There is a lack of standardized methods for socio-economic evaluations within the maritime transport sector. This paper presents a model for analysing and quantifying the intensity and severity of ship conflicts using AIS (Automatic Identification System) data and expert assessments. Also, a case study applying the proposed method to the Southern Gothenburg Archipelago is carried out. The goal is to contribute to cost-benefit analyses within the maritime transport sector by a better understanding of how different actions, such as the widening of fairways or new regulation, impact maritime safety. The importance of validating the model by comparing its results with independent sources of reported maritime accidents is emphasized, and the challenges of using existing accident statistics for this purpose is discussed. The basic model described in the paper can be built upon by differentiating parameters by region and vessel type, account for seasonality etc. Furthermore, a downstream consequence analysis model is needed to enable a monetary valuation of (the consequences of) identified conflicts. Finally, the same principles as laid out here for conflict analysis can also be adopted to the identification of groundings.

The provision of shore power to ships at berth is recognized as an effective measure to reduce the external costs of maritime transport. However, the deployment and uptake of shore power technology is subject to barriers, part of which have to do with insufficient economic incentives for providers and users. Regulatory proposals in the EU have targeted liner shipping segments to be covered by a shore power mandate. There is much less discussion and research focused on other segments of shipping, though these represent a significant share of at-berth emissions. This study uses maritime traffic data and a relatively simple modelling framework to analyse whether public investments in shore power deployment, coupled with added incentives to shipowners, could be socio-economically beneficial. The analysis is focused on maritime traffic in the Swedish port network, but the main findings can likely be generalized beyond this context. We find that investing in (or mandating) the provision of shore power in ports can be socio-economically beneficial also when aimed at segments typically classified as non-liner (or “tramp”). The results do not however indicate that network-wide deployment of shore power is justifiable, but rather that care must be taken to determine the cost-efficient size of the network as well as to design the network of shore power deployment in ports so as to reap benefits of network effects. We also find that the pricing of shore power access has a major impact on expected uptake and consequently on whether or not shore power investments yield benefits in proportion to costs. Crucially, we find that unregulated profit-maximizing pricing by ports leads to significant welfare losses by suppressing take-up among shipowners.

Providing shore power to ships at berth is recognized as an effective measure to reduce external costs of maritime transport. However, shore power technology is subject to barriers, part of which relate to insufficient incentives for providers and users. Regulatory proposals in the EU have targeted liner shipping segments to be covered by a shore power mandate. There is much less research focused on non-liner segments of shipping, though these represent a significant share of at-berth emissions. This study uses a relatively simple modelling framework to analyze whether public investments in shore power deployment could be socio-economically beneficial. We find that investing in the provision of shore power in ports can be socio-economically beneficial also when aimed at bulk carriers, tankers and general cargo ships. We also find that the pricing of access affects expected uptake and consequently whether or not shore power investments yield benefits in proportion to costs.

Syftet med denna PM är att, utifrån historiska trender, prognoser och aktuell litteratur beskriva möjlig utveckling framöver för godstransporter på sjön. Statistik om volym och typ av gods som transporteras redovisas, och den grå och akademiska litteraturen på området beskrivs. 

Under perioden 2010–2020 är såväl mängden anlöp, godsvolymer som genomsnittlig bruttodräktighet i svenska hamnar på totalen relativt konstanta. Däremot har stora förändringar skett vad gäller olika fartygstyper och enskilda hamnar. Antal anlöp och godsvolymer med gastankfartyg har ökat medan en minskning har skett för oljetank- och tankfartyg. 

Det har inte skett någon ökad koncentration, beräknat som de fem största hamnarnas andel av de totala anlöpen och godsvolymerna. För containerfartyg är bilden likartad, även här har andelen anlöp och godsvolymer i de fem största containerhamnarna varit relativt konstanta under perioden. Något annat som talar emot att sjöfarten koncentreras mot färre hamnar är att antalet hamnar med anlöp inte har minskat under perioden. 

Sjöfarten har tappat marknadsandelar till väg och har inte utvecklats i linje med den tillväxttakt och ökning av import- och exportvolymer för samtliga trafikslag som kan observeras under perioden 2010–2020. Det finns inte mycket som tyder på att denna trend kommer att brytas framöver. På grund av en övergång till en mer serviceorienterad ekonomi och en kraftigt ökad e-handel, en fortsatt elektrifiering och godkännandet av 74-tonslastbilar, finns snarare anledning att tro att en fortsatt försämrad konkurrenssituation för sjöfarten gentemot vägtransporter är att vänta framöver.

The Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute (VTI) has been commissioned by the Government of Sweden to “contribute to the creation of knowledge regarding a fast, smart and socioeconomically efficient electrification of the transport sector”. This report describes the current state of electrification of shipping and also policy instruments in Sweden, at the international level and in other countries that have been introduced to accelerate the electrification of shipping. VTI produces additional reports that correspond to the other subjects and reporting dates specified in the Government’s commission.

Shipping is electrified to a very small extent, as only about 340 of more than 98 000 ships in December 2021 had some sort of electric propulsion. Since hydrogen and battery propulsion are associated with higher costs, lower energy density (and large energy losses in the case of hydrogen propulsion) as well as requiring more space compared to conventional propulsion, electrification is best suited for ferries and other vessels operating on shorter, fixed routes with many stops.

The majority of the policy instruments at the international level and in Sweden identified in the report are intended to promote investments in both Onshore Power Supply (OPS) as well as battery and hydrogen propulsion. This applies, for example, to environmentally differentiated port and fairway fees, environmental legislation and support for investments and research. The policy instruments in other countries identified in the report in many cases promote the electrification of individual vessels, for example through targeted investment support for retrofitting of and construction of new ships, and through requirements for electric propulsion in the procurement of publicly owned vessels and public transport. Norway is investing significant amounts in a green transition of shipping, combined with future requirements for low- and zero-emission vessels in Norwegian waters.

With the implementation of the European Commission’s ‘Fit for 55’ legislative proposal, the internalization of emission costs may increase, incentivizing investments in the electrification of shipping. The proposal includes taxation of shipping fuel, an emissions trading system for shipping and carbon dioxide-based fuel requirements.

The purpose of this report is to contribute to a better understanding of inland waterway transport (IWT) in Sweden, and to shed light on how public procurement can be designed to make better use of the potential of IWT. The aim is also to calculate benefits and costs that arise when IWT instead of road transport is procured. 

IWT makes up a very small portion of the total transport activity in Sweden compared with several other European countries. According to literature, this is explained by Sweden’s absence of waivers with respect to fees, staffing, qualifications, or pilot services. However, studies suggest that the potential for IWT in Sweden is limited, and the benefits of waivers targeted at IWT can be questioned.

Detta är en delrapport i Projektet Hållbar inlandssjöfart – offentlig upphandling som katalysator. En utgångspunkt för projektet är regeringens nationella godstransportstrategi där det framgår att en överflyttning av godstransporter från väg till järnväg och sjöfart ska främjas. Syftet med delrapporten är att utgöra ett kunskapsunderlag för att bättre förstå förutsättningarna för att bedriva inlandssjöfart i Sverige. Vi beskriver hur arbetet med inlandssjöfarten organiseras i Sverige och vilken roll offentlig upphandling och regelverk spelar för inlandssjöfartens konkurrenssituation. Praktiska erfarenheter vid offentliga upphandlingar i Stockholmsområdet med koppling till inlandssjöfart redovisas också. Jämförelser görs med Nederländerna, Tyskland, Belgien och Frankrike, länder med en betydligt högre andel inlandssjöfart av det totala transportarbetet jämfört med Sverige. I den huvudrapport som kommer publiceras under våren 2021 studeras även samhällsekonomiska effekter av att använda inre vattenvägar istället för vägar vid godstransporter i olika relevanta transportscenarier. Huvudrapporten kommer också innehålla förslag på riktlinjer för hur offentlig upphandling kan ta hänsyn till inlandssjöfarten som ett transportalternativ.

Förekomsten av sjöolyckor med potentiellt stora konsekvenser utanför VTS-områden (Vessel Traffic Service) men på svenskt vatten kan tyda på att det är lönsamt för samhället att utöka övervakningen av sjötrafiken. En fråga är hur en AI-baserad trafikövervakning kan användas för att upptäcka och hantera trafikavvikelser och att ge stöd till beslutsfattande och om en sådan lösning skulle vara samhällsekonomiskt lönsamt. De viktigaste datakällor, riktlinjer för samhällsekonomiska analyser och effektsamband analyseras ur ett svenskt perspektiv. Följande utvecklingsbehov identifieras: • Analysmetoder för nya/förändrade regelverk och tekniska lösningar behöver utvecklas. Det finns behov av att hantera sjöolyckornas skador på fartyg, last, infrastruktur och natur, som är av större betydelse än för vägtransporter (där personskador har störst betydelse). • Robusta effektsamband för sjösäkerhet saknas. Den befintliga olycksstatistiken och data som tas fram i forskningsprojekt, t ex om vilka farliga trafiksituationer som kan undvikas med hjälp av AI baserad trafikövervakning, bör utnyttjas för att ta fram effektsamband. • Det bör undersökas på vilket sätt FSA-metoden (Formal Safety Assessment) som rekommenderas av IMO (International Maritime Organization) för att utvärdera regleringar som påverkar sjösäkerheten och marina miljöer kan/bör användas i Sverige.

The extent of competition between maritime freight transport and land-based modes of freight transport is studied using different methods. Previous elasticity calculations with the Swedish national freight transport model Samgods are updated. The elasticity calculations made with the latest model version indicate slightly lower elasticities for shipping compared to the elasticities that were calculated earlier.

The elasticity estimates from an econometric approach using data from the Swedish commodity flow survey from 2016 indicates somewhat higher own-price elasticities.

A systematic review of studies which estimate own-price, cross-price or time elasticities of demand for maritime transport shows that this report’s modelled elasticities are on low in comparison to the international literature. The evaluation of how much freight could potentially be shifted focuses primarily on shifting volumes from road to sea. Decomposing the growth in freight transport work over the past years using a shift-share analysis technique shows that maritime transport lost market shares, primarily to road transport.

Commissioned by the Swedish Transport Administration, VTI summarizes cost-benefit analyzes and available research when it comes to impacts of interventions on maritime safety and air emissions. We also suggest ways forward to measure these impacts in a more structured and reliable manner.

We show that analyzes of interventions aimed at improving maritime safety in Sweden and Norway mostly build on expertise within the field and on available data on accidents. This approach, though often well executed, is not considered robust enough, and therefore methods mentioned in available research are proposed that can increase the validity of the estimation of impacts on maritime safety. A considerable advantage that maritime transport has to road transport is the fact that most ships are equipped with an AIS-transponder (AIS stands for Automatic Identification System), making it possible to track ships and with mathematical models find near miss collisions and calculate probabilities for collisions and groundings. We believe this approach, combined with expertise within the field, would result in higher validity of the estimated impacts of interventions.

The impacts of policies and measures aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution are derived based on measurements of actual emissions of various substances. We see a need for improving the description of the impacts of interventions on the emissions by including details regarding the fuels (incl. electricity) used, the vessels and speeds etc. One concrete suggestion is to develop an AIS-based system that complements the national freight transport model Samgods. The idea is to use this system as a database and analysis tool. Furthermore, we would like to stress that it is necessary to apply the same principles in the development of “impact interventions” regarding air emissions for different modes of transport. All in all, we believe that it is possible to develop methods for estimating the impacts of interventions regarding maritime safety and emissions to air of the same quality as the corresponding methods for road transport.