Sustainable Development of Maritime Operations in Ports

Publishedonline27June2011inWileyOnlineLibrary(wileyonlinelibrary.com)DOI:10.1002/bse.718

SustainableDevelopmentofMaritimeOperationsinPorts

JohnDinwoodie,1*SarahTuck,1HarrietKnowles,1JamesBenhin1andMarkSansom21SchoolofManagement,UniversityofPlymouthBusinessSchool,UK

2FalmouthHarbourCommissioners,UK

ABSTRACT

Globalisationhasheraldedburgeoningshipmovementsandmaritimeoperationsinportsalongsideincreasedinternationalconcernsregardingpotentialenvironmentalimpacts.Inparticular,smallerportsrequireaccessibletoolstomanagethem.Aframeworktofacilitateenvironmentalmanagementappliesbusinessprocessprinciplestoidentifyrelevantinputs,processesandoutputs.AcasestudyofFalmouthHarbourCommis-sionerscomparesfunctionalunitsandflowsthatdefineinput–outputprocessesforanchoringandbunkeringoperations.Strategic‐levelprocessesaffectpresentandfutureoperationswhiletacticalserviceprocessesguaranteeservicelevelandqualitythroughtheirintegrity.Operationalprocessesoccurattheoutputlevel.Anaccessiblegenericframeworksupportsplanningofmoresustainablemaritimeoperations,facilitatesmitigationofpotentialrisksandencouragesauthoritiestoengagewithsustainabilityagendasandmanagedevelopmentproposalsproactively.Ongoinginterlocutionwithbusinessstrategistswillrefocusportmanagersoneducationalandcommercialmissionsandincreasestakeholderengagement.Simplificationandoptimisationphasesofbusinessprocessre‐engineeringremainuntappedbybusinessstrategists.Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Received8February2011;revised1April2011;accepted11April2011

Keywords:businessprocessframework;environmentalmanagement;smallerports;sustainabledevelopment;maritimeoperations;stakeholderengagement

Introduction

corporations(e.g.Shah,2011;ChertowandMiyata,2011;Sarkisetal.,2010;Ketola,2007;MillerandQuinn,1998)butnotportauthorities,whichoverseemaritimeoperationsincludingextensiveoilloadinganddischarging.Thispaperproposesabusinessprocessframeworktoremedythisomission.Maritime

operationsspanallroutineprocedureswhichashipmustundergowhilstinporttooperateeffectively,includinganchoring,marinefuelbunkeringandballastwaterexchange.Specialistregulations,conventionsandguidelinesunderpineachoperationwhichmayinteraliahaveanimpactonenvironmentalaspectsincludingemissionstoair,

*Correspondenceto:JohnDinwoodie,Head,InternationalShippingandLogisticsGroup,SchoolofManagement,CookworthyBuilding,UniversityofPlymouthBusinessSchool,DrakeCircus,PlymouthPL48AA,UK.E‐mail:jdinwoodie@plymouth.ac.ukCopyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

BUSINESSSTRATEGISTSHAVESTUDIEDENVIRONMENTALOBLIGATIONSINSUPPLYCHAINSANDMULTINATIONALOIL

112J.Dinwoodieetal.

soilandsediments,dischargestowater,noise,wasteproduction,changesinterrestrialhabitatsandmarineecosystems,odour,resourceconsumptionandportdevelopmentonlandorsea(Darbraetal.,2005).Bunkeringoperationsmayengenderoilspillriskswithpotentiallycatastrophicimpactsonbeaches,foodchains,sedimentandfishingcommunities(e.g.Edoho,2008;Ray,2008;IdemudiaandIte,2006);anchoringmaydamageirreplaceableenvironments(BackhurstandCole,2000)andinvasivespeciesintroducedduringballastwaterexchangesmayupsetdelicateecosystems(InternationalMaritimeOrganisation,IMO,2011).Currently,portauthoritiesreceiveminimalpracticalsupportindischargingtheirresponsibilities.

Typicalofmanyindustries,portsadoptedacombinationofawarenesstrainingandtougherregulationtobridgeagapbetweenenvironmentalaspirationsandpractice(Tilley,1999).EuropeanUnion(EU)DirectiveEC85/337(lateralteredbyEC97/11)advisedportstoconductanenvironmentalauditwhichcoversinteraliahandlingandstorageareasofprescribedmaterials,wasteemissions,spoildisposalareas,fishing,wetlandsandzonesofspecificscientificorculturalinterest,compliancewithconventionsandcodesconcerningmarinepollutionanddangerousgoods,andprioritizationofenvironmentalprotectionissues.Auditsarenon‐mandatory,butportmanagersareliableforenvironmentaldamageswithconsequentpunitivedamages.EachUKportauthorityisresponsibleformanagingtheriskofanypotentiallyadverseenvironmentalimpactscausedbymaritimeoperationswithinitsaegis.Theportsindustrybearstestamentthateffectiveimplementationrequiresmanagerialinvolvementinthedesignprocess(Sroufe,2003)asportauthoritieshavewillinglyinfluencedenvironmentallegislationthroughconsultation,agreementswhichunderpinguidelinesandbestpractice,andassistedindevelopingbenchmarks,managementschemes,training,monitoring,researchandcollaborativeinvolvement(Paipai,1999).

ABritishPortsAssociation(BPA)environmentalcodeofpracticeaimstoraiseenvironmentalawarenessamongstportemployeesandusers.However,growingadministrativepressuresleavemanyportauthoritiesreportinginsufficientaccesstoresourcestohelpthemmeetcurrentregulatoryrequirements(RoyalHaskoning,2009)fuellingrisksofnon‐complianceorblindindifference(HutchinsonandChaston,1994;Wilsonetal.,2010).TheUKgovernmenthaspromotedhighenvironmentalstandardsandsupportedsustainableportdevelopment(DepartmentforTransport,DfT,2000)butoffersportsonlystatisticalinformation,generalguidelines,controlonthedevelopmentplanningprocessandrulesforprojectappraisalandcommercialindependence(Gilman,2003).Portauthoritiesundertakestatutorydutiestomeetsocialandenvironmentalobligationswhilstembeddingcorporatesocialresponsibility(CSR)conceptsinportmanagementsystemsandundertakingroutineoperationsanddevelopmentprojectscommercially(Pettit,2008).WhilstdefinitionsofCSRareprobablysociallyconstructedandidiographic(Dahlsrud,2008),salutaryfailureswithinoilsupplychainstestifytotheimportanceofcorporatestrategiesbeingseentocanvas,understandandintegratecommunityperceptionsintoCSRpolicies(IdemudiaandIte,2006).Expertassessmentofthe‘significance’ofpotentialimpacts(Paipai,1999)isnotnecessarilyevaluatedmonetarilyorquantitativelybutdevelopmentsthatgenerateenvironmentalconcernaresubjecttoenvironmentalimpactassessment(EIA)methodologies(Darbraetal.,2005)toassessthepotentialimpactonmarineandterrestrialhabitats(UNESCAP,2009).Whereassessmentsidentifyadverseimpacts,mitigationrequiresmanagementplanstoconserveandprotectpublicaccesstofeaturesofnaturalbeautyorhistoricinterest.PublicbodiesandportauthoritiespreparetheseforSitesofSpecialScientificInterest(SSSIs;DfT,2000).Aqualitativescopingstudyisrequiredifdevelopmentswillimpactinteraliaonbiodiversityorwater(DfT,2002).

EarlyworktoassistportstomanageenvironmentalrisksandimprovetheirperformanceengagedthreeFalEstuaryports,whichestablishedajointenvironmentalmanagementsystem(EMS;Paipai,1999,p.45;FalmouthPort,2003).Laterinitiatives(EcoPorts,2006)encouragedcontinuousimprovementthroughimplementingtoolsandmethodologiestoencouragebetterperformance.TheEcoPortsFoundationaimstohelpdeveloppracticalsolutionsforportsseekingtoimprovetheirenvironmentalperformanceandtoshareknowledgeandexpertise(ESPO,2003),althoughfewsmallerportsaremembers.Toolsassistdevelopmentofanenvironmentalmanagementandinformationsystemtoplanandassessenvironmentalissues,andtomonitorcomplianceandassessimpacts(Table1).Toassessthesignificanceofmaritimeoperations,theSOSEAtool(Darbraetal.,2005)adoptedamodifiedLeopoldmatrix(Leopoldetal.,1971).Rowslistenvironmentalaspects(seethefirstparagraphoftheIntroduction)andcolumnsshowactivities.Activitiesincludemarineandcoastalengineering,dredging,administrationandplanning,shippingandnavigationandemergencysituationsbyportauthorities;cargohandling,storage,stakeholderactivities,shipbuildingandrepair,fisheriesandport‐basedindustrybyporttenants;andbunkering,wastemanagement,maintenance,landtrafficandrecreationandtourismbyothertenants.Inassessingthestrategicperspectiveofeach

Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

InitiativeIdentifyenvironmentalrisksandestablishprioritiesforactionandcomplianceAimsto:ImplementationReferencesDarbraetal.(2004)Self‐diagnosismethod(SDM)Portenvironmentalreviewsystem(PERS)Portmanagercompletesachecklist.EcoPortsguidanceonbenchmarkingperformance;analysisofstrengths,weaknesses,opportunitiesandthreats;strategicadviceEcoportsofferanindependentreviewconsistingofguidelinesandexampledocumentsEcoports(2010;2006)Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Strategicoverviewofenvironmentalaspects(SOSEA)Assistportstoimplementanenvironmentalmanagementsystem(EMS)throughdevelopingcomponentswithinittoraiseitseffectivenessIdentify‘significant’environmentalaspectsarisingfromoperations;guideportsingatheringinformationtomanageliabilitiesandresponsibilities;enhancelong‐termstrategicdevelopmentandincreaseenvironmentalawarenessDarbraetal.(2005)FrameworktoManageEnvironmentalImpactsofMaritimeOperations

ISO14001PromotecontinualimprovementsbyencouragingportstoadoptandimplementEMS;assistsystematicdevelopmentofaformalisedmanagementprocess,andevaluateeffectivenessofactivities,operations,productsandservicesPromoteongoingimprovementsIdentifyenvironmentalissuesandassociatedrisks;achievescaleeconomiesPortindicatestoEcoportswhethereachof12environmental‘aspects’appliestoactivitieswhichincludebunkering,butnotanchoring.Anaspectis‘significant’ifthenumberofticksagainstitorabreachoflegislationare‘significant’.ForeachsignificantaspectfurtherquestionsonmanagementandactionstakenContinuousmonitoringimprovesunderstandingandassistsriskmanagement,supportedbyappropriatedatacollectiontechniquesandrecordkeepingDarbraetal.(2009),CurkovicandSroufe(2011)IEMA(2010)Darbraetal.(2005,p.867)Eco‐managementschemeandauditscheme(EMAS)AssociatedBritishPortsPreparationofanenvironmentalreviewandstatement.SeeregulationEC1221/2009Multi‐siteapplicationsofstandardisedproceduresTable1.Sometoolstoassistenvironmentalmanagementinports113

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

114J.Dinwoodieetal.

aspect,managementmustassesswhetherlegalregulations(alwayssignificant),local‐scaleconcernsofstakeholdersorgroupswhichrequiremitigation,globalconcernsrelatingtogreenhouseeffects,orothereffects,apply.

Thispaperaimstopresentaframeworktoidentifythebusinessprocessesrequiredtomanagethepotentialenvironmentalimpactofmaritimeoperations,particularlyinsmallerports.Itcomparesapplicationsofaninput–outputsystemsframeworktotwomaritimeoperationsatstrategic,tacticalandoperationallevelsbyFalmouthHarbourCommissioners(FHC),anddiscussesthecontributionoftheframeworkandscopeforfurtherapplications.

FramingEnvironmentalManagementProcessesinSmallerPorts

Typically,organisationalactionssuchasinvestinginequipmenttomitigatepollutionreflectdecisionsbymanagers,underpinnedbyanunderlyingsustainabilitystrategy.However,theprocessofdevelopingenvironmentalawarenessinports(Peris‐Moraetal.,2005)andsystems‐basedinput–outputmodellingofportenvironmentalmanagementprocessesremainlargelyunexplored.InEurope’slargestportssector(OxfordEconomics,2009)fewspecialistenvironmentalmanagementtoolsareavailabletomanagersunlesstheyjoinEcoPortsoremploypersonnelwithenvironmentalexpertise,andarecentsurveyof100portsrevealed32reportingISO14001certification,withlowerratesforothersystems(RoyalHaskoning,2009).Certificationisunlikelyinthenumerousportsnotsampled,probablysmallerauthorities(DfT,2006a).Astagedprocesswherebyenvironmentalassessmentandmanagementisundertakenandownedbyindividualportauthoritiesfosterslocalawarenessandcommitmentmosteffectively(Paipai,1999),butrelativelyfew‘own’theissue,with32%planningtooutsourceenvironmentalmanagementfunctionsandafurther22%torecruitaspecialist(RoyalHaskoning,2009).Toassistindevelopingmanagementawarenessandreportingportenvironmentalmanagementprocesses,thispaperpresentsaframeworktoidentifyrelevantbusinessprocesses.

Smallandmedium‐sizedenterprises(SMEs)typicallyviewenvironmentalmeasuresascostly(RevellandBlackburn,2007),requiringtimetodevelop.However,potentialcostsavings,positivepublicityornewcustomersattractsomebusinessowners(Revelletal.,2010).Toimplementcontinuousenvironmentalmonitoringimpliesdedicatedspecialistpersonnel,typicallyunaffordableinsmallerports.Further,wheremanagersfeelasenseofenvironmentalresponsibility,thismaybeunderplayedandtheirenvironmentalawarenessandcommitmentdiminishedifanEMSismanagedexternally.Effectiveframeworkstoguideenvironmentalmanagementmustbeflexibleandcapableofaccountingforheterogeneity(Vernonetal.,2003).Policymakers’assumptionsofatop‐downdiffusionofenvironmentalinitiativesmaybeinappropriateforSMEs(Baylisetal.,1998).

Onerecentframeworktoassistcomprehensionofenvironmentalmanagementpractices(Lucas,2010)grewfrominterdisciplinarycross‐fertilisationofecologicaleconomicsandstrategicmanagement.Theframeworkpresentedheresimilarlyinnovativelyintegratesbusinessprocessre‐engineeringandenvironmentalmanagementwithinfluencesfrombusinessstrategy.Traditionalphysicallybasedenvironmentalassessmentsinportsrequirestrategicphysicalanddatainputs,butbeinguninformedbymodelsofCSRstrategy,theyhavetypicallyshunnedinstrumentalandpoliticalinfluences.Discardedbrandingandreputation‐buildingmotivatorsofcorporateresponsibility(Ditlev‐SimonsenandMidttun,2011)haveimplicationsfornetworkingprocessesandexternalcommunicationalongsidepolitical,integrativeandmanagerialfactorsmanifestedinstakeholdermanagement.Transitionsinsustainability,typicallyframedwithinasupra‐corporatesocialsystem(Loorbachetal.,2010),implyimportantdevelopmentalgovernanceinputsandconsultationprocesses.Finallyacommercialstrategicinput,perhapsviaresourcemanagement,offersaneconomicdimensiontosupportsocio‐culturalandenvironmentalresponsibilitiesincorporatesustainability(Ketola,2010).

Derivedfrominput–outputprocessmodelling,thesystemsframeworkincludesthreestages,orlevels,comprisinginputs,serviceprocessesandoutputs.Thisestablishedtechnique(Parnaby,1979)aimstoidentifyfunctionalunitsandflowsthatshapeprocessesinacompanybydefiningtheproblem,systemboundariesandfunctionandvariableflows.Managementofthepotentialenvironmentalimpactofmaritimeoperationsinaportisconceivedasasysteminvolvingvariousbusinessprocesses.Lagoudisetal.,(2004,58)definedasystemasa‘groupofinteracting,interrelated,orinterdependentelements,formingacomplexwhole’,andasystemsapproachseeksto

Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

FrameworktoManageEnvironmentalImpactsofMaritimeOperations115

assistobservation,understandingandanalysisoftheissuesinvolved.Thispaperfocusesonprocessmappingtounderstandanddocumentenvironmentalmanagement.

Toachievethestudygoal,threelevelsofdecisionmakingaredefined.Input–outputprocessmodellingidentifiesstrategicinputsrequiredtosetupoperations,analysesserviceprocessesthattakeplaceineverydayoperationsandthendefinestheoperationaloutputoftheseprocesses.Atthestrategiclevel,processesaffectpresentandfutureoperationsandtheirpotentialimpacts;tacticalserviceprocessesensurethatservicelevelandqualityareguaranteedthroughtheintegrityofprocesses;andatoutputlevel,operationalprocessesaredefined.Thevariouslevelsinteractandtheapproachisholistic,aspotentialenvironmentalimpactsextendbeyondthecontrolofoneportauthority.Later,detailedanalysismayspecifywhereeachactionoccurs,whoisinvolved,whenittakesplace,whyitoccursandhowlongittakes.Anexploratoryapplication(Dinwoodieetal.,2009)toanchoringoperationsbyFHC(Table2)identifiedstrategicdecisions(S1–S7)toincorporatetheoveralldeterminationofthesystemobjectives,tacticaldecisions(T1–T7)toachievetheoverallobjectivesandoperationaldecisions(O1–O6)tokeepthesystemwithinconstraintlimitsandinaccordwithobjectives.Somecomponentsmayberevisitedatdifferentlevelsaswhenstakeholdersareengagedatinput(S4),process(T1,T3,T4)andoutputlevels(O6).

ResearchDesign

Carefullyplannedlocalresponsestoglobalpressuressometimesstimulatecompetitiveadvantagesthroughcollectiveaction(Lund‐ThomsenandNadvi,2010).Toughersupra‐nationalregulationofmarinebunkerfuelsheraldedsimilarchallengesforFalmouth,UK,asmallerportinanenvironmentallysensitivearea.Enduringandintensifiedinternationalconcernregardingenvironmentalpollutioncausedbytraditionalburningoflow‐gradeheavyfueloilswithhighsulphurcontentsinships’bunkerspromptedongoingsupra‐nationalresolveandconventionstomanageandreduceemissions.TheIMOadoptedregulationsgoverningthePreventionofAirPollutionfromShips,AnnexVIofMARPOL73/78,in1997.Reducedlimitsforthemass/massofsulphurcontentformarinefueloilconsumedwithindesignatedsulphuremissioncontrolareas(SECA)adjoiningdenselypopulatedregions,includedNorthSea,BalticSeaandNorthAmericanSECAs(IMO,2011;WangandCorbett,2007).WithinUKwaters,0.1%becamethemaximumpermittedsulphurcontentofmarinegasoilsconsumed(Directive1999/32/EC;UKP&IClub,2008a;AtoBviaC,2010).Convenientlylocatedadjacenttothe5°WSECAboundary,andofferingextensivemarinebunkeringfacilities,arrivalsoflargeshipsundertakingbunkeringoperationsatFalmouthtrebled(Table3).FHCapplicationsofferanextremecasecontexttotestthebusinessprocessframeworkinaveryenvironmentallysensitiveareawhichhostsbunkeringoperationsattheUK’slargestoffshoreterminalformarineoilandfuel,operatedbyaprivatecommercialoperator.FHCfurtherregulatesanchoringoperationsasasmallerportauthority.

ThisgrowthpromptedFHCtoreviewhowitmanagedthepotentialenvironmentalimpactofmaritimeoperations,stimulatingaknowledgetransferpartnership(KTP)withalocaluniversityandfundingofamaritimeprojectsofficerwhoworkedwithacademicsandmanagerstounderstandanddocumentthebusinessprocesses

StrategiclevelInputS1S2S3S4S5S6S7

MissionstatementPhysicalconditionsGovernanceissuesStakeholdersLocaldata

ManagementsystemResourceassessment

T1T2T3T4T5T6T7

TacticallevelServiceprocessesLocalfamiliarisationOperationalconventionsNetworkingConsultation

Reviewing,monitoringHireexpertiseReporting

O1O2O3O4O5O6

Operationallevel

Output

Internalmonitoring,reporting,archivingExternalcommunication,disseminationRecommendationsMitigationsSustainabilityAwareness

Table2.Systemsmodeloverview

Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

116

Shiptype

Year

Under1kt

TankersDrycargoContainer

200520082005200820052008

66778210416

Shipdeadweighttonnage5–19.999kt

5316283207044

20–99.999kt

11236358368321

J.Dinwoodieetal.

Over100kt

2770212000

Table3.NumberofshiparrivalsatFalmouth(adaptedfromDfT,2009;2006b,Table3.6)

requiredtomeetenvironmentalobligations.Aframeworkwasdeveloped,testedandappliedtoanchoringandbunkering(Table4),twoverydifferentmaritimeoperations.

Case‐basedresearchstrategieshavebeendeployedtoassesswhetherenvironmentalcertificationmaycreatecompetitiveadvantages(CurkovicandSroufe2011).ThiscasestudyreportsFHCoversightofcontrastingmaritimeoperationswhichvaryinscaleandtype.IftheframeworkcanassistFHCitshouldbetransferabletolessenvironmentallysensitivesettings.Similarly,althoughmanylargerportsalreadyemployaspecialistenvironmentalofficer,theframeworkmightbenefitthemifitassistsFHCtooverseeitslarger‐scalebunkeringoperations.Successfulapplicationtotwooperationsmightimplyagenericframework.WithFHCasthecasecontextandtheframeworkasthephenomenonbeingexamined,acasestudyresearchstrategycentredonthecasecontextallowsthephenomenonbeingexaminedtoremainembeddedwithinitsuniquecontext(DinwoodieandXu,2008).EcoPortsandotherinitiativestypicallyfocusprimarilyonphysicalenvironmentalassessment.Thesystemsframework’snovelfocusonbusinessprocessescomplementsthem,butisnotdirectlycomparable,andfeaturespotentialenvironmentalimpactsratherthanindividualresponsibilitiesortargetsembeddedinISO14001.

ACaseStudy:FalmouthHarbourCommissioners

Asacasecontextofferinginteraliasafeanchoringandbunkeringfacilitiesforvesselofallsizes,FalmouthHarbourislocatedwithintheFalEstuaryinsouthwestEngland,alargeinternationalnaturaldeepwaterharbour.Adjacentfacilitiesincludedrydockfacilities,cruiselineranchorageinFalmouthBayandmaritimeservicesincludingshipbrokers,agentsandchandlers(FalmouthPort,2003).Urbandevelopmentplansprioritizewaterfrontandharbourregenerationinahistoricbuiltenvironmentandregionaldevelopmentplansprioritizeenvironmental

Date

August20072007–08Early2008March2008October2008Late2008

December2008February2009April2009Late2009on

Event

NorthSeaSECAintroduced

ShiparrivalsatFalmouthdoubleFHCreviewsEMS

KTPproposaldeveloped

MaritimeProjectsOfficerinpost

UnderstandanddocumentbusinessprocessesSystemsframeworkdeveloped

ExploratoryapplicationofanchoringoperationsApplicationtobunkeringoperations

Ongoingrefinementandapplicationofframework

Notes

3months6months3months3months6months5months

Table4.Researchcontextandimplementation

SECA,sulphuremissioncontrolarea;FHC,FalmouthHarbourCommissioners;EMS,environmentalmanagementsystem;KTP,knowledgetransferpartnership.

Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

FrameworktoManageEnvironmentalImpactsofMaritimeOperations117

sustainability(CornwallCountyCouncil,2005)inauniquesettingwitharichwaterecosystemandvaluablehabitat.ThebayandestuaryincorporateSpecialAreasofConservation(SAC)includingmaerlbedsofcalcifiedseaweedwhichmaypotentiallybeimpactedbyanchoringoperationsandSSSIs,AreasofOutstandingNaturalBeauty(AONB),andHeritageCoasts.

Aprotectedharbouraccommodatesbunkeringoperations(FalmouthPort,2003)servingbusyshippinglanesandborderingthe5°WSECA,re‐designatedECAfromJuly2010,toembraceNO2andotheremissions(IMO,2011).ThemarineoilterminalbunkeringoperatorFalmouthOilServicesLimited(FOS)offersallgradesoffuelsandlubricantstovesselsanddeliveriesofgasoilandfreshwaterusingbarges,roadtanksandpipes.FOSownsandoperatesa50ktshore‐sidebunkerstationwhichstoresfuelfordeliverytovesselsanchoredalongsideorshelteringlocally(FalmouthPort,2003).FOSmanagesfueldeliveries,supportedbyalargeindependentbunkersupplierandbargeoperator,whichmanagesbunkersales.Theoilterminalcontainsthreetankfarms,cleanoilandfueloilloadingracks,slopreceptionandaprocessingfacility.Twobunkerbargesservicesalesoffueloil(FOS,2009).FourharbourauthoritiesoperatewithintheboundariesoftheFalEstuaryandFHCmanageatrustport,anindependentstatutorybodycontrolledbyanindependentboardandwithoutshareholdersorowners.Bystatute,FHCisrequiredtoproactivelydevelopasustainableapproachtoportoperationsanddevelopmentopportunitiesandensurethatmarineoperationsdonotharmthevaluablearea(FalmouthPort,2009).FHChaveresponsibilityforareaswherebunkeringoperationsfrequentlytakeplace(FalmouthPort,2003;WorldPortSource,2010,showsamap).Allprofitsarisingfromcommercialactivitiesarereinvestedinportdevelopment(FalmouthPort,2007)andportmanagementisopentopublicexaminationandresponsibletointerestedstakeholders(DfT,2000).ApplicablesafestandardsareimplementedthroughcompliancewiththePortMarineSafetyCode(PMSC,FalmouthPort,2009).FHCworkswithenvironmentalagenciesinaccordancewithUKenvironmentallegislationandinternationalconventionstomaintainandimprovetheportenvironment.Toconserveandenhancelocalenvironmentalquality,staffeducationandtrainingisundertakenandhumanactivitieswhichcouldcausenegativeimpactsareguidedbyanenvironmentalcodeofpractice.Harbourauthoritiesprovidewastereceptionfacilities.TheEMSstowslegislationandregulationsnotifiedbytradeassociationsincludingBPA,EcoPorts,andgovernmentbodies.Recordsofallinternalorexternalcommunicationsarekept,includingcomplaintsandenvironmentalcorrespondencepertainingtoportoperationsandcommercialactivities.Iftheimpactsofoperationsaresignificant,consultantsareappointedtoauditandreviewactivitiesorconductanEIA.AlltargetsandobjectivescomplywiththePMSCandfocusonmitigationandapplicablesafestandards(FalmouthPort,2009).

Analysis

StrategicInputs

Foreachprimestrategicinput(S1,S2,…S7)Table5summarisessub‐componentsofthisinput(e.g.i,ii,iiiforS2)andnotesanydifferencesbetweenanchoringandbunkeringoperations.TheprimestrategicinputofFHC’smissionstatement(S1)appliestoallmaritimeoperations.Itobliges‘adutytoworkcloselywithenvironmentalagencies….[FHCis]…committedtotheprotectionandconservationoftheenvironment…strictadherencetoUKenvironmentallegislationandinternationallyagreedconventions.’Commitmentstoeducateandtrainarenotedbelow(FalmouthPort,2009).FHChandlemanyphysicalconditions(S2)whichincludeanAONBwhere‘developmentcontroldecisionsshouldfavourconservationofthenaturalbeautyofthelandscape’(CornwallAONB,2010;S2i),avoidanceofdeteriorationtohabitatsanddisturbancetospecies(S2ii)whichmaypotentiallyaffectanchoringinmaerlbeds,andprotectionofthecoastlinefromundesirabledevelopment(S2iii).

Strategiestomanagegovernanceinputsrequireportauthoritiestomakecontact,consultandcomplywithlocalauthorities(S3i).Atanationallevel,governmentandstatutoryinputs(S3ii)includetheEnvironmentAgency(UKEA)whichseekstoprotectandimprovetheenvironment,andviawaterframeworkdirectivestopreventdeteriorationin,andtorestore,waterquality.InputsarelikelyfromDfT;DepartmentforEnvironment,FoodandRuralAffairs(DEFRA);theMaritimeManagementOrganisationwhichadministersplanning,licensingactivities,marinenatureconservation,publicaccesstocoastalareasandfisheriesmanagement;andPlanningActswhichguidedecisionsonmajorinfrastructuredevelopment,includingharbours.Supranationalinputsregulatebunkering

Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

118

InputS1S2(i)(ii)(iii)S3(i)(ii)(iii)S4(i)(ii)(iii)S5(i)(ii)S6(i)(ii)(iii)S7

MissionstatementPhysicalconditions

Portauthoritylists:

ItsenvironmentalobligationsPhysicaldesignations,e.g.AONBSAC

HeritageCoast

AuthoritiesitisanswerabletoLocallyNationally

Supranationally

GroupswithaninterestinitsoperationsMarineagenciesEIGsSuppliers

InformationavailablelocallytoBaselineportoperations

Baselineresourcemonitoring

HowactivitieswillbemonitoredthroughAnEMS

Benchmarking

Professionalbodies

Howitwillacquireandmanagefundingofassessments

J.Dinwoodieetal.

Doesanchoring(A)differfrombunkering(B)?

No,butBengagesFOSNo

MaerlmayaffectANo

No

B:Oilspillplans

B:MARPOL,operatingrulesNoNoNo

A:locations;B:tideflowsA:AIS;B:buoysNoNo

MoreconventionsforBNo

Governanceissues

Stakeholders

Localdata

Managementsystem

Resourceassessment

Table5.Strategiclevelinputs

FOS,FalmouthOilServicesLimited;AONB,areaofoutstandingnaturalbeauty;SAC,specialareasofconservation;EIG,environmentalinterestgroup;AIS,automaticidentificationsystem;EMS,environmentalmanagementsystem.

operations(S3iii)including:codesofpracticetofacilitatesustainability(ESPO,2003);conventionsunderpinningtransport,handlingandstorageofdangeroussubstancesinports(IMO,2011);dumpingatseaandprotectionofthemaritimeenvironmentfromoilpollution(Paipai,1999).Currently,anchoringoperationsarelessregulated.

Inmanaginganchoringandbunkeringoperations,inputstoengagestakeholdersareessential.Agencies(S4i)includeCornwallSeaFisherieswhichmaintainaflexiblepatrolserviceandsustainablefishery.Environmentalinterestgroups(EIG,S4ii)includestatutorybodieswhichpromotesustainabledevelopmentandvolunteersincludingFriendsoftheEarthwhichaimstoprotecttherightsofallpeopletoliveinasafeandhealthyenvironment.Screeningofsuppliersandsub‐contractorsinbuildingandmaintenanceworksisaninput(S4iii).StrategicinputstoaportEMSrequireinputsofobjectivesandtargets,andmappingandmonitoringoflocalmanagementsystems.Reviewsarerequiredofbaselineoperations(S5i),resourcemonitoringofdatabanks,informationretrieval,surveys,andrecordingsystems.Datarequiredtolocateanchoringpositionsdifferfrominputsoftidalflowsrequiredbymodellingsoftwaretopredictoilspillmovementswhichmaypotentiallyarisefrombunkeringoperations(s5ii).Similarly,althoughthetechnologyunderpinningsystemstocollateautomaticidentificationsystem(AIS)datatomonitortheincidenceofanchoringdiffersfromlocaltidalflowsrecordedatbuoys,similaractionsarerequiredtosetupsystems.

AnEMS(S6i)torecordlegislationandtechnicaldatatodrivecontinuousimprovementsinenvironmentalqualityandpreventpollutionisoneelementofthestrategicmanagementsystem(CurkovicandSroufe,2011;ESPO,2003).Othersincludecommunicationswithlocalauthorities(S6ii)whichdetailrequirementsforEIAs,compliancewithenvironmentalissuesembeddedinlocalpolicies,plansandprogrammes(Paipai,1999)andmembership(S6iii)ofEcoPortsandBPAwhichcollaborateandcontributetoestablishbestpractice.Resourceassessment(S7)isintegraltoFHC’smissionofcommercialviabilityandrequiresthecostingandfundingofallactivities.Financialresourcesaccruefromanchoring,pilotingandotherharbourcharges,orgovernmentfundingwhichincludesKTPswithuniversities.Allmaritimeoperationsaresubjecttothisprocess.

Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

FrameworktoManageEnvironmentalImpactsofMaritimeOperations

TacticalLevel

119

FHCtacticstofacilitatefamiliarisationincludearrangingvisits(T1i,Table6).Toursofanchoringoperationsincludetheharbourarea,docks,pilotagefacilities,mooringsandFHCoffices.Toursofbunkeringoperationsvisittankfarm,hoses,jettiesandbarges.TacticT1iisimilarlyengagesdifferenttypesofshippingcompaniesforeachoperation.Internalstakeholders(T1iii)includeharbourauthoritiespluspilotsforanchoringoperations,andthebunkeroperatorforbunkeringoperations.ActionT1ivrequiressystemstorecordalloperationsandrelevantdatatoenableFHCtoidentifyanychangesandthefrequencyofanyenvironmentalimpacts.AnchoringoperationsentailarrangingaccesstoAISdatatorevealshipposition,courseandspeed;bunkeringoperationsentailacquiringandsettingupbuoystohostinstrumentationtogatherdatatoupdatetidalmodellingandinformPISCESoilspillpredictionsoftware.

BunkeringoperationsaremoreregulatedthananchoringandFHCrequiresprocedurestoguidethoseinvolvedwithsupplyingbunkerstoensurethatoperationsminimisetherisksofenvironmentaldamage(T2).Anyimplicationsforoperationalguidelinesofanchoringinmaerlbedswilldevelopwithongoingresearch.Codesandconventionsgoverningbunkeringoperationsinclude:

•MARPOL,topreventmarinepollutioncausedthroughcarryingordeliveringoilproducts,vesselwastesandemissions,andcontrolpollutioninvolvingnoxiousbulkliquids(IMO,2011).

ServiceprocessesPortauthorityplans:

Doesanchoring(A)differfrombunkering(B)?

DurationADurationBDays

T1(i)(ii)(iii)(iv)T2T3(i)(ii)(iii)T4(i)(ii)(iii)T5(i)(ii)(iii)(iv)T6(i)(ii)(iii)(iv)T7

Local

familiarisation

OperationalconventionsNetworking

Howtoproviderelevantinformationforthosewhoneeditusing:Harbourvisits

ResearchingclientorganizationsEstablishingstakeholdergroupsLocalmonitoringtechnologiesWhattocomplywithandhowWhotocontactandhowthrough:Sitevisitstootherports

RelationswithenvironmentalagenciesStakeholderanalysis

Whotoconsultandwhenincluding:Experts

Professionalbodies/tradeassociationsStakeholders

Whichdatatogather,how,andhowtoanalyseandstorethemincluding:IncidentrecordsSamplingoperations

MonitoringincidenceandimpactEMS/consumersatisfactionreportingWhotohireinandwhenincluding:EnvironmentalconsultantsPublicrelationscompaniesStafftraining

Clienteducationandtraining

Howtostoreincident/operationsdata

A:pilots,mooring;B:tanksShippingcompaniesdiffere.g.A:pilots;B:FOSA:AIS;B:PISCESB:Moreregulated0.50.51.55.05.00.50.50.010.05.0papapapapa

No,butportsvisiteddifferNo,butagenciesdifferNo,butcontactsdifferNo:expertsdifferNo:bodiesdiffer

No:stakeholdersdiffer

1.00.55.01.02.01.0

4.00.55.05.04.03.0

papapapapapa

Consultation

Reviewing,monitoring

A:AIS;B:spills

A:locations;B:incidentsNo;moredataforBNo

No:expertsdifferNoNo

No:providersdiffer

No:dataorproceduresdiffer

1.51.02.04.05.02.00.55.00.5

4.02.02..01.02.03.010.00.5

papapipipipipipipi

Hireexpertise

Reporting

Table6.Servicelevelprocessesanddurations

FOS,FalmouthOilServicesLimited;AIS,automaticidentificationsystem;EMS,environmentalmanagementsystem;pa,[days]perannum;pi,[days]perincident.

Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

120J.Dinwoodieetal.

•SOLAS(safetyoflifeatsea)whichappliestoshipsinvolvedinreceivingandsupplyingfuelatsearelatinginteraliatofireprotection,safetynavigation,carriageofdangerousgoodsandsafetymanagement(IMO,2011).•Thedesignandconstructionofshipscarryingliquefiedgasesandpollutingbulkliquids.

•Minimumstandardsforthesafetransportofdangerousandpollutinggoodsbysea,andportoperationsinEurope(EUDirective2002/59/EC;ESPO,2003).

•UKMerchantShipping(Ship‐to‐ShipTransfer)Regulations2008whichgoverntransfersbetweenships,ofcargoorbunkerfuelinvolvinghazardoussubstancesinUKwaters(MaritimeandCoastguardAgency,MCA,2008).•Operatingguidelinescoverbunkeringequipment,communicationsystem,firefighting,andpollutionpreventionequipment.Safetyconcernsincludevesselcondition,responsiblepersonnel,quantitydemandedandemergencyplans(UKP&IClub,2008b).

Toestablishnetworking(T3)requirestacticalactionstoinstigatesitevisitsandsharedexperienceswithports(T3i)thatdemonstratebestpractice.Instigatingregularmeetings,emailandtelephonecontactisrequiredtodeveloprelationswithgroupsandagencies(T3ii)asisstakeholderanalysis(T3iii)(FalmouthPort,2009),andalthoughcontactsvarywiththetypesofmaritimeoperation,tacticalactionsaresimilar.Similaractionsarerequiredtoestablishconsultation,engagingexpertsfromuniversitiesandNaturalEngland(T4i),andprofessionalbodiesandtradeassociations(T4ii)suchasBPAtoaccessadviceonlegalandpolicyissues,exchangeknowledgeanddevelopbestpractice.Establishedcontactsingovernmentalorotheragencieswillemailnotificationsoradvertisemeetingsasnewobligationsarise.Ongoingstakeholderconsultation(T4iii)requiresupdatedcontactslists,stakeholderanalysis,identificationofcontactsandcommunicationtoidentifyconcerns.

Toenablereviewandmonitoringofimpactsandanyscopeforsimplifyingoperations,serviceprocessesrequiredatabaseswhichdetailprocedures,thefrequencyofoperationsandanyenvironmentalimpacts(T5i).FHCundertakeproactivelocaloceanographicmodellingofpollutionincidentsusingGISdatabasesofhydrographicandtidalrecordstoassistnationalandlocalemergencyauthoritiestoenactoilspillcontingencyplans(ESPO,2003).Updatingrequirestacticaldecisionsonhowandwheretosample(T5ii).Inthecaseofanchoring,historicalAISrecordsareinterrogated.FHCcooperateswithnationalandlocalauthoritiesinpreparingcontingencyplansfordealingwithoilpollutionincidents(IMO,2011),promotingawarenessofexistingcontingencyplans,communicatingthisknowledgeinternallyandassistingcoordinationofcontingencyplansandcontributestoimprovethesafetyofnavigationandpreventpollution(ESPO,2003).TheUKPMSCrequiresallportstocarryoutriskassessmentformarineoperationstoimplementthesafetymanagementsystemformanagingnavigation(RiskSupport,2001).Thisstandardoffersaframeworkforpreparingpoliciesandplans(Paipai,1999;FalmouthPort,2009).Heavyregulationrequiresmoreactionstoestablishmonitoringsystems(T5iii)andreportkeyindicatorsandaspectsofconsumersatisfactionandtheimpactsofmitigationsandmonitoring(T5iv)forbunkering,thananchoringoperations.

Whenhiringinexpertise,processesfacilitateactionsT6iandT6ii,perhapstopubliciseparticularactivitiesormanagemediaengagementsurroundingmaerlbeds,oilspillsorpollutionincidents.Tacticstodevelopenvironmentalawarenesstrainingforstaff(T6iii)mayencouragepersonneltojointradeassociations,attendconferencesorvisitotherportstosharebestpractice.Tofulfilitsmissiontoeducateandtrainwaterwayuserstobeawareoftheirimpactontheenvironment,FHCrequiresprocessestoengagespecialisttrainingprovidersforpersonsundertakinganchoringoperationsorusingbunkeringfacilities(T6iv).Proceduresarerequired(T7)toarchiveAISrecordsofanchoringoperationsandincidentsarisingduringbunkeringoperations.Cumulatively,recordslogchangingportactivities(Paipai,1999).TheserecordsinformtheEMS,areavailabletoauthoritiesandstakeholdersandareupdatedaslegislationchanges.

Table6reportseithertheapproximatenumberofdaysspentperannum(pa)onregularactivitiessuchasnetworkingandconsultationordaysspentperincident(pi)onadhocactivitiessuchastrainingfornewstafforoilspillresponse.Ingeneralthedurationofmanyserviceprocessesissimilarforeachoperation,buttacticT1iiiistransferredtotheindependentbunkeroperator.Becausebunkeringoperationsarecomplex,someactivities(T3i,T4,T5,T6)requiremoretime,dependentonthecomplexityoftheanalysis(T6i).OperationalLevel

Increasingly,FHCmonitorshowfarconsumersaresatisfiedwithhowitmanagesenvironmentalassessments.Asanoutputprocess(Table7)operationalactionsarewellcoordinated.Afirstoperationalactionhighlights

Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

FrameworktoManageEnvironmentalImpactsofMaritimeOperations

Output

Portauthoritywill:

121

Doanchoringactions(A)DurationADurationBDaysdifferfrombunkering(B)?

Collect,record,presentandstorekeydata.Setup:

(i)Monitoringscheme(ii)Environmentallibrary(iii)CSRreporting

ShareinformationwithO2External

thirdpartiesvia:communicationand

dissemination

(i)Tradeassociations,conferences(ii)Stakeholdercommunications

strategy

(iii)Pressreporting(iv)NewslettersO3RecommendationsInformandupdateusersand

authoritiesthrough:

(i)Updatedenvironmental

codeofpractice

(ii)InputstopolicymakingO4MitigationsSetupmanagementprocedures,

manuals,andsystemstorespondtoissuesofusercomplianceby:

(i)Registering/recordingcomplaints(ii)ConsumersatisfactionsurveysO5SustainabilityPromote/monitorsustainable

operations

O6AwarenessEstablish,promotebestpractice:(i)Byeducatingstakeholders(ii)Byestablishingawarenessand

trainingmaterials

O1

Internalmonitoring,reporting,archiving

No;AlessdevelopedNo;AlessdevelopedNo;Alessdeveloped1.00.51.02.00.01.0papipa

NoNoNoNo

1.03.00.50.5

3.53.03.00.0

papapipi

No;AlesscertainNo;Alesscertain

7.02.0

0.00.0

papa

NoNoNo1.00.50.53.00.01.0papapi

NoNo1.01.50.05.0papa

Table7.Outputprocessesanddurations

CSR,corporatesocialresponsibility;pa,[days]perannum;pi,[days]perincident.

monitoringprogrammes(O1i)toidentifywhetherportusersperformoperationstostandard.Tofacilitatecontinuousupdating(ESPO,2003)itisnecessarytodefineenvironmentalperformanceindicators.Next,relevantissuesandcommunicationswithenvironmentalstakeholdersaredocumented(actionO1ii).Electronicdocumentsharingassistsstafftoaccessinformation,raisesawarenessoflegislationandobligations,andensurescompliance.CSRreportingrequiresacomprehensivebaselinedatabasecomprisingreports,documentsandoperatorrecords(ActionO1iii).Directive2003/04ECrequiresportadministrationstoprocessandupdateenvironmentalinformationpertainingtotheiractivitiesandprojects.TocomplyandraiseawarenessofbestpracticeandtheprofessionalprofileofFHC,actionsO2iandO2iiprovideinformationsharingonlinebeforeactivitiesareassessed.Tobroadcasttheenvironmentalcredentialsoftheportauthority(ESPO,2003)requiresmediacontact(O2iii).Newslettersandsimilarupdatestostakeholders(O2iv)enhancelocalengagementwithAONBpartnersandvisitorswhopickupleaflets.Actionsvarylittlebetweenanchoringandbunkeringoperations,althoughthepartnersandresponsibilitiesdiffer.

Regularupdatestoenvironmentalcodesofpractice(O3i)forpublicandcommercialharbourusersaimtoensurecompliancewithWaterFrameworkandEUHabitatDirectives.Updatesandrecommendationsforanchoringoperationsarenecessarilyongoingasresearchintoanypotentialimpactsonmaerlbedsproceeds.Regardingbunkeringoperations,actionO3iencouragesbunkeroperatorstoapplytheInternationalSafetyGuideforOilTankersandTerminals(ICS,2006),incorporateproceduresintotheship’ssafetymanagementsystemtoensure

Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

122J.Dinwoodieetal.

thatriskshavebeenassessedandmitigationcontrolsestablishedandmakeoilspillcontingencyarrangements.NetworkingwithagenciessuchasDEFRA(O3ii)seekstopromoteinputstopolicy.

Forallmaritimeoperations,FHCmustexplainhowitsevidencebaseiscollatedandmonitoringproceduresareestablished(actionO4).Systemsrecord(O4i)andassess(O4ii)FHCperformanceandincorporateprocedurestohandlecomplaints,litigation,appealsagainstdecisionsandcompensationissues,toenhanceclientretentionandcustomerrelations.Regularspotchecksonalltypesofoperationsareconductedtoensurecompliancewithrelevantcodesandtopromotetheethosandpracticeofsustainability(O5).Inaspiringtoshareknowledgeoflegislationandbestpracticewithschoolsandcommunitygroups,usingleafletsformarinausersandonlineinstructionsforshipsrequestingpilotingservices,FHCemphasisesitsowncorporateenvironmentalawareness(O6i).Toreducehumanerrorwhichmaycauseaccidents,actionO6iiaimstoshareknowledgeoflegislation,goodpracticeandmitigationproceduresandensurethatpersonnelarequalifiedtoconductsafeoperationsandpreparedtotacklespillages.Suchtrainingistime‐andcost‐efficientinenhancingindividualskillcompetences(ESPO,2003).

Thedurationofeachoperationalactivity(Table7)isbroadlysimilarformostoutputs,butFOSratherthanFHCisresponsibleforsomebunkeringactions(O1ii,O2iv,O3,O4ii,O6i).ThegreatercomplexityofbunkeringoperationsrequiresproportionatelymoreFHChoursthananchoringtoregistercomplaints(O4i)andmanageexternalcommunicationviaconferences(O2i),themedia(O2iii)andawarenesstrainingmaterials(O6ii).Discussion:ImpactonthePortAuthority

Becauseportauthoritiesimplementthesystemsframeworkdirectly,theirlikelihoodofowningtheevaluationprocessandembeddingenvironmentalawarenessintotheirorganisationisincreased.Along‐standingFHCEMStestifiestogoodpractice,butinseekingfurtherimprovements,applicationsofbusinessprocessthinkingidentifiedtheimportanceofstakeholderengagementandmanagement,laterincorporatedintoabroadercorporate‘sustainabilitymanagementsystem’.PracticalimplementationbenefitsstimulatedfurtherapplicationstodefineandimplementaqualitymanagementsystemtoincorporateinformationspanningallFHCactivities.

BecauseFHCimplementedenvironmentalassessmentsinternally,stakeholderengagementincreased,generatingnewcontactsandoffersofinformationsharing(Table8).Unexpectedly,volunteersfromEIGsnow

Systemcomponent

EnvironmentalagendaResponsetopolicyissues

EvidenceofenvironmentalperformanceHMinput

FHCpolicyengagementWhoconductsassessments

FHCengagementinenvironmentalissuesRoleofexternalengagementExtentofexternalengagementProfessionallinks

NatureofstakeholdersEIGattitudeActionsofEIGs

AnchoringtechnologiesPollutionmodellingNatureofEMSMediumforEMSTrainingfor

Before

AdhocReactive

NumberofspillsAttendsallmeetingsComplianceConsultantsCompliance

AsrequiredbystatuteStatutoryTradebodies

MainlygovernmentalSuspiciousComplain

NodataanalysisOilspillrecordsPiecemealPaperbasedUsers

After

SystematicProactive

ConsumersatisfactionreportingPolicyofficerreleasesHMInitiatesdebate

FHCinitiatesresearch

Newinitiatives,e.g.PortonovoEncouragevisitsAttend,e.g.BPA

EnvironmentalbodiesCommunityandEIGsWorkwithFHC

AdviseonlegislationAISanalysis

Databuoy;PISCESStructured

Web‐basedlibraryNewgroupsengaged

Table8.Impactsofapplyingthesystemsframework

HM,HarbourMaster;FHC,FalmouthHarbourCommissioners;BPA,BritishPortsAssociation;EIG,environmentalinterestgroup;AIS,automaticidentificationsystem;EMS,environmentalmanagementsystem.

Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

FrameworktoManageEnvironmentalImpactsofMaritimeOperations123

contributetomonitoringsystemsandofferresponsestodevelopmentproposalsandlegislativechanges.Amarineprojectsofficer,recruitedfollowingproactivefundingsearcheswhichattractedaKTP,releasestimespentbytheHarbourMasterinattendingroutinemeetings,andhasempoweredFHCtocontributevigorouslytopolicydebatesandtechnicalissues.FHCproactivelyengagesexternalbodiesincludingtheBPAtobenchmarkitsperformanceandsharebestpractice.SystematicrecordingofupcomingmeetingsensuresplannedrepresentationspanningmorestakeholdersincludinglocalinitiativesconsideringlowcarbonissuesandtheMarineandCoastalAccessBill.Stakeholderanalysisprioritisedimprovedengagementwithexistingenvironmentalstakeholders,butanimprovedpublicprofilehasattractednewrequestsfromuniversitiesandharbourauthoritiestoengageandvisit.

EvidencethatFHCenvironmentalpolicyiseffectiveincludesquarterlySACmanagementmeetingswhichauditrecordsofallpollutionincidents.Noactionstodateofnon‐compliance,orprosecutions,providefurtherevidenceofcompliance.PerformancebeyondgoodpracticeisevidencedbypositivemediacoverageandinvolvementinKTP,PortonovoandFalmouthHabitatprojects.

Implementingthesystemsframeworkimproveddecisionmaking,providingastructuredapproachtoidentifyandevaluatepotentialimpactsandtargetresourcesoninvestigatingthemostserious.Clearerprioritiesfocussedeffort,savingtimeandresources.Whentheframeworkidentifiedincompletehabitatresearchnecessitatingstudiesofmaerlbeddistribution,anovelanchorinvestigationwasprioritised,triggeringanchoranalysis,AISshipanchorageplottingandadiveinvestigation.Similarly,whenarequirementtoreviewandformalisehydrographicproceduresemergedaspecialistinternshipwasinitiated.Thelocalmarineschoolwasinvitedtocoordinatestudentprojectstoinvestigatethepotentialimpactsofotherlocalmaritimeoperationsidentifiedinabrainstormingsession.Inpursuinganevidence‐basedapproach,FHChasestablishednewtechnologiestoassistthecollectionandanalysisofdatalocally.AISdatahavegeneratedthefirstsystematicrecordingofanchoringoperationslocally.Toassistinpredictingandhencemitigatingthelikelyimpactofoilspills,FHCdeploysPISCESmodellingandforecastingsoftware.Abespokebuoyhasbeenpurchasedtorecordtidalflowsforinputtothemodel.Trainingofemployeesandharbourusersandincreasingcommunityandstakeholderinvolvementwhichshouldfurtherreducetheriskofmishaps,areoutputsinthesystemsapproachwhichincreaseawareness.OvertimeFHCwillbecomeincreasinglyawareofitsmission,andbetterabletoachieveit,asoutputsofdatacollection,monitoring,recordingandconsumerfeedbackareimprovedcontinuously.

Conclusions

Todate,portauthoritieshaverarelyintegratedpredominantlyphysicalenvironmentalevaluationswithbusinessstrategy.Similarly,businessstrategistshavelargelyoverlookedtheenvironmentaldimensionsofportsassensitivemaritimeinterfaces.Anewdialogueisurgentlyrequiredtoinitiatebothagendas.Portauthoritiesshouldundertakeinitialapplicationsofthesystemsframeworkinternallytopromoteandenhancemanagement’senvironmentalawarenessandgrowcommitmenttoenvironmentalmanagement,learningtoincorporateitwithbusinessstrategy.Thiscommitmentpredicatesincreaseddeploymentofcomplementarymethodologiesandphysicallybasedenvironmentalmonitoringtoolsandauditingsystems.

Portauthoritiesneedtodeploythebusinessprocessframeworktoidentifystrategic,tacticalandoperationallevelsofenvironmentalmanagementprocesses.Ratherthanconductingpredominantlyphysicalevaluations,refocusingonstrategicmissionswillhighlighteducationaldimensionstoraiseawarenessofoperationalconventionsandcommercialdimensionstoreducecostsofhiringinexpertise.Consortiaofsmallerportsapplyingtheframeworkshouldworkcollectivelywithneighbouringauthoritiestocost‐effectivelyacquireanddisseminatespecialistknowledge,contactsandmanagementsystems,benefitfromco‐representationandengageproactivelywithfundinginitiativestopromoteenvironmentalawareness.Manyauthoritieswillneedtoprioritiserevisitingthestrategicroleofstakeholderengagement,tacticalmanagementofserviceprocessesofnetworking,consultationandfamiliarisationandoperationalprocessesforexternalcommunication.Increasedstakeholderengagementisimperativetoenhancetheevaluationprocessasnewsocialcapitalisbuilt.

Thefecundityofcross‐disciplinaryfertilisationtoinformframeworkstoassistcomprehensionofenvironmentalmanagementpracticesisproven(Lucas,2010).Similarlythesystemsframeworkwhichemergedfrominnovative

Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

124J.Dinwoodieetal.

applicationofbusinessprocessthinkingtoenvironmentalmanagementprocesseswithinamaritimecontextandinformedbybusinessstrategy,promisespotentialinter‐sectorbenefits.Normativecategorisationoftheprocessesofenvironmentalmanagementatstrategic,tacticalandoperationallevelswouldbenefitmanyorganisations,encouragingcommitmentfromseniormanagerstobuildanintegrated,systematicandfocusedstrategy.Analysisofactivitydurationsassistsresourceallocationandplanningofenvironmentalmanagement.Byidentifyinganyduplicateactivitiesandrevealingscopefortransferringroutineactionsfromseniormanagerstospecialiststaff,significantcostsavingsarelikely.Asexploratoryresearch,thisworkconcentratedonunderstandinganddocumentingthebusinessprocessesofenvironmentalmanagementinports.However,asmoreportsapplythesystemsframeworkagrowingbodyofoperationalexperiencewillpresentopportunitiestore‐engineerbusinessprocesses,perhapsthroughsimplificationandoptimisation.Achallengeforthebusinessstrategycommunityrelatestohowthisknowledgemightbestbepooled,managedanddisseminatedinter‐organisationally.

Manyportsandarguablyotherlogisticalordistributionalfacilitiesoperatingatfixedlocationswillbenefitfromapplyingthesystemsframeworktomanagethepotentialenvironmentalimpactofbespokeoperations.Althoughdetailsofeachstrategicinputarecontextdependant,linkagestoserviceandoutputprocesseswillbesimilar.Theframeworkencouragesinterlinkingofrelevantenvironmentalcodesandregulationwithbusinessstrategywhichpromotescompliance.Further,thisexplicitstrategicfocuswillstimulateenhancedintra‐organisationalmanagerialenvironmentalawareness.Arisingfromthis,pro‐activedevelopmentpromptedbytheframeworkwillpromotemoresustainableexecutionofroutineoperationsandinfrastructuredevelopment,andmoreviablecommercialoperations.AhighlysensitiveenvironmentatFalmouthinvolvingmultiplephysicalinputsgeneratedacomplexcasestudy;fewerdatainputsshouldberequiredelsewhere.

Thisstudyoffersbroadermaximsforpublicpolicy.WithinthemaritimesectorEcoportsisdedicatedtosupportingenvironmentalmanagementinports,andoffersgradedtoolstoassist.Take‐uptodatehasembracedfewsmallerportsandaccessibletoolsarerequiredtopromoteandassistenvironmentalmanagementinsmallerportsasenginesoffuturegrowthabletorespondrapidlytotechnologicaldevelopments.Therisksofcatastrophicenvironmentaldamageoccasionedbyunsustainablemaritimeoperationsanddevelopmentmustbeoffsetagainstportclosureandcommercialfailurepursuantonenforcedcessationofoperations.Benefitsaccruingfromsafeguardingrevenuefrommaritimeoperationswhichensurecommercialviabilityandconductingenvironmentallysustainableoperationsinformedbyenvironmentalspecialistsandappropriateenvironmentalmanagementtoolsfaroutweighthecostsofclosureorenvironmentalcatastrophe.Thesystemsframeworkoffersonesuchtool,butenlightenedcontextualisa-tionofenvironmentalmanagementwithinthebusinessstrategyofportauthoritiesmayrevealothers.

Acknowledgments

PlymouthBusinessSchoolteamedupwithFHCinaKTP(no.KTP007098).ThispartnershipreceivedfinancialsupportfromtheKTPprogramme.KTPaimstohelpbusinessestoimprovetheircompetitivenessandproductivitythroughthebetteruseofknowledge,technologyandskillsthatresidewithintheUKknowledgebase.KTPisfundedbytheTechnologyStrategyBoardalongwiththeothergovernmentfundingorganisations,whichincludedtheNationalEnvironmentResearchCouncil,theEconomicandSocialResearchCouncilandFHC.Noneofthesebodieswasinvolvedindecisionsrelatingtoresearchdesign,datacollection,dataanalysis,interpretationordissemination.

References

AtoBviaC.2010.SulphurEmissionControlAreas.AtoBviaCplc,UK.Availableat:http://www.atobviaconline.com/public/PageContent.aspx?

PageID=1041[20December2010].

BackhurstMK,ColeRG.2000.BiologicalimpactsofboatingatKawauIslandnorth‐easternNewZealand.JournalofEnvironmentalManagement

60:239–251.DOI:10.1006/jema.2000.0382

BaylisR,ConnelL,FlynnA.1998.Companysize,environmentalregulationandecologicalmodernisation:furtheranalysisatthelevelofthe

firm.BusinessStrategyandtheEnvironment7:285–296.DOI:10.1002/(SICI)1099‐0836(199811)7:5<285::AID‐BSE166>3.0.CO;2‐U

ChertowM,MiyataY.2011.Assessingcollectivefirmbehavior:comparingindustrialsymbiosiswithpossiblealternativesforindividualcompanies

inOahu,HI.BusinessStrategyandtheEnvironment20:266–280.DOI:10.1002/bse.694Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

FrameworktoManageEnvironmentalImpactsofMaritimeOperations125

CornwallAONB.2010.AManagementPlanfortheCornwallAreaofOutstandingNaturalBeauty.Author:Truro,UK.Availableat:http://www.

cornwall‐aonb.gov.uk/documents/[15September2010].

CornwallCountyCouncil.2005.EconomicImpactStudyofthePortofFalmouth.Author:Truro,UK.

CurkovicS,SroufeR.2011.UsingISO14001topromoteasustainablesupplychainstrategy.BusinessStrategyandtheEnvironment20:71–93

DOI:10.1002/bse.671

DahlsrudA.2008.Howcorporatesocialresponsibilityisdefined:ananalysisof37definitions.CorporateSocialResponsibilityandEnvironmental

Management15:1–13.DOI:10.1002/csr.132

DarbraRM,PittamN,RoystonKA,DarbraJP,JourneeH.2009.SurveyonenvironmentalmonitoringrequirementsofEuropeanports.Journal

ofEnvironmentalManagement90:1396–1403.DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.08.010.PMid:129441.

DarbraRM,RonzaA,StojanovicTA,WooldridgeC,CasalJ,2005.Aprocedureforidentifyingsignificantenvironmentalaspectsinseaports.

MarinePollutionBulletin50:866–874.PMid:15946703.

DarbraRM,RonzaA,CasalJ,StojanovicTA,WooldridgeC.2004.TheSelfDiagnosisMethod:anewmethodologytoassessenvironmental

managementinseaports.MarinePollutionBulletin48:420–428.DOI:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2003.10.023DfT(DepartmentforTransport)2009.MaritimeStatistics2008.DfT:London.DfT(DepartmentforTransport)2006a.FocusOnPorts2006ed.DfT:London.DfT(DepartmentforTransport)2006b.MaritimeStatistics2005.DfT:London.

DfT(DepartmentforTransport)2002.Aprojectappraisalframeworkforports.DfT:London.Availableat:http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/

archive/2002/afp/[15May2009].

DfT(DepartmentforTransport)2000.Modernports:AUKpolicy.DfT:London.Availableat:http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/shippingports/ports/

modern/modernportsaukpolicy?page=1[29May2009].

DinwoodieJ,XuJ.2008.Casestudiesinlogistics:areviewandtentativetaxonomy.InternationalJournalofLogisticsResearchandApplications11,

393–408.DOI:10.1080/136755608023130

DinwoodieJ,KnowlesH,TuckS,BenhinJ.2009.Assessingtheenvironmentalimpactofmaritimeoperationsinsmallerports:asystemsapproach.

LogisticsResearchNetworkConferenceProceedings,Cardiff,September.CharteredInstituteofLogisticsandTransport:Corby,U.K536–3.Ditlev‐SimonsenCD,MidttunA.2011.Whatmotivatesmanagerstopursuecorporateresponsibility?Asurveyamongkeystakeholders.Corporate

SocialResponsibilityandEnvironmentalManagement18:25–38.DOI:10.1002/csr.237

EcoPorts.2010.Tool4:PortEnvironmentalReviewSystem(PERS).EcoPorts:Brussels.Availableat:http://www.ecoports.com/page.ocl?pageid=30

[15September2010].

EcoPorts.2006.TheTop‐10PortEnvironmentalissues.EcoPorts:Brussels.Availableat:http://www.ecoports.com/page.ocl?pageid=127[19June2009].EdohoFM.2008.OilTransnationalCorporations:CorporateSocialResponsibilityandEnvironmentalSustainability.CorporateSocial

ResponsibilityandEnvironmentalManagement15,210–222.DOI:10:1002/csr.143

ESPO(EuropeanSeaPortsOrganisation),2003.EnvironmentalCodeofPractice.ESPO:Brussels.Availableat:http://www.espo.be/downloads/

archive/85817e87‐5a24‐4c43‐b570‐146cb7f36b68.pdf[4August2009].

FalmouthPort.2009.FalmouthHarbourCommissionersEnvironmentalPolicy.FHC:Falmouth,UK.Availableat:http://www.falmouthport.co.uk/

pdf/FHC‐environmental‐policy.pdf[15May2009].

FalmouthPort.2007.FalmouthHabourCommissioners’Strategy.FHC:Falmouth,UK.Availableat:http://www.falmouthport.co.uk/pdf/

strategy2007.pdf[1May2009].

FalmouthPort.2003.TheFalmouthandTruroPortsHandbook.FHC:Falmouth,UK.Availableat:http://www.falmouthport.co.uk/pdf/

ports_handbook.pdf[1May2009].

FOS.2009.FalmouthOilServicesLimited.FOS:Falmouth,UK.Availableat:http://www.fosoil.com/[9October2009].

GilmanS.2003.SustainabilityandnationalpolicyinUKportdevelopment.MaritimePolicy&Management30:275–291.DOI:10.1080/

0308883032000145591

HutchinsonA,ChastonI.1994.EnvironmentalmanagementinDevonandCornwall’ssmallandmediumsizedenterprisesector.Business

StrategyandtheEnvironment3,15–22.DOI:10.1002/bse.3280030102

ICS(InternationalChamberofShipping).2006.ISGOTTInternationalSafetyGuideforOilTankersandTerminalsInternational.Chamberof

Shipping,OilCompaniesInternationalMarineForum,InternationalAssociationofPortsandHarbors,5thedn.ICSandBermuda:OilCompaniesInternationalMarineForum:London.

IdemudiaU,IteUE.2006.Corporate–CommunityRelationsinNigeria’sOilIndustry:ChallengesandImperatives.CorporateSocial

ResponsibilityandEnvironmentalManagement13,194–206.DOI:10.1002/csr.101

IEMA.2010.IntroducingEMAS.Lincoln,U.KInstituteofEnvironmentalManagementandAssessment.Availableat:http://www.iema.net/

ems/emas[3September2010].

IMO(InternationalMaritimeOrganisation).2011.IMO.IMO:London.Availableat:http://www.imo.org[23March2011].

KetolaT.2010.FiveLeapstocorporatesustainabilitythroughacorporateresponsibilityportfoliomatrix.CorporateSocialResponsibilityand

EnvironmentalManagement17:320–336.DOI:10.1002/csr

KetolaT.2007.Tenyearslater:whereisourcommonfuturenow?BusinessStrategyandtheEnvironment16,3:171–1.DOI:10.1002/bse.477LagoudisIN,LalwaniCS,NaimMM.2004.Agenericsystemsmodelforoceanbulkshippingcompaniesinthebulksector.Transportation

Journal,43(Winter),56–76.

LucasMT.2010.Understandingenvironmentalmanagementpractices:integratingviewsfromstrategicmanagementandecologicaleconomics.

BusinessStrategyandtheEnvironment19:3–556.DOI:10.1002/bse.662

LeopoldLB,ClarkeFE,HanshawBB,BalsleyJR.1971.Aprocedureforevaluatingenvironmentalimpact.USGeologicalSurveyCircular,5.

GovernmentPrintingOffice,Washington,DC.Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse

126J.Dinwoodieetal.

LoorbachD,vanBakelJC,WhitemanG,RotmansJ.(2010).BusinessStrategiesforTransitionsTowardsSustainableSystems.BusinessStrategy

andtheEnvironment19:133–146.DOI:10.1002/bse.5

Lund‐ThomsenP,NadviK.2010.Globalvaluechains,localcollectiveactionandcorporatesocialresponsibility:areviewofempiricalevidence.

BusinessStrategyandtheEnvironment19:1–13.DOI:10.1002/bse.670

MCA(MaritimeandCoastguardAgency).2008.GuidanceontheMerchantShipping(Ship‐to‐ShipTransfer)Regulations.MCA:London.Available

at:http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c4mca/080511_mgn_for_cons.pdf[4August2009].

MillerVV,QuinnJ.1998.Theharveststrategy:howtoimplementadisasterfortheenvironmentandthestockholders.BusinessStrategyandthe

Environment7:71–.DOI:10.1002/(SICI)1099‐0836(199805)7:2<71::AID‐BSE139>3.0.CO;2‐S?????OxfordEconomics.2009.TheEconomicContributionofPortstotheUKEconomy.AbbeyHouse:Oxford.

PaipaiE.1999.GuidelinesforPortEnvironmentalManagement.ReportSR5.HRWallingford,DepartmentoftheEnvironment,Transportand

theRegions:London.

ParnabyJ.1979.ConceptofManufacturingSystem.InternationalJournalofProductionResearch17:123–135.DOI:10.1080/0020779019600Peris‐MoraE,DiezOrejasJM,SubiratsA,IbanezS,AlvarezP.2005.Developmentofasystemofindicatorsforsustainableportmanagement.

MarinePollutionBulletin50:19–1660.DOI:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2005.06.048.PMid:16095626.

PettitS.2008.UnitedKingdomportspolicy:changinggovernmentattitudes.MarinePolicy32:719–727.DOI:10.1016/j.marpol.2007.12.002RayS.2008.AcasestudyofShellatSakhalin:havingawhaleofatime?CorporateSocialResponsibilityandEnvironmentalManagement15:

173–185.DOI:10.1002/csr.170

RevellA,BlackburnR.2007.Thebusinesscaseforsustainability?anexaminationofsmallfirmsintheUK’sconstructionandrestaurantsectors.

BusinessStrategyandtheEnvironment.16:404–420.DOI:10.1002/bse.499

RevellA,StokesD,andChenH.2010.Smallbusinessesandtheenvironment:turningoveranewleaf?BusinessStrategyandtheEnvironment.19:

273–288DOI:10.1002/bse.628

RiskSupport.2001.LinkingRiskAssessmentofMarineOperationstoSafetyManagementinPorts.RiskSupportLimited:London.Availableat:

http://www.risk‐support.co.uk/vmtMTS2001.pdf[15June2009].

RoyalHaskoning.2009.GreenPorts.Availableat:http://www.royalhaskoning.co.uk[5February2010].

SarkisJ.HelmsMM,HervaniAA.2010.Reverselogisticsandsocialsustainability.CorporateSocialResponsibilityandEnvironmentalManagement

17:337–3.DOI:10.1002/csr.220

ShahKU.2011.Organizationallegitimacyandthestrategicbridgingabilityofgreenalliances.BusinessStrategyandtheEnvironment.DOI:

10.1002/bse.706

SroufeR.2003.Effectsofenvironmentalmanagementsystemsonenvironmentalmanagementpracticesandoperations.Productionand

OperationsManagement12:416–431.DOI:10.1111/j.1937‐5956.2003.tb00212.x

TilleyF.1999.Thegapbetweentheenvironmentalattitudesandtheenvironmentalbehaviourofsmallfirms.BusinessStrategyandthe

Environment8,238–248.DOI:10.1002/(SICI)1099‐0836(199907/08)8:4<238::AID‐BSE197>3.0.CO;2‐M

UKP&IClub.2008a.Sulphurcontentofgasoil–UK.UKP&IClub:London.Availableat:http://www.ukpandi.com/ukpandi/infopool.nsf/html/

LPBulletin562[20July2009].

UKP&IClub.2008b.Preventingpollutionduringbunkeringoperations.UKP&IClub:London.Availableat:http://www.ukpandi.com/ukpandi/

InfoPool.nsf/HTML/LPNewsHead20081107[5July2009].

UNESCAP(UnitedNationsEconomicandSocialCommissionforAsiaandthePacific).2009.Environmentalimpactsofportdevelopment.United

Nations:Bangkok.Availableat:http://www.unescap.org/ttdw/Publications/TFS_pubs/Pub_1234/pub_1234_ch2.pdf[5June2009].

VernonJ,EssexS,PinderD,CurryK.2003.The‘greening’oftourismmicro‐businesses:outcomesoffocusgroupinvestigationsinSouthEast

Cornwall.BusinessStrategyandtheEnvironment12,49–69.DOI:10.1002/bse.348

Wang,C,CorbettJJ.2007.ThecostsandbenefitsofreducingSO2emissionsfromshipsintheUSWestCoastalwaters.TransportationResearch

PartD12:577–588.DOI:10.1016/j.trd.2007.08.003

WilsonC,WilliamsID,KempS.2010.Compliancewithproducerresponsibilitylegislation:experiencesfromUKsmallandmedium‐sized

enterprises.BusinessStrategyandtheEnvironment.DOI:10.1002/bse.698

WorldPortSource.2010.PortofFalmouth.WorldPortSource:SanJose.Availableat:http://www.worldportsource.com/ports/map.2866.

1529.php[1September2010].

Copyright©2011JohnWiley&Sons,LtdandERPEnvironment.

Bus.Strat.Env.21,111–126(2012)

DOI:10.1002/bse