Report from the Commission to the Council and to the European Parliament on experience acquired in the work carried out pursuant to Council Directive 95/64/EC on statistical returns in respect of carriage of goods and passengers by sea
Date: 2001-02-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EFTA countries, European Economic Area, carriage of goods, carriage of passengers, data collection, data transmission, maritime transport, transport statistics

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 20.2.2001
COM(2001) 93 final

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND TO THE
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

on experience acquired in the work carried out pursuant to Council Directive 95/64/EC
on statistical returns in respect of carriage of goods and passengers by sea

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND TO THE
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

on experience acquired in the work carried out pursuant to Council Directive 95/64/EC
on statistical returns in respect of carriage of goods and passengers by sea

(Text with EEA relevance)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.

1.1.

1.2.

2.

2.1.

2.2.

3.

4.

5.

5.1.

5.2.

6.

7.

8.

9.

9.1.

9.2.

9.3.

9.4.

9.5.

9.6.

9.7.

Introduction.............................................................................................................. 4

Background .............................................................................................................. 4

Geographical coverage ............................................................................................. 4

Transitional period (Article 10) ................................................................................ 5

Derogations .............................................................................................................. 5

Pilot Studies ............................................................................................................. 5

(a) feasibility and cost of collection of specific information ...................................... 5

(b) technical aspects of data collection...................................................................... 8

Ports (Article 4)........................................................................................................ 9

Accuracy of statistics (Article 5)............................................................................. 11

Processing and Transmission of the results of the data collection (Articles 6 and 7) 12

Raw data collection and processing by CNA........................................................... 12

Transmission of the results to the Commission ....................................................... 12

Dissemination of statistical data (Article 9) ............................................................ 14

Financial contribution (Article 11).......................................................................... 15

Detailed rules of implementation and procedure (Articles 12 and 13) ..................... 16

Implementation (Article 14) ................................................................................... 16

Belgium.................................................................................................................. 16

Denmark................................................................................................................. 17

Germany................................................................................................................. 17

Greece.................................................................................................................... 18

Spain ...................................................................................................................... 18

France .................................................................................................................... 19

Ireland .................................................................................................................... 19

2

9.8.

9.9.

Italy........................................................................................................................ 20

Netherlands ............................................................................................................ 20

9.10.

Portugal.................................................................................................................. 21

9.11.

Finland ................................................................................................................... 21

9.12.

Sweden................................................................................................................... 21

9.13.

United Kingdom..................................................................................................... 22

9.14.

Norway .................................................................................................................. 22

9.15.

Iceland.................................................................................................................... 22

10.

Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 23

3

1.

INTRODUCTION

1.1.

Background

On 8 December 1995, the Council adopted a Directive on statistical returns in respect
of carriage of goods and passengers by sea. The Directive 95/64/EC establishes a
harmonised framework for the collection of maritime statistics across the European
Economic Area. It defines the information to be periodically transmitted from each
Member State to the Statistical Office of the European Communities, for the carriage
of goods and passengers by sea.

Article 8 of the Council Directive stipulates that the Commission shall submit a
report to the Council on experience acquired in the work carried out pursuant to this
Directive after data have been collected over a period of three years. Data collection
started with reference year 1997.

Where no other legal act is cited in this report, all articles refer to Council Directive
95/64/EC1, hereafter referred to as “the Directive” or “the maritime Directive”. The
Commission adopted two subsequent legal acts laying down implementing rules for
the Directive: Commission Decision 98/385/EC of 13 May 1998 and Commission
Decision 2000/363/EC of 28 April 20002. The main forum for all discussions and
decisions concerning the implementation and application of the Directive is the EEA
Working Group on Maritime transport statistics, hereafter referred to as “the
Working Group”.

The maritime Directive aims at completing the information available on transport by
other modes at European level – road, rail, inland waterways, and aviation – for
enabling the European Commission to carry out the related policies.

1.2.

Geographical coverage

The Directive is applied by all EU Member States except Luxembourg and Austria,
which do not have maritime ports on their territory. Besides these thirteen countries,
the two EFTA countries that are member of the European Economic Area (EEA) and
possess maritime ports, Iceland and Norway, are associated to the maritime
information system of the Directive.

The procedure for integrating the maritime Directive in the Agreement on the
European Economic Area was accomplished on 6 March 1998 with the adoption of
Decision 17/98 by the EEA Joint Committee.3

The Decision amended Annex XXI on statistics of the EEA Agreement so as to
include Council Directive 95/64/EC in a newly introduced point 7B. Two adaptations
to the Directive are made for the purpose of the EEA Agreement, concerning small
Norwegian ports and codes for Norwegian vessels (Annex V of the Directive).
Commission Decision 98/385/EC was also integrated in the EEA Agreement.

1

2

3

OJ L 320, 30.12.1995, p. 25.
OJ L 174, 18.6.1998, p. 1, and OJ L 132, 5.6.2000, p. 1.
Decision 17/98 entered into force on 7.3.1998 and was published in OJ L 272, p. 24 on 8.10.1998.

4

Due to a procedural modification, the participating ports of the EEA/EFTA countries
are no longer laid down by Commission Decisions, but by modification of the EEA
agreement. This reflects the wish of these countries of being fully involved in the
decision making process. Thus Commission Decision 2000/363/EC revised the list of
European ports without including the Icelandic and Norwegian ports.

2.

TRANSITIONAL PERIOD (ARTICLE 10)

2.1.

Derogations

The partners in the European Statistical System (ESS) agreed on starting the regular
data collection one year after the entry into force of the Directive, on 1 January 1997,
and to qualify the first three years as a transitional period. This period should enable
Member States to adopt all necessary administrative and legal measures for
implementing the Directive at national level.

During this period, each Member State was granted derogations that reflected its
specific needs for adaptation. Derogations consisted either in excluding individual
ports from the collection duty, allowing the use of national codes, or providing
exceptions for specific variables. The number of derogations was reduced after the
first year of implementation, assuming that Member States would already have made
progress in adapting their collection systems.

On the one hand side, these derogations were necessary, as setting up the data
collection system required efforts and resources. On the other hand side, as a
consequence, data collected during the first
three reference years are rather
incomplete.

Since 1 January 2000, all Member States have to provide complete data sets,
classified and coded in accordance with the requirements of the Directive.

2.2.

Pilot Studies

In line with Article 10(2) of the Directive, the European Commission adopted a
programme of pilot studies during the transitional phase, covering two domains:

(a)

the feasibility and cost of collection of specific information, and

(b)

technical aspects of data collection.

Funding for these pilot studies mainly stemmed from the Fourth Framework
Programme for Research and Development, in particular from the SUPCOM and
IDA/DSIS (Interchange of data between administrations/Distributed statistical
information service) frameworks.

(a)

feasibility and cost of collection of specific information

When the Directive was drafted,
items of
information within the regular collection system were considered. As no agreement
on this could be reached, it was decided to study the feasibility and cost to the
Member States of collecting such information on a regular basis through a series of
pilot studies. The information concerned was:

the collection of certain additional

5

i

ii

iii

iv

description of the goods transported

passengers transported over short distances

information concerning feeder services and transport chains

data relating to the nationality of the maritime transport operator

For items i, iii and iv, the studies’ purpose was to determine whether the current
system could be extended by these additional variables. For item ii, the scope of the
study was rather a reduction than an extension of the current system.

The pilot studies were carried out by the Commission and funded under the fourth
framework programme. Their results were discussed by the Working Group on
maritime transport statistics in June 1999. Given the difficulties of implementation of
such new items, the Group decided not to launch any procedure for extension of the
the regular collection system is well
Directive immediately, but
established. The Group created a Task Force that should further explore the issue. In
parallel, the Commission continued to develop a detailed methodological framework,
among other subjects on passengers transported over short distances.

to wait until

The main results of the studies are:

i

description of the goods as defined in Annexes III and VIII, data set B1

As the current setting of the Directive foresees only type of cargo information,
detailed comparison with statistics on inland transport mode are not possible, as these
use commodity information according to the NST/R 24-group classification.

The pilot study therefore explored the cost and feasibility of collecting commodity
information in ports according to this classification.

Such detailed information appears to be feasible and at reasonable cost
collected for bulk and semi-bulk cargo.

to be

The main difficulty and cost however occur in compiling such analyses for container
and ro-ro traffic, in most Member States. Collecting information on container content
would require high resources, as substantial coding of text description would be
necessary. Also the high number of different consignments in one container was
found to increase cost.

For ro-ro traffic, the transport documents in general do not contain usable commodity
information available to the operators.

Member States collect commodity information at various degrees of detail. Any
classification chosen should be common to other transport modes, and potential
revisions of the NST/R classification should be taken into account.

ii

passengers transported over short distances

The Directive foresees collection of data on passengers transported by sea without
providing any minimum distance of the journey. Theoretically, also short trips should
therefore be recorded. As some countries do not collect data below a certain distance,

6

there may be distortions in the common database. The scope of the pilot study was to
consider the possibility for Member States to exclude from the survey part or all of
the minor routes that are undertaken in their country.

Nine Member States already cover all passenger movements and two will do so
starting in 2000. The outcome of the study suggests that Member States do not have
substantial problems in obtaining all passenger information. On the contrary, it might
increase the burden on their data providers if new thresholds for excluding minor
passenger movements were created, and thus be counterproductive. Collection of
passenger data might benefit from the information provided in connection with
Council Directive 98/41/EC of 18 June 1998 on the registration of persons sailing on
board passenger ships operating to or from ports of the Member States of the
Community (OJ L 188, 2.7.1998, p. 35).

is not necessarily a meaningful

It was found that the length of a journey, i.e. the number of miles over which
the
passengers are transported,
importance of a certain ferry service. The size of the flow may be more relevant:
Through the threshold of 200 000 passengers per year (Article 4 of the Directive),
traffic flows of minor importance are already excluded. The study also pointed at the
problem of some countries applying the criterion “on seagoing voyages” (Article 2):
where this is the case, very short routes are excluded from passenger statistics, even
where such services carry a large number of passengers.

indicator

for

iii

information concerning feeder services and transport chains

In response to the increasing demand for information on intermodal chain data from
the user side, the feasibility and cost of collection of such data was explored by a
pilot study. The findings were that this information is not available from the sources
used for the Directive. The only possibility would be to collect data from ports, for
which it would be a relatively small burden if they seize the data already for pricing
purposes. Several delegations agreed that some information is available in ports as
they charge different prices. In some countries however, this may be very costly
and/or could only be done through separate sample surveys or from other transport
modes.

The Working Group gave a mandate to the Task Force on extension to discuss
methodological aspects of feeder services and to co-ordinate with the Intermodal
Expert Group.

iv

data relating to the nationality of the maritime transport operator

The pilot study on obtaining information on the nationality of the maritime transport
operator reflects a stated need of users for information on the main economic
beneficiary of maritime operations and on the European fleet in general. The study’s
outcome was that collecting the information required by the Directive – i.e. the real
centre of commercial control – is not feasible. The main difficulty was seen in
defining the country of economic benefit, as ownership and operation are extremely
complex. The cost for any such data collecting would be high and was not seen as
justified. The Working Group considered exploring alternative methods, such as
consulting national associations or consulting commercial databases that could use a
complex algorithm for defining the country of economic benefit.

7

(b)

technical aspects of data collection

A set of pilot studies was established for studying the possibility of collecting data
under the arrangements concluded in the context of the simplification of trade
procedures, the International Standards Organisation (ISO), the European Committee
for Standardisation (CEN) and international customs rules (Article 10(2)(b)).

The studies mainly contributed to the EDIMARS (electronic data interchange in
maritime statistics) project launched in 1995. The first trials were carried out in
Spain, Netherlands and France, followed by Ireland, Germany and the UK and later
all other Member States. The project was open to all actors of the maritime transport
sector within the European Union: national and regional administrations, port
authorities, transport operators, ship owners, ship agents, carriers, port community
systems providers, etc.

In the first three years, the project focused on the collection of raw data from the
providers i.e. ports, carriers or ships agents. In the fourth year, it mainly aimed at
increasing the use of electronic means by the competent national authorities for
sending data to Eurostat.

The EDIMARS project facilitated the exchange of experience in the organisation and
implementation of maritime statistics data collection. It helped reduce the cost and
improve the efficiency of collecting and disseminating maritime transport statistics,
through the use Electronic Data Interchange (EDI). EDI is commonly defined as the
application-to-application transfer of business documents between computers. Many
businesses choose EDI as a fast, inexpensive, and safe method of sending purchase
orders, invoices, shipping notices, and other frequently used business documents. As
traditional means of collecting information (queries, interviews, polls etc.) have
proven expensive, not exhaustive, and not so reliable, Eurostat and the European
Board for EDI Standards (EBES) have designed a common language for exchanging
statistics. GESMES, the Generic Statistical Message, uses the EDIFACT standard
(Electronic Data Interchange for Administration, Commerce and Transport).

The status quo at the beginning of the project was a large number of different formats
(proprietary formats, Gesmes) and supports (paper, diskettes, magnetic tapes, e-mail)
being used. By March 2000, no Member State used manual methods like paper
anymore, some still used a mixture of diskettes and EDI transmissions, and some
countries like Spain, Portugal and Finland systematically use EDI transmissions.

The project demonstrated through real trials that
maritime statistics brings two major advantages:

the use of EDI for collecting

– a homogeneous language for transmitting the data sets required by the Directive

using GESMES for maritime transport statistics;

– there are ways of automatically extracting the statistical data from operational
EDIFACT messages
and
Consolidation Summary Message) or CUSCAR (Customs Cargo Report), as well
as from Port Community Systems or Information Systems.

IFCSUM (International Forwarding

such

as

8

Documentation produced within the project provides a complete description of how
the statistical elements required in the Maritime Directive from an
to extract
IFCSUM message.

international and European groups developed
In parallel to these pilot studies,
standard messages, such as EDIMAN, Maritime Cargo Manifest Message, which is
based on the UN/EDIFACT syntax and was developed by the Manifest Group of the
Maritime Commission. The Commission followed the work of these Groups,
including the International Transport Implementation Guidelines Group (ITIGG) and
the UN/CEFACT Codes Working Group, which is responsible for maintaining the
set of UN/ECE Recommendations covering nomenclatures to benefit global trade
facilitation. This Group deals with revisions of modes of transport codes, package
type codes, commodity coding for transport purposes, types of means of transport
and types of cargo and UN/LOCODES, which are particularly important for
maritime statistics.

The EDIMARS project also contributed to the work of this group by adopting the
ITIGG CUSCAR rules for the third year pilot trials in the UK and in Germany.
ITIGG is currently extending its work to cover the other modes of transport, which
may offer great benefits not only to the other modes for harmonised raw data
collection but also for the collection of intermodal statistics.

3.

PORTS (ARTICLE 4)

As reporting units, ports play the key role for data collection within the information
system of the Directive. According to Article 1, Member States shall collect
Community statistics on the carriage of goods and passengers by seagoing vessels
calling at ports in their territories.

In the 1993 draft of the Directive, the criteria for establishing a list of ports was that
the list should at least cover, for each Member State, 90% of all sea transport of
goods and 90% of all movements of passengers by sea. The final act however
stipulates merely that a list of ports should be drawn up, without providing objective
criteria.

In line with the procedure foreseen in Articles 4(1) and 13, a first list of European
ports was applied since 1997 and formally adopted in 1998 with Commission
Decision 98/385/EC. It comprised a total of 1575 ports in all 15 EEA countries, out
of which 1302 were statistical ports. Starting with the first year of full application,
2000, a new list of ports has been applied. It was formally adopted by Commission
Decision 2000/363/EC and comprises a total of 1357 ports in 13 EU countries, out of
which 1089 are statistical ports (see table 1). Around 160 EEA/EFTA ports will be
added to the list through a separate procedure.

The selection was carried out by each Member State for the ports on its territory. The
number of ports, the relative number of ports per kilometre of coastline and also the
grouping of several sub-ports to a national statistical group differ considerably from
country to country. This is due to local port administration structures and national
traditions in sea transport and also maritime statistics. There is no common minimum
number of passengers, ship movements or cargo handling per year, for a port to be
included in the list.

9

In the United Kingdom, for instance, the total number of ports in the list is double the
number of ports that actually provide statistics as a national statistical port. In Ireland
and Portugal, on the contrary, each port listed is also a statistical port. In Italy, where
all ports are systematically included, each of them reports as a separate statistical
port, without aggregation.

According to the Directive, a port
is defined as a “place having facilities for
merchant ships to moor and to load/unload cargo or to embark/disembark passengers
to or from vessels”. In exceptional cases, Member States have chosen a whole
navigable way as a statistical port, as is the case for the Belgium Albert channel.

Only the analysis of collected data can show whether the heterogeneity of the lists is
an obstacle to the production of comparable and accurate information on EU
maritime transport.

Among the ports included in the list, only those exceeding a certain annual threshold
in cargo or passenger transport need to report in detail and on a quarterly basis. The
ports below this threshold only need to provide summary data on an annual basis.
The threshold is fixed at one million tonnes of goods or 200 000 passengers per year.
During the transition period from 1997 to 1999, Member State may make use of a
derogation foreseen by the Directive, and apply the provisional threshold of two
million tonnes or 400 000 passengers per year. The number of ports on which data
are contained in the common database vary according to the data set.

Due to this threshold restriction, the derogations granted and the revision of the port
list, meaningful time series for the majority of ports can only be started from
reference year 2000 onwards.

10

Table 1

Number of ports in which maritime statistics should be collected

Since reference year 2000 (list as in Decision 2000/363/EC)

ports

sub-ports

Statistical ports

UK
DK
IT
SE
DE
NL
FR
FI
EL
ES
PT
IE
BE

341
145
136
149
123
107
95
85
59
52
31
23
11

EU-15

1357

177
4
0
21
13
6
26
17
1
0
0
0
3

268

(may be added to list at a later stage)

NO
IS

EEA

Total

(96)
(64)

(160)

(1517)

164
141
136
128
110
101
69
68
58
52
31
23
8

1089

(96)
(64)

(160)

(1249)

From experience with data transmitted by the Member States, it appeared that only a
part of the ports that have a reporting duty actually declare traffic. A substantial
revision of the port list may become necessary in the future, when the information
system is well established.

4.

ACCURACY OF STATISTICS (ARTICLE 5)

Intra-Community transport flows have the particularity of being recorded twice: at
the origin and the destination of the flow. The data collection characteristics of the
maritime Directive include information on relation (i.e. the port of loading/unloading
for the EEA, maritime coastal area for non-EEA) both for passengers and goods
consignments. It thus enables the building of mirror tables, which can be used for
quality control. Differences in declarations between two reporting units clearly
indicate methodological problems.

At country-to-country level, differences in total declarations may stem from the fact
that only one of the two concerned ports of a traffic flow is included in the port list,
while the port of (un-)loading does not have a reporting duty. At port-to-port level, in
turn, discrepancies are easy to identify.

The issue is being discussed in the Working Group since June 1999; the Commission
proposes a bilateral approach: two Member States with high differences in reporting
on an identical flow should be notified by the Commission and try to compare their

11

methodologies in order to identify and remove or reduce the source of the
discrepancies. Such bilateral practices have proven successful in other domains such
as migration. Even if the deviation cannot be removed completely, the research may
help building factors for estimations.

Portugal and several scandinavian countries have already started studying the
coherence of data at national level, detecting a number of reasons for discrepancies:

–

–

–

–

flows were declared in different months as they started at the end of one month
and were finished at the beginning of the next month

goods leaving one port destined for another; delays en route may introduce
distortions vis-à-vis the reported data for both ports originally involved

different statistical sources have been used: ship’s manifest vs. knowledge of
the vessel

certain ports use specific unit equivalences for certain types of goods (for
instance tonnes = cubic metres)

The Working Group has begun to undertake a series of continuous activities for
improving the quality of the collected statistics. There is a number of methodological
issues that require further research: such issues may concern national specificities or
general problems such as determining the contents of containers, information on
empty containers or micro-cabotage.

5.

PROCESSING AND TRANSMISSION OF THE RESULTS OF THE DATA COLLECTION
(ARTICLES 6 AND 7)

5.1.

Raw data collection and processing by CNA

As far as raw data collection and processing of the collected data by the competent
national authority (CNA) is concerned, the Directive only binds Member States as to
the result, which is to produce comparable statistics with the agreed standard of
accuracy. The choice of processing tools and work organisation is done at national
level, according to the principle of subsidiarity. Some countries continued to apply
their existing processing systems, adjusting them to the requirements of the Directive
where necessary, while other countries introduced complete new systems. The
financial contribution towards the cost of implementation was partly used to fund
this set up of adequate processing environments.

The findings of the pilot studies concerning data collection are summarised in the
chapter on Transitional period: pilot studies of this report. A project underway in the
UK in 1999/2000 is piloting five different methods of raw data collection. The UK
pilot projects comprise amongst others the SDES (Statistical Data Entry Software)
and a set of data entry web forms for data providers.

5.2.

Transmission of the results to the Commission

For the transmission of the collected data to the Commission, in turn, the Directive
takes a more harmonised approach. It predefines the periodicity and structure of the

12

data sets to be transmitted. The technical details for transmission shall be laid down
by a Comitology procedure.

Given the diversity of tools used in the Member States, and the considerable
adaptation effort necessary, the Commission did not propose common technical
standards in the first phase of application of the Directive. Instead, the Commission
supported Member States’ efforts to install efficient transmission tools by funding
pilot projects and developing a toolbox of software tools in generating electronic
submissions to Eurostat. The aim of the Commission’s EDI strategy is to allow some
choice but at the same time to restrict the options to just two, both of which can be
checked and processed within the Commission without having to be reformatted or
manually edited.

The first out of the two proposed methods is transmission via a subset of the
UN/EDIFACT GESMES message as defined by the “Maritime GESMES message
implementation guidelines”, which were developed during the EDIMARS project.
This “Easy Maritime GESMES EDI solution” has been tested in practice and
constantly improved.

The second method consists in sending a structured flat-file in comma separated
format (".csv") following a structure, which was developed by the Commission for
enabling automatic validation. Its concept is similar to the GESMES structure but it
is a simple flat-file format. Both comma (,) and semicolon (;) can be used as
separators and datasets can be accepted with or without empty fields. The structured
flat-file solution is a no-cost solution, which can be directly derived from common
data processing applications.

The flat-files or GESMES files can be sent either via STADIUM or by structured
email attachments to a pre-defined functional E-mail address.

The overall design criteria of the “MAKEDISI EDI Toolbox” were maximum
simplicity, portability across platforms and also ‘full’ EDI
(Electronic data
interchange) compatibility,
i.e. not requiring any human intervention at all. In
addition, the tools should be put at Member States’ disposal without charge; they
should be independent of software vendor or application, parameterised in order to
easily allow amendments of code lists or GESMES; and should work in conjunction
with standard communications software such as email packages. The PERL language
was chosen, as it not only satisfied the design criteria but also because it offers
additional functionality suitable for structured flat file processing.

The toolbox also provides the functions of format and code validations and of
conversions between structured flat-files and GESMES, thus adding to the accuracy
of data.

The “MAKEDISI EDI Toolbox” accepts both input formats: Maritime GESMES and
structured flat-files. The only output format is GESMES, in order to move towards
100% GESMES transmissions, which corresponds to the general transmission policy
within the European Statistical System.

A Commission managed newsroom on the CIRCA web-site provides support to the
users of these tools and for sharing toolbox experiences, wish lists, frequently asked
questions etc.

13

6.

DISSEMINATION OF STATISTICAL DATA (ARTICLE 9)

The Commission has planned to include the collected data in the regular
dissemination scheme of the European Statistical System, which consists in public
dissemination on a number of supports to all public and private users, and privileged
dissemination to the data providers and Commission Directorate General for
Transport and Energy. The main technical environment for the dissemination of
maritime data will be theme seven of the online database NEW CRONOS. CNAs are
granted a free access, while the general public can purchase extractions from it.

In addition, dissemination of selected data on CD-Rom, or on Commission paper
publication series such as Statistics in focus, yearbooks and Panorama on transport is
foreseen.

This publication scheme responds to the expectations of the CNAs expressed in a
questionnaire in 1998 and in subsequent Working Group meetings.

The main obstacles to dissemination during the transitional period were on the one
hand that according to the Directive, the arrangements for dissemination need to be
laid down by a Comitology procedure, and that there has not yet been a common
agreement in the Working Group on the level of detail in which data should be
disclosed. On the other hand, most Member States allow the dissemination of their
data only under the condition of reciprocity, i.e. that the same data must be available
for all countries at the same time. The situation as regards data reception in the
Commission does not allow for such a complete publication, as several countries
have not yet provided data. Even if all countries had transmitted the data according to
their reporting duty, the derogations granted during the first three years of application
of the Directive would entail considerable differences between countries when
building tables.

the Working Group reached a
In its 1999 meeting and by written follow up,
provisional agreement on dissemination, which consists in publishing data between
ports and maritime coastal areas (MCA). It was also agreed to review this agreement
with a view to increase the level of detail in which data may be published after some
experience is acquired.

These agreements do not give an indication on what should be published, but on
what may be published without prejudice to the confidentiality requirements of the
Directive and of related legal acts. The Member States are currently screening the
concerns about commercial confidentiality among their respective data providers.
First feed back from some countries indicated different views on the side of the
providers, depending on the country of operation but also on the size of the reporting
unit (small ports or operators tend to find information on their activities more
sensitive than large ports or operators).

The formalisation of the Working Group’s agreement in a form of a Commission
Decision is under way.

14

7.

FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION (ARTICLE 11)

Article 11 of the Directive foresees that Member States shall receive a financial
contribution towards the cost of work they carry out for implementing the Directive
during the first three years.

The costs of implementation that occurred in the competent national authorities were
substantial: total costs declared by all Member States in the two budgetary exercises
1998 and 1999 summed up to 3.61 million Euro.

Table 2

Overview on EU contributions

Member State

EU contribution (1998+1999)

BE
DA
DE
EL
ES
FR
IE
IT
NL
PT
FI
SV
UK

66 000
128 000
150 000
82 000
50 491
128 000
38 000
167 735
58 000
20 000
16 000
37 000
194 224

Total

1 135 450

In line with the provisions of Article 11(2) and (3), the European Community has
contracted with Member States to contribute about one third of these costs, with 1.14
million Euro. The work that was taken into consideration concerned both adaptations
within the competent national authorities and developments of software tools that
would be distributed by the competent national authority to their ports or other data
providers.

The costs occurring varied considerably between Member States, depending mainly
on the previous state of data collection on maritime transport in each country. In
some countries, the implementation of the Directive was undertaken in a joint effort
to modernise the existing system of data collection.

In addition to these allocations towards Member States’ costs of implementation, the
European Commission has used financial resources for implementation within
Eurostat and for the pilot projects mentioned in chapter Transitional period.

15

8.

DETAILED RULES OF IMPLEMENTATION AND PROCEDURE (ARTICLES 12 AND 13)

All detailed rules for implementing the Directive are to be laid down by a
management Committee procedure specified in Article 13. So far, two Commission
Decisions containing a set of detailed rules were adopted for implementing the
Directive. They included a first list of ports and as well as a first update of this list.
Furthermore, they completed and adapted the annexes of the Directive.

The port list and the other annexes with data collection characteristics will regularly
be reviewed for reflecting the changes in the tonnage throughput and passenger
transport of the ports, and for adapting them to economic and technical developments
in general. (Ports whose tonnages fall below the threshold in some years may be
maintained in the selected port list.)

The procedure foreseen by the Directive requires a certain amount of time for the
final rule being formally adopted; in questions where all partners involved in the
statistical process agree, it may therefore be conceivable to adopt a working solution
rather than formalising each rule immediately. This has been the practice for detailed
rules for transmission, where the Working Group agreed to apply the options
proposed by the Commission on the basis of a gentlemen’s agreement.

9.

IMPLEMENTATION (ARTICLE 14)

Article 14 requires that Member States adopt the laws, regulations and administrative
provisions necessary to comply with the Directive by 1 January 1997 and
communicate them to the Commission.

By the end of the transitional phase, in December 1999, all Member States except
Ireland have communicated the legal and administrative measures they took for
implementing the Directive. The Commission considered the derogations granted
during the transitional phase as a justification for delaying full implementation until
that date.

The detailed situation concerning legal and administrative implementation in the
Member States, derogations granted under Commission Decision 98/385/EC and
data transmitted is set out below. It reflects the situation as at November 2000 and
is based on experience with data reception in the Commission and on reports made
by national delegations at the meetings of the Working Group and of the Co-
ordinating Committee on Transport Statistics.

9.1.

Belgium

Most of the information required by the maritime Directive was already collected by
the Benelux declarations 20 and 21 on the basis of a Ministerial decree of 1975.4 For
collecting the remaining items of information, a Circular of the Customs and Excises
Administration of 19975 has introduced a supplementary declaration form for

4

“Arrêté ministériel du 13/11/75 relatif à la déclaration générale en matière de douane à l'entrée et à la
sortie de navires.” Published in Moniteur belge of 11.12.1975, p. 15811-15818. In force since 1.1.1976.

16

container transport and ro-ro-units that is annexed to declarations 20 and 21. The
Circular contains an explicit reference to the Council Directive.

Collection of all information required by the Directive should be carried out since
1 February 1997. Belgium was granted derogation for the port of Antwerp for
relation and port of loading/unloading.

Belgium has transmitted all quarterly and annual data for reference years 1997 to
including corrections. The delay of data transmission was continuously
1999,
reduced over the years, and the last annual data sets were transmitted in accordance
with the time frame set by the Directive.

9.2.

Denmark

Denmark has already been collecting data on maritime transport before the adoption
of the Council Directive. The collection was carried out in two surveys: one on ferry
transport of passengers and goods and another one on throughputs in all ports. In
order to comply with the Directive, a third survey was introduced, covering the
transport of goods in major ports, starting in 1997.

Statistics Denmark is carrying out the data collection under the general authorization
of Act no. 196 of 8 June 1966.6 A specific legal act was not required for transposing
the Directive.

Denmark has transmitted all quarterly and annual data sets for reference years 1997
to 1999, and for first quarter 2000 to the Commission. Initial technical problems with
codes in data of the first quarters were resolved. The delay of data transmission was
reduced over the years, and the last annual data sets were transmitted in accordance
with the time frame set by the Directive.

9.3.

Germany

Germany has been collecting statistical information on maritime transport since
1957. In order to implement all variables and classifications foreseen by the
the legislation in force7 was amended on 17 December 19998. The
Directive,
amendment contains an explicit reference to Council Directive 95/64/EC and is in
force since 1.1.2000.

As Germany has been granted a large set of derogations9 by Commission Decision
98/385/EC, it can comply with the Directive during the transition period on the basis

5

6

7

8

9

“Circulaire du 1.2.1997 de l'Administration des douanes et des accises D.D. 92.791 (abroge la
Circulaire du 1.1.1995 n° D.L. 1/7.887)”. This declaration form replaces an earlier form introduced by
Circular No. D.L. 1/7.887 of 1.1.1995 which entered into force on 1.1.1997.
As subsequently amended (most recently by Act no. 1025 of 19.12.1992).
“Gesetz über die Statistik der Seeschiffahrt” of 26.7.1957, in force since 26.8.1957, published in a
consolidated version in BGBl Part III, No. 9510-4, and “Verordnung über die Meldestellen für die
Seeverkehrsstatistik” of 24.4.1958, in force since 1.5.1958, published in BAnz No. 80, last amended by
decree of 5.11.1992 (BAnz p. 8761).
“Gesetz zur Neuordnung der Statistiken der Schifffahrt und des Güterkraftverkehrs”, published in BGBl
of 22.12.1999, Part I, No. 56, p. 2452.
For all data sets partial derogation for port of loading, relation (MCA), type of cargo; total derogation
for number of passengers in A3, D1 (nationality of vessel); partial derogation for nationality of vessel in
E1 and type of vessel in F1 (all throughout the transition period).

17

of its 1957 law. The derogations concern passenger data and the use of the
Directive’s nomenclature for all variables except the reporting port and size of
vessel.

Germany has transmitted quarterly and annual data sets for all reference years to the
Commission, however the data are coded and classified according to the national
system. As this system differs from the nomenclature defined by the Directive, the
transmitted data sets, after applying a filter made by Eurostat, were integrated in the
Eurostat production database in an aggregated format. Annual data sets and those of
third and fourth quarters were transmitted in time.

9.4.

Greece

For complying with the Directive, Greece has adopted two legal instruments: a
Common Ministerial Decision on the Command and authorisation of
the
implementation of specific statistical works in the field of maritime transport of
passengers, goods and vehicles"10, applicable since 1 January 1997, and a Common
Permanent Circular on the Implementation of specific statistical works and
harmonisation of the statistical registration of maritime transport of passengers,
in accordance with Directive 95/64 of the
goods and mobile units (vehicles),
European Union, by the Department of Merchant Marine Statistics11, applicable
since 1 January 1998.

In parallel, a new computer system was set up, and a new methodology and a
separate questionnaire for registration of passengers, mobile units and goods for
domestic and international lines were developed.

Greece was granted extensive derogations, only summary information was required
during the transitional phase (no information was required on relation, vessel details,
and type of cargo (in some data sets)). Freight data collection started in 1998. In
practice, Greece experienced problems with non-response of data providers, which
led to delays in building the data sets.

Greece has only transmitted general cargo and passenger data for reference year
1997.

9.5.

Spain

Spain has already been collecting maritime transport statistics before the adoption of
the Council Directive and did therefore not ask for any derogation. The legislation in
force enables the Spanish authorities to collect and transmit data in accordance with
the Directive without any further modification. For implementing the Directive, a
thus
second version of
incorporating all variables, classifications and codes required by the Directive. In
of
practice,

the computer application SIGMA was developed,

a methodological problem occurred

collecting

port

the

in

10

11

εµπορευµάτων και τροχοφόρων

Ανάθεση και έγκριση διενέργειας ειδικών στατιστικών εργασιών στον τοµέα των θαλάσσιων
“
µεταφορών επιβατών
,

. ” No. 6792/G-81 of 11.4.1997; OJ 333 of
23.4.1997.
∆ιενέργεια ειδικών στατιστικών εργασιών και εναρµόνιση των στατιστικών καταγραφών θαλασσίων
“
µεταφορών επιβατών
σύµφωνα µε την Οδηγία
,

(
από το Τµήµα Στατιστικών Εµπορικής Ναυτιλίας

εµπορευµάτων και κινητών µονάδων

τροχοφόρων

),

”. Circular of

της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης
,

95/64
15.4.1998.

18

loading/unloading, which seems to be often confused with the origin or final
destination of cargo transported.

Spain was one of the first countries to transmit data to the Commission, and has
provided all quarterly and annual data sets for reference years 1997 to 1999, with
improving timeliness of transmission. However several major Spanish ports such as
Bilbao and Valencia were not included in the provided data sets.

9.6.

France

The legislation in force was sufficient for collecting data in the first two categories of
ports in France: the seven largest ports, which are public enterprises, and the large
ports of national interest. For prescribing data collection in accordance with the
maritime Directive in the third category of decentralised ports, which have to provide
statistics under a decree of 8 August 1986, an amending ministerial decree was
adopted on 28 December 199912.

The Ministry of Transport has provided an information system to several ports
allowing them to monitor transport movements in the ports. This software (TRITON)
is adapted both to the requirements of the Directive and to the internal modernisation
programme. For those ports equipped with other software, the Ministry has reminded
them of the obligation to adapt their systems to the output file structures of the
TRITON application. At the same time, the Ministry has installed an Intranet site that
will be accessible to all French maritime services by the end of 2000.

In practice, France experienced some problems with the mobilisation of respondents
and the data flows from ports to the national administration.

France was granted partial derogation for information on type of cargo for all data
sets and total derogation for nationality of registration.

France has only transmitted the annual data set A3 for 1997 and for 1998, and all
data sets for the first quarter 2000.

9.7.

Ireland

Ireland has so far been collecting maritime transport statistics under the Statistics Act
of 1993. A supplementary Statutory Instrument is currently being drafted by the
Parliamentary Draftsman’s Office. This instrument will make the provision of
maritime data from ports (per Maritime Directive) a statutory requirement.

Until its entry into force, data are collected on a voluntary basis according to the
Agreement with the Ports Working Group (established in 1996) to provide the
required statistical data. In co-operation with the ports that are beyond the threshold
of the Directive (and therefore have to report detailed data), CSO developed a central
manifest to be completed by the shipping operators. For small ports, which have to
report less detailed data, a second survey was established. The new survey “National
Survey of Ports in Ireland” is ongoing since the first quarter of 1997.

12

Published in the OJ of 31.12.1999 and in the Official Bulletin of Ministère de l'Equipement, des
Transports et du Logement on 10.01.2000. The annexes were published in the Official Bulletin on
25.02.2000.

19

Ireland had asked for a limited number of derogations only, in particular for type of
cargo information. The Commission received all quarterly and annual data sets for
reference years 1997 to 1999, except for the port of Rosslaire. Due to some code
problems occurring during the integration into the common database, all data sets
were transmitted again.

9.8.

Italy

The survey on maritime transport statistics carried out in Italy since 1995 covered
some of the requirements of the Directive. According to the Italian legislation, the
survey is mandatory for respondents.

For meeting the remaining requirements, the data collection model needed to be
adapted. For this purpose, Italy adopted an administrative measure introducing a
new, fully revised questionnaire on statistical returns on maritime transport. In
practice, Italy experienced technical and administrative difficulties with this new
model which was applied from 1 January 2000 onwards.

Due to derogations granted by Commission Decision 98/385/EC, the Directive has to
be fully applied only from January 2000 onwards. Only direction, number of vessels,
tonnage and unit load needed to be provided according to the nomenclature defined
by the Directive during the transition period.

Italy has transmitted quarterly and annual data sets (except A2 and C1 for which
there was a derogation) for reference years 1997 and 1998.

9.9.

Netherlands

The Netherlands have already been collecting maritime transport statistics before the
adoption of the EC Directive. For implementing the Directive, some technical
adaptations and an amendment of the Dutch national law were necessary. The
amendment was made through Decision of 5 July 199713, which contains an explicit
reference to the EC Directive.

the Netherlands were granted partial
During the three-year transitional period,
derogation for information on “port of loading/unloading”, “relation” and “type of
cargo”.

The Netherlands provided all quarterly and annual data sets for the reference years
1997 to 1999 to the Commission. The time frame of the Directive was usually
observed for the fourth quarters and annual data. In line with the derogation, these
data are broken down by country of loading/unloading, not by port or MCA. The
data were integrated in the common database after translation of national codes. All
data sets for the first quarter 2000 were transmitted using the Directive's codes.

13

“Besluit van 5 juli, houdende vaststelling van bepalingen met betrekking tot de verstrekking van
scheepvaartgegevens voor statistische doeleinden (Besluit statistische gegevens scheepvaartverkeer)”,
published in “Staatsblad van het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden, No. 341 of 5.7.1997.

20

9.10.

Portugal

Thanks to its tradition in collecting maritime statistics, Portugal did not need to ask
for any derogation from its reporting duties under the maritime Directive. The
Statistical law in force14 enables the Portuguese National Statistical Institute to
collect and transmit data in accordance with the Directive without any further
amendment. Data are collected in a new survey since 1997 on a monthly and annual
basis.

Data set D1 for passenger information was not provided by Portuguese ports as none
of them exceeded the threshold of 400 000 passengers per year.

Portugal was one of the first countries to fully comply with the Directive in respect
of data collection and complete transmission. All required quarterly and annual data
sets for reference years 1997 to 1999 have been transmitted to the Commission. The
timeliness of data transmission improved over the years, and data for the first quarter
of 2000 was received in line with the Directive. Problems with some codes that
occurred in the beginning were solved.

9.11.

Finland

Finland traditionally collects statistical information on maritime transport. The legal
basis for this collection is a law of 199015, amended in 199716 for the purpose of the
EC Directive. On 16 December 1996, the Finnish Maritime Administration adopted
an administrative measure17 for implementing the directive in the Finish statistical
system.

Finland only needed a partial derogation for one variable (type of cargo) in 1997, and
was the first country to achieve timely data transmission according to the
requirements of the Directive.

All Finnish data sets for the reference years 1997 to 1999 and for the first quarter of
2000 were transmitted to the Commission. However, the data did not cover the
Finnish domestic traffic, which should also be included according to the Directive.
This information should be added in the future.

9.12.

Sweden

In Sweden, the collection of maritime transport statistics is based on a law and a
regulation on official statistics of 1992.18 With a regulation on transport of persons
and goods by sea of 199619, and the establishment of a new survey in 1996, Sweden
fully implemented the Council Directive in its national legal system.

14

15

16

17

18

19

“Lei N° 6/89, (Lei Assembleia Da Republica)”, adopted on 15.4.1989.
“Merenkulkulaitoksesta annettu laki (13/1990)”, in force since 1.3.1990.
“Laki merenkulkulaitoksesta annetun lain 1 ja 2§:n muuttamisesta (N:o 1248/1997)”, in force since
1.1.1998.
Published in the Official Publication of FMA 4 of 1.1.1997, in force since 1.1.1997.
“Lag om den officiella statistiken” (SFS 1992:889), adopted on 4.6.1992, in force since 1.1.1993, and
“Förordning om den officiella statistiken” (SFS 1992:1668), adopted on 17.12.1992.
“Föreskrifter om uppgifter till statistik om person- och godstransporter inom sjöfart mm” (SIKA-FS
1996:01), adopted on 23 April 1996, in force since 1.5.1996.

21

For 1997, Sweden was granted total derogation for “number of units”, and partial
derogation for “nationality of vessel”, “port of loading”, “relation” and “type of
cargo” (in data sets A1 and C1). For 1998 and 1999, it was exempted partially from
providing “type of cargo” (in data sets A1 and C1) and totally from “units without
load”.

Sweden has transmitted all required quarterly and annual data sets for the reference
years 1997 to 1999, and for the first quarter of 2000. The periodicity for data
transmission foreseen by the Directive has not yet been met. Problems with
conflicting codes in the first transmission batches were solved by re-transmission of
all data sets.

9.13.

United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom, the legal basis for collecting the data is the Statutory
Instrument20 passed in 1997. The collection of passenger data does not present a
problem, as there are already existing systems for collecting them. For the freight
data however, the UK had only run an annual, less detailed enquiry. Starting in 1997
the UK has designed a new collection system for the quarterly and more detailed
data. The majority of data is collected from shipping companies and shipping agents,
and some data are obtained from ports for statistical control purposes. Data providers
may choose between five means of reporting, ranging from paper to full EDI
methods. Around 90 per cent of all returns are submitted using electronic methods.

The UK was granted extensive derogation for freight data, i.e. total derogation for
data set F1/F2 and derogation for information on port of loading/unloading, quarter
and nationality of registration for all freight transport, and partial derogation for type
of cargo.

The UK has already provided quarterly and annual passenger data for the reference
years 1997 and 1998 and freight data with unknown destination for 1997 and 1998 to
the Commission. Only data set D1 was supplied for all quarters of 1999. All data sets
for the first quarter of 2000 were transmitted.

9.14.

Norway

Norway is using the Statistics Act of 16 June 1989 No. 54 which gives Statistics
Norway legal authority to collect the statistical information required by the Directive.
legislative measures were deemed necessary for applying the
No additional
Directive. Statistics Norway planned to start reporting in 1999.

Norway has not yet transmitted any data to the Commission.

9.15.

Iceland

Even though formal transposal of the Directive was not completed before winter
1998/99, Iceland was able to provide detailed information for 1998 in the annual data
set A3, with information only on cargo and not on passengers. Reykjavik is the only
Icelandic port for which detailed information is required.

20

“The Statistical Returns (Carriage of Goods and Passengers by Sea) Regulations 1997” (Statutory
Instrument 1997 No. 2330), made on 24.9.1997, in force since 1.11.1997.

22

Iceland also transmitted tables A1, A2 and C1 for 1998, but without relation, port of
loading/unloading and gross weight.

In practice, the two main problems encountered in data collection in Iceland are
obtaining information on individual vessels and data on destination and origin of
vessels.

10.

CONCLUSION

The experiences from the implementation of the maritime Directive have in general
been positive. Setting up the reporting system in the thirteen EU Member States
concerned, with a total of almost 1100 statistical ports, involved resources and efforts
at all levels: the ports, the competent national authorities and the Commission.

The three-year transitional period turned out to be appropriate to the needs for
the majority of Member States had adopted the
adaptation. By January 2000,
necessary legal and administrative measures and were ready for producing the
required statistical returns. As at November 2000, the Commission has received the
majority of data required by the Directive for the first
three reference years.
However, the collected information is incomplete as far as three Member States with
important maritime transport are concerned. This has a negative impact on building
EU totals and on dissemination of the data in general. The timeliness of data
transmission still needs to be improved for guaranteeing a reliable and in-time
the transmission of data to the
dissemination of maritime data. Technically,
Commission was continuously improved during the first
thanks to
three years,
electronic transmission tools.

Given the provisional threshold for detailed reporting duty and the derogations
granted during the transitional period, complete and comparable data on transport by
passengers and cargo by sea will be available only from reference year 2000
onwards.

In a few countries there are still problems with non-response of data providers.

Compared with the time before the Directive, when only some of the Member States
provided some general data on a voluntary and non-harmonised basis, the Directive
constitutes an enormous advantage:
there will be regular
for
in the EU/EEA on the basis of harmonised
information on maritime transport
definitions and classifications, and with a broad coverage of ports and indicators.

the first

time,

So far, the procedures foreseen in the Directive for laying down its implementing
rules and for adapting it to economic developments have proven satisfactory. No
changes in the text of the Directive are sought in short term. In the medium-term
however, the pilot studies carried out pursuant to this Directive may lead to a need
for changes. This will be explored once that more experience is gained with
collecting the variables of the current system.

23