shipping. Ports provide the essential link between maritime, land and inland 
waterway transport. Only if ports perform efficiently as an integrated part of the 
transport chain, can the full benefits of short sea shipping be achieved. 
The ports are an integral part of the trans-European transport network plan. 
Community guidelines for the development of this plan have been put forward by the 
Commission and are at an advanced stage in the decision-making procedure. The 
Commission's proposal does not provide for a defined network of ports of Community 
interest. Member States rightly feel that network-related action may discriminate 
against ports which are not part of the network. Further, maritime transport is not 
confined to rigid lines of infrastructure. Instead, the proposal focuses on port and port-
related infrastructure projects of common interest. It does not seek to limit the ports 
in which these projects may arise to those tied directly to the land elements of the 
network. In principle, these projects can arise in a much wider range of ports in the 
Community, both sea ports and sea-river ports. 
ft-7 
Under the above mentioned proposal, port projects of common interest must conform 
to a set of general principles appropriate to all modes and a set of special conditions 
specific to ports. Community support under the trans-European network budget line 
will be available for projects of common interest financed by the Member States and 
identified in the context of the Community guidelines. 
Transparency in port tariffs is of direct concern to port users, who have a clear 
interest in knowing the basis on which charges for services have been calculated so 
that they may make an informed choice between those on offer. 
In order to ensure respect of the Treaty rules on State aid, the Commission is starting 
an inventory of all transport State aid granted by Member States to ports as well as 
action to improve the transparency of the financial accounts of entities responsible 
for providing transport infrastructure and services. It envisages the establishment of 
guidelines on how to apply the State aid provisions of the Treaty to the port sector. 
Furthermore, the application of Article 85 of the Treaty, which prohibits restrictive 
agreements between undertakings, and of Article 86, which prohibits abuse of 
dominant positions, together with the regulation of State monopolies pursuant to 
Article 90 of the Treaty is of overall importance in improving efficiency and customer-
oriented services. Full application of competition law will thus help reduce inefficient 
port operations which cause delays, exaggerated prices for port-users, and certain 
employment-related problems, as in the case of the provision of monopoly services. 
Finally, major efficiency improvements in ports could be achieved by a relatively 
simple step on working hours. The absence of essential port services during evening, 
weekend and mid-day hours in many ports has been identified as an important source 
of delay. Introducing 24 hour services, especially for health and customs- checks, in 
ports where there is sufficient demand, could remedy delay problems considerably. 
In the context of improving both the quality and efficiency of short sea shipping 
services and port infrastructure and port efficiency, the Commission supports the 
setting up of informal discussion structures, such as round tables. An enhanced 
dialogue between port bodies (such as port and customs authorities), port service 
providers (such as stevedores and terminal operators), and port users (ship owners, 
agents, shippers, freight forwarders) is particularly important in finding pragmatic 
solutions to port problems. The round tables should be set up in the first instance at 
local port level. Besides this local approach, national round tables, involving the 
central administrations, should be set up to address problems which can not be 
solved at local level. In some European countries, such round tables have already 
produced encouraging results. 
h-8 
C. Preparing Short Sea Shipping for a wider Europe 
The implementation of a series of agreements between the EU and a number of 
Central and Eastern European States, including States in the Baltic, will accelerate 
trade relations and, accordingly, further increase the demand for efficient 
transportation services. The maritime location of most of these countries with 
important ports on the Baltic and the Black Sea means that short sea shipping is well-
placed for contributing more than proportionately to the provision of such services. 
Closer economic ties with neighbouring countries in the Mediterranean region will also 
strengthen the relative importance and potential of short sea shipping. 
Shipping, and more specifically short sea shipping, must prepare for a wider Europe. 
The Commission should stress, where appropriate, the need to promote short sea 
shipping when Central and Eastern European or other States (e.g. Mediterranean or 
Black Sea countries) request Union support for projects or studies related to transport 
infrastructure. It is important that maritime transport and ports infrastructure is fully 
taken into account at a time when fundamental decisions affecting the future transport 
policies of these countries are being made. 
In this context, the Commission services have already set up Working Groups for the 
Development of Waterborne Transport in the Baltic, the Mediterranean and the Black 
sea areas. Each of these Working Groups will set up a multi annual work programme 
aiming at inter alia developing the potential of shortsea shipping in their regions. This 
will allow the Community and other donors to make financial and other assistance 
available for the promotion of Short Sea Shipping. 
III. Conclusion 
This Communication has aimed at giving an outline of the potential of short sea 
shipping for Europe. It has shown that there are still many hurdles to overcome, if 
short sea shipping is to play its full part in the multimodal transport system. 
Improving short sea transport services must involve action in the administrative, 
technical and commercial fields. It also implies close cooperation between industry, 
users and administrations. The solutions need to focus not only on shipping, but also 
on ports and the general political and regulatory framework of shipping. Actions must 
be co-ordinated. The modal shift which should result from removing the obstacles for 
short sea shipping will ease land traffic congestion and improve the environmental 
situation. This should contribute to reducing the level of investment necessary for land 
transport infrastructure. Both transport users and transport providers should ultimately 
gain from a more efficient multimodal network in which short sea shipping attains its 
full potential. 
The Commission has set out an action programme which includes subjects for 
Community action as well as recommendations directed to other parties active in this 
field. Implementation of this programme will be carried out in close cooperation with 
national and local authorities as well as the maritime sector itself. 
f\-9 
In presenting this Communication on the promotion of short sea shipping, the 
Commission wishes to stimulate a general political and public debate on the various 
ideas raised. Following this debate, the Commission will, where necessary, submit 
legislative proposals. 
IV. Action programme 
In section A below are listed all measures which will be undertaken by the 
Community. Section B provides an overview of all measures which need to be taken 
and indicates the parties which should be responsible for the actions. 
A. Commission action programme 
a. Improving the quality and efficiency of short sea shipping 
services 
Promotion of short sea shipping will be one of the main research 
priorities in the context of the specific programme on transport as well as 
the specific programme on telematics applications of the 4th Framework 
Programme on research and development (beginning in 1995). 
Launching of a large-scale demonstration project for short sea shipping 
(1997) integrating the results obtained under EURET, APAS and the 4th 
Framework Programme in its different areas. The structure and terms of 
reference of this project will be defined on the basis of the results of a 
R&D concerted action on short sea shipping (1995). 
Support for short sea shipping pilot schemes in the context of integrated 
intermodal transport chains (ongoing). 
Integration of short sea shipping into a multimodal transport information 
system supporting the cooperative management of the transport flow 
(beginning in 1996). 
Implementation and monitoring of the MARIS (Maritime Information 
Society) project (ongoing). 
Sea-river port projects of common interest to be considered for support 
under the trans-European network plan on the same basis as sea ports 
(ongoing). 
f\-10 
Promotion of Electronic Data Interchange: 
Support financially, where appropriate, initiatives aimed at 
promoting EDI within the maritime industries (1995 and ongoing). 
Support for the creation of a group of industry experts composed 
of industry experts in EDI who would provide services to small 
ports and small and medium-sized shipping companies (1995). 
Support for initiatives which will make data on present short sea 
services available to all interested parties through EDI systems 
(1995 and ongoing). 
Support for conferences, workshops and other actions aimed at 
marketing and promoting short sea shipping services (ongoing). 
Participation in a programme of training courses on short sea shipping 
which is being carried out in the framework of UNCTAD's European 
TRAINMAR centres (ongoing). 
Proposing the establishment of a definitive veterinary check regime which 
will restrict checks as far as possible to the port of final destination 
(1995). 
Proposal for a Council Directive on the provision of statistical data on 
transport by sea (proposal adopted by the Commission in 1994). 
Improving port infrastructure and port efficiency. 
Including in the trans-European network plan port projects of common 
interest of particular interest for short sea shipping (1995). 
Presentation of Commission guidelines on State aids to ports (1996). 
Research and Development in ports will be an important part of the 
waterborne transport programme in the context of the 4th Framework 
Programme on R&D (1995). 
Support for setting up local port or national roundtables of the maritime 
industries to address problems arising in the ports and to promote short 
sea shipping services (1995 and ongoing). 
Support for initiatives taken by industry round tables to improve port 
efficiency and to promote short sea shipping as such (1995 and 
ongoing). 
Provision of financial support for visits, as well as secondments, by 
industry experts to ports, especially in Southern Europe (ongoing). 
Provision of financial support for training programmes for managers of 
ports in peripheral areas organised in highly developed ports in other 
parts of the Union (1995 and ongoing). 
c. Preparing short sea shipping for a wider Europe. 
Emphasis on, in relations with certain third countries (especially the Baltic 
Sea, Black Sea and non-EU Mediterranean countries), the need to 
promote short sea shipping, including maritime links with the European 
Union (ongoing). 
Favouring, where appropriate and requested, projects linked to the 
development of short sea shipping in technical assistance programmes 
to the Central and Eastern European Countries and the Newly 
Independent States (ongoing). 
Participation in Working Parties on waterborne transport in the Black 
Sea, the Baltic Sea and the Mediterranean Sea areas which will pursue 
work programmes aimed at, inter alia, developing the potential of short 
sea shipping in those areas (1995 to 1998). 
Implementing the MARIS project as a mechanism which can contribute 
to the preparation of short sea shipping for a wider Europe (ongoing). 
12 
B. General action programme -- summary chart 
Action/Recommendation 
I. Improving the quality and efficiency of short sea shipping 
services 
Promotion of short sea shipping to be one of the priorities 
within the specific transport programme of the Community's 
Fourth Framework Programme on R & D. 
Support for the establishment of open multimodal transport 
information systems and telematics services for cooperatiive 
management, considering the special need of the short sea 
shippinglines and the small and medium sized ports. 
Support for short sea shipping pilot schemes in the context of 
integrated intermodal transport chains . 
Implementation and monitoring of the MARIS ( Maritime 
Information Society) project 
Promotion of Electronic Data Interchange: 
Further development of EDI in areas such as customs 
procedures and veterinary checks. 
Support financially, where appropriate, workshops, 
conferences and other initiatives aimed at promoting 
EDI in the maritime industries 
Support for the creation of a task-force composed of 
industry experts in EDI who would provide services to 
small ports and small and medium-sized shipping 
companies 
Support for initiatives which will make data on present 
short sea services available to all interested parties, 
possibly through EDI systems Responsibility for Action 
Commission 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X Member States 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X Local/ Regional 
Authorities 
X 
X 
X Port Authorities 
X Maritime Industries 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 2> i 
P 
13 
Action/Recommendation 
Participation in a programme of training courses on short sea 
shipping which is being carried out in the framework ot 
UNCTAD's European TRAINMAR centres 
Support for conferences and workshops aimed at promoting 
short sea shipping 
Regular updated information on services, lines and agents, 
types of cargo and ports of call to be made more widely 
available by ports and shipping companies 
Proposal for a Council Directive on the provision of statistical 
data on transport by sea . 
The establishment of a definitive veterinary checking regime in 
order to restrict checks as far as possible to the port of final 
destination. 
II. Improving port infrastructure and port efficiency. 
Including in the trans-European network plan port projects of 
common interest of particular interest for short sea shipping as 
well as relating to sea-river ports . 
Setting up of rouridtables of the maritime industries to address 
problems arising in the ports and to promote short sea shipping 
services. 
Support for initiatives taken by industry round tables to improve 
port efficiency and to promote short sea shipping as such . 
Provision of financial support for visits, as well as secondments, 
by industry experts to ports, especially in Southern Europe . 
Provision of financial support for training programmes for 
managers of ports in peripheral areas organised in highly 
developed ports in other parts of the Union. 
Presentation of Commission guidelines on State aids to poTts. Responsibility for Action 
Commission 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X Member States 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X Local/ Regional 
Authorities 
X 
X 
X Port Authorities 
X 
X 
X Maritime industries 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 3> 
14 
Action/Recommendation 
Financial relations between ports and public authorities to 
become more transparent. 
Pilotage charging systems for short sea vessels to be reviewed. 
Port charges to be transparent and relate to services actually 
required and rendered. 
Restrictive practices in ports to be abolished. 
Ports to set their tariffs, when based on the new GT system, in 
such a way that no undue profits are made at the expense of 
short sea shipping. 
III. Preparing short sea shipping for a wider Europe 
Emphasis on, in relations with certain third countries (especially 
the Baltic Sea, Black Sea and non-EU Mediterranean 
countries), the need to promote short sea shipping, including 
maritime links with the European Union 
Favouring, where appropriate and requested, projects linked to 
the development of short sea shipping in technical assistance 
programmes to the Central and Eastern European Countries 
and the Newly Independent States 
Participation in Working Parties on waterborne transport in the 
Black Sea, the Baltic Sea and the Mediterranean Sea areas 
area which will pursue work programmes aimed at, inter alia, 
developing the potential of short sea shipping in the area Responsibility for Action 
Commission 
X 
X 
X 
X Member States 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X Local/ Regional 
Authorities 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X Port Authorities 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X Maritime Industries 
X 
X 

The Development of Short Sea Shipping in Europe: 
Prospects and Challenges 
ANNEXES 
ANNEX I: THE ADVANTAGES OF SHORT SEA SHIPPING 
ANNEX II: GROWTH POTENTIAL OF SHORT SEA SHIPPING 
ANNHX III: CHALLENGES FOR SHORT SEA SHIPPING IN EUROPE 
ANNEX IV: AN INTEGRATED POLICY APPROACH FOR SHORT SEA 
SHIPPING IN EUROPE 
ANNEX V: STATISTICAL DATA: A STATISTICAL OVERVIEW OF SHORT 
SEA SHIPPING 
ANNEX 1: THE ADVANTAGES OF SHORT SEA SHIPPING 4 
1. Geographical Advantage 4 
2. Energy and Environmental Performance 4 
3. Positive Effect on the Development of Other Sectors 6 
4. Room for Expansion 6 
ANNEX 2: GROWTH POTENTIAL OF SHORT SEA SHIPPING 8 
A. Examples of growth 8 
B. The "Corridors Study" 9 
1. Introduction 
2. Growth Potential in Specific Corridors 
3. Summary 
ANNEX III: 
A. CHALLENGES FOR SHORT SEA SHIPPING IN EUROPE 14 
B. Structural obstacles to the development of efficient Short Sea 
Shipping services 
1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
5. 14 
Lack of Integration 
Regularity of Services 
Vessel Performance 
Difficulties in Competitive Pricing 
Administrative Barriers 
a. Documentation and Procedures 
b. Veterinary checks 
6. Lack of Statistical Data 
7. Image Problems 
Problems in the area of port infrastructure and port efficiency 
1. Delays In Ports 
2. Port Charges 
3. Labour issues 18 
ANNEX IV: AN INTEGRATED POLICY APPROACH FOR SHORT SEA SHIPPING 
IN EUROPE 20 
The key target: Improving efficiency through modal integration 20 
Subsidiarity: An appropriate allocation of responsibilities for action 20 
A. Improving the quality and efficiency of short sea shipping services . . 21 
1. The Fourth Framework Programme of Research & 
Development - objectives for Short Sea Shipping 
2. Integration into multimodal transport chains 
2.1. Pilot Schemes 
2.2. The MARIS project 
2.3. Combined Transport 
2.4 Sea/river transportation 
2.5 Integrated Management Systems 
2.6 Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) 
3. Administrative framework and promotional activity 
3.1. Liberalisation of Maritime Cabotage: New Business 
Opportunities 
3.2. Improving the Image of Short Sea Shipping 
3.3. Administrative barriers 
a. Documentary requirements and procedures 
b. Veterinary checks 
3.4 Statistical data 
B. Improving port infrastructure and port efficiency 33 
1. Ports and the trans-European networks 
1.1 The trans-European transport network plan 
2. Improvement of Transparency 
2.1 Port tariff transparency for short sea users 
2.2 Transparency duties under State aid rules 
3. Application of Competition Rules 
4. Labour Issues 
5. Dialogue among partners 
C. Preparing short sea shipping for a wider Europe 39 
1. The implications of a wider Europe 
2. Extending the trans-European networks 
3. Developing new structures for cooperation (Working parties 
on waterborne transport) 
4. Further Commission action 
ANNEX V: STATISTICAL DATA - A STATISTICAL OVERVIEW OF SHORT SEA 
SHIPPING 44 
Volumes of goods transported internationally 45 
The importance of feeder services 45 
Traffic flows between European Union Member States (1992) . . .- 46 
The present structure of the Short Sea Shipping fleet 49 
Summary 51 
ANNEX 1 : THE ADVANTAGES OF SHORT SEA SHIPPING 
1. Geographical Advantage 
The European Union has a favourable geographical configuration which makes it 
particularly well suited for waterborne transport. The European Union coastline, 
including the new Member States, is more than 67.000 km long. Few industrial 
and economic centres are situated more than 400 km from a port. Roughly 60 to 
70% of all European industrial centres are located between 150 to 200 km from 
the coast and are therefore, in principle, conveniently located in terms of access 
to waterborne transport. 
Purpose-built coastal vessels can penetrate the wide European network of rivers 
and canals. Europe benefits from a widely dispersed network of 25.000 km of 
inland waterways, of which 12.000 km have been included in the trans-European 
transport network. Canal and river barges transport more than 430 million tonnes 
a year in the European Union. Vessels can load and unload at inland ports such as 
those of Duisburg, Mannheim, Strasbourg as well as Paris, Lyon, Liège, Ghent and 
Brussels. Thjs allows direct waterborne connections with sea and river ports in 
other European Union countries, in Scandinavian countries and in Central and 
Eastern Europe. 
Maritime transport, apart from signalling and safety systems, requires infrastructure 
only in the ports. It therefore requires less infrastructure investment and scarce 
space than land modes. 
2. -Energy and Environmental Performance 
Short sea shipping is generally more energy efficient than road and rail transport. 
For example, according to research undertaken by the United Kingdom Department 
of Transport1, the energy consumption of road freight transport falls in the range 
of between 0.7 and 1.2 mega-joules/tonne-km. For rail the figure is in the region 
of 0.6 mega-joules/tonne-km. In comparison, the energy consumption of a 3000 
dwt coastal tanker at 10 knots is 0.25 mega-joules/tonne-km. The figure for a 
medium sized container ship is approximately 0.12 mega-joules/tonne-km. 
Quoted in Cheetham, C, Hornby, P. and Papenhuijzen, R.. "Recent Developments 
in Feeder Transport by Coasters", in European Shortsea Shipping, proceedings of 
the First European Research Roundtable Conference on Shortsea Shipping, Lloyd 's 
of London Press Ltd. 
Equally important for the success of short sea shipping are its environment and 
safety advantages. Maritime transport is by far the most environmentally-friendly 
mode of transport in terms of levels of pollution and noise. For example, as far as 
air pollution is concerned, it has been estimated that total emissions of C02 
(grammes per tonne-km) are 30 for waterborne transport, 41 for rail and 207 for 
road2. (For a more detailed comparison between modes in terms of both air 
pollution and energy consumption see table below). Comparable data as regards 
emissions of S02 are not available, but work done for the Commission has 
indicated that waterborne transport accounted in 1993 for 32% of total S02 
emissions fom the transport sector and 2% of total emissions. 
Table 1. Different modes of freight transport in terms of energy use and 
pollution 
Specific Primary Energy Consumption (KJ/Tonne-km) 
Rail 
677 Water 
Transport 
423 Road 
2,890 Pipeline 
168 Air 
15,839 
Specific Total Emissions (g/Tonne-km) 
C02 
CH4 
VOC1 
) 
NOx 
CO Rail 
41 
0.06 
0.08 
0.2 
0.05 Water 
Transport 
30 
0.04 
0.1 
0.4 
0.12 Road 
207 
0.3 
1.1 
3.6 
2.4 Pipelin 
e 
10 
0.02 
0.02 
0.02 
0.00 Air 
1,206 
2.0 
3.0 
5.5 
1.4 
1) VOC = Volatile Organic Compounds 
Source: White/egg, John, "Transport for a Sustainable Future -The case for 
Europe", 1993. 
Whitelegg, John. "Transport for a Sustainable Future; The Case for Europe", 1993. 
3. Positive Effect on the Development of Other Sectors 
Short sea shipping also plays an important role in a broader political and economic 
context. 
In case of islands and peripheral regions of the Union, short sea shipping is by far 
the most important and, in many instances the only, mode of transport both for 
passengers and goods. Thus, it can contribute to the development of islands and 
the peripheral regions of the Union by economically stimulating these regions. 
Short sea shipping also contributes significantly to the development of European 
shipbuilding. In 1992, 17% of all merchant vessels of 6.000 GRT or less built 
worldwide were constructed in European Union shipyards, i.e. 96 out of 560. 52% 
of all vessels built in European Union shipyards are 6.000 GRT or less, i.e. 96 .out 
of 185. 
Table 2. Building of merchant vessels of 6.000 GRT* or less (origin) as compared 
to all vessels (excluding passenger ships). Building year: 1992. 
Vessels of 6.000 GRT All vessels, 
or less. 
WORLD 560 984 
EUROPE 1^1 302 
EUROPEAN UNION 96 185 
Source: Institute of Shipping Economics and Logistics (ISL) based upon data 
from Lloyd 's Fleet Data Bank, January 1994. 
* The figure of 6.000 GRT is often used as a dividing line between deep sea 
ships and short sea ships. 
4. Room for Expansion 
While there is increasing congestion in road transport, short sea shipping still has 
available capacity. Extra cargo could be accommodated by the existing short sea 
fleet without high investment in additional vessels. 
Infrastructural costs associated with capacity expansion are relatively low and 
would relate mainly to port projects. Those projects can often be identified, 
prepared and implemented in less time than is generally the case for major projects 
related to other modes of transport. Comparatively small port projects, both in 
terms of scale and costs, can often have a disproportionately large impact on 
transport development. Relatively inexpensive projects such as the removal of 
sandbars or the construction of safety breakwaters can make ports much more 
accessible for maritime transport. A growth in short sea transport would not 
require in most parts of the European Union (Southern European ports, in general, 
being an exception) expensive additional infrastructural works in the ports. 
Investments in capacity increase in short sea shipping are, therefore, in general 
more cost effective than in land modes. 
ANNEX 2: GROWTH POTENTIAL OF SHORT SEA SHIPPING 
A. Examples of growth 
As a consequence of the military conflict in ex-Yugoslavia, traffic carried by land 
transport to and from Greece has been diverted onto other routes which are longer 
and more expensive than the traditional ones as well as to maritime routes.3 There 
has therefore been also an increased use of the short sea crossing to and from Italy 
for transport of cargo. There is a particular need for Greece to develop stronger and 
more efficient maritime connections as an alternative to long and difficult overland 
routes. Table 1 shows that maritime transport from Greece to Italy, in terms of 
lorries/trucks carried, has increased dramatically since 1991. 
Table 3. Lorries/trucks transported by sea from Greece to Italy (1991/1994) 
From: Greece 
1991 
1992 
1993 To: Italy 
Ancona 
20522 
25604 
32913 Bari 
11511 
16982 
24366 Brindisi 
14650 
17613 
36254 Trieste 
-
1263 
2519 Annual Total 
46683 
61462 
96052 1991 = 100 
100 
132 
206 
Source: Athens University of Economics and Business. 
This emphasises the need to assess the functioning of the Adriatic ports and to 
decide upon the measures necessary to upgrade them in order to foster short sea 
services as an alternative to land transport in North-South trade in the Balkan area. 
In 1990, 90% of Greece's exports to its EC partners went by the land route linking this 
country to the central areas of the Community. Since the beginning of the military conflict 
in 1991 traffic switched to alternative routes: 
by road, further East, via Bulgaria, Rumania, Hungary and even the Czech 
and Slovak Republics; 
by sea, via Italy, between Brindisi, Bari or Ancona and Patras or 
Igoumenitsa, whose ports are equipped to accommodate Ro/Ro traffic. 
9 
B. The "Corridors Study" 
1. Introduction 
A large-scale study, co-financed by the Commission, has examined the competitive 
position of short sea shipping. Eight important trade corridors in the Union, of 
which three went beyond its external borders, were selected for analysis.4The goal 
of the study was to identify for each of these eight corridors the types and 
quantities of goods that could be transferred from land modes to short sea 
shipping. The study was also to identify the main obstacles preventing such a 
transfer. The potential of sea-river traffic was examined though not in detail on 
specific routes. 
The following general conclusions can be drawn from the study: 
Trade can be shifted from land modes to short sea shipping. However, 
this will only be possible if short sea shipping improves the efficiency of 
its operations and is integrated into multimodal transport chains. 
The cargo transfer potential is sufficient to justify substantial new 
investment in short sea shipping within the next few years. 
The cargo transfer potential is such that if realized in practice it could 
reduce substantially the growth of land traffic on congested corridors. 
The use of inland waterways ports by short sea vessels could provide 
efficient new transport services between certain major European 
industrial centres. 
2. Growth Potential in Specific Corridors 
The study's findings, based on the available statistical information, were made with 
respect to the following eight corridors: 
Spain - United Kingdom 
Portugal - United Kingdom 
Spain/Portugal - Germany 
Italy/Greece - United Kingdom/Ireland 
Italy - Danubian Countries 
Benelux/Germany - Nordic Countries 
Benelux/Germany - United Kingdom/Ireland 
Benelux/Germany - Black Sea Area 
The study consisted of the following two reports: 
"Analysis of the Competitive Position of short sea shipping: Development of Policy 
Measures". Policy Research Corporation N.V., August 1993; and 
"Transport de Marchandises sur les Grands Axes Européens: Recherche de Routes 
Alternatives Terre-Mer". Institut Français de la Mer, August 1993. 
\) 
10 
Below are the summarized findings of the analysis.5 A certain percentage share is 
shown for road transport in all the corridors concerned, including those in which 
at some stage this transport would have had to cross sea lanes. This is because 
the mode of transport shown in the statistics is the mode used at the point at 
which the data were recorded, although more than one mode may have been used. 
The analysis shows the potential on these corridors for short sea shipping because 
all goods which at some stage have to be carried across sea lanes are potential 
targets for the longer sea route. 
a. Spain - United Kingdom 
Short sea shipping has already a market share of 81% (75.5% northbound and 
87% southbound) of the total trade volume in this corridor. Road transport holds 
a share of 17% (22% northbound and 12% southbound). The remainder -- l.ess 
than 2% -- is transported by rail and other modes. In terms of value, road transport 
represents 50%; short sea shipping holds a share of 33%. The total volume of 
trade in 1990 was 9,3 million tonnes, of which 4,5 million tonnes were south-
north and 4,8 million tonnes were north-south. 
38 to 40% of the road mode share of traffic could be shifted in the short and 
medium term to short sea shipping. The potential transfer in volume terms would 
be around 0,6 million tonnes (0,2 million tonnes south-north and 0,4 million tonnes 
north-south). This would represent approximative^ 6% of the total traffic. A more 
difficult, long-term effort could shift additional traffic volume of 4 to 5% of the 
total traffic to short sea shipping. However, the amount of cargo that can in 
practice be transferred will be effected by the impact of the Channel Tunnel. This 
consideration also applies to the Portugal-United Kingdom corridor. 
b. Portugal - United Kingdom 
The share of short sea shipping in this corridor is 93% (93.6% south-north and 
92.6% north-south) in traffic volume, but only 47.5% in value. Road transport 
accounts for 6.5% of traffic volume. (6.1 % south-north and 7% north-south). The 
total volume amounts to 3,2 million tonnes (1,7 million south-north and 1,5 
million north-south). 
Because of the already high share of short sea shipping, it is estimated that less 
than 3% of the total traffic volume could be transferred in the short and medium 
term to short sea. The potential transfer in volume terms would be 100,000 
tonnes. An additional 2.5% could be transferred in the longer term. 
Unless otherwise indicated, figures are for 1990/91 and indicate volumes for trade in 
both directions. Percentages are rounded. For an exhaustive analysis and the 
methodology, see the above-mentioned studies. 
11 
c. Spain/Portugal - Germany 
In the trade of Spain and Portugal to Germany, road is the predominant mode of 
transport with more than 51 % (similar share in both directions). Short sea follows 
with 23.5% (similar share in both directions). Rail carries 8.5% (12% north-south 
and 5% south-north) and 17% is carried by inland waterways (13% north-south 
and 20% south-north). 
The total volume of trade between Portugal and Germany was 1,8 million tonnes 
(0,7 million north-south and 1,1 million south-north). 
The total volume of trade between Spain and Germany was 7,4 million tonnes (3,7 
million tonnes in each direction). 
Short sea shipping could capture from road transport another 20% of the total 
traffic volume in the short and medium term and a further 13% in the long term, 
if it is able to compete for the expensive commodities trade. The volume 
transferable in the short to medium term would be 1,8 million tonnes (of which 
0,5 million south-north and 1,3 million north-south). 
d. UK/Ireland - Italy/Greece 
Total traffic volumes between the UK and Greece are modest, standing at 220.000 
tonnes northbound and 160.000 tonnes southbound in 1992. The direct short sea 
route is the long sea route via Gibraltar. The other alternatives are land transport 
combined with ferry crossings (Greece-Italy and France-United Kingdom/Ireland). 
The Channel Tunnel, when opened, will also play a role. 
Short sea shipping suffers from fragmentation and a relatively low frequency of 
service. A relatively fast ro/ro vessel could complete the voyage in six days. 
Consolidation of cargo among existing operators could improve effective frequency 
to a service every 2 - 3 days. The greatest frequency at present is one service per 
week. This transit time could however only be achieved if, for northern Europe, a 
UK port was the last port of call and a Greek port the first in the eastern 
Mediterranean. 
A higher proportion of the southern Italian market could also be captured by a 
"direct" short sea service if the problems of transit time and frequency of service 
were satisfactorily resolved. A direct ro/ro service could be attractive on cost 
grounds. Alternatively, East Mediterranean services could call in southern Italy en 
route for the UK. However, overall trade is limited and container lines already 
capture a substantial proportion of the market. 
12 
e. Italy - Danubian Countries 
In 1989, short sea carried 31 % (17% eastbound and 34% westbound) of the total 
traffic between Italy and the Danubian Countries6; 41% went by road (66% 
eastbound and 36% westbound) and 27% went by rail (16% eastbound and 
30% westbound). 
The possible transfer from land transport to the maritime mode could represent up 
to 6% of total traffic volume or 1,4 million tonnes (0,4 west-east and 1 east-west). 
The further development of sea-river traffic on the Danube and the possibility of 
further restrictions on road freight in Austria and Switzerland could mean further 
potential for transfer, even in the short term. 
f. Benelux/Germany - Nordic Countries/Baltic Sea 
Short sea shipping is the dominant mode of transport in this corridor, with 70% of 
total traffic from the Nordic countries and Poland to Benelux/Germany and 55 % 
from Benelux/Germany to the Nordic countries and Poland. Road transport 
accounts for 30 % of total traffic from Benelux/Germany to the Nordic countries 
and Poland, but for only 9% of the traffic from the Nordic countries and Poland to 
Benelux/Germany. 
The total traffic between both regions has a volume of 175 million tonnes, of 
which 52 originated in Benelux/Germany and 123 in the Nordic countries and 
Poland. 
A significant transfer is possible in the Benelux/Germany to Nordic countries/Baltic 
Sea trade. This is conditional on improvement of the overall cost position of short 
sea shipping through effective intermodal management. 
More recent research conducted by the same consultants estimated that for 
example for the port of Zeebrugge alone the increase in short sea shipping traffic 
could be between 2 million tonnes and 4 million tonnes over the next ten years. 
g. Benelux/Germany - United Kingdom/Ireland 
Because of the insular position of the UK and Ireland, all transport of goods (except 
air travel) between these countries and the continent involved by definition a 
maritime component at least before the Channel Tunnel commenced operation. The 
objective on this corridor is to increase the use of those routes in which the 
maritime leg is maximised, the "direct" short sea routes. 
These include, for the purposes of this calculation, Austria, former Czechoslovakia, 
former Yugoslavia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria. 
13 
The main problem in increasing the "direct" short sea share of the traffic between 
Ireland and the Benelux countries is that of attracting sufficient volume to justify 
more frequent and faster sailings. The same is true of the southern and central 
corridor routes to mainland Britain which are in competition with the route through 
Northern Ireland, the "land bridge" route. 
In the UK-Netherlands/Germany/Denmark corridor the "short sea" alternatives are 
the routes from North Sea ports as opposed to Channel ports. 
h. Benelux/Germany - Black Sea Area 
Short sea shipping represents 56 % of total traffic from Benelux/Germany towards 
the Black Sea Area but only 41 % from the Black Sea Area to Benelux/Germany. 
Road transport represents only 18% of the total traffic from Benelux/Germany to 
the Black Sea Area, whereas it represents 34 % in the opposite direction. The 
volume involved is 5,2 million tonnes from Benelux/Germany to the Black Sea Area 
and 3,7 million tonnes from the Black Sea Area to Benelux/Germany. 
There are no concrete estimates of how much additional traffic short sea shipping 
could capture. The main obstacle facing short sea shipping in this corridor is that 
of delivery time. Delivery is slow due to delays in ports, long sailing times and 
sometimes the sailing schedules of the shipping lines. The handling capability for 
containers is also poor in several ports in the Black Sea Area. 
3. Summary 
The survey shows that there are growth opportunities for short sea shipping in at 
least six of the eight corridors analyzed, including in particular Spain/Portugal to 
Germany, Spain/Portugal to The United Kingdom, Benelux/Germany to the Nordic 
countries and Benelux to the Northern region of The United Kingdom. 
14 
ANNEX III: CHALLENGES FOR SHORT SEA SHIPPING IN EUROPE 
A. Structural obstacles to the development of efficient Short Sea Shipping 
services 
1. Lack of Integration 
Lack of integration with other transport modes is a crucial problem of short sea 
shipping, as customers have increasingly come to request cooperation between sea 
freight, rail transport and land haulage, which inter alia concerns just-in-time 
transport logistics. This concept of manufacturing is based on a lower level of 
stockholding. It thus requires regular, frequent and reliable deliveries at agreed 
times. These levels of delivery performance are often as important to customers 
as cost levels. However, at present short sea shipping is seen as not being capable 
of meeting sufficiently these requirements. 
Short sea shipping has not so far been well-integrated into the multimodal transport 
operation. Transshipment costs as a proportion of total costs are very often 
prohibitively high, particularly in the case of relatively short voyages by sea. 
Moreover, with the exception of some container feeder or existing door-to-door 
services, short sea shipping is still in need of significant improvement as far as 
punctuality, reliability and availability of services are concerned. It is thus not 
always a favoured partner in the organisation of multimodal transport chains. 
Lack of integration is further hindered by the absence of widespread use of 
electronic data interchange (EDI), which helps to facilitate considerably the flow 
of cargo, promotes efficiency and reliability, and contributes to maritime safety. 
Another stumbling block to integration is that different types of cargo carrying 
units are being used in the different transport modes. 
2. Regularity of Services 
The regularity of service poses a major problem to short sea shipping. This results 
from trade imbalances in trading relations between parts of Europe. There is often 
a gap between imports and exports in trade between regions in Northern and 
Southern Europe. For example, in 1992 total unit load traffic between the U.K. and 
Greece was approximately 220.000 tonnes northbound and only 160.000 tonnes 
southbound. This, combined with the seasonal nature of some trades, hinders the 
development of regular short sea services. Trade imbalances can affect all 
transport modes. However, unlike road transport short sea shipping can less easily 
adapt to trade imbalances because it is less flexible in picking up additional cargo 
to fill the capacity available. 
15 
The regularity and flexibility of short sea shipping services could be improved to a 
certain extent if the operators of such services were to enter into cooperative 
agreements.to promote joint services and to coordinate shipping schedules. Such 
agreements give operators greater opportunities to adjust their shipping schedules 
and frequency of sailings to reflect variations in demand. 
3. Vessel Performance 
A further comparative disadvantage of traditional short sea shipping is its lack of 
speed when compared to its competitors on European trade corridors, especially 
road. This leads to relatively long delivery or transit times. Delivery times are also 
affected by transshipment delays in ports. Often, vessel technology does not 
match the latest achievements in other transport modes. The resulting slowness 
is exacerbated by port-related deficiencies. The shorter the route, the more marked 
is the advantage of road transport. On longer routes, however, use of advanced 
technologies in the construction of vessels can contribute to shifting the modal 
balance in favour of short sea shipping. 
4. Difficulties in Competitive Pricing 
In view of certain disadvantages in terms of integration, regularity, speed and its 
somewhat negative image, it has been estimated that short sea shipping has to be 
at least 35% cheaper than other transport modes to stay competitive.7 It appears 
not to be easy structurally for short sea shipping to achieve this competitive price 
level. Competitive pricing requires high load factors, which reduces unit costs. But 
the volume of cargo in the vicinity of a port is often insufficient to justify a regular 
high frequency service on a given link. This makes short sea shipping less 
attractive for shippers. 
5. Administrative Barriers 
a. Documentation and Procedures 
The often rather complex documentation and administrative procedures in ports are 
obstacles to the development of short sea shipping. This is particularly true of 
customs procedures concerning either the cargo or the vessel. Information and 
documentary requirements are often not user friendly. Divergent application of the 
procedures in the Member States also cause problems. 
See MERC/NEA, "Mariniseerbare Ladingen (Cargoes that could go by sea)", July 1 991 
16 
Despite simplification of customs transit procedures since 1 January 1993, 
difficulties in maritime transport remain. The new Community transit system 
provides that goods transported within the Union can be assumed to be in free 
circulation in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Goods moved by sea are 
excluded from this assumption where the ship carrying them has also called at a 
port outside the Union (or a freeport in the Union) for loading or for discharging. 
This denies, to some extent, the benefits of the new regime to certain cargo 
shipped by short sea shipping. By the very nature of maritime transport, vessels 
often leave the territorial waters of the Community and call at third country ports. 
In such cases, it is necessary to prove the status of Community goods on arrival 
at the Community port of discharge. However, similar provisions apply to other 
means of transport. For example, when goods are consigned by road between 
Member States via the territory of a third country they must be placed under the 
internal Community transit procedure if the third country is an EFTA country. In the 
case of transit via non EFTA countries, it is necessary to prove Community status 
on arrival in the Member States of destination. 
b. Veterinary checks 
A specific problem in the administrative field lies in the new veterinary check 
regime, in force since 1 January 19938. It appears to have an adverse effect on 
short sea shipping in so far as transportation of goods of animal origin coming from 
a third country is concerned. This problem has been highlighted by the MIF. 
There are different types of veterinary checks: physical, identity and documentary. 
Directive 90/675/EEC provides as a general rule, in the case of goods of animal 
origin entering the Community from third countries, for the veterinary checks to be 
carried out upon entry of these products into the Community territory at one of the 
border inspection posts. It provides that the physical checks may nevertheless be 
carried out in the port of final destination on condition that the cargo is transported 
by sea. 
The fact that all checks are not being carried out in the same place causes 
problems for shipowners. The reason is that the original veterinary document does 
not always accompany the goods transported, as it is used by the carriers as a 
guarantee for banks at the port of final destination. Shipowners also complain that 
the different nature of the checks and the different level of inspections carried out 
in ports in Member States creates uncertainty and increases compliance costs. 
See Commission Decision 92/571 /EEC relating to new transitional measures which are 
necessary to facilitate the move to the system of veterinary checks provided for in 
Council Directive (EEC) 90/675, O.J. No L 367/92 of 16.12.1992. See also Council 
Directive (EEC) 90/675, of 10 December 1990, laying down the principles governing 
the organization of veterinary checks on products entering the Community from third 
countries, O.J. No L 373, 31 December 1990. 
17 
6. Lack of Statistical Data 
The lack of-reliability and compatibility of the available statistical data on the 
transport of goods in general, and on shipping in particular, is a disadvantage. It 
makes accurate analysis of trade flows between ports and between regions 
difficult. This creates problems both for commercial development and policy 
making. 
It means that market analysis and research relating to developing short sea traffic 
on existing routes and creating new routes is difficult to carry out. This 
discourages private operators from looking for new market opportunities. Lack of 
statistical data is also a barrier to effective policy making because it makes 
effective planning difficult for public authorities9. 
7. Image Problems 
Some industry sources feel that, over and above the various practical difficulties 
described, the problem of the image of short sea shipping may be the most 
significant barrier to its development. They have often found a quite strong 
resistance on the part of people dealing with transportation in large companies to 
the idea of using short sea shipping even when reliable services are available. 
Short sea shipping has, in some quarters, an old fashioned image which has 
prevented it from developing a stronger position in the transportation market. 
Services have often not been marketed effectively and shippers are sometimes 
even unaware of the services available. The improvement of its image requires 
appropriate marketing targeted at potential customers. The MIF Short Sea Panel 
has identified this as a significant barrier. 
Many European shippers and forwarders are often not aware of existing short sea 
shipping services. When considering transport of goods, they think first in terms 
of road or rail and perceive shipping as concerned with intercontinental traffic. 
Shipping in the European context is identified with bulk transport only and usually 
not considered to be a real alternative or complement to land transport. 
For a more detailed discussion of this problem see Annex 5. 
(5) 
18 
B. Problems in the area of port infrastructure and port efficiency 
1. Delays In Ports 
A serious disadvantage for short sea shipping lies in the turnaround delays in ports, 
which partly result from lack of suitable infrastructure. This phenomenon is present 
in particular in the Southern European countries and also in Ireland. Generally 
speaking, the smaller ports in these countries have spent little on infrastructure in 
the last two decades, due to lack of financial resources. Turnaround delays can 
also result from the lack of smooth connecting links to inland infrastructure as well 
as inefficient port operations, where facilities are not adapted to present needs. 
There appears for example to be a wide disparity in terms of container handling 
speed between the most efficient Northern European ports and many Southern 
European ports. The most efficient Northern European ports boast container 
handling speeds of up to 30 containers per hour, whereas some Southern European 
ports can only handle approximately half that level. 
As a result of efficiency problems, ships can spend a considerable proportion of 
total transport time in ports, which increases costs. It has been estimated by the 
European shipowners that ships spend on average 60% of their total time in ports 
and only 40% at sea. 
2. Port Charges 
Port charges in Europe are in some instances disproportionately high. The result is 
a considerable competitive disadvantage for short sea shipping. In some specific 
cases, according to the MIF's Short Sea Panel, overall port expenses may account 
for 70 to 80% of the total cost of short sea shipping services. One source has 
estimated that average port costs per container transported by short sea shipping 
can vary from 55/75 ECU in many Northern European ports to over 200 ECU in 
some Southern European ports10. 
Port charges are not always transparent and in some ports users are obliged to pay 
for services which they neither need nor require. A ship calling in a port has to pay 
dues for services including pilotage, harbour and quay use. These depend usually 
on the ship size and type, the amount of cargo loaded or unloaded and the nature 
of the port and its facilities. Pilotage costs in particular may often be a relatively 
heavier burden on short sea ships than deep sea ships. Ships generally have to pay 
pilotage costs even if they do not require the service. A similar situation arises in 
many cases in relation to charges for towing. Further, high stevedoring charges in 
some countries lead to high overall port costs. 
Figures provided by MDS Transmodal, 1994. 
19 
In the context of port charges, reference should be made to the 1969 International 
Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships (Oslo Convention), which entered 
fully into force in July 1994. This Convention provides for changing the basis of 
tonnage measurement from Gross Registered Tonnage to Gross Tonnage. This 
change appears to have caused problems, in particular for owners of vessels more 
than 12 years old which have had to be remeasured. Apart from cargo handling, 
the heaviest costs in ports consist of pilotage fees, towage costs and port dues. 
The tariffs for these services are often and to a large extent based on the ship 's 
tonnage measurement. Shipowners claim that the changes result in much higher 
charges for some vessels. 
3. Labour issues 
While recognising that the situation of labour as well as the working conditions in 
ports have gradually been improving, existing restrictive labour regulations and 
practices still reduce the efficiency of port operations and have a considerable 
impact on cargo handling costs. Regulations and agreements which prevent port 
authorities and other interested parties from freely hiring qualified labour create 
distortions in the market. This is particularly significant where the maritime sector 
is in direct competition with land modes. 
20 
ANNEX IV: AN INTEGRATED POLICY APPROACH FOR SHORT SEA 
SHIPPING IN EUROPE 
The key target: Improving efficiency through modal integration 
Sustainable mobility requires multimodal transportation networks, in which the 
advantages of the individual modes are combined in a way which increases 
efficiency, reduces pressure on the environment and makes best use of existing 
resources. Short sea shipping is not yet contributing to these objectives. 
The lack of integration into the multimodal transport chain is a core problem of 
short sea shipping. Short sea shipping will only develop its fuH potential if it is 
appropriately integrated in the transport chain. Modern trade and industry require 
door-to-door transport services and just-in-time delivery of goods and components. 
Integrated multimodal transport organisation, which guarantees regular and reliable 
service, can best meet these needs. 
According to the results of the study mentioned above, the potential cargo transfer 
from other transport modes is sufficient to justify new investment in short sea 
shipping within the years to come. Action in favour of this transfer should, in the 
Commission 's view, not result in the creation of artificial advantages for short sea 
transport as compared to the other modes of transport. 
Subsidiarity: An appropriate allocation of responsibilities for action 
The agenda for short sea shipping has a marked European Union dimension. 
European short sea shipping is largely international, as a large proportion of its 
trade is between states. Therefore, significant improvements in the performance 
of short sea shipping within the European Union will require coordinated action 
across national frontiers. For example, measures taken by Member States 
individually to improve the efficiency of their ports may turn out to be ineffective 
if they are not matched by actions in other Member States with whom there is 
trade. The development of combined transport including a maritime transport leg, 
the development of Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) networks and the 
enhancement of the role of short sea shipping in relations with third countries, also 
require actions at Community and international level. 
21 
The measures proposed in this Communication are to a great extent directed 
towards industry, port authorities or the Member States' national, regional or local 
authorities. Much of the impetus for development of short sea shipping will have 
to come from the industry or national or local administrations. The Community's 
own contribution to improving the competitiveness of short sea shipping lies in 
expanding research and development efforts as well as fostering integration, 
marketing and business opportunities for short sea shipping. In this context, the 
Commission will continue to liaise closely with the Maritime Industries Forum and, 
in particular, its short sea shipping panel. This will provide the maritime industries 
with an effective input into the preparation of Community policy-making and 
implementation of the proposed action programme. 
A. Improving the quality and efficiency of short sea shipping services 
1. The Fourth Framework Programme of Research & Development -
objectives for Short Sea Shipping 
Previous research and development (R&D) programmes, such as EURET11, COST12 
and APAS13 have already benefited short sea shipping. A major impetus for R&D 
in waterborne transport is to be expected from the Community's Fourth Framework 
Programme of research and development (1994-1998)14, in particular from the 
specific transport programme15 as well as from inter alia the telematics applications 
programme16. 
ii EURET = European Research and Development Programme for Transport, implemented 
under the Second Framework Programme for R&D. 
COST = European cooperation in the field of Scientific and Technical Research. 
The APAS programme has been established to prepare transport actions to be 
supported under the Fourth Framework Programme. It allowed the Commission to 
meet the needs of maritime transport research while the approval procedure of the 
various specific research programmes followed its course. Under APAS, a set of 
studies has been launched in 1994 which cover the assessment of the structure and 
organization of maritime transport, the analysis of supply and demand in short sea 
shipping, and the impact of changing logistics on maritime transport. 
Decision 1110/94 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 April 1994 
concerning the fourth framework programme of the European Community activities in 
the field of research and technological development and demonstration (1994 to 
1998); O.J. No L 126, 18 May 1994. 
Council Decision 914/94 of 1 5 December 1994 adopting a specific programme for 
research and development including demonstration in the field of transport (1994 to 
1998), O.J. N° L 361/94 of 31 December 1994. 
Council Decision 801/94 of 23 November 1 994, O.J. No L 334 of 22 December 1 994. 
22 
The development of maritime transport research projects under this programme will 
contribute to the development of new shipping technologies and strengthen the 
competitiveness of the European maritime industries. A total budget of 240 million 
ECU is allocated for research in transport matters. About 45 million ECU, a 
substantial part. of this budget, is available for the waterborne transport 
programme. Other more generic research and development activities will also have 
a beneficial effect on the maritime industries, such as research in telematics, 
communication technologies or industrial and material technologies. 
In October 1993, the Commission organized a waterborne transport workshop with 
the maritime industries and the Member States. The workshop identified the most 
promising areas for research and development on waterborne transport to be 
developed under the Fourth Framework Programme. The Maritime Industries Forum 
has also put forward recommendations for action on technical concepts in the area 
of short sea shipping. The Commission's priorities for research in waterborne 
transport have been established largely in the light of these two sets of 
recommendations and of contributions from the Member States. 
Research and Development on fast waterborne transport systems and technology 
such as fast-cargo ships, self-unloading bulk carriers, automated unit-load ships 
and sea-river vessels should help to integrate short sea shipping better into 
multimodal transport chains. Other areas of the waterborne transport work 
programme, particularly the ports and logistics sections, will also have a major 
impact on the future development of short sea shipping. 
The design of vessels can play a significant role in improving efficiency. Fast cargo 
ships could play an important role in developing short sea transport subject to 
sufficient cargo being available to justify such services and subject to the time 
savings being significant enough to justify higher energy and other costs. In order 
to fully exploit the potential of this type of ship, however, time spent in ports 
should be reduced. 
Technology such as cargo information systems, self-unloading bulk carriers and 
automated unitload ships could considerably improve the efficiency of short sea 
shipping. Increased automation in the handling of goods on ships and between 
ships and quay could reduce the assistance required from the quayside and help 
reduce delays and costs considerably, particularly when vessels arrive outside 
normal working hours. Extended use of self-loading and self-unloading technology 
should also strengthen the role of smaller ports which will be in a position to 
attract more traffic without substantial new investment. 
In addition, areas of the work programme of Telematics Applications for Transport 
aim at increasing the efficiency of short sea shipping as an alternative transport 
mode supporting the integration and optimisation of the logistical functions in the 
transport chain, the enhancement of vessel traffic services, the organised exchange 
of information and the consideration of additional EDI needs related to the 
movement of passengers, vehicles and freight. 
23 
The application of new technologies to shipping calls for qualified professionals in 
this sector. Training, educational and cultural differences create a gap between the 
professional capabilities and the exploitation of new automated systems. This 
problem requires support for training of workers in the shipping sector through 
interactive multimedia and distance learning technologies. 
The waterborne transport part of the 4th Framework Programme also provides for 
the launching of a large-scale demonstration project for short sea shipping, 
integrating the results achieved under EURET, APAS and the Fourth Framework 
Programme in its different areas. The project will be prepared by the Commission 
and representatives of the Member States through an R&D concerted action on 
short sea shipping.. 
2. Integration into multimodal transport chains 
-2.1. Pilot Schemes 
Much of the research and development efforts described above will foster 
integration of short sea shipping and make it faster, more reliable, more customer-
oriented. However, the Commission believes that besides basic research, learning 
from practical testing of the possibilities offered by new methods, and exploration 
of new markets by pilot schemes is crucial. The Commission therefore has initiated 
a support programme for pilot schemes and intends to expand its support. 
Current pilot schemes include feasibility studies or the actual setting up of 
specialised transport projects. Feasibility studies already supported or currently 
being supported by the Commission relate to: 
• establishment of new maritime links between Ireland and the Continent 
by use of faster ships than the ones currently used; 
• a short sea transport system based on automated unit load ships 
comprising originally Sweden, but now extended to Finland, Norway, 
Denmark, Germany, the United Kingdom, Ireland, the Netherlands, and 
Belgium; 
• a combined transport system based on a maritime link between the UK 
and the eastern part of Germany; 
• a possible new Ro/Ro service between Belgium and Northern Portugal. 
• a possible new Ro/Ro service along the Mediterranean arc, i.e. the West 
coast of Spain, the South coast of France, and North-West coast of 
Italy. 
24 
The Commission intends to seek more financial resources in order to expand its 
support for such schemes. Schemes should focus on the following areas: 
• the identification of potentially viable short sea shipping lines and 
markets, feasibility studies on specific pilot routes and, where 
appropriate and indispensable, the starting-up phase of pilot projects; 
• studies and innovatory schemes aimed at improving the quality of short 
sea shipping multimodal transport services; 
• the promotion of transfer of know-how between Community ports with 
considerable experience and expertise in short sea shipping operations 
and other ports with a potential for this type of transport; 
• assistance in implementing EDI systems in ports; 
• the promotion of cooperation between small and medium-sized short sea 
shipping companies as well as between them and other operators in the 
door-to-door chain, especially through joint-ventures established in 
accordance with EC competition rules. 
Financial support for pilot-schemes will be provided on the basis of co-financing. 
The main requirement the projects will have to meet is a demonstration of their 
potential contribution to attracting current and future cargo flows from land 
transport, mainly road, to the sea on commercial terms. Co-financing of pilot-
schemes should not have a real negative impact on competition between operators 
or ports, or artificially influence competition with land transport. 
2.2. The MARIS project 
The G-717 Ministerial Conference on the Information Society organized by the 
Commission and held in Brussels on 25/26 February 1995 approved eleven pilot-
projects for the development of the Information Society in different sectors. 
One of these projects is MARIS (Maritime Information Society). MARIS aims at 
integrating and enhancing environmental protection and industrial competitiveness 
for all maritime activities by means of information and communication technologies 
including applications in the area of safety and the environment, intelligent 
manufacturing and logistics networks. In general, MARIS will create a basis for the 
re-engineering of production and logistics processes in the maritime sector. It 
embraces four projects: 
Group of the seven most industrialized countries in the world (France, Germany, Italy, 
The United Kingdom, Canada, The United States and Japan). 
25 
• SAFEMAR - maritime safety and environment ; 
• MARTRANS - logistics; 
• MARVEL - industrial manufacturing; 
• MARSOURCE - marine resources. 
The MARTRANS project in particular will have a positive effect on the development 
of short sea shipping. It aims to set up a port logistic information network 
providing real-time information on cargoes and carriers. This will be achieved by 
interconnecting existing port community systems in the G-7 States as well as in 
the European Union and by stimulating the implementation of these systems in 
small and medium-sized ports. Ships and cargoes can be more efficiently matched. 
In essence, MARTRANS is expected to provide assistance in the development of 
competitive, reliable and quality transportation, which should increase cost 
efficiency by providing real time information. 
2.3. Combined Transport 
The Commission is of the opinion that short sea shipping should be developed into 
a fully integrated mode and a competitive alternative. Its role should not be limited 
to providing necessary and inevitable sea crossings as well as links to peripheral 
areas. The promotion of short sea shipping will have to be given greater 
prominence in future action and legislation by the European Community concerning 
combined transport. The traditional combined transport concept, as developed 
more than 20 years ago under Regulation (EEC) 1107/70,18 concentrated on 
road/rail/inland waterway combinations. 
Following the proposal of the Commission, the Council adopted in 1993 a Decision 
creating the trans-European network of combined transport19. This network 
includes rail and inland waterways lines, plus all transshipment installations 
between ro'ad, rail, inland waterways and sea. It aims to define the infrastructure 
which constitutes the combined transport network, such as for example port 
infrastructure. This was an important step towards the integration of short sea 
transport into the combined transport chains. 
18 Council Regulation (EEC) 1107/70 of 26 June 1970 on the granting of aids for 
transport by rail, road or inland waterway. 
Council decision 93/628 of 29 October 1993 concerning the establishment of a trans-
European network of combined transport. 
26 
Under the PACT (Pilot Actions for Combined Transport) programme, launched in 
199220, the Commission can grant financial support for combined transport pilot 
schemes. This programme concentrates primarily on road, rail and inland 
waterways transport. However, when a sea crossing is the only possible means of 
access to Union territory for a given region of the Union, sea routes may be 
covered. 
One example of a scheme supported by PACT which involves short sea shipping 
is a combined transport corridor project from southern Germany to Patras in 
Greece. This project includes a sea route between Brindisi in Italy and Patras, and 
it aims at improving the overall quality and price reduction of the combined 
transport service on the route. 
PACT currently includes three other projects with a maritime link, which concern 
the setting up of: 
• a corridor between Ireland, the United Kingdom and France, across the 
Irish Sea and through the Channel Tunnel; 
• a corridor from Norway/Sweden to Denmark and Germany; 
• a sea corridor from the United Kingdom to Germany, continuing by rail 
into Germany (the Baltic by-pass).21 
2.4 Sea/river transportation 
Sea/river vessels are sea-going vessels which, due to their design features, are able 
to operate also on inland waterways. They enlarge the range of coastal shipping 
considerably and give a number of industrial centres located inland direct access 
to maritime transport. They can profit from cost and time savings because 
transhipment at sea ports is unnecessary. Moreover, economies can be made 
because cargo-handling costs at inland ports are generally lower. 
The development of sea/river transport enables short sea traffic to penetrate 
deeper into the territories of Member States. It will increase the distances covered 
by short sea shipping and improve the viability of its operations. 
20 Commission Decision (EEC) 45/93 of 22 December 1992, concerning the granting of 
financial support for pilot schemes to promote combined transport. 
21 Another part of this project is financed as a short sea pilot scheme, see above A.2.1. 
27 
The Commission has initiated a fact-finding study to examine the market structure 
of sea/river transport on the main European inland waterways. The findings of the 
study indicate that the total annual sea/river transportation volume in the EU and 
EFTA states is approximately 15 million tonnes. In the period from 1982 to 1992 
the overall volume increased by 25%. 
According to the study, the use of sea/river vessels to transport bulk and break-
bulk cargoes on certain routes can produce cost savings of between 10% and 20% 
of total transportation costs as compared to combined use of short sea and inland 
navigation. On certain routes sea/river transportation of containers is 5%-10% 
cheaper than the use of coastal vessels combined with barges or trucks. Thus, in 
the case of goods presently transported by road between Lyon and Rome, the use 
of the sea/ river alternative would reduce transportation costs by over 30%, 
although the transit time would be a few days longer. This alternative would also 
be cheaper than the road/sea route via a port such as Marseilles. 
The R&D needs of sea/river transportation will be covered largely in the specific 
transport part of the Fourth Framework Programme. 
In the context of research into the contribution of transport systems to sustainable 
development, it is important to take into account the ecological role of inland 
waterways. The specific programme on Environment and Climate addresses this 
issue. 
2.5 Integrated Management Systems 
Since a crucial problem of short sea shipping is the lack of integrationjwith other 
transport modes the port and the ship operator need to be integrated in their 
customers'transport chain and the accompanying information flow. 
There are two main potential areas for future applications of innovative telematics 
aiming at increasing benefits, to improve total product quality and meet increasing 
demands through integrated management systems: 
the cooperative management of the cargo flow (e.g. common cargo tracking 
and tracing techniques), and 
the cooperative management of the employment of resources (e.g. of ships, 
transshipment equipment, storage places or staff). 
Action by the Commission in this field will be to coordinate and participate in 
research, technological developments and demonstration work for the definition of 
systems, mainly for the following areas: 
28 
the establishment of an open transport information network enabling small 
and medium sized enterprises and ports to participate in transport and 
logistic information networks; 
the cooperative management of the flow of cargo (e.g. cooperative cargo 
tracking and tracing); 
the cooperative management of the employment of resources (e.g. of ships, 
transshipment equipment, storage places or staff); 
human/system interfaces including multimedia communications to support 
the cooperative dialogue. 
2.6 Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) 
Traditional documentation systems are cumbersome, inhibiting efficient operatipn, 
increasing the possibility of error and raising administrative costs. Electronic Data 
Interchange (EDI) combined with adjusted and harmonised procedures, has an 
important part to play in improving the situation. As already mentioned above, EDI 
enhances the smooth flow of cargo, promotes efficiency, safety and reliability of 
short sea shipping and improves its links with other modes of transport. 
EDI will only achieve its full potential if all the parties concerned (shippers, port 
authorities, stevedores, shipowners, etc.) participate in data interchange and ports 
are interlinked. Although the installation and use of EDI will be beneficial for both 
short and deep sea shipping, the access to real time information is more critical in 
short sea shipping. In this sector, ship/cargo transit times are much shorter, which 
leads to higher demands on rapid data flow. 
The use of EDI is not as yet, however, sufficiently widespread within the maritime 
industries. To enhance the use of EDI all over Europe, and indeed worldwide, the 
use of common standards is important. In this perspective, the work of the 
UN/EDIFACT22 board should be mentioned. The EDIFACT rules comprise a set of 
internationally agreed standards for the electronic interchange of structured data, 
particularly in trade in goods and services. However, the development of new 
EDIFACT messages is a long and laborious process which in general takes an 
average of three years. 
Action by the Commission in the field of EDI will be as follows: 
• The Commission will integrate requirements for information exchange in 
its proposals for Union legislation in the area of maritime safety, 
especially those concerning carrying of dangerous or polluting goods. 
This will provide a stimulus for further development of EDI. Other areas 
which might be of interest in this respect are customs procedures and 
veterinary checks. 
EDIFACT = Electronic Data Interchange for Administrations, Commerce and Trade. 
29 
• Initiatives aiming at increasing the maritime industries ' awareness of the 
usefulness of EDI, will be financially supported by the Commission. 
• The Commission would be willing to support an initiative to create a 
task-force of EDI experts to provide technical assistance services to 
small ports and companies free of charge because the experts involved 
would be seconded from enterprises and companies with an interest in 
spreading the use of EDI. 
• The creation of an EDI info-base will be supported by the Commission. 
This info-base will contain information on all available port-based EDI 
services and be continually up-dated. 
3. Administrative framework and promotional activity 
3.1. Liberalisation of Maritime Cabotage: New Business 
Opportunities 
An important part of all cargo loaded and unloaded in European Union ports is 
domestic. In Member States with long coastlines maritime cabotage plays a 
significant role, particularly as far as bulk traffic is concerned. This is the case of 
Spain and Italy for instance, where the maritime sector handles respectively over 
30% and over 20% of domestic trade. The corresponding figure for Great-Britain 
is also over 20%. 
As mentioned before, one disadvantage of short sea shipping are the trade 
imbalances and the inflexibility of short sea shipping when reacting to these. The 
negative effect of trade imbalances on capacity utilization can be countered to 
some extent by the full freedom of cabotage. This will result in a decrease of traffic 
of empty vessels. Greater utilisation of capacity on board ships will further reduce 
overall transport costs for the user. It should also encourage shipowners to create 
new services thus expanding the maritime cabotage market. 
Liberalising maritime cabotage improves the quality of services, reduces prices to 
the benefit of users and fosters the competitiveness of the Member States' short 
sea fleets. Opening up national markets also helps carriers to organise their supply 
of intra-Union services more efficiently. The liberalisation of maritime cabotage not 
only creates new business opportunities, it also helps to address the problem of 
trade imbalances through giving short sea shipping the opportunity to pick up cargo 
between two national ports. 
30 
The principle of free maritime cabotage has been in force in the Union since 1 
January 1993. Council Regulation (EEC) 3577/9223, applying the principle of 
freedom to provide services of maritime transport within Member States (maritime 
cabotage), removes legal constraints which prevented competition for maritime 
transport services within the Member States. Temporary derogations have been 
provided for specific cabotage trades, in particular island cabotage, in the five 
southern Member States. The derogations should provide sufficient time for a 
gradual adaptation to liberalisation. The full impact of the liberalisation of cabotage 
will, therefore, be realised only once all the derogations will have expired. The 
Commission will be submitting to the Council of Ministers in the near future its first 
report on the implementation of this Regulation. 
3.2. Improving the Image of Short Sea Shipping 
The image of short sea shipping needs to be enhanced and its performance 
highlighted through better marketing of its services. 
Ports and shipping companies should make widely available on a regular basis 
updated information on services, lines and agents, types of cargo and ports of call. 
The Commission will support initiatives which aim at making such data available 
through EDI systems to the potential users and open information systems 
supporting integrated management. 
The promotion of short sea shipping's competitive advantages relies on cooperation 
between shippers, shipowners, port authorities, other transport operators, 
governments and the Commission. In particular, the roundtables mentioned below24 
could promote co-operation between all the interested parties and contribute to the 
improvement of the marketing of short sea shipping services. 
Training courses on short sea shipping are proposed in the framework of the 
UNCTAD's European TRAINMAR centres, with the aim of marketing and promoting 
the positive characteristics and potential of short sea shipping in Europe. Senior 
professionals from small and medium-sized enterprises in the areas of freight 
forwarding, multimodal transport operations, shippers and carriers participate in the 
training courses. The Commission participates in this programme. It intends to 
examine the possibility of enlarging its action in this area. 
23 O.J. No L 364/92, 12 December 1992, p. 7. 
24 See below, B.5. 
31 
3.3. Administrative barriers 
a. Documentary requirements and procedures 
Documentary requirements and procedures, particularly in ports, still constitute 
considerable obstacles to the smooth movement of cargo carried by maritime 
transport. 
In intra-Union trade, documentary requirements and procedures relating to cargo 
and transport modes should be restricted to the minimum necessary and should as 
far as possible be the same everywhere in the Union and for all transport modes. 
In a continuous effort on facilitation, the Commission has already introduced 
provisions to simplify the customs requirements by using commercial documents, 
notably the vessel's manifest. The approach is to minimise the burden on trade, 
whilst preserving the necessary elements of control. An Ad-Hoc Group on maritime 
transport has been established within the framework of the Member States ' 
Customs and Transit Committee. This Group will address specific problems arising 
from documentation and procedures in maritime transport. 
The Commission recommends in addition to Member States that: 
• They should take into account the International Maritime Organisation 
(IMO) Facilitation Convention as far as documents and format are 
concerned, as well as a standard entry declaration relating to the safety 
certificates of the vessel. 
• In areas falling within their sphere of competence, standards and 
controls for hazardous goods should be, where appropriate, equivalent 
for all transport modes in all Member States. 
b. Veterinary checks 
Problems arising from the current veterinary check regime as far as transhipment 
in a Community port is concerned appear to have an adverse effect on the 
transportation of goods of animal origin by sea. 
32 
The Commission has already moved to improve the situation in relation to where 
the checks are to be carried out. In the framework of the transitional measures25 
on veterinary checks, it has been provided that in cases of transshipment in a port, 
the physical and identity checks shall be done in the port of final destination, 
though a documentary check still has to be carried out in the former port. It is 
intended to extend these measures until the end of January 1996. The Commission 
also adopted a Decision on the reduced frequency of physical checks of 
harmonised products to be imported from third countries.26 This Decision should 
in principle enter into force in February 1996. In this Decision, the levels of 
inspection of the different products of animal origin to be carried out by Member 
States have been laid down. However, further harmonisation of import conditions 
are necessary and will be proposed in the near future. 
The Commission intends to propose in the near future a modification of Directive 
(EEC) 90/675 in order to establish a definitive checking regime which will restrict 
checks as far as possible to the port of final destination. However, it is intended 
still to provide for the possibility for documentary checks to be carried out in the 
border inspection post of arrival in cases where the competent authority wishes to 
do so. 
3.4 Statistical data 
The disadvantages resulting from the lack of reliability and compatibility of the 
available statistical data on the transport of goods including maritime transport 
have been outlined above. 
In 1994, the Commission put forward a proposal for a Council Directive to improve 
the provision of statistical data on transport by sea27 . 
The adoption of the Directive will extend the range of information available on the 
carriage of goods and passengers and on the vessels carrying them to or from 
ports in the European Union. The data to be supplied with regard to goods will 
include in particular volume, types of cargo, ports of origin and destination, 
nationality of transport operator and information on vessels used. An approach at 
Community level will ensure that the data are comparable, comprehensive, 
consistent and regular. 
Commission Decision 92/571/EEC relating to new transitional measures which are 
necessary to facilitate the move to the system of veterinary checks provided for in 
Council Directive 90/675, O.J. No L 367 of 16.12.1992. The Decision was last 
amended by Decision 94/659, O.J. No L 256, 4 October 1994. 
Commission Decision 94/360/EC of 20 May 1994 on the reduced frequency of 
physical checks of consignments of certain products to be imported from third 
countries, under Council Directive 90/675/EEC, O.J. L 158, 25 June 1994. 
O.J. No C 214 of 4 August 1994. Proposal for a Council Directive on statistical 
returns in respect of carriage of goods and passengers by sea. COM/94/ 275 final. 
33 
This Directive concerns maritime transport in general rather than short sea shipping 
in particular- Its structure, however, will allow for the necessary short sea shipping 
data to be obtained. 
Further Commission actions on data supply include: 
• the recent launch of a study, pending the adoption and the 
implementation of the directive, on intra- and extra-Community seaborne 
trade. The study will, inter alia, estimate, in cases where the existing 
data is insufficient, seaborne trade flows between the Member States 
and between the Community and third countries in volume and value 
terms as well as on their origin and destination. These trade flows will, 
moreover, be broken down by nationality of operator, owner and of flag 
in order to establish the relevant trends; 
• the launching or co-financing of studies aiming at the identification of 
potential markets on the basis of trade flows in order to favour the shift 
of traffic from land to maritime transport. 
B. Improving port infrastructure and port efficiency 
Actions to improve the short sea transport product must be combined with actions 
to improve port efficiency in order to substantially improve the competitiveness 
of short sea shipping. Ports provide the essential link between maritime, land and 
inland waterway transport. Only if ports perform efficiently as an integrated part 
of the transport chain, can the full benefits of short sea shipping be achieved. 
Ports must therefore provide: 
• efficient, demand-oriented infrastructure which adequately links the 
different transport modes; 
• services and equipment to transfer goods smoothly between transport 
modes; 
• management and labour arrangements which can maximise the potential 
of the physical investments; and 
• arrangements under which operators provide open and competitive 
services. 
In the context of port-related problems, The Commission envisages a global 
approach which is based on the following elements: 
• Improvement of infrastructure in the context of the trans-European 
transport network plan and the Regional and Cohesion Funds; 
• Research and Development for ports, also aimed at improving port 
efficiency and minimizing delays; 
• Improvement of transparency in ports, related to tariffs and state aids; 
34 
Application of EC competition rules to ports, which would address 
monopolies, abuses of dominant position and restrictive practices in 
ports; 
An enhanced dialogue between all parties involved, addressing all 
possible problems in a pragmatic way; 
Improvement of information infrastructure in the context of the 
Information Society initiative and the trans-European 
telecommunications network. 
1. Ports and the trans-European networks 
1.1 The trans-European transport network plan 
Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network 
have already been proposed by the Commission to the Council and the European 
Parliament.28 This proposal provides for the progressive development of a single 
multi-modal network throughout the Community by the year 2010. 
The network covers road, rail, inland waterway, combined transport, port and 
airport infrastructure and appropriate traffic management and control systems. In 
the area of waterborne transport, provisions concerning vessel traffic management 
and information for European waters are included in the Commission's proposal. 
This aims at improving efficiency and safety in maritime transport as well as the 
protection of the environment. It includes the development of VTMIS29 and SAR30 
infrastructure, radio navigation infrastructure for the positioning of vessels and 
information systems on transit of ships through Community waters. The 
appropriate telematics applications and infrastructure will be provided from actions 
planned under the trans-European telecommunications network. Under the 
proposal, the network is to be extended to third countries in Central and Eastern 
Europe, the Mediterranean and the NISs (Newly Independent States). 
28 COMA(94)106 final, Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Decision on 
Community Guidelines for the Development of the Trans-European Transport Network, 
7 April 1994. This proposal was amended on 22 February 1995; see document 
COM(95)48 final. 
29 Vessel Traffic Management and Information Systems. 
Search and Rescue at Sea. 30 
35 
The Commission's proposal does not provide for a defined network of ports of 
Community. interest. Member States feel that network-related action may 
discriminate against ports which are not part of the network. Further, maritime 
transport is not confined to rigid lines of infrastructure. Instead, the proposal 
focuses on port and port-related infrastructure projects of common interest. It does 
not seek to limit the ports in which these projects may arise to those tied directly 
to the land elements of the network. In principle, these projects can arise in a much 
wider range of ports in the Community, both sea ports and sea-river ports. It 
should be noted that at least 15 to 20 of the Community 's inland waterway ports 
are also sea/river ports. The development of these ports can contribute to the 
promotion of sustainable mobility and therefore deserve more emphasis in transport 
policies.. 
Under the proposal, port projects of common interest must conform to a set of 
general principles appropriate to all modes and a set of special conditions specific 
to ports. The specific aims and conditions require that the projects should either 
facilitate the growth of Community trade, support the principle of sustainable 
mobility, in particular by promoting short sea shipping, or improve accessibility and 
strengthen cohesion. An important condition is that the projects should be viable 
on the basis of a financial or social cost/benefit analysis. This is important both to 
measure the efficiency of the proposed projects and to avoid any distortions of 
competition between ports. 
Further, the proposal also requires the Commission to specify the projects, and 
other broad lines of measures, with the assistance of Member States acting in a 
Committee on Transport Infrastructure. In order to assist the Committee, the 
Commission will be preparing a report which will not only propose projects and 
other broad Jines of measures, but will also explain the context in which the 
proposals are being made. This will be prepared with the assistance of the Member 
States Group on Ports and Maritime Transport31 which has established a number 
of Regional Groups32 to study the issues in depth. 
The revised Commission proposal of February 1995 emphasises more strongly the 
importance of short sea shipping through the incorporation of a provision for short 
sea shipping projects as well as ports infrastructure projects in a new Annex III on 
projects of common interest. 
This group was established by the Commission. It is chaired by the Commission 
services and attended by Member States, Observer States such as Norway, and by 
port and shipping experts. 
Regional port working groups were established for the North Sea, the Atlantic Sea, the 
Baltic Sea and the Mediterranean Sea areas. Bordering third countries participate in the 
meetings of the Baltic and Mediterranean groups. 
36 
Implementing these projects and improving the efficient flow of traffic through the 
ports should enable short sea shipping to compete more effectively against land 
transport. 
Community support under the trans-European network budget line will be available 
for projects of common interest financed by the Member States and identified in 
the context of the Community guidelines. A Commission proposal for a Council 
Regulation laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid 
in the field of trans-European networks33 is under discussion in the Council and 
Parliament. Support may also be available for port and port-related projects from 
the European Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund, in accordance 
with the rules under which these funds operate. 
Sea/river port projects considered of common interest will in principle also, be 
eligible for Community funding under the trans-European transport network plan. 
Because of the competitive element between ports, Community support will be 
limited in such a way which ensures that no undue distortion of competition result. 
Finally, it is important that existing infrastructure capacity in ports is used as 
efficiently as possible before new infrastructural projects are undertaken. 
2. Improvement of Transparency 
2.1 Port tariff transparency for short sea users 
Transparency in port tariffs is of direct concern to port users, who have a clear 
interest in knowing the basis on which charges for services have been calculated 
so that they may make an informed choice between those on offer. 
Pilotage costs may often be a relatively heavier burden on short sea ships than 
deep sea ships. However, short sea vessels have shallower draughts and their 
masters visit the same ports more frequently and are often familiar with the 
conditions. Ports or Member States should consider reviewing pilotage charging 
systems for short sea shipping vessels. With regard to sea/river transport, Member 
States should, where possible, grant sea/river vessels exemption from pilotage in 
ports and maritime access channels, if inland navigation is exempted from these 
charges. 
The Commission also recommends that port authorities ensure that tariffs charge 
only for services actually required and rendered. In this context, ports should follow 
a "user-pays" approach with all tariffs clearly identified. The basis for calculation 
of tariffs should be transparent so that the shipping lines know in advance what 
the likely charges will be. 
COM/94/62, of 2 March 1994. 
37 
Further, it is recommended that ports and port service providers, when port tariffs 
are based on Gross Tonnage of the vessels, as provided by the Oslo Convention, 
should set their tariffs in such a way that no undue profits are made at the expense 
of shipping in general and short sea shipping in particular. 
2.2 Transparency duties under State aid rules 
State aid must not allow a port to reduce tariffs in order to undercut the tariffs of 
its competitors and thus to attract business, or to provide services at similar tariffs, 
but with less efficiency than its competitors. 
In order to ensure respect of the Treaty rules on State aid, the Commission is 
starting an inventory of all transport State aid granted by Member States to ports 
as well as action to improve the transparency of the financial accounts of entities 
responsible for providing transport infrastructure and services. It envisages the 
establishment of guidelines on how to apply the State aid provisions of the Treaty 
to the port sector. 
In general, the guidelines are likely to clarify how Article 92 is interpreted by the 
Commission with regard to infrastructure projects and a distinction may be drawn 
between improvements in the public interest and of general benefit (including 
safety and environmental action) for which Article 92 might not apply and support 
for commercial interests where it would apply. State aid for superstructure 
projects, mobile assets, operational services and restructuring programmes would 
be assessed under the normal rules of Article 92 and guidance would be given on 
types of aid eligible for authorisation by the Commission. 
3. Application of Competition Rules 
The application of Article 85 the Treaty which prohibits restrictive agreements 
between undertakings and of Article 86 which prohibits abuse of dominant 
positions together with the regulation of State monopolies pursuant to Article 90 
of the Treaty is of overall importance in improving efficiency and customer-oriented 
services. Full application of competition law will thus help reduce inefficient port 
operations which causes delays, exaggerated prices for port-users, and certain 
employment-related problems, as in the case of the provision of monopoly services. 
The judgement of the European Court of Justice in the port of Genoa case34 made 
it clear that port monopolies for dock workers granted by a Member State which 
facilitate or make abuse of dominant positions possible are incompatible with 
Article 90 (1) and Article 86 of the EC Treaty. 
Decision of 10 December 1991, Case C179/90 - Merci Convenzionali Porto di Genova 
vs. Siderurgica Gabrielli. 
38 
There are other operations in ports which can also affect competition. The 
Commission has studied the relations between port authorities and terminal 
operators, paying particular attention to exclusive rights granted to operators and 
the way in which the tariffs are determined. It is at present studying the 
relationships between port authorities and other service providers, such as pilots 
and boatmen. It will consider what further action might be appropriate in the light 
of these studies. 
4. Labour Issues 
Major efficiency improvements in ports could be achieved by a relatively simple 
step on working hours. The absence of essential port services during evening, 
weekend and mid-day hours in many ports has been identified as an important 
source of delay. Introducing 24 hour services, especially for health and custo.ms 
checks, in ports where there is sufficient demand, could remedy delay problems 
considerably. Efficient operation of ships may also require the availability of 
handling facilities round-the-clock. 
Restrictive labour practices in ports are in the course of being changed in many 
Member States, particularly in the context of the growing trend towards the 
privatization of port terminals. Member States and port authorities should strive 
to satisfy user demand for longer port service hours to make maritime transport 
more competitive, while at the same time improving working conditions and 
employer-employee relationships. 
5. Dialogue among partners 
Given the va_riety of responsibilities in the area of port-related issues, an enhanced 
dialogue between port bodies (such as port and customs authorities), port service 
providers (such as stevedores and terminal operators), and port users (ship owners, 
agents, shippers, freight forwarders) is particularly important in finding pragmatic 
solutions to port problems. The port community is best placed to address these 
problems and improve the operating conditions for short sea transport through a 
concerted action and with a minimum of administrative involvement. 
The Commission supports the setting up of informal discussion structures, such as 
round tables. Besides creating a discussion forum for the problems mentioned 
above, these round tables could provide a forum for industry and public 
administration to discuss required adaptation of relevant legislation. They could 
also examine the exact demands of the market (shippers and freight forwarders) 
in order to bring a shift from land to sea transport. The round tables should be set 
up in the first instance at local port level. Besides this local approach, national 
round tables, involving the central administrations, should be set up to address 
problems which can not be solved at local level. In some European countries, such 
round tables have already produced encouraging results. 
39 
A Workshop of these round tables was organised with Commission support in the 
framework of the Short Sea Panel of the Maritime Industries Forum in Marseilles 
in May 1995. The Workshop brought together the interested parties to discuss 
hindrances in shipping and possible solutions. It aimed at enhancing.the activity of 
the already existing round tables and providing a kick-starter for some other local 
port or national round tables. 
Another pragmatic way to solve port problems is the encouragement of industry 
expert visits to ports. The Short Sea Panel of the MIF organised an industry expert 
visit to ports in Southern Europe to identify problems of these ports and propose 
specific solutions. The mission appears to have initiated a constructive dialogue 
between the parties involved. As a follow-up to these missions, the secondment 
of industry experts to ports for longer periods, up to some months, could be 
envisaged. 
The Commission, having already financially supported the expert mission organised 
by the MIF, will take the following actions: 
" • initiate further expert missions; 
• consider requests to support follow-up missions, particularly if they are 
arranged within the framework of the MIF or the round tables referred 
to above; 
• support visits and training programmes for managers of ports of 
peripheral areas to highly developed ports in other parts of the European 
Union. These visits should focus on gaining experience in planning and 
operation of port activities. 
C. Preparing short sea shipping for a wider Europe 
1. The implications of a wider Europe 
The EU is actively engaged in a process of developing political and economic links 
with adjoining States. This process should lead to significantly enhanced 
opportunities for further developing short sea shipping since it increases the 
average length of goods transportation journeys. 
The accession of Sweden and Finland should lead to the further development of 
economic links already strengthened by the EEA agreement. The emergence of 
market economies in other States in the Baltic area should provide opportunities 
for short sea shipping. Poland, in particular, has recently shown strong signs of 
economic growth and its trade with the EU is increasing significantly. This growth 
is particularly relevant in this context in view of Poland 's maritime importance. 
40 
Political and economic changes in the Black Sea area should lead to increased trade 
with countries in this region. This area also constitutes a bridge between Europe 
and the Middle East and East Africa. In many cases, Black Sea States are the 
closest sources of raw materials and semi-finished products and at the same time 
are markets for EU products and technologies. 
In so far as the Mediterranean area is concerned, exploratory discussions between 
the Commission and Cyprus and Malta with a view to possible accession to the 
Union have already begun. As these are States of considerable maritime 
importance, their accession would provide new opportunities for maritime 
transport. Links with other Mediterranean States are also of growing importance. 
There have been large-scale efforts to restore the links between the Union and the 
Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs) and the Newly Independent States 
(NISs). These countries face important infrastructural challenges. The answer to 
transport needs cannot be the development of land infrastructure only. Such a 
policy implies enormous financial investments which will be spread over several 
years. The relatively bad shape of the infrastructure and the backlog in 
infrastructure investments will continue to result in congestion and create further 
environment problems. It is important that maritime transport and ports 
infrastructure is fully taken into account at a time when fundamental decisions 
affecting the future transport policies of these countries are being made. 
The Commission will stress, where appropriate, the need to promote short sea 
shipping when Central and Eastern European or other States (e.g. Mediterranean 
or Black Sea countries) request Union support for projects or studies related to 
transport infrastructure. In the area of port infrastructure, Union support for 
feasibility studies and port master plans will take into consideration the importance 
of developing short sea links with the Union. 
The second Pan-European Transport Conference held in Crete in mid-March 1994 
has welcomed the steps taken hitherto to develop a Europe-wide transport policy. 
The participants also agreed that there should be cooperation on developing and 
implementing trans-European transport networks. There was also widespread 
support for action to further develop short sea shipping within the context of a 
Europe-wide transport policy. 
2. Extending the trans-European networks 
The international character of short sea shipping calls for, in as far as possible and 
where appropriate, participation of administrations and operators of third States in 
the implementation of the action programme proposed in this Communication. 
Most of the subjects covered are of interest to them. 
41 
Following the results of the Crete conference, the Commission is preparing the 
extension of the trans-European transport network concept to Central and Eastern 
Europe and the Newly Independent States,as well as to the southern 
Mediterranean, with the identification of 9 multimodal priority corridors. Of these, 
one is the Danube river, ideally suited for sea-river shipping; and many of the other 
corridors end at a port. The designation in Crete of these priority corridors is a 
recognition of the possibility of Community financing of particular projects on, or 
related to, these corridors. This is in line with the conclusions of the European 
Councils of Edinburgh and Copenhagen referring to the need to support the 
development of transport infrastructure in European countries which are not 
members of the Union. It reflects also the conclusions of the Corfu and Essen 
summits on the need to prepare the CEECs for accession to the Union. 
Projects linked to the development of short sea shipping, which by their very 
nature encourage links between Eastern and Western Europe, ought therefore to 
be promoted through technical assistance programmes to the CEECs and the NISs. 
3. Developing new structures for cooperation (Working parties on 
waterborne transport) 
The Black Sea Working Party for Waterborne Transport was created by the 
Ministerial Conference on transport challenges in South-Eastern Europe (BlackSea), 
held in October 1993 in Constanza (Rumania). The aim of this Working Party is to 
discuss pragmatic solutions for problems in the waterborne transport sector. It has 
met in Rumania in September 1994, following a preparatory workshop held in 
Brussels in April 1994. 
The Black Sea Working Party is pursuing a three-year work programme which aims 
at: 
• developing the potential for waterborne transport, mainly short sea 
shipping, in the area; 
• mapping out a way of integrating Black Sea ports into the European 
transport system and the trans-European transport network; 
• encouraging action which will raise the levels of efficiency of Black Sea 
ports; 
• developing logistical systems and improving procedures; 
• developing EDI systems. 
Work already undertaken in. the framework of the Baltic Sea Conference of 
Ministers of Transport as well as the Council of Baltic Sea States resulted in a 
workshop on Ports and Maritime Economy organised in Finland in November 1994. 
This workshop examined, inter alia, the co-ordination of port development in the 
region on the basis of a study on the ports of the Baltic Sea region undertaken in 
the framework of the PHARE programme which was completed in 1994. The 
results of this study will be the basis of forthcoming assistance to the ports of the 
Baltic Sea. 
42 
A Conference on the prospects for the development of shipping in the Baltic Sea 
region was organised in Copenhagen by Denmark and the Commission on 22/23 
May 1995. The conference decided to set up a Working Group on Waterborne 
Transport for the Baltic Sea. The Working Group will prepare and adopt a multi-
annual work programme to be submitted to the Baltic Sea Conference of Ministers 
of Transport. 
The Commission organised a regional conference for the development of maritime 
transport in the Mediterranean Sea area which took place in April 1995 in 
Barcelona. The intention was to take up the conclusions of the Essen summit 
concerning the reinforcement of cooperation with countries from the Mediterranean 
area and to follow-up on the work carried out in the Christophersen Group. The 
Conference also aimed at exchanging information on shipping in the Mediterranean, 
at assessing the competitive position of shipping in this area, and at enhancing 
awareness of the importance of subjects such as the need to further develop short 
sea shipping, convergent implementation of safety standards, improvement of port 
efficiency and the facilitation of maritime trade in the region namely through the 
interconnection of ports in the context of the trans-European networks. 
A Working Group on Waterborne Transport in the Mediterranean was established 
to identify areas for further cooperation in shipping and to address matters of 
common interest in the context of a multi-annual rolling work programme. It is 
intended that the Group submits a progress report to the Commission in view of 
the Euro-Mediterranean Intergovernmental Conference which will be held in 
Barcelona in November 1995. 
The programmes pursued by the Working Parties will provide a context and a 
starting point for examination of proposals for assistance to maritime transport 
projects under PHARE, TACIS and the Mediterranean programme. 
4. Further Commission action 
The Commission further envisages the following actions to bring about the 
integration of neighbouring states into a wider European waterborne transport 
network: 
• the launching of a comprehensive study on port development in the 
Black Sea area including an assessment of the shipping and port policies 
of these countries; 
43 
• a pilot-project supported by Finland relating to "Telematics in Foreign 
Trade Delivery Management" was accepted by the Christophersen 
Group35 on the trans-European transport network as a priority project to 
be developed in the coming years. The project aims at more effective 
use of multi-modal transport links between Baltic Sea countries and 
between these countries and the Union. 
The Commission will favour, where appropriate and requested, projects linked to 
the development of short sea shipping in technical assistance programmes to the 
Central and Eastern European Countries and the Newly Independent States. 
Christophersen Group = High level group of personal representatives of the heads of 
State and government chaired by former Commission Vice-President H. 
Christophersen. The group identified priority projects of common interest for the 
development of trans-European networks in the fields of transport, energy and 
environment. It presented its final report to the European Council of Essen in December 
1994. 
44 
ANNEX V: STATISTICAL DATA - A STATISTICAL OVERVIEW OF SHORT 
SEA SHIPPING 
The lack of comprehensive, reliable and compatible statistical data makes a detailed 
analysis of trends and influences on short sea shipping difficult. This, in turn, leads 
to problems in planning and developing commercially sound strategies. 
As the existing Eurostat database is restricted to non-harmonised national statistics 
of the European Union Member States, it has its limitations for studies of a much 
smaller scope (e.g. interregional) or for individual short sea shipping operators who 
want, e.g., to forecast future traffic demand in a certain region or transport 
relation. The Eurostat external trade database does not supply port or regional 
statistics; data on non-EC Member States can only be compiled through the import 
data of the 12 reporting countries. Such demands would have to be met. by 
national or port databases, if they exist. 
For a number of reasons the comparison of short sea shipping flows derived from 
different data bases is a delicate matter: 
there are a number of definitions of short sea shipping: hence, 
depending upon the definition used in an analysis, flows may vary 
considerably; 
to the extent that analyses are based upon external trade data, 
however, definitions of import and export data may not correspond 
because there are different statistical agencies involved; 
cargo flows are often disaggregated into classifications of goods in order 
to appraise the importance of particular categories of goods. 
Unfortunately, many such classifications exist, e.g. SITC, NSTR, CN, 
etc., all of them differing in one or more aspects from the others. Cargo 
flows based upon different databases using different goods 
classifications are therefore hardly comparable. 
As the current Eurostat data base on external trade by mode of transport is limited 
to import and export data, transit -- an important cargo flow in countries such as 
Belgium or the Netherlands -- is either lost or has to be compiled from other data 
bases. Here again problems of inconsistent data arise. Due to certain particularities 
in the collection of the statistical data it is generally felt that 29% is an 
underestimate of short sea shipping's share of intra-European trade between 
Member States and that the real share is above 30%. 
Moreover, since 1 January 1993 the problem has worsened due to the fact that 
Eurostat data on the transport of goods between Member States are no longer 
available. 
These problems mean that market research on existing routes and the potential for 
new routes is difficult to carry out which in turn discourages private operators from 
considering such options. At the same time, they create a barrier to effective policy 
making by public authorities. 
45 
It is expected that many of the statistical problems referred to above will be 
resolved in the context of the application of the provisions of the proposed new 
directive on statistics mentioned earlier. 
Volumes of goods transported internationally 
The total volume of goods (imports) transported (excluding by pipeline) between 
the European Union countries amounted to 685 million tonnes in 199236. Of this, 
the proportion carried by each mode of transport was as follows (percentages are 
rounded): 
road 43% 
sea 29% 
inland waterways 20% 
railway 7% 
In 1992, 76% of EC imports, excluding pipelines, from 5 EFTA States (Norway, 
Sweden, Finland, Austria and Switzerland) were transported by sea. 95% of 
imports from 7 Mediterranean States (Turkey, Israel, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, 
Morocco and Algeria) were transported by sea, again excluding pipelines.37 
The importance of feeder services 
Within short sea transport, maritime feeder services38 are probably the fastest 
growing sector. The feeder share of European container flows has increased from 
30% in 1982 to 43% in 1992.39 There has been a marked concentration of deep 
sea services^ especially for general cargo, in a few ports closest to .the largest 
European markets, i.e. the Northwest of Europe. Most container ships on 
international routes serve the whole of Europe in one single voyage to achieve cost 
savings. From a cost point of view it is no longer appropriate to call at secondary 
ports for smaller cargo volumes. 
36 Source: Eurostat. Data concerning Ireland are estimates. 
37 Source: Eurostat. 
38 Feeder services are maritime services connecting smaller ports to the international 
trans-ocean traffics of containerised goods, these goods being transshipped to or from 
a deep sea containership. Feeder vessels carry containers port to port mainly on behalf 
of deep sea lines. 
39 See MDS Transmodal, "The European Container Freight Market - Containers by Sea", 
1994. 
46 
As a consequence, feeder services have been developed, linking the hub ports with 
ports not directly served by intercontinental shipping services. These services have 
captured from road transport a significant proportion of the additional intra-
European transport flows generated by the decline in the number of ports served 
by deep sea liners. It is expected that the role of maritime feeder services will 
continue to grow.40 
Traffic flows between European Union Member States (1992) 41 
Table 4 shows total international intra-Union transport flows in 1992, excluding 
goods transported by pipeline. 
Table 4 International intra-Union total transport flows, excluding pipelines .(1992 
figures, '000 tonnes) 
destination 
origin mm; DK R-anCe i FR6 s Greece: Ireland : Italy NL Port ;:S£âjf>:;: SUK;:; W&S& 
BLEU* 
DK 
France 
FHG 
Greece 
Ireland 
Italy 
NL 
Portugal 
Spain 
UK 793 : 34.369 : 23.566 : 375 388 : 5.222 .._...._„..... 29.033 651 1.997 5.663 102.057 
"'Ï4.465" 444 ; 
Tàïè'ëoT 799 7.513 | 
TO" 8 65 Ï 105 
T.Ô24" 
T.ÔÏ7" 1.183 
"8.'353" 117 ; 207 
"3"Ô77"1T0."952" 2.771 
'"9.99T 682 ; 791 : 20.489 
"722"i"Ï7'32i" 106.083 
Ï3ÔÏ6Ô6" 21.132 : 4.839 ; 23.022 ; 
200" i i'57' i f.202" C'Y. 148' 47.104 
505" 916 • 4.037 
•"ÏY1 6*50 ' 10.496 
""T.0Ï4" 40 : 4.666 
1 265" 9.593 
"è".4"ÔY 255 j 64 j 693 j 1.017 j 18 
"2*04 ï" i 499" i""l (D.744 ' i"Ï2"5 65* iT.764 ' 659 
T.592' 29 
TëeT 148 
'3.456 5.253 
"3.4Ïë" 139 j .„„.„........„._. 37.779 
T54.4Ï3" 40.658 : 1.504 \ 13.445 ; 72.071 j 962 
476" 1 1 "60" " i T.Ï84 ' j"" l"286 ' 1 60 " 1.165 2.527 
"2.942" 12.533 
" 'Ï.786 
""4.293" 24 : 524 
'237'i 3-470 510 
"2.602" 8.892 
30.506" 1.626 : 566 : 7.825 { 4.645 : 438 
"è""37 9" I" 3". 00 Ï" j""l 4*. 642 ' ITé" 770 ' j 6 94 ' 4.805 
"i"482" 8.302 i 7.459 • 13.935 6.788 82.452 
total 93.071 jT.2.206 ;i07.924 374.446 ; 6.458 : 11.677 : 69.251 305.475 ; 13.816 -33.704 : -57.217 685.247 
* = BLEU includes Belgium and Luxembourg 
Source : EUROSTAT 
CATRAM, "Opportunities for Coasting and Feedering Services - Contribution to the 
promotion of a project for restoring the dynamics of the ports of the Atlantic seabord", 
December 1993. 
41 The tables on traffic flows are based upon Eurostat data and relate to imports. Data 
concerning Ireland are unfortunately not available. The figures for Ireland which are 
included in the tables are based on exports data provided by the reporting countries. 
The mode of transport indicated is the mode used at the point at which the data were 
recorded. There are some slight discrepancies in the tables due to the rounding off of 
the figures. 
47 
The following table shows the origin and destination countries for intra-Union maritime 
transport flows: 
Table 5 International intra-Union maritime transport flows (1 992 figures, '000 tonnes) 
destination 
origin BLEU OK | France \ FRG Greece 
• m- mi. a\, iii Ireland Italy NL Port 
™4I7T Spain 
""SB!" UK 
BLEU * 
DK 
France 
FRG 
Greece 
Ireland 
Italy 
NL 
Portugal 
Spain 
UK 5.652 
221 | 
Tboë'ï 270 : 3.417 { 69 
""7Ï9"! "886* 52 | 
'749"! 782 
"ëïà'ë'ï" 701 | 88 
"ÏÏ2Ï5"i"_4Ï" 97 
Ï7975" 2.766 
•'9.965" 8.463 
"24.4Ï9" 267 ! 
821 j 1.926 : 1.409 : 
"Ï4Ô" " I i'49" i ï i bo" I" 482 353 
""39" 581 
•"4.236" 1.136 j 483 
403" i 9" 1.315 
64Î" 10.472 
"T.biY 18.978 
""7.896" 167 
138 : 59 j 631 j 569 : 15 
'569 ' 280 i 3.092 " ' 363 I ÏÏ45 3 108 470 
.„„.„.. 21 
............. 107 2.635 4.753 
72.309" 27 
1.218 : 
356*1" 966 { 2.682 j 
""•79 "j 573"!" 2571 j 
"'545T 752 
""57" 851 
......... 1.324 975 1.473 
356" 12.517 
""l'J783" 
""4.255" 25.330 
""4.347" 322 : 
947 j 493 : 1.965 : 577 j 421 { 206 | 1.796 : 1.489 | 2.230 
ë'à'ïë" !' 2Ï953" ï'Tz'.ë 30" i""Ï5.b9Ô" i 640" I "TA5Ï" i 5.586" i'Ï2'879" I "T. '3Ï2 ' 14.379 
"68.22Ï" 6.063 
total 10.675 • 7.627 : 28.463 • 24.689 • 5.069 • 7.039 • 21.726 • 19.138 • 9.027 • 14.706 • 54.465 202.623 
* = 
Source BLEU includes Belgium and Luxembourg 
•EUROSTAT 
These data show that geographical factors as well as a country's maritime traditions 
greatly influence the extent to which short sea shipping is used. For example, transport 
flows to and from the United Kingdom have their origin or destination mainly in France, 
Germany and the Benelux-countries. For Ireland, the sea link with the United Kingdom 
is by far the most important. Denmark's major flow is to and from Germany. For Greece, 
Italy is the major maritime relation, with France a distant second. Italy's major relations 
are with the United Kingdom, France, Greece and the Iberian countries. The largest short 
sea shipping transport flows in Europe involve islands such as Britain and Ireland and 
other peripheral regions for which there is no practical alternative. Tables 6, 7 and 8 
show intra-Union trade flows carried by rail, road and inland waterways. 
Table 6 International intra-Union rail transport flows (1992 figures, '000 tonnes) 
1 destination 
origin BLEU OK France FRG Greece ! Ireland Italy NL Port Spain mm total 
BLEU* 
DK 
France 
FRG 
Greece 
Ireland 
Italy 
NL 
Portugal 
Spain 
UK 10 3.773 j 
27" !" 2.558 
â'ë" 
'"2.82Ô" 14 
....... 1.101 : 1.350 55 ; 8.865 
2ÏÏ" 1 
2.290 
"2.7Ô6" 
"'9 100 j 
'26 2 7 
ï"f 26 
"95" 139 j 
'5l858"7 3 
"225" 1 
16 ; 774 { 
"21" i 315*' I" 12.110 
T4.2ÔÏ" 2.882 | 
2Ï 
Ï7 
7ÏYJ' 
T.T77"j" 
3Ï 
166*1" 
74*7 79 
5* 
"2.097" 
T.'ë'àT 
ë" 
'368" 
345" 7.212 : 699 
40 "i '-" 130 
1 96 50 63 
.„.„.. 3 j 74 
'34'i "'• 197 
477 78 j 
""4"!" 10 
*ïë" 13 7 ; 3.206 
"5".62"7" 931 j 
2*i' 26 j 
115 
'965 ' 25 
•47 3 : 151 19 
...... 233 
51 82 1.049 
total 5.751 459 8.818 11.312 163 78 15.923 • 2.425 278 • 1.394 • 74 46.675 
* = BLEU includes Belgium and Luxembourg 
Source : EUROSTAT 
Table 7 48 
International intra-Union road transport flows (1992 figures, '000 tonnes) 
origin destination 
BLEU DK France : FRG Greece : Ireland Italy NL Port Spaifi; wm total 
BLEU * 
DK 
France 
FRG 
Greece 
Ireland 
Italy 
NL 
Portugal 
Spain 
UK 192 
T4.345" 329 ; 26.101 ; 13.517 
'• 46Ï" ~l 3.880 " 64 
"35" 98 
""4" 2.450 • 18.490 174 • 968 
11.898 
44" 314 : j 18.119 
"2" "644" 1" 16".464" 1 110 
"403 
116 
••»•—• 99 ; 
"48 T 434 
•327" 38 
26Ï" 
ï" 347 | 441 
"9".229"i 3Ï95T 29 : 
"806 "I" 109 
8ÏÏ94" 
9.381 : 25.104 
374" i 63" 401 
7 2.373 
9" 
16.028 
TÏ2" 140 | 6.927 j 9.691 
"534" 1 6.272" 1"2ÔÏ985' 3 
*299" 106 
619 
"è'99" 20 j 603 j 372 
W1 5". 680 " 1 2.983" 188 
3" 97 109 
'T.229* 7 | 
•334";" 37 
T.699" 2,536 
ï" 
40 565 3.416 11 
49" 3 
"3Ï" 2.507 : 
266" I" 177 
94 1.025 
"2.482" 12 
........ 
3.778 1.514 : 
71428"!" 743 
876" 2.323 | 
Ï65"i "623" 62.201 
""ë'.'ëb'i'" 
55.115 
"68.936" 
1.034 
3'.'293 
21.736 
"47.85Ï"' 
3.955 
73.975" 
11.840 
mm 45.572 : 4.101 • 63.221 j 73.725 1.165 4.433 • 27.604 • 51.099 4.418 ! 17.519 • 2.583 295.439 
* = BLEU includes Belgium and Luxembourg 
Source : EUROSTAT 
Table 8 International intra-Union inland waterway transport flows (1992 figures, '000 
tonnes) 
destination 
origin BLEU | DK | France j FRG ; Greece j Ireland j Italy ; NL | Port | Spain j UK total 
Br3u^l™i,iil™,il?,^^iT!6^^ 
DK 30 " j j 38" j Ï62* j -7 """ j -" j 38" j - ' ) -" j -* 268 " 
France ""ï.*2Ïo"i '-"j \ "ê'off \ -\ 1 "j - 1 2.960"j - ] -"\ " ï'4Ï248 
FRG ""5'l695"j "-"j""ï'.237"j j '-"\ 96"S "'I "20"Ï53"I -'] -"j " "28."ï81 "" 
Greece ë'i -i -j 464; j -: - j 35: -1 -7 - 505 
Ireland 2 ' j - ' I ÏY j 113* j '-" j j - ' j 15" j "' 1 "" j - ï 42 "' 
itaiy ï4" j -' j ï" j 346" j "" j :*• j"" ; 33" j - ' 1 "' j 39*4 " 
NL "22" 933 " j "" j" 3" 309" j 45Ï434" j -" 1 3" I - ' j j "" "j -" j -" "7ÏÏ67 9 "' 
Portugal {Tf - 1 3 \ 359"j "" I -" I - ' i 6ï" j ] " -" j " 431 
Spain 35" j "-" j ï'ï" \ 702" j "" \ -" j - ' j 339" j "' 1 j - ï". 08 7"" 
UK ÏÏT i '-" j ï 4*' j 849" i -" i "" i -" i Ï6 ë" i - ' 1 "' i «.«..£•£••• 
total 31.047 j - j 7.298 j 64.279 j - j 100 j - j 32.557 j - j - j ~ 135.28~ 
* = BLEU includes Belgium and Luxembourg 
Source : EUROSTAT 
49 
The following table shows international intra-Union maritime transport flows as a percentage of 
total transport flows. 
Table 9 International intra-Union maritime transport flows in relation to 
transport flows, excluding pipelines (1992 figures, %) total 
destination 
origin *SËEI£i DK France : FRG l Greece : Ireland : Italy NL Port Spain UK 
T total: 
BLEU* 
DK 
France 
FRG 
Greece 
Ireland 
Italy 
NL 
Portugal 
Spain 
UK •57.1% ; 8.2% • 2.8% |78.6% 
*65".b%" 74 
"93.T% 31.9% i 0.9% :72.9« 48.3% 99.8% 
"99".8%" 13.3% 
49.8% : j 
""s"ï%'\'ï§'.2%\ 33.8% : 45.5% 
! 2.3% 61.6% 
"26Ï3%*' 59.2% 
74*6%" 75.4% 
:"72*.8% 46.6% 
'"l8.0%"' 58.5% 
'23.0%' 586.5% 
"4'7"'3%" 94.7% 
'4*9.0%' 
'98*7%' 99.7% 
'99.8%" 3.9% {39.8% 
"70."2%'i"94".8%" 6.1% j 
'9Ï".5%''i'''i'4.5% 3.4% 
"9Ô'.'8%"' 
40.9%' 2.4% 
*7*9".*9"%" i 52.8% 
i'77.7%" 32.6% 
'98.6%" 14.5% 
'82.*3%' 99.9% 
"507"%*" 54.0% j 91.6% ] 
•*2"4*.9%''i'56*.'ï%"::* 91.0% j 56.0% 
2*8.8%"" 1 2."9%" :82.2% 
WÏ'.Z% 71.3% 
•'ï'7'7'%"" 74.1% 
:76Ï2%" 
"83'.'7'%" 72.6% 
49.6%" 56.6% 
32.'6%" 19.6% 
*87."i"%" 99.8% 
'99".'9"%" 3.0% : 64.2% : 
"7^8% 779.4"%" f 19.9% : 3.6% 
'48".4"%"'!'"42.4% |78.2% 
J95'7%" 15.5% 
"48.6*%"' 58.3% 
'l'2."l%" 16.4% 
"48.9%" 87.6% 
"87.0%* 63.1% 
5"7*'.2%" 99.8% 
"99".'i"%" 58.3% |87.1% j 
"8"3".3%"i"98'.'4%""i" 25.1% j 12.4% 
"95 7%" I" 76.3"%' |96.1% 
i92".3'%" 51.8% 
•'74.9%' 146.4% 
'88".*5%" 47.1% 
"82.7%" 53.6% 92.4% 89.3% 
total 11.5% 162.5% : 26.4% • 14.2% 78.5% : 60.3% : 31.4% : 18.1% ;65.3% \ 43.6% 95.2% 29.6% 
* = BLEU includes Belgium and Luxembourg 
Source •: EUROSTAT 
The present structure of the Short Sea Shipping fleet 
The following data on the structure of the short sea shipping fleet is limited to vessels 
intended for the transport of cargo and/or passengers. 
It is recognised that the use of different criteria can alter the apparent make-up of a 
fleet. Fleet profiles have been compiled by ownership/nationality rather than by 
flag/registration. Because of the widely established practice of flagging out to 
international registries, it was felt that ownership was a better indicator of fleet 
characteristics. 
For the purposes of these statistics, short sea shipping vessels are considered.to be those 
of less than 6.000 GT. However, it is recognized that in practice larger ships are also 
active in short sea shipping and that smaller vessels also engage in some deep sea 
transport. The profiles of the short sea and deep sea shipping fleets (European Union, rest 
of Europe and rest of the world) are summarized in Table 10 below. 
50 
Table 10 Summary of the European Union, Rest of Europe and Rest of the World 
Fleets (1992) 
European Union 
Rest of Europe 
Rest of the World Deep sea 
Short sea 
Deep sea 
Short sea 
Deep sea 
Short sea {VT{%) 
42.7 
57.3 
37.3 
62.7 
31.5 
68.5 GT(%) 
92.1 
7.9 
88.6 
11.4 
90.4 
9.6 DWT(%) 
93.3 
6.7 
90.8 
9.2 
91.1 
8.9 Average age years 
14 
20 
13 
21 
13 
18 Average GT 
25.958 
1.654 
24.598 
1.882 
27.155 
1.319 
Source : Policy Research Corporation N. V. Data supplied by Lloyd's Register. 
The short sea share of the total cargo carrying fleet is broadly similar, both in terms of 
number and average GT, in the European Union, the rest of Europe and the rest of the 
world. However, small differences can be seen, particularly in the average size and age of 
short sea shipping vessels (the rest of the world average is somewhat smaller than in"the 
European Union; the average age is slightly lower in the rest of the world fleet than in the 
European Union and the rest of Europe). 
Average age is important as it is indicative of the replacement cycle of a fleet. It can be 
seen that the short sea shipping fleet of the three regions is on average significantly older 
than the deep sea fleet, which suggests a lower level of innovation in these vessels. New 
buildings completed or expected to be completed in the 1991 -1993 period were not likely 
to improve the average age significantly as they represented only 2 % of the total fleet. 
As regards the distribution of ship types in the short sea and deep sea fleets, ships are 
categorized into five main types: liquid cargo, dry cargo, container ships, Ro-Ro and 
others42. 
Liquid cargo vessels include liquefied gas carriers, chemical tankers, oil tankers, 
oil/chemical tankers and other tankers. Dry cargo vessels include dry bulk, dry 
bulk/oil, self-discharging dry bulk and other dry bulk. Container vessels include fully 
cellular container ships. Ro-Ro vessels include Ro-Ro cargo ships and passenger/Ro-
Ro. Others vessel types include general cargo, passenger/general cargo, refrigerated 
cargo, passenger and other dry cargo. 
Table 11 51 
Summary of the European Union, rest of Europe, and rest of the World Fleet 
Characteristics (1992) 
Ship type Short Sea 
N"(%) GT(%) Average Average 
age GT l\T(%) Deep Sea 
GT(%) Average Average 
age GT 
European 
Union Liquid cargo 
Dry cargo 
Container ships 
Ro/Ro 
Others 20 
2 21 14,8 ! 1,793 23 
17,9 : 2,244 37 37 
"4**6" 9,8 ; 43,943 
"9",8""J2'9"554 
2 ...„„., 
'64*' 11,8 I 3,450 10 
16 17,8 2,127 7,6 j 25,096 .„.„..„......„..„..„.„„.. 
57 17,5 • 1,459 23 10 13,7 : 11,354 
Rest of 
Europe Liquid cargo 
Dry cargo 
Container ships 
Ro/Ro 
Others 14 17 18,1 j 2,351 27 44 9,7 =41,118 
24,0 : 2,470 28 
1,5 ! 2,934 30 ....... 12,1 125,963 
'"'3".4'"'n'8'75'3 
10 
"74 16,0 : 1,491 10 
72 20,5 I 1,829 33 7 9,0 : 16,664 
'ï"4""6"'"j'Ï2''553" 
Rest of 
the 
World Liquid cargo 
Dry cargo 
Container ships 
Ro/Ro 
Others 26 
""4 23 14,0 : 1,210 
20,0 • 1,518 22 ; 40 ; 11,3 :48,130 
'36 ! " "37 ! ï'5,5 '*j'27"957' 
1 
8" 
....... 14,0 3,400 
16,0 : 1,397 11,0 126,382 
'n*-'0*l7"O85'' 
60 18,8 { 1,306 27 11 17,8 : 10,702 
Source Policy Research Corporation N. V. Data supplied by Lloyd's Register. 
'Other ship types' constitute between 57 % and 72 % of the short sea shipping fleet in 
the European Union, rest of Europe and rest of the world, mainly because of the large 
proportion of general cargo ships. General cargo ships account for 45,3 % of the total 
European Union short sea shipping carrying capacity. Figures 1, 2 and 3 at the end of this 
annex show the break-down into their component parts of the short sea and deep sea 
fleets of the European Union, the rest of Europe and the rest of the world. Liquid bulk is 
the second most important ship type, accounting for between 17 % and 24 % of the total 
carrying capacity. The Ro/Ro category is proportionately more important in short sea 
shipping in the European Union than in the rest of Europe and the rest of the world in 
terms of gros's tonnage but this is much less true in terms of its share of the number of 
vessels. This reflects the rapid increase of the average size of Ro/Ro vessels in the 
European Union. Liquid cargo is important in short sea shipping (21 %), but dry cargo 
takes only a minor share of the total European Union short sea shipping carrying capacity 
(3 %). 
Summary 
Most vessels employed in short sea transport have characteristic features which 
distinguish them from ocean-going vessels. In contrast to deep sea container transport, 
which is generally carried out with cellular container ships, short sea shipping, for the most 
part, continues to use multi-purpose dry cargo vessels. Short sea Ro/Ro vessels are in 
general all-round vessels which are more or less suitable for all existing types of wheeled 
cargo or for all cargo capable of being horizontally loaded or discharged. Recently built 
coasters are especially characterised by a high flexibility in their operational possibilities; 
smaller units have mostly canal-going ability (sea/river going vessels. 
SX 
Figure 1 : Ship type composition of the European Union Fleet (number of ships) 
European Union Fleet by Total Number of Ships 
percentage of ship types per fleet type 
Short sea 
Container ships Liquid cargo 
20% 
Dry cargo 
Uquid cargo 
23% Deep sea 
Container ships 
10% 
RO/RO Others 
Source : Policy Research Corporation, 1993 
SI 
Figure 2 : Ship type composition of the "Rest of Europe" fleet (number of ships) 
'Rest of Europe' Fleet by Total Number of Ships 
percentage of ship types per fleet type 
Short sea 
Deep sea 
Container ships 
Liquid cargo 
Source : Policy Research Corporation, 1993 
St 
Figure 3 : Ship type composition of the "Rest of the World" fleet (number of ships) 
'Rest of the World' Fleet by Total No of Ships 
percentage of ship types per fleet type 
Short sea 
Container ships 1 % 
/ Liquid cargo 
26% 
Deep sea 
Container ships 
RO/RO 
Source : Policy Research Corporation, 1993. 

ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(95) 317 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 07 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-95-364-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77-91504-8 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg