COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION - SYNOPSIS REPORT Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS EU Ports Strategy
Date: 2026-03-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission
Subjects: EU strategy, European security, common ports policy, competitiveness, energy transition, foreign enterprise, foreign investment, harbour installation, third country

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 4.3.2026  SWD(2026) 81 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION - SYNOPSIS REPORT  Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS EU Ports Strategy {COM(2026) 112 final}  
 
 
1.  INTRODUCTION 

This synopsis report (the report) provides an overview of the consultation activities in support 
of the Communication from the European Commission on the EU ports strategy (the EU ports 
strategy or the strategy). The strategy has been developed in response to European Commission 
President von der Leyen’s mission letter to Commissioner Tzitzikostas1, and to specific calls 
for action from the European Parliament2.  

Stakeholders  were  consulted  in  line  with  the  better  regulation  framework3,  ensuring  a 
transparent,  meaningful  and  proportionate  approach  to  consultation.  This  enabled  the 
Commission to: (i) get useful feedback from a wide range of stakeholders; (ii) take the views 
of  these  stakeholders  into  account;  and  (iii)  where  relevant,  reflect  them  in  the  EU  ports 
strategy. In particular, the consultations sought to identify key challenges faced by ports across 
the EU and collect suggestions for actions that could be reflected in the strategy.  

This report highlights the main issues, drivers and recommendations that emerged during the 
consultation, providing an evidence base for the EU ports strategy.  The contributions received 
through the Commission’s Have your say portal or expressed by stakeholders in the various 
fora (as detailed below) cannot under any circumstances be regarded as the official position of 
the Commission or its departments, nor are they a representative sample of the views of the EU 
population. 

2.  CONSULTATION STRATEGY 

The  Commission  gathered  input  for  the  EU  ports  strategy  through  a  combination  of 
qualitative, participatory and structured consultation tools. The consultation process started in 
early 2025 and ended in December 2025. 

It  combined  open  and  targeted  consultation  formats,  including  an  open  call  for  evidence, 
strategic political dialogues, meetings of established expert and stakeholder fora, sectoral social 
dialogue, thematic conferences and bilateral meetings. It included the following key events and 
milestones: 

•  20  February,  20  June  and  3  October  2025  –  meetings  of  the  European  Ports  Forum 

(EPF) expert group4; 

•  5 March and 29 October 2025 – Sectoral Social Dialogue Committee (SSDC) for Ports5; 
•  7-9 May 2025 – European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO) Annual Conference6; 

1 European Commission President von der Leyen’s mission letter to Commissioner Tzitzikostas, available here.  
2 European Parliament resolution of 17 January 2024 on building a comprehensive European port strategy. 
3 Better regulation – European Commission.  
4 The European Ports Forum is a Commission expert group established in 2017 to provide a structured platform 
for dialogue between the Commission, Member States and port stakeholders. It also advises the Commission on 
initiatives  to  promote  and  support  the  uniform  implementation  of  Regulation  (EU)  2017/352  establishing  a 
framework for the provision of port services and common rules on the financial transparency of ports. 
5 Ports – Sectoral social dialogue  
6 ESPO Annual Conference 2025. More information available here.  

1 

 
 
 
•  1 July 2025 – strategic dialogue on the EU ports strategy chaired by the Commissioner 

for Sustainable Transport and Tourism, Apostolos Tzitzikostas7; 

•  30 June-28 July 2025 – call for evidence8;  
•  4  November  2025  –  strategic  dialogue  on  the  security  dimension  of  the  EU  ports 
strategy co-chaired by Commissioner for Sustainable Transport and Tourism, Apostolos 
Tzitzikostas,  and  by  Commissioner  for  Internal  Affairs  and  Migration,  Magnus 
Brunner9. 

The  consultation  targeted  the  following  key  stakeholders  relevant  to  the  ports  sector  and, 
through the various consultation tools used, ensured balanced representation across stakeholder 
groups and geographic regions: 

•  managing bodies of ports and port service providers; 
•  Member  State  authorities  (governments,  public  administrations  including  transport, 

energy, the environment, law enforcement and customs authorities); 
• 
regional and local authorities; 
•  shipping and logistics companies;  
•  energy providers and other companies operating in and around port areas; 
•  social partners; 
•  academic experts and think tanks; 
•  non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and coastal communities.  

3.  CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES  

3.1. 

Strategic dialogues  

To complement this broad consultation strategy and to explore specific issues in more depth, 
the Commission organised two high-level strategic dialogues. The strategic dialogues brought 
together representatives from ports, shipping, logistics, energy, industry, social partners, public 
authorities  and  EU  agencies  to  jointly  define  priorities,  opportunities  and  actions  for  the 
development of the EU ports strategy. 

•  The first dialogue, on 1 July 2025, a strategic dialogue on the EU ports strategy, was 
hosted by Commissioner Tzitzikostas. This dialogue brought together 18 participants 
representing  European  port  organisations,  shipping  and  maritime  service  providers, 
logistics  and  inland  transport  operators,  rail,  energy  and  fuels  stakeholders,  social 
partners and civil society organisations10. It focused on competitiveness, sustainability 

7 Strategic Dialogue on the Ports Strategy. More information available here.  
8 The Call for Evidence on an EU Ports Strategy  
9 More information available here.  
10 Participants included representatives from the European Federation of Port Terminal Operators (FEPORT), the 
European  Community  Shipowners’ Associations  (ECSA),  the  European  Sea  Ports  Organisation  (ESPO),  the 
European Maritime Pilots’ Association (EMPA), the World Shipping Council (WSC), the European Tugowners’ 
Association (ETA), the European Federation of Inland Ports (EFIP), the European Transport Workers’ Federation 
(ETF),  the  European  Dockworkers  Council  (EDC),  the  European  Liaison  Committee  of  Common  Market 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
and  energy  transition,  as  well  as  security  and  network  resilience.  Participants 
emphasised  the  changing  role  of  ports  as  critical  infrastructure,  challenges  linked  to 
decarbonisation and grid capacity, and the importance of coordinated EU support for 
resilience and hinterland connectivity. 

•  The second dialogue, a stakeholder dialogue on the security dimension of the EU ports 
strategy, was held on 4 November 2025. Co-hosted by Commissioners Tzitzikostas and 
Brunner,  this  dialogue  focused  on  organised  crime,  cyber  threats,  hybrid  risks, 
workforce protection and military mobility. 17 participants, representing EU agencies 
and  institutions,  national  authorities  (including  law  enforcement  bodies,  customs 
authorities  and  coast  guards),  port  authorities  and  port  associations,  global  shipping 
companies, social partners, cybersecurity bodies and people involved in defence took 
part  in  the  dialogue11.  Stakeholders  underlined  the  importance  of  public-private 
cooperation and information exchange and, building on the work of the European Ports 
Alliance12, called for stronger joint platforms,  better data sharing, minimum security 
standards, and better alignment of existing EU instruments. 

3.2.  European Ports Forum (EPF) expert group 

The  EPF  is  an  expert  group13  that  supports  the  exchange  of  information  and  advises  the 
Commission  on  port-related  matters  and  on  initiatives  to  promote  and  support  uniform 
implementation of the Port Services Regulation14. 

The  group  met  three  times  in  2025  (20  February,  20  June  and  3  October)  and  provided 
continuous  structured  feedback  on  the  development  of  the  EU  ports  strategy.  Discussions 
covered competitiveness, foreign  influence, security, resilience, sustainability, digitalisation, 
energy transition and the role of ports in military mobility. The EPF also served as a key channel 

Forwarders (Comité de Liaison Européen des Commissionaires et Auxiliaires de Transport du Marché Commun) 
(CLECAT), the Marine Care Association (MCA), the European Barge Union (EBU), the European Association of 
professional  portside  storekeepers  for  agribulk  commodities  (UNISTOCK),  the  Community  of  European 
Railways (CER), the European Onshore Power Supply Association (EOPSA), the European Dredging Association 
(EUDA), FuelsEurope and Transport & Environment (T&E). 
11  Participants  included  representatives  from  Europol,  the  Belgian  National  Drugs  Commissioner,  the  Finnish 
Ports  Association,  the  Rotterdam  Sea  Port  Police,  the  French  shipping  and  logistics  company  Compagnie 
Maritime d'Affrètement and Compagnie Générale Maritime (Maritime Freighting Company and General Maritime 
Company (CMA CGM)), Finnish Customs, the Port of Antwerp-Bruges, the Hellenic Coast Guard, the European 
Transport Workers’ Federation (ETF), the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA), the Italian State 
Police, the Port of Burgas, Maersk, the EU Military Staff, the Hamburg Port Security Centre, the Hamburg Water 
Police, and Le Havre Rouen Paris (HAROPA) Ports. 
12 The European Ports Alliance and its public-private partnership, launched in January 2024 under the ProtectEU 
strategy,  aims  to  bring  all  relevant  stakeholders  together,  to  develop  solutions  to  protect  ports  and  to  boost 
resilience against organised crime at both major and minor ports. 
13 The European Ports Forum consists of up to 43 members representing three main categories: (i) 27 Member 
State competent authorities responsible for port policy; (ii) 14 port sector associations, including port associations, 
trade  and  business  associations  and  professional  associations  or  other  related  sectors;  and  (iii)  2  other  public 
bodies.  
14 Regulation (EU) 2017/352 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
for discussing the preliminary results of the call for evidence (see Section 3.5) and ensuring 
coherence across consultation formats. 

3.3. 

Sectoral Social Dialogue Committee (SSDC) for Ports  

The SSDC is a key player in the social dialogue in the maritime transport sector15. Established 
in 2013, the SSCDC aims to improve the working and living conditions of port workers and 
boost the sector’s competitiveness and productivity.  

The SSDC meetings of 5 March and 29 October 2025 gave social partners an opportunity to 
provide input for the strategy, in particular, on the social aspect, including working conditions, 
skills,  security  awareness  and  workforce  protection.  These  discussions  highlighted  the 
importance of treating workers as key partners in ensuring safe, resilient and competitive ports. 

3.4.  European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO) Annual Conference 

From 7 to 9 May 2025, the 21st ESPO Annual Conference took place in Thessaloniki under the 
theme Towards a strategy for Europe’s ports in the post-2024 era. The event brought together 
more  than  two  hundred  participants  from  port  authorities,  public  administrations  and  the 
broader port ecosystem and was a major consultation milestone for the development of the EU 
ports strategy. 

As  part  of  the  consultation  process,  a  parallel  session  was  organised  with  Commissioner 
Tzitzikostas  and  around  30  port  CEOs,  focusing  on  sustainability,  competitiveness  and 
resilience. Ports underlined their role as critical infrastructure increasingly tasked with non-
traditional  public  responsibilities,  such  as  supporting  the  energy  transition  and  military 
mobility. Concerns were raised regarding the implementation of onshore power supply, grid 
capacity  constraints,  funding  needs,  lengthy  permitting  procedures,  geopolitical  risks  and 
cybersecurity  challenges.  Participants  also  stressed  the  need  to  consider  different  port 
segments, peripheral and outermost regions, and the potential of port clusters. 

3.5.  Call for evidence  

The Commission call for evidence on the EU ports strategy, published on the Commission’s 
Have your say portal, received 193 responses16. An additional 16 contributions were submitted 
after  the  deadline  and  analysed  as  part  of  the  broader  consultation  process. All  qualitative 
responses and supporting documents (translated into English using a Commission AI-powered 
tool) were taken into account.  

Respondents  represented  a  broad  cross-section  of  the  port  ecosystem,  including  port 
authorities, 
logistics  providers,  equipment 
manufacturers, technology providers, energy suppliers, wind and alternative fuels stakeholders, 

terminal  operators,  shipping  companies, 

15 The Committee is composed of representatives from various organisations, including the European Transport 
Workers’ Federation (ETF), the International Dockworkers Council (IDC), the Federation of European Private 
Port Companies and Terminals (FEPORT), and the European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO). 
16 The statistics figures presented in this paragraph exclude these additional submissions. However, their content 
was analysed and taken into account as part of the broader consultation process. 

4 

 
 
 
trade  unions,  NGOs,  academic  and  research  institutions,  and  national  and  regional 
administrations.  

The figure below shows the breakdown of respondents by category17.  

In terms of country distribution, responses were received from stakeholders based in 21 EU 
Member  States  and  from  five  non-EU  countries  (Norway,  Switzerland, Türkiye,  the  United 
Arab  Emirates  and  the  United  Kingdom).  Most  responses  came  from  Belgium  (25.4%), 
because Belgium  hosts many of the associations and organisations representing  EU interest 
groups.  This  was  followed  by  Germany  (10.4%),  Spain  (10%),  France  (8%)  and  the 
Netherlands (7%).  

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

The call for evidence complemented previous consultation activities and helped to validate and 
refine the policy directions for the strategy. The results of the call for evidence can be found on 
the Commission’s better regulation portal. Annex 1 contains details of the inputs provided in 
the form of responses to the call for evidence. 

17 Respondents were asked to describe themselves as a company/a business, business association, public authority, 
academic/research institution, NGO, trade union, EU citizen/non-EU citizen, or other. 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
3.6.  Ad hoc responses  

In addition to the formal consultation formats, the Commission received input through around 
30 bilateral meetings. These exchanges involved a broad range of representatives, including 
representatives  from  ports  and  port  authorities,  trade  associations  from  the  port  and  cruise 
sectors, regional and local authorities, and Members of the European Parliament. They enabled 
more detailed discussion of specific challenges, regional contexts and sectoral perspectives and 
complemented the findings of the structured consultation activities. 

4.  INTERDEPENDENCIES AND CONSISTENCIES IN THE RESPONSES FROM STAKEHOLDERS 

There was a high degree of consistency across stakeholder responses and consultation formats. 
Perspectives varied depending on stakeholders’ roles and responsibilities, but their input was 
largely complementary. 

Public  authorities  (Member  States,  regional  and  local  authorities)  broadly  supported  a 
comprehensive EU ports strategy providing policy coherence across transport, energy, security 
and industrial policies. They emphasised ports’ strategic role, the importance of coordinated 
implementation  of  existing  EU  legislation,  and  the  need  to  address  security,  resilience  and 
military mobility. 

Port authorities and port associations highlighted competitiveness challenges, investment 
gaps, grid constraints and permitting delays, while stressing the diversity of EU ports and the 
need for flexibility in any EU approach. 

Port  operators,  shipping  and  logistics  companies  focused  on  operational  efficiency, 
connectivity  and  predictability,  supporting  digitalisation  and  better  hinterland  connections 
while cautioning against regulatory fragmentation. 

Social  partners  broadly  welcomed  the  initiative. Trade  unions  stressed  the  need  for  strong 
commitments on skills, workers’ safety and protection and social dialogue, while employers 
highlighted the importance of practical guidance, safety and adequate funding for workforce 
transitions. Both sides emphasised security, safety, competitiveness and cooperation through 
existing frameworks. 

NGOs,  academia  and  other  stakeholders  supported  the  strategy’s  focus  on  sustainability, 
resilience  and  societal  value,  while  calling  for  stronger  alignment  between  environmental 
objectives and competitiveness. 

The responses revealed  close links between competitiveness, sustainability, security and the 
social  aspect,  with  stakeholders  widely  recognising  that  progress  in  one  area  depends  on 
coordinated action in the others. 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
5.  MAIN MESSAGES FROM ALL THE CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES 

The  consultation  process  confirmed  broad  support  for  a  comprehensive,  non-legislative  EU 
ports strategy addressing the evolving role of ports as economic gateways, clean energy hubs 
and  critical  infrastructure  for  security  and  resilience.  After  analysing  the  results  of  the 
consultation activities listed above, it is possible to summarise the input as follows. 

i. 

Governance, coordination and regulatory framework 

Overall, stakeholders supported greater coherence between and better coordination of existing 
legislation  affecting  ports  rather  than  the  introduction  of  new  regulatory  obligations. 
Simplification, better implementation and faster permitting procedures were recurrent requests. 
The  majority  of  respondents  across  the  board  stressed  the  importance  of  recognising  the 
diversity of EU ports and avoiding one-size-fits-all approaches, while ensuring a predictable 
and stable policy environment. 

ii. 

Competitiveness and level playing field 

Global  competition,  rising  compliance  costs  and  foreign  influence  were  identified  as  major 
challenges.  Stakeholders  called  for  predictable  State  aid,  competition  policy  and  foreign 
investment screening frameworks. Concerns were raised about cumulative regulatory burdens 
and  rising  compliance  costs,  particularly  for  ports  facing  competition  from  non-EU  hubs. 
Stakeholders therefore called for systematic competitiveness checks and closer coordination 
between transport, competition, trade and industrial policies. 

iii. 

Digitalisation, efficiency and connectivity 

Digitalisation  was  widely  seen  as  a  key  enabler  of  efficiency,  sustainability  and  security. 
Stakeholders  supported  interoperable  digital  systems,  data  sharing  among  port  authorities, 
operators, people involved in logistics and public authorities, while ensuring cybersecurity and 
data  protection.  Better  hinterland  connectivity  and  the  integration  of  ports  into  multimodal 
transport chains were also identified as essential to reduce congestion, improve reliability and 
strengthen the competitiveness of EU ports within global supply chains. 

iv. 

Security, resilience and military mobility 

Security  concerns  featured  prominently  across  all  consultation  formats.  Stakeholders 
underlined growing threats from organised crime, cyberattacks, hybrid risks, climate impacts 
and  geopolitical  instability.  There  was  broad  support  for  adopting  a  holistic  approach  to 
resilience, building on existing EU and international frameworks, strengthening information 
sharing and public-private cooperation, and supporting ports’ dual civilian and military role, 
including through resilient and, where appropriate, dual-use infrastructure. 

v. 

Ports and the energy transition 

Stakeholders broadly agreed that ports are increasingly central to the energy transition, not only 
as  transport  nodes  but  also  as  energy  hubs  supporting  alternative  fuels,  electrification  and 
industrial  decarbonisation.  Stakeholders  highlighted  the  need  to  support  the  deployment  of 
onshore power supply, alternative fuels, hydrogen, offshore wind (including offshore floating 

7 

 
 
facilities)  and  related  infrastructure,  while  maintaining  a  technology-neutral  and  flexible 
approach. Grid capacity constraints, high investment needs and lengthy permitting procedures 
were consistently identified as major bottlenecks. 

vi. 

Funding and access to finance 

Access to finance emerged as the main cross-cutting concern, especially given the increasing 
need to fund additional safety, security and energy transition investments. Stakeholders called 
for  better  coordination  and  use  of  existing  and,  in  particular,  adequate  future  EU  funding 
instruments, simplified procedures and support for smaller ports and ports in peripheral and 
outermost regions. 

i. 

Skills and social aspects 

Stakeholders  underlined  that  the  success  of  the  EU  ports  strategy  depends  on  a  skilled, 
protected and adaptable workforce. They stressed the importance of skills development,  the 
safety of workers, social dialogue and fair transition measures to ensure social sustainability 
and accompany digitalisation, automation and  the development of new technologies. Social 
partners  highlighted  the  need  to  anticipate  changing  skills  requirements  through  training, 
upskilling and reskilling, alongside adequate health and safety measures. 

6.  HOW FEEDBACK WAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT 

The views expressed during the consultation process were instrumental for the preparation of 
the EU ports strategy by helping determine its overall structure and priorities. 

On this basis, the EU ports strategy is structured around the core themes identified during the 
consultation  process,  including  competitiveness,  digitalisation,  skills  and  social  aspects, 
security and resilience, the energy transition, and funding and financing. 

Stakeholders  consistently  highlighted  competitive  pressure  from  non-EU  ports,  rising 
regulatory  and  operational  costs,  and  concerns  about  foreign  influence  and  market 
concentration.  These  inputs  resulted  in  the  strategy’s  emphasising  safeguarding  the 
competitiveness of EU ports, ensuring a level playing field and strengthening coherence across 
EU  policies  affecting  ports.  Calls  for  clearer  and  more  predictable  State  aid,  foreign  direct 
investment  screening  and  competition  policy  frameworks  were  taken  into  account  in  the 
strategy’s focus on better coordination, guidance and implementation of existing instruments. 

Stakeholders  stressed  the  potential  of  digitalisation  to  improve  efficiency,  security  and 
sustainability, while highlighting uneven levels of digital maturity and persistent administrative 
burdens. These views are reflected in the strategy’s focus on interoperable digital systems , data 
sharing  and  data  storage  in  the  EU,  full  implementation  of  the  European  maritime  single 
window environment and better hinterland connectivity to reduce bottlenecks and emissions. 

The  consultation  underlined  ports’  central  role  in  supporting  the  energy  transition  and 
industrial  decarbonisation,  while  identifying  grid  constraints,  high  investment  needs  and 
lengthy permitting procedures as key barriers. These are reflected in the  strategy’s focus on 

8 

 
 
 
ports  as  clean  energy  hubs,  the  need  for  multi-fuel  approaches,  and  the  importance  of 
coordinated planning, faster permitting and investment in energy and grid infrastructure.  

Security  and  resilience  featured  prominently  across  all  consultation  formats.  Stakeholders 
drew attention to organised crime, cyber threats, hybrid risks, climate-related disruptions, and 
the growing importance of ports for military mobility. These responses fed into the strategy’s 
holistic  approach  to  resilience,  building  on  existing  EU  and  international  frameworks, 
strengthening  cooperation  and  information  sharing,  and  supporting  ports’  dual  civilian  and 
military role through resilient and, where appropriate, dual-use infrastructure. 

Stakeholders  also  emphasised  the  importance  of  skills,  training  and  attractive  working 
conditions  to  support  the  energy  and  digital  transition  of  the  port  sector.  These  inputs  are 
reflected  in  the  attention  the  strategy  pays  to  the  social  aspect,  including  upskilling  and 
reskilling,  social  dialogue  and  workforce  involvement  as  key  enablers  of  competitiveness, 
safety and resilience. 

Access to finance was identified as a cross-cutting challenge, particularly given the significant 
investment  needs  linked  to  decarbonisation,  security  and  connectivity.  Stakeholder  input 
resulted  in  the  strategy’s  emphasising  better  coordination  and  use  of  existing  EU  funding 
instruments,  the  simplification  of  procedures  and  the  mobilisation  of  public  and  private 
investment, while recognising the specific needs of smaller ports and ports in peripheral and 
outermost regions. 

Several  proposals  made  during  the  consultation  fall  under  Member  State  competences  or 
require national or local action. Their implementation will therefore depend on Member States’ 
priorities  and  readiness  to  act.  The  Commission  stands  ready  to  support  and  complement 
national action within its competences. The strategy also strengthens implementation follow-
up by foreseeing a high-level Maritime Board to steer implementation of the Ports Strategy 
together with the EU Industrial Maritime Strategy, in dialogue with Member States and key 
sectors. 

Overall, the responses to the consultation fed directly into the structure, priorities and strategic 
thrust of the EU ports strategy, while respecting the diversity of the EU’s port system.  

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX: Factual report of the call for evidence  

1.  This Annex  presents  the  main  findings  of  the  views  expressed  by  stakeholders  in 

response to the call for evidence, presented by thematic area. 

1.1. Governance and regulatory framework 

In  general,  respondents  broadly  supported  the  development  of  a  comprehensive  EU  ports 
strategy, stressing the need for a stable, predictable governance framework and coordinated 
implementation  of  existing  rules  rather  than  new  legislation  or  additional  administrative 
burdens. Many also asked for the strategy to recognise ports’ strategic and expanding role in 
the EU economy, encompassing the energy transition, industrial clustering, trade and security, 
while reflecting their diversity (core, regional, inland, island and outermost) and avoiding one-
size-fits-all approaches. 

In  particular,  respondents  underlined  the  need  for  greater  coherence  across  EU  legislation 
affecting ports, faster permitting procedures, and more coordinated implementation of policies 
on port-related matters across Member States. 

1.2. Competitiveness and a level playing field  

Global  competition  and foreign  influence were highlighted as major concerns.  Respondents 
asked for stronger safeguards to protect critical port infrastructure and clear rules on foreign 
investment to ensure EU’s strategic autonomy. Many supported robust, predictable screening 
of foreign direct investments to protect critical port assets, while cautioning that screening must 
remain balanced and not deter productive investment. 

Some  public  authorities  highlighted  increasing  concentration  and  vertical  integration  along 
maritime logistics chains (such as liner shipping into terminal and hinterland services), calling 
for vigilant mergers and competition control, including for vertical integration that could affect 
port  competition  and  user  choice.  In  parallel,  they  called  for  the  safeguarding  of  public 
ownership  of  port  land  and  waters  where  applicable  and  for  the  recognition  of  diversity  in 
concession  models,  while  considering  more  comparable  concession  terms  and  durations  to 
support fair competition.  

Respondents called for a dedicated State aid framework for ports, to address disadvantages in 
the face of global competitors and provide clarity on eligible support measures.  

Several terminal operators also identified gaps in current aid schemes for terminal operators 
and  asked  for  a  tailored  State  aid  framework  that  reflects  ports’  multifunctional  role  and 
investment needs. 

Several  responses  also  asked  the  Commission  to  systematically  assess  the  competitiveness 
impacts  of  future  measures  (especially  for  new  EU  maritime  legislation).  Respondents 
expressed concern that climate-related costs and congestion could divert cargo to non-EU ports. 

Respondents  supported  EU  action  to  promote  innovation  pilots,  testbeds  and  regulatory 
sandboxes, as well as automation and the wider uptake of emerging technologies. 

10 

 
 
 
Finally, several respondents called for guidance to ensure that EU support for port projects in 
third countries (under the Global Gateway18 for example) align with EU strategic interests and 
do not distort competition with EU ports.  

1.3. Ports as enablers of the energy transition & environmental protection 

Many respondents underlined the strategic role of ports as clean energy hubs, central to  the 
EU’s decarbonisation and industrial policy. They called in particular for support for offshore 
wind, hydrogen, carbon  capture, utilisation and storage  (CCUS), and onshore power supply 
(OPS)  deployment,  alongside  the  development  of  new  infrastructure  for  alternative  fuels. 
Respondents urged the Commission to work on EU codes of practice and EU-funded pilots for 
the safe storage and bunkering of hydrogen, ammonia, methanol and batteries, including fire 
safety, detection and emergency response protocols. 

Respondents  stressed  that  port  fuel  and  bunkering  infrastructure  should  be  developed  on  a 
technology-neutral, multi-fuel basis, to avoid lock-in and keep investment options open as new 
fuels become available. 

Views diverged on liquefied natural gas (LNG); some respondents asked the Commission to 
repurpose  LNG  terminals  as  multi-molecular  hubs  (including  hydrogen  carriers  and  CO₂ 
transport and storage infrastructure), while others urged it to divert new investment away from 
LNG towards green hydrogen and e-fuels. 

Respondents  also  underlined  the  need  for  coherent  investment  in  port-side  electricity  grids, 
storage  capacity  and  smart  energy  systems.  Respondents  proposed  that  the  Commission 
introduce  EU-level  onshore  power  supply  (OPS)  price  transparency  guidance,  OPS  tax 
exemptions, grid stress tests in major ports, and priority grid access in the EU grids package19.  

Many  respondents,  including  port  operators,  also  emphasised  that  faster  and  more  efficient 
permitting procedures are essential for deploying energy infrastructure at scale and on time. 
They argued that permitting delays undermine EU’s competitiveness and risk slowing down 
the energy transition and therefore called for simplified and coordinated approval processes 
across  Member  States,  including  net-zero  acceleration  areas  and  recognition  that  port 
decarbonisation  projects  are  of  overriding  public  interest.  Synergies  between  the  trans-
European transport network (TEN-T)20 and the trans-European network for energy (TEN-E)21 
were also highlighted. 

On  the  environmental  protection  front,  several  respondents  asked  for  the  streamlining  of 
strategic  environmental  assessments/environmental  impact  assessments  and  permitting 
procedures for port upgrades while maintaining robust safeguards, including the management 
of dredged material using the best available techniques. Certain NGOs highlighted the need for 
stronger environmental safeguards, such as air and water quality monitoring, measures to deal 

18 The Global Gateway, launched by the European Commission and the EU High Representative in 2021, works 
to establish sustainable and trusted connections that work for people and the planet. It  aims to tackle the most 
pressing  global  challenges,  from  fighting  climate  change  to  improving  health  systems  and  boosting 
competitiveness and the security of global supply chains. 
19 European Grids Package  
20 The  EU’s  trans-European  transport network  policy,  the TEN-T  policy,  is  a  key  instrument  for planning and 
developing coherent,  efficient,  multimodal and high-quality transport infrastructure across the EU.  Regulation 
(EU) 2024/1679 
21 The trans-European network for energy (TEN-E) policy is a long-standing EU instrument for connecting EU 
countries’  energy  networks,  strengthening  cohesion  and  developing  solidarity  and  cooperation  across  the  EU. 
Regulation (EU) 2022/869 

11 

 
 
 
with underwater noise, and better waste and pollution management. Several responses called 
for greater use of nature-based solutions and circular economy practices in ports. 

1.4. Security, resilience & military mobility 

Security and resilience emerged as major themes. Respondents raised concerns about organised 
crime,  drug  trafficking,  foreign  interference  and  cyberattacks  in  ports  and  their  operations. 
Respondents  asked  for  the  Commission  to  strengthen  port  security  frameworks,  update  the 
International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS) rules, improve customs cooperation, 
and promote harmonised cybersecurity standards. Notably, respondents drew attention to the 
need to address modern threats, expand biometric access controls and establish an EU-wide 
suspicious transaction reporting system. They also asked for the Commission to issue sector-
specific guidance for ports in the context of Directive (EU) 2022/2555 on measures for a high 
common level of cybersecurity across the Union, also known as NIS222. 

In particular, many respondents called for the strengthening and provision of resources for the 
European  Ports  Alliance,  the  development  of  an  EU  cargo  crime  database  and  a  Trusted 
Truckers protocol, and for an annual Europol-coordinated intelligence overview of port threats. 

On military mobility, the dual role of ports for civil use and military mobility was emphasised, 
with  calls  for  targeted  investment  in  resilient  dual-use  infrastructure,  as  well  as  greater 
integration of ports into civil protection and military mobility planning.  

The need for investment in adaptation to climate risks, including responses to the rise in sea 
levels, drought, saline intrusion and floods, was also highlighted. Respondents called for an 
EU programme to map port climate risks and co-finance adaptation measures, supported by 
guidance on resilient design. 

1.5. Efficient port operations and digitalisation 

Many responses supported the acceleration of the digital transformation of ports through the 
roll-out of port community systems, EU port data spaces, and interoperable digital platforms. 
Respondents also highlighted the need for digital port masterplans, supported by EU guidance 
and funding. 

Stakeholders  asked  the  Commission  to  ensure  the  full  implementation  of  the  European 
maritime  single  window  environment23  and  further  simplification  of  customs  (including  a 
streamlined EU maritime space/blue belt), with harmonised checks and single-portal reporting 
to reduce the administrative burden for intra-EU traffic. 

Respondents, including many public authorities, also stressed the need to strengthen hinterland 
connectivity (rail, inland waterways, multimodal  links) and remove bottlenecks, to  increase 
efficiency and to reduce emissions.  

1.6. Funding and investment 

Access  to  finance  emerged  as  a  central  concern  across  responses.  Respondents  asked  the 
Commission to simplify EU funding streams and procedures, set up a dedicated Connecting 
Europe Facility envelope for ports, and reinvestment EU emissions trading system (ETS)24 and 

22 Directive (EU) 2022/2555 
23 The  European  maritime  single  window  environment  (EMSWe), established by  Regulation (EU) 2019/1239, 
aims to harmonise and simplify reporting requirements for ships arriving at, staying in and departing from EU 
ports. EMSWe became applicable on 15 August 2025.  
24 European Commission, ‘EU ETS – EU Emission Trading System’. 

12 

 
 
 
FuelEU25 revenues in  port decarbonisation and digitalisation. The importance of mobilising 
private investments was also underlined by respondents.  

Respondents also underlined the need to prioritise the use of tailored EU funding instruments 
for regional ports (in outermost regions for example) by providing services of general economic 
interest, and to bear in mind the cross-border nature of port operations in the design of funding. 
They called for targeted measures for outermost regions and small ports, which are affected by 
specific connectivity gaps and have higher unit costs. Ports also identified very high capital 
expenditure needs for the energy transition, for connectivity and for decarbonisation, pointing 
out that the complex funding landscape impedes timely project delivery. 

Respondents asked the  Commission to  establish a Port Competitiveness Fund to  co-finance 
electrification, hinterland connections and digital tools.  

Respondents  also  highlighted  the  role  of  de-risking  tools  such  as  guarantees,  European 
Investment  Bank  support,  contracts  for  difference  and  export  credits,  and  the  need  for 
predictable long-term investment frameworks to de-risk clean infrastructure.  

1.7. Social aspect and workforce upskilling 

Many responses emphasised the importance of a people-centred transition. Trade unions and 
social  partners  called  for  social  conditionalities  in  EU  funding,  protection  against  social 
dumping and stronger social dialogue. 

Respondents stressed the importance of upskilling and reskilling to handle new fuels, digital 
tools and automation, and urged the Commission to establish common minimum qualifications 
for key port roles and promote the mutual recognition of qualifications across the EU. 

Several responses also highlighted the need to attract more women and young people to the 
sector, and to ensure safe and fair working conditions. 

25 Regulation (EU) 2023/1805 

13