WORKING GROUP MARITIME TRANSPORT STATISTICS (WG MTS) MINUTES

EUROPEAN COMMISSION EUROSTAT Directorate E: Sectoral and regional statistics Unit E-3: Transport ESTAT/E-3 Doc.MAR-2016-Minutes WORKING GROUP MARITIME TRANSPORT STATISTICS (WG MTS) HELD IN LUXEMBOURG BECH BUILDING ROOM QUETELET ON 23-24 MAY 2016 STARTING AT 10:00 MINUTES 1

WG MTS 2016 - MINUTES The (WG MTS) met in Luxembourg on 23 and 24 May 2016, to assess the activity in the European maritime transport statistics since the last meeting and discuss the progress and developments planned for the next two years. The meeting was attended by the experts from the Member States, EFTA countries and candidate countries, as well as representatives from DG MOVE and the International Maritime Statistics Forum (IMSF). Item 1 Opening address Ms Ruxandra Roman Enescu, Head of Unit for transport statistics in Eurostat, welcomed the participants. Item 2 Adoption of the agenda The draft agenda was approved with a minor adjustment in the timing of the lunch break. Item 3 Recent developments in EU transport policy DG MOVE gave an overview of recent developments in EU transport policy and the resulting data needs for the maritime sector, focusing on: The upcoming mid-term review of the EU Maritime Transport Strategy, which aims to take stock of recent achievements, evaluate current trends and identify areas for further improvement. The state of play of the implementation of the Reporting Formalities Directive and the National Single Windows (NSWs) for receiving port call notifications, which are now either partially or fully completed in all Member States. The objective of developing a comprehensive emanifest and a European Maritime Single Window (EMSW) solution with the aim of enhancing, harmonising and streamlining the reporting formalities for ships calling in EU ports. Item 4 Recent developments in European maritime transport statistics Eurostat presented the progress made in European maritime transport statistics since the meeting of the Working Group in 2014, as well as prospects and planned developments in the following areas: Timeliness, quality and dissemination Legal framework 2

Report to the Parliament and the Council on use of delegated powers Methodology Short sea shipping Port-to-port distances and modal split indicators Intermodal transport statistics Study on use of SSN and NSW data for maritime statistics IT and standardisation developments Data validation and quality assurance Further details on each of these topics can be found in the document MAR-2016-04. DG MOVE highlighted two main challenges encountered in their work on combining trade and transport statistics in order to estimate feeder transport of containers in short sea shipping; the lack of data on mode of transport in intra-eu trade statistics and the use of different weight concepts in the two statistics (gross weight and net weight). - The Working Group took note of the progress and planned developments in the European maritime transport statistics. Item 5.1 Harmonisation of the list of ports Eurostat presented the plans for preparing a new Commission Delegated Decision with an updated list of European ports, as well as the status of the harmonisation of the current list of ports and some proposals for modifications in the codes used for non-eea countries. Further details can be found in the document MAR-2016-05.1. One country expressed some concerns about the proposed code change if the implication is that the introduction of unique port codes will make MCA codes unnecessary. Eurostat clarified that the introduction of specific port codes for each MCA is necessary in order to comply with the SDMX standards for code lists. However, both the MCA level and the port level will be kept for reporting purposes. One country expressed its support to the proposal for the code modifications and underlined the importance of coordinating the use of codes with other organisations, in particular EMSA and the maritime authorities. Eurostat acknowledged the need for coordination on EU level and emphasised that some analysis and coordination have been carried out with EMSA in this area, and that most of the port codes used in the SafeSeaNet (SSN) system are identical to the 3

codes used for maritime statistics. However, there are some special, non-harmonised codes in each of the systems, which will need to be converted on a one-to-one basis. Eurostat underlined the importance of preparing a new legal act with an updated list of ports, as this codified list is used by other organisations as basis for their port lists. - The Working Group took note of the preparatory work for the new Commission Delegated Decision with an updated list of EU ports and the provisional time table for consultations and adoption by the Commission in the second quarter of 2017. - The Working Group approved the proposed modification of port codes for non-eu countries with several MCAs. Item 5.2 Proposals for clarification of methodology Eurostat presented recommendations on three methodological issues that have been raised since the last meeting of the Working Group. These issues cover: 1. Harmonisation of vessel statistics 2. Reporting of fluvio-maritime transport 3. Collection or estimation of gross weight of goods for road goods vehicles and accompanying trailers (code 51) and unaccompanied road goods trailers and semi-trailers (code 61) transported by ferries. Further details about the methodological clarifications of these issues can be found in the document MAR-2016-05.2. 1. Harmonisation of vessel statistics In the presentation, Eurostat proposed that vessels in the categories Fishing (code 41), Tugs (code 43) and Miscellaneous (code 49) should be excluded from the disseminated vessel statistics on the assumption that these vessels do not carry goods or passengers for commercial purposes, while vessels in the category Offshore activities (code 42) should only be reported when involved in commercial transport of goods or passengers. In the following discussion, one country specified that tugs can be involved in transport of heavy floating structures and that such transport should be included in the statistics. Another country questioned the ambiguity of the word commercial in the proposal and specified that an activity is considered as commercial when a paid service is provided. However, transport of goods or passengers on a company s own account should also be included in the maritime statistics. 4

A third country expressed that it would continue with not reporting the optional type of vessel categories, and specified that offshore activities are reported only partially in their national data. Eurostat underlined that the objective of the proposed harmonisation is to achieve coherence between the data reported in the tables for goods, passengers and vessels in the maritime transport statistics. 2. Reporting of fluvio-maritime transport In the presentation, Eurostat put forward the following proposals for recommendations on how to report fluvio-maritime transport in the maritime and IWW statistics, taking into account recent comments from the countries reporting inland waterways data, the text of the respective legal frameworks and the relatively small scale of fluviomaritime transport reported: I. Fluvio-maritime transport performed by an IWW vessel should be reported in the IWW statistics and not in the maritime statistics. II. III. IV. Fluvio-maritime transport performed by a seagoing vessel should be reported in the maritime transport statistics and not in the IWW statistics. If type of vessel information is unavailable in the source data, related information (such as port of loading/unloading) could be used to determine whether the fluvio-maritime transport is likely to be carried out by IWW or seagoing vessels. If necessary in order to compile relevant and coherent IWW statistics on national level, specific cases of fluvio-maritime transport performed by seagoing vessels could be included in both the maritime and the IWW data reported to Eurostat (e.g. fluvio-maritime transport on specific canals or to/from specific IWW ports). However, any such deviations from the main recommendations in points 1 and 2 should be clearly communicated to Eurostat in order to be specified in the metadata of the IWW statistics. In the following discussion, two countries stated that they would provide comments to the recommendations by email after the meeting. One country specified that the information on vessel type is not available in the national IWW data, and that fluvio-maritime transport is identified by the port of loading and unloading. This country would like the fluvio-maritime transport to be included in both the maritime and inland waterways statistics. Another country supported including fluvio-maritime transport in both the maritime and inland waterways statistics, but specified that they would be able to report fluviomaritime separately in each of the statistics if required. A third country pointed out that they do not have much fluvio-maritime transport and is therefore ok with both alternatives. However, attention should be paid to the coherency with ESPO data regarding this issue. One country warned about potential asymmetries in the mirror checks between countries if there is a change in the reporting of fluvio-maritime transport. 5

Eurostat highlighted that the proposal includes the possibility of reporting fluviomaritime transport in both statistics in specific cases, as long as this is clearly specified in the metadata of the statistics. 3. Collection or estimation of gross weight of goods for road goods vehicles and accompanying trailers (code 51) and unaccompanied road goods trailers and semi-trailers (code 61) transported by ferries In the presentation, Eurostat emphasised that estimates based on historical data might be an effective way of ensuring coherency in the time series in the short term, but that average weight ratios used for estimation need to be updated regularly. In addition, Eurostat pointed to the road freight transport statistics as a possible alternative data source. In the following discussion, one country confirmed the challenge with collecting detailed data for vehicles and goods transported on Ro-Ro ferries, but added that based on the national experience it is not feasible to use data from the road freight survey as basis for the required estimates. Another country has had success with collecting the required data directly from the ferry companies instead of from the port. Furthermore, useful information on the type of vehicle transported by ferries is often available. At the end of the discussion, the country that had raised this methodological issue thanked the Working Group for sharing their experiences, and underlined that the medium-term solution will probably be to renegotiate data reporting with the ferry companies in order to be able provide quality estimates. - Regarding the harmonisation of vessel statistics: "Commercial transport" should be re-phrased to cover all transport included in the tables for goods and passengers. In special cases where vessels in categories 41, 43 and 49 are used for transport of goods or passengers, they should be included in the vessel statistics. With the two amendments above, the Working Group agreed with the proposal put forward by Eurostat. A revised proposal text will be forwarded to the Working Group for comments by email after the meeting. - Regarding the recommendations for reporting of fluvio-maritime transport: Eurostat will sum up the discussions and input and forward a finalised set of recommendations to the Working Group for approval by email after the meeting. 6

Item 5.3 Update of the reference manual Eurostat presented the plans for disseminating a revised version of the reference manual on maritime transport statistics in 2016, and specified the changes compared with previous version of the manual. Further details on the update of the reference manual can be found in the document MAR-2016-05.3. One country thanked Eurostat for the work done on the new version of the manual and suggested that additional information on national methodologies could be supplied by email after the meeting. - Eurostat will send an email following the meeting, asking the reporting countries to: Comment on the new version of the reference manual. Validate the new list of competent authorities for maritime transport statistics. Approve the new manual for dissemination on the Eurostat website. If necessary, provide updated information on national data sources and methodologies for inclusion in part III of the manual. - A one month deadline for replies to the email was agreed. Item 6.1 Intermodal transport statistics Eurostat presented the two main recommendations for improvements in the maritime data collection which was put forward by the recent Task Force on Intermodal Transport Statistics: 1. The correspondence table between ports and NUTS3 regions should be improved. 2. The voluntary reporting of data for containers on Ro-Ro units (in dataset C2) should be extended to more countries in order to have a better coverage of Ro-Ro container movements in the main EU ports. Further details can be found in the document MAR-2016-06.1. Regarding the improvement of the port-nuts correspondence table, Eurostat suggested to forward the existing table to all reporting countries after the meeting and ask for assistance in validating and updating the information. Regarding the collection of Ro-Ro containers, Eurostat suggested to do a tour de table in order to gather opinions on this recommendation and get an overview of the data availability on national level. 7

During the round table discussion, a total of 15 countries stated that the C2 data on Ro-Ro containers cannot be provided, either because the data is not available on national level or because collecting the data would mean an increased burden on data providers. On the other hand, three countries stated that Ro-Ro container data is available on national level and that dataset C2 could be reported in the future. Furthermore, three more countries specified that some data on Ro-Ro containers might be available nationally and that they will provide further feedback after the meeting. In addition, one country confirmed that the C2 data is already being collected and transmitted to Eurostat, even though they face some difficulties in separating Ro-Ro containers from other containers in the source data. Eurostat closed the discussion with reminding the Working Group about the possibility for applying for intermodal grants in order to improve data availability on national level. - Eurostat will forward the existing Port-NUTS correspondence table to the reporting countries after the meeting, asking for assistance in validating the list and providing missing and updated information on NUTS3 codes for ports (deadline for reply: One month). - Regarding the voluntary data collection for Ro-Ro containers, there is little data available in most countries. However, some countries have this data available and will look into the possibility of starting to transmit the voluntary dataset C2. Item 6.2 Modal Split Indicators Eurostat presented a proposal to calculate and territorialise maritime tonnekilometres (tkm) and passenger-kilometres (pkm) at national level, by attributing transport performance to the countries in which waters this transport takes place. Eurostat s presentation focused on the possible approaches for territorialising maritime transport performance discussed in recent years, which can be summarised as follows: 1. 50/50 allocation: 50% of the tkm/pkm performed on a given journey is allocated to the port/country of loading, the remaining 50% to the port/country of unloading. 2. Territorialisation based on the share of the distance performed in national waters, i.e. either within: a) national territorial waters, or b) national Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) 3. 'Hybrid approach': Recognising the importance of the origin/destination ports by attributing e.g. 1/3 of the tkm/pkm to the country of loading, 1/3 to the country of 8

unloading, and the remaining to the transit countries passed along the route according to national territorial waters or EEZs. Further details can be found in the document MAR-2016-06.2. In the presentation, Eurostat underlined that the aim is to find an approach for maritime territorialisation that is comparable to the ones used for other modes of transport and used in the modal split indicator calculations and which is easily applicable without creating extra burden on the reporting countries. Based on this, Eurostat expressed a preference for the EEZ approach. DG MOVE agreed with not using the 12 nautical miles territorial water approach, but had some concerns with using the EEZ approach as it might cause underestimation of traffic in major ports. In consequence, DG MOVE would favour a hybrid approach. One country supported the use of a hybrid approach. Two countries expressed difficulties with supporting the proposal and choosing a preferred method without analysing the actual results of the different approaches first. One of these countries pointed out that the choice of method would depend on what is going to be measured. For example, for measuring trade the point of loading and unloading is essential. On the other hand, EEZ could be more suitable for other purposes. It might therefore be necessary to consult national stakeholders before providing feedback on the approaches. The other country commented that using the EEZ has a large impact on the countries with the biggest EEZs, and pointed out that territorial waters were chosen for air transport. Moreover, attention should be paid on how EEZs around islands are treated, as large volumes of extra-eu maritime transport pass through the EEZs of the same islands. One country supported the EEZ approach from a purely technical perspective, but added that the 50/50 approach could be appropriate for some analyses. This country expressed doubts about the hybrid approach, as the weights would be challenging to define in a good way. Additional doubts were expressed regarding the concept of transit and on how areas like the Channel or the sea between Denmark and Sweden should be treated. This latest concern was shared by another country. Two countries commented that no approach is perfect and that the most important aspect is to be able to measure the changes over time. With respect to this, the choice of approach will not make much difference. One country specified that it does not have any EEZ and expressed additional doubts about the 50/50 method. One country commented that the resulting Modal Split Indicators would be challenging to interpret and expressed doubts about whether they should be used for policy decisions. 9

Eurostat pointed out the need to agree on one of the approaches before a territorialised distance matrix for maritime transport can be developed. Eurostat also underlined that a clear separation of transit transport could make the interpretation of the results more explanatory. - Eurostat will send an email to the reporting countries following the meeting containing two alternative proposals: 1. A two-step solution, by first developing a territorialised distance matrix based on the EEZ, and then producing a detailed analysis comparing the EEZ and hybrid solution(s) results for discussion in the Working Group. 2. Use the 50/50 approach (and not develop a territorialised distance matrix). - Based on the majority opinion, Eurostat will continue with the next steps in the project. Item 7 Integration of statistics with emaritime Eurostat presented the main results of the study on possible use of SSN and NSW data for maritime transport statistics, as well as some background information for the discussions on possible follow-up actions on EU level and national level. In particular, the possibility of setting up a dedicated Task Force on Maritime Transport Statistics in order to facilitate further integration and use of SSN/NSW data for maritime transport statistics was put forward for discussion. The main purposes of this Task Force would be to: 1. Produce recommendations for harmonisation of code lists and standardised conversion tables between classifications and data elements in the SSN/NSW systems and the requirements of the Directive on Maritime Transport Statistics. 2. Draft guidelines and define best practices on how SSN/NSW can be integrated with the production of maritime transport statistics. Further details on the presentation can be found in the document MAR-2016-07. The presentation was followed by a round-table discussion, where countries discussed the possible follow-up actions and informed the Working Group about the status of cooperation between the statistical authorities and the competent authorities for the SSN/NSW systems on national level. Four countries expressed interest in participating to a Task Force dedicated to facilitate further integration and use of SSN/NSW data for maritime transport statistics. Four countries shared their experience in analysing data from SSN/NSW in some detail. 10

One of the main issues expressed by several countries was concerns about missing data and low coverage for some variables in the SSN/NSW systems (such as port of loading/unloading, flag of vessel and type of goods). Low coverage of data for outwards intra-eu transport was especially highlighted. A lack of collaboration between maritime authorities and custom authorities up until now was also mentioned by several countries, as well as lack of harmonisation in the classifications used in the SSN/NSW systems and in the maritime statistics, and lack of quality checks in the SSN/NSW systems. In consequence, it is probably not feasible to replace the current data collection with NSW data for at least the next 4-5 years. One country pointed out that the statistical authority will be part of the governing board of the NSW and will ask for additional data required for statistics to be reported via the NSW. In another country the statistical authority is participating in a working group trying to improve the lack of detailed cargo data in the NSW. One country inquired whether DG TAXUD could take some measures on EU level in order to facilitate the access to customs data. Eurostat pointed out that following the implementation of the new Union Customs Code, DG MOVE and DG TAXUD have initiated a new phase of cooperation with the objective of developing a comprehensive emanifest and a European Maritime Single Window, as presented by DG MOVE under item 3 earlier in the meeting. - A draft mandate for a Task Force on Maritime Transport Statistics on further integration of SSN/NSW data with maritime transport statistics will be presented to the CGST for approval at the meeting in November. - Proposals for additional participants or subjects to be discussed in the Task Force can be forwarded to Eurostat until the CGST meeting. Item 8 Use of AIS data for maritime statistics The Working Group was updated on the latest developments in the ESSnet Big Data task force work package 4 on use of AIS data, which is headed by Statistics Netherlands. The objectives of this work package are to investigate whether real-time data for ship positions measured by the Automatic Identification System (AIS) can be used: 1. To improve the quality and internal comparability of existing statistics. 2. For new statistical products relevant for the ESS. Statistics Netherlands also gave a live demonstration of a publicly available AISbased statistics service developed by the Norwegian Coastal Administration (www.havbase.no) and encouraged the Working Group to share experiences with use of AIS data. Further details can be found in the presentation for item 8. 11

Two countries shared their national experiences with AIS data, highlighting the possibility of improving the accuracy of the national port distance matrix and challenges with securing data access, respectively. Both countries expressed interest in working on similar AIS related projects. One country asked Eurostat whether the provision of datasets F1 and F2 would still be required if AIS data can be used for compiling vessel statistics. The question of how data could be accessed was also put forward; should it be purchased by the countries, as is often the case today, or could Eurostat provide access to the data from a centralised data source? Eurostat thanked Statistics Netherlands for the presentation and emphasised the great potential of AIS data as an additional data source both for new and existing maritime statistics. Regarding data access, Eurostat underlined that in general AIS data is collected and managed by the national maritime authorities. Centralised access to historic AIS data for EU waters is approved by the national maritime authorities in the High Level Steering Group for SSN on a project-by-project basis. In 2013, Eurostat was granted access to an extraction of AIS data for 2011 in order to improve the maritime route calculations in the port-to-port distance tool. Eurostat added that the current procedures for accessing historic AIS data on EU level do not secure the kind of regular data collection that would be needed for statistics. In addition, there are some questions regarding the completeness, coverage and quality of the existing AIS and port call data exchanged through the SSN system. In consequence, it is not feasible to replace the current collection of vessel data (datasets F1 and F2) with centralised data collections of AIS and/or port call data from SSN in the near future although this might become a possibility in the longer term. Finally, Eurostat encouraged the Working Group to explore the data access options available on national level and underlined the importance of close cooperation with the national maritime authorities. Item 9 Use of EMCIP data for maritime accident statistics Eurostat presented the state of play for the transport safety project, which aims to disseminate accident statistics for road, rail, air and maritime transport based on data compiled by the EU transport safety agencies and DG MOVE. Within this framework, Eurostat and EMSA are in the final stages of signing an Administrative Agreement on use of data from the European Marine Casualty Information Platform (EMCIP) for maritime accident statistics. Although discussions on how to how to disseminate the data from EMCIP in Eurobase are still ongoing, Eurostat showed a few examples of possible tables for maritime accidents by area of accident, category of ship and vessel s flag state category. Eurostat also underlined that while most maritime fatalities occur in smaller vessels, the EMCIP data coverage is limited to vessels over 15 meters. 12

Item 10 National initiatives and developments Statistics Belgium informed the Working Group about their work on changing the IT system in the last year. The new system is more modern and adapted for changes when required, and there will be no break in time series between data produced with the old and the new system. Item 11 Reports from other institutions and organisations No reports were presented. Item 12 New annual quality report Eurostat presented the draft version of a new annual quality report summarising the compliance with Directive 2009/42/EC and later amendments. The new report has been developed in order to document the compliance of each reporting country in a harmonised and transparent way, and provides an overview of the completeness, timeliness and quality of the quarterly and annual datasets based on the results of the regular quality checks. Further details about the new annual quality report can be found in the document MAR-2016-12. One country asked for clarifications on how the number of revisions is counted in the report, as new versions of data files are now submitted by Eurostat through edamis following minor corrections in the codes and/or format. These re-transmissions should, however, not be counted as revisions. Two countries voiced their agreement with distribution of the annual quality report to all reporting countries. Eurostat clarified that the number of revisions in the report only covers the actual revised data files transmitted by the countries, not the re-transmissions that are required following the migration of the maritime production system in Eurostat to TRIS. In addition, Eurostat emphasised that the number of revisions is not a compliance criteria in itself, but an indicator of the level of quality improvements and data treatment resources needed for the respective datasets in the period covered. - The Working Group agreed to distribution of the annual quality report to all reporting countries by email and on CIRCABC every year when finalised. 13

Item 13 IT developments - SDMX Eurostat presented the technical framework, status and recent developments for transmission of maritime transport data to Eurostat in the SDMX-ML format. Since the WG MTS in 2014, six countries have started transmitting maritime data to Eurostat in the SDMX-ML format. So far, all of the countries have chosen to use the SDMX converter to generate the maritime SDMX files, which are then transmitted to Eurostat via edamis in the usual way. Due to the automatic validation of data format and codes which is done when creating the SDMX files, a significant reduction in the format and code errors has been observed for the countries that have migrated to SDMX transmission of maritime data. Further details on SDMX transmission of maritime data can be found in the document MAR-2016-13. One country inquired about the best option for producing maritime SDMX files; using the converter or implementing SDMX functionality directly in the national IT system. One of the countries sending SDMX files pointed out that the SDMX functionality had recently been implemented in the national IT system for maritime statistics and that, consequently, the converter is no longer being used. One country informed the Working Group about the intention to migrate to SDMX transmission of maritime data files next year and inquired whether SDMX transmission would also be implemented for IWW statistics. One country asked whether it would be possible to do some testing of SDMX transmission in collaboration with Eurostat as a first step. Eurostat clarified that the best option for producing SDMX files would depend on the national ambitions, strategies and available IT resources, but added that the most robust long term approach would probably be to implement SDMX functionality in the national IT system for production of maritime statistics. Eurostat also confirmed that a technical framework for SDMX transmission is being developed for the IWW domain as well and underlined that the intention is to promote SDMX transmission of data for all statistical domains in Eurostat. Finally, Eurostat confirmed that it is possible for countries to transmit test files in SDMX format through edamis, provided that the test transmissions are agreed with Eurostat in advance (in order to be monitored and separated from the regular data transmissions). Item 14 Eurostat presented a summary of the main conclusions of the meeting and thanked the participants for all of the good discussions and valuable input. 14