This paper investigates the current status and trends over time in the environmental performance of European ports. The research is based on the provision of data from 79 European ports on issues related to their environmental management, environmental priorities and current environmental monitoring practices. This study updates previous environmental reviews, so that the trends over time are drawn. For instance, 90% of respondent ports stated that they have an environmental policy and 94% of ports have designated environmental personnel. The percentage of ports that have an Environmental Management System has increased by +33% in the last 9 years. Air quality, port waste and energy consumption emerged as the three major environmental priorities of the European port sector in 2013. The research also reveals the diversity amongst European ports in terms of size and physical surroundings. Some examples are presented on specific initiatives carried out by sector organisations about the Top-10 port priority issues. The future expectations of European ports on data collection and reporting are describedPeer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft
This paper aims at defining a set of indicators to be applied in port areas on the topics of Occupational Health, Safety, Security (OHSS) and Environment. The techniques used to identify and select the OHSS indicators involved two different approaches: (i) a bottom-up method, where an extended and in-depth analysis was performed in order to assess the current indicators applied by ports and, (ii) a top-down approach, mainly based on legislation and regulations as well as the feedback from stakeholders of the port and shipping industry. The bottom-up approach analysed a total number of 526 ports, allowing the identification of the most frequent indicators used by them. The top-down approach collected valuable opinions and suggestions from the port community members. A consensus between the results obtained in the two approaches was reached in order to provide ports with the most adequate and implementable indicators. The Environmental Performance Indicators (EPIs) have been selected based on the results of previous research projects plus further discussions with port stakeholders. The information provided in this paper can be considered as a preliminary attempt to promote port performance measurement in these four sensitive fieldsPeer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft
This paper analyses the 2016 environmental benchmark performance of the port sector, based on a wide representation of EcoPorts members. This is the fifth time that this study has been conducted as an initiative of the European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO). The data and results are derived from the Self-Diagnosis Method (SDM), a concise checklist against which port managers can self-assess the environmental management of their port in relation to the performance of the EcoPorts membership. The SDM tool was developed in the framework of the ECOPORTS project (2002-2005) and it is managed by ESPO. A total number of 91 ports from 20 different European Maritime States contributed to this evaluation. The main results are that air quality remains as the top environmental priority of the respondent ports, followed by energy consumption and noise. In terms of environmental management, the study confirms that key components are commonly implemented in the majority of European ports. 94% of contributing ports have a designated environmental manager, 92% own an environmental policy and 82% implement an environmental monitoring program. Waste is identified as the most monitored issue in ports (80%), followed by energy consumption (73%) and water quality (70%).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.