Back to SSG 08

Public support should be used with care
Short Sea Shipping has become a hot political issue in EU. It already accounts for more than 60 per cent of the entire transportation of goods in the union, and politicians want it to grow ever further. Maritime transport is considered energy effective and therefore more environmentally friendly than land-based transports. Infrastructural costs are also almost negligent compared to road and rail.
The EU is investing heavily in a transport shift from land to sea. The Marco Polo II program will contain earmarked funds for a new concept, the Motorways of the Sea.

The political support for ro-ro shipping is of course encouraging for ship operators, but one of the most significant arguments for increased maritime transport could soon be lost. While the environmental performance of trucks and lorries continues to improve, there is still a lot to do in shipping. Already today there are examples where a shipping alternative to a long-haul road transport will not contribute positively to air emissions. Maritime transport is a large source of air emissions but with an equally large potential for emission reductions. This requires incentives encouraging shippers to use environmentally improved maritime transport systems.

Today there is no incentive in the market to support investments in for instance catalytic converters.

The Motorways of the Seas concept and kilometre based taxation for heavy cargo road transports are political initiatives to transfer goods transportation from land to sea. Income from road taxation is to be used to support alternatives. The Motorways of the Sea concept is a direct support to reliable, regular and frequent short-sea services between selected ports with efficient and non-congested intermodal transport connections.

At a first glance, it all looks as a bright future for shipping. However, there are concerns that must be addressed.

If a kilometre-based taxation becomes a too heavy burden for the industry, especially in peripheral member countries, the transport pattern can change. Proper introduced road taxation could promote shipping services with longer duration, parallel to motorways and railways, but if the cost is too high, there will be negative consequences for the society as a whole.

The transport of a cargo does not add to the value of it. If the cost for the transport increases too much, the industry will look for alternatives. Shipping in general might still be a winner, but if the number of trailers and lorries declines, ro-ro shipping will suffer. Industry in countries with a transportation disadvantage, such as the Nordic countries, will find ways to get closer to their markets. This could mean movement of production facilities to central Europe.
The Motorways of the Sea initiative will support new shipping services on markets where alternatives already exist. There is an obvious risk that public funding could distort competition. If a subsidised service leads to the closure of an existing service, nothing has been gained.

Properly used, maritime transport is by far the best alternative for cargo transports. It also has a huge potential for an increase of its environmental performance. Emissions can be drastically reduced by installation of equipment such as catalytic converters. Low sulphur bunker fuel and fuel efficiency technology could further add to shipping’s role as the environmentally sound alternative.

Public funding will have a large influence on the future cargo transportation pattern within the European Union, but it must be used with care and consideration. Instead of support to specific shipping services, the Motorways of the Sea funding should be directed to general investments in ports and terminals, accessible for all short sea shipping operators.

Another political initiative would be to let the trade with emission permits for nitrogen and sulphur also comprise shipping.

//Rolf P Nilsson