A few words about ESPO ESPO and the environment EcoPorts ESPO Environmental Code of Practice

2. Summary • A few words about ESPO • ESPO and the environment • EcoPorts • ESPO Environmental Code of Practice • ESPO Environmental Review • ESPO Code of Practice on the Birds and Habitats Directives • Other issues which deserve clarification • Conclusion

3. Founded in 1993 Represents +/- 800 European seaport authorities (members) From EU countries and countries neighbouring the EU Secretariat in Brussels Recognised counterpart of EU institutions 1. A few words about ESPO

4. Main activities Raising awareness on the importance of seaports for EU trade, economy, welfare, employment, cohesion and culture Providing detailed information about seaports to EU policy-makers Providing detailed information about EU legislation and policy to European port authorities Facilitating exchange of knowledge and best practice among European seaports Encouraging seaports to be pro-active in protecting the environment by means of self regulation

5. European ports function in a strong growth environment This creates ecological and societal pressures Port authorities are under pressure to defend their ‘licence to operate’ Port authorities are easy targets for criticism from stakeholders even if they are not always directly responsible for environmental damage However: Port authorities are well-placed to accommodate the various conflicting interests that relate to port development Environmental management has become a widely accepted element of good port governance Nevertheless: (Implementation of) EU environmental legislation causes unnecessary administrative and financial burdens on port authorities The environmental added-value of these is not always clear 2. ESPO and the environment

6. Developing self-regulation The mission of ESPO: Influencing public policy in the EU to achieve a safe, efficient and environmentally sustainable European port sector operating as a key element of a transport industry where free and undistorted market conditions prevail as far as practical. 1994: First ESPO Environmental Code of Practice 1997- 1999: ECO-information project 1999: EcoPorts Foundation 2001: ESPO Environmental review 2003: Second ESPO Environmental Code of Practice 2005: Second ESPO Environmental Review 2007: ESPO Code of Practice on the Birds and Habitats Directives 2008: EcoPorts secretariat moved to ESPO secretariat

7. Established by ports for the benefit of ports Create level playing field in port-related sustainable management issues, eliminating the environment as a competitive factor Exchange cost and environmentally effective solutions Work together in collaborative projects addressing common environmental issues Developing specific management tools to improve environmental management in ports (Port Environmental Review System – PERS) Establish a link between policy and practice 3. Ecoports

8. Part A: Ports’ commitment to environmental improvements: 10 Environmental Commandments = The main environmental objectives which EU port sector should aim to achieve Part B: Practical tool for port managers: Handbook of recommended environmental practices Section 1: 3 perspectives: port area (land and sea) ship/port interface maritime area Section 2: ports and environmental management Recommending Ecoports tools for auditing, reviewing and environmental management (PERS), or other management systems(ISO 14001 & EMAS) 4. ESPO Environmental Code of Practice

9. 5. ESPO Environmental Review

10. Despite long experience with Birds and Habitats Directives, implementation still causes problems for port development Not tackled in previous ESPO Environmental Codes of Practice Based on existing good practices and projects (New!Delta, Paralia Nature, GEODE, SEDNET) ESPO extrapolated recommendations for managing port related activities and the different phases of port related projects/plans possibly having an adverse effect on designated areas ESPO also identified outstanding issues which cause unnessary administrative and financial burdens on port authorities without significant environmental added-value 6. ESPO Code of Practice on the Birds and Habitats Directives

11. ESPO B&H Code of Practice has multiple aim Providing useful guidance tool to port authorities, port planners and local regulators, contributing to better dialogue with NGOs and stakeholders. Minimizing risks of delays and extra costs despite legal uncertainties by offering recommendations Attracting the necessary attention of EU policy makers to the outstanding problems and questions: as also identified in the EU Ports Policy Communication of 18 October 2007

12. Chapter I – Environmental Performance of European Seaports Introduction, lessons learned from the past, transport vs. environmental policy priorities Chapter II – Scarcity of space Recommendations on increased partipation in all spatial planning exercises Chapter III – Conservation Measures and Management of Sites Recommendations on increased participation in management plans Chapter IV – Assessment of a plan or project Recommendations on how to go through the appropriate assessment requirement Structure

13. Chapter V – Going through Article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive Recommendations on how to pass the alternative solutions and IROPI assessment Chapter VI – Compensation Recommendations on the implementation of compensation issues Chapter VII – Remaining issues

14. Despite taking into account all recommendations in the Code of Practice, there are remaining uncertainties for port authorities related to the B&H Directives.These uncertainties continue to cause delays and extra costs despite no clear environmental benefits: Outstanding issues: Better integration of transport policy priorities and the need for port expansion into spatial planning exercises More study on novel spatial planning concepts improving the balance between economic and ecological objectives (buffer zones) More guidance on acceptable ways of carrying out port activities in designated areas and how to include these in a management plan Remaining Issues

15. When can it be concluded that an ‘appropriate assessment’ is appropriate and sufficient studies have proved this? Lack of clarity lead to vague and unworkable conservation objectives and unclear compensation requirements How avoiding individual interests that block the process of finding proactive solutions? How can it be determined, objectively, that enough alternative solutions have been assessed? How can transport policy priorities play a role when determining IROPI?

16. How to fulfil compensation requirements in a more flexible manner by cooperating with environmental agencies and NGOs? The European Commission should actively disseminate industry initiatives to the relevant national authorities

17. Issues not covered by the ESPO B&H Code of Practice: Misconception of clean sediments as waste How to deal with historic contamination of sediments in port areas? Impact of implementation of Water Framework Directive (cost- benefit, exemptions) Ports are logistic hubs creating modal shift which leads to a concentration of transport related emissions and industry 7. Other issues which deserve clarification

18. ESPO thanks the Commission (DG ENV and DG TREN) for their efforts to work with the port sector ESPO hopes that the Estuary Expert Group will lead to actual procedural improvements for port authorities avoiding delays and unnecessary extra costs ESPO will continue to promote pro-active self-regulation by the sector ESPO is ready to continue a constructive co-operation with the Commission, Member States and other stakeholders 8. Conclusion

19. Thank you for your attention Roel Hoenders – Policy Advisor European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO) vzw/asbl Treurenberg 6 – B-1000 Brussel / Bruxelles - Tel + 32 2 736 34 63 – Fax + 32 2 736 63 25 Email: roel.hoenders@espo.be – www.espo.be