Acronyms and abbreviations Introduction Purpose and scope of the study PCS: proposal of logistic integration

Transcription

1 Summary 1

2 Acronyms and abbreviations Introduction Purpose and scope of the study PCS: proposal of logistic integration Definition(s) of PCS The e-maritime concept The Single Window concept Definitions of Port Community Systems Evolution of PCS in European logistic ambit PCS implementation Some technological aspects Reasons of the implementation of PCS Implementation of PCS in Europe Legal framework A general overview and the EU legislation The WCO data model standard for the PCS/SW implementation Port of Rotterdam Brief overview PCS in Rotterdam Interfaces and technologies Business model and stakeholders Detail of offered services Port of Venice Brief overview PCS in Venice Interfaces and technologies Business model and stakeholders Detail of offered services Port of Antwerp Brief overview PCS in Antwerp Interfaces and technologies Business model and stakeholders

3 3.4.5 Detail of offered services Port of Hamburg Brief overview PCS in Hamburg Interfaces and technologies Business model and stakeholders Detail of offered services Port of Le Havre Brief overview PCS in Le Havre Interfaces and technologies Business model and stakeholders Detail of offered services Port of Livorno Brief overview PCS in Livorno Interfaces and technologies Business model and stakeholders Detail of offered services Port of Genoa Brief overview PCS in Genoa Interfaces and technologies Business model and stakeholders Detail of offered services The Italian experience of SW and integration towards a PCS environment Italian legislation Framework The PMIS system The E-customs and the A.I.D.A. system The UIRNET platform Annex I: PCS transactions Annex II

4 Acronyms and abbreviations AIS Automatic Identification System APICS Antwerp Port Information Control System B2B Business to Business B2C Business to Consumer B2G Business to Government BIM Bilateral Information Model CIM Centralized Information Model DIM Decentralized Information Model EDI Electronic Data Interchange EDIFACT Electronic Data Interchange for Commerce and Transport HDS HafenDatenSatz (local standard Hamburg) HTTP Hyper Text Transfer Protocol IAF Integrated Architecture Framework ICT Information and Communication Technology ISO International Standardisation Organisation ISPS International Ship and Port Facility Security IT Information Technology NSW National Single Window OTAP Development, Test, Acceptation and Production PCS Port Community System PKI Private Key Infrastructure SaFE Security and Facility Expertise SME Small and Medium Enterprises SW Single Window UN/CEFACT United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business VPN Virtual Private Network VTS Vessel Tracking System XML Extensible Mark-up Language 4

5 1 Introduction 1.1 Purpose and scope of the study Ports and port systems face nowadays major challenges due to the volatility of the global trade, and their performances impact substantially on the overall structure of the supply chains. The crucial role of ports for the entire EU27 area comes straightforwardly from the EUROSTAT related statistics (Table 1), which show EU ports to handle about 3.7 Billion tons in recent years, representing approximately a sixth of the overall world seaborne trade and almost 90% of the international EU trade. In terms of countries, Netherlands and United Kingdom play a major role in the northern range, whilst Italy and Spain are the main players in the southern range. Table 1 - Goods handled in ports (unloaded and loaded) for the major EU countries (values in 1000t/year) EU27 3,718,691 3,835,969 3,937,528 3,918,669 3,445,521 3,645,610 3,706,420 United Kingdom 584, , , , , , ,495 Italy 508, , , , , , ,885 Netherlands 460, , , , , , ,695 Spain 400, , , , , , ,332 Turkey n.a. n.a. n.a. 305, , , ,082 France 341, , , , , , ,251 Germany 284, , , , , , ,037 Belgium 206, , , , , , ,789 Norway 201, , , , , , ,970 Sweden 178, , , , , , ,636 Greece 151, , , , , , ,314 Finland 99, , , ,725 93, , ,452 Denmark 99, , , ,096 90,636 87,068 92,613 Portugal 65,301 66,861 68,229 65,275 61,714 65,981 67,507 Latvia 59,698 56,861 61,083 61,430 60,088 58,691 67,016 Poland 54,769 53,131 52,433 48,833 45,079 59,507 57,738 Estonia 46,546 49,998 44,964 36,191 38,505 46,026 48,479 Ireland 52,146 53,326 54,139 51,081 41,829 45,071 45,078 Lithuania 26,146 27,235 29,253 36,379 34,344 37,869 42,661 Romania 47,694 46,709 48,928 50,458 36,094 38,122 38,918 Bulgaria 24,841 27,513 24,900 26,576 21,893 22,946 25,185 Croatia 26,201 26,325 30,097 29,223 23,377 24,329 21,862 Slovenia 12,625 15,483 15,853 16,554 13,356 14,591 16,198 Cyprus 7,305 7,676 7,516 7,962 6,808 6,954 6,564 Malta 5,283 5,452 5,254 5,501 5,507 6,004 5,578 Source: Eurostat In terms of single port throughput, the following Figure 1 shows the main European cargo ports in 2010 by gross weight of goods handled. The majority of the EU megaports are located in the northern range, with Rotterdam, Antwerp and Hamburg at the top of the 5

6 list (Rotterdam alone accounts for about 10% of the overall EU27 seaborne trade). Notwithstanding, a remarkable number of medium/small ports represent the structural backbone of the EU port system, since only few countries exhibit more than a pair of ports with a throughput higher than 100 Million tons/year. At the same time, the competition amongst EU and non-eu ports is rapidly increasing, especially in the Mediterranean area, especially with the fast growth of northern African ports (e.g. Tanger-Med). Importantly, integrated and fast exchange of information has become a key competitive factor for ports and port systems, in order to boost EU seaport competitiveness and also to provide an effective and valuable environment supporting worldwide integrated supply chains: nowadays, shippers and carriers select individual ports not only based on their cargo handling capabilities but also on the added value of the services offered. Figure 1 - Main European cargo ports in 2010 by gross weight of goods handled Source: Eurostat (Statistics in Focus 12/2012) Author: Vidar Lund. This has led to an increasing interest towards IT (intelligent technologies) solutions specifically devoted to ports. However, even if many ports are equipped with advanced IT systems, within-port and port-to-port interoperability between different information systems is often poor or non-existent. Furthermore, many sectors of the port are organized and managed independently, and often even within a single sector duplication of information and the production of printed materials, is enormous. As a result, the effective 6

7 implementation of IT oriented port and port systems is still an important governance issue. The general framework EU has chosen to promote the development of IT-oriented ports and port systems is the e-maritime concept 1. Within this framework, attention was firstly focused on the interactions between private operators and public bodies and administrations, i.e. to the so-called business-to-government (B2G) transactions, leading to the proposition and to the promotion of the single window (SW) concept: a practical declination of the single window concept specifically devoted to all custom transactions is the e-customs concept. In addition, in recent years, thanks to some pioneering and seminal applications in important EU ports, also the sector of the transactions between private operators in the port system, i.e. the so-called business-to-business (B2B) interactions, led to the development of the concept of Port Community Systems (PCS). The main purpose of this deliverable is to draw a state of the art of the implementations and of the reference market of PCS in EU, through a general review of the main relevant concepts and of some noteworthy case studies. For this aim, Chapter 2 reviews the relevant definitions related to the e-maritime concept, together with the general architectural framework of a PCS; furthermore, it also proposes some key aspects/issues to be accounted for in the evaluation of a PCS. Then, Chapter 3 provides some case studies of PCS implementations in relevant EU ports. 2 PCS: proposal of logistic integration 2.1 Definition(s) of PCS This section provides a review of the relevant definitions for a PCS. In general, providing an universally agreed definition of Port Community System is not an easy task, due to the heterogeneous approaches available in the literature. Rather, it is useful to report some definitions provided by research experts and international organizations, with the attempt to find common factors that may help identifying the key factors of a PCS. In that respect, a preliminary review of the general framework wherein PCS operate should be presented as well, with specific reference to the e-maritime and the single window concepts. Consistently, the section is structured as follows: section illustrates the e-maritime concept, section deals with the single windows, and section reviews the most significant PCS definitions in the literature and in the practice The e-maritime concept The general umbrella under which PCS operate is the e-maritime concept, defined 2 by EU as an initiative aimed to foster the use of advanced information technologies for working 1 All definitions here reported will be thoroughly and formally assessed in Chapter 2. 2 Above definitions of e-maritime from EU are available at 7

8 and doing business in the maritime transport sector. More specifically, a primary aim of the e-maritime concept relates to the integration between within-port and port-to-port IT systems: Major European ports have advanced information systems, which deliver considerable quality and efficiency gains. However, the interoperability between port information systems is practically non-existent limiting the potential for new services and economies of scale. As a result, through e-maritime initiatives the EU envisages promoting interoperability in its broader sense. It aims to stimulate coherent, transparent, efficient and simplified solutions in support of cooperation, interoperability and consistency between Member States and transport operators. Clearly, the e-maritime concept is not just a matter of technologies, as pointed out by the DG-TREN (Directorate-general Energy and Transport) which defines the e-maritime as a network interaction amongst all relevant stakeholders within the maritime sector 3. In that respect, the summary report of the public consultation on the EU e-maritime initiative, carried out in the first 2010 semester, provides interesting insights on the standpoints of all relevant public and private stakeholders potentially involved in the implementation of e- maritime facilities: a synthesis of the interviewed subjects is reported in the following Table 2. Table 2 EU DG-TREN e-maritime public consultation: number of interviews by stakeholder type of stakeholder # interviews type of stakeholder # interviews port authority 25 shortsea promotion centre 7 educational/training/research organization 24 coast guard 6 maritime authority 20 cargo handlers 5 IT provider 18 stevedores 5 ship operator 18 shippers/receivers 5 ship owner 17 exporting/importing agents 5 harbourmaster 16 maritime law/insurance 5 pilotage 16 rail/truck operators 4 other 14 ship crews/trade unions 4 ship brokers and agents 12 vessel inspection society 4 port state control 11 entities responsible for health 3 terminal operator 10 inland terminals 3 freight forwarder 10 marketing/public relations 2 multimodal transport operator 9 dockers 1 customs operator 8 large producers/retailers 1 Source: European Union, 2010 A noteworthy result of the survey 4 is that there is a consensus that the EU e-maritime initiative is important and worthwhile. There is widespread support and agreement that maritime reporting data should be submitted electronically and only once. Interestingly, 3 E-maritime concept and objective document, presented by C. Pipitsoulis (EU DG-TREN) at JST 2008 CETMEF Journées scientifique et techniques. 4 Summary report of the contributions received to the e-maritime public online consultation (2010) available at 8

9 respondents were asked to rank some domains of e-maritime applications, so as to come up with a final priority list of e-maritime application fields, reported in the following Table 3. Table 3 Public EU DG-TREN consultation on e-maritime: priority list ranked by respondents Rank Application Domain 1 Support for national single window, one-stop-shop developments or an European single window including common reporting interface and dynamic Administration integration with existing applications 2 Establishing cooperative transport networks and integration of short-sea shipping into logistics Transport/logistics 3 Support for compliance to and enforcement of regulations Administration 4 Improved interoperable maritime surveillance/monitoring systems for traffic, ship and cargo facilitating EU and national administrations to collaborate in safety, security and environmental risk management in support of proactive Administration or remedial operations 5 Integrated systems for monitoring, evaluating and managing situations including improved risk assessment and decision support systems Administration 6 Imporved automation in ship reporting Ship operations 7 Solutions for more effective and coordinated controls and inspections Administration 8 Fleet and sip routing and scheduling Ship operations 9 Integration of port single windows with national and international web portals Port/terminal operations 10 Delivering and EU system for statistical data on maritime transport Administration 11 e-learning and e-training for career development both at sea and in land Training/education Source: European Union, 2010 A major conclusion drawn by DG-TREN based on such ranking was that notwithstanding the importance of the other proposed measures, the technical standardization process and the implementation of National Single Window emerge as measures receiving the highest support. [ ] With regard to possible applications, the general opinion is that administrative domain applications are more urgent than others. However, it is a matter of fact that the private domain of the effective integration of ports, short-sea shipping and logistics was ranked second: in that respect DG-TREN noted that there should be carefully evaluation as to whether applications in the business domain require public intervention or could be left for the industry to develop. In other words, a policy orientation seems to emerge towards a prioritization of public investments and initiative towards administrative issues in the e-maritime framework, leaving the transport and logistics integration as a substantially open market facility: this is a key aspect which will be investigated specifically later on in the report (section 2.3). Two other main findings of the survey are worth to be mentioned. Firstly, a large number of respondents stress that it is essential to establish an open, comprehensive and regular coordination with all stakeholders involved at European and international levels : this has practical consequences on the implementation of e-maritime compliant facilities, since at least a national coordination would be desirable. It also suggests that a key factor for the success of an e-maritime initiative seems to be represented by the involvement of all the relevant stakeholders. Secondly, given the complexity of the initiative and the desired priority for administrative applications, a step-by-step approach should be 9

10 considered : this is a clear suggestion towards designing gradual road maps of implementation of e-maritime applications. In general, an important classification of the stakeholders involved in the e-maritime concept (most of them are cited in Table 3) relates to their nature, leading to the two broad clusters of the public stakeholders (e.g. for operations regulation and control, system governance, customs, sanitary inspection) and of the private stakeholders (either business operators or final customers). This leads to a consistent classification of the main physical and information transactions between stakeholders: the most common and straightforward for the e-maritime concept are the business-to-government (B2G) and the business-tobusiness (B2B) transactions 5. However, other possible transactions may be common as well, for instance government-to-government (G2G) interactions between public bodies 6, or information provided to final consumers either by public or private bodies, i.e. in the form respectively of government-to-consumer (G2C) or business-to-consumer (B2C) transactions 7. This classification reflects the two major e-maritime declination clusters, which are the single window concept mainly conceived for B2G transactions, described in detail in section 2.1.2, and the port community system concept related to B2B and B2C transactions, described in section The Single Window concept According to the European Port Community System Association (EPCSA 8 ), the single window is a complex community undertaking which facilitates trade. More in detail, the United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business (UN/CEFACT) provides the following definition: A Single Window is a facility that allows parties involved in trade and transport to lodge standardized information and documents with a single entry point to fulfill all import, export, and transit-related regulatory requirements (the information exchange is B2G, between trade and government). If information is electronic, then individual data elements should only be submitted once. The Single Window is a practical application of trade facilitation concepts intended to reduce non-tariff trade barriers and deliver immediate benefits to all members of the trading community. Along this line, the Recommendation n 33 by UN/CEFACT and the EU TAXUD/1241/2005 Single Window at the Community Level documents define a single window as a facility that: expedites and simplifies information flows between trade and government; allows the lodging of standardized information; provides one point of entry (for all cross-border trade transactions); allows submission of information only once through electronic non redundant 5 Examples of e-maritime relevant B2B and B2G transactions will be provided in the following. 6 An example is represented by the information which customs may exchange with port authorities, or crossauthorizations between public inspection officials. 7 This may be relevant for some ports involved in the MED-PCS project, for instance information to the congestion and/or the status of the queues at the gates of the port for Ro-Pax trade. 8 Detailed documents available at 10

11 data fields; facilitates trade, bringing gains to all parties involved. Similarly, the review by PORTEL 9 defines a port single window as a system which provides local level information about the vessel to the authorities on a port level, that has B2G (Business to Government) character. From the above definitions, it is clear that the single window concept is aimed to facilitate international trade through allowing to transmit the relevant information only once, i.e. via just a single information transfer to a common interface. Such interface acts as a unique inter-administrative body, which centralizes all data provided by each private operator and, in turn, sort, share and distribute them to all relevant public stakeholders 10. Therefore, a single window acts as a platform which can be accessed by private operators (e.g. freight forwarders, shipping companies, multimodal transport operators) in order to carry out all import/export procedures through a single electronic data/documents transmission. Clearly, the absence of a single window would lead to a substantial fragmentation of the import/export process, resulting in higher costs in terms of time and resources used by all sides involved in the procedures. Normally, additional tracking and monitoring functions are implemented also within a single window, so that each private operator may check instantaneously the status of his/her data processing. Importantly, the single window concept embeds (and therefore should not be confused with 11 ) two relevant trade facilitation frameworks, that is: the e-custom concept, which represents the cluster of all activities related to the custom processing of import/export goods; the maritime single window concept acting at national level in response of Directive 2010/65/EC (see section 3.1). Furthermore, depending on the geographical coverage of the single window implementation, the concepts of port single window, regional single window, national single window may be encountered as well Definitions of Port Community Systems Many definitions of Port Community Systems may be found in the literature, not always consistent amongst each other. According to Capgemini a Port Community System can be defined as an entity delivering information to supply chains operating in the port. The 9 SKEMA 7 th FP project SST 2007 TREN 1 - SST deliverable E-marittime Inventory of PSW and PCS. 10 The DG TAXUD explicitly states: In the interests of facilitating business, while at the same time providing for the proper levels of control of goods brought into or out of the Customs territory of the Community, it is appropriate that the information provided by economic operators is shared, taking account of the relevant data protection provisions, between Customs authorities and with other agencies involved in that control, such as police, border guards, veterinary and environmental authorities, so that the economic operator needs to give the information only once ( Single Window ) and that the goods are controlled by those authorities at the same time and at the same place ( one-stop-shop ). 11 For more detail see the document Good Practice Collection 3-01/II - Overview of e-maritime initiatives in selected European Ports released in the context of the PortIntegration project ( 11

12 PCS is responsible for: data supply, data control, data distribution, and data conversion. Similarly, PORTEL 9 defines a PCS as a tool to exchange messages in port environment, having a commercial and logistic nature, that has B2B character. Notably, both definitions highlight the PCS capability to enable the unification of the relevant B2B transactions, that is complementing the concept of single windows. However, the PCS concept is intuitively interconnected with the SW concept defined in section 2.1.2, with a level of integration which may overcome the simple B2B complement to the B2G nature of the single window. This aspect is explicitly reflected in some other definitions. For instance, according to the EPCSA, a PCS is a neutral and open electronic platform enabling intelligent and secure exchange of information between public and private stakeholders in order to improve the competitive position of the sea and air ports communities [ ] it optimizes, manages and automates port and logistics efficient processes through a single submission of data and connecting transport and logistics chains. Furthermore, a PCS provides for the electronic exchange of information between all ports and logistics sectors and is acknowledged as the most advanced method for the exchange of information within a single or national port community infrastructure. A PCS has the ability to act as a National Single Window or to integrate into a National Single Window which European Member States are developing in response to recent Directives and policy from the European Commission. A PCS is therefore pivotal in the Single Window concept and will reduce duplication of data input through efficient electronic exchange of information. Many other authors follow this line, for instance Grizell (2001) states 12 that PCS are centrally operated systems for transferring data and providing other services with the help of this data, which can be used by any party who is interested in information concerning seaborne transport. A Port Community System avoids bilateral data transfer, whilst Rodon and Ramis-Pujol (2006) report that a Port Community System (PCS) is an electronic platform that connects the multiple systems operated by a variety of organizations that make up a seaport community. According to these wider definitions, a PCS acts as the only access point for a business operator, which is interfaced directly also with the B2G functionalities of the single window. In that respect, through a smart and effective electronic information exchange and a secure data repository, a PCS may support for instance the following activities: customs declarations and procedures; import/export of containerized, bulk, Ro-Ro and general cargo trade; tracking and tracing along the legs of supply chains related to ports; dangerous goods trade; access control; transport statistics and calculation of key performance indicators. 12 Grizell, P. (2001). The economic potentials for a port community system in the ports of the Netherlands. Master thesis, Erasmus University Rotterdam. 12

13 A formal representation of the integrated structure of a PCS and of a single window, in the two possible cases of complementarity and full integration, is reported respectively in the following Figure 2 and Figure 3 respectively. private subjects third-party subjects PORT OPERATORS SHIPPING COMPANIES B2B B2C FINAL CUSTOMERS public bodies NVOCC TERMINAL OPERATORS PCS G2C PUBLIC OFFICIALS PORT AUTHORITY CUSTOMS HAULIERS AND CARRIERS B2G (limited) G2G SANITARY ISPECTORS MARITIME AGENTS SHIPS B2G SW GOVERNMENT BODIES Figure 2 PCS and SW functional scheme: case of complementarity 13

14 private subjects third-party subjects PORT OPERATORS FINAL CUSTOMERS SHIPPING COMPANIES NVOCC TERMINAL OPERATORS B2B B2C G2C PCS B2G G2C PUBLIC OFFICIALS PORT AUTHORITY CUSTOMS public bodies HAULIERS AND CARRIERS SANITARY ISPECTORS MARITIME AGENTS SHIPS B2G B2C SW G2G GOVERNMENT BODIES Figure 3 - PCS and SW functional scheme: case of full integration More specifically, in the first case the PCS and the SW act as two separate systems, the former mainly devoted to the B2B and B2C transactions and the latter to the B2G and G2G transactions: this situation may occur, for instance, when the e-custom implementation embedded into the single window concept is not open to input from third party systems 13. Thus, there is a remarkable time saving and effectiveness increase thanks to the presence of IT implementations in the port, but the full e-maritime concept is not entirely satisfied, since private operators may still face the presence of (at least) two access points for data entry. In the second case, instead, the full interface between the PCS and the SW allows obtaining a real overall integration in the sense of the e-maritime principles. A noteworthy practical example of such integration is reported by EPCSA in its White paper 14, with reference to the cargo manifests: cargo manifests have traditionally been received by the PCS primarily for port operational purposes and for Customs fiscal controls. Almost 100% of manifests are now received electronically into the PCS, predominantly using the UN/EDIFACT CUSCAR message, replacing the seven copies that were previously circulated around the port on paper! A screen input facility is available for the very few companies that do not have the capability to send data electronically. However, the data included in the manifest received by the PCS enables it to fulfill other regulatory 13 This occurs, for instance, in Italy due to specific regulations

15 requirements on behalf of the ports and carriers, while enabling the carriers to submit data only once. There are obvious many variations of those simplified schemes, which however capture quite precisely the inner nature of the possible IT system architectures for ports. Importantly, as it will be described in section 2.2, the practical development of one of such possible schemes depends normally on the nature of the focal organization that promoted its implementation. The above schemes refer to a context with a single port involved. Obviously, potential integrations and economies of scope may be achieved in the case of a network of connected PCS. In that respect, there are very few examples of networks of PCS, mostly at a very preliminary stage and mainly involving ports within the same country. In terms of processed information, PORTEL has carried out an exhaustive review 15 of all data circulating within PCS, identifying 68 types of transactions, reported in the Annex 1. Interestingly, even if with remarkable differences between ports, all PCS offer terminal control facilities (e.g. gate-in/gate-out access control); furthermore, very common offered services include: vessel arrival/departure management (e.g. schedules, call announcement); berth request, shipping instructions and berth allocation; cargo loading/unloading: summary declarations, manifests, dangerous cargo; declaration, loading & unloading lists, transshipments; basic information services (apart from container status): statistics, port directory. Less frequent but remarkable services refer to: truck/rail arrival pre-notification; truck fleet scheduling and control system (including event reporting at client s warehouse facility), offered by Portic (Barcelona); stowage plans, offered by Dakosy (Hamburg); container damage/repair reports; integration with national/international platforms 16 ; billing/invoicing. In general, most of operational PCS in EU process container flows mostly in import trade, i.e. from seaside towards landside and dangerous goods. There are few examples of bulk goods processed by PCS and no recognized examples of Ro-Pax traffic. Another remarkable aspect refers to the possible integration of PCS with inland transport networks. In that respect, some PCS were developed among TEN-T European project, thus respecting multimodal transport integration, and however many PCS incorporate specific services to cover for instance rail and barge traffic (e.g. loading and 15 PORTEL. Inventory of Port Single Windows and Port Community Systems. Released within the 7 th FP project SKEMA: Sustainable Knowledge Platform for the European Maritime and Logistics Industry. 16 See section 3.9 for an example related to the Italian case. 15

16 unloading lists for train or barge and arrival and/or discharge notifications). Finally, it is worth mentioning that, due to its nature, a PCS should face more challenging implementation issues with respect to a single window. In that respect, the most common problems cited in the relevant literature are: normally, a PCS is not designed from scratch, being rather a superposition over preexisting systems: this may influence substantially the road map for the implementation of a PCS and its overall architecture; a PCS should be characterized by a modular and interoperable architecture, since it is expected to evolve as new companies ask to be integrated or as new port processes/supply chains are added; as in all IT implementations, the development of a PCS should be coupled with a consistent business process reorganization of the private subjects involved in port operations; all safety, sharing and sensitivity issues related to data transmission by private bodies may represent relevant barriers to the effective implementation of a PCS. 2.2 Evolution of PCS in European logistic ambit The previous section was primarily aimed at defining a common understanding on the main concepts of e-maritime, single window and port community system. Starting from this point, the present section deals with a critical review of the development of PCS in Europe in recent years, so as to provide a common background to the case studies which will be analyzed in chapter 3. It is widely recognized that the development of PCS in Europe started in the early 80s in the most important ports of the Northern range, from Le Havre to Hamburg. The pioneer experience of Antwerp is dated 1986, and almost contemporarily Rotterdam went through some pilot projects prior to the adoption to the currently operational PCS. Nowadays, even if in some cases it is actually just a seminal application of some single window functionalities, a wide range of European ports claim to have a PCS implemented. It is therefore not surprising that PCS become also the object of investigation from some academic researchers and from relevant public institutions, including IAPH-TF&PCS (Trade Facilitation & Port Community Systems Committee of the IAPH), EU, EPCSA, WCO, UNCTAD and many others. In general, there is consensus on the implementation time needed on average for the full implementation of a significant portion of a PCS, which falls in a range between 2 ½ and 3 years: remarkable exceptions are represented by the Portbase Rotterdam system (15 months) and the Dakosy Hamburg system (18 months). Interestingly, the evolution of PCS in the European logistic ambit followed different paths in terms of focal organization, business models, involved stakeholders and technologies. Therefore, in order to support the review of the case studies carried out in 16

17 the chapter 3, such aspects will be specifically recalled in the next subsections PCS implementation The key role of the focal organization and of the business model for the successful development of a PCS is explicitly recognized by EPCSA, which states that various business and functional models can be used for the design of a successful Single Window/PCS system. Whether implemented at the regional, national or international level, a major factor in accomplishing a Single Window/PCS project is a strong leading body to promote its benefits. These efforts, combined with strong political support and the appropriate project-centric organization and resources, are the elements required for a Single Window project to succeed. In order to assess those aspects, the portfolio of the most significant European PCS implementations has been reviewed in order to identify the focal organization, i.e. the main body in charge of promoting and carrying out the PCS implementation. In that respect, three main subjects may be identified: national/regional government bodies; private operators active in the port environment (bottom-up approach); port authorities (top-down approach). The first case refers to a situation wherein relevant public governments (national and/or regional) are directly the main promoters of a PCS. Importantly, even if this scheme is quite common in single window implementations due to their prevailing B2G nature, their main involvement in PCS development is substantially marginal, and principally limited to a start-up financial support. Rather, there are national governments which, under the umbrella of the EU e-maritime policy, try to force the implementation of PCS by other bodies through specific acts and regulations, often related to prior single window/e-custom initiatives. The second case refers to a situation in which private members of the business/logistics community of a port need to improve the performance of the port environment. This is a typical bottom-up approach with a private major company or a small group of medium to big size private companies acting as focal organization for the development of a PCS-like system. The key driving factor may be represented normally by the need for implementing advanced IT solution, e.g. in the presence of complex transport procedures (such as in the trade of dangerous goods) or in response specific security requirements by trade customers. Other common driving factors for a bottom-up implementation of a PCS-like system are also represented by vertical and/or horizontal integration strategies, e.g. when a shipping company controls a port container terminal and possibly also some landside facilities. There are various examples of PCS implementations fostered by private operators in EU, as it will be reviewed in section 3. The third case refers to the design and the implementation of PCS within the strategic planning and the supervision of the relevant Port Authorities, who implement e-maritime schemes with the consensus of the private operators of the port communities, i.e. in a 17

18 classical top-down implementation approach. In that respect, two different private engagement schemes may be found: the former deals with a voluntary participation of the private operators, which may choose either to join the system or to continue with the traditional paper-based operations; the latter is characterized by the obligation to comply with the PCS as a necessary condition for using the port facilities. Clearly, the voluntary participation is not entirely effective, since the traditional system and the PCS should coexist, leading to a significant mitigation of the expected improvements offered by a PCS; on the other side, forcing private operators towards a given PCS may result in a loss of competitiveness of the port if the management and operational change implied by the PCS is too costly for the private operators. Notably, the majority of implementations of PCS in EU ports are fostered by this type of focal organization. Clearly, the adoption of one of the three above mentioned schemes is conditional also on the size of the port and of the related main private business players. As a rule of thumb, it may be observed that large ports usually host large private operators, which have the capability to foster a bottom-up approach. On the contrary, medium to small ports may develop a PCS normally only if the port authority is strongly committed towards this objective. In addition, the role of the national/regional government is strictly related to the strength of the public administration in each specific country: emblematic examples are the PCS implementations in France with a strong and solid public background and in England entirely left to the initiative of private bodies. Finally, in terms of network of PCS, it is important to underline that the issue of identifying a focal organization is still an unsolved issue, due to the absence of practical examples. Current initiatives suggest that the port authorities may act as focal organizations towards the establishment of PCS networks, as in the case of the MED-PCS project. A noteworthy specific situation is also represented by quite close ports that may decide to join a common PCS: in such cases, normally the largest involved port acts as focal organization, as in the case of the Portbase system in Rotterdam which currently manages some operations in the nearby Amsterdam port. A PCS characteristic strictly related to the type of focal organization fostering the PCS development is represented by the business nature of the shareholders of the PCS manager/supervisor company. In that respect, three main types of PCS operators may be identified: private; public; mixed public/private. The private shareholder scheme complies with the above mentioned bottom-up approach: in other words, if private operators boost the development of a PCS, it is quite straightforward to expect private shareholders such as shipping agents, shipping companies, freight forwarders, brokers, terminal operators, stevedores and so on. Sometimes, private associations of entrepreneurs (e.g. chamber of commerce) and banks act also as relevant shareholders. 18

19 The public shareholder scheme is instead coupled with the top-down implementation approach, which normally envisages the port authorities and possible other public bodies as main shareholders. In countries with a proactive participation of national public authorities, the presence of state-owned corporations as main shareholders is also a common situation. The mixed public/private scheme is aimed at achieving a full acceptance and/or an active participation of private companies in a top-down PCS implementation. In that respect, probably the most advanced and complex scheme of public-private partnership is represented by the SOGET experience in France. An interesting analysis can be carried out by comparing the focal organization and the business model of some PCS implementations, as reported for some remarkable case studies (see section 3 for details) in the following Table 4. Interestingly, most of the implementations involve contemporarily PCS and SW functionalities, but with a remarkable heterogeneity in terms of nature of the focal organization and of business models adopted. Finally, in accordance with the general schemes provided in section 2.1.3, there are many potential public and private bodies that may act as stakeholders of whatever PCS/SW facility: port authorities, customs, shipping companies and agents, freight forwarders, terminal operators (container, roll-on, roll-off and bulk), stevedores, brokers, warehouse operators, inland carriers (truck, barge, rail), empty container depots, importers/exporters, NVOCC, sanitary inspector, and so on. However, it is noteworthy to investigate in the EU case studies wherein this information is provided who are the most frequently involved stakeholders: a review in that respect will be reported in section 3. However, in general, in most of observed case studies Customs, Port Authority, Freight Forwarders, Shipping Lines and Agents, Terminal Operators, Customs Brokers are the main users of the PCS. Table 4 Focal organization and business model of some remarkable PCS/SW implementations in Europe Country Port Name of system Type of system Name of focal org. Type of focal org. Business model France Le Havre AP+ PCS+SW Soget SA mixed PPP Germany Hamburg DAKOSY PCS+SW DAKOSY private bottom-up Belgium Antwerp Porthus.net PCS+SW Port-I-Com mixed PPP Netherlands Rotterdam Portbase PCS+SW Portbase public top-down Italy Livorno TPCS PCS+SW Port authority public top-down Italy Venice LOGis PCS Port authority public PPP Italy Genoa E-Port PCS+SW Port authority public PPP In general, as noted by EPCSA 17, in terms of the types of PCS clients the number of

20 clients differs and ranges from about 280 to 2.000, with most of them being importers or exporters, forwarders, terminals, on-carriage operators, ship agencies or brokers. The number of end users ranges from about 500 to more than 7,500 but this does not seem to be related to the size of the PCS or to how many PCSs are being operated Some technological aspects The technology enabling the implementation of a PCS/SW framework should be able to integrate community members and give them access to pertinent data, so as to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of their interactions. More specifically, according to the technical literature 18, an integration between systems external to an organization with the internal systems of the organization should be performed, through two main vehicles: interfaces and network integration. Building interfaces mean substantially altering the business applications of a firm so as to comply with EDI applications. In particular, technical, organizational, structural and work changes are required and, mostly, changes in workers roles, responsibilities, necessary skills, experience and knowledge are expected to take place. Achieving a network integration mean defining a common architectural platform wherein a group of firms may interact electronically and connect its IT systems. This process entails the development of standards for electronic interaction together with the corresponding development of the relevant technological infrastructures. As a consequence, important aspects of the implementation of PCS are represented by the following issues: electronic/informatics infrastructure adopted in the port; informatics exchange protocols underlying the system; type of transactions processed by the system. A careful review of such aspects is very technical and goes beyond the scopes of the present review. However, PORTEL provided a review 19 of the most common technical aspects of existing PCS in EU, to which the reader may refer for further details. For the objectives of this review, it is important to underline two important technological aspects which may represent significant barriers towards a fluid and full PCS implementation, that is the data security and the data recovery issues. In particular, the data security issue refers to the protection of the data processed by a PCS both from sharing between PCS members and to/from external users (authorized or potential hackers): in that respect, there is a common understanding that intrusion protection usually adds a significant overhead to operating costs. Sometimes, the need to guarantee an adequate data security level forces the implementation of PCS based on local closed network systems rather than on open (obviously protected) web-based systems. The data 18 See for instance Rodon J. and Ramis-Pujol J. (2006). Exploring the Intricacies of Integrating with a Port Community System. Proceedings of the 19 th Bled econference evalues Bled, Slovenia, June 5-7, PORTEL. Inventory of Port Single Windows and Port Community Systems. Released within the 7 th FP project SKEMA: Sustainable Knowledge Platform for the European Maritime and Logistics Industry. 20

21 recovery issue refers instead to the actions envisaged in order to recovery the PCS under the situation of a failure (either accidental or malicious): again, this may potentially impact significantly on operating costs, due to the need of guarantee specific backup servers. In addition, there is some diffidence towards cloud-based storage systems, which are often psychologically recognized by PCS user not adequate to solve data recovery problems. 2.3 Reasons of the implementation of PCS A noteworthy aspect of the review carried so far out refers to the analysis of the reasons why an IT facilities should be implemented under the umbrella of the e-maritime concept. In general, the straightforward benefit coming from a PCS/SW implementation for all port operators is a more efficient data processing, with higher response speeds and a substantial removal of all paper documents, resulting in an higher port competitiveness. Furthermore, a PCS allows increasing the safety and security performance of the port and, from a social standpoint, may help achieving more sustainable transport chains. In accordance with section 2.2.1, the nature of the focal organization and the business model underlying the PCS implementation influences the main perceived benefits: for instance, a PCS development driven by a public body (e.g. a port authority) may be primarily related to the increase of the overall competitiveness and attractiveness of the port, whilst a private driven implementation (e.g. by a group of big operators) may be related substantially to an inner optimization just of the directly controlled processes. Importantly, the PCS case studies that will be reviewed thoroughly in chapter 3 are not represented only by big ports which however represent the vast majority of operational PCS/SW facilities in the EU being present the two examples of Venezia and Livorno in Italy. Therefore, effective PCS may be developed with positive results not only in leading EU ports, but also in medium/small size ports. Which are the main driving factors fostering the implementation of a PCS in such contexts? Relevant motivations include the following: a medium/small port may be located in the city centre, surrounded by the city and therefore with very limited possibility of further enlargement. Since the capacity becomes a constraint, the PCS may become a necessary condition to speed up all import/export processes and therefore a mean to increase the port throughput; a port may be part of a regional cluster with neighboring ports: in such situation, a PCS may allow either obtaining a performance advantage with respect to the other ports in a competing environment, or achieving an IT-based integration with the other ports of the cluster, so as to boost the entire cluster. In the latter case, the entire port regional cluster would share a unique PCS/SW; the PCS may allow strengthening the relationship between the smaller port and bigger ports, so as to benefit of their traffics and obtaining a throughput increase. It should also be remembered that, whatever the dimension of the port, another key driver towards the implementation of PCS schemes is represented by the need to comply 21

22 with the increasingly complex security requirements imposed by national and international laws and regulations. As a matter of fact, it is not a case that most of the PCS implemented to date embed a module for controlling port access at gates. Interestingly, some interviews carried out in the context of the SKEMA 7 th FP EU project revealed that the two most perceived benefits from the introduction of PCS are the reduction of the administrative burden ( very positive impact for about 50% of respondents), an increase of the efficiency of the maritime transport ( very positive impact for about 40% of respondents) and a generally better security ( very positive impact for about 40% of respondents). Only marginal were instead the perceived benefits for the job quality and the changes in the modal share. Finally, as reported in the literature 20, there is common agreement about the key critical success factors of a PCS implementation, listed in the following order: logistics procedures know how; strong financial capacity; confidentiality and neutrality; involvement of all stakeholders of the logistics operation; believing PCS benefits everyone; involvement of the public bodies; public-private partnership (PPP). 3 Implementation of PCS in Europe This section provides a brief review of some relevant PCS implementation in EU ports relevant for the MED-PCS project. More specifically, section 3.1 deals with some legal aspects relevant for the study, sections from 3.2 to 3.8 report a description of the analysed case studies (that is: Rotterdam, Venice, Antwerp, Hamburg, Le Havre, Livorno and Genoa), whilst section 3.9 discusses the case study of some components of the Italian national single window implementation. 3.1 Legal framework A general overview and the EU legislation The complex of laws and regulations relevant for a PCS implementation is very wide and covers different frameworks, as explicitly stated in the Action 8 of the EPCSA guide 21. Therefore, a thorough review goes beyond the scopes of the present review. In broad terms, the overall legal frameworks wherein a PCS is supposed to work should include European, Member State and regional/local acts and rules, in addition to Data Protection Acts, Marine Acts and Directives, Customs Acts and procedures released by worldwide and international bodies. As a result, according to the country wherein the PCS is implemented, the legal framework may change substantially; furthermore, the overall organization of the maritime sector itself may exhibit remarkable discrepancies across EU member states. A good and rather exhaustive review in that respect is reported in a 20 Milà G.S. (2011). Keys to successful PCS. Presented at IAPH World Ports Conference, Busan, May

23 document released in the context of the PortIntegration project 22, to which the reader may refer for further details. For the purposes of the study, it is worth recalling the EU Directive 2010/65 aimed to facilitate maritime transport and reduce the administrative burdens for shipping companies, through a simplification and an harmonization of all reporting formalities resulting from legal acts of the EU and of Member States. Specifically, the directive 2010/65/EU aims to simplify and harmonize the administrative procedures applied to maritime transport by establishing a standard electronic transmission of information and by rationalizing reporting formalities for ships arriving in and ships departing from EU ports. Notably, as explicitly recalled in the following Figure 4, the cooperation between competent authorities (e.g. customs, border control, public health, transport authorities, and so on) and to/from private operators should make the most efficient use of electronic data transmission and information exchange systems, in the light of the achievement of an European maritime transport space without barriers. More specifically, EU Member States shall accept the fulfillment of reporting formalities in electronic format and their transmission via a single window no later than June the 1 st Source: C. Pipitsoulis. European Commission (2011) Figure 4 Administrative procedures in accordance with 2010/65/EU This single window, linking SafeSeaNet 23, e-customs and other electronic systems, shall be the place where all information is reported once and made available to various competent authorities and to the Member States. Furthermore, a legal issue arising in strict relationship with the technical aspects 22 PortIntegration project (2011). Environment for the application of ICT Technologies in European Ports. 23 SafeSeaNet is the vessel traffic monitoring in EU waters. 23

24 recalled in section is represented by the regulation of collaborative IT solutions such as the PCS. Indeed, a collaborative solution differs from the standalone systems operated by each organization internally: this implies the establishment of a legal entity which will be the operator of the IT platform underlying the PCS and a neutral warrantor of the relationships between members of the PCS. Therefore, in addition to the compliance with all external regulations, an inner regulatory framework should be established for the correct implementation of a PCS, based mainly on memorandum of understanding and regulations within the public sector, and interchange agreements with the private sector. Normally, Service Level Agreements (SLAs) and Interconnect Security Agreements (ISAs) are explicitly regulated so as to avoid any misunderstanding and potential conflicts in sharing of data in the possible disclosure of private, confidential and protected information. Finally, another issue normally arising when implementing a PCS and, more generally, collaborative IT solutions is represented by the recognition of the equivalence between a paperless electronic transaction and a paper-based transaction: this is unfortunately not a straightforward task, especially in some countries. The development of the Single Window Approach has brought some new declarations. The first one is valued since January the 1 st 2011 where we can see new law duties for importers/exporters and their representatives. As previously stated, in order to ensure risk controls, the operators have to supply some information before the goods that were purchased in the community territory arrive. The Reg. (EC) n. 273/2009 of the Commission has provided a transitory period (until 31/12/2010) where the declaration s presentation previously mentioned was facultative. Now, on the basis of the new law from the first January 2011, this presentation becomes mandatory. The start of this phase of the "e-customs" project has been postponed (first it was fixed for the July 2009) because of the delay of the implementation of the informatics system in some Community countries and it was established on first January Since 2011 there is the duty to complete the ENS (Entry Summary Declaration). This means that both the entry summary declaration of the arriving goods from the non-eu countries and the EXS (Exit Summary Declaration) relating to the exit summary declaration of the leaving goods with the destination non-eu countries must be completed. It is necessary to emphasize that these declarations have to contain some essential dates to identify the shipment s characteristics and to speed up the analysis operations of the customs risks. On the basis of the measures of the community risk, the ENS and EXS are analyzed by the customs system and once the risk noticed, the goods can be subordinated to the control. Reg. (EU) N. 430/2010 of the Commission from 20 May 2010 introduced some new modifications of the Regulations (EEC) n. 2454/93 (application of the customs community codex, "DAC"). Regulation (EC) n. 648/2005 of the European Parliament and the Council has 24

25 introduced in the iter of the new custom rules, the summary declaration about goods entry/exit by the electronic system. It must be remembered that the ENS dispatch is managed by the figures reported in Figure 5: Source: RAM elaboration, Italian Custom s Agency Figure 5 - Administrative process Source: RAM elaboration, Italian Custom s Agency Reg. (EC) n. 1192/2008 of the Commission that has recently modified the DAC, introduced common principles and a common demand form for the provision of integrated permits, which is related to the simplified declaration and the local clearance procedure. The new Regulation clarifies that these rules should be considered applicable to all customs procedures. The same Regulation have also provided (since 1 st January 2010) the use of the simplified declaration or the local clearance procedure that are subject to electronic submission of customs declarations or notifications. In Italy, the Customs Agency has clarified (in the line with EU guidelines and in order to avoid duplication of requirements) that the Manifest of Incoming goods, containing dates of the means of transport (like date of arrival, means of transport c.d. entry key) and references of the Declarations entry summary (Movement Reference Number of the ENS and Item Number of the goods included in the ENS) accomplishes the functions for electronic notification of the means of transport arrival. Similarly, with regards to the goods leaving the Community territory, the Manifest of Departure goods, containing M.R.N. (Movement Reference Number) export declarations, the EXS, accomplishes also the function of the arrivals notification at the office of the outgoing and permission request to the board. The deadline for sending the ENS varies with regard to the means of transport used for the goods travelling. In the case of maritime transport: for container cargo: at least 24 hours before the loading at the port of departure; for bulk cargo: at least 4 hours before the arrival at first port in the customs territory of the Community; 25

26 for transport between Greenland, the Faerøer islands, Ceuta, Melilla, Norway, Island or Baltic Sea ports, North Sea ports, Black Sea ports or Mediterranean ports, all the ports of Morocco and the territory of the Community with the exception of the French overseas departments, the Azores, Madeira and Canary Islands: at least 2 hours before the arrival at first port in the customs territory. Besides, it will be fundamental how the customs authorities of different member countries will manage the start up phase: it is possible that, initially, the means of transport of goods arrive into the Community customs territory and that in the information system the customs administrations are missing or the dates are incomplete/inexact. There is a risk of a slowdown of the operations of their appointment or paralysis and, therefore, it becomes necessary to identify common solutions at the competent Community offices. However, there are traders who can give a vital contribution and facilitate the work of the administration, raising awareness among their suppliers to communicate the data promptly. Those are essential for the proper completion of the Declarations entry by presenting such data through its acquisition by the carriers The WCO data model standard for the PCS/SW implementation In order to standardize the flow of information between the relevant actors in a PCS, standard electronic messages are the backbone for the exchange and the sharing of information: in this context, providing standardizations is a very helpful and effective way to improve the electronic data flow. In that respect, an useful help comes from the World Customs Organization (WCO), who has realized a data model representing a framework to which electronic messages related to arrival, departure and transit goods should comply. Ultimately, the WCO data model 24 may support the implementation of a PCS/SW framework by providing a common data model and a set of messages in a standardized electronic format. Importantly, the WCO data model has been developed in accordance with the regulations and the requirements of relevant international bodies, including the International Maritime Organization (IMO), with specific reference to the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS Code) and Facilitation of International Maritime Traffic (FAL) conventions. Obviously, the WCO data model complies also with other regulations by World Customs Organization itself, e.g. the SAFE Framework of Standard (FOS) for the safety and security of container tracking. Finally, the WCO data models also derives some standards from the Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods of the United Nations Economic and Social Council (UN/ECE). In terms of data format, the WCO data model is consistent with the international standards ebxml (Electronic Business using extensible Markup Language), UN/CEFACT

27 recommendations 25 (United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business) and UN/EDIFACT 26 (Electronic Data Interchange For Administration, Commerce and Transport). 3.2 Port of Rotterdam Brief overview The port of Rotterdam is the largest logistics and industrial hub in Europe, with port premises and the related industrial complex stretching over a length of about 40 kilometers and covering hectares, both seaside and landside. The total throughput of almost 442 Million tons in 2012 makes the port of Rotterdam by far the largest seaport in Europe: of them, bulk trade accounts for 292 Million tons (214 liquid bulk and 78 dry bulk), 125 Million tons by container and the remaining 23 Million tons of break-bulk. In terms of accessibility, the port area of Rotterdam has excellent seaside accessibility, being the only port in Northwestern Europe that offers unrestricted access to ships with the deepest draughts: in 2012, for instance, the world s largest containership (CMA CGM Marco Polo) and the largest iron ore carrier (Vale Rio) called Rotterdam. Some issues are instead still present on the landside area: Rotterdam continues to lag behind Hamburg with reference to rail connections and, similarly to Amsterdam and Antwerp, it experiences a significant road congestion. The port is also remarkable for its extremely strong position for large-scale energy generation due to factors such as location, draught, cooling water facilities. It also hosts state-of-the-art facilities in refining and tank storage PCS in Rotterdam Rotterdam has a pioneering experience in the implementation of PCS. The current system, named Portbase, founded in 2009 jointly by the Port Authorities of Rotterdam and Amsterdam, which decided to merge the prior Rotterdam s Port Infolink (established in 2002) and the Amsterdam s PortNET (established in 2000) existing PCS. The implementation of Portbase in its initial version, and all subsequent improvements, enjoyed wide support from the overall port business community. In fact, new potential services are identified on the basis of market surveys and users workgroups aimed at recognizing the most important user needs. The corresponding feedbacks are very precious in the overall maintenance and upgrading of the PCS. Furthermore, pilot projects are the conceptual vehicle fostering the adoption of new services/functionalities to Portbase. Nowadays, key figures of Portbase report 41 different services currently offered 25 More specifically, the following recommendations are embedded: n 3 (use of ISO Country code), n 5 (abbreviations of INCOTERMS), n 9 (alphabetic code for the representation of currencies), n 16 (code for ports and other locations LOCODE), n 17 (abbreviations for terms of payment PAYTERMS), n 19 (code for modes of transport), n 20 (code for units of measurement used in international trade), n 21 (codes for types of cargo, packages and packaging materials). 26 More specifically, it implements the CUSCAR (Customs cargo report message), CUSDEC (Customs declaration message) and CUSREP (Customs conveyance report message) standards. 27

28 to around clients from every port sector. Every month, around 4.2 Million electronic messages are processed via the PCS Interfaces and technologies The structure of the Portbase PCS in Rotterdam consists of three parts: an application layer with the services; a platform with the facilities common to all services; a central database in which all the information that companies and government authorities exchange via Portbase is gathered. Within the platform, there is also a further distinction between services according to their nature, that is: domain-related services, specifically devoted to support port functions, such as reference tables with ship names; generic services, covering general basic cross-user functions such as security, authorizations, resource management and logging; implementation services, with the building blocks for adding new services. Each service includes several processes, aimed at achieving the desired message exchange and interaction between parties involved in the service. In detail, the exchange of messages includes communications between systems (system messages) and between people (notifications). Obviously, the platform itself ensures that the processes run in accordance with prior established rules and the presence of the central database makes straightforward the re-use of information. Companies need only enter data once via internet, choosing their preferred browser and device. In that respect, a quarter of the total interactions with Portbase occurs through mobile devices (mostly smartphones and tablets), whilst Internet Explorer is used in 80% of the total accesses to the PCS. The security and recovery issues are top priorities of the Portbase PCS. Based on risk analyses, some thorough measures have been taken in order to keep information safe: regular training of employees in information security; establishment of an ICT security company, in charge of investigating periodically the presence of potential security problems in the infrastructure and software of the PCS; setting up of the PCS in such a way that service provision can continue in the case of malfunctions; proper physical security and access control for all Portbase locations Business model and stakeholders Portbase is a non-profit organization, clearly fostered by the public through a top-down approach. Companies only pay a contribution for the use of services, with a clearly demonstrable added value since, when set off against the advantages, the fees are 28

29 relatively small. The financing of services of particular strategic interest to the port is pursued using the general income of shareholders of the port authorities of Rotterdam and Amsterdam. In general, for each service, customers can choose between two different subscriptions: Portbase Basis Plus: a fixed amount per month and a payment per transaction; Portbase Basis: just a (somewhat higher) payment per transaction. Clearly, this is especially attractive to customers who do not work through the PCS very often. In terms of stakeholders, the services offered by Portbase are intended for every port trade sector (i.e. containers, general cargo, dry bulk, liquid bulk) and all relevant players in the logistics chains of the ports of Rotterdam and Amsterdam can simply and efficiently exchange information using Portbase. Main stakeholders are represented by barge operators, customs, empty depots, exporters/importers, forwarders, the Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority (VWA), inspection points, port authorities, rail infrastructure operators, rail operators, road hauliers, shipbrokers, shipping companies (deep sea and shortsea), terminals, traction suppliers. Each target group has its own service package with customized services within the PCS. Interestingly, the Portbase system is capable to deal contemporarily with container import and export flows 27, and also exhibits a strong integration with the relevant e-custom applications. In that respect, Portbase may be seen as a best practice towards the EPCSA concept of developing PCS as gateways for National Single Windows Detail of offered services The most significant services offered via PCS are listed below: barge planning: service to pre-notify terminals about barges (lighter agreements) and container cargo (discharge/loading lists), including feedback from them on the status. This enables all parties to work more efficiently; cargo declaration export (EDI and Internet): service for submitting outgoing Customs manifests in the container sector (EDI) and in the bulk and general cargo sector (Internet); cargo declaration import (EDI and Internet): prior to the ship s arrival, this service allows submitting summary declarations for discharging cargo (SAL) to Customs; cargo declaration status report: allows having an overview of the summary declarations for which no follow-up declaration has yet been submitted. This means arrange for clearance can be still quickly performed; cargo information: 24/7 access to the itineraries of visiting sea-going vessels and cargo data for the containers on board; customs scan process: service to optimize the logistics relating to Customs 27 In fact, most of PCS implementations, especially in medium to small ports, preferably deal with only import flows for the sake of simplicity of implementation. 29

30 inspections. Containers can quickly continue on their way along the chain; declaration Food and Consumer products (EDI and Internet): low-threshold, lowcost service for submitting electronic Common Entry Documents (GDBs) to the Netherlands Food and Consumer Safety Authority (NVWA); discharge confirmation report: overview of the containers actually discharged at the terminal versus the number stated in advance. This enables to complete all declarations quickly; discharge information: practical, low-threshold service for all communication related to the discharge of a (liquid) bulk carrier. All relevant parties can see B/L data, stowage status and actual discharged weight at a glance; discharge list: a simple way of submitting the list of containers for discharging to the terminal; discrepancy list: overview for Customs of the containers actually discharged versus the number stated on the manifest; ECS notification: exporters/forwarders ensure that their export declarations are dealt with in a watertight manner by submitting five pieces of cargo data in advance; exit summary declaration: a simple way of meeting the obligation to submit an Exit Summary Declaration (EXS) for outgoing cargo for which the safety and security data are not (or no longer) available to Customs in any other way; loading list: a simple way of submitting the list of containers for loading to the terminal; notification bonded warehouse: to notify Customs that goods are being taken to a bonded warehouse for storage; notification dangerous goods (EDI and Internet): service for reporting the presence of dangerous goods on board a sea-going vessel to the Harbour Master; notification import documentation (EDI and Internet): via this service, the container terminal may be informed of the IMA number that confirms permission for removal and of the Movement Reference Number (MRN) received from Customs following an NCTS (both the simplified and normal procedure). 3.3 Port of Venice Brief overview Strategically located at the top end of the Adriatic sea, at the intersection of the main European transport corridors and of the Motorways of the Seas (MoS), the Port of Venezia (Venice) promotes itself to be in a position to act as the European gateway for trade flows to and from Asia. The Port of Venice is one of the major European ports for project and general cargo, and one of the main port in the Adriatic for the number of containers handled. Key figures for 2012 report about 25 Million tons traded, of which 11 of liquid bulk, 6 of dry bulk, 4 of container and 4 of general cargo. In addition, it ranks as the first 30

31 cruise homeport in the Mediterranean hosting 2.3 million passengers yearly. In terms of landside connection, it benefits of railway and road connections, being the latter very congested. In addition, Venice is the only port in Italy to benefit from a river port providing freight transport by barge along the Po river, even if this transport option is very marginal nowadays PCS in Venice The Port of Venice, under the public umbrella of the Port Authority, has invested heavily in recent years in the analysis and in the development of integrated IT solutions in order to satisfy the increasing need for process optimization and reduction of operating costs. A PCS has been therefore implemented so as to get rid of paper-based documents and increase the efficiency of all procedures, with the primary objective of raising overall performance of the port. The PCS is referred to with the name of LogIS, that is the company in charge of its management. The service is available h24 all the year, and in 2012 it registered more than one million of transactions Interfaces and technologies All system components are integrated in a single platform, in terms of application and database. LogIS is also open to third-party applications through a specifically devoted EDI component. The platform is web-based and consists of a series of application modules specifically designed for the management of the documental flow related to the port processes Business model and stakeholders The business model follows a typical top-down approach, with the port authority acting as focal organization. The parties involved are all operators within the port community, plus all private bodies playing a role in the relevant supply chains for the port Detail of offered services The LogIS system is composed of four main component modules, which collect and convey information toward a central module, wherein they are processed and dispatched: the overall architecture is reported at a glance in Figure 6. Each module is in turn characterized by various functionalities, some already operational (green boxes in Figure 6) and some still under implementation (grey boxes in Figure 6). Furthermore, some functionalities allow for external exchange via EDI (red flags in Figure 6, whilst pink flags denote future EDI implementations) and some others can be digitally signed (yellow flags in Figure 6). Clearly, the EDI-based functionalities are those fostering the capability of the PCS to involve all relevant port actors and increase potentially the overall port performance. 31

32 Source: port authority of Venice. Figure 6 Flowchart of the LogIS PCS in Venice In more detail, the four modules are the following: ship module: is dedicated to the management of all bureaucratic steps related to the ship authorization, i.e. taking place from the entry of a ship into the port premises to its output. Obviously, main players within this module are maritime agents, maritime public officials, harbor pilots, terminal operators, tugs, customs officials. Notably, the module is also integrated with the AIS (Automatic Identification System); security module: provides tools for managing all instances of landside access/egress to port, included application for temporary access allowances. For this aim, it is also integrated with the access control component of the SAFE (Security and Facility Expertise) system dedicated to video surveillance and access control in the port; job module: deals with the management of information related to companies operating in the port, their employees and their training, qualifications, occupational accidents, their roles within the company, and so on; goods module: provides details of the loading/unloading activities at the terminal and deals also notably with activities related to the inland shipment of goods via railway. A fifth module embedding all cargo declarations and allowing for integration with the Italian e-custom system AIDA is currently under design and will be implemented in a future upgrade of LogIS. For the purposes of the study, it is worth looking in more detail into the transactions processed within the ship and goods modules, that is: the ship module allows processing the following main transactions: notice of ship 32

33 arrival, request for berthing, service request, arrival declaration, waste declaration, tugboat request, pilot request, departure declaration, management of dangerous goods, integration with AIS, historical statistics, reporting; the goods module allows managing the following main activities: documentation related to the landside dispatch/arrival of goods by railway, loading/unloading operations in terminals, request of terminalization services, reporting, historical statistics. 3.4 Port of Antwerp Brief overview Due to its inland location, Antwerp differs from other European ports, as it enjoys a potentially more central location in Europe. As a result, it became one of European largest seaports, ranked second behind Rotterdam by total freight throughput, with a catchment area extended from Benelux and France towards Central Europe. In 2012 the total tons traded were just below 200 Million tons, with about 25 Million of dry bulk, 38 Million of liquid bulk and some 7 Million TEUs. However, although Rotterdam handles twice as much traffic as the Port of Antwerp, the added value created by the 900 logistics companies in Antwerp is just as great. In terms of landside dispatching/arrival, modal split is 11% rail, 33% inland waterways and 56% road. The remarkable presence of liquid bulk goods, of which the vast majority is represented by dangerous commodities, provides a major challenge: as it will be described in the next sub-sections, the PCS of Antwerp is mainly devoted to this type of trade 28. It is also worth noting that the logistics activities of the service providers in the port offer many advantages. As a part of the Port s integrated supply chain, they ensure that the freight gets to the end customer in a reliable and cost efficient way. All logistics activities are IT supported to guarantee the quality and the visibility of the supply chain PCS in Antwerp APCS (Antwerp Port Community System) is the network of systems and solutions for the electronic communication in the Port of Antwerp. The main objectives of APCS, as explicitly stated by the port authority, are: enhancing the interaction between all actors in the logistics chain by facilitating and stimulating the electronic exchange of information; establishing more standardization by stimulating the use of the existing ICT portfolio; creating added value by improving the efficiency of communication; reducing costs and delays by improving the efficiency of transport and cargo handling procedures in the port and between the port and the hinterland. The main claimed advantages refer to a more efficient and rapid handling of 28 In 2012 more than transactions processed by the PCS of Antwerp were referred to dangerous goods. 33

34 administrative and operational processes, a reuse of the imported data and information, lower costs and errors, transparency regarding the legs of the logistics chain, optimization of planning and execution. APCS comprises the exchange of data between business to government (B2G), business to business (B2B) and between government agencies (G2G) and offers services regarding nautical functionalities, cargo and logistics, dangerous goods and customs. In that respect, it is an ideal case study for the PCS as a gateway for a national single window claim by EPCSA. Key features of APCS include: information for customers is interchangeable with business partners and other ports, and reusable within the whole logistics chain; electronic communication results in lower costs and less errors. it bundles and guarantees an efficient and secured electronic message and information exchange in the support of the day-to-day administrative and operational activities; users receive a quick and exact status of the freight so that planning and execution of the supply chain can be optimized. APCS was first introduced in Nowadays, it forms an essential part of the day-today activities of the many public and private players in the maritime sector. The new release of APCS represents a major step forward, characterized by an evolution from a passive registration and monitoring system to an active application that helps users optimize their planning and decision-making processes. One of the first interfaces built was the VTS (Vessel Traffic System) adapter: the port of Antwerp operates a state-of-the-art VTS that integrates signals from six radars, an AIS (Automatic Identification System) and various video cameras. The tracking fusion technique is used to generate a video image from these signals on which both the radar track and the AIS information can be seen. This allows the ACC (Antwerp Coordination Centre), the nautical command centers at the locks and other operational service suppliers to keep a close watch on all shipping traffic movements. Other interfaces have also become operational now 29 : they are a link to the Central Broker System (CBS). The VTS and RIS authorities, ports and pilotage services use CBS to exchange information about shipping in their operational areas, CBS (VTS Scheldt, pilotage, MRCC, inland water authorities), to the NOS/METEO system of the Port Authority's electronics service for state of tide and wind information and weather reports, to the BRUSSTAT system for the positions of the bridges and the doors of the locks, with HYMEDIS to retrieve the tide expectations for Antwerp and Flushing (Tidal information), with Antwerp Port Community System (APCS) for the exchange of information with the Antwerp Port Community, to the PLDA (PaperLess Douane en Accijnzen) system for reporting the Customs Report to customs (Customs), with Sea-Web to retrieve shipping 29 Further details are available at the institutional website of the Port of Antwerp: 34

35 data from the HIS Fairplay database Interfaces and technologies The APCS system is based on international standard IT facilities and concept. The kernel of the system is the centralised information model, managed by a third neutral party, used to store, forward and retrieve information. Participants are therefore able to exchange standardized messages easily with each other via the electronic clearing centre, the centralized platform for electronic communication. All participants (private companies, Customs, the Port Authority) are connected to the system via a unique identification. The user chooses a public internet or a dedicated network connection (via a leased line) with the clearing centre. Adequate security standards are guaranteed through identification numbers, passwords and encryption technology; all data entrusted by a user to the clearing centre remains the user's property. Furthermore, the system guarantees that only the sender and recipient of a message have access to the content, unless the user gave his explicit consent to send a copy of the data to other parties. Users may also send and receive electronic messages to their business partners and government-agencies via a network platform, over which the messages are distributed by means of a trusted third party: this guarantees the confidentiality of the data. The network supports EDI and XML versions of the electronic standard messages, as well as the sending of other formats and scanned or otherwise generated documents Business model and stakeholders As reported in the institutional website the port of Antwerp has a long tradition in electronic message exchange. This goes back to the incorporation of SEAGHA in Both the private sector and the Port Authorities have launched many business-to-business and business-to-government projects which support, implement and promote the use of electronic messages. In June 2011 the Antwerp Port Authority and ALFAPORT, the federation of port companies & logistic service providers, founded APCS. The Antwerp Port Community System bundles resources from both private and public sector in order to offer the best service to all port users. The implementation of APCS is therefore the result of a partnership between the public and private sectors. Importantly, the APCS Steering Committee decided to work with a third party for the design, development, implementation or support of APCS functionalities, selecting the Descartes Systems Group (formerly Porthus). Nowadays, Descartes is the APCS strategic partner in charge of operating and managing the clearing centre: this is why a lot of the applications on this site belong to Descartes. Other providers are also listed, e.g. when Descartes has no solution for the functionality. In terms of stakeholders, the usual public and private subjects are involved, such as customs, shippers, shipping companies, ship s agents, forwarders, terminal operators, road and rail carriers, barge operators, logistics service providers, pilots (Flemish and 35

36 Dutch), Vessel Traffic Services (VTS)/Vessel traffic monitoring, inland waterway authorities (River Information System RIS), entities linked to MRCC, entities linked to SafeSeaNet Detail of offered services Under the umbrella of APCS four main port processes are embedded, with the following functionalities: nautical process o barge planning request (BTS) o consult lock planning (BTS) o declaration of berthing dues o declaration of waste collection o electronic invoice o ocean vessel berth reservation o ordering pilot, tug and other services o pre-notification of arrival/departure o request barge position(bts) o terminal planning inland barge(bts) o waste notification notification of dangerous cargo process o declaration of hazardous goods o SafeSeaNet obligation customs process o custom declaration(vat and excise duties) o custom import manifest o ECS o arrival notice of export cargo at Terminal o exchange of MRN with Terminal operator o export Manifest/Loading list o notification of departing o ICS: pre-notification Customs regarding safety o ISPS declaration(safety) o notification of incoming ocean vessel o official exit confirmation of ocean vessel to custom o official notification of arrival ocean vessel o transshipment notification o TUL: transit upload cargo transportation process o booking notification of containers at Terminal and gate reporting o booking of maritime transport o container release (procedure for container collection) o container status information (track and trace) o contract - and rates management 36

37 3.5 Port of Hamburg o electronic invoicing and processing of invoices o inland transport order o invoice audit o loading and discharge order breakbulk for ocean vessel (including load and discharge list) o loading and discharge order breakbulk of pre - and on-carriage via inland carrier o loading and discharge order containers for ocean vessel (including load and discharge list) o loading and discharge order inland barge containers o notice of arrival goods ocean vessel import o pre-notification delivery and collection of containers at Terminal (road and rail transport) o route planning and real-time follow-up of resources o shipping instructions for bill of lading o stowage position / baylist o yard and gate planning warehouse Brief overview The Port of Hamburg is the largest German seaport and the second largest European port for container traffic and in terms of total tonnage. With a total throughput of about 132 Million tons, with an incidence of almost 70% of container traffic, the port shows a strong focus in the container segment. However, the port has also multi-purpose terminals that can also handle heavy lifts, conventional cargo, and project cargo. Furthermore, bulk cargo makes up an important part of the port s business. Dry and liquid cargo is handled at bulk cargo terminals using grabs, suction equipment, conveyors, or facilities for liquids. In terms of catchment area, around 25% of the goods handled in the Port of Hamburg have their origin/destination in the greater Hamburg area, giving the port a high proportion of local cargo. Therefore hinterland transport to shorter distances is dominated by truck, whilst railway has also a remarkable overall modal share of 36.5%. Services available in the port range from traditional cargo handling and warehousing through value-added services and logistics right up to IT and communications solutions PCS in Hamburg The PCS implemented in the port of Hamburg takes the name from DAKOSY, the third party company in charge of its implementation and maintenance. Thanks to DAKOSY, today the Port of Hamburg is substantially a paperless port wherein all companies and authorities involved in the export, import and transit processes can handle their transport processes rapidly and with electronic assistance. The export-relevant transport and (transit) processes have been supported for many 37

38 years by the communication services of DAKOSY, summarized under the acronym EMP (Export Message Platform). All documents necessary for the transport handling (e.g. transport orders, customs applications, hazardous goods notifications and other official documents, harbor orders, bills of lading, manifests, delivery notifications through to status information for everyone involved) are transferred in internationally standardized message formats. In April 2010, the last loophole in the import-relevant communication processes was closed after the launch of the IMP (Import Message Platform), which supports the individual sector requirements of the carriers, terminals, haulage and transport companies and all relevant authorities, while optimizing the overall process from the ship's entry to the port through to delivery of the goods at the customer in the hinterland. Today DAKOSY acts also as a single window for the Port of Hamburg: all logistics companies and authorities involved in the export/import processes communicate their business data via the data centre. Amongst more than 2000 customers, haulage companies, line agents/ship owners, rail transport companies, trucking companies and feeders as well as all involved authorities (customs, harbor police, fire service etc.) along with internationally prestigious trade firms, branded companies and industrial enterprises are included Interfaces and technologies The DAKOSY PCS in Hamburg is based on the standard EDI protocol for the exchange of information. However, in spite of a great effort of standardization and unification, still some other protocols remain in usage for specific operations and transactions. For example, communications with the customs or with the railway terminal require the PCS to be interfaced with their protocols, which may differ for instance due to security reasons. Interestingly, there are many private operators within the port interacting with the PCS: this implies a very careful organization of the interfaces between the PCS and the proprietary IT systems of such private operators. In that respect, a quite straightforward integration has been achieved since DAKOSY is also one of the main suppliers also of the port users Business model and stakeholders The PCS of the port of Hamburg is sponsored by the port authority and, consistently, the financial support is essentially public. In spite of this, private bodies exhibit a great interest towards the PCS: as a result, one third of the company that manages the PCS, i.e. DAKOSY, is owned by various port operators and shipping companies active in the terminal. This circumstance highlights the effectiveness and the utility of a PCS implementation and confirms that the benefits of implementing a state-of-the-art are not only organizational but also economically tangible. More specifically, the IMP platform is the result of a project group created in 2004 comprising prestigious representatives of the Hamburg harbour economy and under the aegis of DAKOSY. The work of the project group received an additional boost by the 38

39 research program of the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi) ISETEC II as part of the project "LPM Lean Port Management". Furthermore, the DAKOSY company is benefiting of all the tests and pilot implementations of PCS functionalities and modules carried out in Hamburg, leading to a significant know-how which may be spent in the market as a possible PCS supplier for other ports Detail of offered services An important characteristic of the PCS in Hamburg is that there is a remarkable heterogeneity in the penetration rate of the offered services by the PCS across port processes. More specifically, there is a noteworthy difference between import and export flows, as described below 30. The import clearance processes in the Port of Hamburg are set to speed up with the launch of the aforementioned IMP platform (Figure 7). IMP enables information to be exchanged between the parties involved faster and more or less automatically, which means the import process can be handled more efficiently altogether. Early and extensive status information to all transport partners - e.g. altered ship arrivals - improves the planning and scheduling options. Follow-up processes can be initiated in a targeted manner and planned in line with resources and location. Bottlenecks, which typically result from delays and unscheduled arrivals of container ships, can be recognized earlier in time in the product context - and extensively mitigated. Acting as a single window, IMP supports the individual sector requirements of the carriers, quay operators, haulage and transport companies as well as all authorities involved and the relevant importers. A data pool is formed for each import process, in which all information is included under a fixed IMP reference and re-composed for all follow-up orders (official registrations, transport handling etc.). Current status information supplements the information base. Workflows can be automated by follow-up processes, such as official registrations. The export relevant processes are supported comprehensively by the communication services of DAKOSY for many years. All messages which the business partners exchange with one another and with the involved authorities as part of the export or transit process via DAKOSY are grouped together under the EMP platform (Figure 8). 30 The presented information is mostly taken from the website of DAKOSY ( and from institutional presentations of the port of Hamburg. 39

40 Source: DAKOSY Figure 7 IMP platform structure of the DAKOSY PCS in Hamburg Source: DAKOSY Figure 8 EMP platform structure of the DAKOSY PCS in Hamburg 40

41 All messages can be implemented and used by the customer as an EDI service. DAKOSY also supports customers with customized solutions, e.g. UNIBOOK for booking at ship owners, ZAPP for electronic export presentation to customs in the Port of Hamburg, ZODIAK for customs processing with the German customs system ATLAS, GEGIS for electronic hazardous goods notification to the Hamburg harbour police, the Harbour Data Record (HDS) or the German Port Order (GPO) for registration at the terminal and electronic processing of the bill of lading between the haulage company and ship owner. Far in excess of 600 million data records are communicated monthly. Another remarkable feature of the PCS in Hamburg is represented by the PRISE (Port River Information System Elbe) module 31 (Figure 9): with its implementation, Hamburg reacted to the continuing growth in the container handling and the increasing demands towards the scheduling of vessel movements because of the increasing clearance of large container ships. The efficiency of the clearance of the ships should be maintained, respectively increased, in case of increasing vessel movements. PRISE is a information platform, which merges the existing information from the areas of ship arrival and ship departure and provides it currently for authorized participants (terminals, tug boats, pilots and mooring lines as well as the port authority). Thus, the scheduling of ship arrival and ship departure is facilitated and the possibilities of reaction towards short-term events are improved. Source: DAKOSY Figure 9 PRISE platform structure of the DAKOSY PCS in Hamburg Notably, PRISE does not intervene in the workflow of the individual participants, rather 31 The platform PRISE, gone into operation in April 2012, was conceptualized and developed under the aegis of DAKOSY in cooperation with the Hamburg Port Authority (HPA), the Elbe pilots, the harbour port association and the two major Hamburg terminal operators HHLA and EUROGATE. Therefore, it is another noteworthy case of public/private partnership finalized at the development of a PCS. 41

42 providing relevant information for the traffic flow to the relevant participants: this includes the berth planning and registration of the terminals, the status information concerning the vessel positions on the Elbe river from "German Bay" to "Mooring", the ETA shipping lists of the harbour pilots, the responsibility message of the tug boats as well as the mooring lines and the water level prediction of the Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency (BSH). All information are immediately be provided as status information. The last relevant component is the VIP (Vessel Information Platform) platform, a new integral information and data platform for ship voyages. VIP is based on the already existing 32 ship departure list SHIPS, but has more functions and an extended database. Besides the ship departures for the Port of Hamburg, the ship departures and arrivals for all other major container ports in Europe can also be called up. Among the Port of Hamburg, this includes the ports of Bremerhaven, Rotterdam, Antwerp, Zeebrugge, Felixstowe, Southampton, Le Havre and Genoa. The Hamburg ship voyages (corresponding to SHIPS) as well as the European shipping timetables of some carriers for all European ports are integrated in the first development stage of VIP. By the end of 2013, the VIP platform will be extended with ship voyages for all European main ports. Besides Internet access, all customers are free to integrate the VIP ship voyages into their IT landscape via a standardized EDIFACT interface. A synthesis of the transactions possible through the PCS in Hamburg is reported, together with the active stakeholders and the corresponding service platform, in the following Figure The established ship departure list SHIPS was commissioned by DAKOSY as one of the first free online services already in In the early stages, the ship departures, that were communicated by fax or letter, had to be entered manually in the IT database by DAKOSY. Since the middle of the 1990s, the shipping companies and liner agents have also been able to perform the notifications via EDI interfaces and/or the SHIPS Internet. 42

43 Forwarder Terminal Carrier Rail Truck Importer Exporter Customs Authority Transaction Platform Ship departures VIP, EDI Ship arrivals VIP, EDI Transport order IMP, EMP Export declaration EMP Port order Export Hamburg EMP Port order Export Bremen EMP Export decs Rotterdam EMP NCTS declaration ZODIAK Summary declaration IMP, ZODIAK Import declaration ZODIAK Import announcement IMP, ZODIAK Gatepass/release order IMP, ZODIAK Pre-announcement truck EDI Bill of lading EMP Consignment data EMP Booking/booking confirmation UNIBOOK Manifest data EMP Codes DAKOSY Gate in report EMP, IMP Gate out report EMP, IMP Load/discharge report EMP Damage/repair report EDI Dangerous goods declaration GEGIS Stowage plan/bay plan EDI Invoice EDI Free formatted data all Status messages all Statistical data EDI Load order rail HABIS Status order rail HABIS Rail customs declaration HABIS Wagon sequence rail HABIS Source: elaboration on DAKOSY data Figure 10 Taxonomy of transactions, stakeholders and platforms in PCS Hamburg 3.6 Port of Le Havre Brief overview The port of Le Havre is the leading container port in France and its most important marketplace for foreign trade and shipping. Key figures report a total throughput of about 71 Million tons in 2012, of which more than 42 Million tons of liquid bulk. Container traffic in 2012 reached the 7 Million TEUs. In terms of ship calls, more than 6000 calls/year are 43

44 observed on average, corresponding to about 30 calls/day; in terms of type of ship, 40% are containerships, 35% bulk carriers, 10% ferries and 10% Ro-Ro ships. Currently there are shipping connections to every continent and more than 500 ports worldwide. The port is active h24 every day of the year, it allows berthing in all tidal conditions and has berths and facilities for ships of all sizes and all types of draft. Inland connections are very effective, allowing reaching with remarkable efficiency also important Central European destinations. On average, about 1000 companies involved in shipping, port and industrial activities operating in the port premises PCS in Le Havre The port of Le Havre is one of the historical pioneers in the use of SW and PCS facilities, whose implementation was strongly driven by the need to speed up customs clearance of cargoes. Of course, as soon as a prototypical SW showed promising performance, a PCS was promptly integrated with it, with the primary aim of managing the traffic of trucks inside the port and at the gates. The seminal PCS/SW implementation was termed ADEMAR, aimed at managing just some customs declarations. Since then, the public/private partnership SOGET (see section 3.6.4) developed complex IT solutions leading to the currently active systems AP+ (which implements mainly single window functions) and TAS (which implements mainly truck appointment system functionalities) Interfaces and technologies Relevant information in the PCS in Le Havre is transmitted using the EDI standard. However, SOGET has recently established a collaboration with Microsoft, who became an official partner of the company. The partnership will likely result in significant changes to their systems: furthermore, the two companies are currently working on an e-maritime project aimed to create a single PCS macro-product based on Microsoft protocols and platforms Business model and stakeholders The driving force for the implementation of PCS/SW system in the port of Le Havre is predominantly public, with a main role played by the port authority. However, the PCS/SW initiatives in Le Havre are attracting a growing interest of private operators, who recognize the benefits arising from its use. All management services related to the SW and to the PCS is entrusted to SOGET, a French company established in The company is a mixed public/private partnership and was founded as a spin-off of the Port of Le Havre, which is still one of its main shareholders. In more detail, the PPP is between the Port Community of Le Havre, the Port of Le Havre Authority and French Customs. Nowadays SOGET PCS is in operation throughout French ports as well as overseas Detail of offered services Currently, in le Havre, logistics operations carried out through the PCS system are those related to the loading/unloading of goods and their clearance made by customs, port 44

45 authorities, shipping companies, car carriers, terminal operators. Furthermore, auxiliary services to navigation (tugs and pilots) may be also handled. 3.7 Port of Livorno Brief overview The port of Livorno, classified as a big regional port in the Tyrrhenian cluster, is a versatile structure equipped with all facilities able to accommodate any kind of ship type and every type of traffic (Lo-Lo, Ro-Ro, liquid and dry bulk, new cars, cruises, ferries, forest products, machinery, and so on). The infrastructural facilities of the Port enables connectivity to the main national road and rail networks and also to the neighboring airports of Pisa and Florence. Its catchment area is rather large and covers a remarkable part of the central Italy. Key figures for 2012 report about 26 million tons traded PCS in Livorno The port community system actually in operations in the port of Livorno is termed TPCS (Tuscan PCS), and was promoted through the sign of a memorandum of understanding between the port authority and the regional directorate of the Italian customs agency, with the aim of boosting initiatives able to speed up the procedures necessary for goods clearance. TPCS has been developed within the 2010-EU S Program TEN-T Motorways of the Sea - project MOS4MOS (Monitoring and Operation Services For Motorways Of the Sea), a EU project that involved 28 international partners from Greece, Slovenia, Italy and Spain, united by a common vision to develop technological tools in support of Motorways of the Sea. Thanks to its capability of supervising the entire procedural and physical goods flows in the port, from the gate arrival to the departure of the ship and vice versa, TPCS proves an operational, effective and efficient environment for shipping companies, importers and exporters, which can therefore improve the level of their work and facilitate, ultimately, the development of port traffic Interfaces and technologies The PCS of Livorno is a web-based IT application, made up by modules very similar to the architecture of the PCS operational in Venice (section 3.3): in that respect, TPCS is regarded as another best practice of PCS implementation in Italy. More specifically, four modules are embedded within TPCS: import, export, customs single window and community cabotage. Furthermore, the system meets all the most recent technological communication requirements between traders and control authorities (e-customs, customs and controls without paper, and so on) Business model and stakeholders The implementation of TPCS follows a traditional top-down approach, fostered by the port authority, with the remarkable presence of the Italian custom agency as primary actor/shareholder. However, the management is in charge to the port authority, being the role of the Italian custom agency primarily devoted to facilitate the integration between 45

46 TPCS and the Italian e-custom system AIDA. Main stakeholders of TPCS include: ocean carriers and their representatives, which in several steps may retrieve data related to import and export goods and fill electronically the manifests of loading and unloading goods; freight forwarders, who may interactively present all customs-related declarations and, once goods are cleared, the needed loading/unloading requests; terminal operators, which may easily interface their own IT management and operations systems with TPCS, resulting in a faster and more effective data exchange; public officers and institution, able to check all port operations in real time and electronically; landside carriers, who may infer about the status of goods to be picked-up so as to adjust their operations Detail of offered services As mentioned in section 3.7.3, TPSC is made up by four main modules: import, export, custom single window and national/eu cabotage. All modules are designed so as to be compliant with tracking and tracing principles and to support possibly the entire door-todoor transport chain. The import module of TPCS (Figure 11) manages ships and goods coming from other ports to Livorno, offering detailed information on reloading, on the electronic output from the port and on the dispatching of the goods towards the final destination. The platform also allows full management of all applications related to the preparation of the goods received manifest (MMA acronym in Italian). The import phase is primarily based on the cooperative management of the document entitled A3 by the relevant subjects. Normally, the ship agent drafts the MMA and sends it electronically to the e-customs system AIDA which, after all double-checks and controls, retransmits the A3 list in a not clearable status. This allows all relevant subjects (e.g. freight forwarders) to log on the TPCS and start working on their A3 even if they are still not clearable, so as to save time and to speed up the overall process. Once the ship agent has sent the closing record Z of the MMA to AIDA, he receives an instantaneous update of the status of each A3 (i.e. clearable/not clearable): the corresponding updated information is then send again to the TPCS. This allows freight forwarders to know about their clearable A3. Once completed the clearing process, the AIDA system provides the customs release declaration, which is in turn entered by the freight forwarder into AIDA in the form on an inbound loading list. 46

47 Source: Port Authority of Livorno Figure 11 Import module of TPCS: main transactions and involved stakeholders Similarly, the export module of TPCS manages goods and ships related to the export cycle, i.e. destined for other ports, monitoring all applications related to the management of the manifest of goods loaded (MMP acronym in Italian). The shipping agent is in charge of issuing a ship s data entry procedure through agreeing with the terminal about all the relevant parameters: vessel name, voyage, estimated time of arrival (ETA), estimated closing time of termination operations (CT). He/she also indicates the subject in charge of downloading the file needed for producing the MMP. In turn, the terminal operator validates the ship s data entry procedure. From this moment and until closing time is reached, freight forwarders may send the outbound loading list to the TPCS platform. Contemporarily, the customs forwarders can start to download the data necessary for the generation of the MMP: in that respect, the record layouts currently managed by TPCS are those corresponding to the types D, E, F, S, X, N of the Italian customs procedures. Once the electronic transmission of MMP to the e-customs system AIDA is performed, the custom forwarder shall transmit to the TPCS the flow of data generated in response (IRISP acronym) by AIDA. Finally, after the departure of the ship, the terminal is in charge of sending the message of confirmation of embarkation (COARRI acronym, i.e. the list of the goods actually boarded). 47

48 Source: Port Authority of Livorno Figure 12 Export module of TPCS: main transactions and involved stakeholders The single window module follows the commitment of the Italian customs, which have been working for years on the development of SW concepts. For this aim, a specific module of TPCS is able to be interfaced with the e-customs system AIDA, in order to process and manage applications and requests related to immigration, clearance of non- EU goods, and specific authorizations for dangerous goods. The national/eu cabotage module embedded in TPCS allows managing goods in national and Community cabotage loaded/unloaded at Livorno, in addition to all the transactions handled by the import and export modules described above. In fact, the specific focus of this module is to encourage logistics implementations for goods tracking in accordance with the philosophy of the project MOS4MOS 33. More specifically, this module allows: automatic transmission of data between two specific systems that have shared a common procedure for the exchange of T2L (unique identifier); transmission of data in XML and PDF formats in order to allow the sender to check also visually the stamp and the sign on the documents by the customs officers (Figure 13). 33 TPCS was developed actually within the context of this project, see section

49 Source: Port Authority of Livorno Figure 13 Potential integration of TPCS with third-party PCS Apart the modular structure described above, it is worth mentioning some other specific functionalities of the TPCS: tracking function: the simple access to the TPCS home webpage allows authorized and guest operators to look at ships departure/arrival list, wherein ships not yet authorized by the terminal are highlighted in red. Furthermore, there is an open-access functionality which allows tracking goods through queries by number of container, plate, booking id and so on. In response, the system displays the research results in the form of color codes indicating if the searched goods are in the port premises, if they have been already cleared, or if an embarking/disembarking process is under way; port taxes: the system is able to calculate the exact amount of port taxes to be paid by each port user, through a double-check and cross-check with the custom agency, and accounting for all possible specific situations and exceptions that may influence on the calculation of the taxes themselves. The TPCS system is able to return in Pdf format the A22/FD document related to the port charges, containing the detailed list of the amounts to be paid for the relevant period; bar code: TPCS provides a list of movement reference numbers (MRN) combined with the container and sorted in the same way the related printed barcode labels. The list allows MMA/MMP operators to search quickly within the e-custom system AIDA any MRN on the ship just using a scanner. 3.8 Port of Genoa Brief overview The port of Genoa (Genova) is the first domestic Italian port in terms of cargo handled: key figures for 2012 include a total throughput of 51 Million tons in 2012 (about 10% of goods loaded and unloaded in Italian ports), of which 28 Millions of general cargo (20 Millions 49

50 containerized, corresponding to 2 Million TEUs), 4 Million of solid bulk and 17 Million tons of liquid bulk. The catchment area of the port of Genoa includes the most industrialized regions of the Northern Italy and is located in an excellent strategic position towards the European commercial and economic hinterland. The port premises are extended from the East towards the West of the city (i.e. from the Marina Duca degli Abruzzi in the city centre up to Voltri) for an uninterrupted seafront of about 20 kilometers. The port can accommodate ships of any type and handle, with 13 connected and specialized terminals. Furthermore, a ferry terminal and a cruise terminal within the most ancient part of the historic port completes the port structure PCS in Genoa The PCS implemented in Genoa is named E-port, and was conceived in order to ensure the availability of seaside information for the whole port community and an effective integration with the landside documentation process. ELSAG Datamat is the technological partner in charge of the implementation. E-Port satisfies the need shared by all involved operators to speed up traffic at gates, enhance the security of information flows, reduce paper documents in circulation and improve working conditions. As reported by the port authority (Table 5), the introduction of E-Port has brought considerable benefits in terms of terminal operations, significantly reducing exit queues and vehicle in-terminal times with statistics showing that, thanks to E-Port, vehicle transit times through the container terminal decreased by 50%. Table 5 Positive impacts of the E-port implementation in Genoa Source: port authority of Genoa Interfaces and technologies E-port s core hardware is housed within the ELSAG Datamat datacenter. An essential element in the success of the E-port approach is its capacity to be integrated with other technological assets already operating in the port of Genoa Business model and stakeholders The business model underlying E-port is driven by the port authority, who acts as focal organization in a classical top-down scheme. Notably, the cooperation between the port and the customs authorities was fundamental in the first phase of the project development, since customs officers made 50

51 available in real-time the results of the customs process of the containerized goods. Also in later project stages, another element in the relationship between port and custom authorities was represented by the circular issued by the two Bodies on 12/10/2007 and referred to as the electronic procedure to be used for export customs clearance. The consistent disposition 01/2008 by the Genoa customs authority revised loading procedures for SECH and VTE terminals 34. Nowadays, customs police operate at port gates with E- port systems, in order to control the movement of goods, with a significant change of job organization. Furthermore, E-port allowed remote control at VTE terminal, with remarkable time savings with respect to the prior job organization based on physical presence and on a paper-based environment. Furthermore, relevant stakeholders are active parts of E-port, being formally represented by their professional associations, including: the municipal association of freight forwarders, couriers and carriers; the local customs brokers association; the regional customs forwarding agent register; the local shipping agents and shipbrokers association; the terminal operators section of Confindustria 35 Genova. The main types of stakeholders and their usual interactions with E-ports are described below: ship forwarding agent o complete and transmit MMA and MMP 36 terminal operator o send the acceptance/denial of a booking o transmit a regular summary related to exiting traffic o transmit gate-in messages o compile the dates of opening and closing of ships o transmit acceptance/denial of shipment orders (export clearance) o receive loading lists o receive offloading orders (container announcement) o transmit loading reports shipping agent o transmit the delivery order and every necessary variation required for the release at the moment of the discharge by the freight forwarder o transmit the voyage code of the ship before the opening of the vessel at the terminal o transmit the offloading order (container announcement) o transmit the loading list customs clearing agent o complete and transmit the customs declaration (Customs Entry) o associate the customs clearance number with the delivery order for the purpose of booking the container 34 SECH and VTE are the main container terminal operators in Genoa port. 35 Confindustria is the Italian confederation of the industries. 36 MMA and MMP are respectively the Italian acronyms for the manifest of goods unloaded and the manifest of goods loaded. 51

52 o complete and transmit customs export clearance for declarations both issued in Genoa customs office and in the internal customs offices (the latter includes additional port dues for the customs declaration issued by the internal customs offices) gate operating forwarder o verify (looking at the documents) if a container can be loaded/unloaded and deliver the voyage documentation to the truck driver o when a documentation problem arises in container check, alert the corresponding freight forwarder 37 o produce the paper documentation on request by customs officials or custom police o stop delivering voyage documentation in the event of an interruption in terminal activity for an undetermined period. o check the booking time integrity and to register the entry into the port area of trucks for delivery operations o verify the presence of an offload order and, when appropriate, the authorization for transit and a temporary stay-over of dangerous goods truck drivers o submit the transport form (consignment note) to the gate operating forwarder who receives in return the documentation for the delivery of the container o check the status of the container from the documentary point of view o transmit an arrival advance notice integrated, for security reasons, with the truck driver s name and truck number plate Detail of offered services There are various cycles of transactions embedded in E-port worth to be mentioned for the purposes of this review 38. The import-exit cycle at VTE (Figure 14), operational from may 2005, is aimed at speeding up the container gate operation. Thanks to the acquisition, association and collation of various information embodied in the MMA, customs declaration A3 and clearance number allocated by the customs authority the system is able to notify to Gate Operator and Customs Police each container s current customs state. The system has recently been extended to ensure also telematic transmission of delivery orders and transit and layover authorizations for dangerous goods. 37 If the forwarder is not contactable or is not able to enter the documentary process in order to perform the necessary corrections, the gate operator immediately informs the call-center to insert the container information into the system. 38 Most of the information provided in this section comes from official documents of the Port Authority of Genoa. 52

53 Source: Port Authority of Genoa Figure 14 Import-exit cycle at VTE implemented in E-port The stakeholders involved are: the ship forwarding agent, who prepares and transmits the MMA; the shipping agent, who transmits, by means of E-port, the delivery order at the moment of clearance in the shipping agency. He also has to submit any later variation; the customs agent, who submits a request for authorization to the port authority to ensure the exit of dangerous goods. He also renews, by means of the system, expired delivery orders. Furthermore, he completes and transmits the Customs Declarations (as soon as the Clearance is available) and the phonograms. He completes the information matching the weight indicated in the Customs Declaration with that of the container resulting from the MMA. He delivers to the Gate Operator the transport form and the voyage documentation; the gate operating agent, who verifies, by means of the system, if a container can be withdrawn and, if appropriate, delivers the voyage documentation to the truck driver. Conversely, he stops delivering voyage documentation in the event of an interruption in terminal activity for an undetermined period; the customs police, who by means of E-port examines the customs declaration which accompanies the container and consequently decides if a physical control or whatever inspection type has to be made; the terminal operator, who transmits gate-in messages to E-port, both for full and empty containers. He also fills in a regular summary of exiting containers both by means of road and rail; the customs agency, which makes available in real time by means of its own 53

54 telematic system the clearance number of the container passing through the VTE port gate; the truck driver who, in order to obtain a container withdrawal, has to submit the transport form to the gate operating forwarder and receives in return the voyage documentation. In addition, he checks by E-port system the clearance status of the container and transmits consistently the arrival advance notice ; the contact and call center, who supervises the functioning of the system, restores missing data into the system, supports forwarders in matching weight operations and assists the customs police in exiting control operations. Noteworthy rules include the following aspects: customs declarations should be transmitted to the E-port system in telematic modes both by the operators who utilize a service center and by those who are directly linked with the customs agency; the request for exiting authorization of dangerous goods should be submitted to the Port Authority exclusively in telematic mode; the intervention of the call center in order to insert in the system missing declarations is permitted only when a copy of the original documentation is being transmitted (typically by fax). In other words, if the declaration is absent or incomplete, no insertion is permitted; the MMA should be transmitted exclusively in telematic mode, any modification and/or exception may be processed only through the call centre. The Import Booking for container withdrawal cycle (Figure 15), operational from March 2007, is aimed at reconfiguring the documentary exchange between freight forwarders and the SECH terminal, particularly for the booking of container withdrawal. Source: Port Authority of Genoa Figure 15 Import Booking for container withdrawal cycle implemented in E-port Delivery orders managed telematically by shipping agencies operating with terminal SECH represent the basic information that, integrated by customs agents with the code of 54

55 custom declarations, originates the booking request disseminated by E-port to the terminal. This system component has been integrated with the arrival advance notice generated by truck Companies. The stakeholders involved are: the shipping agent, who transmits by means of E-port the delivery order at the moment of clearance to the shipping agency; the customs agent, who carry out and transmits customs declarations and links the customs clearance number to the delivery order for the purpose of booking the container withdrawal; the terminal, which receives from E-port the booking requests and notifications of reinstated expired delivery orders, and in turn transmits regular summaries of exiting containers; the gate operating forwarder, who checks the booking time integrity and registers the entry into the port area of trucks for withdrawal operations; the contact and call center, which supervises the functioning of the system, supports operators in the routine processes and contacts the relevant operators in cases of failures or anomalies. Noteworthy rules include the following aspects: the shipping agencies operating with terminal SECH are obliged to transmit in a telematic mode delivery orders when the forwarders manage the relevant clearance. The same procedure should be followed in case of integration and/or modification of the delivery order; if a failure arises in the electronic delivery process, the agency has to communicate immediately with E-port call center for the information regarding the estimated time needed to restore normal activity. In the meantime, with the aim of ensuring a seamless procedure, the agency should transmits delivery orders to the call center via fax; the forwarder, at the stage of clearance in the shipping agency, is obliged to notify the gateway operator in charge of the booking; the shipping agent, at the moment of consigning the delivery order to the forwarder, has to correctly specify the gateway operator; in the event of more than 24 hours interruption in terminal activity, the expiry date of delivery orders is prorogued together with the related commercial undertakings until the restoration of normal terminal activity; the intervention of the call center (for documentation not present in the system or apparently expired or with a wrong specification of the gateway operator) is only possible if a copy of the original documentation is attached to the request. The Export orders of shipment cycle (Figure 16), active from the end of 2007 in both VTE and SECH terminals, has the objective of optimize the documentary exchange between operators and terminals in container loading procedures, and also to ensure a 55

56 radical simplification of port duties payment procedures related to customs declarations issued by internal customs offices. This system component has been integrated with the arrival advance notice received from the trucking Companies. Source: Port Authority of Genoa Figure 16 Export orders of shipment cycle implemented in E-port The stakeholders involved are: the shipping agent, who transmits by telematic mode the ship s voyage code to the relevant subjects, including offload orders (i.e. container announcement) and loading list 39 ; the customs agent, who completes and transmits the customs export clearance (i.e. the order of shipment) for declarations both issued by Genoa customs office and the internal customs; the gate operating forwarder, who checks by means of the system the clearance documentation of the container passing through the export operation gate, and registers into the system the truck gate entry; the terminal, which transmits to E-port the dates of the opening and closing of ships, receives offloading orders (i.e. container announcement) and transmits their acceptance or denial, receives loading lists, transmits loading reports, transmits (within 24 hours of the vessel departure, excluding Saturdays and Sundays), the loading reports; the customs police, who by means of E-port, examines the customs declaration which accompanies the container; the customs authority of Genoa, which receives the lists related to customs 39 This is necessary in the light of the already mentioned disposition 01/08 from the local customs authority which requires receiving in advance a complete MMP. 56

57 declarations issued by the internal customs offices and matches them with the data contained in the loading lists; the contact and call center, which supervises the functioning of the system, supports operators in the routine processes and contacts them in the case of failures or anomalies. Noteworthy rules include the following aspects: the shipping agencies operating with the VTE and SECH terminals are obliged to insert in telematic mode the voyage number of the ship as soon as it is available, and however before that opening operations by the terminal start; the shipping agencies operating with the VTE and SECH terminals are obliged to insert in telematic mode the container announcement (offload orders) prior to the truck driver arriving at the gate for unloading operations. 3.9 The Italian experience of SW and integration towards a PCS environment In order to illustrate the conceptual and practical issues that may arise in a SW implementation, the present section reports the Italian experience towards the development of the AIDA and PMIS components compliant with the single window concept. Furthermore, the UIRNET platform is also briefly reported. In fact, due to its inherent complexity and to the presence of several subjects involved, the concept of Single Window in Italy has been implemented in different ways, depending on the entity entrusted with the management of the different information flows. By way of an example, practical declinations of this approach are the Port Management Information System (PMIS) managed by the maritime authority and the e-customs system AIDA (Italian acronym of Automation Integrated Customs and Excise) managed by the customs. More specifically, the PMIS system allows shipping agents, through a web interface accessible from the Internet, to carry out easily and free of charge all administrative tasks connected with the arrival/departure of ships, otherwise requiring paper-based time consuming transactions. Furthermore, the PMIS allows also the management of authorizations for the trade of dangerous goods on ships, and permits various users to monitor traffic in ports and to obtain real-time information on the entire voyage of the ship in a context of integrated data sharing at national level. The AIDA system is the IT system of the Italian Customs, implementing the EU e- customs concept, which allowed the computerization of the overall customs document flows for import and export. The system has been operating since November 2003 and nowadays processes about 11 million customs declarations per year, of which only 4% is presented on paper. Finally, UIRNET has the target mission of developing a "suite of basic services" for the transport system in Italy aimed at improving safety and efficiency. These services are intended for the benefit of logistics companies, managers of freight, ports, shopping centers and infrastructure. 57

58 3.9.1 Italian legislation Framework In Italy, the Customs Single Window was introduced by Prime Ministerial Decree 40 (PMD), November 4 th, The Customs Single Window mechanism has the aim to simplify import and export operations and to give to operators the opportunity to present all requests for obtaining documentation necessary for carrying out import/export operations (e.g. Certifications, licenses, import and export licenses, No-obstacles). This process is uniquely realized by single transmission and through electronic documents. When these requests are transmitted to a single point of entry (interface), then, they are forwarded to the various competent administrations which prepare their response that return subsequently via interface. The PMD n. 242/2010, provides the Customs Single Window activation within 180 days after it come into force. This decree, in particular, establishes details related to the investigation procedures in relation to the conclusion of the customs procedures. Table 6 (see Annex II) contains a list of various documents required for the completion of the import and export transitions setting the maximum time limits for these procedures completion. Table 7 (see Annex II), instead, identifies the maximum time limits for those procedures completion that are developed together with the goods submission whose objective is to fulfill the customs formalities with the indication of the competent authorities. In this case, it is the Customs Authority that has a central coordinating role: customs offices will indeed provide for the control and eventual discharge of various approvals, permits, licenses and No-obstacles requests presented by operators and listed in detail in Table 6 which must be issued by the competent authorities within the time specified in the Table 6. In particular, with regard to the customs declaration, the customs office where this declaration is submitted, will send the data collection necessary for the start of the procedures of its own competence by electronic transmission to the competent authorities, communicating the outcomes by electronic transmission to the customs office which shall define the customs procedure. This provides the creation of an interoperability system that allows the dialogue by electronic transmission between all administrations involved in the mechanism under consideration, to be completed within three years after the start up of the Customs Single Window. A special backup "manual" procedure will be developed in the case of unavailability of government computer systems involved in the project. A transitional rule provides that the operators will activate directly the procedures (see Table 6 and Table 7, Annex II) at the governments which will ensure their completion within the time specified in these Tables. Finally, a very important layout is the one that gives the regional directors of the 40 In Italian: Decreto del Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri (DPCM). 58

59 Customs authority the task to define the appropriate conference services at the local level (beginning no later than 30 days after the entry into force of the decree concerned), in order to be able to proceed with the synchronization and harmonization of the opening hours of government offices participating in the Customs Single Window. This will be done taking into account the specific need of the traffic, the obligations arising from collective agreements and other operational requirements. Each department concerned should also appoint an operational representative of the Customs Single Window. In addition, for the first three years of the Customs Single Window operation, the monitoring of the Customs Single Window activity is provided because in case of problems preventing the proper operation, some technical measures may be required in order to remove those negative aspects The PMIS system The PMIS system is used by the staff of the Italian maritime authority both in processing all administrative duties related to the arrival and departure of ships and for the supervision of the traffic within the port waters. The PMIS consists of a web application allowing operators of the port community to interact with it, either through specific web-pages accessible using the most common browsers, or through a direct connection between IT systems, which can exchange data using services exposed by the PMIS via web-services technologies. The latter communication channel allows therefore a potential B2B integration between processes of port operators through the exchange of XML documents and the http protocol: such B2B channel facilitates the subsequent development of new value-added services that third parties may be interested in developing and proposing in the various ports. The PMIS system allows operators of the port community to interact directly with the functionality of the PMIS. More properly, the PMIS provides users with port community features similar to those used by the operators of the Italian maritime authority, so that agents and other professionals in the supply chain can enter the necessary data to carry out the practices of arrival and departure of the ship and ask for the necessary permissions using the Internet. Port community operators can access their accessible services either by direct connection to the PMIS modules to which they have the access rights or through the VTS (Vessel Traffic Service) portal, which is the privileged entry point to all PMIS portals installed in Italian ports. It is worth noting that, even if the data management capabilities are similar for both operators and Italian maritime authority officers, the way in which the PMIS aggregates and presents the information to the two main types of users is tailor made on the peculiar operational characteristics of each of them. The internet portal of the PMIS enables the exchange of documents, data and information between the maritime authorities and other public and private stakeholders, therefore with a primarily B2G scope. Importantly, emphasis is also towards intermodal traffic, cabotage (motorways of the sea) and passenger traffic. 59

60 The PMIS can be divided into three main functional areas, that is: Italian maritime authority data; control of maritime traffic; administrative procedures. For the purposes of this review, it is worth mentioning that the functional area of the control of the maritime traffic involves mainly the archive of transactions carried out by ships in port and at anchor, as well as the presentation of the position of vessels in an electronic map of the port in real time, in a situation in the past and anticipated future situation. The most relevant administrative transactions processed within a PMIS are: management of the journey the ship; berth request and berth planning and allocation; documentation to be presented to the Italian maritime authority; management of the declarations of dangerous goods onboard the ship; landside management of dangerous goods; solid waste management; carrying out activities required by the Memorandum of Understanding of Paris on port state control (PSC); interface with the Italian SIGEMAR and BDN systems; management of custom manifests; specific functions for the motorways of the sea; summary of historical data printed in summary and detail; B2B services, i.e. communication and integration among the services provided by the PMIS and the possible use of commercial operators; functions to interface with other PMIS for the exchange of data and documents. From the above list it is clear that the functionalities offered by a PMIS are only partially related to a single window concept (i.e. devoted to B2G transactions), leaving instead room for also potentially complex B2B transactions. In that respect, a PMIS may be regarded as architecturally equivalent to a PCS The E-customs and the A.I.D.A. system The E-customs is an important tool covering the land and maritime area of the EU State Members. 60

61 Source: e-custom.it, Custom s Agency Figure 17 E-customs There are 27 European administrative customs working in accordance with Community normative framework. The aims of these bodies are presented in the following Figure 18: Source: RAM elaboration, Italian Custom s Agency Figure 18 Aims of EU Administrative customs bodies 61

62 In addition, the Customs seek to bring balance between: efficient controls exchange rapidity. Both values are important for trade: exchange rapidity is related to the reduction of undertaking costs and time, whereas efficient controls, focus on guaranteeing the trade regularity and fluency and control of the illegal traffic and falsification. In Italy, the e-customs application has been developed by the Italian Custom Authority and is known as the A.I.D.A. system (Customs and Excise Integrated Automation). The system supports electronic customs clearance of goods and allows the dialogue with economic operators and enterprises, other public administrations and EU countries. It was designed in full compliance with the single windows and one-stop-shop concepts and, among others, exhibits the following benefits: full compliance with the relevant European Directives; integration with the customs systems of other Member States; high level of availability, efficiency and effectiveness; communications with users through secure connections; real-time operations. This system was implemented on the basis of four processes, reported in Figure 19. Source: RAM elaboration, Italian Custom s Agency Figure 19 Administrative customs processes The straightforward positive effects on private operators and on custom offices are represented by a remarkable reduction of the time required for customs operations, a reduction in the stopping time of goods at the customs, and online transactions processing 62

63 for all customs regimes. In order to protect the safety of citizens and facilitate legitimate trade and the competitiveness of enterprises from one side, and to avoid unnecessary increase in related national and EU budgets from the other side, the system aims to achieve a balance between speed and effectiveness of trade controls. This objective is pursued through complex internal forms of risk analysis for preventing frauds and falsifications of goods. Figure 20 shows the framework of an exemplification of A.I.D.A. as an interactive system connecting economic operators and bodies. This system offers a custom clearance service on-line with different controls integrated and communicates the information received from the customs documents directed to the national and community bodies and administrations. More specifically, the AIDA system allows traders to electronically submit documents and declarations including import-export declarations, national and EU transit declarations, summary of intra-eu sales and purchases, declarations of arrival and departure of goods by sea and by air, declarations of electricity/gas consumption, and so on. In response to each declaration/submission, the user receives the corresponding elaboration result and, where possible, authorized users may fulfill electronically all customs obligation without any additional steps using electronic signature systems. Source: RAM elaboration, Italian Custom s Agency Figure 20 A.I.D.A. system Principal A.I.D.A. functions A.I.D.A. carries out a number of functions. The most important in relation to our case of study are reported in Figure 21: 63

64 Source: RAM elaboration, Italian Custom s Agency Figure 21 - A.I.D.A. functions In addition, the Single Window approach is regulated by different rules at different levels. At an extra-european level we find the World Customs Organization (WCO) that describes the Single Window (reusing the REC n. 33 of the United Nation Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business UN/CEFACT) as: "a facilitation that allows [ ] to leave the information and documents at the unique entrance's point to can satisfy regulation prescriptions connected with import/export/transit". At a European level, one of the most relevant regulations was issued by the European Parliament and the European Council; we are talking about Reg. n. 648/2005 that introduced the principle of the uniqueness of the custom s transitions and telematics coordination of the controls made by different authorities". The aim of the Customs Single Window is to create a connection mechanism able to communicate with administrations and bodies who intervene in the custom s transitions releasing authorizations, permissions, licenses or realizing controls. At this point, different administrations can complete the competence processes (where these subjects remain in charge) offering a unitary interface to its citizens and companies. Finally, relying on data collected with the customs declarations, a telematics process is set up related towards the verification of the documentation in support of the declaration and controls execution. In summary, it is necessary to underline that the electronic custom and subsequently the modernization of the custom codex led to the realization of new modalities with more than 300 million Euro allocated for the period Policy agreement provided from the European Union decision about ecustoms. 64

65 Policy controls It is also necessary to mention the rule of the policy control. Its system is represented in Figure 22 where attention is given to different subjects at risk that are subsequently checked. Source: RAM elaboration, Italian Custom s Agency Figure 22 Policy controls The policy control s goal is to value a subjective risk of each transition to benefit "available" economic operators. This process is known as computerized risk management and its aim is to direct the customs declaration to four control channels (green, yellow, orange and red) in relation to the associability to the risk profile catalogued that are a combination of the declaration elements (origin, goods.). Source: RAM elaboration, Italian Custom s Agency Figure 23 - Administrative process 65