The 1st batch of classed domestic ships opened up a new prospect for shipping in China

Since entering 2005, CCS has been strivingto promote the work of classification ser-vices for domestic ships, which has at-tracted extensive attention from the mari-time industry due to its far-reaching significance.Recently, with the united actions taken…     

The potential role of public–private partnerships in the upgrade of port infrastructure: normative and positive considerations

There is a broad consensus on the need for the major expansion of many ports. Traditionally, ports and related facilities have involved significant levels of direct or indirect government ownership or some degree of government financing. Most governments, however, are reluctant to either borrow money to fund the needed additional capital infrastructure or to fund it directly. Public–private partnerships (P3s) are thus an attractive potential option. But are they the answer? This article examines the normative rationales for P3s and presents a positive theory perspective that focuses on the conflicting goals of public and private partners. It argues that the major government impetus for P3s is likely to be for physical port infrastructure with moderate levels of market failure, such as small to medium sized ports, and not for intangible port activities. Furthermore, small to medium sized port P3s are likely to be successful in terms of having relatively low transaction costs and lower total social costs than alternative provision mechanisms. Nonetheless, even in this situation, the different goals of public and private partners may give rise to conflict. Drawing on the global empirical evidence on P3s, this article proposes some institutional design features that will help to ensure P3 success.     

The impact of the Polar Code on risk mitigation in Arctic waters: a “toolbox” for underwriters?

The existing risk weighing on vessel, crew and ecosystem in the Arctic and more globally in Polar waters promoted the adoption of the Polar Code (PC) early 2017, a mandatory international legal framework intended for enhanced safety and environmental protection. While the substance of the PC has been extensively analyzed, few studies have focused on the underlying relationships between the PC and underwriters. Based on an extensive literature review, documentary materials and interviews with insurance companies, this article conceptualizes the PC as a “toolbox” and analyzes how underwriters can exploit it in their work within the emerging Arctic market. The PC does not only regulate the navigation in Arctic waters in legal terms, but is also aimed at mitigating risks in the Polar areas through the identification of hazard sources and proceduralization of risk assessment. As a result we observe a certain “Polar Code paradox”. Even though the PC is a risk-based instrument and constitutes a key step for improving ship insurability, it has only limited capacity to assist underwriters in assessing risks and insuring vessels. Marine insurers still face a lack of data and high pending uncertainties leading them to exercise extreme caution with Arctic risks appraisal.     

Assessing land‐use regulations in coastal wetlands: The case of the long point area,lake Erie,Ontario

Abstract

The first comprehensive attempt at development control along the Canadian Great Lakes shoreline was the 1976 lakeshore regulation policy adopted by the Regional Municipality of Haldimand‐Norfolk on the north Lake Erie shore. This innovative strategy was initiated at the municipal level as a component of the regional land‐use planning process. Determination of efficiency and effectiveness of the policy implementation process is based on analysis of permit approval files. All development applications submitted between 1976 and 1980 in the Turkey Point and Long Point Peninsulas are evaluated. Those areas, the most popular cottaging areas in the region, are most susceptible to flood and erosion hazards. Of the total applications submitted during the four‐year study period, 37 percent were in these areas. The policy was ineffective and inefficient in controlling development in the two peninsulas. Applications were approved in the majority of cases, despite regulatory prohibition of developments in hazard‐susceptible areas. There were lengthy decision‐making delays, often exceeding one year, and frequent violations of regulatory procedures. Recommendations are suggested to improve policy implementation.     

The decline of the U.K. merchant fleet: an assessment of government policies in recent years—a rejoinder to Goss's comment

In recent years, the Hong Kong port has been challenged by the emergence of the Shenzhen port. This gives rise to a concern that the high terminal handling charges (THC) levied by the Hong Kong terminal operators are undermining the competitiveness of the Hong Kong port. As the major container terminals in both Hong Kong and Shenzhen are operated by the Hong Kong terminal operators, the monopoly power of these operators is commonly believed to be the cause of the high THC in Hong Kong. The theoretical model developed in this study shows that the trigger point mechanism (TPM) used by the Hong Kong Government to control the supply of terminal capacity may be a source of such monopoly power. Two possible scenarios are considered in the model—Scenario 1 in which expansion of capacity is unconstrained (i.e. the Shenzhen port); and Scenario 2 in which expansion of capacity is constrained by TPM (i.e. the Hong Kong port). Under TPM, the Hong Kong Government commits not to grant the right to build new container terminals unless and until the demand for container handling services exceeds the current capacity by a certain amount, which provides the incumbent operators incentives to invest preemptively in excess capacity in order to block the entry of potential entrants. This model is supported by the empirical findings from this study. The results from this study suggest an urgent need for the Hong Kong Government to overhaul the current port development policy as a part of the effort to promote economic integration between Hong Kong and the Mainland China.     

The concept of “shipowner” under new maritime labor law (MLC, 2006): does the shipowner own the ship? (comparative analysis of national law of Denmark,Finland, Germany,Norway, and the United Kingdom)

The identification of the responsible shipowner is essential for seafarers in order to claim payments and compensation in respect of their employment on board a ship. Often this may be difficult because of corporate arrangements and the many intermediaries traditionally involved in ship operation. The Maritime Labour Convention 2006 (MLC, 2006), adopted by the International Labour Conference (ILC) 94th (Maritime) Session in 2006, entered into force on August 2013; it significantly affects the shipowner’s responsibility in respect to seafarers’ employment. Taking into account the mentioned issue, the article examines the concept of “shipowner” under the MLC, 2006 and presents comparative analysis of the relevant national law implementing the MLC, 2006 in Denmark, Finland, Germany, Norway, and the United Kingdom.