4.2 Land Side Incentives
In the study carried out by Gonzalez-Aregall and Bergqvist
38 mentioned above, a
survey over different projects in ports to reduce emissions and congestion was
carried out. They made a survey to be able to consider as many case studies as
possible. After using the relevant sources
39 they selected 77
40 different cases that
could prove to have a potential for drawing some conclusions. Out of these, a total of
160 different initiatives were considered for the study. Their study is further based on
container ports. From this study a couple of these initiatives will be presented in
more detail in this chapter.
The ports that Gonzalez-Aregall and Bergqvist studied were from the United
States, Australia, New Zealand and Europe. It is important to add here that port
regulation is perhaps not easy to compare from a straightforward perspective.
European rules of non-discriminatory actions are obstacles to certain incentives
taken in the US. Their study is based on five different case examples; namely,
(1) on air emission goal, (2) on acoustic emission goal, (3) on land congestion
goal, (4) on modal shift and (5) on intermodal incentive.
41 These incentives mirror
some of the suggestions put forward in some of the reports from the work packages
presented in the final report of the aforementioned projects.
From the study that Gonzalez-Aregall and Bergqvist carried out, three examples
will be reviewed briefly. First, is the examples of the Ports of New York and New
Jersey and is referred to as the “Truck-replacement program”. The aim of it is to
reduce the number of heavy polluting trucks frequenting the port area. Through this,
the port is supporting the replacement of older so- called Drayage Trucks. According
to the Port Authorities of these ports, there is a mandate to replace the old trucks and
allow funding for two new trucks with a grant which covers up to 50% of the cost.
42
Coupled to this program is a registration in the Port Truck Pass which is a tool in the
Clean Truck Program. Such registration must be made before the date of the entry
into the port. In this way, the port authorities support the replacement of older trucks
with newer ones with more environmentally sound engines. How such a program
would fit into a port in Sweden will be dealt with later.
38 Port Initiated Incentives and Fees for more Sustainable Transport from a Hinterland Perspective.
39 Sources used by Gonzalez-Aregall and Bergqvist was BestFact case studies, Green Ports project,
IAPH database, OECD report (2011; 2012), World Port top hundred ranking. See the report page
17.
40 The authors made the following remark in a footnote on how the 77 ports were chosen:
“Specifically, it has been considered 44 potential cases of the top hundred container port worldwide
ranking (including a total of 148 port authorities) and 33 of IAPH database and other sources.”
See p. 17.
41 See pp. 20–22.
42 It is a maximum level of 25,000 US$. At the time of the report was written 429 cases of
replacement was carried out between 2010 and 2013. According to Gonzalez-Aregall and Bergqvist
the successfulness in the program this was prolonged for 4 more years.
448
L.-G. Malmberg
In the study carried out by Gonzalez-Aregall and Bergqvist
38 mentioned above, a
survey over different projects in ports to reduce emissions and congestion was
carried out. They made a survey to be able to consider as many case studies as
possible. After using the relevant sources
39 they selected 77
40 different cases that
could prove to have a potential for drawing some conclusions. Out of these, a total of
160 different initiatives were considered for the study. Their study is further based on
container ports. From this study a couple of these initiatives will be presented in
more detail in this chapter.
The ports that Gonzalez-Aregall and Bergqvist studied were from the United
States, Australia, New Zealand and Europe. It is important to add here that port
regulation is perhaps not easy to compare from a straightforward perspective.
European rules of non-discriminatory actions are obstacles to certain incentives
taken in the US. Their study is based on five different case examples; namely,
(1) on air emission goal, (2) on acoustic emission goal, (3) on land congestion
goal, (4) on modal shift and (5) on intermodal incentive.
41 These incentives mirror
some of the suggestions put forward in some of the reports from the work packages
presented in the final report of the aforementioned projects.
From the study that Gonzalez-Aregall and Bergqvist carried out, three examples
will be reviewed briefly. First, is the examples of the Ports of New York and New
Jersey and is referred to as the “Truck-replacement program”. The aim of it is to
reduce the number of heavy polluting trucks frequenting the port area. Through this,
the port is supporting the replacement of older so- called Drayage Trucks. According
to the Port Authorities of these ports, there is a mandate to replace the old trucks and
allow funding for two new trucks with a grant which covers up to 50% of the cost.
42
Coupled to this program is a registration in the Port Truck Pass which is a tool in the
Clean Truck Program. Such registration must be made before the date of the entry
into the port. In this way, the port authorities support the replacement of older trucks
with newer ones with more environmentally sound engines. How such a program
would fit into a port in Sweden will be dealt with later.
38 Port Initiated Incentives and Fees for more Sustainable Transport from a Hinterland Perspective.
39 Sources used by Gonzalez-Aregall and Bergqvist was BestFact case studies, Green Ports project,
IAPH database, OECD report (2011; 2012), World Port top hundred ranking. See the report page
17.
40 The authors made the following remark in a footnote on how the 77 ports were chosen:
“Specifically, it has been considered 44 potential cases of the top hundred container port worldwide
ranking (including a total of 148 port authorities) and 33 of IAPH database and other sources.”
See p. 17.
41 See pp. 20–22.
42 It is a maximum level of 25,000 US$. At the time of the report was written 429 cases of
replacement was carried out between 2010 and 2013. According to Gonzalez-Aregall and Bergqvist
the successfulness in the program this was prolonged for 4 more years.
448
L.-G. Malmberg