Final Report by BSPC WG Integrated Maritime Policy

[pic] [pic]Schwerin, August 22nd 2011Final Report of the Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC)1) Preface2) Political Recommendations3) Mandate and Framing Issues4) The Working Group and its Themes: Maritime Policy Areas• Emission Reduction and Competitiveness• Maritime Transport• Port Infrastructure• Maritime Safety• Maritime Spatial Planning5) Working Group Activities• Procedure and mode of work• Sessions Overview• Course and Results of the Working Group Sessions6) Baltic Sea Maritime CooperationAnnexes:• List of Working Group and Staff Members, Working Group Contact• List of Experts who have addressed the Working Group• Midterm Report - Working Group Chairman’s speech at the 19th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference on 29th - 31st August 2010 in Mariehamn, Åland• Working Group Vice-Chairman’s Report on the Joint European Maritime Day Event on 20th May 2011 in Gdansk(1) PrefaceMaritime policy issues have always played a key role on the agenda of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC), having recognized that all countries around the Baltic Sea share many common sea-related challenges and opportunities that are closely interlinked.Since 2006, the BSPC is actively committed to the development of an integrated maritime policy for the entire Baltic Sea Region and has called on the governments in the Baltic Sea Region, the Council of the Baltic Sea States, the Helsinki Commission and the European Union “to work for an integrated maritime policy in order to create favorable conditions for a prosperous, socially balanced and ecologically sustainable development of the Baltic Sea Region” and “to establish a balance between the many competing economic benefits of the sea on the one hand, and adequate protection of the marine environment on the other, so as to allow an economically and ecologically sustainable use of marine resources[1]”. In subsequent years, the BSPC has continued to address maritime issues and has, in its 16th (Berlin), 17th (Visby), 18th (Nyborg) and 19th (Mariehamn) Conference Resolutions, adopted a number of substantial recommendations regarding aspects of maritime transport and infrastructure, short sea shipping, maritime spatial planning, environmental protection and maritime safety and security.With this background, the BSPC has considered it necessary to further deal with the issue in depth in the framework of a working group and has therefore, during its 18th Conference in Nyborg on 31st August 2009, asked the Standing Committee to establish a Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy, especially infrastructure and logistics, to submit reports to the 20th BSPC. Under the auspices of the Standing Committee of the BSPC, the Working Group was introduced on 13th November 2009.During its nearly two years of existence, the Working Group has gained a deeper insight into a wide range of different specific aspects of an integrated maritime policy. The integrated approach to the subject offered the potential of involving a wide range of stakeholders and faciliated a broad, cross-sectoral dialogue on maritime issues within the Baltic Sea Area. Within its six working sessions the Working Group has seen 30 presentations by national and international experts and representatives from shipping companies, national and European Shipowners’ associations, shipbuilders, port authorities and associations, national maritime authorities and administrations, maritime safety authorities, environmental agencies and organisations, transport agencies, universities and maritime research institutes as well as regional and national ministries and European institutions on such different maritime related issues as maritime spatial planning, port infrastructure and sustainable port development, short sea shipping and co-modality, transport efficiency and safety at sea, environmental aspects and ways for the reduction of emissions from shipping, challenges of sea transport under ice-conditions, response capacities to combat oil-spills and hazardous substances and trends of the shipbuilding industry.In its first year, the Working Group, according to its mandate, has focused on the areas of transport, environment and nature protection, maritime spatial planning, infrastructure and hinterland connections, maritime safety and related aspects of maritime policy and has hereto presented political recommendations to the 19th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference in Mariehamn which have been fully incorporated into the 19th Conference Resolution and are also part of the Interim Report delivered by the Working Group on 30th August 2010. During the second year, questions of port infrastructure and ways for improving competitiveness in the maritime sector while at the same time exploring possibilities for the reduction of emissions from maritime shipping were identified as priorities in developing the Group’s further work programme. Another commitment of the Working Group has been to engage in the further development of the cooperation with the Council of the Baltic Sea States and the Baltic Sea States Subregional Cooperation on maritime issues.Maintaining maritime issues as a high priority will be important for the further development of the Baltic Sea countries and for the region as a whole. We see the need to continue the work of the BSPC in the field of an integrated maritime policy. Moreover, we believe that a continued close cooperation of the BSPC with the maritime policy groups on CBSS and BSSSC will increase chances of realizing common interests and bringing forward common issues of the region. The modes for such continued cooperation should be decided by the BSPC Standing Committee. An integrated maritime policy for the Baltic Sea Region is necessary in order to make common needs and potentials of the regional maritime sector more visible in Europe and beyond. Strengthening public awareness for maritime policy in the region and ensuring that its influence in the international debate is maintained and enhanced is one major role for us as parliamentarians. Therefore, we will continue our commitment to promote an integrated maritime policy throughout the region and to encourage civil society and regional stakeholders to participate in shaping a future maritime policy for the Baltic Sea Region.In this report, the Working Group presents the results of its two-year work and gives an overview of its entire activities.On behalf of the Working Group, we would like to thank the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference for setting up this Working Group. Also, we would like to express our gratitude to the BSPC Secretariat and the staff members of the participating parliaments for their excellent cooperation and skilful support as well as to the experts who have contributed to stimulating our debate with their interesting presentations and arguments and have helped the Working Group in shaping its Recommendations.Jochen Schulte Roger JanssonChairman Vice-Chairman(2) Political Recommendations for the 20th Baltic Sea Parliamentary ConferenceOn the basis of its mandate, the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy has discussed the issue of an integrated maritime policy in the Baltic Sea region and has during its 6th session in Schwerin on 20th June 2011 unanimously decided to submit the following political recommendations regarding emissions reduction and competitiveness, maritime transport, maritime spatial planning, port infrastructure, maritime safety, integrated maritime policy in general and cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region to the 20th BSPC in Helsinki on 28th - 30th August 2011:The participants, elected representatives from the Baltic Sea States and European Parliament,call on the governments in the Baltic Sea Region, the CBSS and the EU• to revisit the political recommendations concerning Integrated Maritime Policy contained in the 19th BSPC Resolutions from 2010[2];• to intensify research and to promote the use of alternative marine fuels such as – for example – Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) in the Baltic Sea Region and others by supporting innovative emission reduction technologies and by creating incentives for investments in the development of the necessary port infrastructure with a well developed network of filling stations and uniform industry and usage standards (10[3]);• - against the background of new studies on the implications of the intended reduction of the sulphur content of ship fuels to 0,1 percent from the year 2015 in the framework of the international MARPOL convention- to take precautions and to start initiatives to prevent a modal backshift in traffic from sea to land for example• by a moratorium period for existing ships not longer than 2025,• by extending the timeframe for the gradual limits of sulphur,• by incentives to support the modification of existing ships- to work actively within the International Maritime Organization (IMO) for a speedy designation of further sea areas, such as the Mediterranean Sea, as Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECA), thereby abolishing competitive disadvantages for the Baltic Sea Area can be prevented (11);• to work for a reduction of administrative obstacles for cross-border maritime traffic (12);• to develop maritime spatial planning as an important instrument for an optimized interaction between the actors in the various maritime sectors in the interest of a more efficient and sustainable usage of sea waters and coastal regions, to create national, compatible spatial planning concepts and thereby promote a stronger cross-border cooperation between the Baltic Sea countries (13);• to support a sustainable port development by the development of environmental port services in order to reduce environmental pollution for port residents and simultaneously strengthen the competitiveness of the ports (14);• to further implement an integrated maritime policy with regard to its economic and ecological significance for the entire Baltic Sea Areaparticularly by- developing and promoting integrated maritime lead projects for the entire Baltic Sea Area (e. g. Clean Baltic Shipping, Galileo Research Port Rostock, SUBCAS – Sea Surveillance Cooperation Baltic Sea) also in the areas of “green, save transport and a clean environment” for the strengthening of environmentally friendly goods traffic and the port cooperation in the whole Baltic Sea Area in order to further promote the maritime policy in the consciousness on the European level,- promoting and facilitating the cooperation on all levels of maritime governance and by- the development of national integrated maritime policies of the member states (15);• to support integrated activities of the Baltic Sea Region in the areas of maritime research, technology and innovation, in order to use the growth potential of new maritime sectors such as energy generation in offshore installations and offshore technologies, the security and surveillance technique as well as maritime environmental technology and to enhance access to future markets; for this purpose, create necessary political and judicial frameworks and disseminate best practices (16);• to further develop cruise tourism as a maritime growth sector against the background of its importance for the whole Baltic Sea Region for example by attractive inland tourist offers and concepts of common marketing in this field of tourism (17);• to proceed with the development and implementation of measures for safe operation of ships in severe and icy winter conditions (18).Additionally, the Working Group recommends to include into the Draft Resolution’s general part a further passage with regard to the cooperation with CBSS and BSSSC, taking up the first joint event of a BSPC working group with working groups of CBSS and BSSSC on the occasion of the European Maritime Day on 20th May 2011 in Gdansk:• – welcoming the joint event of the Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference with the Expert Group on Maritime Policy of the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS) and the Working Group on Maritime Policy of the Baltic Sea States Subregional Cooperation (BSSSC) on 20th May 2011 and supporting the further coordination and joint activities between these and other institutions and organizations.Regarding the Recommendations elaborated by the Working Group during the course of the first year of its existence, having already been incorporated into the Resolution adopted by the 19th BSPC in 2010, it is intended to include a reference underlining them once more in the 20th BSPC Resolution. Therefore they are relisted below:• promote new measures in view of reduction of harmful emissions:- render more active support than heretofore to short sea shipping as an eco-friendly alternative to inland transport;- investigate to what extent the reduction of the sulphur content of ship fuels may result in competitive disadvantages to the economy in the Baltic Sea Region and elaborate proposals on how to avoid such disadvantages while maintaining high environmental standards in the maritime sector;- actively support the projects approved for funding under the Baltic Region Programme, especially such projects with the objective to reduce harmful emissions from ships and develop reception facilities for waste water from ships in the ports of the Baltic Sea (1);• support the implementation of improved security and fire prevention measures regarding vessels, terminals, ports, sea and shore-line constructions as well as the use of environmentally friendly substances to alleviate damages caused by accidents (2);• extend the obligatory use of pilots in risk areas of the Baltic Sea and strictly implement the ban on transporting oil in single-hulled tankers (3);• initiate measures which 1) pave the way for and promote the use of a single language in international transport operations at sea and on land, and 2) standardize and facilitate the implementation of joint customs and taxation procedures (4);• continue to ensure improvements to the transport infrastructure in the Baltic Sea Region and, while focussing in particular on developing land and sea routes, promote a transport policy that is in principle governed by the idea that transport operations should be carried out in an eco-friendly way, supported by an interconnected infrastructure (5);• make sure that the EU TEN-T core network must be made up of nodes (capitals, other cities or agglomerations of supra-regional importance, gateway ports, intercontinental hub ports and airports, the most important inland ports and freight terminals) and connections of the highest strategic and economic importance linked with key infrastructure in third countries (including Russia) (6).• attach particular importance to the strategic development of the seaports with associated logistics centers and rail terminals in order to create national, regional and European networks. In this context, gaps in the priority TEN projects should be filled and the projects should be linked and consolidated into a core network (7);• support initiatives for improving safety of navigation and environmental risk reduction in the Baltic Sea and addressing the human factor including support of initiatives that can lead to less administrative burdens by harmonizing and elaborating the existing ship reporting systems (SRS) and vessel traffic services (VTS) in the Baltic Sea (8);• strengthen the joint regional as well as national preparedness and capacity to tackle major spills of oil and hazardous substances, for instance by sub-regional preparations, coordination and exercises, as pursued in the HELCOM BRISK project, and by procuring sufficient supplies of oil spill and hazardous substances recovery equipment (9);(3) Mandate and Framing IssuesMandateThe concept of an integrated maritime policy has a strong parliamentary history in the Baltic Sea Region. Based on the recognition that policies in the Baltic Sea countries to a large extent have a maritime dimension and that all maritime related matters are interlinked and therefore must be developed in a joined-up way, the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC) has, beginning with its 15th Conference Resolution in 2006, continuously and repeatedly addressed the necessity of an integrated maritime policy for the entire Baltic Sea Region and has supported activities in this direction. Within the past six years, the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference has adopted a series of political recommendations in this field.The 15th (2006) BSPC called on the governments in the Baltic Sea Region, the Council of the Baltic Sea States, the Helsinki Commission and the European Union “to work for an integrated maritime policy in order to create favorable conditions for a prosperous, socially balanced and ecologically sustainable development of the Baltic Sea Region” and “to establish a balance between the many competing economic benefits of the sea on the one hand, and adequate protection of the marine environment on the other, so as to allow an economically and ecologically sustainable use of marine resources”. Further requests of the Conference related to marine sciences and technologies and their integration in future research programmes, a European fisheries policy taking into account the particularities of the Baltic Sea Region and implementing the principle of sustainable fisheries and a strengthened cooperation in the field of maritime safety and security[4].Both the 16th (2007) and the 17th (2008) BSPC called on the governments in the Baltic Sea Region, the Council of the Baltic Sea States and the European Union to take concrete steps towards developing the Baltic Sea region into Europe’s model maritime region, i.e. into the cleanest and safest sea of Europe and by recommending that all Baltic Sea States ratify existing international conventions on marine environmental protection (16th BSPC), recognizing that maritime policy must be seen within an overarching framework of sustainable development, environment, marine spatial planning, safety at sea and intermodality (17th BSPC). The 16th BSPC also requested, against the background of the rapidly increasing amount of oil transports in the Baltic Sea Region, to ensure a high level of maritime safety and security, in particular by improving the Baltic Sea coastguard practices, promoting innovative navigation technologies and introducing the use of pilots in difficult sea routes[5]. The 17th BSPC formulated demands regarding the full commitment to the implementation of the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan and measures against eutrophication, supporting and encouraging global regulations ensuring a high level of safety and environmental standards in the Baltic Sea and supporting the harmonization of vessel traffic services and the development of a satellite-based, emission-related monitoring system for ships throughout the Baltic Sea Region[6].Demands by the Baltic parliamentarians regarding maritime safety and security and environmental protection in the region were further elaborated by the 18th (2009) BSPC, requesting that the governments in the Baltic Sea Region, the Council of the Baltic Sea States and the European Union should promote and support initiatives and measures such as enhancing the joint preparedness to tackle oil spills, ship traffic monitoring and surveillance systems and that they encourage active cooperation with the International Maritime Organization on the development of measures to reduce the environmental impacts of shipping, support the designation of further sea basins as Sulphur Emission Control Areas and the BSSSC Action Plan “Clean Baltic Shipping”[7].With this background, the participants of the 18th BSPC resolved with their consent to the final declaration on 1st September 2009 in Nyborg, Denmark, under subparagraph 38 to establish a Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy, especially infrastructure and logistics to submit a report to the 20th BSPC.Under the auspices of the Standing Committee of the BSPC, the Working Group was introduced on 13th November 2009 and Jochen Schulte, MP, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, appointed as Chairman of the Group. All BSPC member parliaments and parliamentary organizations were entitled to appoint delegates to the Working Group.The Working Group commenced its work in January 2010 in Rostock and has delivered a Midterm Report to the 19th BSPC on 30th August 2010 in Mariehamn, Ǻland Islands (which can be downloaded from the BSPC Website under http://www.bspc.net/file/show/327).In accordance with its mandate and the objectives of the BSPC Work Programme 2010-2011, the Working Group should promote the development of an Integrated Maritime Policy and elaborate joint political positions and recommendations for the resolution to be adopted by the 20th BSPC.The Working Group was also asked to strive to establish contacts and exchange with other initiatives and organizations active within this field.Framing IssuesIntegrated maritime policy is a concept for different policy levels, regional and national, the European Union level and international levels. Taking up the idea of an integrated approach on maritime affairs, different organizations in the Baltic Sea Region have in the meantime established working groups on maritime policy. An integrated maritime policy for the Baltic Sea area needs close coordination with other existing or newly created formats of cooperation in the region, that are working in the same field. The Working Group therefore encourages further steps and has developed intensified activities in this direction (see Section (6)).HELCOM is a key Baltic organisation that has already been working for more than 30 years on the improvement of the environmental situation of the Baltic Sea. The Maritime Group of HELCOM works to prevent any pollution from ships including deliberate operational discharges as well as accidental pollution. The Baltic Sea Action Plan of HELCOM, adopted in November 2007 and based on the ecosystem and integrated policy approach, is an essential instrument to address environmental challenges of the Baltic Sea, thus contributing to an integrated maritime policy of the Baltic Sea region, sharing the same cross-sector approach, though with a more specific focus on aspects of protection. The Chairman of the HELCOM RESPONSE Group has significantly contributed to the results of the Working Group on maritime safety by giving a presentation on the preparedness for a major oil spill in the Baltic Sea. The BSPC has repeatedly confirmed its full support for HELCOM activities and in particular for the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan.Baltic maritime policy needs to be closely linked and coordinated with the Northern Dimension policy. Following a recommendation of the 15th BSPC in Reykjavik in 2006, a Partnership on Transport and Logistics has been established in the framework of the Northern Dimension in October 2009, with a current focus on maritime transport. The Second Northern Dimension Parliamentary Forum on 22nd/23rd February 2011, within its Conference Statement regarding the Northern Dimension Partnership on Transport and Logistics, asks the governments of the Northern Dimension cooperation to give the maritime dimension of the partnership due attention (further recommendations regarding the strategic development of seaports, the reduction of harmful emissions from shipping and the improvement of port reception facilities, safety of maritime navigation and emergency capabilities[8]). The question of how to combine the integrated maritime policy and the Partnership of Transport and Logistics within the Northern Dimension will have to be further discussed.The Council of the Baltic Sea States Expert Group on Maritime Policy (CBSS EGMP) was established in 2009 and is composed of civil servants from eleven Baltic Sea countries including the European Commission. It is intended to contribute to sustainable growth and employment in the maritime sector, to combine and better coordinate all sea related activities and tasks, as well as to strike an appropriate balance between economic, social and ecological aspects. The Expert Group is cross-sectoral and coordinates its work mainly within the priority areas of Economic Development and the Environment. Its three-year mandate ends in November 2012, while the current German Presidency (since July 2011) is exploring possibilities for a prolongation.The Baltic Sea States Subregional Cooperation (BSSSC) Working Group on Maritime Policy’s aim is to bundle and formulate the interests of the Baltic Sea regions in a maritime policy and organize relevant political support. Founded in 2008, the standing working group currently has members from Denmark, Germany, Norway, Poland, Russia and Sweden.VASAB is an intergovernmental multilateral cooperation in spatial planning and development between eleven countries of the Baltic Sea Region. A new VASAB Long-Term Perspective was endorsed on the 16th October 2009. The Ministers underlined that new common responsibilities and challenges had emerged which called for deeper pan-Baltic cooperation on spatial planning and development and the integration of spatial development policies into all relevant sectors. There was also a growing understanding that the Baltic Sea itself is in urgent need of maritime spatial planning.The Baltic Sea Forum is a non-profit organization which supports the economical, political and cultural cooperation in the Baltic Sea region. It was founded in 1992 in Helsinki as a German-Finnish organization named Pro Baltica Forum. It supports the cooperation with the Baltic States as well as with the whole Baltic region, sees to the relations between the European Union and Russia and the development of the south-north-relation between the Baltic and the Mediterranean. The Baltic Sea Forum has an extended network of members, representatives and partners from all fields of activity such as from the economy, politics, culture as well as science in the Baltic region and Central Europe.The Baltic Sea Commission of the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions (CPMR) has a Working Group on maritime issues that is currently focusing on maritime spatial planning and integrated coastal zone management, maritime safety and blue growth and naval industry. The Baltic Sea Commission is organizing 26 regions in seven countries around the Baltic Sea (Finland, Sweden, Germany, Estonia, Poland, Norway, Denmark). The BSC counts several national capitals as members and the organization also has the majority of the Baltic Sea islands as members.The “Baltic Europe” Intergroup of the European Parliament was formed in 2004 as a forum for discussion and promotion of economic actions, environmental protection, and geopolitical problems of the Baltic Sea region. One of the most significant achievements of “Baltic Europe” was establishing Europe’s Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region which was passed in the EP at the end of 2006.The “Seas and Coastal Affairs” Intergroup of the European Parliament was founded in March 2010. Main issues include maritime security, sustainable development of the coastal areas, sea routes, employment, innovations and the impact of the Common Fisheries Policy on the European maritime policy. The “Seas and coastal affairs” Intergroup is a space for discussions about issues concerning the Baltic Sea, Atlantic Ocean, North Sea, Black Sea and Mediterranean Sea.The Intergroup “Baltic Sea Regions” of the Committee of the Regions was set up in 2008 and deals with different aspects of the development and integrated maritime policy around the Baltic.Dealing with the subject matter as a whole, the European Commission in 2007 has launched an Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union[9], whose main objective is to maximize the sustainable use of the oceans and seas while enabling growth of the maritime economy and coastal regions. It aims at providing a coherent policy framework to develop integrated responses to maritime challenges of globalization and competitiveness, climate change, degradation of the marine environment, maritime safety and security, energy security and sustainability and thereby enabling a better balance between economic, social and ecological aspects of maritime policy. According to the European Commission, integrated maritime policy making requires and promotes reinforced cooperation and effective coordination of all maritime-related activities and tasks at the different decision-making levels. The European integrated approach to maritime policy intends to include regionalization and strengthening of stakeholder involvement and requires moving away from very fragmented, sectoral policy approaches. On 15th October 2009, the European Commission issued a Communication on the International dimension of the Integrated Maritime Policy of the European Union[10], recognizing that the Integrated Maritime Policy cannot only be considered as a European policy, as it is an issue for the entire Baltic Sea region, and that its success will depend on the extent to which all neighboring countries can be included in the process. On 30th September 2010, the European Commission proposed a Regulation for continued financial support of the EU’s Integrated Maritime Policy[11], for the period between 2011 and 2013. This proposal establishes a programme aimed at supporting the measures planned to further the development and implementation of the IMP. The programme will provide financial resources for achieving the objectives and priorities set out in the action plan which was adopted in 2007.The EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region (EUSBSR)[12], adopted by the European Commission in June 2009 and endorsed by the European Council in October 2009, is a macro-regional strategy for the European Union with a high proportion of actions of maritime nature and therefore can be seen as a first step to implement the integrated maritime policy on a regional basis. Key maritime actions of the EUSBSR include the development of maritime governance structures, maritime spatial planning and in particular cross-border approaches, sustainable fisheries, maritime surveillance and integration of different surveillance systems across borders and sectors, clean shipping, motorways of the sea, maritime transport space without barriers, implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, accelerated implementation of the Baltic Sea HELCOM action plan, development of maritime clusters, maritime training and education. On 22nd June 2011, the European Commission provided a first progress report on the implementation of the Baltic Sea Strategy[13].(4) Policy AreasFollowing the above described integrated approach, the Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy has dealt with different specific aspects of Maritime Policy that in the view of its members needed to be discussed in greater depth, giving special attention to links and interferences between the various maritime sectors. This section provides an overview of the focus areas within the broad thematic range of maritime policy handled in the course of the debate, taking up the main issues raised by the Working Group members and the experts heard in the light of ongoing developments. The aim is to outline the background to the elaboration of the political recommendations by the Working Group.Emission Reduction and competitivenessPolitical recommendations relating to ‘Emissions Reduction and Competitiveness’: 1, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16Safeguarding and improving the competitiveness of the Baltic Sea Region and of its maritime economy in global markets while protecting the marine natural resources has been a central concern of the working group.The Baltic maritime industry has a long tradition and is one of the most important branches of the future in the region with a high potential for growth and employment. On the other hand, due to increasing shipping activities and although being by far the most environmentally mode of transport, marine shipping is contributing considerably to the air and sea pollution in the Baltic Sea Region.Emissions of sulphur oxides (SOx) from shipping due to combustion of marine fuels with high sulphur content contribute to air pollution, harming the environment through acidification as well as human health, particularly around coastal areas and ports. Nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from ships, like SOx emissions, cause acid depositions that can be detrimental to the natural environment and contribute to eutrophication. For a sustainable development of the region, it is also in the interest of maritime industry to contribute to the reduction of emissions caused by shipping operations.The provisions of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) on the sulphur content in shipping fuels and the economic impacts of the designation of the Baltic Sea as a Sulphur Emission Control Area (SECA) have been a focal issue in the working group’s debates. The international low-emission requirements are a joint challenge for the Baltic Sea countries and for their shipping industries and therefore need greater attention. While supporting the IMO regulations in general, many members of the Working Group believed that the decision was made with too little consideration for the possible consequences for the maritime-related sectors in the region.The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL Annex VI) defines two sets of emission and fuel quality requirements: global requirements and more stringent requirements applicable to ships in emission control areas. Existing emission control areas include:• Baltic Sea (SOx, adopted: 1997 / entered into force: 2005)• North Sea (SOx, 2005/2006)• North American ECA, including most of the US and Canadian coast (NOx & SOx, 2010/2012)MARPOL Annex VI limits the maximum sulphur content of fuel to 4.5 percent. This is going to be changed to 3.5 percent after 1st January 2012 and to 0.5 percent after 2020 (or 2025, depending on the outcome of a review in 2018). In SECAs sulphur limit in fuel is 1 percent until 1st July 2015 when it changes to 0.1 percent. For the Baltic Sea Region, the sulphur content in shipping fuels is limited to 0.1 % as of 2015.| | ||Date |Sulphur Limit in Fuel || |SECA Global ||2000 |1.5 % |4.5 % ||2010 | 1.0 % | ||2012 | |3.5 % ||2015 |0.1 % | || 2020* | |0.5 % ||* alternative date is 2025, to be decided by a review in 2018 |While supporting in general the internationally agreed environmental targets, the Working Group members attach great importance to prevent distortion of competition to the disadvantage of the Baltic Sea Region. In the view of many experts, the implementation of stricter sulphur regulations is not only a question of competing within this area with road or rail transport, but also of competitiveness of the Baltic Sea Region with other regions. In particular, disadvantages for shipping going in and out of the Baltic Sea compared to other shipping routes worldwide should be avoided. Therefore, the Working Group reaffirms and extends the demand of the 18th BSPC to work actively within the IMO for European-wide solution for SECAs and a speedy designation of further sea areas, such as the Mediterranean Sea, as SECAs, in order to reach equal competitive conditions at least on the European level.In the first year of its mandate, the Working Group has consulted different experts on that matter. A. P. Møller Maersk Group as the world’s largest shipping company explained that for larger companies the reduction of the sulphur content in marine fuels to 0.1 percent as of 2015 was feasible since the differences in fuel prices were for them negligible. Additionally, the oil industry increasingly managed to produce low sulphur distillates in a cost-effective way. In contrast, the Danish Shipowners’ Association pointed out that smaller shipping companies, mainly operating in the Baltic Sea Area, would be much more affected by the designation of the Baltic Sea as a SECA than companies offering intercontinental services. The gradual reduction in sulphur levels by more than 90 percent adopted within the IMO posed great technical and economic challenges for the companies concerned. For shipping solely in the Baltic Sea, there was a significant risk that business would be displaced to other means of transportation, where the costs would be lower. The European Community Shipowners’ Association expected substantial price increases in bunker costs, in the total ship costs as well as in the freight rates and, as a consequence, a shift from sea to land transport by 20 to 50 percent.Meanwhile, in light of the recommendations suggested by the Working Group and incorporated into the Resolution of the 19th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference, several impact studies on the implications of the intended reduction of the sulphur content of ship fuels to 0.1 percent from the year 2015 have been presented. According to these studies, the future requirements of a maximum level of 0.1 percent sulphur in bunker fuels would induce a modal shift towards road transport, if nothing was done additionally[14]. During the fifth session of the Working Group, the German Shipowners’ Association presented findings of a recent study of the Institute of Shipping Economics and Logistics Bremen (September 2010) coming to the result that serious impacts on the competitiveness of the Baltic Sea Shipping are going to be expected, leading to a considerable shift from marine to road transport. The predicted increase in road traffic would counteract the environmental objective and the politically desired shifting traffic from the road to the sea. According to the Association of Northern German Chamber of Industry and Commerce, a sulphur limit of 0.1 percent in 2015 would have a negative impact on competitiveness of industries in the affected Northern EU countries, leading to substantial cost increases for sea transport, changing logistic flows in Europe and a considerable traffic shift from sea to road. An overview of existing impact assessment studies on the subject given by Mr Martin Kruse, Association of Northern German Chamber of Industry and Commerce, showed that issues of modal shift and Short Sea Shipping were in the center of concern and that the Scandinavian and Baltic states in particular had strong fear of losing international competitiveness by the new regulations. The volume of shipping would decline considerably in the Baltic Sea and the new regime would give severe disadvantages to the Baltic Sea Region’s economy.With regard to the expected costs, some experts and Working Group members proposed to take into consideration a limited reduction of the sulphur content planned for the SECAs from 2015 to only 0.5, because this limit would already represent a considerable improvement for the environment and would impose significantly lower costs on the economies in the Baltic Sea Region. A proposal for initiating a general revision of MARPOL Annex VI was debated as well, but did not find a consensus in the working group.Experts made clear that while the new sulphur regulations would pose no greater problems for new ship constructions, it was very difficult and cost-intensive for a large number of existing ships to adapt to the new environmental requirements. With regard to the long life cycle of a ship (compared to the life cycle of a truck: five times longer) it was important to reach more flexibility for the shipping industry during a transitional period, allowing them to develop the instruments necessary to adjust to the new standards. Therefore, the Working Group demands a moratorium period for existing ships, which should not be longer than 2025, the date of the introduction of the general global sulphur limit of 0.5 percent. This would particularly improve the situation of those ship owners, mainly smaller companies, who continually and exclusively operate in the Baltic Sea.At the same time, the Working Group stands for any measures helping to reduce sulphur emissions in shipping. Several alternatives have been discussed.The development and use of innovative maritime technologies to limit Sox emission is considered a promising option and should be supported on national and on European level. Marine engine manufacturers have started building engines complying with the new standards.The use of exhaust gas cleaning systems for desulphurization using sea water (scrubber technology) is considered by experts as no real alternative as the space requirements and weight of scrubber technology pose great problems in sea transport.The perspectives for the use of alternative fuels, in particular Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) in maritime transport have been discussed by the Working Group. LNG was described by experts as a competitive marine fuel, particularly in view of the Emission Control Areas, currently available on the global market at lower price than distillates. From an environmental point of view, LNG brings many advantages as it causes neither SOx nor particle emissions and very low NOx emissions and is also useful in consideration to the reduction of CO2 emissions. Major challenges to the widespread economical use of LNG as ship fuel are the transport room needed for larger tanks and the necessary reduction in transport capacity, the establishment of necessary port infrastructure for distribution of LNG fuel in the Baltic Sea Region (a network of LNG terminals) as well as missing industrial standards required as supporting framework conditions. At present, Norway is the only country in northern Europe disposing of an adequate LNG-supply structure. If potential LNG suppliers are expected to invest in port infrastructure, political intervention by the states and economic incentives are required.In order to remain economically competitive, ship operation has to be profitable and environmentally compatible. By using low-sulphur fuels, shipping can enhance its reputation as an environmentally-friendly mode of transport on the path to further growth. At the same time, the shipbuilding industry and the supply industry, in particular the engine manufacturers are provided with great opportunities to promote innovative techniques for more climate and environment protection and to secure innovation-based competitive advantages.Maritime TransportPolitical recommendations relating to ‘Maritime Transport’: 1, 4, 5, 6, 12, 15Transport and logistics have been one main focus area of the working group, being closely interrelated with every other maritime economic activity. Transport routes are the arteries for the economy, for the accessibility of regions and customers.Growing trade creates pressure on the transport network in the Baltic Sea Region. An effective transport system is needed to ensure the competitiveness of the Baltic’s trade and industry.Policy priorities for maritime transport in the Baltic Sea region that have been discussed by the Working Group include short sea shipping, co-modality, the development of transport infrastructure, including port infrastructure and port industry and the European maritime transport space without barriers. Important future activities concerning transport infrastructure policies are the further development of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) and of the “Motorways of the Sea” (MoS) and the development of ports and their hinterland connections.Short Sea Shipping, in comparison to other transport means, has been described by experts as extremely energy efficient having a high potential as an environmental and economic alternative to land transport in Europe. Being consistent with the goals of EU for energy efficiency, the promotion of short sea shipping is one of the main areas of the European Transport Strategy. Main challenges are environmental regulations, in particular regarding the reduction of sulphur and carbon emissions. In that respect, innovation and research are important to keep maritime transport and short sea shipping competitive on an international level. In addition, the transport system itself has to be further developed, strategic, technical and infrastructure bottlenecks have to be eliminated and the integration in the transport chain has to be improved. Short-sea shipping has the potential to create alternative clean routes along “Motorways of the Sea” between EU ports, but there is still much unexplored potential for developing a comprehensive short sea shipping network across the Baltic Sea Region. Short sea shipping should become a component of an integrated, inter-modal transportation system.The concept of intermodality, as it has been presented in the European Commission’s Transport White Paper in 2006, includes the combined and efficient use of different modes of transport to reach an optimal transport system. According, to Ms Ritta Pöntynen, Shortsea Promotion Centre Finland, modes should complement each other, not compete with each other and an optimal use of modes created an effective transport system. For the further improvement of intermodal transportation, she considered it important to develop the links between transport modes (ports, logistic centers as well as the information flow in the transport chain). There needed to be a high level of functionality, efficiency and integration between the transport modes.Another important issue for maritime transport in the Baltic Sea Region seen by the Working Group is administrative simplification and harmonization. The European Commission’s initiative “Towards a European maritime transport space without barriers”, adopted in 2009, intends to increase the efficiency and productivity of European sea ports by simplifying administrative and customs procedures and making increased use of information and communication technologies (e-maritime).The Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) is the base of infrastructure for the development of the macro-region Baltic Sea and a competitive transport system. The TEN-T projects and “Motorways of the Sea” can be used to build up the necessary infrastructure for maritime trade. In that respect, the Working Group sees the necessity to develop major ports in the Baltic Sea Region strategically. This must go hand in hand with further developing their hinterland connections and with better integrating the Baltic Sea Ports into the core axes of the European Transport Network at sea and ashore. The Russian transport network is to be included in these measures.Port InfrastructurePolitical recommendations relating to ‘Port Infrastructure’: 1, 2, 4, 10, 14, 15 and 17The infrastructure of a port is seen as a key to its success, requiring continuous development and adaptation. Regulations need to be adhered to, running a port must be economically sustainable and environmental friendliness practiced. Important current aspects with regard to port infrastructure as part of an integrated maritime policy for the Baltic Sea region have been the topic of several expert presentations given to the Working Group.The differing regulations within the ports have been subject to criticism particularly by yard operators and ship owners, and clear rules for ship construction and a common regulation for the entire Baltic Sea area have been demanded, including joint customs and taxation procedures. It is an aspect for ports to consider and to thereby contribute to the harmonization of procedures and regulations in the Baltic Sea area.A topic of much discussion is the usage of liquefied natural gas (LNG). The focus on alternative marine fuels such as LNG and others is increasing as regulations are toughened and the environmental pollution of the Baltic Sea is progressing. Investments in the development of the necessary port infrastructure with a network of filling stations are measures to be considered by a number of ports around the Baltic Sea. Mr. Manfred Müller-Fahrenholz (Managing Director of Neptun Shipyards) argues that a challenge today is that LNG is still expensive and not available everywhere. “A complex distribution system is needed, where every vessel can bunker and is independent of individual systems. There must be a sufficient supply chain which covers fuel and is fit for other purposes such as other goods delivery and good waste management”. To arrive at this level, investment is required and potential funding mechanisms must be elaborated. An important potential funding mechanism for investments related to ecologic infrastructure developments such as LNG facilities and waste water reception is the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) 2014-2020. Overall it is clear that the development of environmental port services will also contribute to strengthening the competitiveness of ports. It is an aspect that must be kept in mind and further highlights the need for investment in this area.As large volumes of waste arrives at the ports, the availability of systems dealing with this waste become necessary and reception facilities for waste water from ships in the ports of the Baltic Sea need to be developed. Following the presentation of Mr Erik Andersson Pauldin, Ports of Stockholm can serve as an example of how ports can manage their waste, using incentives for sorting out ship-generated waste and adding no special fees for waste handling. Waste is delivered to the municipality system via the port and is taken care of by the city and used, for instance, for heating. Moreover, good results have been achieved by cooperation with other ports. For example, an agreement between the Ports of Stockholm and the Port of Helsinki for improving grey and black water facilities proved mutually beneficial.A topic of debate remains the issue of shore side electricity (SSE). Ships use their Auxiliary Engines (AE) to produce electricity for their activities while they stay in ports. One measure to reduce emissions from AEs while at berth is to provide electricity to the ships from the national grid. To provide ships with electricity, a shore side electricity supply arrangement is required, also known as ‘cold-ironing’. The question of its usage is debated, as some hold that SSE will transfer the problems (emissions in port) to other parts of the world (emissions resulting from the transport of raw material and from the energy conversion at the power plant) and others argue that shore side electricity is indeed an advantage as ship emissions are reduced and should be developed further. It should be flagged that in the case of SSE operation at ports, there is a necessity to arrive at common standards and uniform technical interfaces around the Baltic Sea.Moreover, cruise tourism plays a key role for a vast number of ports around the Baltic Sea and cooperation of the ports in the field of cruise tourism is to be promoted. Ports and cities profit from the income generated by visitors and for ports to receive cruise vessels according infrastructural investments must be undertaken and facilities be incorporated in the ports infrastructure. In addition, for ports to be sustainable, an expansion and modernization of existing sea routes and connections to the hinterland is necessary, enabled by the creation of a well-balanced relation between land-based and maritime transport which not only takes air pollution into account, but also limits land consumption, noise pollution as well as the use of available resources.Maritime SafetyPolitical recommendations relating to ‘Maritime Security’: 2, 3, 8, 9, 16 and 18Maritime safety is a complex and multifaceted issue. The BSPC has, in close cooperation with HELCOM, been giving priority attention to the issue of safety at sea for 10 years. Already in 2001, the 10th BSPC in Greifswald adopted a Resolution containing extensive recommendations regarding shipping safety and has set up a working group which under the chair of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern has treated the subject comprehensively in the subsequent years and whose recommendations have become part of the following Conference Resolutions. A series of measures have been implemented since then. However, not only the fast increase of transport of oil and hazardous substances, but also the constant growth of the size of ships still remains a big challenge needing a high level of attention and further measures in the future.With this background, the Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy has tackled this issue and sees it as central to the future well-being of the Baltic Sea area and its people. To improve security of shipping and to reduce the risk of environmental hazards is a challenge that requires much attention. For instance, the use of pilots in risk areas, the harmonization of existing ship reporting systems and the support of measures for safe operation of ships in icy conditions have been identified by the working group as potentially important contributions to a safe Baltic Sea.A major topic is the danger of oil spills. There is a significant increase of oil transportation taking place on the Baltic Sea, with around 100 accidents taking place annually, the most common types being groundings and collisions. Mr. Francis Zachariae (Deputy Director General of the Danish Maritime Safety Administration) argues in the second session of the working group that incidents such as the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and other accidents underline the importance of planning ahead to avoid and if necessary to be prepared to tackle such accidents. Many of the experts confirmed that the challenge indeed consists in the increased oil transportation, which in the Baltic Sea has doubled between 2000 and 2007 and is likely to continue to increase further. Moreover, it is highly likely that oil tankers and cargo ships will increase in size, leading to ever larger amounts of oil on board of these ships that make their journey across the Baltic Sea.Extending the obligatory use of pilots in risk areas of the Baltic Sea and strictly implementing the ban on transporting oil in single-hulled tankers are necessary measures that need to be undertaken in order to help deal with the increase of ship number and size and to make ship journeys across the Baltic Sea safer by minimizing the risk of accidents and spills of oil and hazardous substances. Moreover, it is important to strengthen the joint regional as well as national preparedness and capacity to tackle major spills. The HELCOM BRISK project is an example of an undertaking in this direction, the projects overall objective being to contribute to the development of an appropriate level of preparedness in the whole Baltic Sea area to tackle major accidental spills.As oil traffic on the Baltic and the ship size is expected to rise, a monitoring and routing system for ships at sea should be established for maritime safety to be enhanced. The harmonization and elaboration of existing ship reporting systems (SRS) and vessel traffic services (VTS) in the Baltic Sea is encouraged by the Working Group. The aim of vessel traffic services is to prevent accidents at sea and thus contribute to the safety of the environment and of life at sea. For this purpose, information has to be provided in situations of emergency and exchanged with the stakeholders. A ship reporting system enables a speedy identification of vessels in the area of a distress situation, along with their positions, courses, and speeds and in sum improves the likelihood of aid reaching a boat in a distress situation quickly during emergencies. In the opinion of the experts, a harmonization of these monitoring and routing systems across the Baltic Sea has the potential to improve the safety of navigation within each monitored area. Moreover, the use of satellite supported navigation systems to strengthen the safety of navigation at sea and in the ports is to be promoted. An example of a project in the field is SEAGATE where a facility supporting the development and testing of maritime applications of the European satellite system Galileo has been installed in the Port of Rostock.Further, the improvement of security and fire prevention measures is important and looking back to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill shows just how necessary such measures are in case of accidents. Moreover, the preparedness and capacity to tackle major spills of oil and hazardous substances should be supported by procuring sufficient supplies of oil spill and hazardous substances recovery equipment.During winter, substantial parts of the Baltic Sea are covered with ice. Therfore another challenge in the area of maritime safety is the sea transport under ice conditions in the Baltic Sea. The working group holds that it is important to proceed with the development and implementation of measures for safe operation of ships in severe and icy winter conditions. As Mr. Illmari Aro (Finnish Transport Agency) states, due to the limited amount of icebreakers, vessels have to manage 50 until 60 percent of their journey through ice alone, so there certainly remains room for improvement. Particularly for Finland, Sweden, Russia and Estonia, icebreakers are a must and these countries therefore face the largest challenges when it comes to icy winter conditions. Good and effective cooperation between icebreaking authorities and operators across the Baltic Sea can potentially improve the safety of winter navigation in ice conditions. Steps in this direction are being undertaken, such as the deeper cooperation regarding icebreaking services agreed to in 2010 by Finland and Sweden for the Bay of Bothnia, the Bothnian Sea and the Åland Archipelago.Maritime Spatial PlanningPolitical recommendation relating to ‘Maritime Spatial Planning’: 13Given the exploitation of the Baltic Sea in particular through fishing, maritime transport and the energy sector and in the light of the discussions taking place on environmentally protected areas, a system that organizes the efficient use of maritime space becomes a necessity. Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) is as a tool of great potential in that it combines all possibilities of using the sea in a more efficient way whilst keeping in line with the principles of sustainability, both ecologically and economically. The Baltic Sea region is particularly ideal for research activities in general and for MSP in particular, as many countries are closely connected by the inland sea. The Baltic Sea offers a considerable potential for maritime use, with nearly every area of it usable in some form or another. These areas consist of shipping areas, platforms, pipelines, cables, offshore wind farms, natural reserves and tourism areas for instance. Those manifold possibilities of use are and can be profitable for all Baltic Sea countries. However, the potential for conflict cannot be neglected. In order to co-ordinate the beneficial usages and the growing conflict of maritime uses it has become apparent that an integrative and sustainable approach is needed which takes into account the economic and the scientific use, the ensured security and efficiency of shipping as well as the protection of the marine environment.The necessity of preparing a joint MSP for the Baltic Sea is emphasized as a consequence of the various economic and environmental concerns of the Baltic Sea area and will help to avoid or tackle conflicts should those arise whilst enabling a screening for beneficial usages of maritime areas. A joint plan is according to experts, an indispensable instrument for the coordination of activities in the coastal regions and at sea whilst simultaneously showing responsible ways of managing the resources of these areas. The monitoring of the sea is important and it is more efficient to develop a joint plan rather than having every country create and implement individual plans. Awareness and a common understanding of MSP have to be built as the concept of MSP is still relatively new to many countries. The countries are therefore encouraged to cooperate and to establish national, compatible spatial planning concepts.Actions on the international level have for instance been the roadmap launched by the European Commission in 2008 for MSP and the Commission is currently in the process of launching an impact assessment on how MSP should be taken forward at EU level. Moreover, a joint HELCOM-VASAB Maritime Spatial Planning Working Group has been established to further long-term sustainable management and planning for the whole Baltic Sea.As a concrete example of the use of MSP many experts and politicians see the possibility of using the Baltic Sea for offshore wind farms, which is considered an important source of alternative energy. The potential for conflict with shipping increases for every plant installed and it is therefore necessary to find a balanced solution. Also, the aspect of tourism has to be taken into account as the view across the open sea may be disturbed. In the view of the experts, a large number of offshore wind farms anticipated to be installed in the future, it will be necessary to lead shipping routes around those offshore wind farms at a sufficient distance and to ensure that collisions of vessels with wind power plants are prevented. International cooperation on this aspect is and will be important and a coordinated cross-border maritime spatial planning is likely to have a positive impact on the installation and performance of offshore wind parks in the Baltic Sea. As stated by the experts, MSP is an economic tool to provide actors who wanted to engage in maritime activities with the necessary security and stability for their investments. Additionally, it is an environmental tool and a tool for maritime transport.(5) Working group ActivitiesProcedure and mode of workDuring the 1st meeting in Rostock, it was agreed upon to take up the subject areas of transport, environment and nature protection, maritime spatial planning, infrastructure and hinterland-connections in order to stabilize the Baltic Sea Region and to strengthen its competitiveness. It was also decided to consult national and international experts and parliamentarians in the framework of hearings on different political levels and to cooperate with relevant expert-groups from the CBSS, HELCOM and other institutions and organizations in order to elaborate political recommendations. The next sessions would be held in Brussels on 19th/20th April 2010 and 14th/15th June 2010 in Copenhagen.During the 2nd meeting in Brussels, it was decided that the Chairman would provide an interim report of the working group for the 19th BSPC in Mariehamn. The next session would be held in Copenhagen on 15th June 2010. The working group will prepare first political recommendations for the 19th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (29th – 31st August 2010) in Mariehamn, Åland, based on the expert hearings, consultations and political debates. Concerning the report and draft recommendations for the resolution, it was decided that the secretariat would prepare first draft recommendations for the Expanded Standing Committee on 3rd June in Vilnius which would be circulated by email and considered in detail at the next working group session in Copenhagen. The draft interim report will be discussed as well. It was also decided to pick up questions of competitiveness among regions and ports in the Baltic in the second half of 2010.At the 3rd session in Copenhagen, Denmark, the working group decided on first political recommendations for the 19th BSPC resolution in Mariehamn on 29th – 31st August 2010 and agreed to the structure and thematic content of the Chairman’s draft interim report, which was based on the expert hearings, consultations and political debates. Concerning the draft recommendations, it was decided that the discussed and proclaimed modifications and supplements had to be submitted by 23rd June 2010 to the secretariat in Schwerin. Moreover, the meeting agreed on the working plan for the 20th BSPC. The next session should be held in one of the Baltic States as a two-day meeting during the 47th calendar week of 2010 (22nd until 26th November). The 5th session is planned for the 12th calendar week of 2011 (21st – 25th March) in Sweden as a two-day meeting as well. The final session will be held in Schwerin, Germany, on 20th and 21st June 2011.The 4th session took place in Tallinn, Estonia. As an outcome of the discussions, the participants agreed on the continuation of the working plan for the next year until the 20th BSPC. The 5th session will be held in Stockholm, Sweden, on 24th March, and will focus on ways of improving competitiveness in the maritime sector and on maritime spatial planning. The 6th and final session will take place in Schwerin, Germany, from 19th – 21st June 2011 with the main focus on the infrastructure of ports, including technical challenges of cruise tourism, the discussion of political recommendations and the report of the working group for the 20 th BSPC in Helsinki in 2011. In this context, the participants decided to elaborate first recommendations for discussion by the 5th session in Stockholm in order to submit key points for the Enlarged Standing Committees’ consultations in May 2011. Last recommendations should be added to the draft resolution subsequent to the final session by the end of June 2011. The meeting gave the chairman and the vice-chairman the mandate as political representatives of the BSPC-Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Maritime Day on 20th May 2011 in Gdansk. The European Commission would like to present a tripartite event of maritime actors from the CBSS, BSSSC and the BSPC which will be prepared by Germany. Further, the working group agreed to not only formulate recommendations for the resolution in the form of brief and precise political demands as it was held that in some cases it might be useful to include technical details in order for the resolution to remain understandable and clear. Finally, the participants decided to create a directory of all working group members based on a standard form which will be distributed to the parliamentary secretariats by email.The 5th session took place in Stockholm, Sweden. During the second part of the session the chairman informed about proceedings for a planned joint meeting of the three maritime working groups of CBSS, BSSSC and BSPC in connection with the European Maritime Day on 20th May 2011 in Gdansk. The intention of this common event was to broaden the awareness of the European public on the maritime cooperation in the model region Baltic Sea, to illustrate the integrated political approaches and to promote a more regular and structured dialogue between different levels of political decision-making in the region. Therefore, he suggested that the three bodies should meet again in tandem with the group’s regular final working group session in Schwerin on 20th/21st June in order to speak about further cooperation. The participants agreed. The 6th and final session will be focusing on the infrastructure of ports, including aspects of cruise tourism, shore side power supply, port reception facilities, Clean Baltic Shipping and on satellite-supported navigation systems for ports. The discussion should centre on the political recommendations and the final report of the working group for the 20th BSPC in Helsinki in 2011.The 6th session took place in Schwerin, Germany, from the 20th - 21st June 2011. The working group draft political recommendations for the 20th BSPC were discussed and agreed upon. On the day following the working group meeting, the agreed upon draft political recommendations would once again be sent to the participants for final suggestions, which would have to reach the secretariat by the upcoming Thursday after the conference. Moreover, the structure of the final report was discussed and it was announced that the draft of the final report was planned to be sent to the participants at the end of July/beginning of August for commenting by the middle of August. The 6th session also saw the presentation of several expert speakers on the issue of port infrastructure. Moreover, a meeting with representatives of the BSSSC and CBSS maritime working groups took place with the prospect of further exchange also in the future.Sessions OverviewThe Working Group has conducted six meetings as shown in the table below.|20th/21st January 2010 |First session of the Working Group, in the premises of the Federal Maritime and Hydrographic||(Rostock, Germany) |Agency in Rostock || | || |-objectives, mandate and timeframe of the WG || | || |-Discussion on WG priorities, working plan and activities, || | || |-Presentation on function and fields of activity of the Federal Maritime and Hydrographic || |Agency in Rostock by Ms Monika Breuch-Moritz (President of the Federal Maritime and || |Hydrographic Agency), || | || |-Presentation on Maritime Spatial Planning in the Baltic Sea Region by Mr Helmuth von || |Nicolai, Ministry for Transport, Building and Regional Development Mecklenburg Western || |Pommerania, || | || |-Presentation on tasks, development potentials and current issues of Baltic Sea Ports by Dr.|| |Ulrich Bauermeister, Port of Rostock, || | || |-Presentation on the Work of the CBSS Expert Group on Maritime Policy by Mr Christer || |Pursiainen, Secretariat of the CBSS, || | || |-Presentation on the Research Port of Rostock by Ms Sylvia Westland, Research Port Rostock, || |Network for Maritime Applications, || | || |- Presentation on maritime research using the Maritime Simulation Centre Warnemünde - MSCW -|| |by Prof. Dr. Knud Benedict, University of Wismar. ||15th/16th April 2010 |Second session of the Working Group ||(Brussels, Belgium) | || |Expert Presentations on different issues of the EU Integrated Maritime Policy and the || |cooperation between the EU and Russia in these fields: || | || |-Presentation on maritime traffic and emissions – green and short sea shipping by Mr Alfons || |Guinier, European Community Shipowners’ Association, || | || |-Presentation on the implementation of the EU Integrated Maritime Policy by Ms Izolda || |Bulvinaite, European Commission, DG MARE), || | || |-Presentation on the areas of European Transport Policy by Mr Werner Kuhn, MEP, Committee on|| |Transport, || | || |-Presentation on Maritime and Ports Policy by Mr Giovanni Mendola, European Commission, DG || |MOVE, || | || |-Presentation on measures to improve Short Sea Shipping by Mr Patrick Norroy, European || |Commission, DG MOVE, || | || |-Presentation on Logistics, Co-Modality, Motorways of the Sea & Marco Polo by Mr Pavel || |Stelmazczykm, European Commission, DG MOVE, || | || |-Presentation on the sustainable development of ports as an EU policy by Mr Patrick || |Verhoeven, European Sea Ports Organization, || | || |-Presentation on the development of the relations between the EU and Russia by Mr Knut || |Fleckenstein (MEP, Chairman EU-Russia cooperation committee), || | || |-Presentation on the Russian Parliament's Commission on Maritime Policy by Mr Nikolay Lvov, || |MP, Moscow, ||15th June 2010 |Third session of the Working Group ||(Copenhagen, Denmark) | || |Expert Presentations on environmental aspects of maritime policy and on maritime safety: || | || |-Presentation on Efficient, Safe and Sustainable Traffic at Sea by Mr Francis Zachariae, || |Danish Maritime Safety Administration, || | || |-Presentation on Emission Control Areas (ECAs) as challenges and possibilities for short sea|| |shipping by Mr Jan Fritz Hansen, Danish Shipowners’ Association, || | || |-Presentation the ECAs compliance strategy of an international shipping line by Mr Niels || |Mortensen, Maersk Maritime Technology, || | || |-Presentation on the Expert Group on Maritime Policy of the CBSS by Ms Raimonda || |Liutkevicience, Chair of the Expert Group on Maritime Policy, || | || |-Presentation on environmental aspects of green shipping by Ms Jacqueline McGlade, European || |Environment Agency, || | || | || |-Discussion and vote on the Draft Political Recommendations and the Interim Report of the || |Working Group for the 19th BSPC ||29th – 31 August 2010 |19th BSPC in Mariehamn, Ǻland Islands ||(Mariehamn, Ǻland Islands) | || |-Presentation of the Working Group’s Midterm Report ||22nd/23rd November 2010 |Forth session of the Working Group ||(Tallinn, Estonia) | || |Expert Presentations on options for the reduction of emissions from maritime shipping, || |maritime vessel and traffic monitoring and maritime shipping in ice-conditions: || | || |-Presentation on MARPOL Annes VI / Technology and Compliance by Ms Ramona Zettelmaier and || |Prof. Dr. Karsten Wehner, Lloyd’s Register Hamburg, || | || |-Presentation on Hydrodynamic Optimization of Ships by Mr Jürgen Friesch, Hamburgische || |Schiffbau-Versuchsanstalt (HSVA), || | || |-Presentation on LNG-Infrastructure in the BSR – State and Perspectives by Mr Mogens || |Schrøder Bech, Danish Maritime Authority, || |-Presentation on examples for a harmonized and overall Supervision of Sea Transport in the || |Baltic Sea Region – the Gulf of Finland Ship Reporting System (GOFREP) by Mr Are Piel, || |Estonian Maritime Administration, || | || |-Presentation on Challenges of Sea Transport under Ice-Conditions in the Baltic Sea Region || |by Mr Ilmari Aro, Finnish Transport Agency in order of HELCOM || | || | || |- Appointment of Mr Roger Jansson as new vice-chair ||23rd/24th March 2011 |Fifth session of the Working Group ||(Stockholm, Sweden) | || |Expert Presentations on ways for improving competitiveness in the maritime sector: || | || |-Presentation on The economic impact of the classification of the Baltic Sea as a Sulphur || |Emission Control Area (S)ECA by Mr Gernot Tesch, Scandlines Deutschland GmbH and German || |Shipowners’ Association, || | || |- Presentation on The Impacts of IMO‘s New Sulphur Emission Regulations in the Baltic Sea by|| |Dr. Martin Kruse, Northern German Chamber of Industry and Commerce, || | || |-Presentation on oil spill liability and International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds || |(IOPC Funds) by Mr Mans Jacobsson, former Director of the IOPC Funds, || | || |-Presentation on Response capacities to combat oil-spills and hazardous substances by Mr || |Bernt Stedt, HELCOM Response Chair, || | || |-Presentation on measures to improve co-modality by Ms Riitta Pöntynen, SPC Finland, || | || |-Presentation on EC Communication on Maritime Spatial Planning issued on 17th December 2010 || |- COM (2010) 771 - and the Baltic Sea Region by Mr Pierre Schellekens, European Commission, || |Head of Representation in Sweden, || | || |-Presentation on Baltic Sea Cooperation in Maritime Spatial Planning – VASAB – HELCOM by Mr || |Sten Jerdenius, Vice-Chairman VASAB-HELCOM Maritime Spatial Planning Working Group, || | || |-Presentation on the work of the CBSS Expert Group on Maritime Policy by Mr Lars Almklov, || |Chairman of the CBSS Expert Group || | || |-Participation in common maritime working group presentation of CBSS, BSSSC and BSPC at the || |European Maritime Day on 20th May 2011 in Gdansk || | || |-Common maritime working group session of CBSS, BSSSC and BSPC together with 6th BSPC || |Working Group Session in Schwerin on 20th June 2011 ||19th - 21st June 2011 |Sixth session of the Working Group, ||(Schwerin, Germany) | || |Expert Presentations on Port Infrastructure: || | || |-Presentation on challenges for port infrastructure development respecting trends of the || |shipbuilding industry by Mr Manfred Müller Fahrenholz, Neptun Werft, || | || |-Presentation on ecological specifications of German Shipowners taking Scandlines as Example|| |by Dr. Hans-Jörg Wenzel, P+S Werften Stralsund, || | || |-Presentation on the ports of Stockholm as a sustainable cruise Destination by Mr Erik || |Andersson Pauldin, || | || |-Presentation on practical solutions for clean shipping by pilots in Baltic Sea ports by Mr || |Sten Björk, Port of Trelleborg, || | || |-Presentation on possibilities for policy and administrations to support clean shipping by || |Mr Jörg G. Sträussler, Baltic Energy Forum, || | || |-Presentation on the Port of Rostock as a logistics center at the Baltic Sea by Mr Jörg || |Litschka, Rostock Port || | || | || |- Report from Vice-Chairman Roger Jansson on Joint European Maritime Day Event in Gdansk || | || |-Common discussion with outgoing and incoming Chair of CBSS Expert Group on Maritime Policy,|| |Mr Lars Almklov and Mr Dietrich Seele, and Chairman of BSSSC Working Group on Maritime || |Policy, Mr Stefan Musiolik, on possibilities for a closer cooperation in the maritime field || | || | || |-Discussion and adoptin of political recommendations for the draft resolution of the 20th || |BSPC in Helsinki || | || | || |-Visit to Rostock Port and Caterpillar Motors in Rostock and to Warnemünde Cruise Terminal ||28th – 30th August 2011 |20th BSPC in Helsinki, Finland, ||(Helsinki, Finland) | || |-Presentation of the Working Group’s Final Report |Course and Results of the Working Group SessionsThis section contains an outline of all experts and their presentations as shown during the six sessions and highlights the main points of discussion. The presentations can be downloaded from the homepage of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (www.bspc.net) under . http://www.bspc.net/page/show/217 (Folder: Related Information; sub: Background Documents).Inaugural session of the “Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy, especially infrastructure and logistics” in Rostock, 21st and 22nd January 2010The inaugural meeting of the “Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy, especially infrastructure and logistics” was held under the chairmanship of Mr. Jochen Schulte (MP, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania) in the premises of the Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency in Rostock, Germany, on 21st and 22nd January 2010. 32 participants, experts, representatives of parliaments and parliamentary assemblies and from the administration as well attended the meeting. The main topics of the agenda were the objectives and main topics of the working group, the scope of its mandate, the working group methods employed as well as time frames, scheduling, and additional matters. The initial thematic introduction was conducted by experts in order to provide the participants with important aspects of the range of issues the working group will deal with in future:Ms. Monika Breuch-Moritz, President of the Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency, welcomed the participants and introduced them to the responsibilities of the federal agency and informed them of important aspects of infrastructure and logistic from the point of view of maritime spatial planning.Mr. Helmuth von Nicolai, Head of the Spatial Planning Division in the Ministry of Traffic, Building and Regional Development of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, discussed the topic of maritime spatial planning and its current status and key aspects for the Baltic Sea region.Mr. Ulrich Bauermeister, Managing Director of Rostock Port, briefed the participants on the port infrastructure and its interfaces with other means of transport (water, rail, road), the upgrading of the hinterland-connections, and on logistics optimization with the goal of speeding up goods traffic.Mr. Christer Pursiainen from the Secretariat of the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS) illustrated the activities of the CBSS Expert Group on Maritime Policy for permitting the use of synergies and strengthening the co-operation between the BSPC and the CBSS in accordance with corresponding intentions of the BSPC.Ms. Sylvia Westland, Network for Maritime Applications at the Rostock Research Port, dealt with the area of research and its links with the maritime economy and underlined the dependence of the maritime economy on an efficient and safe infrastructure and on the modernization of technical applications for the improvement of maritime safety and security.Mr. Knut Benedict, Wismar University, Department of Maritime Studies, informed of maritime training opportunities, as well as of the connections between maritime training and other relevant areas.It was agreed to handle the subject areas of transport, environment and nature protection, maritime spatial planning, infrastructure and hinterland-connections in order to stabilize the Baltic Sea region and to strengthen its competitiveness. Moreover, it was decided to consult national and international experts and parliamentarians in the framework of hearings on different political levels and to co-operate with relevant expert-groups from the CBSS, HELCOM and other institutions/organizations in order to elaborate political recommendations.On 22nd January 2010 the participants visited the Maritime Simulation Center Warnemünde (MSCW) where they were informed on the basic and follow-on training of seafaring personnel with the aid of the Vessel Traffic Service Simulator, the Ship Handling Simulator and the Ship Engine Simulator.2nd Session in Brussels, 15th and 16th April 2010The second meeting of the Working Group on “Integrated Maritime Policy, especially infrastructure and logistics” was held in Brussels under the chairmanship of Mr. Jochen Schulte (MP, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania) in the premises of the European Parliament and the Committee of the Regions on 15th and 16th April 2010. 27 Representatives of 13 parliaments and parliamentary assemblies attended the meeting. The working group was extended by MPs from the Russian Council of Federation, the Finnish Parliament and by the Land Parliament Schleswig-Holstein. Ms. Lisbeth Grönfeldt Bergman (MP, Sweden) from the Nordic Council was appointed Vice-Chair. Members of the European Parliament, representatives of the European Commission and the Committee of the Regions as well as representatives from the European Ports Organization and the European Community Shipowners Association informed the participants about issues on the EU Integrated Maritime Policy, Trans European Networks, maritime transport and environmental aspects, short sea shipping and the cooperation between the EU and Russia in these fields.Mr. Nikolay Lvov (MP, Parliament of Russia) explained the work and cooperation of the Russian Parliaments’ Commission on Maritime Policy, which was set up in 2006 and which deals with the utilization of marine resources, maritime traffic and safety as well as environmental issues.Mr. Werner Kuhn (MEP, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania) gave an introduction of the focal points and the development of the European Transport Policy from the European Parliament’s point of the view. He described the fundamental importance of the Trans-European-Networks (TEN-T) and Motorways of the Sea (MoS), the Harbor-Infrastructure and their connections to the hinterland.Mr. Knut Fleckenstein (MEP, Chairman EU-Russia cooperation committee) illustrated the relationship between the EU and Russia. The co-operation is based on special policies which have to be strengthened in the future. He stressed the need for legally binding agreements which included all fields of co-operation. Mobility and possibilities for the trade of goods were essential.Mr. Patrick Norroy (EU Commission, DG MOVE) gave an insight into the topic “Measures to promote Short Sea Shipping” on the basis of the Commission’s Transport Strategy up to 2018. He highlighted three challenges: the reduction of pollutant emissions, the effects of the economic crisis including the increasing prices of fuels as well as the improvement of transport systems and the elimination of technical and infrastructural bottlenecks.Mr. Pawel Stelmaszczyk (EU Commission, DG MOVE) briefed the participants on the revision of the TEN-T, MoS and the Marco-Polo project which will be better financed in future. The latter project will be broadened to passenger traffics and linked with clear objectives on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.Mr. Patrick Verhoeven (European Sea Ports Organization, ESPO) illustrated the theme “Port infrastructure and the effects of environmental legislation” and the societal integration. The 1.200 ports in Europe were very diverse in size, ownership, organization and sustainability as well as depending on their location. He stated that the awareness of port managers of environmental issues was growing all over the world as a result of the legislation and the need for saving costs and that maritime spatial planning would be an important instrument in order to deal with conflicts of interests. Moreover, he criticized that the EU legislation did not work effectively and demanded a better dialogue between industry, NGOs, EU member states and the EC. He also referred to the “World Ports Climate Initiative” for strengthening the efforts of combating hazardous emissions of ships in ports. Regarding the revision of the TEN-T, he demanded the identification of priorities.Mr. Alfons Guinier (Secretary General of the European Community Shipowners’ Association ECSA), focused his presentation on the sulphur content in bunker fuels, the promotion of short sea shipping and finally on the European maritime transport space without barriers. He stated that European ship owners controlled 41% of the global merchant fleet which meant that Europe was a leader in shipping. Regarding the emissions, he underlined that shipping was an environmentally friendly way of transportation. With a share of 90%, shipping was most eminent for the global trade but on the other hand shipping was responsible for 2-4% of the global CO2-emissions. With reference to the sulphur emissions in bunker fuels ECSA welcomed the decisions of the IMO to reduce the content to 0.1% up to 2015 in SECA but he saw the risk of a modal shift (up to 50%) from sea to land. A change from 1.5% to 0.5% would mean an increase of bunker fuel costs of 20 to 30%, a reduction to 0.1% an increase up to 60%. According to studies, by using 0.1% sulphur in bunker fuels and having a modal shift of only 20% the reduction of external costs would completely disappear. So the studies described 0.5% of sulphur in bunker fuels as a win-win-situation. Moreover, he urged for a better taxation and customs clearance.Mr. Dr. Gerhard Stahl, (Committee of the Regions) welcomed the participants and explained the organization and its tasks. He informed that the Committee of the Regions had built up the Intergroup “Baltic Sea Regions” which dealt with different aspects of the development and integrated maritime policy around the Baltic. In this framework, the topics logistics and infrastructure were in the main focus of the political discussions. He said that this sector was a political challenge because different aspects were affecting a large scale of economic, environmental and social matters. On the other hand, the Committee of the Regions supported the EU Baltic Sea Strategy by contributing ideas and initiatives to the Commission.Ms. Izolda Bulvinaite (EC, DG Mare) focused on the implementation, situation and prospects of the IMP. She illustrated that the DG Mare had been reorganized with special regard to the IMP and the characteristics of the sea basins in Europe. The main goal of the IMP was that different demands and interests of the sea had to be weighted up carefully in a cross-sectoral approach for guaranteeing a sustainable development. She defined the integration of maritime surveillance systems, maritime spatial planning (MSP) and maritime data as an important basis for the IMP. Further, the exchange of data between the different sectors had to be strengthening for more efficiency. She informed that the European Council and the Regions called for the implementation of the IMP on a regional basis considering the geographical characteristics, economic and social situation and environmental challenges. Inter alia key actions of the IMP were the development of good maritime governance structures, the implementation of the MSP, the realization of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan.Mr. Giovanni Mendola (EC, DG Move) explained the Communication on the EU-Strategy for maritime transport up to 2019 and the revision of the European ports policy. Summarizing, he outlined some strategic goals to stabilize the role of Europe as a key player on the global market: European shipping in globalize markets, human resources, seamanship and maritime know-how, co-operation on the international level, use of the full range of short sea shipping and transport services, investments in research and innovation, maritime safety and last but not least in technologies for green shipping. With regard to the port policies he focused on state aid and environmental guidelines as well as on social dialogue. He stated that financial support and investments were essential to raise the importance of ports for the economy. Also, ports had to be adapted to environmental legislation and rules. A set of guidelines would probably be adopted in 2010. Consultations between port stakeholders and public authorities should go hand in hand with social partners.Mr. Aleksey Zinoviev (MP) presented the Kaliningrad region port infrastructure and the main transport connections. He complained that the Kaliningrad region was not always present in the projects presented by the EU. So he was interested in additional contacts, business and participation in EU projects. He stated the important strategic position of the Kaliningrad ports in the Baltic and their connection with the main European transport routes. The ports had been under reconstruction recently to comply with state-of-the-art technology and infrastructure. A new deepwater port was also under construction.The meeting decided that the Chairman would give an interim report of the working group at the 19th BSPC in Mariehamn.3rd Session in Copenhagen, 15th June 2010The 3rd Meeting of the Working Group on “Integrated Maritime Policy, especially infrastructure and logistics” was held in Copenhagen under the chairmanship of Ms. Lisbeth Grönfeldt Bergmann (Nordic Council, Sweden) in the premises of the Danish Folketing on 15th June 2010. 34 representatives from 13 parliaments and parliamentary assemblies in addition to 5 experts attended the meeting. In the first part of the session, representatives from the Council of the Baltic Sea States, the world’s largest shipping company A. P. Møller Mærsk Group, the Danish Shipowners’ Association, the European Environment Agency as well as the Danish Maritime Safety Administration informed the participants about co-operation to improve maritime safety and security, the effects of the designation of the Baltic as an Emission Control Area (ECA) with regard to strategies of shipping enterprises, measures for the improvement and extension of short sea shipping, economic demands on environmentally friendly ports and Green Shipping, environmental aspects of shipping in the Baltic as well as the EfficienSea Project which aims at improving the Baltic with a focus on the environment and the safety of navigation.Ms. Raimonda Liutkeviciene (Council of the Baltic Sea States) explained the work and co-operation of the CBSS Expert Group on Maritime Policy with other institutions involved in these fields. She underlined that she was very pleased with the systematic exchange of information between the relevant working groups of CBSS and BSPC. She remarked that the working group was constituted in 2009 with a mandate for three years. The chairmanship rotated on an annual basis; this year it would pass on from Lithuania to Germany and in the next to Norway. According to Ms. Liutkeviciene the working group defines itself as a platform for the exchange of information in the Baltic Sea region, for the purposes of initiating maritime clusters, bringing together science, research and support projects, as well as identifying gaps in strategic projects (e. g. SubMariner, BaltSeaPlan, EfficienSea and Clean Baltic Shipping). In the long run it was also intended to raise public awareness of maritime affairs and promote a “common Baltic identity“. One key result had been the Baltic Sea Action Summit held in Helsinki at the beginning of 2010, under Lithuanian leadership. Finally Ms. Liutkeviciene suggested presenting the collaboration results obtained jointly with the BSPC Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy during the European Maritime Day on 20th May 2011 in Gdansk.Mr. Niels Bjørn Mortensen (A.P. Møller Mærsk Group, Mærsk Maritime Technology) cited the Baltic Sea as an example for an Emission Control Area and explained how the A.P. Møller Mærsk Group met its international obligations relating to the protection of the environment in maritime transport. He explained that the group, which was the largest container shipping company worldwide, had more than 250 large vessels. In addition to that, the same number of vessels was chartered. In this context the company felt obliged to prevent environmental and climatic damage caused by ship operation. The focus was put on the gradual transition from sulphur-containing heavy fuel oils to low-sulphur distillate fuels – as requested by the IMO – and the application of flue gas desulphurisation technologies. He continued that a reduction of sulphur content to 0.1 % in marine fuels from 2015 was feasible for larger companies since the difference in price between fuel of 0.5 % and 0.1 % sulphur content was presently only 10 USD/t. In addition, the oil industry increasingly managed to find cost-effective ways to produce low-sulphur distillates. With regard to the possibility of prescribing low-sulphur fuels for the Baltic Sea region at an earlier date than proposed by the IMO, Mr. Mortensen stated that, in a global context, this had already been applied off the coasts of the United States and Canada. So far there was evidence of neither distortions of competition nor a short supply of low sulphur-content marine fuels. The line shipping sector had adapted to these conditions on a voluntary basis. He attested that neither bio fuels nor nuclear fuels have the potential to replace mineral fuels in maritime transport. Considering both costs and technical complications, this could only work with LNG. But first a sufficient technical infrastructure needed to be established in ports. Furthermore, the transport capacity was reduced by the larger LNG fuel tanks. By contrast, onshore power supply (cold ironing) for vessels in ports could only lead a “niche existence“ due to technical obstacles and the considerable effort involved. He rejected subsidies for maritime shipping, arguing that the maritime sector had to practice sustainable management policies.Mr. Jan Fritz Hansen (Danish Shipowners’ Association) illustrated that his association represented 100 shipping companies, which transported approximately 10 % of the world’s transport tonnage. He stated that shipping companies working mainly in the Baltic Sea region were much more affected by the designation of the Baltic as a SECA than companies working on an intercontinental basis. Nevertheless, a notable shift from sea to road transport had not yet been observed since sea transport offered substantial economic and ecological advantages under the existing general conditions. Considering the fact that shipping traffic will further increase, he continued, emissions of sulphur dioxide had to be reduced. But the gradual reduction of sulphur by more than 90 % as agreed via the IMO marked a significant technical and economic challenge for the companies affected. This is why there was a close cooperation with research and development institutes in this field. The purpose was to reduce the CO2 emissions by 30 % and the SOx- and NOx emissions by 90 % each in the near future. The measures for the realization of these goals shall be managed in Denmark or across Scandinavia respectively by a so-called “industrial group“. With respect to the expected costs, however, the companies also discussed whether a reduction of the sulphur content in marine fuels to 0.5 % was not more cost-effective than the application of new technologies. Therefore, in 2018 a study on the global consequences of the designation of ECAs would be submitted. This might possibly lead to a revision of Annex VI of the MARPOL Convention. He continued to point out that it was the aim of the Danish Shipowners’ Association to gain more flexibility for the companies during the current transition period. Only the use of LNG as marine fuel on a broader scale allowed for a quick reduction of the pollutant emissions. But this would fail, predominantly due to the lack of the required infrastructure. He also pleaded for the reduction of subsidies for the shipping sector which in his opinion constituted a distortion of competition. He requested that the criteria for measures in the framework of TEN-T and for the development of Motorways of the Sea be modified in such a way that European funds could be used for the establishment of an LNG infrastructure across the Baltic Sea.Ms. Jaqueline McGlade (European Environment Agency) started her presentation with an overview of the goals and the organizational setup of EEA. She explained the agency followed a holistic approach for the analysis of the state of the environment and for the assessment of the anthropogenic influences on the environment. Special attention was given to how the specifications made by the European environmental legislation were implemented in the respective fields of politics. In addition, emission inventories and analyses among other accounts were conducted with respect to the impact of landside transport corridors, while intermodal transport and the optimization of transport chains were also evaluated. She criticized that the respective member states often delayed turning in their data to the EEA. As a particular environmental problem in the field of maritime shipping she pointed out the introduction of invasive species into the seas through ballast water. Due to the changing conditions (e. g. climate change, nutrient and pollutant emissions), more and more invasive species inhabited the Baltic Sea, thus competing with and threatening local species. Ms McGlade pointed out that there was no single cause, but rather a combination of many causes which led or had led to a drastic negative change of the Baltic Sea biotopes. With regard to environmental monitoring, she underlined that the instruments of air and satellite surveillance constituted great progress towards the localization of pollution discharges, which in turn had led to a significant decrease in the illegal discharges from ships. She attested that the European shipping companies had a high level of cooperation when it came to providing information on the quantification of emissions relevant to the climate. As for the negative effects of maritime shipping, she explained that the resulting pollutant emissions (especially sulphuric oxides, nitrogen oxides, airborne particles and volatile organic compounds) deteriorated the air quality particularly in northern Europe, increasing the mortality rate. She stated that the reduction of the sulphur content especially in marine fuels would lead to a considerable reduction of air pollution. She considered the financial effort associated with the use of low-sulphur marine fuels as being cost-effective, since the expenses for the countering of negative effects on the environment and on the population were considerably higher than the investments to be made. This position had public support. Closing her presentation, Ms McGlade welcomed the political recommendations proposed by the working group for the 19th BSPC.Mr. Francis Zacharie (Danish Maritime Safety Administration) informed the working group about the EfficienSea Project which had 16 partners from the Baltic Sea region. The three-year project (2009-2011) was financed by 18 million € through European funds (INTERREG IVB) aimed especially at improving maritime safety by using e-navigation. In his opinion, ensuring maritime safety and security was the basis of human activities at sea. DMSA focused on the maritime traffic through the Danish straits with approximately 70,000 movements per year. Further services provided by DMSA were the operation and maintenance of lighthouses/navigational lights and conventional support including traffic control (water-level reports, nautical charts, weather forecasts, other information services, etc.) and coastal rescue with the help of 21 emergency units. He pointed out that in the framework of prevention measures the improvement of maritime training and the quality of shipmasters were by far the most important factors in preventing maritime accidents. On the basis of the IMO definition of e-navigation, he explained how the shipmasters received information that was only relevant for the trip, which would be processed by means of an integrated system. Presently a prototype of a model was being developed in order to facilitate the steering of the ship from departure in a port until the landing in another port. The system included for example the ship’s papers, course calculations, positioning and further relevant data. Presently the Øresund served as a testing area and was monitored jointly with Sweden through the Vessel Traffic Service Center in Malmö. Cooperation partners include ferry lines, pilots, tug boats and tankers. Mr. Zacharie continued that the designation of further test areas such as the Gulf of Finland and the Gulf of Gdansk were being considered, in order to evaluate the transferability of this system to other marine areas. In that case, the project would need to be prolonged by three more years, which he did not exclude at the present time. Concluding, he invited further partners to join the EfficienSea Project and proposed that the working group should place greater emphasis on the improvement of maritime safety in their political recommendations.4th Session in Tallinn, 22nd/23rd November 2010The 4th Meeting of the Working Group “Integrated Maritime Policy, especially infrastructure and logistics” was held in Tallinn under the chairmanship of Mr. Jochen Schulte (State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany) in the premises of the Riigikogu on 23rd November 2010. 26 representatives from 15 parliaments and parliamentary assemblies as well as 5 experts attended the meeting. In the first part of the session, representatives from Lloyd’s Register in Hamburg, the Hamburgische Schiffbau-Versuchsanstalt (HSVA), the Danish Maritime Authority, the Estonian Maritime Administration (Vessel Traffic Services Centre) and from the Finnish Transport Agency (on behalf of HELCOM) informed the participants about options for the reduction of emissions from maritime shipping (low-emission propulsion systems and ship operation technologies, treatment of exhaust gases, ship building and refitting with regard to the current state of research and perspectives in the ship-building sector as well as setting up an LNG infrastructure in the Baltic Sea region), maritime shipping in ice conditions and maritime vessel and traffic monitoring.Ms. Ramona Zettelmaier (Lloyd’s Register, Hamburg) outlined the legal framework on the international level and the timeline for the reduction of SOx-, NOx- and CO2-emissions. She reported that on the basis of Annex VI of the MARPOL convention the NOx Emission Control Areas (NECAs) were obliged to reduce emissions considerably from 2016 in order to comply with the applicable emission standard fixed in TIER III. As a consequence, a fundamental change to the marine propulsion and operation technologies in the NECAs was required. From 2015 this was also applicable to the SOx-Emission Control Areas (SECAs) since also the gradual reduction of the sulphur content in marine fuels to 0.1 % had an enormous impact on the ship operation technology. Subsequently, she illustrated the change of the fuels used during the past 30 years which was primarily due to the tightening of environmental regulations. Today, mainly middle distillates were used and had been reference fuels for the MARPOL convention since 2008. Taking account of the respective fuel regulations of the different sea areas, the vessels were equipped with different fuel tanks. This made them less cost-effective. A solution might be on the one hand combining the use of middle distillates and the application of exhaust gas treatment (scrubbing) in order to reduce SOx-emissions and on the other hand modernizing the propulsion technology so as to reduce NOx-emissions (new injection technologies, application of water-fuel emulsions). According to her, new vessels could be run with LNG and could keep all emission standards without any problems; but there was still a huge number of vessels with “antiquated technology“. In addition, the use of LNG required special safety engineering. Ship operation had to be both profitable and environmentally compatible. Technology had to be functional, reliable, durable and easy to handle. Against this background she claimed that firstly there should be one consistent and proportionate Port State Control worldwide and that the ports should have sufficient reception facilities in order to prevent distortion of competition; secondly she demanded a certification of bunker suppliers; thirdly there should be standardized criteria for exhaust gas treatment; fourthly and finally Ms Zettelmaier claimed that research in the use of alternative fuels had to be intensified.Mr. Jürgen Friesch (Hamburgische Schiffsbau-Versuchsanstalt GmbH, HSVA) illustrated the possibilities of hydrodynamic optimization of ships and ship propulsion systems with the aim of reducing emissions. He pointed out that more than 95 % of the goods traded worldwide were transported by ship, primarily slow-going container ships and tankers. According to him their efficiency could be considerably improved by modifying the hull form (especially the length-width ratio), the machines and propulsion technologies as well. But this could only succeed if no standard ships designed on the drawing board were used; instead, ships had to be designed for their main intended use. A modified length-width ratio while retaining the same tonnage and speed could save 25 % of energy. Already a 10% speed reduction of speed could reduce energy consumption by 40 %. Yet there were limits depending on the ship-specific operating range and speed range which themselves were related to the width, length, hull form, and draught of the ship as well as to the propeller type and the engine speed. He added that also the surface of the underwater hull played an important role. Water resistance could be reduced by up to 30 % by smoothing welding seams and using improved smoothed paints. Further ways of reducing water resistance were the use of new technologies like air injection at the bottom of the hull, a balanced and precise ballast distribution, the optimization of the propeller design and the use of additional jets and fins. Further on he briefly referred to alternative propulsion technologies like fuel cells, nuclear power and the use of solar and wind energy, some of them to be used as add-ons (e.g. wind power). Closing his presentation, he claimed that the future political focus should particularly be put on technologies designed to reduce emissions, taking into account hydrodynamic aspects of ship design.Mr. Mogens Schrøder Bech (Danish Maritime Authority) presented the current status of the Liquid Natural Gas (LNG)-infrastructure in the North Sea, the English Channel and in the Baltic Sea region and outlined new perspectives for the use of LNG in maritime transport, based on a strategic discussion paper. In general, the use of LNG required the establishment of specific technical prerequisites. In addition, safety aspects both on the ships and in the ports had to be considered. Nevertheless, he described LNG as a competitive marine fuel – particularly in view of the Emission Control Areas (ECAs) – which currently was available on the global market at lower price than distillates. Further he pointed out that if potential LNG suppliers were expected to invest in port infrastructure, political intervention by the states and economic incentives were required. Only then would consumers be ready to use this environmentally friendly fuel which caused neither SOx nor particulate emissions and very low NOx emission. Further, a network of LNG-filling stations as well as industrial standards (and public regulations if necessary) was required as supporting framework conditions. He recommended carrying out a feasibility study for the Baltic region, to serve as a basis of decision-making both for politics and industry. In order to promote the use and acceptance of LNG, he continued, it was vital to use the latest technologies (new engines or retrofitting), to increase the number of filling stations (both stationary and mobile) and integrate them into the supply network, starting with the existing regular service. At present Norway was the only country in northern Europe disposing of an adequate LNG-supply structure. The only LNG-terminal currently being planned in the Baltic region was Szczecin. Norway and Denmark were partners in a pilot project which investigated until the end of 2012 the feasibility of the use of LNG in the Baltic region. He concluded that ECA provisions set the competitiveness of short sea shipping under pressure. Action had to be taken to avoid a modal back shift from water to road transport. New technologies of Green Shipping had to be introduced.Mr. Are Piel (Vessel Traffic Services Centre, Estonian Maritime Administration) illustrated “Examples for a harmonized and overall supervision of sea transport in the Baltic Sea region“, using the Gulf of Finland as an example. He started his presentation by outlining the hydro-graphical and morphological characteristics of this sea area which had a high traffic density due to tankers going from and to Russia, ferry and cruise traffic. In addition the North Stream gas pipeline was being built, and more than 100 days per year maritime traffic had to cope with ice. He continued that the risk potential for the region was ever increasing due to increasing oil and freight transports on ever growing vessels. Based on the HELCOM Copenhagen Declaration of 2001, Russia, Finland and Estonia had agreed to create a common and binding traffic management and monitoring system with the aim of enhancing safety. VTS (Vessel Traffic Service) was mainly radar-based and offered traffic guidance services; GOFREP (Gulf of Finland Reporting System) was AIS-based and managed the standardized cross-border surveillance of maritime traffic. But the system could not be applied for international waters to the desired extend, he added, since to date competencies were not clarified and transmission processes were not consistent. Information referring to the name, position, speed and course of the ship were given as so-called short reports or full reports, respectively, to the respective coastal station. Sometimes reporting was very labor- and time-intensive for the shipmasters; e.g. on a trip from the Mediterranean to the Gulf of Finland a vessel had to give eleven reports to the coastal stations altogether. Against this background the Safe Sea Net was applied, a network which interlinked databases of different systems and nations provided users with the requested data. In addition a Single Window facility was used which provided national regulatory documents for customs, Port State Control, weather services etc. at one single location. He continued that from the side of the European Commission a common communication platform entitled “MARSUNO – Maritime Surveillance North” was planned, aiming at the reduction of administrative effort of cross-border maritime traffic, providing traffic information and appropriate instruments for pollution control and identifying rescue efforts and fisheries control.Mr. Ilmari Aro (Finnish Transport Agency - FTA, on behalf of HELCOM) informed the participants about the special conditions and requirements of maritime shipping in the Baltic region in ice conditions. He explained that during an average winter FTA-icebreakers had to keep approx. 800 km of iced sea routes navigable for maritime traffic (pre-defined routes along the coastline). It was the goal to achieve a maximum waiting time of four hours for the vessels and enable them to cruise at a speed of 10 knots. In winter 2009/2010 almost 8,000 vessels in the Baltic had received assistance by the FTA, nearly 3,000 of them in the Gulf of Finland, he continued. Due to the limited amount of icebreakers the vessels had to manage up to 60 % of their ice trip alone. For this reason special requirements had to be fulfilled both regarding the vessels and the crew. According to him the main problems in ice conditions were sea spray icing, insufficient vessels and inadequate trained shipmasters. Finland had a fleet of nine icebreakers in a good state although some of them were more than 30 years old. Further he explained that for maritime shipping in ice conditions there were certain restrictions, classified according to the ice thickness (there were four classes: 10-15, 15-30, 30-50, and more than 50 cm). Only those vessels received assistance by icebreakers which corresponded to certain ice classes and dead weights. These restrictions were aimed to keep out unsuitable vessels in winter. Thus, safety of navigation and continuity of winter traffic should be guaranteed. The Baltic Icebreaker Meeting (BIM), he continued, was a common information platform for the Baltic region which was running by all countries bordering the Baltic Sea (except Lithuania). It also had an interface with the HELCOM database. This year Finland and Sweden had concluded a separate co-operation agreement for the Gulf of Bothnia and the Åland Sea area. Last winter Finland had spent 38.5 million euros on icebreaking, 10 million out of that for fuel.5th Session in Stockholm, 23rd/24th March 2011The 5th meeting of the Working Group “Integrated Maritime Policy, especially infrastructure and logistics” was held on 24th March 2011 at the Riksdagen, Swedish Parliament, in Stockholm under the direction of Chairman Mr. Jochen Schulte (State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany). 28 representatives from 13 parliaments and parliamentary assemblies as well as 7 experts and the Chairman of the CBSS Expert Group on Maritime Policy, Mr. Lars Almklov, attended the meeting. During the first part of the session, representatives from the German Shipowners’ Association, the Association of Northern German Chambers of Industry and Commerce, the International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds, the HELCOM RESPONSE Group, the Shortsea Promotion Centre Finland, the European Commission and the VASAB-HELCOM Maritime Spatial Planning Working Group informed the participants about the economic impact of the classification of the Baltic Sea as a Sulphur Emission Control Area, oil spill liability and International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds, response capacities to combat oil-spills and hazardous substances in the Baltic Sea Region, measures to improve co-modality and maritime spatial planning. The following provides a brief summary of their conclusions and recommendations to the Working Group.Mr. Gernot Tesch (Scandlines Deutschland GmbH, German Shipowners’ Association) presented the findings of a recent German study about a possible modal backshift as a consequence of MARPOL Annex VI regulations regarding sulphur content in ship fuels.The study was entitled “Reducing the sulphur content of shipping fuels further to 0.1 percent in the North Sea and Baltic Sea in 2015: Consequences for shipping in this shipping area.” In terms of the containment of CO2 emissions, shipping had many advantages over other methods of transport, but SOx and NOx emissions were still a cause for concern.The decision of the IMO member states regarding the MARPOL Annex VI Regulations to reduce sulphur content in shipping fuels to 0.1% had been made without any impact assessment, and resulted in a division in shipping burdens perpetuating the likelihood of a modal-shift. The study assessed the real costs associated with the implementation of these regulations in terms of competition based on isolated shipping corridors. Most likely, volume losses between 10%-20% already would lead to a closure of the trade route and a 100% modal shift.The proposed solutions to attain the sulphur regulations through scrubber technology, alternative fuels (LNG), the adjustment of sulphur caps in tandem and a postponement strategy were additionally analyzed. The problems associated with technological, infrastructural development and retrofitting made scrubber technology an unattractive solution. Mr. Tesch additionally noted that the solution that seemed most likely was the increased utilization of LNG products in tandem with an interim solution for the existing fleet.The second presentation was given by Mr. Martin Kruse (Association of Northern German Chambers of Industry and Commerce). According to the Association of Northern German Chambers of Industry and Commerce, already a reduction to 0.5% would be a benefit for nature and would impose significantly lower costs on the economies in the Baltic Sea Region. He gave a short overview of existing impact assessment studies on the subject. Comparing the interests of the different commissioners, the (shipowners’) associations were mainly interested in the question of modal shift, and the European Union itself was looking on the issue of Shortsea Shipping and on modal questions as well. The Scandinavian and the Baltic states had strong fear of losing international competitiveness by the new regulations. The volume of shipping would decline considerably in the Baltic Sea and the new regime would give severe disadvantages to the Baltic Sea Region’s economy. He also mentioned statements by the Baltic Sea Port Organization and a letter to the European Commission signed by 50 organizations, including the German Shipowners’ Association and the Association of Northern German Chambers of Industry and Commerce. Concluding, Mr Kruse asked the Working Group members to promote the 0.5 limit on European level and, if possible, within IMO, for the best of the Baltic Sea Region.Mr. Måns Jacobsson (Former Director of the International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds – IOPC Funds) started his presentation by pointing out that oil pollution was another topic of great importance for all people around the Baltic. The Civil Liability Convention was ratified by 123 states and the Fund Convention by 105 states. The Conventions largely applied to pollution damage caused by oil spills from laden tankers and spills of bunker oil from empty tankers in certain circumstances.Under the Civil Liability Convention, the ship owner was liable regardless of any evidenced negligence on the part of the crew or shipmaster (“strict” or “objective liability”). If the ship owner was exonerated under one of the few defenses admissible under the Civil Liability Convention, if he was originally found to be liable and did not have the ability to pay and did not possess the necessary insurance coverage, or if the damage exceeded the permissible limitation amounts for the ship owner, the Fund Convention would apply. The main costs associated with oil spills were property damage, costs of clean up, losses in various industries and environmental damage. When oil was spilled at sea, measures were taken to preemptively clean up the spill at sea, in order to avoid the costs associated with cleaning up the oil spill on land. As a general conclusion, the international community had worked reasonably well in most cases which was also shown by the number of Fund member states. All the states close to the Baltic Sea were members of the 1992 Fund and all coastal states of the Baltic except for the Russian Federation were members of the Supplementary Fund. Governments and parliaments had to see a benefit and consider worthwhile burdening their oil industry with a contribution to the Funds.The fourth presentation by Mr. Bernt Stedt (Chairman of HELCOM RESPONSE Group and head of the response unit at the Swedish Coast Guard Headquarters) was regarding the topic of current levels of preparedness in the Baltic Sea region for a major oil spill. At any given moment, there were at least 2,000 ships in the Baltic Sea Area. The high traffic had led to roughly 100 accidents annually in the Baltic Sea, although only a fraction has resulted in oil spills (a total of 5 in 2009).The HELCOM Response Group had worked on requirements for emergencies and response capacities. The Group worked with airborne surveillance both nationally and bilaterally, which led to the development of the current response manual, which instructed on topics ranging from the proper reporting and alert system that applied to all states as well as financial aspects when giving or requesting assistance.The present status of the Baltic Sea Area response capacity was in comparison to many regions quite well prepared. The “HELCOM fleet,” the European Maritime Safety Agency’s (EMSA) contribution of three vessels, the ‘HELCOM Seatrack Web,’ as well as aerial flights helped monitor and contain oil spills utilizing national, bilateral, and international support mechanisms.Ms. Riitta Pöntynen (Shortsea Promotion Centre Finland) focused in her presentation on inter-modality and maritime transport. Her primary thesis was that while each of the modes had its strengths, the transport modes should complement each other, not compete with each other. With regard to the European Commission’s Transport White Paper in 2006 co-modality, sustainable transport and environmental impacts of transport were of increasing importance; however, it was also important to develop the links between transport modes (ports, logistic centers, inland and dry ports; as well as information flow in the transport chain).Additionally, the European Commission Communication and Action Plan on freight logistics (2007), which also followed an inter-modal approach and the European Commission’s Communication on a European Ports Policy (COM(2007) 616) were also mentioned. The European Commission’s Initiative “Towards a European maritime transport space without barriers” included a new concept of a “Blue Belt” launched in 2010. This was intended to reduce administrative changes related to EU maritime transport.In sum, the simplification and harmonization of administrative and custom procedures was important for all transport modes, and should be achieved through the promotion of co-modality through a number of consolidating and logistical measures.The sixth presentation from Mr. Pierre Schellekens (European Commission, Head of Representation in Sweden) focused on the EC Communication on maritime spatial planning (MSP). There were economic, environmental and social benefits to be derived from increased and integrated cross-border planning of the areas at sea. This supposed a common understanding of what MSP is and there had been some work in developing awareness of the needs and of the concept of maritime spatial planning which was still a new concept for many (very few of the EU member states actually had MSP). In 2008, the European Commission had launched a roadmap for MSP which had established ten principles on which planning should be based. The European Commission was now in the process of launching an impact assessment on how MSP should be taken forward at EU level. MSP should be carried out by the member states and in the member states. Major economic benefits resulted from reduced transaction costs for maritime actors and a more secure, stable environment for investments. Furthermore, it was an environmental tool and a tool for maritime transport.The seventh presentation by Mr. Sten Jerdenius (Vice-Chairman VASAB-HELCOM Maritime Spatial Planning Working Group) focused on cooperation in terms of MSP in the Baltic Sea region.There were two organizations in the Baltic Sea region working with MSP, one of them being VASAB (Vision and Strategies around the Baltic Sea region) and the other being HELCOM. VASAB had started working with MSP by making a compendium which gave a good description on the state of MSP of all Baltic Sea countries (to be downloaded on the VASAB homepage). At the starting point of MSP one had to take note of the very severe environmental situation in the Baltic Sea and of the increased competition for sea areas. Very large differences existed between the Baltic Sea countries as far as MSP was concerned, and therefore the starting point for introducing MSP was very different in the various countries. Both HELCOM and VASAB had decided to set up a joint working group on MSP for the BSR in order to support this process. All the Baltic Sea countries and the European Commission were taking part and it was a very good arrangement as the European Commission received direct information on the ongoing processes in the member states and the member states had the possibility to influence the Commission in its work on MSP. The group had drafted MSP principles, adopted by both organizations, and was the only formal group in Europe on MSP.The presentations are available on the following BSPC website:http://www.bspc.net/page/show/217 (Folder: Related Information; sub: Background6th session in Schwerin, 19th – 21st June 2011The 6th and final session of the BSPC Working Group on “Integrated Maritime Policy” took place in Schwerin, Germany, between 19th and 21st June 2011 at the premises of the State Parliament of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania.The session saw expert presentations on the issue of port infrastructure and the challenges faced in the Baltic Sea region related to integrated maritime policy. Mr. Schulte welcomed the experts.Mr. Manfred Müller-Fahrenholz (Managing Director of Neptun Shipyards) introduced the sister companies Mayer Shipyard in Papenburg and the Neptun Shipyard in Rostock. He explained the shipbuilding process and continued with the building programme which, for example, includes passenger ships, lifestock carries, gas tankers and container ships. He stated that it is easy to define values for air emission regulation but how to achieve them would be the question. Mr. Müller-Fahrenholz explained that his company would see LNG as a main future fuel. In his opinion, a competitive system that is available for everyone must be developed because today LNG is expensive and not everywhere available. Mr. Müller-Fahrenholz mentioned the issue of shore power after he explained the disadvantages of the use of catalysts and scrubbers. In his opinion, the supply of shore power is difficult. A lot of energy and infrastructure is required for this and the shore has to be capable of dealing with this. Cables, feeding lines, a standardization of ship to shore connections and a control system need to be installed. It can be done, but the conditions under which the electricity supply is made may not be environmentally friendly. Lastly, Mr. Müller-Fahrenholz touched on the topic of rules and regulations. There are various regulations in the Baltic Sea, he stated, but also regulations within each individual state. There must be clear rules for the operators of the yards regarding the construction of future ships, how to develop changes for the vessels to make them able to serve ports in sensitive areas while also giving the passengers a qualitatively high journey and not pollute the environment.Mr. Hans-Jörg Wenzel (Project Manager at P+S Werften) gave his presentation on Ecological ship specifications: realization at the RoPAX GR12 ferries for Scandlines. Mr. Wenzel thereafter presented a couple of concepts of vessels operated with alternative energy, such as the vessel operation with modern sail concepts (SKYSAIL/BELUGA). He underlined that as long as these technologies are not technically matured, yards and owners would have to take small steps based on the state of the art. The RoPAX GR12 ferries might be an innovative energy-optimized ferry project. The vessels in their design already differ to current ferries in the Baltic, because of certain aspects on the line Rostock – Gedser. For the Baltic Sea the hull optimization is a significant part of the design, Mr. Wenzel stated. Another part of this energy optimization is the sophisticated propulsion system. The 2 x gensets of 4300 kW each and the 3 x main engines of 4500 kW each will be used in accordance to the needs of the nautical situation. With regard to the problematic of LNG the challenges for the harbors are how to provide and how to ensure a safe operation. If the LNG for dual-fuel concepts shall be used for these passenger ferries, a safe infrastructure for LNG bunkering has to be established by 2015, Mr. Wenzel argued.Mr. Erik Andersson Pauldin (Ports of Stockholm) thanked the hosts for the invitation and the possibility to speak on the topic of Ports of Stockholm as a sustainable cruise destination. The City of Stockholm is the owner of Ports of Stockholm. Since 1990 the region has grown and the population of Stockholm will also continue to rise until the year 2030. This is on the one hand a good development but on the other hand also a big challenge especially when it comes to building new departments and to constructing a sustainable traffic and transport system. Mr Pauldin explained that Ports of Stockholm has three ports. One port is located directly in the city of Stockholm and two harbors nearby Stockholm. In 2010 Ports of Stockholm had more 12 million ferry and cruise passengers and a flow of goods of 8.4 million tonnes. The turnover conducts approximately 68 million Euros. The environmental impact by a port, Mr Pauldin continued, can and should be looked at from two points, namely from the direct impact, such as impact from ones own operational activities, and from the indirect impact, which is the impact that the ports customers and ship owners have on the environment. For example, we gave discounts to vessles for reducing sulphur and nitrogen oxides emissions, for sorting out ship-generated waste and for low water content in sludge.Due to the environmental work of Ports of Stockholm, the NOx emissions from vessels could be reduced by 40% between 1995 and 2006. For the same period, sulphur could be reduced by 60% and all tankers have double bottom hulls.Mr. Sten Björk (Port of Trelleborg, Project Leader Clean Baltic Sea Shipping) began his presentation on the Clean Baltic Sea Shipping project by speaking about the origin of the project and informed about its main objectives. There are for example pilot projects with shore side electricity for ferries and cruisers that have been started by the Port of Oslo and Trelleborg. Moreover, pilot projects with voluntary ferry owner port agreements for pumping over all sewage and biological wastes when in port have been started in the Ports of Stockholm, Trelleborg and Helsinki. Mr. Björk explained that the project has introduced four working groups and one of them would deal with the issue of LNG. He affirmed that we should try to get away from fossil energy and in Skåne have started to produce biogas methane. Mr. Björk stated that in the pilot projects, several issues will be looked at. For example, the port of Klaipeda will elaborate how local small scale LNG logistics to ships can be derived from a large LNG import terminal and the port of Trelleborg will elaborate how Bio-LNG logistics can be organized from a biogas plant to ships at the berths. Coming to the challenges faced, Mr. Björk argued that a joint clean shipping strategy would require intensive cooperation between all stakeholders. The final goal for the project might be a Baltic Sea free from water and air pollution. It would be a large goal but one that is achievable.Mr. Jörg Sträussler (Clean Baltic Sea Shipping, Baltic Energy Forum) gave his presentation on What can parliamentarians do to support Clean Shipping? One of the first issues he touched upon was that of eutrophication. If nothing is done, the Baltic Sea will be dead by 2020, he argued. Air pollution is not a minor polluter of the Baltic Sea he argued and told the participants that HELCOM states that shipping contributes by 16% to air pollution, making it the largest single emission source for NOx in the HELCOM area. Moreover, Mr. Sträussler underlined that EMSA has found 50 different systems for waste and wastewater management being implemented at 50 different ports. We must arrive at joint regulations and joint systems. Clean shipping would need a clear strategy, Mr. Sträussler stated. Therefore it would be ideal to have a clear cut and coherent integrated clean shipping part in the integrated maritime policy. Mr Sträussler stated that the innovation curve of LNG started fairly slowly, but he is certain that as the year 2015 is approaching as regards SOx or 2016 as regards NOx, the innovation curve and the implementation curve will drastically increase. Mr. Sträussler added that bilateral contracts for the reduction of ship borne wastewaters such as those undertaken between Stockholm, Turku and Helsinki should also be arranged between other nations of the Baltic Sea area. Thereafter, Mr. Sträussler indicated where in the Baltic Sea area LNG production facilities are located, under construction, near development or where discussions are taking place but no further steps have been taken. Mr. Sträussler underlined his believe that LNG would be the optimum solution for shipping as regards fuel. Funding of shipping should be focused on clean shipping, Mr. Sträussler further explained. The focus should incorporate LNG, shore side electricity, fuel cells, hydrogen, methanol and others and the majority of funding should go to conversion of ships to green ships rather than to the construction of new ships. When thinking about clean shipping, a focus should also be on research and development, Mr Sträussler stated. In the Baltic Sea countries, research and development platforms on clean shipping are needed and the existing maritime clusters should be joined. There remains a big gap concerning the treatment of LNG in relation to other fuels. Heavy fuels are non-taxed, so ship owners can rely on the fact that their fuels are exempted from taxes. Moreover, tax reductions on shore side electricity already exist in Germany and Sweden, but these taxations should be harmonized, Mr. Sträussler held. Clean Shipping should be anchored in European policies. For instance, not much is mentioned on clean shipping in the Integrated Maritime Policy of the European Union, Mr. Sträussler criticized. There is a gap and politicians should arrange for clean shipping to become a visible part of this policy.The second session dealt with fields of cooperation. Chairman Jochen Schulte welcomed the guest from the Baltic Sea States Subregional Cooperation (BSSSC) and the Council of Baltic Sea States (CBSS).Vice-Chairman Roger Jansson who had represented the Working Group in Gdansk gave a short report on the European Maritime Day event. He called the event a promising premiere as it had been the first ever common presentation of the maritime policy groups of the three organizations to a larger European public.As a representative of the CBSS Mr. Lars Almklov mentioned the five CBSS long term broad priority areas being environment, economic development, energy, education and culture, civil security and the human dimension. To focus on these areas, it had been decided to establish expert groups which could include experts with a clear and time-limited mandate and tasks. The EGMP was a cross-sectoral group with three focus areas, the main focus area being the economic development, including innovation and competitiveness and a favorable business environment, fostering entrepreneurship, cluster development, transport and logistics and research and development in the maritime policy field. The second focus of the group was energy, including energy security and efficiency as well as the environmental aspect of energy efficiency in the maritime policy field. The EGMP had focused on having a close relation with BSPC and BSSSC. On the issue of environmental protection, Mr. Almklov explained that the current Norwegian chairmanship had also organized three meetings, including a workshop focusing on promoting LNG as an environmental friendly alternative to existing fuels for shipping which was in particular relevant for the Baltic Sea, bearing in mind the new sulphur and possible NOX regulations for the region. He noticed that the potential of LNG was one item of common interest of the EGMP and the BSPC Working Group.Mr. Dietrich Seele gave an outline of the plans of the upcoming German CBSS presidency which would start officially on 1st July 2011. Maritime policy would be one of the most important priorities of the German presidency. The presidency wanted to continue and intensify the work of the EGMP in this respect. In accordance with the elements of competitiveness, environment and climate change, the priorities of the German presidency were the following: improving the dialogue of maritime policy actors and pooling the maritime policy initiatives of BSPC, BSSSC and CBSS, strengthening innovation by supporting maritime research and maritime clusters in the BSR and by further development of existing databases of maritime relevance, developing the possibility to support politically cross-sectoral projects that served as an example to demonstrate the added value of Baltic Sea cooperation. The CBSS had already successfully supported some very important projects, e.g. Clean Baltic Shipping (which would now receive EU funding from the Baltic Sea Programme). Another new element would be to build up an exchange of information and experience with other European maritime areas. There would be more sea basin strategies in the near future and it seemed to be useful to have a regular exchange of information and experience in that respect.Mr. Stefan Musiolik said that he also considered the first joint event of the three Maritime Working Groups in Gdansk as quite successful. With the Schwerin meeting the second step was made and he hoped there would be further steps. The task of BSSSC was to promote and advocate the interests of the regions to decision-makers on the national and European level. For example, during the consultation process for the Baltic Sea Strategy, a common statement by the BSSSC was issued and now, during the phase of implementation the BSSSC also gave its vote to raise the voice of the regions. A Working Group of the BSSSC on Maritime Policy has been established in 2008. This working group has developed a five point action plan. The action plan consisted of the following five points: onshore power supply for ships in harbors to reduce emissions, environmentally differentiated harbor dues, a voluntary ban of wastewater discharges in the Baltic Sea, awarding of best practice in clean shipping and sustainable port management which was important to raise awareness and the introduction of labels for Clean Baltic Shipping and sustainable ports. This five point action plan had been developed within BSSSC, but it was supported also by five other Baltic Sea organizations (Union of Baltic Cities, Baltic Sea Commission, B 7 Baltic Islands, Baltic Development Forum and Euroregion Baltic). It had been quite helpful that different organizations had spoken with one voice. The action plan had been fully integrated into the Baltic Sea Strategy proposed by the European Commission in June 2009 which helped a lot in moving forward in this policy field. Mr. Musiolik has also mentioned the idea of an INTERREG project for Clean Baltic Sea Shipping and invited the BSPC to join the project by becoming a member of the Political Committee.Mr. Roger Jansson suggested to make a recommendation to the Standing Committee of the BSPC according to Mr. Musiolik’s offer.Mr. Dietrich Seele added ideas for cooperation and a concrete dialogue between the different organizations. He understood the meeting today as a starting point and as a core group for further organizations which should be involved during the next weeks and months. The CPMR, the Baltic Sea Commission and the Baltic Sea Forum were very keen on joining this cooperation. He mentioned in his introductory speech that Germany would look into the architecture of Baltic Sea cooperation and would like to generate more transparency and efficiency of the whole Baltic Sea architecture.Chairman Jochen Schulte proposed to prepare a common paper of the BSPC, CBSS and BSSSC including the major points of Mr. Seele.Mr. Dietrich Seele agreed with Mr. Schulte’s proposal and said it would be possible to create a coherent strategy.Also Mr. Stefan Musiolik supported the idea to create a core group of the three organizations which could be supplemented by further organizations. He pointed out that the common meeting in Schwerin was a promising start, but in front of the background of the possible end of the BSPC Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy in August, he asked himself how the promising steps could be continued and who would take them. It was very promising to come together, but there would be some continuity needed.Chairman Jochen Schulte added at the end of the second session that it would be planned to integrate a paragraph in the final report on supporting further coordination and joint activities between these institutions and that this paper could be a first step to support such activities.Chairman Jochen Schulte opened the discussion on the draft political recommendations of the WG for the 20th BSPC, the final report and on additional matters (morning and third session). He pointed out that the draft as handed out to the participants during the third session had been adjusted to meet the suggested changes as agreed on during the morning session. The Working Group successively decided on the recommendations which will be submitted for the resolution of the 20th BSPC.On the 21st June 2011, the participants travelled to Rostock and to the district Warnemünde to see and hear about Rostock Port, Caterpillar Motors and Warnemünde Cruise Terminal. Port representatives explained that the main focus of the port is ferry and ro-ro traffic and that Rostock is the only deep sea port on the German Baltic coast. Moreover, the port has a high-capacity road and railroad network to the hinterland with short transit times to metropolitan areas and economic hubs such as Berlin, Leipzig, Prague and Hamburg. It was stated that the infrastructure development should be in line with sustainability and environmental friendliness. A next step in an environmentally friendly direction would be the supply of shore side electricity, shore side gas and LNG facilities. Feasibility studies on the LNG issue were in progress.Thereafter, the participants joined a guided tour around Rostock Port and visited Caterpillar Motors in Rostock, where a presentation was given which explained Caterpillar as a company, its products and how the company tries to meet the challenges posed by IMO legislation concerning the reduction of NOx and SOx. Thereafter, a guided tour through the manufacturing hall followed. During the tour, the participants were able to see several ship motors, including a VM 43 C engine with an output range of 16000 kW.The final visit for the group was at Warnemünde Cruise Terminal. Cruise shipping at Warnemünde Cruise Terminal is also operated by Rostock Port. It is one of the most important cruise ports in Germany and the base port for AIDA cruises.(6) Baltic Sea Maritime CooperationIn the BSPC Work Programme for 2010/2011, one of the objectives stated is to support the policies of the CBSS and to further the co-operation between the CBSS and the BSPC, for instance by sustaining contacts and cooperation between secretariats, by attempting to synchronize priorities, and by maintaining an interaction between working bodies of the BSPC and the CBSS, such as the BSPC Working Groups and the CBSS Expert Groups and Task Forces. Civil Security, including Trafficking and Integrated Maritime Policy are priorities in 2011 both of BSPC and CBSS. In the 19th BSPC Resolution, BSPC recognizes the usefulness of this interaction as a joint resource in following and addressing the economic, social and political challenges of the Baltic Sea Region. BSPC furthermore calls upon the governments of the Baltic Sea Region to consider ways to further strengthen cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region between the CBSS and the BSPC in order to ensure cohesion and to avoid divisions in the Baltic Sea Region.At the 8th Baltic Sea States Summit organized by the CBSS in June 2010, BSPC Chairwoman Ms. Christina Gestrin reaffirmed the close, continuous and constructive interaction between CBSS and BSPC. In the opinion of BSPC, CBSS had a central role as a driver for comprehensive action to manage the challenges of the Baltic Sea Region. BSPC on its side had a pronounced ambition to synchronize its objectives and priorities with those of the corresponding bodies of the CBSS. She also said that the Baltic Sea Region was bustling with actors and initiatives. A practical and more structured dialogue between stakeholders would strengthen both their individual and their combined capacity to deal with the challenges of the Region. She called for developing ideas for future cooperation.As collaborative policy-making is the essence of an integrated maritime policy, the working group has put a particular focus on the issue of cooperation and has undertaken several steps for new cooperative approaches in the Baltic Sea Region. Most recently, the outgoing and incoming chair of the CBSS EGMP, Mr. Lars Almklov (Norwegian Ministry of Trade and Industry) and Mr Dietrich Seele (German Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development) as well as the Chairman of the BSSSC Working Group on Maritime Policy (WGMP), Mr. Stefan Musiolik, have actively taken part in a common working group session in Schwerin on 20th and 21st June 2011 and thereby have shown their great interest in a closer cooperation with the parliamentary bodies of the Baltic Sea Region. One week ahead of the official start of the German CBSS Presidency on 1st July 2011, the designated Chairman of the CBSS EGMP gave an outlook on the priorities and the work programme for 2011/2012. The Chairman of the BSSSC WGMP gave a report on his working group’s activities. In particular he informed about recent developments in the project Clean Baltic Shipping and invited the BSPC to become a member of the Political Committee supporting that project. This question will have to be decided on by the Standing Committee.During their common session, the representatives of the CBSS and BSSSC maritime working groups and the members of the BSPC Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy also discussed possibilities for a closer cooperation in maritime affairs. Mr. Seele presented a list of suggestions for joint activities, ranging from mutual and regular information exchange, common monitoring of maritime activities of the EU Baltic Sea Strategy, creating an inventory of existing regional or national maritime policies, to developing jointly political guidelines for the future. Strengthening visibility and raising awareness were also considered as very important aspects. He pointed out that Germany would like to generate more transparency and efficiency in the architecture of the Baltic Sea cooperation as a whole and to strengthen the Baltic Sea Region as a very efficient pillar of the worldwide architecture of maritime policy. He could imagine that the priorities within the three organisations could differ to some degree, but there could be a certain division of labour between the different organisations and Groups. Strengthening awareness could in his view be a specific task and priority of parliamentarians having impact in the regions to strengthen efforts in that respect. He understood the meeting in Schwerin on 20th June as a starting point and as a Core Group for further organisations which should be involved during the following weeks and months. He also mentioned that the Baltic Sea Commission of the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions and the Baltic Sea Forum were very keen on joining this cooperation. He suggested organising an annual assembly of all interested maritime organisations in the Baltic Sea area, discussing guidelines for the future. Finally, he stressed that he would like the presented suggestions to be understood as a very informal set of ideas that could be further developed or amended by the members of the other maritime working groups.At the end of the debate, Mr. Musiolik considered it very important for the further building up on the first very promising common activities that all three working groups could continue their work to further deepen their cooperation. The efforts already been made by all of the three maritime groups would risk to be in vain without a continuous working structure.At the European Maritime Day in Gdansk on 20th May 2011, the Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy has been engaged in organizing a common event of the maritime working groups of BSPC, CBSS and BSSSC under the title “Common vision, linking efforts, strengthening visibility”. Vice-Chairman Roger Jansson co-chaired the joint meeting which included an opening address by Mr. Grzegorz Grzelak, Chairman of the Committee on Interregional and International Cooperation of the Sejmik of the Voivodeship Pomorskie, representing the Southern Baltic Sea Parliamentary Forum and the host country of this year’s European Maritime Day. The joint event was intended to promote the opportunities and potentials of the Baltic maritime sector and an increased, more structured dialogue for the development of further common activities of institutions and organizations involved in maritime affairs in the Baltic Sea Region. The representatives of the three working groups called the event a promising premiere as it had not only been the first ever common presentation of the maritime policy groups of the three organizations to a larger European public, but it also should mark - as it had been agreed upon by all participants - the beginning of a closer, more regular dialogue between the three organizations on marine related issues in the near future. Mr. Seele expressed the hope that this could become a tradition, to be continued on the occasion of the following European Maritime Day in Gothenburg in 2012.In the recent progress report of the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region[15] published by the European Commission on 22nd June 2011, the joint event and the improved cooperation of BSPC, CBSS and BSSSC in maritime affairs was acknowledged by the European Commission as a best practice example for maritime governance.The common event has also been the topic of an article published in the June issue of the CBSS magazine Balticness.The work of the BSPC Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy was acknowledged as well in the Oslo Declaration of the 16th CBSS Ministerial Meeting on 7th June 2011.Conversely, the Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy has suggested to include an additional text taking up the first joint event of a BSPC working group with working groups of CBSS and BSSSC in the introduction of the Draft Resolution for the 20th BSPC.Over the past two years, the three successive chairpersons of the CBSS EGMP have actively participated in working group sessions of the BSPC Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy, starting with Ms. Raimonda Liutkeviciene, representing the Lithuanian Presidency at the 3rd Working Group session in Copenhagen, followed by Mr. Lars Almklov representing the Norwegian Presidency who has participated in the 5th and the 6th Working Group session in Stockholm and Schwerin and concluded by Mr. Dietrich Seele, representing the current German Presidency as of 1st July 2011 who has also participated at the 6th Working Group Session in Schwerin.Moreover, the joint activities of the three working groups have already attracted first interested organizations who would like to join them in the future work of their trilateral cooperation. In a letter of 17th June 2011 addressed to the Chairman of the Working Group, the Baltic Sea Commission of the CPMR expressed interest in participating in joint exchange on maritime issues with the three working groups.In its 18th Resolution, the BSPC called on the governments in the Baltic Sea Region, the CBSS and the European Union, regarding Cooperation in the Region, to “define and pursue a common political agenda for the Baltic Sea Region, e.g. by devising a joint understanding of governance, leadership and division of labour among the leading regional and subregional actors in the Region, and by enhancing coordination between them”[16]. The proposals presented by the new Chairman of the CBSS EGMP at the Schwerin Session on 20th June are in great parts consistent with requests from the BSPC in earlier Resolutions and thus represent a good opportunity for a real progress in the Baltic maritime cooperation.Collaboration between different maritime-related policy fields, different levels of political decision-making on regional, national, European and international level and looking for synergies being a key element of an Integrated Maritime Policy for the Baltic Sea Region, continuous effort will be required to develop and coordinate common fields of interest and to realise common maritime objectives in order to strengthen the regional approach for an Integrated Baltic Maritime Policy. With one of the competitive advantages of the region being its already existing high degree of integration, the Baltic Sea area could become a forerunner in integrative and collaborative policy-making./Working Group Members1. Jochen Schulte MP, ChairmanState Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany2. Roger Jansson MP, Vice Chair (from 4th session)Parliament of Åland, Finland3. Lisbeth Grönfeldt Bergman MP, Vice Chair (up to 3rd session)Nordic Council, Parliament of Sweden4. Mart Jüssi MP, Baltic Assembly, Parliament of Estonia5. Janis Reirs MP, Baltic Assembly, Parliament of Latvia6. Bronius Pauza MP, Baltic Assembly, Parliament of Lithuania7. Niels Sindal MP, Parliament of Denmark8. Jeppe Kofod MP, Parliament of Denmark (from 3rd session)9. Susanna Huovinen MP, Parliament of Finland10. Martin Günthner MP, City-State Parliament of the Free and Hanseatic City of Bremen, Germany (first session)11. Frank Schildt MP, City-State Parliament of the Free and Hanseatic City of Bremen, Germany (from 2nd session)12. Roland Heintze MP, City-State Parliament of the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg, Germany13. Dr. Henning von Storch MP, State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany14. Kirstin Funke MP, State Parliament Schleswig-Holstein, Germany15. Ines Strehlau MP, State Parliament Schleswig-Holstein, Germany16. Torsten Staffeldt MP, Deutscher Bundestag, Germany17. Lyly Rajala MP, Nordic Council, Parliament of Finland18. Fredrik Karström MP, Nordic Council, Parliament of Åland, Finland19. Ingebjørg A. Godskesen MP, Parliament of Norway20. Zbigniew Kozak MP, Parliament of Poland21. Alexey Zinoviev MP, Parliament of the Kaliningrad Region, Russian Federation22. Nikolay Lvov MP, Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation23. Börje Vestlund MP, Parliament of SwedenStaff Members:Bodo Bahr State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, GermanyGeorg Strätker State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, GermanyGerald Gutzeit State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, GermanyDr. Wolfgang Röhl State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, GermanyIris Putz State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, GermanySolveig Herrmannsen State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, GermanySteffen Davids State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, GermanyUlrike Dufner State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, GermanyAleksandra Szczepanski State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, GermanyNiclas Slotte Parliament of Åland, FinlandMarika Laizane-Jurkane Baltic AssemblySilga Lejasmeiere Baltic AssemblyIngrida Putnina Baltic Assembly, Parliament of LatviaEne Röngelep Baltic Assembly, Parliament of EstoniaSkirmaitas Strimaitis Baltic Assembly, Parliament of LithuaniaPeder Pedersen Parliament of DenmarkHardo Müggenburg European ParliamentJaakko Hissa Parliament of FinlandKatharina Köhler City-State Parliament of the Free and Hanseatic City of Bremen, GermanyJutta Schmidt-Holländer State Parliament Schleswig-Holstein, GermanyKenneth Ekberg Nordic CouncilHalla Nolsøe Paulsen Nordic CouncilJan Widberg Nordic Council, BSPC-SecretariatKamilla Kjellgard Nordic Council, BSPC-SecretariatPatrick Zilliacus Nordic Council, Parliament of FinlandBjörn Andreassen Parliament of NorwayThor Bostad Parliament of NorwayKjell Myhre-Jensen Parliament of NorwayAndrey Shchegolikhin Federal Assembly of the Russian FederationAlexander Sokolov Federal Assembly of the Russian FederationSergey Kudryavtsev Russian Mission to EUEva Smekal Parliament of SwedenHelena Lundstedt Parliament of SwedenBengt Ohlsson Parliament of SwedenFrom November 2009 till December 2010 the International Division of the State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany has been secretariat for Working Group. The Division “Secretariat of the Committee on European and Legal Affairs, International Secretariat” of the State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania has been secretariat for the Working Group since then.Working Group Point of ContactMr Georg SträtkerHead of Division, State Parliament Mecklenburg-Western PomeraniaSecretariat of the Committee on European and Legal Affairs/International SecretariatLennéstrasse 119053 SchwerinGermanyphone: +49 385 525.1530telefax: +49 385 525.1535email: europaausschuss@landtag-mv.deweb: www.landtag-mv.deMr Jan WidbergHead of the BSPC-Secretariatc/o Nordic CouncilVed Stranden 18DK-1061 CopenhagenDenmarkphone: +45 24 699 446telefax +45 33 11 1870email: jw@norden.orgweb: www.bspc.netList of Experts who have addressed the Working Group▪ Erik Andersson Pauldin, Ports of Stockholm, Ports of Stockholm – A Sustainable CruiseDestination▪ Ilmari Aro, Finnish Transport Agency in order of HELCOM, Challenges of Sea Transport under Ice-Conditions in the Baltic Sea Region▪ Dr. Ulrich Bauermeister, Port of Rostock, Baltic Sea Ports: Tasks, development potentials and current issues▪ Prof. Dr. Knud Benedict, University of Wismar, Competency and Strategy of HS Wismar,On maritime research using the Maritime Simulation Centre Warnemünde – MSCW –▪ Sten Björk, Port of Trelleborg, Practical solutions for clean shipping by pilots in Baltic Seaports▪ Monika Breuch-Moritz, Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency Germany, presentation on functions and fields of activity of the Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency in Rostock▪ Izolda Bulvinaite, European Commission, Implementation of the Integrated Maritime Policy▪ Knut Fleckenstein, MEP, Chairman EU-Russia cooperation committee, Development of the relations between the EU and Russia▪ Jürgen Friesch, Hamburgische Schiffbau-Versuchsanstalt (HSVA), Hydrodynamic Optimization of Ships in the design stage and in service – What can be gained by efficient hull forms and propulsors?▪ Jacqueline McGlade, European Environment Agency, Environmental aspects of green shipping▪ Alfons Guinier, European Community Shipowners’ Association, Requirements to the port infrastructure and logistic port reception facilities, effects on environmental regulations▪ Jan Fritz Hansen, Danish Shipowners’ Association, ECAs – Challenges and Possibilities for Short Sea Shipping▪ Måns Jacobsson, former Director of the IOPC Funds, Oil spill liability and International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds (IOPC Funds)▪ Sten Jerdenius, Vice-Chairman VASAB-HELCOM Maritime Spatial Planning Working Group, Baltic Sea Cooperation in Maritime Spatial Planning – VASAB - HELCOM▪ Werner Kuhn, MEP, Committee on Transport, The Areas of European Transport Policy▪ Dr. Martin Kruse, IHK Nord, The Impacts of IMO‘s New Sulphur Emission Regulations in the Baltic Sea – An Overview▪ Jörg Litschka, Rostock Port, The Port of Rostock –Logistics Center at the Baltic Sea▪ Giovanni Mendola, European Commission, DG MOVE, Maritime and Ports Policy▪ Niels Mortensen, Maersk Maritime Technology, ECAs compliance strategy of an international shipping line▪ Manfred Müller Fahrenholz, Neptun Werft, Challenges for Port Infrastructure Developmenttoday and in the future respecting trends of the Shipbuilding Industry▪ Helmuth von Nicolai, Ministry for Transport, Building and Regional Development Mecklenburg Western Pommerania, Maritime Spatial Planning in the Baltic Sea Region▪ Patrick Norroy, European Commission, Measures to improve Short Sea Shipping▪ Are Piel, Estonian Maritime Administration, Examples for a harmonized and overall Supervision of Sea Transport in the Baltic Sea Region – The Gulf of Finland Ship Reporting System (GOFREP)▪ Riitta Pöntynen, SPC Finland, Measures to improve co-modality▪ Pierre Schellekens, European Commission, Head of Representation in Sweden, EC Communication on Maritime Spatial Planning issued on 17th December 2010 - COM (2010) 771 - and the Baltic Sea Region▪ Mogens Schrøder Bech, Danish Maritime Authority, LNG-Infrastructure in the BSR – State and Perspectives▪ Bernt Stedt, HELCOM Response Chair, Response capacities to combat oil-spills and hazardous substances▪ Jörg G. Sträussler, Baltic Energy Forum, What can policy and administrations do tosupport clean shipping?▪ Gernot Tesch, Scandlines Deutschland GmbH and German Shipowners’ Association, The economic impact of the classification of the Baltic Sea as a Sulphur Emission Control Area (S)ECA▪ Patrick Verhoeven, European Sea Ports Organization, Sustainable Development of Ports - An EU-policy▪ Prof. Dr. Karsten Wehner, Lloyd’s Register Hamburg, MARPOL Annes VI / Technology and Compliance▪ Dr. Hans-Jörg Wenzel, P+S Werften Stralsund, Ecological Specifications of GermanShipowners taking Scandlines as Example▪ Sylvia Westland, Research Port Rostock, Network for Maritime Applications▪ Francis Zachariae, Danish Maritime Safety Administration, Efficient, Safe and Sustainable Traffic at Sea▪ Ramona Zettelmaier, Lloyd’s Register Hamburg, MARPOL Annes VI / Technology and Compliance▪ Alexey Zinovev, Kaliningrad region port InfrastructureInterim Reportby the Chairman of theBSPC Working Group on Integrated Maritime PolicyJochen Schulte, MP(State Parliament Mecklenburg-Vorpommern)on the Occasion of the19th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC)Second Session30 August 2010MariehamnÅland, FinlandNot to be released before the speech is commencedCheck against delivery!INTRODUCTION:Ladies and Gentlemen,in my capacity as the Chairman of the BSPC Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy, I’d like to thank you for the invitation to this lovely place, the hospitality extended to me, and the chance to give you an interim report on our activities.Politics is a fast-moving business: In many cases, current topics and even politicians frequently change. However, let me briefly recapitulate some basic facts on Integrated Maritime Policy and its recent development in the light of substantive consistency, even though the BSPC – albeit with different foci - has already dealt with some aspects of this issue before.As you know, some 100 million people live in the Baltic Sea Region today. They generate slightly more than 1,200 billion euros a year, which is approximately 11 percent of the European (EU 27) gross domestic product (GDP). Marine and coastal activities make up a significant proportion of the regions’ economic performance. In past decades, diverging sea use requirements and sector-related interests demonstrated that the different sectors such as the maritime economy, maritime traffic, energy production but also fisheries and tourism may have developed on separate tracks for too long a time, thereby resulting in a situation where the seas were subject to an ever more extensive use by and for the benefit of these sectors.It was against this backdrop that the European Commission published its Communication on an Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union* including an Action Plan as a so-called Blue Book in 2007, which seeks to achieve closer cooperation at all levels of decision-making as well as an efficient cross-cutting coordination of all maritime actions. To this end, the Commission, at the end of 2009, submitted a progress report on this issue, which provides a substantive assessment of the measures previously taken under the new Integrated Maritime Policy and submits further proposals for future maritime actions.The Integrated Maritime Policy now serves as a superstructure for several other maritime strategies at the European, national, regional and sub-regional levels, including the European Marine Strategy Directive*, which acts as the so-called environmental pillar. From the Commission’s point of view, the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region represents a regional concept for the implementation of the Integrated Maritime Policy in this region, with the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan serving as the environmental pillar of the concept. (Ms Brusendorff, HELCOM’s Executive Secretary, has already mentioned this point.)In its June 2010 Conclusions, the Council of the European Union, with respect to resource efficiency, competitiveness, and climate action, highlighted the crucial importance of the maritime sectors for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. In this context, maritime traffic, infrastructure, climate protection, the ports and logistics centres and their inter-modal connection with the European transport network are essential to smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Also, as far as the transferability of measures is concerned, the Baltic Sea Region can serve as a model for other sea regions.WORKING GROUP MEETINGS:Ladies and Gentlemen,let me give you a brief run-down on the composition of the Working Group and the subjects discussed at our meetings before addressing the main results achieved there.The Working Group, which now comprises 20 members of 17 national and regional parliaments and parliamentary assemblies, held its inaugural meeting in January 2010 at the Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency (BSH) in Rostock and discussed the subject areas to be dealt with. Also, a work programme and timetable as well as the working methods were laid down there. An agreement was reached that transport issues, aspects of environment and nature conservation, Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP), port infrastructure and port hinterland connections should be addressed in the first year. Most of the technical input was to be provided in hearings by national and international experts from various levels.The second meeting of the Working Group where our Swedish colleague Ms Lisbeth Grönfeldt Bergman was elected Vice Chair took place in April of this year at the European Parliament and the Committee of Regions in Brussels. Members of the European Parliament, the European Commission, the European Sea Ports Organization (ESPO) and the European Community Ship-Owners’ Association (ECSA) engaged in an in-depth discussion on European Integrated Maritime Policy, Trans-European Networks, maritime traffic and the associated economic problems, environmental aspects, short-sea shipping, and the cooperation between the European Union and Russia on maritime affairs, which I consider extremely important in and for the Baltic Sea Region.In June the third meeting of the Working Group took place at the Folketing in Copenhagen. Members of the world’s leading shipping company, the A.P. Møller Mærsk Group, the Danish Ship-Owners’ Association, the Danish Maritime Safety Authority, and the European Environment Agency (EEA) discussed the following issues: Measures to improve maritime safety, the economic consequences of designating the Baltic Sea as an Emission Control Area, ways of improving and extending short-sea shipping, opportunities provided by “Green Shipping“ for reducing the adverse environmental effects of maritime shipping as well as new technologies for improving navigation in the Baltic Sea.Now, from the point of view of the Working Group, I’d like to turn to the main results we took home from the expert hearings. Ladies and gentlemen:Speaking with reference to Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP), experts had emphasized that a common spatial planning for the entire Baltic Sea Region would be called for in future in order to minimize cross-border conflicts of interest. The construction of offshore wind farms may serve as an example in this context. Also, designating areas suitable for development as well as prohibited zones in the Baltic Sea will be required to an increasing extent. In summary, it may be said that insufficient attention is still being paid to Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) as an efficient planning tool. Another point of criticism concerned the fact that there are significant differences in the application of this tool in the Baltic Sea Region. In this connection, the meeting recommended that administrative decisions and measures taken in the States bordering on the Baltic Sea should be rendered legally binding. It will be important for the future that a greater number of States bordering on the Baltic Sea and a greater number of sea areas should participate in the European “BaltSeaPlan” project, a possible follow-up project or similar projects.Our discussions on port infrastructure were directly linked to the trans-European transport axes due to the hinterland connection of the ports. The fact that the competitiveness of the ports largely depends on their function and the services they offer, their geographical position and their hinterland connections was emphasized. Also, it is obvious that the global flows of goods – irrespective of the ongoing financial and economic crisis – are mainly handled by ever-bigger vessels. In this light, then, the recommendations we submitted are logical: First, major ports in the Baltic Sea Region should be developed strategically and in a multi-modal manner. Secondly, these ports should be connected to the European core transport network at sea and ashore; also, in the scope of reviewing the TEN-T projects, the priority projects should be interlinked and gaps be filled in order to facilitate high frequency multi-modal transport operations. The Russian transport network is to be included in these measures.The designation of the Baltic Sea as a Sulphur Oxide (SOx) Emission Control Area (SECA) was the starting point of the discussions on environmental actions in maritime traffic and the economic impact of this IMO measure. From an environmental perspective, this measure was welcomed. However, experts feared that the gradual reduction of the sulphur content in marine fuels might lead to a drastic increase in transport costs – by as much as 60 percent, depending on the current price of fuels. As a result, transport operations in the Baltic Sea Region could be moved back to the road again in an order of magnitude of up to 20 percent or, in the opinion of some experts, even 50 percent. This development would be counter-productive as far as the desired environmental effects and short sea shipping are concerned. In order to mitigate these competitive disadvantages suffered by the regions, the requirement has been put forward that other European sea areas should also be designated as Emission Control Areas. The 18th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference (BSPC) had already taken up this issue in Paragraph 12 of the Conference Resolution adopted in Nyborg.In the case of older vessels, the treatment of exhaust emissions might serve as an alternative solution to technical problems involving the use of low sulphur marine fuels, provided these ships use ordinary bunker oil - that is to say fuels with a higher sulphur content. Consequently, if a treatment of such exhaust emissions is carried out, the emissions thus treated may be the same as those of ships using low sulphur fuels. However, experts have told us that retrofitting older vessels with this technology is onerous and costly. Nevertheless, such a retrofit could be a good idea considering that the vessels have long life cycles of more than 30 years.In addition, the Working Group recommends the following: First, to encourage the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to move the start of the worldwide lowering of the sulphur content of marine fuels to 0.5 percent to an earlier date, secondly, to examine whether and to what extent an even further reduction to 0.1 percent would result in unacceptable competitive disadvantages in the Baltic Sea Region, and what measures might be taken to avoid or compensate for such disadvantages.All experts and politicians have described short sea shipping as a relatively eco-friendly alternative to inland transport. However, they also referred to the use of shore-side electricity at berth and alternative fuels such as liquefied natural gas (LNG) as a necessary and promising way of dealing with pollutant emissions from shipping. These measures call for creating an appropriate standardized port infrastructure – not only in the Baltic Sea Region – and for developing standardized technical interfaces and financial incentives. So, for instance, the European Union could introduce a tax exemption on the shore-side electricity used by ships. This would already be a first step. In addition, short sea shipping in Europe would be particularly suited to using alternative propulsion systems and technologies (gas generators, fuel cell technology, etc.). In my opinion, the government and the business sector ought to work harder than before to achieve this goal.Harmonized data communication, strict traffic monitoring and mandatory pilotage in tricky sea areas continue to be regarded as ways of further enhancing maritime safety. The GALILEO satellite navigation system in combination with the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) may be of special relevance in this context; however, the system would have to be advanced more swiftly than before and, with respect to GNSS infrastructure, extended to many Baltic ports. Also, it was generally understood that the continuous traffic monitoring and management provided should be improved for the entire Baltic Sea Region by harmonizing existing vessel monitoring and traffic management services. All national systems must be compatible with one another.However, technical upgrading isn’t everything, ladies and gentlemen. I am sure that mandatory pilotage can provide additional safety. Although it is true that more than 90 percent of all hazardous cargo carriers with a draught exceeding 11 metres have complied with the relevant IMO recommendation by availing themselves of pilotage services on a voluntary basis, we should continue to encourage the IMO to introduce mandatory pilotage for large vessels transiting the Baltic Sea.Short sea shipping is a different kettle of fish. In this context, the Working Group is in favour of looking into the extent to which pilotage can be dispensed with if the masters and officers have sufficient knowledge of the routes operated. This measure could enhance the competitiveness of small enterprises and reduce turn-around and travel times, thereby ultimately saving costs.With regard to actions aimed at enhancing competitiveness, experts, when referring to cross-border inter-modal transport operations, highlighted the need to initiate measures such as the use of a single language as in air transport and the standardization of customs and tax procedures.In connection with the incident in the Gulf of Mexico, actions to improve accident prevention and the safety of technical facilities as well as the provision of sufficient numbers of suitable maritime accident control capacities at sea and ashore were regarded as another important point.SUMMARY:Ladies and Gentlemen,let me summarize as follows: The first-year meetings of the BSPC Working Group on Integrated Maritime Policy were focused on port infrastructure and logistics as required. The meetings clearly showed that, in this connection too, maritime safety and climate protection constituted the principal political content of deliberations and were closely linked to the competitiveness of the Baltic Sea Region. The harmful effects of ship-generated emissions and the designation of the Baltic Sea as an Emission Control Area were at the centre of discussion, especially during the Copenhagen meeting.As far as the second year is concerned, the Working Group will have to agree on further priorities for work. In my opinion and owing to the discussions held so far, the following issues could be considered: Ways of using state-of-the-art marine engineering technologies, in particular technologies to reduce fuel consumption and emissions, improving the competitiveness of ports in relation to one another - including their equipment with disposal capacities for wastes and effluents – and the use of Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) as a mandatory planning tool in the construction and linkage of infrastructure facilities. Greater attention should be accorded to Clean Baltic Shipping, particularly in regard to environmental issues; Clean Baltic Shipping can be a major competitive and locational advantage for the Baltic Sea Region.In the context of this advantage, I’d like to refer to the most recent activities of the European Commission, which – in cooperation with public private partnerships (PPP) - intends to sponsor new TEN-T projects in the fields of Motorways of the Sea (MoS) and integrated eco-friendly transport systems to the amount of more than 7 billion euros. The principal objectives of the EU include better environmental compatibility of all modes of transport, improvements in logistics, and the use of intelligent transport systems.Cooperation with the competent CBSS Expert Group on Maritime Policy has also undergone a favourable development. It was interesting for me to see how this group dealt with the subject; the group regards itself as a network for initiating maritime clusters and as a mediator in the fields of science, research and public relations with the aim of promoting a common Baltic identity. The two Working Groups can learn and benefit from each other. We should maintain this constructive exchange in my opinion.For further details I would ask you to refer to the Working Group’s interim report, which will be available to you here in Mariehamn and on the Internet.CLOSING REMARKS:Ladies and Gentlemen,in conclusion I’d like to thank you again for the trust placed in the Working Group and myself by the Standing Committee and the entire BSPC.I would like to express my personal thanks to my parliamentary colleagues in the Working Group for the friendly and constructive cooperation we enjoyed. My special thanks goes to my colleague Lisbeth Grönfeldt Bergman who did such a wonderful job of standing in for me in Copenhagen when my health prevented me from taking part in this very interesting event.Also, on behalf of all members of the Working Group, I’d like to express my thanks to the experts and the members of the administrative departments of the parliaments who provided substantive support to the activities of the Working Group and took care of the organization.Thank you for your attention.Landtag Mecklenburg-VorpommernJochen SchulteSchloss SchwerinLennéstraße 119053 Schwerin (DEUTSCHLAND)Phone: +49 385 525.2336Fax: +49 385 525.2338eMail: jochen.schulte@landtag-mv.deWeb: www.landtag-mv.deReportby the Vice-Chairman of theBSPC Working Group on Integrated Maritime PolicyRoger Jansson, MP(Regional Parliament of Åland, Finland)on the European Maritime Day in Gdansk on 20th May 2011Joint event of CBSS, BSPC and BSSSC Working Groups on Maritime Policy:“Common vision – linking efforts – strengthening visibility”20 June 2011Schwerin, GermanyReport on the common eventDear Mr Almklov, dear Mr Seele,Dear Mr Musiolik, dear Ms Rothe,Dear colleagues,The common event of the three maritime working groups of CBSS, BSPC and BSSSC on the occasion of the European Maritime Day was a promising premiere, as it was not only the first ever common presentation of the Maritime Policy Groups of our three organisations to a larger European public, but it also marks - as it had been agreed upon by all participants - the beginning of a closer, more regular dialogue between the three organisations on marine related issues in the near future. The first very practical result of the joint event is our common discussion here in Schwerin today.I would like to give the working group a short report on the Gdansk event, before we start our further discussion.The event was opened by a welcome address of Mr Grzegorz Grzelak, Chairman of the Committee on Interregional and International Cooperation of the Sejmik of the Voivodeship Pomorskie, representing the host country of this year’s European Maritime Day and - at the same time - of the Southern Baltic Sea Parliamentary Forum. He stressed that maritime topics formed a main focus of work of the Forum and that the Forum was actively involved in the development of an Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union as well as of the EU Baltic Sea Strategy by participating in the consultation process on the European level.The following panel discussion, moderated by Udo Biss (North German Broadcasting) began with introductory speeches by the chairmen / vice-chairman of the three groups. Mr. Almklov described the role of the CBSS as political forum for regional inter-governmental cooperation,working through network and project-based activities. As priority areas for the CBSS he mentioned environment, economic development, energy, education and culture and civil security. The main focus of the Norwegian presidency had been maritime policy. In particular, the Expert Group on Maritime Policy had dealt with the potential of LNG as alternative energy solution for maritime traffic. For this purpose, the Norwegian presidency had organized a workshop on “The Baltic Sea as pilot region for LNG in Europe” in March 2011.Mr Musiolik pointed out that the BSSSC saw itself as an advocate for the regions of the Baltic Sea, supporting promising projects. The BSSSC Working Group on Maritime Policy had been founded in 2008 and pursued the vision of establishing a European maritime best practice region by 2015. By suggesting a flagship project “Clean Baltic Shipping” that had been fully integrated into the EU Baltic Sea Strategy Action Plan the working group had successfully participated in the process of developing the EU Baltic Sea Strategy. In order to strengthen political support for the implementation of the different projects of the initiative, he invited other organisations, and in particular the BSPC, to become member in the political committee of the Clean Baltic Shipping project. Personally, I would support this suggestion and I think we should discuss this together later on. Additionally, in Mr Musiolik’s view - and I think we could all agree to this -, it will be of major importance for the successful implementation of the Strategy to increase the visibility of the potentials of the region. In this regard, he suggested to introduce a “Baltic Sea Clean Marine Award” that could be awarded in connection with the European Maritime Day 2012 in Gothenburg.For the BSPC I spoke in favour of a more regular and structured dialogue between the different levels of political decision-making in the region. We should all strive to build a Baltic Maritime Community by developing and sharing maritime knowledge, exchanging information and experience on best-practice examples in order to promote common objectives for the best of our region. I informed that during our meetings so far maritime safety and climate protection have been identified as principal maritime challenges of the Baltic Sea Region and that the harmful effects of ship-generated emissions and the designation of the Baltic Sea as an Emission Control Area have been at the centre of discussion. Finally I mentioned that a more regular dialogue between our groups and organisations could strengthen the combined impact of our efforts to promote competitiveness and environmental sustainability in the Baltic Sea Region.Mr Haitze Siemers, DG Maritime Affairs and Fisheries of the European Commission, who also took part in the panel discussion, thanked the panel members for their valuable input. He stressed that the European Commission would particularly welcome approaches for the development of integrated maritime governance structures. In the economic field, the topics “innovation” and “clusters” would play an important role in the further development of the Baltic Sea Strategy. In particular, initiatives that combined aspects of environmental protection and economic growth would receive high priority by the European Commission. He fully agreed with Mr Musiolik’s statement regarding the need for an improved visibility of the maritime aspects of the Baltic Sea Strategy and considered suggestions for creating a Baltic Sea Award or for the developing environmental standards and labels for shipping and ports as good ideas.In my eyes, the common event in Gdansk was a success and we should build up on it in the near future, starting with today’s discussion!-----------------------[1] Conference Resolution adopted by the 15th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference in Reykjavik on 5th September 2006, regarding the European Maritime Policy and the Baltic Sea Action Plan.[2] See page 6 f. for the political recommendations already adopted by the 19th BSPC.[3] The numbers in brackets reflect the chronological order of the elaboration of the recommendations in the two years of the mandate of the Working Group; Recommendations No. 1 – 9 having already been included into the Conference Resolution adopted by the 19th BSPC in Mariehamn on 31st August 2010, they are listed further below; Recommendations No. 10 – 18 are to be submitted to the 20th BSPC in Helsinki (the chosen numeration is also referred to in Section 4 of the Report).[4] Conference Resolution adopted by the 15th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference in Reykjavik on 5th September 2006, regarding the European Maritime Policy and the Baltic Sea Action Plan.[5] Conference Resolution adopted by the 16th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference in Berlin on 28th August 2007, regarding an Integrated Maritime Policy[6] Conference Resolution adopted by the 17th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference in Visby on 2nd September 2008, regarding the Baltic Sea Action Plan and the Integrated Maritime Policy.[7] Conference Resolution adopted by the 18th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference in Nyborg on 1st September 2009, regarding Maritime Safety and Security in the Region.[8] http://www.stortinget.no/Global/pdf/Diverse/Conference%20statement%20Final%20Draft.pdf[9] An Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union, COM(2007) 575 of 10.10.2007and SEC(2007) 1278 of 10.10.2007.[10] Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Developing the international dimension of the Integrated Maritime Policy of the European Union, COM(2009) 536.[11] Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Programme to support the further development of an Integrated Maritime Policy, COM(2010) 494.[12] COM(2009) 248 und SEK(2009) 712/2.[13] Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the Implementation of the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region (EUSBSR), COM (2011) 381.[14] Possible impacts on the shipping sector, especially the short sea shipping sector have also been recognized by the European Commission in its recent proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 1999/32/EC as regards the sulphur content of marine fuels of 15th July 2011, COM(2011) 439 final; the proposal is accompanied by a communication making suggestions for compliance strategies and outlining existing too[pic][15] HTUVZmotuvwxyz†ìðåÚÏÚåÀμ¡–‹€uj[L:#hz* ̄hH]5?CJ^J[16]aJmH sH h÷ 5?CJ^J[17]aJmH sH hz* ̄h±(CJaJmH sH hz* ̄h–hz* ̄ls and possible future measures which can help industry in meeting its environmental challenges, COM(2011) 441 final.[18] Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social committee and the Committee of the Regions on the Implementation of the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region, COM(2011) 381, p. 3.[19] Conference Resolution adopted by the 18th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference in Nyborg on 1st September 2009, regarding Cooperation in the Region, Point 1.* Full title of the Communication: Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 10 October 2007 on an Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union (COM (2007) 575 final).* Full title of the Directive: Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing a Framework for Community Action in the field of Marine Environmental Policy (COM (2005) 0505 final).