Table 3 Governance models in Southern Europe
FRANCE | ITALY | PORTUGAL | SPAIN | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Governance model | ||||
Property | Autonomous under supervision of Ministry of Transport | State | State | State |
Status P.A. | Own legal personality entity | Own legal entity | Own legal entity | Legal personality entity. Private-law body |
Ports governance | Two major groups: Grands Ports Maritimes (7) and Regional Interest ports (17). | Commercial ports (24) + ports of regional interest. Proposal to establish eight regional ports | The system is made up by five primary P.As. and four secondary P.As. The former are autonomous, the latter depend on National Organisms such as the Institute for Ports and Maritime Transport. | Forty-six general interest ports, grouped into 28 P.As. Coordination is done by Puertos del Estado [Ports of the State] |
Decision-making bodies | Port Directory, formed by users, dependent on Chambers of Commerce. President appointed by the Government. | Port committee, formed by representatives of local and Regional communities; users and workers. President appointed by Ministry. | Administration Council, formed by institutional representatives and representatives from the local community. President appointed by Ministry | Administration Council, where regional and local communities, users and workers participate. President appointed by Regional Government. |
Partnership | Under a regional belonging scheme, where the criterion used is geographical proximity | Within a port system included in a corporate and territorial scheme. | Solidarity through the Port Solidarity Fund | |
Autonomy | Grand Ports are autonomous in function, budget and fees: no autonomy in national ports | Limited budgetary autonomy. | Budgetary and rate fixing autonomy | |
Model | Landlord | Turned from a public, centralized model into Landlord, in 1994 | Landlord, since 1998; previously, Tool Port | Landlord, since 1992 |
Governance modalities in management operation | ||||
Property and control | National government | National government | State; through the Institute for Ports and Maritime Transport and the P.As. | State: through Puertos del Estado |
Nautical-technical services | Private, controlled by P.A. | Private, controlled by P.A. | Provided by P.As. through concessions to privates (maximum duration 30 years) | Concessions to private bodies (35 years); except terminals, where concessions could go up to 50 years given special conditions (RDL 8/2014) |
Fees | Autonomous | Autonomous, though only 15% goes to P.A., the rest goes to State | Regulated by Government, specifying services and port operations | Total autonomy, coordinated at a state level |
Challenges | ||||
Infrastructure investments | P.A., with compensation from State | State | Dependent on the Ministry of Public Works | P.As, through company plans approved by the national government. |
Planning | Operational level: State | Operational level: State; Company level: the P.A., under supervision of the State, is in charge of regulating, coordinating, promoting and planning port activities. The private sector handles operations through public concessions (which save for exceptions cannot exceed the length of 30 years) | Ministry of Public Works and Institute for Ports, that develop strategic planning and supervise and monitor the port sector. | Ministry of Public Works and Transport; jointly with and Port Authorities |
Major challenges | Linked to economic development and territorial planning | Aim: to reduce the number of P.As; include logistics hinterland into P.A. management; increased economic autonomy. | To reach a higher competitiveness and increased efficiency. To achieve financing, since public funds are not available | To achieve profitability of P.As. (set on yearly 2.5%); promotion of intermodality; improvement of environmental policies. |
Main laws and other legal documents | Law 496/92; Law 809/2004; Law 660/2008. | Law 84/94 | Decree-law 298/1993; Law 1998, Law 2012 | Law 30/2011 and RDL 2/2011 |