Relationship of ESPO on the systems of governance of the European ports



The European Sea Ports Organisation (ESPO) has published the relationship "European Port Governance" that it collects a series of information on the governance of the European ports and that it is based on an investigation lead last year between the ports of the association. The relationship, consultabile in this page opened in a new window of the browser, analyzes the objectives of the Harbour Authorities, their functions, the institutional system in which is framed and their resources financial institutions.

The relationship takes cue from a hypothesis of "rebirth" of the Harbour Authorities that allows they to face the multiple new and changing economic and social challenges and meanwhile identifies a series of factors of governance based on which to determine if the Harbour Authorities have an approach to the governance merely conservative or assume a role of more entrepreneurial type and mainly turned to the development of the economic-harbour activity.

According to found how much in the course of the investigation - it has explained the European association of ports - in the majority of the cases sussistono in fact ambitions of a "rebirth" of the role of the Harbour Authorities, ambitions that however are stopped or stimulated according to the different arrange of governance in vigor.

The great part of the Harbour Authorities - the relationship finds - stretches to carry out a role action to facilitate the harbour activities and their development, while only little venture in activity of entrepreneurial type. This last trend is more recurrent if of greater the Harbour Authorities, mainly of the anseatica region, and the Harbour Authorities of the regions Anglo-Saxons, than especially in the United Kingdom they are for many backs nearer the business institutions. Moreover, with the exception of the remainder of Europe where almost the totality of the Harbour Authorities is of public property, in the United Kingdom some of the greater ports (and also smaller) are of private property.

This evidences - the relationship explains - than the differences in the systems of governance is determined mainly to regional level. The investigation has confirmed that the majority of the systems of governance harbour is riconducibili to the three traditional systems anseatico, Latin and Anglo-Saxon. The Harbour Authorities of "new" the European regions are placed about half way between these models of governance, even if the strong infuence of the central government returns many of these port authorities nearer the system of governance of Latin type.

Considering that in Europe the majority of the Harbour Authorities anticipates a form of governance that falls back in that of Latin tradition or in that of anseatico type - the relationship observes - the difference between the two systems of governance translate in a dualism north-south that is not centralized alone on differences of property or administration of the harbour areas, but also on many other elements of the relative governance in particular to the functional autonomy and financial institution, than generally more it is limited in the southern regions of Europe.

The relationship emphasizes but that if on one side these limits to the functional autonomy and financial institution seem to prevent to the Harbour Authorities with systems of governance of Latin type to reach their objectives and to realize investments, from the other in some way, paradoxicalally, they do not seem to always constitute a tie for a proattivo functional approach to the development of the harbour economy.

The relationship evidences in existence also as the changes, if also not immediately substantial, they stretch to less clearly return the border between the systems of governance of anseatico and Latin type and as the dimensions of the Harbour Authorities can in some way to explain the diversity of governance.