University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Embedding sustainability: a change management guide for ports

(USC Thesis Other)

Embedding sustainability: a change management guide for ports

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

EMBEDDING SUSTAINABILITY:
A CHANGE MANAGEMENT GUIDE FOR PORTS

by

January Green Rebstock

A Doctoral Project Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF POLICY, PLANNING, AND DEVELOPMENT

December 2013

Copyright 2013 January Green Rebstock

ii

Dedication

To my husband Matthew for your support and willingness to travel around the globe
with me and to my son Hudson who I hope will inherit a more sustainable world.

iii

Acknowledgements

Thank you to my esteemed committee members, Dr. Daniel Mazmanian, Dr. Paul Adler,
Dr. Peter Robertson, and Dr. Geraldine Knatz, for encouraging my passion, providing insightful
feedback, and exercising patience with me as this project has evolved. My committee chair,
Dan, deserves a special acknowledgement for his guidance. Geraldine, thank you for being such
an inspirational leader of the Port of Los Angeles – you are definitely a change agent for
sustainability and I am proud to have worked with you. I also appreciate the tuition
reimbursement program you created at the Port – without it I could not have pursued this
degree.
Two special people that made my experience at USC quite enjoyable include Dr. Hilary
Bradbury-Huang and Dr. Deborah Natoli. Hilary, thank you for welcoming me into your work
with the Sustainable Enterprise Executive Roundtable (SEER), co-authoring the book chapter,
and helping me understand how important organizational learning and action research are to
advancing sustainability. Debbie, thank you for creating a supportive space at the Price School
for academic practitioners and being a champion for the professional doctorate program.
Other mentors at the Port of Los Angeles that I need to mention are Dr. Ralph Appy and
Christopher Patton. Ralph, thank you for hiring me and helping me grow at the Port, supporting
my flexible schedule while attending USC, and assigning me the role of the Port’s Sustainability
Liaison. Christopher, thank you for collaborating with me to draft the Port of Los Angeles
Sustainability Plan. I really enjoyed the process and our time together. Thank you also to
Candace Hodder, Dr. Robert Vos, and Seri McClendon at Clean Agency for your technical
expertise and support of our sustainability planning efforts.
iv

I appreciate the warm reception that I received at the case study ports that I visited.
Thank you to all of the study participants and my colleagues engaged in the inter-organizational
learning work described in Chapter 4. I hope this paper accurately reflects your challenges and
achievements and that you find the guide in Chapter 6 helpful in some way. Thank you to Eric
Caris at the Port of Los Angeles for helping me arrange the interviews and port site visits. In
particular, I would like to thank David Young of Inchcape Shipping Services for being such a
gracious host and helping me during my first trip alone to Shanghai. I would also like to thank
Charng Ching (CC) Lin of Tetra Tech for his translation services and guidance during my second
trip to China.
Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends for their support and
encouragement. My husband Matthew for his understanding and continued patience with my
time-consuming endeavor; my mother, mother-in-law, and sister for listening to me; and my
Aunt Barbara for her support. My friends Joanne, Kanya, and Shilpa also get credit for helping
me talk through my ideas and providing comments on various iterations of this work.

v

Table of Contents

Dedication ii

Acknowledgements iii

List of Tables vii

List of Figures viii

Abstract x

Chapter 1: Introduction 1
A. The Challenge: Institutionalizing Sustainability in Port Organizations
B. Research Methods
C. The Advance in Practice: A Change Management Guide
D. Summary of Findings and Implications

Chapter 2: Framework for Evaluating Port Sustainability 25
A. Adapted Model of a Mature Sustainable Organization
B. Port Stakeholders
C. Adapted Framework for Evaluating Sustainability within Port Organizations
1. Sustainability Aspects
2. Organizational Maturity Levels
D. Profiles of Organizational Sustainability Strategies
E. Flaws and Benefits of the Evaluation Model

Chapter 3: Port Case Studies 45
A. Overview: Major Container Ports in China, Europe, and the US
B. Methodology
C. China
1. Major Sustainability Policies in China
2. Chinese Ports: Background and Sustainability Analysis
i. Shanghai
i. Ningbo/Zhoushan
D. Europe
1. Major Sustainability Policies in Europe
2. European Ports: Background and Sustainability Analysis
i. Rotterdam
ii. Antwerp
iii. Hamburg

vi

E. United States
1. Major Sustainability Policies
2. Los Angeles: Background and Sustainability Analysis
F. Summary of Findings among Global Container Ports

Chapter 4: Organizational Change Case Study: The Port of Los Angeles 139
A. Mirvis and Googins - Dimensions; Stages; and Triggers for Sustainability
B. POLA’s Sustainability Story – Past and Present
C. POLA’s Potential Future – A Sustainability Plan for 2035
D. Discussion of POLA’s Sustainability Maturity and Strategy Profile
E. Findings related to POLA’s Organizational Change for Sustainability

Chapter 5: Inter-organizational Collaboration and Learning Efforts among 157
Ports and the Goods Movement Industry
A. Pacific Ports Clean Air Collaborative
B. IAPH World Ports Climate Initiative
C. Environmental Ship Index
D. PIANC Sustainable Ports Guide
E. ESPO Green Guide
F. BSR Performance Metrics for Supply Chain and Terminal Operators
G. West Coast Ports Technical Committee Sustainable Infrastructure Design Tool
H. Findings related to Inter-organizational Learning Efforts

Chapter 6: A Change-Management Guide to Advance Sustainability 175
within Port Organizations
A. Introduction
B. Sustainability Wheel of Change
C. Self-Assessment
D. Port Sustainability Plan
E. Resources and Tools
F. Conclusion

References 211
Appendices: 221
A. List of Site Visits and Stakeholder Interviews
B. Case Studies Site Visit Photos
C. Port Authority and Terminal Operator Interview Questions
D. Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Plan (unpublished) 2013 – 2035
E. Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Plan (unpublished) 2013 – 2014 Priority Actions

vii

List of Tables

Table 1: Sustainability Aspects Comparison Table 30
Table 2: Concepts of Sustainability 32
Table 3: Economic Aspects of Port Organizational Sustainability 33
Table 4: Environmental Aspects of Port Organizational Sustainability 34
Table 5: Social Aspects of Port Organizational Sustainability 35
Table 6: Maturity Levels 36
Table 7: Maturity Levels of Port Economic Sustainability Aspects 38
Table 8: Maturity Levels of Port Environmental Sustainability Aspects 39
Table 9: Maturity Levels of Port Social Sustainability Aspects 40
Table 10: Organizational Sustainability Strategies 42
Table 11: Top World Container Ports 46
Table 12: Top World Ports – Total Cargo Volumes 46
Table 13: Sustainability Aspects of Shanghai Port 54
Table 14: Shanghai Port Organizational Sustainability Maturity Summary 60
Table 15: Sustainability Aspects of the Port of Ningbo/Zhoushan 68
Table 16: Port of Ningbo/Zhoushan Organizational Sustainability Maturity Summary 74
Table 17: Sustainability Aspects of the Port of Rotterdam 81
Table 18: Port of Rotterdam Organizational Sustainability Maturity Summary 90
Table 19: Sustainability Aspects of the Port of Antwerp 96
Table 20: Port of Antwerp Organizational Sustainability Maturity Summary 104
Table 21: Sustainability Aspects of the Hamburg Port Authority 109
viii

Table 22: Hamburg Port Authority Organizational Sustainability Maturity Summary 116
Table 23: Sustainability Aspects of the Port of Los Angeles 123
Table 24: Port of Los Angeles Organizational Sustainability Maturity Summary 130
Table 25: Summary of Port Organization Views of Sustainability and Maturity Levels 134
Table 26: Summary of Port Organization Sustainability Strategies 137
Table 27: Summary of Port Sustainability Strategy Profiles and Maturity Levels 138
Table 28: Mirvis and Googins (2006) Dimensions of Corporate Citizenship 140
Adapted to Sustainability

Table 29: Mirvis and Googins (2006) Stages of Corporate Citizenship 143
Table 30: POLA Sustainability Initiatives 149
Table 31: POLA Assessment of Mirvis and Googins (2006) Dimensions of Sustainability 150
Table 32: POLA Assessment of Mirvis and Googins (2006) Stages of Sustainability 152
Table 33: Stakeholder Analysis Assessment 189
Table 34: Concept of Sustainability Assessment 190
Table 35: Port Economic Sustainability Assessment 192
Table 36: Maturity Levels of Port Economic Sustainability Aspects 193
Table 37: Port Environmental Sustainability Assessment 194
Table 38: Maturity Levels of Port Environmental Sustainability Aspects 195
Table 39: Port Social Sustainability Assessment 196
Table 40: Maturity Levels of Port Social Sustainability Aspects 198
Table 41: Sustainability Maturity Summary Table 199
Table 42: POLA Sustainability Initiatives 204
Table 43: Material Issue, Action, Metrics, Targets and Timeline Matrix Example 207
ix

List of Figures

Figure 1: Model of a Mature Sustainable Organization 26
Figure 2: Typical Stakeholders of Port Operations 27
Figure 3: Five Stages of Development and Triggers for Change 144
Figure 4: Framework for Draft Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Plan, 2013-2035 154
Figure 5: West Coast Ports Sustainable Design and Construction Tool Format 172
Figure 6: Model of a Sustainable Port Organization 179
Figure 7: The Wheel of Change toward Sustainability 184
Figure 8: Typical Port Stakeholders 187
Figure 9: Port Sustainability Aspects 191
Figure 10: Draft Material Issues Framework for the Port of Los Angeles 201
Figure 11: Port Sustainability Plan: 206
A Framework for Strategic Sustainability Management

Figure 12: Example of a Proposed Program 208

x

Abstract

To advance and embed sustainability within port organizations, this paper offers an
organizational change management guide for port practitioners. A framework from
Baumgartner and Ebner (2010) is adapted to evaluate the maturity level of sustainability within
six of the world’s top container ports: Shanghai, Ningbo/Zhoushan, Rotterdam, Hamburg,
Antwerp, and Los Angeles. Port organizations are then classified by a sustainability strategy
typology adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010). Through this process and by
highlighting the most advanced practices among ports, we are better able to understand the
aspects and influences that contribute to the evolution of a mature sustainable port
organization.
Applying the framework from Mirvis and Googins (2006), an organizational change case
study of the Port of Los Angeles offers a look at the triggers, drivers, successes, and remaining
challenges of integrating sustainability into the organization’s culture and decision-making
processes. This analysis is supplemented by examining inter-organizational learning efforts that
endeavor to drive change for sustainability among ports and within the goods movement
supply chain. Building on these approaches, the final chapter provides a guide for change
agents who want to further advance and institutionalize sustainability within their port
organizations and the ports industry.

1

Chapter 1:
Introduction

This chapter discusses the challenge of embedding sustainability within port organizations,
summarizes the research approaches used, and presents an advance in practice to managing
port sustainability. The final section summarizes major findings from the port case studies,
organizational change analysis, and examination of inter-organizational learning efforts.
A. The Challenge: Institutionalizing Sustainability in Port Organizations
Ports serve a vital function within the global economy as international trade gateways.
Ninety percent of world trade is estimated to be transported through maritime ports (AAPA
2009). Creating sustainable seaports “through a balance of environmental, economic, and
social responsibility initiatives” has been identified by the American Association of Port
Authorities (AAPA) as a major port issue that should become “fundamental business practice”
(Nagle 2008, 8). How are ports addressing sustainability issues, and to what extent is
sustainability embedded within port organizations?
To advance and embed sustainability within port organizations, there needs to be a
focus on creating an organizational culture that supports transparency, learning, collaboration,
innovation, and integrative thinking and decision-making. There has been early movement by
port authorities, terminal operators, and shipping lines in investment in new technologies,
planning tools, and better infrastructure design, but there is a need to increase efforts to
systematize sustainability into the decision-making processes within ports.
2

As the previous Sustainability Liaison for the Port of Los Angeles, I defined sustainability
for the organization as the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) approach (or People-Plant-Profit) combined
with the concept of “green growth.” In the 2011 Sustainability Report for the Port of Los
Angeles, I presented the following explanation, “Through green growth, the Port is able to
expand operations while aggressively reducing past and present impacts to the community and
the environment. Through a comprehensive approach to balancing environmental, social, and
economic impacts, the Port is able to identify the need for new initiatives and ways to modify
existing operations to be more sustainable. Further, to achieve sustainable green growth, the
Port will maximize its social, economic, and environmental objectives to find mutually
reinforcing solutions, recognizing their interdependencies. Likewise, social, economic, and
environmental impacts of Port actions are considered when assessing organizational
performance” (POLA 2011, 10).
Although a recognized global leader in port sustainability, like many others, the Port of
Los Angeles is still struggling with how to use sustainability as a framework for measuring
organizational performance and truly embed this perspective throughout the organization.

B. Research Methods
Research methods include a literature review and case studies analysis based on data
collected through site visits, interviews, personal observations, corporate communications
(reports, brochures, and websites), and internet research. The following literature review
3

discusses the use of sustainability frameworks, governance needed to support sustainability,
and the growing field of port sustainability.
Literature Review
The following literature review focuses on the concept of sustainability and how it is
applied to measure organizational performance. Incorporating sustainability into the
governance structures within organizations and industries is discussed, along with important
tools and elements for making this happen, including organizational change, learning,
collaborative partnerships and networks, and sustainability reporting. The robust
implementation of these tools and elements are signals of how integrated a commitment to
sustainability is within an organization or industry.
Through corporate sustainability, companies start to examine the social and
environmental impacts of their products and business operations. The need for sustainable
supply chains and sustainable goods movement systems can contribute to motivations for
increased sustainability governance and a move toward a more sustainable economy.
Theoretical frames such as transition research and action research are also discussed, along
with their role in advancing the understanding and practice of sustainability. Finally, literature
that discusses the connection between sustainability governance and ports is explored, and two
surveys of port organizations related to climate change and environmental practices are noted.

4

Sustainability Frameworks
There are many definitions for the concept of “sustainability”. The most cited reference
to sustainable development is the “Our Common Future” report by the Brundtland Commission
(1987), which defines sustainable development as “meeting the needs of the present
generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”
(Dobers and Springett 2010). Sustainability related concepts include Corporate Social
Responsibility, Corporate Sustainability, the Triple Bottom Line approach, and others.

Corporate Social Responsibility
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) calls for the inclusion of environmental
considerations in making business decisions, a commitment to equity, and the
acknowledgement that development means more than just economic growth (Dobers and
Springett 2010). Dobers and Springett (2010) find much of CSR to primarily be focused on good
public relations campaigns and branding, and less about business leaders having a level of
commitment to change their operations beyond the status quo once they have implemented
easy cost-saving and efficiency measures.
Babiak and Trendafilova (2010) find that while CSR practices have become increasingly
popular, there is little discussion in the academic literature regarding the motives driving these
changes in practice. Vidaver-Cohen and Simcic Bronn (2008) argue that “the parameters of
legitimacy for many businesses have changed in the new millennium, and that there may be
both moral and strategic imperatives for corporate efforts to strengthen the communities in
which they operate” (Babiak and Trendafilova 2010, 12). Campbell (2007) and Babiak and
5

Trendafilova (2010) also argue that institutional conditions determine whether CSR behavior is
likely to occur and suggest that if “well organized and effective industrial self-regulations” are in
place, or if there is monitoring of corporate behavior through independent organizations,
corporations are more likely to behave in socially responsible ways (13).

Sustainability Science and Approaches
Quental (2010) conducted a literature review regarding the links between the scientific
approaches to sustainability, including ecological economics, sustainability transition, and
sustainability science. He found that unlike conventional economics, ecological economics
recognizes the limits of natural resources and the impacts resulting from human activity on the
natural environment (259). This recognition supports the view that the scale of economic
development should be limited by the carrying capacity of the natural ecosystems it is
embedded within (Daly 1996, Quental 2010). An example of carrying capacity within an
ecosystem would be the amount of grazing goats a meadow could support before all of the
vegetation is gone and cannot regenerate.
Sustainability transition is the idea that as the world population stabilizes, it will meet its
needs by moving away from actions that degrade resources and move toward actions that
sustain and restore life support systems and living resources (National Research Council 1999,
21; Quental 2010). It is possible for this transition to sustainability by society to occur over the
next fifty years, but “significant advances in knowledge, social capacity, technological change,
and political will” all will be required (National Research Council 1999, Quental 2010, 260).

6

TBL Approach
The Triple Bottom Line approach to sustainability focuses on understanding and
measuring the economic, environmental, and social value that corporations add or destroy
(Elkington 2004). The TBL looks at the result of the activities of an organization, voluntary or
governed by law, that demonstrate the ability of the organization to maintain viable business
operations while not negatively impacting social or ecological systems (Smith and Sharicz 2011).
The Smith and Sharicz study begins to assess to what extent organizations have begun to shift
practices toward TBL sustainability. Milne et al (2005) strongly protest that despite the
association of TBL with sustainability, “It simply is not” and does not go far enough to support
the underlying premise of sustainability that the equilibrium of natural ecosystems must be
preserved and protected (14).
Chouinard et al (2011) argue in the Harvard Business Review that “no one denies the
need for sustainable business practices, even those that only care about the bottom line
recognize the viability of business depends on healthy ecosystems and the stability of just
societies” (52). The authors posit further that the following trends are converging to result in a
catalyst for sustainable business: 1) true cost accounting – the cost of resources previously
treated as free, such as the pollination services of honeybees, are being monetized and
accounted for; (2) companies that manage these costs efficiently are rewarded with capital, and
3) value chain indices are being created within industry sectors to allow true comparisons of
products by examining the impacts accrued throughout their life cycle (Chouinard et al 2011).
The article highlights the work of the Sustainability Consortium, which is a group composed of
companies, universities, and government organizations focused on taking life-cycle data from
7

their supply chains to identify hot spots where impacts occur. Impacts that have the most
negative consequences are weighted within a rating that allows product procurement
managers to compare products against a benchmark (Chouinard et al 2011, 59). Previously
these buyers would rely on certifications or green standards for raw materials that only
addressed one impact category.

Corporate Sustainability
Corporate sustainability refers to how sustainability is managed within an organization.
It too has many definitions; including “demonstrating the inclusion of social and environmental
concerns in business operations and in interactions with stakeholders” (van Marrewijk 2003,
Searcy 2011, 239). This definition is influenced by stakeholder theory, which according to
Searcy (2011) is one of the most applied theoretical frameworks for corporate sustainability
research, and posits that corporations have responsibilities to groups and individuals internal
and external to the organization, including shareholders, employees, and the community (239).
A study of the top 100 sustainable global companies in 2008 for the periods of 2006-
2010 revealed that these companies had significant higher mean sales growth, return on assets,
profits before taxes, and cash flows from operations in some activity sectors of sample
companies compared to the control group; The study also found that the higher financial
performance of sustainable companies has increased and was sustained over the sample,
linking CSR practices and corporate financial performance (Ameer and Othman 2011).

8

Baumgartner and Ebner (2010) observe that often corporations pursue sustainability
issues without a clear strategy, and that a comprehensive corporate sustainability strategy
requires consideration of all dimensions (economic, social, and environmental), their impacts,
and their interrelations when evaluating business practices. They go on to classify classic
corporate sustainability strategies: introverted (risk mitigation), extroverted (license to operate
with social legitimacy), conservative (focus is on eco-efficiency and cleaner production), and
visionary, where a holistic sustainability strategy is applied to all business activities to create a
competitive advantage through innovation (78).
Baumgartner and Ebner (2010) provide a good though limited discussion of the three
dimensions of sustainability: economic, social, and environmental, and the role these aspects
play in corporate strategy and reporting. Interestingly, economic sustainability, which applies to
“general aspects of an organization that must be respected in order to have longevity in the
market,” includes “innovation and technology, collaboration, knowledge management,
processes, purchases, and sustainability reporting” (78). The environmental or ecological
dimension pertains to environmental impacts from corporate activity, such as impacts to air,
water, waste, habitat, etc. The social dimension of corporate sustainability can be interpreted
broadly or narrowly, and apply to internal as well as external activities. Some examples of
internal initiatives include corporate governance, health and safety of workers, and
professional development of employees; external aspects could include no corrupt business
practices, no controversial activities, and being a good corporate citizen by participating in
community philanthropic events (Baumgartner and Ebner 2010, 80).

9

Sustainability Governance
Topics related to sustainability governance focus on how sustainability is cultivated,
integrated and managed within an organization or across organizations. Adaptive capacity,
organizational change, collaboration, and sustainability reporting are all discussed in this
section.
Adaptive capacity refers to the ability of a social-ecological system (or the components
of that system) to withstand disturbance and be capable of responding to change (Walker and
Salt 2006, Carpenter and Brock 2008, Plummer and Armitage 2010, 2). Factors that may foster
adaptive capacity in socio-ecological systems, particularly in times of crisis, include “learning to
cope with uncertainty and change,” seeking resilience through diversity, “combining different
types of knowledge for learning,” and “creating opportunities for self-organization toward
social-ecological sustainability” (Folke et al 2003, Plummer and Armitage 2010, 2).
Organizations will need this quality in order to negotiate sustainability challenges and reduce
the impacts of their operations.
Many sustainability challenges are system problems, requiring the participation of
multiple stakeholders within the system to engage in problem-solving. Adaptive governance
strategies require collaboration among these actors with diverse interests, flexible institutions
that are “nested in scale and levels,” and discussion that “draws on multiple knowledge
systems” for understanding complex issues; these processes can “build trust through repeated
interactions,” foster learning, and allow for organizations to “develop adaptive responses
through continuous feedback” with other stakeholders in the system (Dietz et al 2003, Folke et
al 2003, 2005, Armitage et al 2009, Plummer and Armitage 2010, 5). Knowledge to facilitate
10

adaptive governance and transformation emerges when stakeholders agree that system
conditions must change; often this recognition is preceded by a crisis, which leads to a
reevaluation of knowledge about the system, along with the assumptions and values that frame
that knowledge (Armitage and Plummer 2010). Trust was found to be a primary tool for
integrating complex, network relationships to support adaptive governance (Heuer 2011).
Heuer (2011) finds that collective action within networks is more likely to improve the
sustainability of ecosystems than the “going green” activities not connected to a network or
organizational field.

Organizational Change
Organizations are the main drivers of large-scale institutional change (North 1990,
Dienhart and Ludescher 2010). Organizational learning is required to implement sustainability
within organizations (Siebenhuner and Arnold 2007). Sustainability-oriented learning is defined
as “a process where organizations display behavioral changes that are attributable to a change
in the knowledge and value base as a result of reflexive processes, and where the concept of
sustainability serves a fundamental framework” (Siebenhuner and Arnold 2007, 341). When
focusing on when and why companies pursue processes of learning and change to integrate
sustainability within their organizations, Siebenhuner and Arnold (2007) found that while
learning mechanisms, leadership styles, and internal networks all play a significant role, change
agents (individuals that initiate concrete measures and learning processes between
organizational units and levels) were the main influencing factor (350).

11

Mirvis and Googins (2006) provide a framework that describes the dimensions,
evolution, triggers, and drivers of the development of Corporate Citizenship (a similar
integrative framework to sustainability that considers “ethics, philanthropy, stakeholder
management, and social and environmental responsibilities” of an organization (Bettignies
2002)) that is helpful to examine when studying organizational change processes (107).

Collaborative Partnerships and Networks
In their study on motivations for the adoption of CSR practices, Babiak and Trendafilova
(2010) found evidence that the creation of strategic collaborations is a strong motivating force
to address environmental CSR. The result of these collaborations is expected to further embed
the commitment to these issues within the organizational culture and through strategic
practices (Babiak and Trendafilova 2010, 17).
Senge et al (2007) posit that “the sustainability challenge is fundamentally a learning
challenge, a process that requires ‘outer changes’ like new metrics and ‘inner changes’ like in
ways of operating” (47). Further, they find that private and public organizations will increasingly
confront complex sustainability problems they are unable to solve alone; Adaptive change will
require “a new mandate for learning across organizations, industries, and sectors” (51).
Cross-sectoral collaborative partnerships will be required to address the challenges of
sustainability because no one sector (government, business, or non-profit organizations) have
the capacity or legitimacy to address the economic, social, and environmental issues related to
sustainability (Deinhart and Ludescher 2010). Through an inductive analysis of a variety of case
studies of cross-sectoral governance, Deinhart and Ludescher (2010) posit that a new paradigm
12

is emerging to effectively address sustainability challenges through cross-institutional
governance (411).

Sustainability Reporting
The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) is an independent institution that provides the
world’s first standardized approach to sustainability reporting (Milne et al 2005). GRI provides a
set of seventy-nine corporate sustainability indicators that have been voluntarily applied to
over 1000 companies worldwide (Searcy 2011). GRI is currently supplementing its guidelines
with sector-specific indicators (such as for the utility, automotive, and mining industries).
Criticism of GRI includes the concern that companies could “sell their GRI compliant report as
evidence of sustainable behavior,” regardless of what negative information may be disclosed
(Wackernagel 2002, Milne et al 2005, 11).
A survey conducted by consulting firm KPMG found that 14% of the Global Fortune Top
250 companies and 12% of the top 1900 companies issued sustainability reports in 2002. At
minimum, TBL sustainability reporting involves measuring and reporting economic, social, and
environmental performance objectives that are pursued simultaneously (Milne et al 2005). TBL
reporting can also include assessing the values of an organization, along with strategies and
practices that can be utilized to achieve economic, social, and environmental objectives (Milne
et al 2005).
It appears sustainability reporting became equated with the TBL in 1996, when the
consulting firm SustainAbility began to provide benchmarking surveys focused on best practice
reporting, where a score system reported on economic, social, and environmental indicators for
13

integrated accountability (Milne et al 2005). There can be a significant gap between the
benchmarks provided by guidelines from the GRI and SustainAbility and what is included in
company reports (Mordhardt et al 2002, Milne et al 2005).
A study to address what extent corporate governance has become integrated into
disclosure reporting by multinational corporations found that more than half of the Fortune
Global 250 companies have a separate corporate governance section in their CSR report and
link corporate governance with CSR issues (Kolk and Pinkse 2009). The study also found that
multinationals “that disclose information on a wider variety of social and environmental issues
and frame CSR with a focus on internal issues are more inclined to integrate corporate
governance into CSR reporting” (Kolk and Pinkse 2009, 15). This trend appears to cut across
countries and industrial sectors.
One criticism of sustainability reporting of operations is that instead of exploring the
linkages and interdependencies between environmental, economic, and social factors, they are
considered separately, with emphasis on balancing the tradeoffs that may be needed to meet
objectives (George 2001, Colantonio 2011). Sustainability appraisals by nature must be
integrative.

Theoretical Frames
The roles of transition research and action research in advancing the understanding and
practice of sustainability are discussed in the next section.

14

Transition Research
Transition research seeks to address ongoing societal change in an evolutionary manner
in order to influence the speed and direction of these ongoing changes towards sustainability
(Loorbach et al 2011, 73). The transition perspective recognizes that society is composed of
“complex adaptive systems in which individuals and organizations (may) self-organize within
limits set by the physical, institutional, and informal structures, and can experience the
emergence of innovations of different types” such as technological or social innovations to
adopt new practices (74). This process can take decades to occur and the outcome is highly
uncertain. Loorbach et al (2011) argue that not only the translation of sustainability into a
specific context needs to be coordinated (what is right for a particular place or society), but also
the actors may need to re-evaluate their roles and practices; the transitions approach can aid
our understanding of the complex process of societal transitions and supporting governance
structures toward sustainability (74). Specifically, a transitions approach to sustainability
focuses on “continuous processes of change that reorient and restructure a societal system
towards a sustainable system state that satisfies sustainability values” (77). This requires an
integrative view of sustainability, where multiple viewpoints and information at different levels
of scale and time are incorporated (77).
It is important to note that transition research is a new field in development that
addresses research topics that cannot be developed in a traditional, purely scientific sense.
“The only way to achieve coherence between theory and practice of transition management is
through a learning-by-doing and a doing-by-learning approach in which fundamental research,
15

theory development, participatory research, and applied research are combined” (Loorbach
2011, 79).

Action Research
Bradbury (2007) argues that “action research can be of significant value in building
capacity for sustainable development” (241). By focusing on organizational processes, reflective
practitioners can facilitate dialogue among multiple perspectives to identify needs, lessons, and
ideas to foster organizational sustainability. One method Bradbury uses to do this is by creating
a “learning history,” where the process in which knowledge in an organization was acquired to
make useful interpretations for preferred action is documented and reflected upon by
researchers and practitioners for future reference and use by the organization (242). As a
reflective academic practitioner, this research approach encouraged me to explore insights I
acquired over my ten year career at the Port of Los Angeles and apply them to this work on
institutionalizing sustainability within port organizations.

Discussions on Port Sector Sustainability
Ports are major nodes in the supply chain management and goods movement processes
that corporations rely on to manufacture and deliver their goods and services. Many
corporations measure and track the air emissions and other environmental impacts created by
transport of their goods and include this data in their own sustainability reporting (such as how
many tons of carbon are created by shipping products from China). As major retailers like
Walmart continue to create pressure within their own procurement and goods movement
16

chains to manufacture products with less toxic materials and reduce emissions while shipping
these products, ports will increasingly be asked to implement more sustainable practices. As
reported by the Port of Long Beach, “shippers are starting to insist that their supply chains are
as green as possible” (IAPH 2011, 8).
P. Scott Abbott (2011), in the Association for American Port Authorities (AAPA) industry
trade magazine discusses how proactive seaports recognize the need for thriving port
communities, and that they are working to build support for future development and
strengthen the identity of the port within the community as a job creator, source of recreation,
and supporter of healthy environments. Throughout the port industry, there is a call for ports
to transform themselves and perceive sustainability as fundamental to conducting successful
business operations. Globally there is also a focus on sustainable ports. The workplan for the
Port Environment Committee of the International Association of Ports and Harbors (IAPH)
recently included the mandate to “develop a green port program and framework.” A resolution
by the IAPH reiterates that “a license to grow presupposes incorporation of sustainability in the
ports environmental strategy” (IAPH 2011, 12).
Two relevant surveys of the port population have recently been conducted. Becker et al
(2011) surveyed the AAPA and IAPH port population to measure the perceptions of climate
change impacts on international seaports. The survey found that the Ports community needs to
address climate change and that most Ports felt relatively uninformed about potential climate
impacts. Most ports will be expanding their infrastructure in the future: 69% of the ports
surveyed said they would complete some major infrastructure project within 5 years (Becker et
al 2011). The European Sea Ports Organization (ESPO), together with its research non-profit
17

institute EcoPorts, conducted a survey in 2009 to gauge the status of environmental policy
within European ports. Results showed that 72% of respondents have an environmental policy,
58% of these ports focus on achieving improvements beyond regulation; 43% produce a
publicly available environmental report; and there is an increasing trend to monitor
environmental performance through systematic use of performance indicators (ESPO and
EcoPorts 2009). This industry behavior builds a strong foundation for the ability to integrate
sustainability objectives into port planning and operations.
In June 2011, I co-authored a case study of the challenges of managing sustainability
issues at the Port of Los Angeles. In addition to highlighting the enablers of organizational
change for sustainability, I also discussed the collaborative efforts the Port of Los Angeles has
engaged in to create systems-level change throughout the Southern California goods
movement industry (such as the Technology Advancement Program and Clean Trucks Program)
and throughout the global port industry, such as creating a carbon footprinting guidance
document for ports and a carbon emissions calculator that has been shared with other ports
throughout the world to help them manage greenhouse gas emissions (Green Rebstock and
Bradbury-Huang, 2011). Some of this work is occurring through port learning collaboratives,
including the World Ports Climate Initiative and the West Coast Ports Technical Committee,
which is supported by the Institute for Sustainable Seaports.
As discussed in the literature, organizations and industries are slowly moving toward
more sustainable business practices and governance approaches. How prepared are port
organizations for this needed transition to sustainability? Have sustainable seaports already
emerged? How mature and to what extent is sustainability embedded within Port
18

organizations? Measuring the presence and degree of organizational change processes,
adaptive capacity, collaboration, organizational learning, and sustainability reporting occurring
within port organizations would help our understanding of their sustainability maturity.
Case Study Analysis
As discussed in more detail in Chapter 2, to examine the sustainability of operations of
specific port organizations, I applied an adapted framework from Baumgartner and Ebner
(2010) to evaluate the maturity level of sustainability within six of the world’s top container
ports. The following ports were examined: Shanghai, Ningbo/Zhoushan, Hamburg, Rotterdam,
Antwerp, and Los Angeles. Through this process I have been able to classify the sustainability
strategies of these organizations, identify advanced best practices, and better understand the
influences and components that contribute to the profile of a mature sustainable port
organization.
Next I conducted a case study of the organizational change process toward embedding
sustainability that I observed at the Port of Los Angeles, highlighting the triggers, drivers,
successes, and remaining challenges. Finally, I examined collaborative efforts where ports work
together to share lessons learned and drive change for sustainability throughout the port
industry.

19

C. The Advance in Practice: A Change Management Guide for Port Organizations
The advance in practice offered is a change management guide for sustainability for port
organizations. The guide provides a model of a mature sustainable port organization, presents
Dopplet’s (2010) “Sustainability Wheel of Change,” which identifies the major steps needed to
implement a successful organizational change process toward sustainability, includes a self-
assessment tool that uses the adapted sustainability framework discussed in Chapter 2, and
discusses the major components of a sustainability plan for port organizations. The manual is
offered to assist change agents working within port authorities who want to further advance
and institutionalize sustainability within their organizations and the port industry.

D. Summary of Findings and Implications
This section summarizes major findings from the adapted framework in Chapter 2, port
case studies in Chapter 3, organizational change analysis in Chapter 4, and examination of inter-
organizational learning efforts in Chapter 5.
Chapter 2: Findings Related to the Framework for Evaluating Port Sustainability
Through the adapted framework presented, the work of Baumgartner and Ebner (2010)
can be used to drive the integration of sustainability into the core business of port
organizations by identifying the key aspects of sustainability and prompting organizations to
synch their processes and investments within these aspects with this focus. The framework is
structured to emphasize a holistic approach to sustainability and supports the application of the
20

Triple Bottom Line to measuring organizational performance, demonstrated by the model
sustainable organization illustrated in Figure 1.
In general, the adapted model for measuring the sustainability maturity of ports
provides a roadmap for how to achieve continuous improvement towards sustainability by
creating a continuum of competency levels for each aspect. While used in this study to gain an
understanding of how embedded sustainability is within specific port organizations, the model
could be used as a self-assessment tool and guide when developing or expanding port
sustainability programs.
Chapter 3: Findings Related to the Port Case Studies
Among the port organizations studied, two ports viewed the concept of sustainability as
a balance between environmental and economic concerns (Shanghai and Ningbo/Zhoushan)
and three ports understood it as the Triple Bottom Line (Antwerp, Hamburg, and Los Angeles).
The most advanced view of sustainability (sophisticated) was held by Rotterdam, who uses the
Triple Bottom Line approach to sustainability to measure organizational performance
(Rotterdam).
When applying the adapted framework for evaluating the overall levels of sustainability
maturity within a port organization, the least mature organization is Ningbo/Zhoushan, with a
transitional maturity level of 1-2 overall, and the most advanced port organizations are
Rotterdam and Los Angeles, with overall maturity levels of 3-4, satisfying to sophisticated.
21

Some common challenges that port organizations face include improving efficiency,
expanding operations to accommodate anticipated future cargo growth, managing air quality
and water quality impacts, and habitat management. Constructing or retrofitting container
terminals with electric equipment and/or automated equipment has been one common
response to improve efficiency. However, there are both push and pull approaches among port
authorities and terminal operators regarding implementation. For example, some
environmental measures are pushed by port authorities through requirements in RFPs for new
land leases (such as Rotterdam’s MV2 and their Front Runners Policy) and enforced through
concession and lease agreements. However, at the Port of Hamburg, the HHLA CTA terminal
took the initiative to automate and use electric equipment because they saw it as a means to
innovate and double their productivity; there was no direct push from the port organization.
Going forward, the Port of Hamburg has started to require terminal utilization rates in lease
agreements to boost productivity at other terminals.
Many ports have very large capital development projects underway or in the planning
stages to accommodate anticipated future cargo growth or diversify their land uses. For
example, Shanghai plans to expand the Yangshan Deepwater Port, Meishan Island is under
construction in Ningbo, Rotterdam will soon be operating the first phase of MV2, and Los
Angeles is redeveloping part of its waterfront for recreational and commercial uses. Many of
these ports were able to gain community acceptance of expansion plans by including
environmental measures in lease agreements (Los Angeles, Rotterdam), conducting master
business planning activities with tenants and the community (Rotterdam, Antwerp, Hamburg),
restricting cargo types and volumes to manage impacts (Ningbo), and replace and restore
22

habitats that are displaced by development (Rotterdam, Los Angeles, Antwerp). The Ports of
Rotterdam and Antwerp also subscribe to the Building with Nature approach to manage water
quality and impacts to habitat.
Incentive programs are also used among ports to reduce a range of environmental
impacts and improve environmental performance. For example, the Ports of Rotterdam,
Hamburg, Antwerp, and Los Angeles all participate in the Environmental Ship Index program to
reduce vessel emissions. The Port of Shanghai is planning to identify “role model” terminal
operators within the port who shall receive subsidies for improved energy efficiency and
reduced air emissions. Additionally, the Port of Hamburg offers discounts to its customers for
using noise-reducing breaks on rail cars.
Sustainability Strategy Profiles
A hybrid approach to sustainability strategies is common among the case studies. All of
the port organizations studied seemed to employ two or more strategies, except for the Port of
Hamburg, which seemed to be most directly focused on a Conservative Efficiency strategy.
The Conservative (Efficiency) approach seems to be the most commonly included
among the sustainability strategies used by the ports (four out of six rely on this strategy or
combine it with others). This is most likely because the underlying drivers are cost efficiency
(and now energy efficiency and emissions efficiency, since ports are increasingly being held
responsible for the externalities attached to these inputs and outputs, either by regulatory
agencies or local stakeholders). Legitimization strategies, either conventional or
transformative, are also widely used among the case study ports.
23

When viewed along the continuum of sustainability strategies and maturity levels, the
Conventional Visionary (Holistic) approach seems to lay the groundwork as a pathway to the
Systemic Visionary strategy, which arguably is what would be employed to create a mature
sustainable port organization, displaying a sophisticated maturity across all sustainability
aspects. With this approach, port organizations can excel at both internally and externally-
focused measures to gain a unique competitive market position, continuous improvement of
sustainability inside the organization, and drive change throughout the industry sector to create
new industry standards of practice.
Chapter 4: Findings Related to POLA’s Organizational Change for Sustainability
The organizational change case study analysis for the Port of Los Angeles (POLA)
determined that POLA needs to achieve coherence to advance to the next stage of sustainability
maturity. This can occur through better organizational alignment and programmatic
sustainability management. Deepening the organizational commitment to sustainability by
drawing better connections to business strategy and core business functions (through better
integration into strategic and business planning) will help POLA reach a transformative state. A
sustainability plan for the organization can make this happen by addressing these gaps.

Chapter 5: Findings related to Inter-organizational Learning Efforts

This section examines how some practical dynamic assessment tools have been created
(carbon foot printing methodologies, calculators) and mitigation strategies (technologies,
incentive programs) are being shared and diffused among ports. The collaborative efforts
discussed in Chapter 5 are hard to sustain without the right organizational structure. Among
24

these efforts, no guides or tools specifically address how to create or enhance the
organizational culture needed to support and advance sustainability in port organizations.
Specifically no activities are discussing the organizational change efforts or structure needed.
One particular project discussed, the West Coast Ports project-based learning tool, has great
potential to advance the TBL framework for measuring project performance and decision-
making at the project level.

25

Chapter 2:
Framework for Evaluating Port Sustainability

In this chapter, I introduce an adapted framework from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010)
that takes into account several indicator systems (McKinsey, BSR, ESPO, EcoPorts, and PIANC)
to evaluate the maturity level of sustainability within six major port organizations across the
globe.
A. Model of a Mature Sustainable Organization

A mature sustainable organization does not evolve overnight. An organization that has
successfully achieved integration of sustainability into its decision-making processes looks much
like the model illustrated in Figure 1. In a mature sustainable organization, there is a core
commitment to using the TBL approach to sustainability as the major framework for decision-
making. This sustainability commitment is reflected in the organization’s business strategy and
all policies, programs, and practices. The organization’s commitment to sustainability is then
reinforced through stakeholder relationships, leadership within the industry, measuring
performance, and reporting.

26

Figure 1: Model of a Mature Sustainable Organization

Source: Adapted from Corporate Sustainability Management – A Reference Model.
Center for Sustainable Organizations. 2006.

B. Port Stakeholders

To better inform the discussion of port sustainability, Figure 2 identifies typical general
stakeholders related to port operations.

27

Figure 2: Typical Port Stakeholders

Source: Adapted from Port of Los Angeles (2011) Figure 1: Port of Los Angeles Stakeholders

The interests of the local community are usually focused on economic benefits and
impacts to the local and regional environment (air, water, traffic, etc.), including public health
impacts. Local, state, and national policy regulators tend to focus on compliance with
environmental, health and safety regulations and addressing emerging issues in these areas.
Non-governmental organizations typically engage the port on environmental, ethics, social
justice, and education, research or work-force development issues. Employees and their unions
generally care about career opportunities, pay and benefits, health issues and working
conditions. Port tenants and business partners focus on the financial health of the port, any

28

prospects or constraints for future growth, the quality and cost of port services, security, and
requirements to address environmental issues. Local officials in the port city or region tends to
be concerned with economic benefits, integration of port and city infrastructure, social
integration with the community, political governance issues, and management of the
environmental impacts of port operations. Finally, the ports and goods movement industry
(industry trade organizations, other ports, shipping companies, terminal operators, rail and
truck operators, equipment and engine manufactures, warehouses and distribution centers,
along with business and engineering consulting firms) tend to focus on local versus national or
global regulations, technology, market and economic trends, and facilitating the efficient
movement of goods along the supply chain for their customers.

C. Adapted Framework for Evaluating Sustainability within Port Organizations

The following framework for evaluating sustainability within port organizations is
adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner’s (2010) approach to measuring the sustainability
maturity of corporations and their typology of corporate sustainability strategies. Baumgartner
and Ebner’s framework is based on the use of a maturity model. Why is this approach helpful
when talking about sustainability? Maturity models, created by the software industry to
improve the software development process, present a progressive benchmarking framework
that tracks how formal and optimized organizational processes are to achieve desired outcomes
(Humphrey, 1987). The degree of maturity of the process could range from no existing practice
to achieve a specific effect, to adhoc practices, to formal protocols. Later, metrics may be used
29

to manage performance and eventually the process may be optimized to achieve an ideal state
(Humphrey, 1987). The maturity model provides a structure for comparing organizational
processes or competencies across different companies or organizations. It also provides a
structure one can use to think about how diffused or integrated the concept of sustainability is
throughout an organization.
To create the adapted framework, I compared the aspects in the Baumgartner and
Ebner model to the results of the 2011 McKinsey Global Survey, which was designed to
measure how, why, and to what extent companies are addressing sustainability. To better
customize the Baumgartner and Ebner framework to ports, I compared it to other port
performance indicator systems and aspects contained in green port guides. Table 1 provides a
comparison of the aspects among these sources, including: the Businesses for Sustainability
(BSR) environmental indicators for terminal operators, the European Sea Ports Organization
(ESPO) Green Guide, ESPO and EcoPorts Port Environmental Review System (PERS), ESPO Port
Performance Indicators Selection and Measurement (PPISM), and PIANC, the World Association
for Waterborne Infrastructure. Many of these green port guides are discussed further in
Chapter 5, which discusses collaboration and inter-organizational learning efforts.
30

Baumgartner and Ebner
Sustainability Aspects
(2010)
McKinsey Global
Survey (2011)
Businesses for
Sustainability (BSR)
Environmental
Indicators for Terminal
Operators (2012)

ESPO Green Guide
(2012) and
ESPO & EcoPorts
Port Environmental
Review System
(PERS) (2009)
ESPO PPISM Port Performance
Indicators (2012)
PIANC (2013)
Economic Market Trends
TEUs
Rank/Market Share

Innovation/Technology Commit R&D to
sustainable products;
Manage portfolio to
capture trends
Investment Use tech to improve efficiency
of operations; Innovation –
transport and energy sources
Collaboration Logistics/Operations Vessel
Turn time
Mean time customs clearance
Intermodal connectivity
Maritime connections
Strategic planning; modalities/
connectivity;
Knowledge Management EMS EMS EMS (ENV indicators) EMS, Certifications
Processes Integrate into strategic
planning
EcoPorts PERS EMS
standard
Existence of aspects/MI
inventory; Existence of
monitoring program (ENV
indicators); performance
measurement/management
Support/monitor research
development , ecological
management of project;
closing loop of processes
Purchases Manage risk of supply
purchases

Sustainability Reporting Formal CSR reporting Reporting
Ecological/
Environmental

Resource Use Reduce Energy, Water,
Waste
Energy, GHGs, Water,
Chemicals
Air Quality
Energy Conservation
Climate Change
Water management
Total energy/water use, carbon
footprint, amount of waste
Land use, water use, habitat
conservation; port-city
interaction re jobs, quality of
life, public space; reduce
water/energy consumption;
develop long-term dependable
renewable energy sources;
climate adaptation
31

Table 1: Sustainability Aspects Comparison Table Source: author
Baumgartner Framework
Sustainability Aspects
(2010)
McKinsey Global
Survey (2011)
Businesses for
Sustainability (BSR)
Environmental
Indicators for Terminal
Operators (2012)

ESPO Green Guide
(2012) & ESPO &
EcoPorts Port
Environmental
Review System
(PERS) (2009)
ESPO PPRISM Port
Performance Indicators (2012)
PIANC (2013)
Emissions (Air, Water,
Ground)
Reduce Emissions Air – SOx, NOx Air, Water, reduce CO2, Sox,
PM, NOx; Traffic Management
Waste/Haz Waste Reduce Waste Waste Waste management Reduce ship waste, sediments
Biodiversity Biodiversity Habitat/space management,
prevent invasive species
Envr Issues of Products
(Supply Chain)
Risk Management -
Manage impacts of
products through value
chain

Noise, Light/Glare Noise Management Public Health impacts, noise,
visual impacts, light and glare
Social
Ethical Behavior
No Controversial Acts Manage Corporate
Reputation

No Corruption
Corporate Citizenship Community
Engagement
Management of
community relations;
Social integration
(Socio-Eco) Employment –
direct & indirect
Quality of life, stakeholder
responsiveness
Corporate Governance Risk Management Integration of Port cluster;
Extent of performance
management; Existence of
performance measurement;
Formal CSR reporting

Transparency, develop
initiatives ahead of regulations
to meet current needs
Motivation/Incentives Improve employee
retention/motivation
Employee productivity
Health & Safety Security/safety Safety/incident management
Human Capital
Development

Training per Full Time
Equivalent
Emergency disaster
management plans
32

To create the final list of 21 sustainability aspects reflected in the modified framework,
some aspects borrowed from Baumgartner and Ebner were combined, while others, based on
the aspects in Table 1, were added or modified to specifically address port organizations. The
aspects are grouped into economic, environmental, and social categories and presented in the
following tables. Aspects related to governance and management (leadership, collaboration,
transparency, etc.) are included within the economic, social, and environmental aspects in the
framework.
1. Sustainability Aspects

First, it is important to explore the organization’s concept of sustainability. The most
advanced organizations have an integrated and holistic concept of sustainability, understanding
that it incorporates considerations of environmental, economic, and social performance. Table
2 provides poor and sophisticated concepts of sustainability within the port sector.
Table 2: Concepts of Sustainability

Source: author
Concept of Sustainability
Beginning/Poor Economic sustainability only – financially sustain business operations
Elementary Environmental sustainability only – need to address environmental impacts of
business operations; balancing economic and environmental concerns in making
business decisions
Satisfying Environmental and social license to operate now and in the future; Need to
consider and address environmental and social impacts of business operations;
Business profitability still maintained; People/Plant/Profit
Sophisticated/
Outstanding
Measuring organizational performance by considering economic, environmental,
and social performance; Integrated Triple Bottom Line approach to business
model, strategy, and decision-making; This is reflected by integrated systems,
processes, and governance structures within the organization; integrated
corporate reporting and accounting; Identification of material issues most
important to sustainability performance and establishing related sustainability
goals. Understanding that actions must focus on improving port area and global
goods movement industry.
33

Economic Aspects

Table 3 summarizes the economic aspects of sustainability within port organizations,
such as their competitive ranking among container ports, the investments they are making in
their future growth and technologies, innovative policies or practices that promote
sustainability, and incentives they offer to their customers to reduce the negative impacts of
port operations and improve the industry as a whole.

Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010) Table 1, Page 79

Table 3: Economic Aspects of Port Organizational Sustainability

Description
Financial Strength Container cargo volumes measured in twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs),
Rank/Market Share; Total cargo volumes; Cargo mix and sources of revenue
Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives
Investments made in research and development to create new technologies,
reduce environmental impacts, improve business operations; Use of best
available control technologies (BACTs), focus on cleaner production and zero-
emissions; Investments in financial incentives to customers to reduce impacts of
operations. Innovative policy structures and approaches.
Collaboration Cooperation and collaboration with business partners, networks, and
stakeholders.
Knowledge Management Actions and approaches to obtain, share and retain sustainability-related
knowledge in the organization. Use of systemic approaches, organizational
learning; Methods to plan, develop, organize, apply, and measure specific
knowledge and to improve the organizational knowledge base. Database
systems.
Processes Sustainability issues considered in business processes; Clear processes and roles
are defined so that business activities are efficiently conducted and every
employee understands what is expected of him or her; Implementation of
sustainability systematically throughout the business units and operations.
Integration of sustainability into daily business life.
Purchases Social and environmental criteria are considered when making purchases.
Relationship with suppliers and consultants also focuses on sustainability.
Sustainability Reporting Sustainability issues are considered in corporate communications or in annual
reports. Options include a separate sustainability report or corporate social
responsibility (CSR) report, or an integrated annual report.
34

Environmental Aspects

Table 4 summarizes the environmental aspects of sustainability related to port
organizations. These issues range from making efficient use of resources, limiting the release of
emissions into the environment, protecting and enhancing habitats, and managing impacts to
public health.

Table 4: Environmental Aspects of Port Organizational Sustainability

Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010), Table 2, Page79

Environmental Aspects

Description
Existence of Aspects Inventory;
Monitoring, and Management
Org knows material issues, has done an inventory of
environmental issues and potential impacts; has prioritized, with
monitoring and management systems in place
Resource Use Use of land, materials, energy, water; resource consumption and
efficiency measured; Recycling tracked and measured; Issues
related to carbon footprinting, climate action planning, and
measuring land productivity.
Emissions into Air, Water, Ground Emissions from operations (including construction activities) into
the air, water, and ground are avoided, measured, controlled, or
mitigated. Regulatory compliance, reduction goals, cleaner
production. Issues related to traffic management and efforts to
reduce congestion are also considered to reduce idling of mobile
sources.
Waste and Hazardous Waste Reduce and manage waste and hazardous waste due to past,
present, and future operations. Issues related to ship waste,
contaminated sediment disposal, minimizing landfill needs.
Biodiversity/
Habitat Management
Considers and reduces impacts to species, habitats, and
biodiversity through strategy, process, policy, and actions. Issues
related to invasive species during construction and operations.
Environmental issues related to the goods
movement supply chain; Traffic, Noise,
Light/Glare, Aesthetics, Public Health
Impacts
Considers and addresses environmental impacts resulting from
the goods movement supply chain (beyond emissions) within
the vicinity of the port, which could include traffic congestion,
noise, light/glare, visual impacts, and public health impacts.
35

Social Aspects

Table 5 discusses the social aspects of port organizational sustainability, applied both
external to the organization, with a focus on stakeholders and the surrounding community, and
internally, with a focus on employees and performance management.

Table 5: Social Aspects of Port Organizational Sustainability

Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010), Tables 3 and 4, Page 80

Social Aspects

Description
External
Ethical Behavior/No Corruption/
Human Rights; Public Health &
Safety
Conducting business fairly, no manipulation of business practices; No
corruption to gain a competitive advantage; Conducting operations in a
way that respects human rights and does not endanger public health
and safety.
Community Engagement/
Manage Community Relations
Role and venues for community stakeholders to participate in port
planning processes, projects and decision-making.
Corporate Citizenship - Quality of
Life,
Livability, Social integration
Sponsorships, grants, volunteering, community events hosted by port
organization; Projects that contribute to better quality of life of nearby
residents and community stakeholders.
Employment/Workforce
Development – External
Local or regional jobs created related to the port or goods movement
industry; Direct & indirect jobs, including construction; Partnerships
with educational/ training institutions or non-profits to identify and
prepare future port workers with technical and management skills;
Focus on hiring local residents for port-related jobs.
Internal
Corporate Governance Focus on transparency and giving insight to all relevant data that guides
decision-making; Develop initiatives ahead of regulations to manage
risks appropriately; Extent of performance management; Existence of
performance measurement.
Motivation and Incentives - Internal Management provides leadership and engages employees on
sustainability topics; Active involvement and awareness of needs and
motivation factors of employees by management to implement
sustainability successfully in the organization; Development of
incentives and reward systems (recognition, performance reviews).
Health & Safety;
Emergency/Disaster Management
Programs to help employees prevent risks, stay healthy, be prepared
for emergencies; Operations don’t negatively impact employee health.
Human Capital Development –
Training and Education
Developing capacity of employees to successfully address sustainability
issues through training and education programs; Tuition
support/reimbursement for higher level education or technical training;
Mentoring and cross-training programs throughout the organization is
offered. Resource experts are groomed within the organization.
36

2. Organizational Maturity Levels

Due to the range of business, policy and stakeholder pressures, the attention and
importance that an organization gives to each economic, environmental, and social aspect can
vary. Table 6 describes the general level of attention organizations give to a particular aspect.
We can think of these as “maturity levels” of the approach to the aspect in the organization. In
this way, we can begin to understand how embedded the approach to sustainability is in the
organization’s culture. The framework for evaluating maturity levels (beginning, elementary,
satisfying, and sophisticated) places more of an emphasis on organizational processes versus
results, but outcomes are considered when designating a “sophisticated” level of maturity.

Table 6: Maturity Levels
Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010) Page 81

The concept of maturity levels is applied to the economic, environmental, and social
aspects of sustainability within port organizations to measure the extent to which sustainability
is embedded within the organization. By applying the criteria in the following Tables 7, 8, and 9,
which summarize each economic, environmental, and social aspect related to sustainability
1 Beginning
(Poor)
Org is starting to consider the sustainability aspect in the company; Only mandatory
rules and laws are respected, if they exist.
2 Elementary
(Sufficient)
Org is focusing on basic integration of this aspect through compliance with
applicable laws but is going slightly further; Org might be using environmental
technology, has some reduction and consideration of impacts of their business
activities, etc.
3 Satisfying

Org considers aspect in an adequate and satisfying way and is mature in its approach
– often above the industry average;
4 Sophisticated Org exhibits an outstanding effort towards addressing this aspect; Demonstrates
industry leadership.
37

specific to port organizations and describe the maturity level of the approaches within the
organization to these aspects, the framework can be used to gauge how an organization
compares to the model mature or “sophisticated” sustainable organization illustrated in Figure
1.
The maturity criteria in Tables 7, 8, and 9, range from level 1 (beginning) to level 4
(sophisticated). If the level of activity in the organization regarding an aspect seems to be in a
transitional state, or does not exactly fit the criteria described, it is possible to assign a
transitional score for each aspect. For example, related to the aspect of collaboration, an
organization may not communicate or collaborate regarding sustainability issues with the
majority of stakeholders listed in the maturity level 3 criteria, but the amount or type of
collaboration they do with some specific groups may be extraordinary, which necessitates a
rating beyond just “elementary” or level 2. As you can see, the ratings can be fairly subjective.
However, notations in the assessment table, when compared to the maturity criteria tables,
should help the reader understand why a rating has been assigned.
38

Table 7: Maturity levels of port economic sustainability aspects (Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010) Table 5, 82)

Financial
Strength
Innovation, Technology, Investment
& Incentives
Collaboration
Knowledge Management
(KM)
Processes Purchases
Sustainability
Reporting
Beginning

1
Low rank or %
of TEU market
share; cargo
mix not
diversified
Follows laws and regulations regarding
Best Available Control Technologies
(BACT).
The org is not an active
partner in networks.
No systematic approach
towards KM
Sustainability issues are
not considered in
business processes
Sustainability
issues are not
considered in
making
purchases
No sustainability
report; No
consideration of
sustainability in
annual report
Elementary

2
Low to
competitive
rank or % of
TEU market
share; cargo
mix not
diversified
Has made a first effort in Research &
Development (R&D) to create new
technologies, reduce environmental
impacts, or improve business operations;
Use of BACT. Integrated environmental
technology is partially used.
Communication and
collaboration with most
customers and some
port stakeholders
Specific actions and
approaches to obtain, share
and retain sustainability-
related knowledge in the org
occurs (mostly database, IT
based)
Some sustainability
issues are considered in
business processes and
project planning
activities
Some
environmental
criteria is
defined and
considered
when making
purchases
Most relevant
sustainability issues
are addressed in
corporate
communications
(one-way) or in a
sustainability report
and/or an annual
report
Satisfying

3
Consistently
competitive
rank or % of
TEU market
share;
Diversified
cargo mix and
sources of
revenue
Higher effort in sustainability related
R&D than industry average. Proactive
investments in BACT and use of
integrated environmental technologies
and/or cleaner production. Innovative
policy structures and approaches. Some
financial incentives are offered to
customers to improve environmental
performance.
Communication and
collaboration with
stakeholders (customers,
community residents,
Non-Governmental Orgs
(NGOs), labor, R&D
institutions, etc.)
regarding sustainability
issues
Broad actions and approaches
to obtain, share and retain
sustainability-related
knowledge in the org occurs;
Some human capital
development and org learning
occurs
Sustainability issues are
integrated into strategic
planning and are
considered in business
processes; Clear
processes and roles are
defined so that business
activities are efficiently
conducted and every
employee understands
what is expected in
daily operations and
future project planning
Some
environmental
and social
criteria is
defined and
considered
when making
purchases from
direct suppliers
and throughout
the whole
supply chain
Sustainability issues
are addressed in
corporate
communications
(one-way) and in a
distinct sustainability
report or within an
annual corporate
report; Also,
sustainability goals
and measures are
defined and
communicated
Sophisticated

4
High rank or %
of TEU market
share;
Diversified
cargo mix and
many sources
of alternative
revenues
Significantly higher effort in
sustainability related R&D than industry
average. BACT is proactively used, also
integrated environmental technologies,
cleaner production. There is a focus on
zero emissions. Innovative policy
structures and approaches. Financial
incentives are offered to customers to
improve environmental performance.
Consistent
communication and
collaboration with
stakeholders
((customers, residents,
NGOs, labor, R&D
institutions, etc.) is
conducted. Org has a
proactive and leading
role in creating these
networks related to
sustainability.
A systemic and
comprehensive approach,
with broad activities related to
sustainability KM, is
implemented. Methods to
plan, develop, organize, apply
and measure specific
knowledge and improve org
knowledge base are used.
Implementation of
sustainability
systematically
throughout business
units and operations
and future project and
capital program
planning; Integration of
sustainability into daily
business life and
decision-making
Social and
environmental
criteria are
defined,
considered,
and actively
verified within
the supply
chain
Sustainability issues
are addressed in
corporate
communications
(two-way) and in a
distinct sustainability
report or within an
annual corporate
report; Sustainability
goals and measures
are defined and
communicated.
39

Existence of Aspects
Inventory, Monitoring, and
Management
Resource Use
Emissions into Air, Water,
Ground
Waste and Hazardous
Waste
Biodiversity and
Habitat Management
Envr Issues related to
Goods Movement
Supply Chain beyond
emissions (Traffic,
Noise, Light/Glare,
Visual, Public Health
Impacts)
Beginning

1
Org is not aware of material
issues ; There is no inventory
of environmental issues and
potential impacts
For the use of resources (land,
materials, energy, and water), only
economic and technical criteria are
considered
Org conforms with laws and
regulations related to emissions
from operations into the air,
water, or ground
Org conforms with laws and
regs related to hazardous
waste
Org conforms with laws
and regs related to
biodiversity,
endangered species and
habitat management
Not considered or only
in conformity with laws
and regulations
Elementary

2
Org is aware of material
issues; There is a general
inventory of environmental
issues and potential impacts
from operations
Economic, technical, and/or
environmental and social criteria
are partially considered in resource
use; Resource consumption and
efficiency is partially measured
Org conforms with laws and regs;
Emissions from operations
(including construction activities)
are avoided, measured,
controlled, or mitigated;
Reduction goals are defined for
major emissions
Org conforms with laws and
regs related to hazardous
waste; Has quantified major
waste flows and has some
reduction goals
Org conforms with laws
and regs; Biological
impacts from
construction activities
and operations are
identified and
considered
Some environmental
impacts associated with
the supply chain within
the vicinity of the port
are identified and
acknowledged; Some
efforts are made to
reduce impacts
Satisfying

3
Org is aware of material
issues; There is an inventory
of environmental issues and
potential impacts; Has
prioritized issues, created
programs to address issues,
and has monitoring and
management systems in
place
Economic, technical, and/or
environmental and social criteria
are considered in resource use;
Resource consumption and
efficiency is measured; Recycling is
tracked and measured; Goals for
resource management are defined
and sustainability is partially
considered;
Org conforms with laws and regs;
Emissions from operations
(including construction activities)
are avoided, measured,
controlled, or mitigated;
Reduction goals are defined for
most emissions; Cleaner
production technologies are used;
Issues related to traffic
management and efforts to
reduce congestion occur.
Org conforms with laws and
regs related to hazardous
waste; Has quantified waste
flows and has reduction goals
for most waste; Focus on
recycling and cleaner
production technologies;
Addresses issues related to
ship waste & contaminated
sediments
Has baseline/inventory
of biological and habitat
resources; Considers
and reduces impacts to
species, habitats, and
biodiversity through
strategy, process,
policies, and actions;
Issues related to
invasive species are
addressed
Most environmental
impacts associated with
the goods movement
within the vicinity of
the port are identified,
acknowledged, and
addressed in some way
to reduce impacts
Sophisticated

4
Org is aware of material
issues; There is an inventory
of environmental issues and
impacts; Issues are
prioritized, programs are in
place with monitoring,
management, and reporting
systems; There is a symbiotic
programmatic approach to
measuring environmental
performance
Economic, technical, environmental
and social criteria are considered in
resource use; Resource
consumption and efficiency is
measured; Recycling is tracked and
measured; Long-term resource
management is aligned with
sustainability; Issues related to
carbon or eco footprinting, climate
action planning, and land
productivity are addressed.
Conforms with laws and regs;
Emissions from operations
(including construction) are
avoided, measured, controlled, or
mitigated; Ambitious reduction
goals for air and water emissions
are defined; Zero emissions
strategies are pursued;
Collaboration and/or enforcement
with port tenants and along the
supply chain to reduce emissions
Org conforms with laws and
regs related to hazardous
waste; Has quantified waste
flows and has ambitious
reduction goals for most
waste; Waste is avoided due
to zero-emissions/ zero-waste
activities; Addresses issues
related to ship waste &
contaminated sediments
Significant efforts
implemented and
results achieved to
avoid, reduce, or
mitigate biological
impacts from
construction activities
and operations
Environmental impacts
associated with the
goods movement
within the vicinity of
the port (beyond
emissions) are
identified,
acknowledged, and
either avoided or
mitigated to reduce
impacts
Table 8: Maturity levels of port environmental sustainability aspects (Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner 2010, Table 6, 83)
40

Table 9: Maturity levels of port social sustainability aspects (Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner 2010, Tables 7 and 8, 84-85)
Ethical Behavior/No
Corruption/Human
Rights; Public Health &
Safety
Community
Engagement/
Manage
Community
Relations
Corporate Citizenship –
Quality of Life,
Livability, Social
Integration
Employment/
Workforce
Development -
External
Corporate
Governance
Motivation &
Incentives – Internal
Employee Health,
Safety & Wellness;
Emergency/
Disaster
Management
Human
Capital
Development
– Training and
Education
Beginning

1
Human Rights are generally
respected; Conforms with
laws and regs for corruption;
No corporate statement or
guidelines regarding ethics or
protection of public health &
safety
There is no
engagement with the
community on port
issues
Corporate Citizenship (CC)
or socially integrating
within the port city is not a
focus of the organization
No specific
employment targets
or measures are set;
these numbers are
not captured or
reported
Conforms with
mandates regarding
transparency; risk
management
Motivation of employees
toward sustainability is not
considered or has
dysfunctional impact on
org
Meets legal
requirements; Not an
active major focus
No specific
human capital
development
measures are
set regarding
sustainability
Elementary

2
Human Rights are generally
respected; Compliance with
laws and regs; Impacts
regarding corrupt practices
are identified and measures
set to avoid them; Rules for
how Board and top senior
managers to behave ethically
in the org are defined
There is some one-
way public
communication
regarding port
projects; There are
limited opportunities
for feedback from
the public on specific
issues
Money is donated by the
org to a few projects or
organizations; The link
between corporate
business and the
donations is rarely given or
explained
Some job numbers
are captured to
understand impact
on economy and
community; Some
efforts made to hire
local
Some additional
measures to ensure
transparency are set;
Some measures
regarding performance
management
Some incentive measures
to improve motivation
toward sustainability are
established
Legal requirements
met; Measures
toward health &
safety of employees
are set in reaction to
threats or events
Some measures
are set; Limited
training for
certain
personnel
occurs.
Satisfying

3
Conducts business fairly, no
manipulation of business
practices; No corruption to
gain a competitive
advantage; Designs and
conducts operations in a way
that respects human rights
and does not endanger public
health and safety
There is a role and
many venues and
opportunities for
community
stakeholders to
participate in port
planning processes,
projects, and
decision-making;
Both one and two-
way communication
occurs
Org hosts events/projects
and provides
sponsorships, grants, and
volunteers to community
orgs; Contributions are
systematically planned and
chosen; The link or
rationale is mostly given;
Org conducts projects that
contribute to better
quality of life of nearby
residents and community
stakeholders
Employment
numbers are
routinely tracked and
reported, including
construction; Local
hire preference
policies are in place;
Partnerships with
non-profits/schools
for job training and
outreach
Increased focus on
transparency;
Additional measures
regarding performance
management and
measurement;
Proactive approach to
risk management
In most areas of the
organization, employees
are motivated by incentive
measures to focus on
sustainability; Top
management exemplifies
the approach to
sustainability for
employees
Systematic approach
to planning for
health & safety &
emergency
preparedness of
employees is used an
deployed throughout
org; Proactive
measures are taken
to avoid long-term
health & safety risks
Various
education
programs and
training
opportunities
are made
available. Most
employees are
trained
regarding
sustainability
issues.
Sophisticated

4
Conducts business fairly;
Designs and conducts
operations in a way that
respects human rights and
does not endanger public
health and safety; Codes of
conduct and guidelines
regarding ethics, human
rights, and public health &
safety are proactively
improved to respond to
emerging issues.
On-going dialogue
with community
stakeholders on port
policy issues, through
port planning
processes, and port
decision-making;
Two-way
communication is
most common
CC is systemically planned
and conducted; focus is on
long-term commitment
and relationships. Most
employees are integrated
or have an opportunity to
participate; The link
between these projects
and core business is
provided and understood.
Local benefits are
observed.
Initiatives focus on
boosting local hire
numbers;
Partnerships with
non-profits/schools
for job training and
outreach are
effective and focus
on preparedness for
future technologies
and market
approaches
High level of
transparency - giving
insight to all relevant
data; Effectively
develops proactive
initiatives ahead of
regulations to manage
risks; Performance
measurement and
management result in
continuous
improvement
Top management
exemplifies the approach
to sustainability for
employees and provides
sustained leadership;
Employees are effectively
supported by appropriate
motivation and incentives;
Sustainability principles
are internalized in the org
culture and behavioral
changes are observed.
Health & safety
approach supports
organizational goals
towards
sustainability;
Systematic approach;
Measures are met
and improved; There
is a focus on
employee wellness
Various
education
programs and
training
opportunities
are made
available; Every
employee is
trained
regarding
sustainability
issues.
41

D. Profiles of Organizational Sustainability Strategies
Baumgartner and Ebner (2010) present the following six sustainability strategies,
summarized in Table 10, based on the maturity level of their sustainability aspects:
1. Introverted: Risk mitigation is the major driver of this strategy, where organizations
generally “focus on a very low standard of sustainability” across all sustainability aspects
(81).
2. Conventional Extroverted: Organizations following this strategy are concerned about the
outward presentation of their sustainability commitment (81). They will do more than what
is generally required for basic compliance with the law.
3. Transformative Extroverted: Organizations with this strategy are also focused on
establishing credibility around the sustainability commitment of the organization, usually
through a focus on internal measures. Reinforcing the industry’s social license to operate is
also a motivating factor for following this strategy (84).
4. Conservative: Efficiency (cost, process, etc.) is the major motivator for organizations
following this strategy, which focuses mostly on internal measures and generally does not
address the social aspects of sustainability (85).
5. Conventional Visionary: These organizations are motivated to be a market leader in
sustainability, with a sophisticated level of performance across most sustainability aspects
(86).
6. Systemic Visionary – These organizations display a sophisticated level of maturity across
all sustainability aspects, advancing the Triple Bottom Line approach to sustainability. They
also contribute to improving the sustainability-related standards of practice within their
industry (86).

42

Table 10: Organizational Sustainability Strategies
Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner 2010, Pages 81 - 86
Strategy Description Maturity Level
Introverted
(Risk
Mitigation)
strategy
“This strategy focuses on a very low standard of sustainability.”
Port organizations following this strategy concentrate on the bare
minimums such as conformity and compliance with rules and
guidelines. No specific sustainability aspect can be determined to
be the most important. The “strategy is mostly based on the poor
maturity level of the sustainability aspects” (81).
Poor maturity level
overall - 1
Conventional
Extroverted
(Legitimization)
strategy
A port organization with this strategy focuses on “communicating
its sustainability commitment to society” to “increase its
credibility” and “differentiate itself from competitors.” Its driven
to act at level 2 – more than what is required by law.
“Responsibility for sustainability is often located in the public
relations or communications department”; At “risk of green-
washing” if there is not a deeper commitment to sustainability
throughout the organization. “This strategy is focused on the
external presentation of sustainability” (81).
Generally level 2, but to
“increase credibility,
corporate citizenship,
no corruption, health
and safety, and
collaboration” are
typically at a level 3
Transformative
Extroverted
(Legitimization)
strategy
Focus is to “positively influence the basic conditions” of port
sustainability. An organization with this strategy is a driver for
“sustainability in society and gains much higher credibility.” This
requires the need to “assure implementation of sustainability
through a high maturity of internal sustainability aspects” (84).
“Overall maturity level is
generally one level
higher than the
conventional
extroverted strategy;
Society-related aspects
are usually most
important”
Conservative
(Efficiency)
strategy
“Oriented mostly towards internal measures, focuses on cost
efficiency and well defined processes – outstanding maturity in
processes; Investment in appropriate technology, sophisticated
H&S for employees, and ecological sustainability is very
important. There is not much focus on other sustainability
aspects, especially social or society-related issues” (85)
“Usually outstanding in
processes, technology,
H&S, and ecological
issues; May be poor in
social issues”
Conventional
Visionary
(Holistic)
“Has a highly developed sustainability commitment to become a
market leader in sustainability issues; Strategy is focused on the
organization’s impact on the market; Level 3 aspects don’t
appear to have enough direct impact to affect role as a market
leader” (86)
“Mostly sophisticated,
but some aspects may
be at a level 3 – such as
processes, purchasing,
and corporate
citizenship”
Systemic
Visionary
The organization “must show very good results in all aspects; The
organization must demonstrate to stakeholders and the market
its commitment to sustainability;” This strategy combines
outside-in and inside-out perspectives to achieve a unique
competitive position, based on internalization and continuous
improvement of sustainability issues inside the company. The
organization is contributing to generally “changing basic
conditions in the industry positively towards sustainability” (86).
“Sophisticated maturity
level across all aspects
of sustainability – Level
4;” Efforts improve port
sector and global goods
movement supply chain
43

E. Flaws and Benefits of the Evaluation Model
The following section discusses some of the flaws and benefits of the adapted
framework.
Flaws
Some weaknesses of the adapted framework include the following: the design in
general is focused more on process versus outcomes, it doesn’t account for the challenges
when making comparisons across countries, and it doesn’t account for every aspect related to
sustainability.
There is not a consistent focus on achieving specific results or outcomes. In general, the
model is process-oriented, but results must be demonstrated to achieve a “sophisticated” Level
4 rating on many of the aspects.
There are issues with making comparisons of port organizations among different
countries. For example, different levels of effort may be required to reach a rating based on the
political and historical context of the area where the port organization is located. Specifically,
some ports may already be required to focus on some aspects to comply with existing local,
regional, or national laws and industry practices.
Also, despite the comparison across frameworks presented in Table 1, some aspects
related to sustainability are still not captured by the adapted framework, such as historic
preservation.
44

Finally, while this framework is meant to advocate for a systemic approach and measure
how diffused or integrated sustainability is within an organization’s business processes, it might
not even be possible for organizations to excel at all 21 aspects, which begs the question – is
the ideal systemic visionary strategy, which requires a “sophisticated” Level 4 performance
across all aspects achievable or even necessary?
Benefits
The work of Baumgartner and Ebner (2010) can be used to drive the integration of
sustainability into the core business of port organizations by identifying the major aspects of
port sustainability and prompting organizations to synch their processes and investments
within these aspects with this focus. The framework is structured to emphasize a holistic
approach to sustainability and supports the application of the Triple Bottom Line to measuring
organizational performance, suggested by the model sustainable organization illustrated in
Figure 1.
In general, the adapted model for ports provides a roadmap for how to achieve
continuous improvement towards sustainability by creating a continuum of competency levels
for each aspect. While used in this study to gain an understanding of how embedded
sustainability is within specific port organizations by examining the maturity levels of various
sustainability aspects, the model could be used as a self-assessment tool and guide when
developing or expanding port sustainability programs.

45

Chapter 3:
Port Case Studies

A. Overview: Major Container Ports in China, European Union, and the United States

The following case studies examine the sustainability maturity and strategies of six of
the world’s top container ports: Shanghai, Ningbo/Zhoushan, Rotterdam, Hamburg, Antwerp,
and Los Angeles. To understand the context of the policy choices each port has made, a brief
discussion of some national policies that are relevant to sustainability are presented for each
country. The local context for each port is then presented, with some challenges and advanced
practices highlighted. Tables analyzing the sustainability aspects of each port organization and
their maturity levels are presented, summarized, and then used to identify a sustainability
strategy for the organization. The final section of this chapter summarizes the major findings
and provides a comparison of the sustainability maturity levels and strategies among ports.
The port case studies focus on six of the world’s top container ports. Container volumes
are conveyed in Twenty-Foot Equivalent Units (TEUS), which refer to the standard
measurement of a cargo container (even though there are many forty-foot containers now
commonly used in the market). Table 11 summarizes the world and national rank of the
container ports included in the case study analysis.

46

Table 11: Top World Container Ports

Source: The Journal of Commerce 2012

As the cargo mix at some ports includes more than just containers, such as liquid bulk
(oil), dry bulk (grains or iron ore), and other commodities that are not transported by container,
a ranking of the case study ports by total cargo volumes is also provided in Table 12.

Table 12: Top World Ports - Total Cargo Volumes

Source: Port of Rotterdam Statistics 2011
*Not ranked among top 20

World
Rank
National
Rank
Port, Country Volume 2011
(Million TEUS)
% Change
from 2010
1 1 Shanghai, China 31.74 +9.3%
6 4 Ningbo-Zhoushan, China 14.72 +11.7%
10 1 Rotterdam, Netherlands (EU) 11.88 +6.5%
14 2 Hamburg, Germany (EU) 9.04 +14.2%
15 3 Antwerp, Belgium (EU) 8.66 +2.3%
16 1 Los Angeles, United States 7.94 +1.4%
World
Rank
National
Rank
Port, Country Total Cargo Volumes 2011
(Million Metric Tons)
1 1 Shanghai, China 728
2 2 Ningbo-Zhoushan, China 691
5 1 Rotterdam, Netherlands (EU) 435
17 1 Los Angeles, United States 203
18 2 Antwerp, Belgium (EU) 187
* 3 Hamburg, Germany (EU) 132
47

B. Methodology

The following case studies are based on information collected through site visits,
interviews, corporate communications, and internet research. Fieldwork to collect information
on Chinese ports was conducted in May – June 2012 and in October 2012, and visits to the
European ports occurred in September 2012. Information related to the Port of Los Angeles
was collected over my tenure as a port employee, from 2003 to 2013.
A set of interview questions were provided to participants in advance and Chinese
participants received a copy translated into Chinese. In general, a one hour interview was
requested with each participant. Each case study was initially designed to include perspectives
from the port authority, a terminal operator, an environmental regulator, and a non-
governmental organization. In the end, not all perspectives were collected for each location due
to access or schedule constraints. However, when available, these perspectives are included in
the discussions for each port organization.
Appendix B contains a list of site visits and stakeholder interviews. Photos of the site
visits can be found in Appendix C. Appendix D contains a copy of the interview questions. As
the adapted framework to evaluate the sustainability maturity of each organization (discussed
in Chapter 2) evolved after the interviews were conducted, observations from the interviews
are supplemented with information from corporate reports, press releases, news and industry
journal articles, and websites.

48

C. China

1. Major Sustainability Policies in China

This section highlights some of the major national policies in China related to
sustainability, including legislation directed by the Five Year Plan for environmental protection
and energy efficiency.

China’s 12
th
Five-Year National Plan
China’s Five Year National Plan (Plan) is the major source of sustainability-related
policies in the country. Some important updates to the current Five Year Plan were announced
over 2011 and 2012.
Environmental Protection
In January 2012, the State Council distributed its 12
th
Five Year Plan for Environmental
Protection. Some specific goals are included in the plan, such as requiring over 80 percent of
cities to meet Grade II national air quality standards and over 60 percent of the seven big water
bodies under the national monitoring program to meet at least Grade III water quality
standards (China’s classification system for air quality has five tiers and six tiers for water
quality; The highest quality is at Grade I). Among other things, investments in environmental
protection should prioritize reduction of total discharges of major pollutants and the
development of a workforce of environmental professionals. The State Council has directed
local governments to integrate the Plan objectives and targets into their local master plans for
economic and social development and understand that plan implementation will be an
49

important component for their performance evaluations. The Ministry announced that by the
end of 2013 and 2015, an interim assessment and final examination of the plan implementation
will be conducted and the results will be made public (MEP 2012a).

Energy and Emission Reductions
In July 2012, the State Council approved “The 12
th
Five-Year Plan for Energy Saving and
Emission Reduction.” This plan identifies the following targets by the end of 2015, compared to
2010:
 16% reduction of energy consumption per unit GDP
 8% reduction of sulfur dioxide (SO2)
 10% of discharges of ammonia nitrogen and nitrogen oxide (NOX)
To achieve these targets, China has committed to the following strategies:
1) Optimizing their industrial structure to curb the growth of high-polluting and energy-
consuming industries;
2) Adjusting their energy mixes;
3) Promoting higher energy efficiency through an energy-saving and low carbon campaign
targeting 10,000 enterprises; and
4) Reducing major pollutants through increased pollution prevention and control measures
for industries such as electricity, iron, steel, and cement; focusing on rural pollution, and
controlling vehicle emissions and control of fine particulates in the atmosphere.
Overall, the plan identifies ten key programs and measures, including a focus on energy
management programs and technologies, construction of urban sewage treatment facilities,
prevention and control of water pollution of key river basins, removal of sulphur and nitrogen
from emissions, and capacity building in energy efficiency and emissions reductions (MEP
2012b).
50

Environmental Policy Structure and Process
Existing environmental policy regulations in China are surprisingly extensive. Regulations
exist for protection of marine resources, air quality, water quality, soil, noise, etc., preparation
of an environmental impact assessment before project construction, and public involvement in
the environmental review process. Regulations are promulgated from central government in
Beijing by the Ministry of Environmental Protection. Implementation of central government
initiatives in the Twelfth Five Year Plan is carried out by local governments. Implementation and
enforcement at local level that is consistent with the central government’s intent has been a
challenge. As a result, there is a renewed focus on enforcement.

2. Chinese Ports: Background and Sustainability Analysis

This study focuses on China’s top two container ports: Shanghai and Ningbo/Zhoushan.
The following case studies provide background information, highlight challenges and advanced
practices, and present an analysis with the use of the adapted framework of the sustainability
maturity and strategy of the port organizations.

51

i. Shanghai

Background

Shanghai, the world’s largest city, has a population of over twenty-three million. The
Port of Shanghai (Shanghai Port) is located on the Pacific Ocean and the mouth of the Yangtze
River. It is the world’s largest port, and China’s largest port, consisting of six major port areas. In
2011, Shanghai Port handled 31.74 million TEUS of containers and 728 million metric tons of
cargo.
In 2003 the Shanghai Port Authority was divided into two organizations: the Shanghai
Port Authority and the Shanghai Port International Group (SIPG), which is the only operator of
public terminals within the Port. In 2008, the Shanghai Port Authority was merged with the
Municipal Transportation Bureau, creating the Shanghai Municipal Transportation and Port
Authority, which reports directly to the Shanghai Municipal Government.

Challenges and Advanced Practices
This section highlights just a few of the key challenges experienced and advanced
practices demonstrated by Shanghai Port.

Challenges
The latest Five Year Plan mandates from the Central Government focus on energy
efficiency, environmental impact assessment, and local enforcement. Shanghai Port is working
to address these things amidst extremely poor air quality, water quality, traffic congestion, loss
of habitat, and displacement of populations due to port expansion projects.
52

Regarding air quality, based on the results of their newly completed air emissions
inventory, nitrogen oxide (NOx) along the Huangpu River (BUND area) has the greatest effect
on downtown Shanghai, as air emissions don’t diffuse as much and there is a highly
concentrated population. Transit or cruising emissions from ocean-going vessels (OGVs) are the
main port contributors to air emissions in the City of Shanghai. Public health impacts from air
emissions are also a concern. Shanghai is ranked second in China for risk of lung cancer
(Lingbing 2012).

Advanced Practices

Shanghai Port has implemented many advanced practices to further sustainable
operations. These practices include developing guidelines and metrics for energy efficiency for
state enterprises within the port and designating “Role Model” terminal operators who follow
standards and receive subsidies from the State for good performance and helping with the
State’s focus on industrial restructuring for cleaner production. Shanghai Port has piloted a real-
time integrated air quality, water quality, and noise monitoring system. It also has a Port
Research Institute that advises on marine and transportation policy and technology issues.
Some of the technology retrofits at port terminals include the use of electric rubber tired gantry
cranes (RTGs), the introduction of alternative maritime power (AMP) and the use of LNG trucks.

53

Yangshan Deepwater Port
In addition to policies and technologies to reduce impacts, Shanghai Port has also
invested in expanding operations south in a remote but strategic maritime location. Among an
atoll of islands, the Yangshan Deepwater Port is located in the East China Sea, in naturally deep
water along an international shipping route. The port area started operations in 2005 and is
connected to Shanghai by the world’s longest sea bridge. The Donghai Bridge is 20 miles long
and six lanes wide, dedicated to port traffic. Yangshan has 13 berths and 60 gantry cranes to
service vessels at berth. In 2011, 13 million TEUS moved through the deep water port, mostly as
transshipments (moving cargo from one vessel to another vessel within the same port
terminal). When the terminal was constructed, compensation and relocation assistance were
provided to displaced fishing villagers living on the island. Shanghai Port also implemented a
reproduction-release program to address impacts to fish habitat due to construction.

Sustainability Aspects

Using the adapted sustainability framework discussed in Chapter 2 and outlined in
Tables 2 through 9, Table 13 summarizes the sustainability aspects of the Shanghai Port
organization and ranks the maturity level of each aspect, along with their overall concept of
sustainability. Table 14 summarizes the sustainability maturity of Shanghai Port across the 21
aspects.

54

Table 13: Sustainability Aspects of Shanghai Port
Sustainability Aspects Shanghai Port
Maturity
Level
Concept of Sustainability

The strategic priorities of Shanghai Port include the utilization of the
shoreline and land, environmental protection, and a focus on review for
project compliance after construction. The green port concept for
Shanghai includes a focus on water quality, air quality, dust control, and
energy efficiency (Lu, 2012).

Elementary
2
Sustainability-Related
Goals

In 2011, the Shanghai Port committed to becoming a “resource-
conservation and environmentally-friendly port”

There are defined targets for reductions in energy consumption, CO2
emissions, the reduction of dust and particles from bulk cargo, and
collection targets of bilge water and waste water.

Only for terminal side (buildings, cargo handling equipment)
1) Energy Consumption, target 8% decrease in 2015, 10% decrease in
2020 (2010 baseline)
2) Compared to 2005, decrease CO2 emissions from port cargo handling
10% by 2015, 12% by 2020
3) Rubber-Tired-Gantry Cranes (RTGs) – energy savings inside port
terminal; By 2015, 100% hybrid or electric
4) 70% reduction in dust and particles from bulk cargo by 2020 (sand,
petro coke, iron ore)
5) 100% of bilge water and waste water will be collected by 2020

Schedule:
2011 – Initial stages of planning
2012 – 2014 – start driving reductions
2015-2017 – deepen reductions
2018 – 2020 – complete plans
(SPAC 2012a, 2012b, 2012c)
Economic
Financial Strength Ranks 1
st
in the world and nationally in TEUS (2011) – 31.74M
Ranks 1
st
in the world and nationally in total cargo volumes (2011) - 728M
metric tons

SIPG, Shanghai’s terminal operator, was recently awarded as one of
China’s Top 100 listed company brands. They have a reported capital
value of $1.56 billion, ranking 43 among the top 100 companies (SIPG
2012a).
Sophisticated
4
Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives

Innovation: The Shanghai Transport and Port Development Research
Center focuses on transportation and maritime industry policy research,
technologies, and recommendations. Their scope also includes academic
exchanges and assessing the environmental effects of development
projects within the industry. The organization has a research arm,
management services arm, and an investment arm that focuses on

Satisfying –
Sophisticated
3 - 4
55

technology. Major topics under study right now include a berthing
capacity study, port-wide energy supply study, feasibility study for electric
and LNG trucks, and a pilot study for carbon emissions trading (Lingbing
2012).

The Port of Shanghai started designing and testing automation
technologies in the early 2000s. According to SIPG, after two years they
saw a tremendous increase in the container handling capacity and
efficiency at their pilot terminal, reporting, “throughput capability per
meter of waterfront has increased by 47.3%, the average berthing time at
the port decreased by 17.38%; the utilization rate of major equipment
went up by 11% and the failure rate went down from 6% to 2%. The profit
growth of the demonstration points and the whole port was RMB83.93
million and RMB173.403 million respectively” (SIPG 2012b).

Technology & Investment: Within cargo terminals: The Port has been
investing in the development of electric trucks and LNG trucks, and they
have been using hybrid RTGs. SIPG is currently using LNG trucks within its
terminals and plans to have a total of 150 by early 2013. They will test the
trucks over the next year and potentially increase the fleet in the future.
The Port is also focusing on investment in LNG for fueling vessels and
providing necessary infrastructure (SIPG 2012a).

The have implemented an electronic container tracking system for more
efficient operations, along with a pilot integrated air quality, water
quality, and noise monitoring system (real-time) at a few select terminals
(SIPG 2012a).

Incentives: The Port plans to administer an energy savings and emissions
reductions incentive program. They are in the process of making a
booklet that explains potential energy consumption reduction
opportunities and technologies. They will give this to the terminals to
help them understand their options for reductions. This will be completed
by 2014. They will also identify standards and select five role models, who
will receive incentives (subsidies from the central government) (Lu 2012).
Collaboration

Economic strategic planning – has partnerships with Port of Ningbo for
joint terminal ventures and Port of Hamburg for rail connections to
Europe.

Through engagement and collaboration with U.S. EPA, agreed to do air
emissions inventory and share results of port mobile sources.

Staff exchange program with the Port of Los Angeles; Sister port
relationships with Ports of Long Beach, Hamburg, Antwerp, Rotterdam,
and others to learn best practices and share technologies.

Communicates with environmental staff and suppliers of port enterprises
regarding improvements needed in environmental management, shares

Elementary –
Satisfying
2-3
56

monitoring results regarding water quality, sewage treatment, and
management of discharges.

To manage future risks/liabilities, there is some communication with the
public regarding environmental impacts of proposed projects. Shanghai
Port takes public comments. However, most port planning is coordinated
with the Central government. Limited to no role for NGOs, which must be
state-sponsored.
Knowledge Management

Shanghai Port is currently developing and planning an organizational
knowledge base related to energy efficiency approaches throughout
marine operations and equipment. They are currently using database
systems to increase operational efficiencies and for environmental
monitoring. For integrated terminal environmental monitoring, they are
using a GIS system for data collection and to display and analyze
information. The system serves as an early warning system and allows
them to analyze emissions data at several terminals; Currently in the pilot
testing phase; They plan to expand this to all terminals within the
Shanghai Port if successful.

Elementary
2
Processes Very clear energy efficiency – energy consumption reduction targets; A
holistic approach to environmental and social issues has not been taken
yet throughout the organization. Shanghai Port has started to implement
public outreach when doing environmental assessments for port
development projects.

Elementary
2
Purchases

When choosing or implementing new technologies, cost and energy
consumption are major considerations. Shanghai Port spends 3% of its
budget on environmental programs (Lu 2012).

Elementary
2
Sustainability Reporting

Shanghai Port does not issue a sustainability report, an environmental
report, or an integrated annual report. The City of Shanghai has recently
created an annual reporting brochure on environmental information, but
nothing in it is clearly port-related.
Beginning
1
Environmental
Existence of Aspects
Inventory; Monitoring and
management
The Port is focused on air quality, water quality, gathering data on soil
contamination, and some biological baseline information. They have
created a pilot real-time environmental monitoring network of air quality,
water quality, and noise at the Waigaoqiao Phase IV terminal, with plans
to extend this port-wide if successful (SIPG 2012a).

Elementary –
Satisfying
2-3
Resource Use They track energy consumption and have goals regarding energy
efficiency and land utilization. The mandatory target for coastline usage
efficiency is 10,000 tons of cargo per meter (SPAC 2012a).
Elementary
2
Emissions into air, water,
and ground

The Port created an air emissions inventory in 2011 for ocean-going
vessels, inner harbor/river vessels, trucks (movements within harbor
district), berthing emissions, and cargo handling equipment (based on
fuel consumption) (SPAC 2012b, 2012c).

Shanghai Port has started monitoring water quality (4 times a year) and
they have a mandatory goal that 100% of port wastewater (sewage) will

Elementary –
Satisfying
2-3
57

be treated; The newer terminals (Yangshan and Waigaoqiao) have their
own wastewater treatment systems; some facilities have no access to a
sewage system or their own sewage systems, so they discharge directly
into the river.

Standards for water quality in the Huangpu River (drinking water source
for the City of Shanghai) were promulgated in 2009. In 2010, all new
discharges into the river were prohibited. Shanghai Port is trying to
comply and is reaching out to the environmental staff of port enterprises
and promoting the construction and repair of sewage treatment systems
and facilities and management of discharges. Approximately 60-70% of
the port terminals along the river are not in the city area and do not have
access to city sewer systems (SPAC 2012c).

They have mandatory reduction goals related to energy use and carbon
emissions; There are policy goals to reduce SOx and NOx significantly
when feasible (SPAC 2012b and 2012c).

SIPG has converted cargo handling equipment to diesel –electric to save
on fuel consumption. Researching electric trucks and alternative fuel
technologies for vessels (SIPG 2012a).
Waste and Hazardous
Waste
Reduction goals are in place regarding collection of bilge water from
ships.

Over the past 5 years, Shanghai Port has worked with the Municipal
Environmental Protection Bureau to perform more than 50
environmental site assessments, human health impact assessments, and
soil remediation projects on port and city properties. Some
bioremediation techniques have been implemented to address soil
contamination (SPAC 2012c).

Elementary -
Satisfying
2
Biodiversity/Marine
Habitat Management

The Port of Shanghai started research on a habitat and ecosystem
compensation program during the construction and development of the
Yangshan Deepwater Port terminal in 2002. The Port has spent almost $2
million to implement a reproduction-release program to address impacts
to fish habitat (SPAC 2012c).

During the Waigaoqiao Phase VI terminal construction between 2007 and
2010, approximately $1 million was spent to repopulate and release fish
at the mouth of the Yangtze River. To get a sense of the scale of the
effort, one of the release events in December 2009 included: “739,000
fish, 85,000 Chinese mitten crab, 1100 lbs. of shrimp, and 29 tons of
razor, rainbow, and river clams” (SPAC 2012c).

A 2010 Shanghai Port policy prescribes that for large scale projects,
ecological reimbursement and restoration will be provided.

Elementary
2
58

Environmental Issues
related to the Goods
Movement Supply Chain;
Traffic, Noise, Light/Glare,
Visual, and Public Health
Impacts

In general, Shanghai Port has been trying to develop goods movement
facilities away from major population centers and residents. Examples
include the construction of Yangshan Deepwater Port, and more recently,
land use policies have directed the relocation of cargo-related facilities
from the Huangpu River docks and focus more on commercial and retail
waterfront redevelopment in these areas.

There is noise monitoring at some terminals, along with a noise complaint
hotline managed by the Port.

Regarding traffic, there is a focus on the construction of internal
waterways for use by freight traffic that will take trucks off of the road;
however, these have their own biological and socioeconomic impacts by
displacing populations that may not always be addressed. The Port plans
to construct a total of 14 inner rivers that will accommodate cargo vessels
(SPAC 2012c).

Elementary
2
Social
Ethical Behavior/No
Corruption/Human Rights;
Public Health & Safety

Population relocation compensation and assistance has occurred in
recent past to make way for development projects (example: Yangshan
Deepwater Port). It is not clear how consistent this approach is being
applied to future projects that require the displacement and relocation of
communities.

In late 2012, Shanghai Port issued new public safety, security, and
aesthetic guidelines for passenger ferry services and terminals along the
Huangpu River. They also announced new safety training programs for
bus and tram drivers.

In January 2013, the Port issued new guidelines for reporting the handling
of dangerous goods during port operations and discussed increased
inspection, monitoring, and enforcement measures to protect the public
and workers (known as the “People Port Law”) (SPAC 2013a).

Elementary
2
Community
Engagement/Manage
Community Relations

For public outreach, Shanghai Port posts public notices on a website. They
currently visit nearby communities and conduct public surveys; reports
from these surveys are made public. They also hold stakeholder meetings
for proposed projects and have created a hotline to receive public
complaints. Noise complaints are common, so there is a process set up to
do investigations to resolve the complaint (SPAC 2012b, 2012c).

Elementary
2
Corporate Citizenship-
Quality of Life, Livability,
Social Integration

Shanghai Port seems to host some educational community events
throughout the year, including the “River Safety Warning Day” on March
25, 2013, which included: posters, banners, LED display, panels, and
distribution of safety knowledge and pollution prevention materials (SPAC
2013b).

Regarding quality of life, Shanghai Port is also combined with the
Municipal Transportation Authority, which has been focused on

Elementary
2
59

extending public transit (bus lines) to underserved areas throughout the
city.

Employment/
Workforce Development

Total full-time employment numbers and hiring policies are unknown;
6,000 full-time workers were used to construct the Yangshan Deepwater
Port over two years (Barboza 2005).

Elementary
2
Corporate Governance

There are performance measures for safety, efficiency, and
environmental protection.

Elementary
2
Motivation and Incentives
- Internal

Employees are aware of the need to achieve energy efficiency and
emissions reductions targets (SPAC 2012b, 2012c).
Elementary
2
Employee Health, Safety &
Wellness;
Emergency/Disaster
Management
In reaction to several spills, in 2010 the Port began to focus on dangerous
cargo labeling, training, enforcement for workers. The Port is also
involved in providing bus and ferry transportation to support emergency
evacuation planning efforts in the City of Shanghai (SPAC 2012c).

Elementary
2
Human Capital
Development -
Training and Education

In 2011, Shanghai Port announced its intentions to increase staff
development and improve the overall quality of resource conservation
efforts, knowledge of environmental protection needs and procedures,
and to increase personnel training efforts to strengthen high-level
research and development talent. Shanghai Port plans to increase efforts
to train young people to focus on sustainable development, relying on
technological innovation (SPAC 2012b, 2012c).

Elementary
2
60

Table 14: Shanghai Port Organizational Sustainability Maturity Summary
Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010), Figure 2

Sustainability Aspects
Level 1:
Beginning
Level 2:
Elementary
Level 3:
Satisfying
Level 4:
Sophisticated
Concept of Sustainability X
Economic
Financial Strength X
Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives

Collaboration
Knowledge Management X
Processes X
Purchases X
Sustainability Reporting X
Environmental
Existence of Aspects Inventory; Monitoring and
management

Use of Resources X
Emissions into air, water, ground
Waste and Hazardous Waste X
Biodiversity/
Habitat Management
X
Environmental Issues of Goods Movement Supply
Chain; Traffic, Noise, Light/Glare, Visual, Public
Health Impacts
X
Social
Ethical Behavior/No Corruption/ Human Rights;
Public Health & Safety
X
Community Engagement/Manage Community
Relations
X
Corporate Citizenship - Quality of Life, Livability,
Social integration
X
Employment/Workforce Development X
Corporate Governance X
Motivation and Incentives – Internal X
Employee Health, Safety & Wellness;
Emergency/Disaster Management
X
Human Capital Development – Training and
Education
X
X

X

X

X

61

Sustainability Maturity Analysis
Shanghai Port has an elementary concept of sustainability and is concerned with
balancing economic costs and benefits with reducing environmental impacts. Social
sustainability is only a concern related to stakeholder opposition to port development or
operations. Energy efficiency, operational efficiency, cost efficiency, and the reduction in CO2
emissions are primary factors in their decision-making, which is consistent with targets set by
the central government in the current national Five Year Plan. The Port has a high level of
maturity related to financial strength and is above the industry average related to investments
in innovation and technology. There is also a higher priority in the organization given to
collaboration, and measuring, monitoring, and management of certain issues, such as air and
water emissions.
In general, Shanghai Port has a maturity level of 2, elementary, across the majority of
sustainability aspects, based on the criteria contained in Tables 7, 8, and 9. This includes all of
the social sustainability aspects and most of the environmental ones. Shanghai Port performed
lowest on Sustainability Reporting, as the port organization has not released either a separate
environmental or sustainability report, or a corporate report with information related to
environmental or social performance. Most environmental achievements are announced
through press releases.

62

Port Organizational Sustainability Strategy
When compared to the organizational sustainability strategies identified by
Baumgartner and Ebner (2010) discussed in Table 10, the Shanghai Port strategy could be
classified as a hybrid between the Conservative Strategy, which is focused on efficiency, and the
Conventional Extroverted Strategy, which is focused on legitimization.
The Conservative Strategy, which mostly has an internal orientation, aligns with
Shanghai Port’s goals to improve the efficiency of logistics, operations, costs, and energy. Many
of these goals are dictated by China’s Five Year Plan, which has directives regarding reductions
in energy consumption and carbon emissions. Internally the organization is very procedural,
and many of the organizational and technological processes are efficient and highly
sophisticated (such as the focus on tracking containers for efficient operations, fuel
consumption, carbon emissions, and the use of automation technology). However,
organizational processes to holistically address environmental and social impacts from current
operations or future planned development are not well developed.
Regarding the Conventional Extroverted Strategy, there is a focus by Shanghai Port on
the external presentation of their progress in becoming an “environmentally-friendly port” and
building legitimacy and credibility regarding this purpose with the central government and
international community through collaboration.

63

ii. Ningbo/Zhoushan

Background

Ningbo
The Port of Ningbo is located off the coast of the East China Sea, approximately ninety-
three miles south of Shanghai Port. Total trade volumes at the Port of Ningbo have increased
from $10.3 million in 1985 to $98.19 billion in 2011 (Zhixiong, 2012). The Port of Ningbo serves
as a major transfer base for iron ore, crude oil, coal, and containers. There are six major port
areas at the Port of Ningbo, 335 vessel berths, and an average of 1300 vessel calls a month.
Vessels as large as 14,000 TEUs call at this port.
In 1987, the Port of Ningbo was under dual leadership of the Ningbo Municipal
Government and a state owned enterprise. In 2004, the Ningbo Port Authority changed to the
Ningbo Port Group, which became the sole port operator. In 2008, Ningbo Port Co. Limited was
created, and in 2010 it became a public company, listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange. There
are six shareholders, and Ningbo Port Group is the largest. With a total asset value of $2 billion
USD, it is one of China’s largest public companies (Wei 2012). Ningbo and neighboring Zhoushan
have now merged into one port (Wei 2012).

Zhoushan
The Zhoushan Port area is known as the Marine Silk Road. There are a total of 1390
islands in the area, with fifty-four kilometers of deep water coastline, 331 berths and thirty-
seven berths to serve deep water vessels. The area is the designated national center for the
64

processing and distribution of bulk commodities, such as petroleum oil and grains.
Approximately 400 metric tons were processed last year. Many chemical and oil companies are
located within the port. In general, the Zhoushan port area specializes in bulk and breakbulk
commodities, but is looking to expand its container trade. Compared to Ningbo, which handled
14 million TEUs in 2011, Zhoushan handled 200 thousand (Jun 2012).
Professor Ren-xiang Wang with the Ningbo University of Technology (NUT) has observed
that Shanghai and Ningbo together are seen as the shipping center of the world, strategically
located in the middle of China’s coast and at the mouth of the Yangtze River (Wang 2012). While
both have been rapidly growing over the past ten years and have been adding throughput
capacity, the development model of just enlarging the scale or capacity is not sustainable. As a
major percentage of the City of Ningbo’s GDP comes from the port logistics industry, the local
government has started to focus on how to transform from “large” to “strong.” It is anticipated
that the local economy will benefit from investments while expanding supporting port services
and improving functionality (Wang 2012).
While Shanghai and Ningbo are both competitive, they also cooperate. The inland
service areas that the ports serve are what distinguish them: Shanghai serves the Yangtze River
Region, and Ningbo serves the areas south of that region. These service regions have been
greatly enlarged through rail and inland waterways.
Gao Zhixiang, an economics professor with NUT, has commented that over the past ten
years, China has been trying to give more power to the local governments of ports in China.
Local governments decided growth targets and strategies, which created issues of overcapacity
65

among shipping terminals and too much competition in the market. The trend now is to
consolidate smaller ports to have a more efficient network. The main ports in China (which
include Ningbo/Zhoushan and Shanghai) are supervised by the National government, and their
development plans must be approved at the national level. The national government has clean
environment goals that the ports have been asked to follow while pursuing these development
plans (Zhixiang 2012).

Challenges & Advanced Practices

This section highlights just a few of the key challenges experienced and advanced
practices demonstrated by the Port of Ningbo/Zhoushan.

Challenges

Amidst the rapid expansion, a range of environmental quality issues were observed and
reported within and around the Ningbo/Zhoushan Port, including impacts to air quality, water
quality, noise, and habitat loss. There does not seem to be the use of any environmental metrics
to measure performance. Stationary sources such as coal power plants, coal dust and factories
are the major drivers of air pollution. Waste water discharges from factories, processing centers
and spills from oil production facilities contribute to poor water quality in rivers and coastal
waters. As previously mentioned, Zhoushan is the designated national center for the processing
and distribution of bulk commodities: petroleum oil, many chemicals, and grains. The largest
crude oil terminal in Asia is located in the Ningbo Daxie Port area, with a capacity of 17 berths.
It is designed for 70 million tons of throughput capacity and was temporarily suspended as a
66

precaution due to a series of oil spills occurring in China’s northern Bohai Bay (Want China
Times 2011).
Regarding habitat, the displacement of wetlands by industrial development was
observed, along with conflicting land uses, like locating shellfish farming operations next to
industrial development, which can impact marine life. This poor planning can have direct
economic impacts. For example, Ningbo/Zhoushan supports China’s largest fishing fleet. Aquatic
exports in 2011 were $700 million to over 100 countries, according to the Ningbo Fisheries
Trade Association (Team 2012). However, when port officials from either administration were
interviewed regarding habitat protection, there did not seem to be any understanding or
acknowledgement of potential biological impacts of port operations.
Impacts to historic and cultural resources, displacement of indigenous populations, loss
of farmland, and impacts to the quality of life of residents and workers have also occurred due
to port operations.

Meishan Island
The Port of Ningbo/Zhoshan’s largest development project, currently under
construction, is Meishan Island. Meishan has a population of 15,000. The total coastline is
approximately sixteen miles, with over five miles of deep sea coastline. The construction of the
Meishan port area will be complete in 2020, with an annual throughput of almost six million
TEUS (comparable to the cargo volumes of the Port of Los Angeles in 2012). Many of the
indigenous shellfish farmers were displaced due to development of the port. The future vision
for the development is to create a high end commercial and residential real estate island
67

alongside an international trade hub with container operations and a cruise center. The original
farmers are assigned to a new designated “local cultural community” zone on the island, next
to housing for the local workers that will support the “playboy living facilities” (Ningbo Binhai
New City 2012).

Advanced Practices

Some of the mitigation strategies mentioned by participants include the practice of
restricting cargo type and setting volume caps on growth at some terminals. In general, port
officials plan to discourage locating polluting industries in new developments like Meishan
Island, but will maintain and concentrate existing heavy industrial areas like Beilun. Another
observed practice was extending the wharves over 1000 feet offshore to avoid the need for
dredging. Electric rail mounted gantry cranes (e-RMGs) were observed in the backlands at the
Ningbo Beilun Container Terminal. The primary driver for these practices (wharf extension and
electrification) was to reduce costs.

Sustainability Aspects

The following Table 15 summarizes the sustainability aspects of the Ningbo/Zhoushan
Port organization and ranks the maturity level of each aspect, along with the Port’s overall
concept of sustainability. Table 16 summarizes the sustainability maturity of the Port of
Ningbo/Zhoushan across the 21 aspects.

68

Table 15: Sustainability Aspects of the Ningbo/Zhoushan Port
Sustainability Aspects Ningbo/Zhoushan Port Maturity Level
Concept of Sustainability

The stated values of the Port are security, environmental
friendliness, and financial strength. However, economic
development appears to be the primary factor in their decision-
making.

Port officials had some understanding of the sustainable
development concept as balancing economic benefits with
reducing environmental impacts. There is an expressed desire
to be “environmentally-friendly” and develop a “marine garden
city,” but there is a not a sign of systemic integrated thinking
about the relationship between development decisions and
environmental and social impacts. There is a lack of
understanding of ecosystem health and biological impacts of
port operations.

Elementary
2
Goals The Port has some metrics related to energy consumption. No
specific goals were identified.
Economic
Financial Strength Ranked 4
th
nationally and 6
th
in the world in container volumes;
The Port moved 14.72 million TEUs in 2011, an 11.7% increase
over 2010 volumes. The Port was ranked 2
nd
in the world and
2
nd
nationally in total cargo volumes, with 691 million metric
tons in 2011.

Total asset value is $2 billion; In 2011 the Port saw $389 million
in net profit that resulted in a bonus to shareholders and
reinvestments in the Port’s future development (Wei 2012).

Sophisticated
4
Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives

Business Innovation – Ningbo has formed a joint business
venture with Shanghai Port – a maritime insurance company. It
is also looking to diversify its operations and build a bulk
commodities exchange platform for products like nickel and
fuel oil. Zhoushan does a current daily exchange volume of over
300 million a year. They hope to reach 18 billion a year. They
also want to do futures trading to complement their
warehousing and distribution facilities and are currently asking
for permission from the Central government (Ning 2012).

In Zhoushan, they are currently building a new power plant to
provide a stable power supply to industry and residents. While
they currently have more than 300 berths in the Zhoushan port
area, 85% are privately owned for the special purpose of the
owner; 15% are for multi-purpose public use. The policy goal in
the future is to build a free port trade zone with more public
terminals (Ning 2012). Private ownership of the terminals poses

Beginning –
Elementary
1-2
69

a challenge to environmental management.

Environmental technologies include the use of cold ironing
(alternative maritime power) for vessels, electric rubber tired
gantry (RTG) cranes, and LNG trucks.
Collaboration

The Ports of Ningbo and Zhoushan combined under the same
management umbrella in 2006 to more strategically plan port
infrastructure in the region and better compete against
Shanghai. The capital and management resources of the Ningbo
Port are now available to further develop Zhoushan, allowing it
to focus on expansion of future bulk commodities
transportation and storage among multiple islands (Ning 2012).

There is collaboration with the City of Ningbo regarding land
use and master planning and with Shanghai Port (they have
joint annual meetings and have jointly invested in terminals in
other ports).

There is no evident stakeholder collaboration with community
residents or NGOs.

Beginning –
Elementary
1-2
Knowledge Management

Actions and approaches to obtain, share, and retain knowledge
in the organization systemically seem to focus on economic
planning and cargo handling efficiency. There does not seem to
be a systemic focus on addressing environmental or social
impacts of port development or operations.

Beginning –
Elementary
1-2
Processes

The stated values of the Port are security, environmental
friendliness, and financial strength. However, economic
development appears to be the primary factor in their decision-
making.

Port officials could not highlight or share any environmental or
social metrics or goals in general for the port. “Environmental-
friendliness” was mentioned most in the marketing showroom
for the Meishan Island development. There does seem to be a
desire to be a good neighbor and avoid complaints with the use
of sound walls and truck route planning, but it is not clear if
these strategies are used routinely or if other environmental or
social impacts are routinely considered.

Beginning –
Elementary
1-2
Purchases

Economic development and cost savings appears to be the
primary factor in their decision-making and purchases.

Beginning –
Elementary
1-2
Sustainability Reporting

The Port of Ningbo/Zhoushan does not issue a sustainability
report, an environmental report, or an integrated annual
report.

Beginning
1
70

Environmental
Existence of Aspects
Inventory; Monitoring and
Management
The following priorities were identified by Ye Wen Wei, Chief of
the Business Section at Ningbo Port: dust from cargo operations
(mostly from iron ore), leaks from crude oil operations, as the
largest oil terminal in China is located in Ningbo, and pollution
from emergency accidents and spills of hazardous products
(Wei 2012).

The Port does have a Security and Environmental Protection
Department to enforce local environmental protection laws
within the port area. Port officials were not able to discuss
monitoring and reporting practices.

Beginning –
Elementary
1-2
Resource Use

High utilization of the coastline for economic development was
a major focus.

When interviewed, Port officials did not seem aware of any
energy consumption or resource use targets for the Port. In
fact, they were not able to identify any environmental metrics.
However, a press release on the Port of Ningbo website has
announced that in 2012, the Port of Ningbo achieved total
reduced coal consumption of 14,000 tons, saving $16.32
million. Also, for 2012, the energy consumed for every $1,632
spent was decreased by 6% compared to last year (Ningbo Port
Co., Ltd. 2013a).

Beginning –
Elementary
1-2
Emissions into air, water,
ground

The Port of Ningbo has funded its own waste water processing
factories, and they have special facilities to collect spilled oil
(Wei 2012). In 2012, fifty monitoring points were added to
monitor water quality throughout the port areas (Ningbo Port
Co., Ltd. 2013a).

There is no air emissions inventory; Emissions from
construction activities do not seem to be considered. Mitigation
strategies are applied to some air emissions from operations.
Emissions from some cargo handling equipment (RTGs) are
mitigated by the conversion to Electric RTGs, which also saves
on fuel costs.

The Port of Ningbo added 71 new LNG trucks and constructed
one LNG filling station in the Meishan Port Area in 2012. There
are a total of 193 LNG trucks and three LNG filling stations so
far (Ningbo Port Co., Ltd. 2013a).

AMP technology (shore-side power) is installed and available to
mitigate emissions from ocean-going vessels. The Port
increased shore power supply locations and used shore power
connections for 1500 vessel calls in 2012 (Ningbo Port Co., Ltd.
2013a).

Beginning –
Elementary
1-2
71

While there does not seem to be any specific air emissions
reduction targets or goals, a number of priority projects for
implementation in 2012 were identified (some previously
mentioned), including the installation of dust screens and
sprinkler systems at several bulk terminals to address fugitive
dust emissions (Wei 2012).
Waste and Hazardous
Waste
Pollution prevention assessments are conducted before
purchasing new facilities (Wei 2012). The Port also provides
services to support the disposal of ship garbage; In 2012,
10,823 vessel calls received garbage disposal services (Ningbo
Port Co., Ltd. 2013a).

Beginning –
Elementary
1-2
Biodiversity/
Habitat Management

Many terminals are built with extended wharves to reach
deeper water and avoid the need for dredging. However, there
does not seem to be a general awareness of biological impacts
of Port operations. Shellfishing, which is prohibited in industrial
areas due to the potential of contaminated sediments, was
observed during a site visit to the Beilun terminal and shellfish
farms appeared to be routinely located next to industrial
developments throughout the port area.

Beginning
1
Environmental Issues
related to Goods
Movement Supply Chain
beyond emissions; (Traffic,
Noise, Light/Glare, Visual
Impacts, Public Health
Impacts)
The Port of Ningbo chooses truck routes far from the
community to avoid noise impacts, uses sound walls during
construction, and tries to plan operations during the daytime to
avoid disturbing residents at night (Wei 2012).

Elementary
2
Social
Ethical Behavior/ No
Corruption/Human Rights;
Public Health and Safety

There is a basic code of conduct for staff posted on the Port
website that highlights the need for “Well-disciplined conduct,
safe and efficient operation, high quality services, pragmatic
and innovative attitude.” There is also a professional ethic
statement posted (Ningbo Port Co., Ltd 2013b).

The Port has the ability to create Special Economic Zones
(SEZs), which attract foreign investment by creating a
preferential investing environment. Examples include tax
reductions for new plants and foreign exchange settlement.
The Ningbo Free Trade Zone, located adjacent to the Beilun
port area, has successfully attracted numerous import and
export processing and manufacturing facilities. However, many
of the employees who work in these SEZ plants are migrant
workers, who traveled from the poor western provinces. They
suffer from social disadvantages, wage inequalities, and poor

Beginning –
Elementary
1-2
72

working conditions. The Port plans to create more of these
SEZs when developing the ports of Meishan and Zhoushan.
Unless they create policies to address these issues, these
problems will continue and stay concentrated in the coastal
region (Wang 2012).
Community Engagement/
Manage Community
Relations

Generally appears to be low; There is little to none public
engagement; Port planning occurs at the central government
level and also privately by Ningbo Port Company Limited, a
state owned enterprise, the sole terminal operator in the
Ningbo Port area. The local environmental protection bureau
official seemed to be uniformed, not motivated, and not
engaged in port environmental issues.

The perception of some academics is that the Ningbo and
Zhoushan Port and government officials “are more concerned
with focusing on profits than environmental pollution” (Wang,
2012).

There are complaints that the transport of goods to the
Zhoushan islands is too high for island residents; There is a
need for a bridge to connect the smaller islands, instead of just
by ship; Reduced farmland has resulted from harbor
development.

Beginning
1
Corporate Citizenship -
Quality of Life, Livability,
Social Integration

The Port of Ningbo does provide grant funds and special
assistance to employees in need, and it has done this since
1992. In 2012, 206 people were given grants totaling 274,000
RMB. A “special disease rehabilitation fund” also gave 70
employees grants totaling 350,000 RMB (Ningbo Port Co., Ltd
2013e).

Beginning –
Elementary
1-2
Employment – direct &
indirect

Corporate Governance

There is a basic code of conduct for staff posted on the Port
website that highlights the need for “Well-disciplined conduct,
safe and efficient operation, high quality services, pragmatic
and innovative attitude” (Ningbo Port Co., Ltd 2013b).
Beginning –
Elementary
1-2
Motivation and Incentives
– Internal
Management engagement with employees on topics related to
sustainability seems to be low
Beginning
1
73

Employee Health, Safety &
Wellness;
Emergency/Disaster
Management
The Port’s safety concept is “Breaking rules means accidents;
security brings benefits.” The policy statement further reads
“Security is critical not only to individual safety and family
happiness but to the steady operation and economic benefit of
enterprise. Security is the base for enterprise production and
operation and it’s each employee’s obligation to intensify the
safety consciousness and improve safety operation skill.”
(Ningbo Port Co., Ltd 2013d).
In 2012, the Port of Ningbo renewed hospital insurance
coverage for 8889 employees and provided insurance for
covering “special serious diseases” for 2690 employees. The
Port of Ningbo also provided household property insurance for
employees and helped them in the settlement of claims. For
three years from 2010 to 2012, the Port helped settle 467
claims, for an amount close to $200,000. In 2012, while keeping
the premium unchanged, the Port of Ningbo expanded their
insurance coverage and increased the claim amount. The
maximum claim amount for theft protection was increased by
50% from the previous year (Ningbo Port Co., Ltd 2013e).
In 2012, the Port of Ningbo provided employee gifts such as
sports equipment and “care boxes” containing a thermometer
and other medical instruments and common-used medicines. It
also invited experts to give lectures on health topics for
employees (Ningbo Port Co., Ltd 2013e).

Elementary
2
Human Capital
Development -
Training and Education

There are 17,000 employees at the Port, 7,500 of which are
direct hires with labor contracts (Wang 2012).

The Port expresses a desire to be people oriented, with a
scientific outlook of development. Statement on website:
“The core value of Ningbo Port Group is to care for employees,
protect employees and value their enthusiasm, initiative and
creativity as the foundation and source for enterprise
development. People orientated principle and scientific outlook
of comprehensive, harmonious and sustained development are
the value premises for the survival and development of the port
and are the soul for the enterprise culture of Ningbo Port
Group.” Another policy statement directs “Give priority to
virtue and talent of staffs; provide opportunities for employees
to give full play of their talent; build up a high-quality,
innovative and versatile professional working team to gear with
port development; provide posts and platforms for employees
to satisfy their desire and competence through fair, open and
just competition” (Ningbo Port Co., Ltd 2013c).

Elementary
2
74

Table 16: Port of Ningbo/Zhoushan Organizational Sustainability Maturity Summary

Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010), Figure 2

Sustainability Aspects
Level 1:
Beginning
Level 2:
Elementary
Level 3:
Satisfying
Level 4:
Sophisticated
Concept of Sustainability
X

Economic
Financial Strength
X
Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives

Collaboration
Knowledge Management
Processes
Purchases
Sustainability Reporting
X

Environmental
Existence of Aspects Inventory; Monitoring
and management

Use of Resources
Emissions into air, water, ground
Waste and Hazardous Waste
Biodiversity/
Habitat Management
X

Environmental Issues of Goods Movement
Supply Chain; Traffic, Noise, Light/Glare,
Visual, Public Health Impacts

X

Social
Ethical Behavior/No Corruption/ Human
Rights; Public Health & Safety

Community Engagement/Manage
Community Relations
X

Corporate Citizenship - Quality of Life,
Livability, Social integration

Employment/Workforce Development
Corporate Governance
Motivation and Incentives - Internal
X

Employee Health, Safety & Wellness;
Emergency/Disaster Management

X

Human Capital Development – Training and
Education

X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
75

Sustainability Maturity Analysis

The Port of Ningbo/Zhoushan has an elementary understanding of sustainability,
viewing it with a focus only on environmental protection. The Port of Ningbo/Zhoushan is
mostly in transition from beginning to elementary regarding its maturity level for the majority
of sustainability aspects. It has a sophisticated level of maturity related to Financial Strength
and the poorest performance related to Sustainability Reporting, Biodiversity and Habitat
Management, Community Engagement, and motivating employees to focus on sustainability. It
should be noted that the Port reports a high rate of use of AMP shore-power technology (1500
vessel calls) to mitigate vessel emissions. While the motivation is most likely to reduce fuel
costs (and not environmental protection), this is a higher rate of use than what is reported by
many ports who have installed AMP at their facilities.

Port Organizational Sustainability Strategy
The Port of Ningbo/Zhoushan exhibits a hybrid sustainability strategy that combines a
focus on risk mitigation and basic compliance with rules and guidelines (Introverted Strategy)
and legitimization (Conventional Extroverted Strategy) to potential investors of Meishan Island
and the central government.

76

D. Europe

1. Major Sustainability Policies in Europe

Some of the major sustainability policies in Europe focus on climate change,
conservation planning, and air quality regulations that establish emission control areas (ECAs)
for vessels and limit particulate matter of 2.5 microns, which pose a risk to human health.

Climate Change
Under the Kyoto Protocol, the European Union committed to reducing its greenhouse
gas emissions to eight percent below 1990 levels by 2008-2012 and twenty percent below 1990
levels by 2020. The European Climate Change Programme (ECCP) was launched in 2000 to
address these commitments (EU 2012). There are several planning initiatives and directives
issued by the European Council and Commission to address climate change, including the
establishment of a greenhouse gas emissions trading system that limits carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions from the industrial and aviation sectors, a focus on the generation of more
renewable energy, increasing energy efficiency, and the development of carbon capture and
storage technologies (EU 2012).

Conservation
Since the 1970s, European Council directives have been in place to protect and manage
wild bird populations. In 1992 a directive was issued that extended this protection to natural
habitats. Special Protection Areas formed under these directives together form a network (the
Natura 2000 network) that was created to preserve important habitats and preserve
77

biodiversity through the application of management plans (ESPO 2012b). Many of the special
protection areas overlap with port areas. Guidelines for how this conservation legislation
should be considered and applied to port development (under the title Estuary Guidance) were
published by the European Commission in 2011 (ESPO 2012b).

Air Quality

A few air quality regulations affecting ports worth noting are related to sulphur emission
control areas (SECAs) for vessels and restrictions on particulate matter. The North Sea, English
Channel, and Baltic Sea are currently designated as low sulphur areas for ships, with the sulphur
content of the marine fuel currently limited to 1% and by 2015 it will be limited to 0.1% (ESPO
2012b). Regarding ambient air quality, in 2007 an EU Directive was issued establishing targets in
2010 and exposure limits for 2015 and 2020 for the finest levels of particulate matter (PM2.5)
(ESPO 2012b).

78

2. European Ports: Background and Sustainability Analysis

The following case studies focus on the three largest European container ports:
Rotterdam, Hamburg, and Antwerp.

i. Rotterdam

Background

Located in the Netherlands between the North Sea and the City of Rotterdam, the Port
of Rotterdam (PoR) stretches over twenty-five miles inland and is the largest port in Europe,
both in containers and by total cargo volumes. The PoR started 800 years ago as a small fishing
town, and over the years it grew to the largest port in the world. However, it lost this position
in 2004 to Shanghai, and then Ningbo and other Asian ports over time (van Dijk 2012). These
Asian ports are now Europe’s largest trading partners.
In 2011, 11.1 million TEUS moved through the port, with total cargo volumes reaching
435 million metric tons (PoR 2011). Liquid bulk (oil and chemical products) and dry bulk (coal,
ore, scrap, and minerals) make up the major portions of the cargo mix, along with containers.
Each year, over 35,000 oceangoing vessels and 135,000 inland vessels visit the port area (van
Dijk 2012).
The PoR Authority was originally a municipal department until 2004. Now it is an
unlisted public company, with approximately seventy percent of ownership controlled by the
City of Rotterdam and approximately thirty percent shared with the Dutch State (PoR Authority
2011, 79). The PoR Authority is managed daily by an Executive Board and an independent
Supervisory Board, which oversees the activities of the Executive Board. There is also a General
79

Meeting of Shareholders, which is authorized to appoint and retire members of the Executive
Board (79).

Challenges & Advanced Practices

This section highlights just a few of the key challenges experienced and advanced
practices demonstrated by the Port of Rotterdam.

Challenges

Some of the major challenges identified by the PoR include delivering its largest
expansion project, Maasvlakte 2 (M2) on time, better utilization of existing space within the
port area, traffic congestion, air quality, corporate social responsibility, building knowledge and
achieving innovations, and customer satisfaction.

M2 is PoR’s latest attempt at sustainable development, which will expand the port area
by twenty percent, with a net addition of 12,500 acres (van Dijk 2012). Original attempts to
move forward with the project stalled several years ago amid concerns about environmental
impacts. Future tenants were selected based on economic considerations and sustainability
criteria – modal split to rail, inland shipping, reduction of emissions, and the company’s vision
regarding a sustainable enterprise. M2 will provide three new container terminals, all
automated and electric, with carbon neutral buildings. Construction of the new port area
resulted in the removal of an existing beach; However, new beach areas will be provided
(almost five miles), along with a paved access road and parking. To compensate for loss of
marine ecology in the footprint of M2, a seabed protection area was established and a new
eighty-six acre dune area was developed (PoR 2012); Also, to allow residents to enjoy natural
80

areas nearby, approximately 1,853 acres of nature and recreation areas will be developed to
the north and south of Rotterdam (PoR 2011a).
Advanced Practices

To show off the impressive new land mass, PoR has created “Futureland,” an onsite
visitor center that celebrates M2 and turns port development into a tourist attraction. Over
445,000 visitors have observed construction activities by taking a tour bus, going on the viewing
platform, or taking advantage of boat tours (PoR 2012b). The center has many interactive
educational kiosks related to the goods movement industry and the 4,000 page environmental
impact assessment for the development of M2 is on display, along with a large wooly
mammoth fossil found in a nearby seabed. Development of M2 is designed with the Building
with Nature approach, where sand from the ocean floor is spread slowly by wind, waves, and
currents along the coast to naturally nourish the beach and reinforce the sand dunes (PoR
2012).
The PoR also advances sustainability within their port organization in several ways.
Through the adoption of the “Front Runners Policy,” by 2015, the PoR plans to have 50 percent
of companies in container, energy, and fuel hub sectors comply with specific environmental
criteria. The policy has criteria for modal splits, NOx and PM emissions, CO2 capture and
storage, application of biomass, and application of vapor recovery units (PoR 2011a). Many of
these requirements were initially included in the new tenant criteria for M2 and now the PoR is
applying them to existing tenants port-wide (Vellinga 2012). The PoR also has GRI compliant A+
integrated annual reporting, sustainability metrics to measure organizational performance, and
through Port Vision 2030, a strategic mid-term and long-term plan, sustainability is
81

incorporated into future business planning. Sustainability criteria is also used in spatial
planning and land allocation policy. Carbon footprinting tracks water and energy use.

Sustainability Aspects

Table 17 summarizes the sustainability aspects of the PoR organization and ranks the
maturity level of each aspect, along with the PoR’s overall concept of sustainability. Table 18
summarizes the sustainability maturity of the PoR for each aspect.

Table 17: Sustainability Aspects of the Port of Rotterdam

Sustainability Aspects Port of Rotterdam
Maturity
Level
Concept of
Sustainability

Sustainability is the balance between the TBL; Sustainability
priorities are: optimum use of space; accessibility; air quality and
climate (van Dijk 2012).

Sustainability provides the PoR a future license to operate;
Investments in sustainability are necessary for consensus and
growth (van Dijk 2012). The PoR subscribes to a mutual gains
approach to sustainability and has an official CSR statement on its
website.

PoR’s concept of the TBL is PPP – People in and outside the
company; Planet – the environmental consequences; Profit and
Prosperity– production and economic impacts of goods and
services; social benefits in addition to economic gains (van Dijk
2012).

Sophisticated
4
Goals

“Our ambition is to develop the port of Rotterdam into the most
sustainable port in the world in 2015” (PoR 2011a, 17).

Vision in 2011-2015 Business Plan: “The Port is fully committed to
the continued development of port/industrial complex so it can
become the most efficient, safe, and sustainable in the world.”

Sustainability Framework of PoR:
“Focus on People – pleasant work environment with PoR and port
area; HR policy, mobility policy for employees; contribution of
direct and indirect employment

82

Sustainability Aspects Port of Rotterdam
Maturity
Level
Commitment of the people living in the vicinity of the Port –
Synergy between port & city – projects to enhance quality of life;
Sponsoring outside the core activities of companies; Contribution
to knowledge and education

Focus on Profit – ROI to ensure continuity of port area and
company; - no profit maximization; efficiency of logistic and
production chains; Focus on companies that fit in with a
sustainable vision for the future and which can enhance each
other optimally

Focus on Planet – have three strategies based on sphere of
influence/effect: Port operations, Port area, Goods Movement
Chain” (van Dijk 2012).
Economic
Financial Strength Ranked 1
st
container port in European Union (EU); EU TEU Market
share (2011) –28%; 11.1M TEUs (2011)
Ranks 10
th
in the world in TEUs (2011)
Total cargo volumes in 2011 – 435M tons
Net Income for 2012 was almost 228M Euros, an increase of
almost 17% from 2011 (PoR 2011a, 2011b).

Sophisticated
4
Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives

The PoR has a well-defined sustainability framework based on the
Triple Bottom Line that guides investments and incentive
structures and is integrated into its strategic plan, Port Vision
2030, which was created based on a SWOT analysis, forecasting,
trends analysis, and backcasting.

Renewable/Alternative Energy - The PoR is investing in an LNG
bunkering fuel station that will be operational in 2014 to prepare
for LNG fueled ocean-going vessels. 330MW of wind power are
under construction and are expected to come online in 2013.
Also, two hydrogen power plants were built in 2011; A
gasification cluster will be built after 2015. (van Dijk 2012, PoR
2011a).

AMP for new terminals at MV2, inland shipping, and ferry service

Building with Nature Approach: The Sand Motor Peninsula Pilot
Project – Scientists are studying a new way of coastal
reinforcement by creating a sand peninsula to protect the new
coast at Maasvlakte 2. Wind, waves, and sea currents spread the
sand slowly along the coast. The added sand that is moved
naturally acts as buffer and creates a dynamic nature and
recreation area. The sand motor consists of 21.5 million cubic
meters of sand from the ocean floor, in the shape of a hook. Over

Sophisticated
4
83

Sustainability Aspects Port of Rotterdam
Maturity
Level
time, it will slowly be incorporated into new dunes and a wider
beach (PoR 2012a).

Dedicated electric rail line for freight up to as far as possible.

Policy Incentives/Innovations – Front-Runners Policy

PoR offers financial incentives and penalties to inland barge
operators based on air emissions (PoR 2011).

PoR participates in the Environmental Ship Index (ESI) incentives
program at the request of their customers.

Maasvlakte 1 is home to ECT Delta, the world’s first automated
container terminal, which was built in 1996. Maasvlakte 2, under
construction, will have three automated electric container
terminals (van Dijk 2012).
Collaboration

Nineteen City councils and 3 regional planning platforms are
involved in port issues; There is consistent communication with
stakeholders (van Dijk 2012).

FutureLand visitor center highlights Port operations and the
construction of M2.

The PortVision 2030 strategic planning process included a
dialogue among the following stakeholders: customers, port
service providers, community residents, municipalities,
employees, non-profit organizations, and others (van Dijk 2012).

In 2012, the Port conducted its first stakeholder involvement
survey, where stakeholders rated Port performance a 7.6 on a
scale of 1-10. The Port was acknowledged as a reliable venture
partner, but areas of improvement include supply chain efficiency
and accessibility and continuing to make the Port a more
attractive place to learn, work, and live (van Dijk 2012).

The PoR is active in the International Association of Ports and
Harbors (IAPH) World Ports Climate Initiative, which shares best
practices with other ports to address climate change and air
quality impacts. The PoR is also a contributing member to PIANC,
which is currently preparing a Green Ports Guide.

Dialogue and collaboration is also conducted with local and
regional ports within the European Sea Ports Organization
(ESPO).

Sophisticated
4
84

Sustainability Aspects Port of Rotterdam
Maturity
Level

Knowledge Management IT database and GIS systems are used to track environmental and
land use data. Databases are also used for project control
systems to manage costs and schedules. Lessons learned
developing the Maasvlakte 2 port expansion project were applied
to the Port Compass 2030 strategic planning process to guide
sustainable development port-wide and build on the community
dialogue.

Rotterdam intends to become a “Knowledge Port.” Rotterdam
University has established a new campus for research, design,
and manufacturing (RDM) in a section of the old port area. The
RDM Innovation Dock, managed by the Technical University of
Delft is part of the campus, and acts an incubator for practical
research and entrepreneurship, connecting universities, business
services, and industry. Major research and development themes
include water management, climate change technologies,
floating communities, and sustainable mobility.

Satisfying -
Sophisticated
3-4
Processes A substantial portion of the Port’s Key Performance Indicators,
which are used to measure organizational performance, focus on
sustainability.

In 2010, the PoR published a Business Plan for 2011 – 2015 with
the following objectives regarding their carbon footprint:
10% reduction of CO2 emissions with the 2011 – 2015 business
plan period; operational activities are to be CO2-neutral as of
2011 – other objectives include:
*sustainable use of space
*sustainable transport
* sustainable organization/sustainable operations;
These objectives have Key Performance Indicators and progress is
measured quarterly; There is also a yearly strategy audit for
reevaluating or introducing new metrics.
Identifies CSR as the key for a successful future and an essential
part of business processes and corporate culture (PoR 2011).

Has long-term plan for Port – Port Vision 2030, to focus the
direction of the development of the port in the medium and long-
term

Financial incentives for inland barges:
15% discount Green Award to incentivize inland barges; 10%
increase in port dues if not compliant with CCR II emission
standards; 30% discount if 60% below CCR II emission standards;

Sophisticated
4
85

Sustainability Aspects Port of Rotterdam
Maturity
Level
Non-compliant barges will be banned in 2025
-ESI to promote clean OGVs
-Clear assessment framework for air-related measures and basis
for sustainability in allocation policy

-Sustainability Initiative for Port Area - Have established a
Frontrunners Policy for Container, Energy, and Fuel Hub
companies; Goal is by 2015 to have 50% of companies in these
segments to meet the frontrunners policy; The policy has criteria
for modal splits, NOx and PM emissions, CO2 capture and
storage, application of biomass, and application of vapor
recovery units (PoR 2011a, 46).

Purchases Focuses on sustainable sourcing of products and services through
procurement process and design and construction guidelines.
Satisfying
3
Sustainability Reporting

Has a 2011 integrated annual report; GRI compliant A+
-Has a CSR policy online (2012)
-Publishes a yearly footprint report regarding CO2 emissions from
its own operational activities (25 vessels, 170 leased cars, 50
operational vehicles)

Sophisticated
4
Environmental
Existence of Aspects
Inventory; Monitoring
and Management
The Port has identified and prioritized material issues, with the
appropriate inventories. Since 2010, they use a sustainability
index for measuring their own sustainability performance.

Sophisticated
4
Resource Use Sustainability criteria are used in spatial planning and land
allocation policy for long-term resource management and
strategic planning. For Land use – increase productivity of existing
terminals; restructuring different areas near port city to create
pleasant and livable environment. Sustainable construction of
real estate – application of BREEAM.
Carbon footprinting – tracks water, energy use; Planning for
carbon capture.

Sophisticated
4
Emissions into Air,
Water, Ground

Focused on reduction of CO2 footprint – goal is 2% reduction a
year; in 2011 saw a 6% reduction; Compensate for CO2 emissions
by purchasing offsets – Gold Standard Emissions rights. In 2011
PoR was CO2 neutral company (for own operations – building
emissions, 14 inspection boats, fleet cars and trucks)

Clean Air Action Program for port fleet started in 2006; Using
ULSD and have done engine retrofits; includes use of biofuel
(veggie oil) in patrol vessel;

Sophisticated
4
86

Sustainability Aspects Port of Rotterdam
Maturity
Level
Front Runners Policy addresses emissions reductions from
tenants (the policy has criteria for modal splits, NOx and PM
emissions, CO2 capture and storage, application of biomass, and
application of vapor recovery units).

Incentive programs for inland barges to control emissions
standards; speed limitations in 2014; On-shore power supply
available at all public docks for inland vessels.

ESI to provide clean OGVs – pushed by customers to offer
incentive; drivers are image & ability to offset fuel costs
AMP for inland shipping, StenaLine ferry service, EuroMax (ECT)
and MV2 (new container developments)

Rotterdam Climate Initiative – goal is to reduce emissions in 2025
to 50% of 1990 levels (through energy savings, sustainable energy
generation, CO2 reuse, carbon capture)

Focus on cleaning supply chain is through cleaner modes of
transport (fuels and engines) and improving accessibility,
reducing congestion.
Waste and Hazardous
Waste
In 2012, the Port was given the authority by the Dutch Ministry of
Infrastructure and the Environment to conduct waste inspections
on board ocean-going vessels. An enforcement plan has recently
been drafted for this purpose (PoR 2012b).

With 79,000 movements of ocean-going vessels a year, and a
multiple of that for inland shipping, the Port has set a threshold
of 250 spills/instances of water pollution that result annually
from bunkering (ship fueling). In 2012, there were 192 spills. The
Port provides a clean-up service 24-hours a day to address the
spills immediately and then bill the responsible party (PoR
2012b).

Satisfying
3
Biodiversity/
Habitat Management
Building with Nature approach used to create MV2 (see
description under Innovation/Technology)

For MV2 – provided compensation for impacted habitat areas (EU
Habitat directive); replaced Dunes habitat and marine habitat
area with an area ten times as large as the impacted area;
provides intertidal habitat for birds and fish and a dedicated
nesting area.

PoR is also working with WWF on a project for the southern
delta.

Sophisticated
4

87

Sustainability Aspects Port of Rotterdam
Maturity
Level
Environmental Issues of
Goods Movement Chain;
Traffic, Noise, Light,
Visual Impacts;
Public Health Impacts

Two traffic noise barriers have been constructed; recreation
areas have been expanded; Five of eleven planned neighborhood
parks have been created; Bicycle routes have been improved and
expanded. Traffic congestion remains a major issue. The
construction of a new tunnel and some bridges are under
consideration.

Satisfying
3
Social
Ethical Behavior/No
Corruption/Human
Rights; Public Health and
Safety
In 2012, the Port signed the UN Global Compact Letter of
Commitment, subscribing to the ten UN Global compact business
principles related to human rights, labor conditions,
environment, and anti-corruption (PoR 2012b).

Satisfying
3
Community
Engagement/Manage
Community Relations
The Port regularly schedules “Resident Evenings” so they can talk
with residents about port development projects and related
environmental impacts.

Since opening in 2009, the Futureland visitor center at
Maasvlakte 2 has received 445,000 visitors. The Port uses the
center to convey information and past, current, and future port
development plans and ongoing events in the Port recreation
areas (PoR 2012b).

Annual consultations, called “The Sustainable Dialogues” are held
with municipalities in the port region to discuss development
project, plans, and impacts and work through stakeholder
agreements.

A quarterly Port newspaper is distributed to 500,000 residents in
the Port region (PoR 2012b).

Satisfying -
Sophisticated
3-4
Corporate Citizenship -
Quality of Life, Livability,
Social Integration
Among other annual events, the Port hosts World Port Days with
free tours and presentations that focus on sustainability. There is
also an annual summer art exhibition with a local museum to
highlight public art; In 2012 the art event attracted 13,000
visitors.

A new recreation beach was opened in May 2012, with biking and
walking path. This is connected to a new 10 mile bike route
throughout the port area. Bike route maps have been distributed
to the community to encourage them to visit the port area for
recreation.

The social commitment of employees is valued and rewarded
through an annual award recognition program for 15 people who
are nominated based on their service in the community.

Satisfying
3
88

Sustainability Aspects Port of Rotterdam
Maturity
Level

Sponsorships are based on highlighting the relationship between
the Port and the city, and tend to focus on buildings in adjacent
communities: the De Doelen concert hall, the Fevenoord
stadium, the Boijmans van Beunigen museum, and the Nieuwe
Luxor theater.
Employment/Workforce
Development
Total direct and indirect employment attributed to the Port is
350,000 people, of these 140,000 are in the region. The Port
conducts an annual labor market survey. To address the expected
labor shortage in coming years, the Port has invested in the
following programs:

In 2012, the Port created the Port Rangers, a teaching program
focused on the port and nature for primary education levels 6
and 7. The Port also teamed with a non-profit to create the
curriculum for Havenlink, a program that provides port tours to
high school students and couples this with a teaching unit on port
careers (PoR 2012b).

The Port also has a Collective Labor Agreement in place that
provides for offering traineeships to at least 2% of “the formative
workforce.” The Port also sponsors internships and student
worker programs with local universities (PoR 2012b).

Satisfying
3
Corporate Governance

Has identified stakeholders in annual reports; Has conducted a
stakeholder involvement survey in 2012 for feedback on
performance.

The Port is transparent in reporting (2011 and 2012 report)
regarding risks, challenges, and dilemmas (development of coal-
fired power stations, speed limitations, construction of shore-
based power for inland shipping). External auditing for reporting;
GRI compliant with A+ level of transparency.

Although not legally required because the Port is not a publicly
listed company, the Port has chosen to implement provisions of
the Corporate Governance Code wherever possible and relevant
related to transparency and management accountability.

The Port also has a very well developed and defined “strategic
risk management” process that is updated yearly. Principles and
project controls from the process are applied to the Port Vision
2030 framework and five year business plans, which are
discussed in the Port’s annual reports.

Sophisticated
4

89

Sustainability Aspects Port of Rotterdam
Maturity
Level
Motivation and
Incentives - Internal

In 2011 the Port launched the Sustainable Employment Initiative
to motivate employees to work in a productive and healthy
manner through mobility and timetabling for flexible scheduling.
There are yearly performance reviews; career development is
based on PRINCE2 project management method, and every two
years there is a satisfaction survey conducted among employees.
All employees are accountable and responsible for meeting the
objectives in the 2011-2015 Business Plan, which is framed by
sustainability principles (PoR 2012b).

Satisfying
3
Employee Health, Safety
& Wellness;
Emergency/Disaster
Management
The Port provides employees with access to a company social
worker, company doctor, physiotherapist, and Health and Safety
coordinator. In addition, there is a fitness program and a
smoking cessation program available.

Satisfying
3
Human Capital
Development -
Training and Education
Port authority has 1220 employees.

In 2012 the Port entered into a 5 year collaborative agreement
with the Delft University of Technology and created the basis for
a Port Research Centre (PRC). Together with three research
professors, Port staff is carrying out research in the areas of
logistics, accessibility, and navigation channels, with work being
directed by the objectives of the Port Vision 2030 plan. There are
currently 14 research projects as part of the PRC, six of which are
doctoral projects (PoR 2012b).

Port employees also participate in higher professional education
programs, such as HBO in the Port and the Ideal Port Institute.

Satisfying
3

90

Table 18: Port of Rotterdam Organizational Sustainability Maturity Summary

Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010), Figure 2

Sustainability Aspects
Level 1:
Beginning
Level 2:
Elementary
Level 3:
Satisfying
Level 4:
Sophisticated
Concept of Sustainability
X
Economic

Financial Strength
X
Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives

X
Collaboration
X
Knowledge Management

Processes
X
Purchases
X
Sustainability Reporting
X
Environmental

Existence of Aspects Inventory; Monitoring
and management

X
Use of Resources
X
Emissions into air, water, ground
X
Waste and Hazardous Waste
X
Biodiversity/
Habitat Management

X
Environmental Issues of Goods Movement
Supply Chain; Traffic, Noise, Light/Glare,
Visual, Public Health Impacts

X

Social

Ethical Behavior/No Corruption/ Human
Rights; Public Health & Safety

X

Community Engagement/Manage
Community Relations

Corporate Citizenship - Quality of Life,
Livability, Social integration

X

Employment/Workforce Development

X
Corporate Governance

X
Motivation and Incentives - Internal

X
Employee Health, Safety & Wellness;
Emergency/Disaster Management

X
Human Capital Development – Training and
Education

X
X

X

91

Sustainability Maturity Analysis

The PoR has a sophisticated understanding of the concept of sustainability, as described
in Table 2. Not only do they understand and accept the economic, social, and environmental
dimensions of sustainability, but they use it to measure their organizational performance and
guide their strategic planning, both in the short term, with their five year Business Plan (2011 –
2015) , and into the future, with Port Vision 2030. The PoR has a high level of maturity across
most economic and environmental aspects, with all social aspects meeting or exceeding the
industry standard.

Port Organizational Sustainability Strategy
The primary sustainability strategy exhibited by the PoR is Conventional Visionary, which
embraces a holistic approach. The PoR demonstrates this focus by working to stimulate
companies in the port area to work in a more sustainable manner, facilitate cleaner transport in
and around the port, and by aiming to become a more sustainable port organization (PoR
2011). The Port has a highly developed commitment to become a market leader in
sustainability issues, as exhibited by their goal to develop into the most sustainable port in the
world by 2015. They have recently created a Sustainable Development Department that focuses
on refining organizational processes to promote and further integrate sustainability within the
organization.

92

The PoR believes it is necessary to invest and excel in sustainability to retain support for
port activities and grow operations. Their future growth plans are ambitious. In 2011, they
handled 11.1 million TEUS. Upon the opening of M2 in 2014, they expect to have the capacity
to handle 17 million TEUS. Upon full build out of M2 in 2033, which will host three new electric
automated container terminals, they will be able to handle an additional 17 million TEUS. The
PoR’s cargo forecast for 2035 is 38 million TEUs.
Because Rotterdam is home to a large energy industry cluster, and is a port industry
leader in reducing carbon emissions, the Conservative Strategy that focuses on efficiency could
also be applicable in that the Port has well defined processes and investments in appropriate
technologies with generally sophisticated approaches to environmental management.
The Transformative Extroverted strategy, which focuses on positively influencing the
basic conditions of corporate sustainability and legitimizing the industry sector as a whole,
could also be included in the PoR’s hybrid strategy approach.

93

ii. Antwerp

Background

The Port of Antwerp, located in Belgium, is an inland seaport approximately sixty-two
miles upstream the river Scheldt. In 2011, the Port processed 8.7 million TEUs and 189 million
metric tons of cargo. The cargo mix is roughly half liquid bulk/dry bulk and half containers.
While a river port, the Port is capable of serving cargo container vessels as large as 15 thousand
TEUs during tidal windows. The Port of Antwerp is the second largest rail port in Europe and
also Europe’s largest petrochemical industrial cluster.
Until almost 15 years ago, the Port of Antwerp was part of a city department. It is now
managed by a municipal group with a governing board of eighteen people consisting of
representatives from elected officials (fourteen), and the rest from industry, non-governmental
organizations, and independent citizens.

Challenges & Advanced Practices

This section highlights just a few of the key challenges and advanced practices
demonstrated by the Port of Antwerp.

Challenges

The Port of Antwerp has a host of environmental, economic, and social challenges. To
begin with, the entire port is located within a nature-protected area designated by the
European Union. This brings a high level of scrutiny to proposed development projects. To
enable future development, the Port of Antwerp has agreed to set aside 5 percent of port land
94

(1,482 acres) as designated nature habitat. Regarding air quality issues, the Port does have an
emissions inventory and notes that port emissions exceed NOX and PM10 standards. The port
area is also designated as a “hotspot zone” for PM10 and NO2 (de Crane 2012).
To manage these impacts and for future planning, environmental policy was considered
in drafting the Port of Antwerp’s most recent Business Plan, but the importance given to
environmental issues still needs to diffuse throughout the organization. The Port of Antwerp
has drafted sustainable lease agreements with environmental requirements, but is experiencing
some challenges with the implementation.
To stay competitive, the Port is also trying to prepare for the arrival and servicing of LNG
cargo vessels, which are expected in 2015. To do this the Port needs to construct the required
infrastructure, develop and approve safety regulations, and gain public acceptance of the
potential risks of operating LNG vessel fueling stations.
Finally, the local Port industry is facing a labor storage: 1 in 4 jobs can’t be filled. In fact,
over 4,000 vacancies are expected within the port cluster over next few years (Port of Antwerp
2011, 73).

Advanced Practices

In 2011, the Port of Antwerp approved the “Total Plan,” a strategic plan for the port
community guiding 1.6B Euros of investment in port expansion. A Sustainability Steering
Committee participated in drafting the Plan and identifying the indicators for the Port
Community Sustainability Report. Rather than reporting solely on the port authority, the Report
95

focused on collaboration and reported from a port area community perspective, following GRI
protocols.
The Port of Antwerp has master plans for rail, barge, and roads to coordinate and guide
future development. Of note, all rail freight is electric except for the last mile out of the port
area. To relieve road and rail congestion, the Port uses barge transport. To maintain river
capacity, continuous dredging is required. Through the Amoras project, the Port recycles
dredge material into filter cake that is used to create concrete bricks.

Sustainability Aspects

The following Table 19 summarizes the sustainability aspects of the Port of Antwerp
organization and ranks the maturity level of each aspect, along with the Port’s overall concept
of sustainability. Table 20 summarizes the sustainability maturity of the organization for each
aspect.

96

Table 19: Sustainability Aspects of the Port of Antwerp
Sustainability Aspects Port of Antwerp Maturity Level
Concept of Sustainability

Attention paid to TBL is of fundamental importance for future
growth (Port of Antwerp 2012); TBL one of core values.

“the primacy of the economy is no longer absolute. It is now
generally accepted that the economy, social support, and
ecology are in a balanced “and/and” relationship, not “or/or.”
(Port of Antwerp 2010, 87).

Satisfying
3
Goals

Mission: to position Antwerp as the sustainability leader in the
Hamburg/Le Harve range (Northwestern Europe) (Port of
Antwerp 2011, 19).

The Port notes that environmental costs and benefits must be in
reasonable proportion to one another, and that “any
environmental efforts that go beyond what is legally required
must not distort competition, either between companies or with
respect to neighboring ports.” (Port of Antwerp 2012, 55).

Port sustainability-related goals include:
-Achieve energy efficiency;
-Make the remaining energy consumption as sustainable as
possible; and
-Motivate people to play a pioneering role (Port of Antwerp
2012, 58).

Regarding carbon capture and storage, the Port’s main task is to
“safeguard access to CO2 storage locations and prevent this
leading to distortion of competition between ports” (Port of
Antwerp 2012, 58).
Economic
Financial Strength Record container volumes in 2011; 8,664,243 TEUs for 2011
15,240 vessel calls in 2011; TEU Market share (2011): Ranked 2
nd

in Europe with 25% of the container market share;
Total cargo volumes 2011 – 187,151,714 tons
Ranks 14
th
in the world in TEUs (2011)
Largest petrochemical industrial cluster in Europe (de Crane
2012).

Satisfying –
Sophisticated
3-4

Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives

Approved 2011 – 2025 Investment Plan (1.6B Euros) for port
expansion, infrastructure and to improve competitiveness; IT
systems to improve transparency, community, productivity; In
2011 signed letter of intent to invest/construct biomass power
station in the port area (CO2 neutral combustion, could allow for
reduction in GHG of 20% by 2020); Focused on carbon capture,
utilization, and storage initiatives; working with universities and
Flemish government (Port of Antwerp 2012).

Satisfying –
Sophisticated
3-4

97

Sustainability Aspects Port of Antwerp Maturity Level

To strengthen links between the Port and the hinterlands, the
Port has established several collaborative agreements and has
acquired a 20% ownership share in the inland Beverdonk
Container Terminal in Gobbendonk. The terminal acts as a
transfer point to consolidate containers from truck to barge for
trips in and out of the port area. The Port also created a rail
freight connection to Chongquing, an inland port logistics center
in China (Port of Antwerp 2012, 30).

The Port is conducting LNG feasibility study (as a ship fuel) and
wants to cater to LNG ships by 2015; Collaborating with regional
ports – reduces NOx and Sox up to 90%, along with CO2 (de
Crane 2012).

The Port of Antwerp is providing 400K Euros to retrofit cargo
handling equipment.

Operations in new port headquarters will be paperless, more
transparent - digital management diaries, hot-desking for
collaborative work, more efficient use of digital file management
(de Crane 2012).

All rail freight in the port area is electric except the last mile.
Collaboration

The Port of Antwerp created the world’s first port community
sustainability report and collaborated with industry to produce it
for the port area.

The Port has focused on collaborative agreements with the
private sector to improve intermodal connections – rail and
barge transport options. There is also a new rail link to China.
The Port is collaborating with Alfa Port (private companies) on
consultation processes for trade facilitation and with Customs
for border control and extending work hours for customs
services/container clearance notices. They are also working to
have combined inspections for food safety (Port of Antwerp
2012).

Collaborative agreement with Natuurpunt nature association to
create a network of ecological infrastructure within the port
area – network of core areas and corridors for flora and fauna
(de Crane 2012).

For 30 years, the Port has been affiliated with APEC, the
Antwerp/Flanders Port Training Center, which offers short,
practical interactive training seminars to share the Port’s

Satisfying –
Sophisticated
3-4

98

Sustainability Aspects Port of Antwerp Maturity Level
expertise with foreign ports. Over 9,000 people from 140
countries have attended (Port of Antwerp 2012, 18).

Knowledge Management IT, GIS, and database systems are used to manage data, track
efficiency, and assist with port planning processes. In May 2011
the Antwerp Port Community System (APCS) was launched,
which efficiently conveys goods movement information across
vessel, barge, truck, and rail links. The Antwerp Port Information
and Control System (APICS) was also updated in 2011, which
assists the Port in monitoring shipping traffic, including tug
activities, conduct lock planning, berth management and port
dues collection, and registration of dangerous goods. An
additional update is expected in 2012, which will allow for
further optimization in port planning processes (Port of Antwerp
2012).

The Port is focused on developing a knowledge center that
gathers relevant information to implement a coordinated
environmental and nature policy for the port area (Port of
Antwerp 2011). They are benchmarking port performance
against international and European environmental targets.

Port expertise is also housed and packaged in APEC. In 2011, a
collaboration agreement was signed with the Antwerp
Management School to augment port management approaches
and measure performance (Port of Antwerp 2012, 18).

Satisfying –
Sophisticated
3-4

Processes Master Plans created for rail, barge, and road to improve
efficiency and consolidate freight, reduce emissions; Creating
Mobility Impact Assessments for the community when planning
future projects (de Crane 2012).

Has an environmental policy; has an environmental charter (de
Crane 2012).

Satisfying
3
Purchases Has a sustainable procurement policy, where orders for
purchases are reviewed early to assess environmental and safety
risks; Focused on purchase of more environment friendly office
supplies, cleaning materials, paint, vehicles, retrofitting port
authority tug engines, and building design (de Crane 2012).

Satisfying –
Sophisticated
3-4

Sustainability Reporting

World’s First Port Community Sustainability Report (2010) – GRI
Certified C
2011 Integrated Annual Report – followed an integrated
approach for TBL; GRI guidelines

Satisfying –
Sophisticated
3-4
99

Sustainability Aspects Port of Antwerp Maturity Level
Environmental
Existence of Aspects
Inventory; Monitoring and
management
Measures environmental performance; has an environmental
policy; tracks environmental expenditures; Has an energy and
climate policy

Satisfying
3
Resource Use Embracing “finiteness”; limits to physical expansion of port
boundaries; will need to focus on infill development, rezoning
and investment – sustainability helps frame this focus (Port of
Antwerp 2011).

Tracks use of paper, energy, gas, diesel, CNG, electricity, water,
and the use of recyclable materials in production processes.

Focused on Energy Efficiency: In 2011 the Port of Antwerp gave
financial assistance to 15 companies to conduct energy audits.
They also conducted energy audits on approximately 20% of the
port owned 140 buildings. Implemented measures saved 1.5M
kwh in 2011; Audits continued in 2012 (Port of Antwerp 2012,
59).

-Monitors consumption of drinking water

Satisfying
3
Emissions into air, water,
ground

The Port of Antwerp has created an emissions inventory of SO2,
NOX, PM10, CO2 and COE of port users/by source/industry;
Tracks CO2 Equivalents (GHGs) – direct and indirect emissions of
its own operations and entire port area; Looking at Carbon
offsets where reductions aren’t possible (de Crane 2012).

The Port also has a dynamic traffic management system with
signage to reduce traffic congestion and emissions.

The Port is investing in a large-scale wind farm (55 turbines to
deliver power to 100,000 households) and has transferred the
electricity distribution network to an inter-municipal company
IVEG, which has allowed for the creation of sufficient
transmission capacity for more solar units. Permitting authority
has been relaxed for units up to 5MW per site (Port of Antwerp
2012, 60).

Regarding air quality, there are eight monitoring stations in the
Port. The Port of Antwerp experienced a slight increase in
emissions in 2011. Overall they have seen a deep reduction in
sulfur dioxide over the past 20 years. Many port vessels have
been retrofitted to reduce NOx. The port vehicle fleet has been
replaced with more environmentally-friendly vehicles and
bicycles are available to staff for short journeys (Port of Antwerp
2012, 62).

Satisfying –
Sophisticated
3-4

100

Sustainability Aspects Port of Antwerp Maturity Level

The Port of Antwerp introduced the Environmental Ship Index
program in 2011. They offer a 10% discount on port dues with a
score of 31 or higher (ships must reduce SO, NO, and CO2) (Port
of Antwerp 2012, 63).

The Port of Antwerp provides onshore power to barges and
container vessels (which reduces NOx and noise).

Regarding water quality, the Port of Antwerp has a monitoring
program and they also looks at sediments. They support
integrated water management in collaboration with the
University of Antwerp.

Waste and Hazardous Waste In Oct 2011, the Port of Antwerp began to operate the Amoras
project, which allows for dewatering, recycling, and application
of dredge spoils within the port (allows for controlled and
efficient processing of dredge material into filter cake, which is
stored onsite. They are looking at ways to recycle it into bricks,
concrete, and building materials (Port of Antwerp 2012, 68).

The Port maintains centralized waste data base to track
reduction goals and costs. Last year they created two barge
waste collection centers (Port of Antwerp 2012, 66).

Regarding ship waste, incentivizes ships to use port collection
services; uses data management system to monitor ship waste
(oil, garbage, chemicals) collection volumes and dates – then
efficiently facilitates inspection services; 50K tons of oil and
hazardous waste was collected in 2010 at the Port of Antwerp
versus the PoR (larger port) at 20K tons (Port of Antwerp 2011,
40).

Reports 70-110 oil spills (registered incident of oil on surface
water) a year within the port.

Sophisticated
4
Biodiversity/
Habitat Management
Has committed to reserving 5% of port area (600 hectares) as
suitable habitat for specific species and protect/manage habitat
accordingly; Drafted a species protection program in 2011; Goal
is to comply with EU Bird and Habitat Directives but provide
flexibility within port area – conserve species across the port
area as opposed to numbers at a particular site; An additional
1400 hectares within and around the port have already been
created as “ecological infrastructure” to protect several bird
species (Port of Antwerp 2011, 86; Port of Antwerp 2012, 64).

Satisfying –
Sophisticated
3-4

101

Sustainability Aspects Port of Antwerp Maturity Level
Environmental Issues related
to the Goods Movement
Supply Chain; Traffic, Noise,
Light/Glare, Visual Impacts,
Public Health Impacts

Has created a noise survey map for the port area; has regular
consultations with municipal councils as part of a good neighbor
policy; new regulations required the creation of noise action
plans and noise limits for the most exposed population centers;
in 2011 a sub-regional public consultation forum was established
(Port of Antwerp 2012, 72).

The Port is trying to increase barge transport to relieve traffic
congestion and has created master plans for barge, rail, and
road. Antwerp is the second-largest rail port in Europe; it is
continuing to build new infrastructure to provide sufficient
capacity; also trying to improve internal freight transport within
the Port.

Satisfying
3
Social
Ethical Behavior/ No
Corruption/Human Rights;
Public Health and Safety

In 2010 established corporate values: reliability, respect,
innovation, customer orientation, and collaboration; In 2011
these values were anchored in behavior agreements with
employees; New code of conduct was established (Port of
Antwerp 2012, 74).

Satisfying
3
Community Engagement/
Manage Community Relations

Has identified stakeholders in port planning processes; went
through extensive consultation process to create 2010 port
community sustainability report

The Port engages in dialogue with stakeholders through media,
events, and MAS Port Pavilion, which welcomed 80,000 visitors
its first year. The Pavilion serves as a meeting place for the port
community and features a 360 degree screen that allows the
viewer to experience the sights and sounds of the working port.
Interactive educational exhibits focused on the Port are also
included. The Pavilion is also the starting point for four bicycle
routes throughout the port. More than 30,000 maps of the bike
routes have been distributed (Port of Antwerp, 84).

Satisfying –
Sophisticated
3-4

Corporate Citizenship –
Quality of Life, Livability, Social
Integration
Gives financial support to social projects

Opened MAS Port Pavilion in 2011 to strengthen link of Port
with general population and ensure good communication with
local residents – educational exhibit (360 degree screen) at the
MAS museum re modern port operations; museum offers
rooftop views of the entire port operations (Port of Antwerp,
84).

Also connected to four bicycle routes throughout the port; 30K
maps have been distributed; 80K visitors in 2011 (Port of
Antwerp, 84-85).

Satisfying
3
102

Sustainability Aspects Port of Antwerp Maturity Level
Also hosts Ports Day (tours of port), job events/fairs, and does
sponsorships (for 1 year - Port of Antwerp Giants professional
basketball team) (Port of Antwerp 2012, 86-87).
Employment/Workforce
Development

The Port provides direct and indirect employment for 150,000
people. In 2011, they were recognized as Top Employer in
Belgium. They were also voted Port of the Year by the
International Seafarers.

The results of a 2011 port industry workforce survey revealed
that there are over 4,000 vacancies for the port cluster to fill
over the next few years, and they are facing labor market
shortages (1 in 4 jobs can’t be filled). Most of the jobs are for
technicians – process operators, pipefitters, maintenance
mechanics, and welders. There is also a high demand for
industrial and civil engineers (977 engineers over the next three
years) (Port of Antwerp 2011). To address these issues, as part of
the Port’s Total Plan (the Port’s strategic port development
plan), a Talent Workgroup has been formed with the City of
Antwerp, Chamber of Commerce, the Flemish Employment
Agency, and the Port (Port of Antwerp 2011, 73).
Workforce development efforts also include partnership efforts
with ACTA, a training center for the process industry and
chemical sector that focuses on electrical, measurement and
control technology, industrial automation, and safety and
transport systems. Many of the attendees are from the port
area. The Port has also partnered with ANTTEC, a technology
center for the metals sector in Antwerp, the PipeTech Academy,
which trains pipefitters for the building and installation of
pipelines, and SIRA, which targets young people between the
ages of 18-26 for careers in the chemical sector (Port of Antwerp
2011, 66-67).

Satisfying
3
Corporate Governance The Port is transparent in its annual reporting, identifying risks,
challenges, and liabilities. For example, to comply with new
sustainable funding of pension legislation, the Port set aside
299M Euros in 2011; This resulted in a 170M Euro loss for 2011,
as disclosed in the 2011 annual report. Annual reports are
audited by two sets of auditors and reviewed for appropriate
disclosures of financial risk and to ensure regulatory compliance.

Satisfying
3
Motivation and Incentives –
Internal
In 2011 job and behavior agreements with all Port employees
require a commitment to collaboration and innovation, which
support the focus on sustainability.

Elementary
2
103

Sustainability Aspects Port of Antwerp Maturity Level
Employee Health, Safety &
Wellness;
Emergency/Disaster
Management
The Port has a crisis management system (CALaHAN) and has
developed an innovative form of training for emergency
planning and response (the “serious game”) within a virtual
game environment.

The Port also tracks employee hours lost due to industrial
accidents. A Community Internal Service Committee was formed
with Port management, employees and three trade unions to
discuss workplace safety protection and prevention. Publications
on workplace safety are regularly distributed to keep everyone
focused and motivated. Daily safety instructions, known as the
“Take 5” approach, have been credited with reducing work
accidents among port workers (Port of Antwerp 2011, 77).

Satisfying
3
Human Capital Development
Training and Education

Port authority has a staff of 1650 employees; Port community
directly employs approximately 60,000 (Port of Antwerp 2011,
52).

Training is a high priority; Tracks training and education,
diversity of staff and management; 9 hours of training per FTE;
has a training unit, also offers opportunities to staff and
management to attend specialist courses, seminars, and receive
personal coaching (Port of Antwerp 2011).

The Port has its own training center with Portilog, an
independent practical training provider that focuses on port and
logistics topics, such as customs, dangerous cargo handling, and
modes of transport. Portilog also focuses on retraining programs
to fill jobs with skill shortages (Port of Antwerp 2011, 66).

As of Jan 2012, all new employees will be salaried only; contract
labor is given an opportunity to become a salaried employee.

Satisfying
3

104

Table 20: Port of Antwerp Organizational Sustainability Maturity Summary

Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010), Figure 2

Sustainability Aspects
Level 1:
Beginning
Level 2:
Elementary
Level 3:
Satisfying
Level 4:
Sophisticated
Concept of Sustainability
X
Economic

Financial Strength

Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives

Collaboration

Knowledge Management

Processes
X
Purchases

Sustainability Reporting

Environmental

Existence of Aspects Inventory; Monitoring
and management

X

Use of Resources
X
Emissions into air, water, ground

Waste and Hazardous Waste
X
Biodiversity/
Habitat Management

Environmental Issues of Goods Movement
Supply Chain; Traffic, Noise, Light/Glare,
Visual, Public Health Impacts

X

Social

Ethical Behavior/No Corruption/ Human
Rights; Public Health & Safety

X

Community Engagement/Manage
Community Relations

Corporate Citizenship - Quality of Life,
Livability, Social integration

X

Employment/Workforce Development

X
Corporate Governance

Motivation and Incentives – Internal
X
Employee Health, Safety & Wellness;
Emergency/Disaster Management

X
Human Capital Development – Training and
Education

X
X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

105

Sustainability Maturity Analysis

While the Port of Antwerp has the highest level of maturity among economic and some
environmental aspects (generally in transition between 3 and 4), virtually all of the aspects are
integrated at or above the industry average (at least at a level 3). For internal motivations and
incentives, there are some measures in place, but diffusion throughout the organization has not
yet occurred. This is also true for some organizational processes related to environmental
management, which is usually a port organization’s foot in the door to addressing or
confronting its approach sustainability. In reaction to a European Union court action regarding
their environmental impact assessment process, unhappy NGOs, and the recognition that it
would be beneficial to do better planning, a Board Committee was formed in 2007 to consider
environmental policy issues for the port as a whole (de Crane 2012).
Over the past five years, the Port’s environmental department has struggled with
integrating environmental standards into Port policies and practices, but this realization among
employees and management is slowing evolving. The creation of the port community
sustainability report and supporting stakeholder consultation and workshop process was the
first time everyone in the port community came together as a team and the experience has
served as a catalyst for a more integrated approach. The outcome of the two year process was
the identification and agreement to track and report on forty sustainability indicators every two
years, consistent with Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines.
The Port of Antwerp has a satisfying or standard understanding of the concept of
sustainability, realizing the need to consider and address environmental and social impacts of
business operations while still maintaining profitability. They recognize that “attention paid to
106

TBL is of fundamental importance for future growth” and provides them with a social license to
operate now and in the future (de Crane 2012). While the Port’s mission is to be the regional
market leader in sustainability, they don’t want environmental efforts to distort competition
between ports (Port of Antwerp 2012, 55).

Port Organizational Sustainability Strategy
Since the Port of Antwerp hosts the largest petrochemical industrial cluster in the
European Union and one of their main sustainability-related goals is to achieve energy
efficiency, the Conservative (Efficiency) strategy seems to apply. However, based on the general
trend of the sustainability aspect maturity rankings, the Transformative Extroverted Strategy
that is focused on legitimization and maintaining a social license to grow, could also
characterize part of the Port of Antwerp’s sustainability strategy. The Port’s initiative and
approach to creating the first port community wide sustainability report has also contributed to
advancing the practice of sustainability reporting within the port industry.

107

iii. Hamburg

Background

Hamburg is home to Europe’s second largest container port, handling 9 million TEUs in
2011. It is also the largest rail container-handling facility in Europe with over 200 rail
connections a day. The port is located along the River Elbe, approximately sixty-eight miles
south of the North Sea, and in the heart of the City of Hamburg. The total area of the port is
approximately twenty-eight square miles.
The Hamburg Port Authority (HPA) was established in 2005 by combining the functions
of two ministries of the State. HPA follows the landlord port model, where it leases land to
tenants but remains responsible for development of port infrastructure, such as bridges, docks,
and dikes, and related industry infrastructure and equipment, such as warehouses and gantry
cranes.

Challenges & Advanced Practices

This section highlights just a few of the key challenges and advanced practices
demonstrated by the HPA.

Challenges

One of the major challenges faced by HPA is creating acceptance of port expansion to
increase economic development. To minimize impacts to the City, HPA’s strategy is to intensify
development within the existing port area, recycling and restructuring existing land parcels.

108

Non-governmental organizations want HPA to create a comprehensive clean air action
plan like the Port of Los Angeles and disclose a full emissions inventory of port sources. In 2012,
groups like Naturschutzbund (NABU) Hamburg were applying political pressure through
demonstrations and actions at city hall to see this occur (Porschke 2012).
Water quality is also a major concern. Contaminated sediments have built up in the in
River Elbe and the fish are not recommended for human consumption. In addition, agricultural
products are harvested in flood areas near the port that are exposed to pollution.

Advanced Practices

To boost land use productivity, terminal utilization rates are required in some leases.

To better manage port traffic, HPA has an IT based road management system with 300 data
points throughout the port to collect real-time data and improve traffic flows. There are sixteen
electronic signs to communicate to users on the road to avoid congested areas. The system is
merged with other networks through a Port Community System so that information can be
shared across modes and among port users and logistics companies to facilitate more efficient
freight movements.
Regarding incentives, HPA offers discounts on rail for cars with noise-reducing breaks
(there are about 3000 now) and locomotives with diesel soot filters. Apparently HPA did not
need to offer any incentives to encourage the development of HHLA’s CTA terminal - a modern
automated container terminal that is high efficient and fully electric. The move to automated
operations was driven by the private operator to achieve gains in efficiency and reduce carbon
emissions (Pietsch 2012).

109

Sustainability Aspects

The following Table 21 summarizes the sustainability aspects of the Hamburg Port
Authority and ranks the maturity level of each aspect, along with HPA’s overall concept of
sustainability. Table 22 summarizes the sustainability maturity of the organization for each
aspect.

Table 21: Sustainability Aspects of the Hamburg Port Authority
Sustainability
Aspects
Hamburg Port Authority Maturity Level
Concept of
Sustainability

The Port does consider the Triple Bottom Line approach to
sustainability (environment –economy-equity) (EEE). They are on the
way to becoming a sustainable port, but not there yet (Birke 2012b).

Green port – “we are aware of our responsibility for the
environment and as a role model for the metro area This applies to
CO2 footprint and sustainable management of traffic and energy.
On our way to becoming a green port, we use new technologies and
innovative approaches to a sustainable symbiosis between the port,
city, and environment. The aim is a leading profile amongst
international ports and a green future.” (HPA 2013)

Drivers are current and future regulations (EU directives, IMO ECA),
Hamburg European Green City status, competition with other ports,
managing AQ & WQ, ensuring employment, improving port image.

Satisfying
3
Goals

Objective in 2025 Port Development Plan – make the port
metropolis more sustainable (Birke 2012a);

Trying to balance growth & environmental issues through dialogue
with stakeholders regarding port development; Economic Prosperity
to ensure employment is a major objective.
Economic
Financial Strength TEU Market share (2011) – 3
rd
– 21% Ranks 13
th
in the world in TEUs
(2011) 9M TEUS in 2011 (Lutz presentation)
Port Rail Hub: Largest rail container-handling facility in Europe; Over
200 rail connections daily.

Satisfying
3
Innovation,
Technology,
Investment &
Incentives
Port is the largest railway port in Europe; investments have been
made to increase the percentage of rail modal split (currently at
36%, the goal is 41%) by extending and upgrading electric
infrastructure for freight rail and allowing longer trains; Investing in

Satisfying –
Sophisticated
3-4
110

Sustainability
Aspects
Hamburg Port Authority Maturity Level

IT systems for more efficient and competitive railway handling.
Also using geothermal heating to de-ice railways in a pilot project
(HPA 2010, HPA 2011).

Installed port traffic management system to reduce congestion and
increase efficiency; IT Road management system – DIVA, Dynamic
Information on traffic volumes in Area of the Port; there is a port
road management center, along with flow control pre-gate parking
at terminal entrances; Has also merged IT networks, so info can be
shared system-wide across modes; 16 variable message electronic
signs on roads to communicate to users; 300 measuring points
throughout the port to collect real-time data and improve traffic
flows (HPA 2010).

Also participates in Port Community System – IT info sharing system
among port users and logistics companies to facilitate more efficient
freight movements (HPA 2010).

The Port is an Environmental Ship Index (ESI) partner, so they offer
incentives for clean vessel engines and fuel use to their customers.
They have also created a charging system that financially rewards
companies for shortening their railcar standing times in the port and
thus makes use of existing tracks in a more efficient manner (HPA
2011).

HHLA is one of their customers, the most modern container terminal
in the world – most efficient; fully automated with automated
guided vehicles.

There is a solar-thermal plant on the roof of one of HPA’s buildings –
it supplies the building with hot water and saves 56K kwh annually
(Birke 2012b).
Collaboration

The Port held the Hafendialog process to gain insights into the
interests and needs of stakeholders to create a market-oriented and
sustainable Port Development Plan for 2025. Four bi-weekly
meetings were held in August and September 2011. However, not all
stakeholders feel the level of engagement was adequate (Kohler
2012).

The Port is an active member of port industry networks such as
IAPH, World Ports Climate Initiative, and the Environmental Ship
Index (ESI) program.

Elementary -
Satisfying
2-3

111

Sustainability
Aspects
Hamburg Port Authority Maturity Level
Knowledge
Management

The Port has merged multiple IT database systems to share data and
manage traffic flows on road and rail. This enables new control
systems to be deployed across various modes of transit, improve
efficiency, and reduce energy consumption. The system also allows
for a charging system that financially rewards companies that
shorten their rail wagon standing times while in port, resulting in
more efficient processing of trains (HPA 2010).

The Port started to implement an Environmental Management
System (EMS) last year. They are currently collecting consumption
data and focusing on the quality of the data. They plan to have a two
year reporting cycle on aspects in the EMS. There are annual reports
regarding CO2 emissions (Birke 2012a).
Satisfying
3
Processes 2025 Port Development Plan Strategic Guidelines to guide future
port development: Value Added, Throughput, Quality, and
sustainability; Re environment – wants to show responsibility as an
“ecological world port in the middle of a metropolis, an
environmental pioneer in terms of environment and climate
protection, and pursue a peak image by means of scheduled targets,
active promotion, and use of innovative ideas and technologies”
(Birke 2012a).

Offering environmental discounts on port railway charges and port
dues for rail cars with noise-reducing breaks (there are about 3000
now) and locomotives with diesel soot filters (HPA 2011).

Participates in ESI – vessels with a score above 20 points are given
up to 10% discount on harbor dues (targets reductions in NOx, Sox,
particulates, and CO2) (HPA 2011).

Environmental Strategy Department is not completely supported by
Corporate Management Board; This presents a challenge for
implementing a sustainable business strategy (Kuhler 2012).

Elementary -
Satisfying
2-3
Purchases

Along with cost, some environmental criteria, such as energy
consumption and emissions, is considered when making purchases.
When considering if whether to invest in pilot projects, return on
investment calculations are performed, and then there is an effort to
get projects subsidized if possible. When designing new projects,
there is a focus on environmental design. When leasing existing
terminals, there is an integrated decision matrix based on
environmental impacts and employment (Birke 2012a).

Elementary -
Satisfying
2-3

Sustainability
Reporting

The Port released their first sustainability report in 2013 covering the
reporting period 2011 – 2012. The report is GRI certified at C+ for
transparency and was independently audited.

Satisfying
3
112

Sustainability
Aspects
Hamburg Port Authority Maturity Level
Environmental
Existence of Aspects
Inventory;
Monitoring and
Management
Has an environmental policy with environmental guidelines; “The
reduction of emissions and consumption, avoidance of waste,
increases in efficiency and the improvement of environmental
performance are essential corporate goals” (HPA 2013b). Some
programs are in place to reduce emissions and increase efficiency of
operations.

Elementary –
Satisfying
2-3
Resource Use Energy consumption and efficiency are measured. Energy use &
future supply are identified as major challenges related to
environmental impacts from port operations. Land productivity is
also measured. The Port can require certain terminal utilization rates
by requiring productivity levels in leases (Birke 2012a).

Elementary –
Satisfying
2-3
Emissions into Air,
Water, and Ground
Traffic management is a major issue; has invested in a port road
management IT system and created a Road Traffic Master Plan (HPA
2011).

Reducing emissions is identified as a key environmental objective;
HPA fleet has run on sulphur-free fuel since 2009; Shore power is
available for HPA’s own berths and public berths for inland barges,
ferries, and other service ships. Joined ESI in 2011 to address
emissions from ocean-going vessels from tenants. Currently
evaluating the use of AMP for cruise vessels (Birke 2012b).

Alternative drive systems and fuels are being considered to address
truck emissions.

There is a port-wide inventory of air emissions sources, but it is not
publicly disclosed. Road and vessel traffic contribute to 40% of the
City of Hamburg’s total emissions, 30% of their NOx emissions, and
17% of particulate matter (Birke 2012b).

Satisfying
3
Waste and
Hazardous Waste
The Port is focused on dealing with contaminated sediments in the
River Elbe. Regular dredging occurs to address siltation and maintain
needed water depths for navigation. Contaminated dredge spoils are
dewatered and disposed of at silt disposal sites within the port.
Because of the high level of suspended contaminants in the river,
fish from the river are not recommended for human consumption.
Agricultural products harvested in flood areas are exposed to
pollution (HPA 2011).

Elementary -
Satisfying
2-3
113

Sustainability
Aspects
Hamburg Port Authority Maturity Level
Biodiversity/
Habitat Management
Involved in the development of the Integrated Management Plan for
the Elbe Estuary – establishes measures for creating favorable
conditions for habitats and species; includes allowing silted-up areas
and branches of the Elbe to be reopened to tidal flooding to give the
river more space to spread out during high tide.

Beginning –
Elementary
1-2
Environmental Issues
of Goods Movement
Supply Chain; Traffic,
Noise, Light/Glare,
Visual Impacts,
Public Health
Impacts

Willing to prioritize environmental management within port
community operations, despite lack of priority by many port-related
businesses (outcome of Hafendialogues) (Birke 2012a).

Has invested in port traffic management system to reduce
congestion in port area.

Noise management – promotes noise-reduction in construction
equipment; has built a noise wall in a city district close to port
operations; The Port is also looking at ways to reduce the noise of
pile driving. They are currently participating in research project to
reduce noise in operations at container terminals (Kuhler 2012).

HHLA CTA – automation, innovation, clean electric equipment –
driven by private operator; Port authority is not seen by terminal
operator as an influencing factor for the terminal design/equipment
choices. However, the Port did limit the space available in the port
area to HHLA (they weren’t able to spatially expand), so they choose
to densify operations with clean electric automated equipment,
which helps to reduce public health impacts from port-related
emissions (Pietsch 2012).

Satisfying
3
Social
Ethical Behavior/No
Corruption/Human
Rights; Public Health
and Safety
Corruption prevention is seen as a permanent task by management
board and each employee (HPA 2013c). The Port has established a
corruption prevention committee with directors from several
internal HPA business units to prepare guidelines and develop
measures to prevent and detect corruption. There is a zero tolerance
policy (HPA 2013c).

2025 Port Development Plan strategic guidelines suggest that port
development is designed with public health and safety in mind (Birke
2012a).

Satisfying
3
114

Sustainability
Aspects
Hamburg Port Authority Maturity Level
Community
Engagement/
Manage Community
Relations
Perceptibility of the port is a major focus, including reputation
management.

Conducts Moorburg Dialogue with residents that live in the Port
Expansion Zone of 2035 – roundtables and information sessions are
held to keep residents up to date and receive complaints (Birke
2012a).

Has established a complaint management system for residents
within the vicinity of the port (Birke 2012a).

In creating the 2025 Port Development Plan, an environmental NGO
was invited to participate in the process to provide feedback, along
with many of the Port’s customers and service providers. However,
not all of the Port’s stakeholders were included (Kuhler 2012).

The Port received an award in May 2013 from the International Ports
and Harbors Association for their television program Hafen-TV,
which is produced with the local TV channel, Hamburg 1. The 15-
minute program airs every two weeks on Hamburg 1 and has its own
YouTube channel. Over 90 broadcasts have been aired featuring a
diverse range of port and River Elbe issues (HPA 2013d).

Elementary -
Satisfying
2-3
Corporate
Citizenship – Quality
of Life, Livability,
Social integration
The Port’s current focus is on creating “Acceptance” of port
expansion and increased economic development. The Port hopes to
make the port a city attraction so it will be accepted as a more
integral part of the city. Currently the Port hosts events to celebrate
Port anniversary day and cruise days. The Port also conducts port
tours for public and businesses. They have created a Port Adventure
Route map for bike tours and they conduct some bike tours as well
(HPA 2011).

Satisfying
3
Employment/
Workforce
Development
The total number of jobs directly and indirectly dependent on the
port business is approximately 156,000 in the Hamburg metro area
and 262,000 in the country (HPA 2010).

The Port has identified the need to ensure adequate employment to
support the port sector. They plan to focus on the quality of
employment (logistics, bulk terminals, containers); developing
higher wage & skilled workers; and increased work in distribution
centers. In 2010, 89 apprenticeships were sponsored by the Port.
Annually, the Port offers a minimum of 25 new apprenticeships (HPA
2010, 29).

Satisfying
3
115

Sustainability
Aspects
Hamburg Port Authority Maturity Level
Corporate
Governance

Have established a Hamburg Corporate Governance Code;
Transparency is one of highest corporate values.

Conducted Hafendialouges to influence 2025 Port Development
Plan; however, did not involve all stakeholders and integration of the
results of the dialogue process into the final plan was marginal
(Kuhler 2012).

Elementary -
Satisfying
2-3
Motivation and
Incentives
- Internal
The Port held a contest with HPA staff to gather ideas for how to
green their historic port office building – 150 ideas were submitted.
There is room for improvement to inform employees of port projects
and sustainability efforts (Kohler 2012).

Elementary
2
Health, Safety &
Wellness;
Emergency/Disaster
Management
Has an occupational health and safety system, which includes social
counseling, rehabilitation and reintegration management, severely
disabled employee representation, a company doctor, and human
resources management; Instructions and training related to OHS are
held regularly to make management and staff aware of OHS risks
and inform them about legal requirements (HPA 2010, 44).

Satisfying
3
Human Capital
Development -
Training and
Education

Port authority has approximately 1900 employees. The Port is
currently developing a professional competence management
system to systemically identify, monitor, maintain, and promote the
professional development of staff; Programs target high performers,
junior staff development, and dual education program students
(HPA 2010, 44).

The Port does engage staff on sustainability issues to collect data
and ideas, although a student researcher recently found that
internal sustainability awareness among HPA Port employees needs
to be enhanced (Kohler 2012).

Elementary -
Satisfying
2-3

116

Table 22: Hamburg Port Authority Organizational Sustainability Maturity Summary
Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010), Figure 2

Sustainability Aspects
Level 1:
Beginning
Level 2:
Elementary
Level 3:
Satisfying
Level 4:
Sophisticated
Concept of Sustainability
X

Economic

Financial Strength
X

Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives

Collaboration

Knowledge Management
X

Processes

Purchases

Sustainability Reporting
X

Environmental

Existence of Aspects Inventory;
Monitoring and management

Use of Resources

Emissions into air, water, ground
X

Waste and Hazardous Waste

Biodiversity/
Habitat Management

Environmental Issues of Goods
Movement Supply Chain; Traffic, Noise,
Light/Glare, Visual, Public Health
Impacts

X

Social

Ethical Behavior/No Corruption/
Human Rights; Public Health & Safety

X

Community Engagement/Manage
Community Relations

Corporate Citizenship - Quality of Life,
Livability, Social integration
X

Employment/Workforce Development

Corporate Governance

Motivation and Incentives - Internal
X

Employee Health, Safety & Wellness;
Emergency/Disaster Management

X

Human Capital Development – Training
and Education

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
117

Sustainability Maturity Analysis

The Hamburg Port Authority’s concept of sustainability is satisfying or standard,
subscribing to the Triple Bottom Line approach. In general, HPA’s approach to the economic
sustainability aspects are the most mature, closely followed by the environmental aspects. The
social sustainability aspects have the lowest maturity level, ranging from elementary to
satisfying.
Through the Port Development Plan (PDP) 2025, HPA has recently begun to integrate
sustainability with their long term strategic and spatial planning processes. “Making the port
metropolis more sustainable” is identified as a key strategic objective of the PDP. Measures
identified in the PDP include a combination of environmental, social, and economic approaches
focused on strengthening cooperation for the success of the port, greening the port
environment, and further integrating the port and city through quality employment, spatial
planning, and stakeholder management (Birke 2012a).

Port Organizational Sustainability Strategy
HPA has a high level of maturity related to Innovation, Technology, and Investment
(transitioning from 3-4) and performs above the industry standard related to Financial Strength,
Knowledge Management, management of environmental emissions, and Employee Health and
Safety. These attributes fit squarely with the Conservative (Efficiency) sustainability strategy.

118

E. United States

1. Major Sustainability Policies

The United States has had major environmental legislation since the 1970s protecting
air quality, water quality, soils, and biological resources through the Clean Air Act, Clean Water
Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and the Endangered Species Act. The National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), also approved in that era, requires that any development
project requiring federal funding or permits undergo an environmental impact assessment
process that provides for citizen notification and opportunities for input. In California, the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review process is heavily utilized by opponents of
development projects who have standing to sue public agencies under the law if they believe
impacts were not addressed or if feasible mitigation measures were not applied.
Regarding carbon emissions and greenhouse gases, in 2006 California passed Assembly
Bill 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act, which sets a cap on greenhouse gas emissions in
2020 at 1990 emissions levels and requires implementation of an emissions reduction plan,
mandatory reporting of emissions, and creation of an emissions trading market. The use of low
carbon fuels and renewable energy are widely encouraged.

119

2. Los Angeles: Background and Sustainability Analysis

Background

The Port of Los Angeles (POLA), located in southern California, is the largest port in the
United States by total cargo volumes. In 2011 POLA processed 7.94 million TEUS and 203 million
metric tons of cargo. Containers make up the largest portion of the cargo mix. POLA is part of a
port complex (along with the adjacent Port of Long Beach) located in the San Pedro Bay, twenty
miles south of downtown Los Angeles. Over forty percent of US imports move through the port
complex.
POLA, established in 1907, is composed of forty-three miles of waterfront and 7,500
acres of land. The Port is managed by the Harbor Department, a proprietary department of the
City of Los Angeles. The five member Board of Harbor Commissioners is appointed by the Los
Angeles Mayor to oversee the use of revenues generated from its lease agreements.

Challenges & Advanced Practices

This section highlights just a few of the key challenges and advanced practices
demonstrated by POLA.

Challenges

In response to strong local political pressure and a legal challenge under CEQA, POLA
has made great strides to reduce environmental impacts from its operations and enable port
expansion projects to move forward. Specifically, through the voluntary implementation of the
Port’s Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP), the first of its kind, the Port achieved emissions reductions
120

of seventy-nine percent of diesel particulate matter (DPM), a known toxic air contaminant and
carcinogen. Large reductions in sulfur oxide (SOx) and nitrogen oxide (NOx), which contribute to
the formation of smog, were also achieved port-wide. However, in February 2013, the local air
agency South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) asserted regulatory control
over the port area as an indirect source, pressuring to make the voluntary emissions reductions
mandatory under a new “backstop rule.” Now if emissions reduction goals in the CAAP are not
met, the Port of Los Angeles could be fined and ordered to draft a new plan to gain regulatory
compliance. If achieving some of the remaining emissions reductions goals becomes cost
prohibitive or technically infeasible, there could be concerns regarding the future economic
competiveness of the Port.
Several port expansion projects have moved forward since adoption of the CAAP in
2006. All of the new lease agreements executed for container terminal expansion projects have
included environmental requirements for construction activities and future operations.
However, an ongoing challenge is monitoring the enforcement of these environmental
measures to ensure compliance in the field. With a new backstop rule in place, it is expected
there will be higher scrutiny over mitigation monitoring and compliance reporting in the future.

Advanced Practices

Advanced practices employed by POLA include the following: rigorous environmental
review processes for proposed large developments, programmatic management of port-wide
health risk, air quality, and water quality with long-term reduction goals, and the use of
sustainable lease agreements to implement measures from the port-wide plans (like the CAAP).
121

Two award-winning components of the CAAP developed by POLA are the Technology
Advancement Program (TAP) and the Clean Truck Program (CTP). Under the TAP, the Port
provides funding through grants to help the commercialization of port-related technologies
that reduce environmental impacts of port operations. The focus of the program has been to
develop port-related equipment that operates on cleaner fuels and/or reduced emissions, such
as hybrid terminal operating equipment or electric drayage trucks.
Under the CTP, the Port created a concessions model that restricted the entry of
drayage trucks entering Port terminals to deliver or pick-up cargo containers based on the
model year of the truck engines. For example, when the program began, all trucks with engines
older than the 1989 model year were banned from entry. In 2012, all truck engine model years
entering the port terminals had to be 2007 or newer. The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach
implemented the program together, although some provisions differed, and they both provided
grant funding to help truckers upgrade their vehicles. After a phase-in period, a fee was charged
per container for each truck that did not comply with the program. These measures contributed
to the successful completion of the program, with a rapid turnover of the trucking fleet serving
southern California: over 12,000 trucks are now registered in the Port Drayage Truck Registry
with 2007 or newer engines or are powered by alternative fuels (POLA 2013c).

122

Advancing sustainability globally and locally
POLA has participated in and led several international collaborative efforts to advance
sustainability within the port industry. Specifically, POLA is a founding member of the World
Ports Climate Initiative (WPCI), a group of over sixty-one ports dedicated to addressing climate
change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions within the global supply chain. This work is
discussed further in Chapter 5.
Locally POLA has been focused on improving the physical interface between the port
area and community through redeveloping the LA Waterfront. The LA Waterfront program is
composed of a series of redevelopment projects bordering the communities of San Pedro and
Wilmington, covering over 500 acres, that are focused on reconnecting the community with the
waterfront by providing recreational and commercial development. Along with several miles of
waterfront promenade and plazas, over forty-five acres of new public green open space has
been created. Thirty acres of the open space also serves to buffer nearby residents from the
sights and sounds of port operations.
Finally, to advance the future green growth of the port, in 2008 POLA executed a
mitigation agreement with a group of non-profits and community residents. As a series of
development projects move forward (mostly container terminal expansion projects), POLA
deposits money into an account that is used to fund community mitigation projects. The funds
could total up to $50 million and are administered by a non-profit formed in 2011, the Harbor
Community Benefit Foundation.

123

Sustainability Aspects

The following Table 23 summarizes the sustainability aspects of the POLA organization
and ranks the maturity level of each aspect, along with POLA’s overall concept of sustainability.
Table 24 summarizes the sustainability maturity level of the organization for each aspect.

Table 23: Sustainability Aspects of the Port of Los Angeles
Sustainability
Aspects
Port of Los Angeles
Maturity
Level
Concept of
Sustainability

While POLA subscribes to the Triple Bottom Line concept of sustainability
(environmental, social, and economic), as reported in its 2011 Sustainability
Report and in various staff and management presentations, in POLA’s
Strategic Plan Vision, social responsibility is listed separately from
sustainability, which creates some confusion regarding how holistically or
integrated the Port views the concept.

Common policy statement on port press releases – “The Port of Los Angeles
has a strong commitment to developing innovative strategic and sustainable
operations that benefit the economy as well as the quality of life for the
region and the nation it serves.”

Satisfying
3
Goals

Regarding broad sustainability policy goals, there are a few points of
reference:
POLA’s Strategic Plan Vision/Motto is “We are America’s Port – the nation’s
#1 container port and the global model for sustainability, security, and social
responsibility.” (POLA 2012a).

“Advancing Technology and Sustainability” is also Strategic Objective 3 in
POLA’s 2012 – 2017 Strategic Plan. Initiatives that support this objective
include increasing the number of zero emission trucks in the Port drayage
fleet by 2020, partnering with educational institutions to create workforce
development programs that support a transition to automated terminal
technology, and exploring less expensive but as effective alternatives to
Alternative Maritime Power (shore-side power) for vessels (POLA 2012a).

POLA also has the following specific air emissions reductions targets in the
Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP) (against a 2005 baseline):
 DPM: 72% by 2014, 77% by 2023
 NOx: 22% by 2014, 59% by 2023
 SOx: 93% by 2014, 93% by 2023
124

Broader port-wide sustainability goals have been drafted but not yet
adopted.
Economic
Financial Strength POLA is ranked as the number 1 port in the U.S. by container volume (since
2000) with 7.94M TEUS in 2011. Combined with the Port of Long Beach, the
LA/LB port complex is the sixth largest port by container volume in the
world. The Port has been redeveloping a portion of its waterfront to create
more revenue sources from recreational, commercial, retail, and
institutional uses and better integrate with the adjacent community. There
are 9 container terminals, 7 liquid bulk terminals, 2 breakbulk terminals, 2
dry bulk terminals, 2 cruise passenger terminals, and 1 auto terminal. POLA
enjoys a AA bond rating among investor rating companies. Net income in
2011 was $96.1M, and total operating revenue was $400.5M (POLA 2012c).

Sophisticated
4
Innovation,
Technology,
Investment &
Incentives

POLA has made numerous investments in port-related green technologies to
reduce environmental impacts. Some examples include electric drayage
trucks, hybrid tugboats, hybrid and electric cargo handling equipment,
Alternative Maritime Power (AMP), which provides shore-side power to
ocean-going vessels, a seawater scrubber system to filter contaminants from
vessel engines, and others. These technologies are supported through
POLA’s technology advancement program, which provides grant money and
pilot-testing assistance, and PortTechLA, a public/private non-profit
technology commercialization center and incubator that helps bring
technologies through the testing phases and to the marketplace.

POLA has also created innovative policy structures and approaches to reduce
emissions from port-related mobile sources that are beyond their direct
control. These include POLA’s Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP), Clean Truck
Program (CTP), and Sustainable Lease Agreement structure with port
tenants.

Financial incentives offered to customers to reduce impacts from the
operations include participation in the Environmental Ship Index (ESI)
program. Past programs included the Vessel Speed Reduction Incentive
Program and the Low Sulfur Fuel Incentive Program.

Sophisticated
4
Collaboration

POLA is active in port industry stakeholder organizations, such as the IAPH
and AAPA, and a founding member of the World Ports Climate Initiative
(WPCI) and Pacific Ports Clean Air Collaborative (PPCAC). They have had joint
board meetings with the adjacent Port – Port of Long Beach, and partnered
together on environmental initiatives and planning, such as the Clean Air
Action Plan, Clean Truck Program, Technology Advancement Program, and
Water Resources Action Plan.

For a new energy efficiency management initiative in June 2013, the Port is
partnering with the LA Department of Water and Power for technical
assistance, terminal operators and port customers for data collection and
participation, and a local university.

Sophisticated
4
125

Knowledge
Management

For large capital projects, there is an opportunity to systematize sustainable
design approaches and apply mitigation measures to reduce environmental
impacts through a standardized environmental review process. POLA also
has policies regarding green buildings, sustainable design guidelines, and
sustainable construction guidelines. However, the guidelines are not
consistently used on all projects and there is not consistent training of staff
throughout the relevant divisions about using them as a resource. POLA is
exploring further integration of their GIS system and environmental data.
Database systems are used to document compliance with various air quality,
water quality, and environmental mitigation monitoring programs.

Satisfying
3
Processes

For large capital development projects requiring new leases, environmental
and social criteria are considered in leasing policies and environmental
permitting processes. It is not clear that sustainability criteria is applied to
decision-making processes throughout all divisions. Creating and applying
sustainability criteria to project design and approval decisions within the
context of a cross-divisional staff/management Project Development
Committee has been under discussion.

Elementary –
Satisfying
2-3
Purchases

POLA has an environmentally preferable purchasing policy that is considered
when making purchases for office supplies, cleaning products, building
materials, and sometimes in design criteria for development projects. POLA
also has a Small Business and Very Small Business Program that promotes
the use of regional/local and small businesses in Port contracts for
professional consulting services.

Satisfying
3
Sustainability
Reporting

In 2008 a Sustainability Assessment and Plan Formulation was issued. In
2011, a sustainability report was released and is available on the POLA
website. The 2011 report discusses a commitment to do annual reporting. A
2012 sustainability report was prepared but has not been publicly released.
POLA releases annual corporate reports that discuss some environmental
information, and there is a discussion of sustainability-related topics on
POLA’s website.

Elementary –
Satisfying
2-3
Environmental
Existence of
Aspects Inventory;
Monitoring and
Management
POLA has identified its material issues and has done an inventory of
environmental issues and potential impacts. Prioritized impacts include air
quality, water quality, contaminated soil and groundwater, and public
health. There are air quality, water quality, and waste and hazardous waste
management and monitoring systems in place.

Satisfying-
Sophisticated
3-4
Resource Use POLA tracks recycling for various materials and maintains a carbon emissions
inventory for scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions. Energy and water consumption are
not widely tracked and monitored – there are no port-wide reduction
targets. However, a new energy management plan for POLA introduced in
June 2013 will highlight energy efficiency, so this may change. On a project-
level basis, LEED guidelines, which are required to be followed for at least a
GOLD-level status on all new buildings over 7,500 square feet, encourage the
use of resource-efficient design and materials. Large open space areas within
the port, including an 18-acre park and a 30-acre park, have infrastructure
installed to provide recycled water for landscaping when it becomes
available from the City’s Dept. of Water and Power. POLA has prepared a

Satisfying-
Sophisticated
3-4
126

draft unpublished port-wide climate action plan. Regarding renewable
energy, POLA has committed to constructing 10MW of renewable energy
within the port area. 1MW of power is currently available from solar panels
installed on the roof of one of the cruise terminals.
Emissions into Air,
Water, Ground
emissions

Air emissions from new large capital projects (during construction and
operations) are estimated, avoided, and mitigated where feasible through
the use of clean construction equipment and newer engines in mobile
sources or mitigation technologies. Port policy and public health risk
reduction goals emphasize cleaner production and a pathway to a zero
emissions port. Traffic management and efforts to reduce congestion and
truck idling are also implemented. Discharges into the water and soil are
prohibited, and best management practices are followed to avoid releases
during construction or in-water work. Water quality throughout the port
area and San Pedro Bay is managed through control measures contained in
POLA’s Water Resources Action Plan.

Sophisticated
4
Waste and
Hazardous Waste

POLA has recently inventoried and prioritized contaminated port-owned
properties and is the process of remediating the largest contaminated site in
the port area (Westways). POLA is strategically using contaminated
sediments within Confined Disposal Facilities (CDFs) to create new land for
port development.

Sophisticated
4
Biodiversity/
Habitat
Management

POLA conducts a joint biological baseline study of the San Pedro Bay with the
Port of Long Beach approximately every two years. The most recent surveys
were in 2008 and 2010.

Biological impacts are considered during project planning, construction, and
operations, and appropriate mitigation measures are applied.

POLA manages a 15-acre nesting site for the endangered Least Tern on
Terminal Island, adjacent to active container cargo operations.

POLA is also engaged in several habitat restoration projects to mitigate for
open water that was displaced by port development. These include the Bolsa
Chica Wetlands (over 300 acres restored) and the Batiquitos Wetlands (380
acres restored) near San Diego. Within the port area, POLA actively manages
the 3.25 acre Cabrillo Saltwater Marsh, which it plans to enhance and
enlarge the mudflat habitat within it in the future to mitigate for
construction impacts from its Ports O’ Call redevelopment project.

Sophisticated
4
Environmental
Issues of Goods
Movement Supply
Chain; Noise, Light,
Visual Impacts,
Public Health
Impacts

Mitigation funds provided by POLA in 2012 to the non-profit Harbor
Community Benefits Foundation will fund a Noise Assessment study that will
document noise levels at schools and residences within nearby communities
that are affected by Port operations, with the aim of avoiding, reducing, or
mitigating impacts. A similar study will also be conducted related to health
impacts from port activities.

Since 2003, POLA has contributed $34M to community projects in San Pedro
and Wilmington that focus on beautification, education, and open space to
address aesthetic impacts from port operations.

Sophisticated
4
127

Social
Ethical Behavior/
No Corruption/
Human Rights;
Public Health and
Safety

There is a code of ethics governing the behavior of Port employees,
management, and Board members. Board meetings are open to the public,
televised on a local channel, and simultaneously webcast from POLA’s
website. Board decision-making documents are available on POLA’s website
or available through public requests for information.

To protect public safety, POLA has adopted a public health risk threshold for
incremental residential health risk - No project will be approved by the
Board of Harbor Commissioners unless the public health risk to residents
posed by toxic air emissions from proposed project is less than 10 in a
million. The assumed exposure period for residents is 70 years, so this is a
very conservative threshold.

Satisfying-
Sophisticated
3-4
Community
Engagement/
Manage
Community
Relations
Stakeholders are given opportunities to participate in port planning
processes through port master planning workshops and project
environmental review processes. Port representatives also attend monthly
neighborhood council meetings to provide updates on port topics and
answer questions from the community. For ten years, POLA also maintained
a Port Community Advisory Committee, which was recently disbanded due
to waning participation and reduced effectiveness. Public comments are
taken at Board of Harbor Commissioner Meetings regarding pending items,
as well as items not on the agenda.

POLA maintains a website, community newsletter, and occasionally releases
informational videos. They have released a children’s book, a book on Port
history to commemorate POLA’s anniversary, and in 2010 teamed with
National Geographic to produce a 10-episode series that focused on working
life in the port and on the cargo terminals from perspectives of ship captains,
the port police, and dockworkers. Other initiatives include the TransPorter, a
mobile interactive educational exhibit about POLA that visits schools and
community events, and POLA’s affiliation with POLA High School, a maritime-
focused magnet school located next door to POLA’s administration building
(POLA 2012c).

Sophisticated
4
Corporate
Citizenship –
Quality of Life,
Livability, Social
Integration

POLA contributes to various organizations and hosts numerous annual
community events, including a free summer concert series, Navy Week, and
the Port of Los Angeles Lobster Festival (the world’s largest). Nearly 40,000
people attended the event in 2011 (POLA 2012a). Boat tours are also very
popular – in 2011, more than 4,000 visitors participated in POLA’s free tours.

As part of POLA’s LA Waterfront Program, over 50 acres of new open space
that is enjoyed by local residents has been created over the last five years.
Spaces include waterfront promenade, plazas with fountains, play fields,
walking trails, bike paths, and open meadows. The 30-acre Wilmington
Waterfront Park was selected in June 2013 by the Urban Land Institute as a
finalist for their national Urban Open Space Award as an outstanding
example of “a transformative and vibrant public open space project that has
spurred economic and social regeneration of the adjacent community.”

Sophisticated
4
128

Employment/
Workforce
Development
POLA generates more than 830,000 regional jobs and $35 billion in annual
wages and tax revenues (POLA 2013a). Nationwide, jobs are estimated at 3.6
million.

Workforce development efforts include POLA’s sponsorship of the
International Trade Education Program (ITEP), which is designed to introduce
local high school students to careers in international trade. Approximately
200 students from Bannings HS participated in 2012.
In 2011, POLA negotiated a 5-year labor agreement with local building and
trade unions. The PLA targets unemployment and underemployment in
concentrated poverty neighborhoods, particularly in communities near the
port area, which advances skills of the local labor pool. The agreement
requires that local residents perform at least 30% of total work hours and
disadvantaged workers perform at least 10% of total work hours on
upcoming projects. Additionally, apprentices shall perform at least 20% of
the total work hours, and local residents in specific low-socioeconomic area
zip codes shall be given the opportunity to perform 50% of these
apprenticeship hours (POLA 2012c).

In 2007, POLA initiated the Trade Connect Program, a trade development
program for small to medium businesses. The Program provides educational
workshops to assist the businesses to expand their operations to export
internationally. Offered in partnership with government agencies and local
officials, the workshops connect businesses with resources, expert advice,
and services. This program received the US President’s “E Star” award for
boosting U.S. exports and has hosted over 150 workshops with over 15,000
attendees (POLA 2012c).

POLA also has a student internship program, hosting 60 interns year-round
on a part-time basis. A summer internship program sponsors 40 interns from
local schools and 40 from schools across the U.S. (POLA 2012c).

Sophisticated
4
Corporate
Governance

Strong transparency has been inserted into the environmental review
process for large capital development projects. Technical studies, findings of
environmental impacts, mitigation measures, public comments, and port
responses and rationale for policy decisions are all posted on POLA’s
website.

The Port has also been very aggressive about developing pilot incentive
programs to reduce air emissions; Many of these programs have become the
basis for current state regulations.

There is room for improvement regarding overall performance measurement
of the organization. Projects are generally evaluated by schedule delivery
dates and budget. Performance metrics are included in the strategic plan,
but it is debatable about their helpfulness in measuring effectiveness of the
organization.

Satisfying
3
129

Motivation and
Incentives - Internal

There is no general sustainability training for employees; A recent employee
newsletter discussed the topic of sustainability and the port’s perspective
(Triple Bottom Line approach). Employees may be familiar with certain port
initiatives that are particular to their daily work (Engineers are aware of
Green Building Policy) and most port employees are aware of the Clean Air
Action Plan and its relationship to demonstrating responsible future growth
at the Port, but it is doubtful that most employees have a holistic sense of
Port sustainability issues and how their role in the organization is connected
to this.

Elementary –
Satisfying
2-3
Health, Safety &
Wellness;
Emergency/
Disaster
Management
POLA has a variety of health and wellness programs for employees. There is
an annual health fair, generous employee health insurance that covers
preventative care, onsite gym, organized athletic activities, and healthy
foods available at a subsidized cost in POLA’s cafeteria. In early 2013, the all
port employees were trained in disaster preparedness. Employees are
provided emergency preparedness kits.

Satisfying-
Sophisticated
3-4
Human Capital
Development -
Training and
Education

POLA has approximately 990 employees. There is a very generous tuition
reimbursement program for undergraduate and graduate education and
professional development. Many employees participate in professional
organizations, conferences, and training seminars. In house, the Port also
offers lunchtime learning seminars, where management and staff share their
expertise and updates on port programs or projects. Every employee is not
trained regarding sustainability issues or port policies related to
sustainability.

Satisfying-
Sophisticated
3-4
130

Table 24: Port of Los Angeles Organizational Sustainability Maturity Summary

Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010), Figure 2

Sustainability Aspects
Level 1:
Beginning
Level 2:
Elementary
Level 3:
Satisfying
Level 4:
Sophisticated
Concept of Sustainability
X
Economic

Financial Strength
X
Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives

X
Collaboration
X
Knowledge Management
X
Processes

Purchases
X
Sustainability Reporting

Environmental

Existence of Aspects Inventory;
Monitoring and management

Use of Resources

Emissions into air, water, ground
X
Waste and Hazardous Waste
X
Biodiversity/
Habitat Management

X
Environmental Issues of Goods
Movement Supply Chain; Traffic, Noise,
Light/Glare, Visual, Public Health
Impacts

X
Social

Ethical Behavior/No Corruption/
Human Rights; Public Health & Safety

Community Engagement/Manage
Community Relations

X
Corporate Citizenship - Quality of Life,
Livability, Social integration

X
Employment/Workforce Development

Corporate Governance

X
Motivation and Incentives - Internal

Employee Health, Safety & Wellness;
Emergency/Disaster Management

Human Capital Development – Training
and Education

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

131

Sustainability Maturity Analysis

POLA has a satisfying or standard concept of sustainability. The organization
understands the need to address the environmental and social impacts of port operations while
maintaining business profitability, as this procures its social license to operate and grow. Similar
to the Ports of Rotterdam and Antwerp, POLA came to embrace more sustainable
environmental and social practices by addressing challenges to its environmental management
approaches, public health impacts created from its tenants’ operations, and efforts to build
support with local communities around implementing an ambitious capital development
program. While POLA has developed many approaches and tools to advance sustainability
locally and throughout the port and goods movement industry, it hasn’t started using it as a
framework to consistently measure its own organizational performance and is still struggling to
integrate it into organizational processes, governance processes, and culture.
POLA exhibits a sophisticated maturity regarding many economic sustainability aspects
(Financial Strength; Innovation, Technology, Investment & Incentives; and Collaboration) and
environmental ones (Emissions, Waste, Biodiversity, and Environmental Issues related to the
goods movement chain, such as public health impacts). For the social aspects, the maturity
level is transitioning from satisfying to sophisticated or has achieved a sophisticated level, such
as Community Engagement and Corporate Citizenship. There is room for improvement related
to POLA’s Processes, Sustainability Reporting, and the Motivation and Incentives that are given
to employees to advance sustainability throughout the organization.

132

Port Organizational Sustainability Strategy
What is most striking about POLA’s sustainability strategy is the lack of integration of its
innovative sustainable practices and the most recently adopted strategic plan and land use
plan. POLA has designed some very successful sustainability-related programs and has achieved
more results in the near-term over the other ports examined in the study (for example the port-
wide diesel emissions reductions through the CAAP and related reductions in public health
risks). However, while the Port of Rotterdam and Port of Hamburg make sustainability an
explicit, broadly integrated part of their future business and spatial plans, POLA has yet to do
so.
Applicable sustainability strategies to the Port of Los Angeles include the Conventional
Visionary (Holistic) and Transformative Extroverted (Legitimization for the Industry). A more in-
depth discussion of the evolution of POLA’s sustainability strategy and my suggestion for its
future is presented in Chapter 4.

133

F. Summary of Findings among Global Container Ports

Among the port organizations studied, two viewed the concept of sustainability as a
balance between environmental and economic concerns (Shanghai and Ningbo/Zhoushan) and
three understood it as the Triple Bottom Line (Antwerp, Hamburg, and Los Angeles). The most
advanced view of sustainability (sophisticated) was held by Rotterdam, who uses the Triple
Bottom Line approach to sustainability to measure organizational performance and guide its
future business planning (Rotterdam). The views of sustainability and overall maturity levels of
each port organization are summarized in Table 25.
When applying the adapted framework for evaluating the overall levels of sustainability
maturity within a port organization, the least mature organization is Ningbo/Zhoushan, with a
transitional maturity level of 1-2 overall, and the most advanced port organizations are
Rotterdam and Los Angeles, with overall maturity levels of 3-4, satisfying to sophisticated.

134

Table 25: Summary of Port Organization Views of Sustainability and Maturity Levels
Port Organization View of Sustainability
Overall Maturity
Levels
Shanghai Port Elementary Understanding – 2
(balancing environmental and business
concerns)
Overall maturity is 2
Elementary
Port of Ningbo/Zhoushan Elementary Understanding – 2
(balancing environmental and business
concerns)
Overall maturity is 1-2
Beginning -
Elementary
Port of Rotterdam Sophisticated – 4
(Triple Bottom Line plus measures org
performance, explicitly guides business
and strategic planning)
Overall maturity is 3-4
Satisfying –
Sophisticated
Port of Antwerp Satisfying – 3 (Triple Bottom Line) Overall maturity is 2-3
Elementary - Satisfying
Hamburg Port Authority Satisfying – 3 (Triple Bottom Line) Overall maturity is 2-3
Elementary - Satisfying
Port of Los Angeles Satisfying – 3 (Triple Bottom Line) Overall maturity is 3-4
Satisfying –
Sophisticated

135

Common Challenges and Advanced Practices
Some common challenges that port organizations face include improving efficiency,
expanding operations to accommodate anticipated future cargo growth, managing air quality
and water quality impacts, and habitat management. Constructing or retrofitting container
terminals with electric equipment and/or automated equipment has been one common
response to improve efficiency. However, there are both push and pull approaches among port
authorities and terminal operators regarding implementation. For example, some
environmental measures are pushed by port authorities through requirements in RFPs for new
land leases (such as Rotterdam’s M2 and their Front Runners Policy) and enforced through
concession and lease agreements. However, at the Port of Hamburg, the HHLA CTA terminal
took the initiative to automate and use electric equipment because they saw it as a means to
innovate and double their productivity; there was no direct push from the port organization.
Going forward, the Port of Hamburg has started to require terminal utilization rates in lease
agreements to boost productivity at other terminals.
Many ports have very large capital development projects underway or in the planning
stages to accommodate anticipated future cargo growth or diversify their land uses. For
example, Shanghai plans to expand the Yangshan Deepwater Port, Meishan Island is under
construction in Ningbo, Rotterdam will soon be operating the first phase of MV2, and Los
Angeles is redeveloping part of its waterfront for recreational and commercial uses. Many of
these ports were able to gain community acceptance of expansion plans by including
environmental measures in lease agreements (Los Angeles, Rotterdam), conducting master
business planning activities with tenants and the community (Rotterdam, Antwerp, Hamburg),
136

restricting cargo types and volumes to manage impacts (Ningbo), and replace and restore
habitats that are displaced by development (Rotterdam, Los Angeles, Antwerp). The Ports of
Rotterdam and Antwerp also subscribe to the Building with Nature approach to manage water
quality and impacts to habitat.
Incentive programs are widely used among ports to reduce environmental impacts. For
example, the Ports of Rotterdam, Hamburg, Antwerp, and Los Angeles all participate in the
Environmental Ship Index program. Shanghai Port is planning to designate role model terminal
operators within the port to receive subsidies for improved efficiency and reduced air
emissions. The Hamburg Port Authority offers discounts to its customers for using noise-
reducing breaks on rail cars.

Sustainability Strategy Profiles
A hybrid approach to sustainability strategies is common among the case studies. All of
the port organizations studied seemed to employ two or more strategies, except for the
Hamburg Port Authority, which seemed to be most directly focused on a Conservative
Efficiency Strategy. Table 26 summarizes the sustainability strategies employed by each port
organization.

137

Table 26: Summary of Port Organization Sustainability Strategies
Port Organization Organizational Sustainability Strategy Hybrids
Shanghai Port Conservative (Efficiency) +
Conventional Extroverted (Legitimization)
Port of Ningbo/Zhoushan Introverted (Risk Mitigation) +
Conventional Extroverted (Legitimization)
Port of Rotterdam Conventional Visionary (Holistic) +
Conservative (Efficiency) +
Transformative Extroverted (Legitimization for the Industry)
Port of Antwerp Conservative (Efficiency) +
Transformative Extroverted (Legitimization for the Industry)
Hamburg Port Authority Conservative (Efficiency)
Port of Los Angeles Conventional Visionary (Holistic) +
Transformative Extroverted (Legitimization for the Industry)

As illustrated in Table 27, the Conservative (Efficiency) approach seems to be the most
commonly included among the sustainability strategies used by the ports (four out of six rely on
this strategy or combine it with others). This is most likely because the underlying drivers are
cost efficiency (and now energy efficiency and emissions efficiency, since ports are increasingly
being held responsible for the externalities attached to these inputs and outputs, either by
regulatory agencies or local stakeholders). Legitimization strategies, either conventional or
transformative, are also widely used among the case study ports.

138

Table 27: Summary of Port Sustainability Strategy Profiles and Maturity Levels
Introverted
– Risk
Mitigation

Conventional
Extroverted -
Legitimization

Transformative
Extroverted -
Legitimization
Conservative -
Efficiency
Conventional
Visionary -
Holistic
Systemic
Visionary
Level 1 –
Poor
Maturity
Overall
Generally Level 2
– but Level 3 for
Corporate
Citizenship and
Collaboration
Level 3 – Overall
Maturity is higher
than
Conventional;
Society-related
aspects most
important
Levels 3-4
Outstanding in
processes,
technology
Levels 3-4,
Mostly
sophisticated
approach, but
some aspects
are at a Level 3
Level 4 –
Sophisticated
maturity level
across all
aspects
Focuses on a
very low
standard;
concentrates
on
compliance,
No specific
aspect is
important
Focuses on
communicating
its commitment
to sustainability
to increase
credibility;
Emphasis on
external
presentation
Org is a driver for
corporate
sustainability in
society –
legitimization of
industry sector
efforts
Mostly focused
on internal
measures, cost
efficiency
Has a highly
developed
commitment to
become a
market leader
in sustainability
issues
Combines
Outside-in and
inside-out
perspectives,
Efforts improve
port sector and
global goods
movement
supply chain

Ningbo
Ningbo
Shanghai
Los Angeles
Rotterdam
Antwerp
Shanghai
Rotterdam
Antwerp
Hamburg
Los Angeles
Rotterdam

When viewed along the continuum of sustainability strategies and maturity levels, the
Conventional Visionary (Holistic) approach seems to lay the groundwork as a pathway to the
Systemic Visionary Strategy, which arguably is what would be employed to create a mature
sustainable port organization, displaying a sophisticated maturity across all sustainability
aspects. With this approach, port organizations can excel at both internally and externally-
focused measures to gain a unique competitive market position, continuous improvement of
sustainability inside the organization, and drive change throughout the industry sector to create
new industry standards of practice.
139

Chapter 4:
Organizational Change Case Study: The Port of Los Angeles

This chapter provides an in-depth case study of the organizational change process
toward sustainability at the Port of Los Angeles. Mirvis and Googins (2006) provide a
framework that describes the dimensions, evolution, triggers, and drivers of the development
of Corporate Citizenship within companies that is helpful to examine. POLA’s past and present
sustainability story is explored within this framework. A 2012 internal sustainability planning
process is discussed and the resulting draft sustainability plan for 2035 is presented. A
discussion reflecting on the maturity of POLA as a sustainable organization and its sustainability
strategy is presented, and the chapter concludes by identifying what drivers and triggers might
need to occur in the future for POLA to evolve to its next level of maturity.

A. Mirvis and Googins - Dimensions, Stages, Triggers and Drivers for Sustainability

While the focus of Mirvis and Googins (2006) is on Corporate Citizenship (a similar
integrative framework to sustainability that considers “ethics, philanthropy, stakeholder
management, and social and environmental responsibilities” of an organization (Bettignies
2002)), their approach to the dimensions of the framework and their description of its
evolution within companies is helpful to consider when thinking about the challenge of
embedding sustainability within organizations (107). Table 28 presents their dimensions and
defining questions of the framework that have been adapted to help frame sustainability.

140

Table 28: Mirvis and Googins (2006) Dimensions of Corporate
Citizenship Adapted to Sustainability

Dimension

Defining Questions
Concept How is sustainability defined? How comprehensive is the organizations’
understanding of it? How integrated is the framework that guides
corporate action?
Strategic Intent What is the purpose of sustainability in the company? What is it trying to
achieve through the pursuit of sustainability? How does this guide action
and investments?
Leadership Do top leaders support sustainability? Do they lead the effort? How
much leadership do they exercise and to what extent do they exemplify
behavior?
Structure How are responsibilities for sustainability managed? Are there “islands”
within the organization, or is there formal integration through cross-
functional committees and a combination of structures, processes, and
systems?
Issues Management How does the organization deal with sustainability issues as they arise?
How responsive is the organization in terms of sustainability policies,
programs, and performance measurement and management?
Stakeholder Relationships How are stakeholders engaged? Does the company take unilateral
actions, have interactive dialogue, create partnerships or align with
multiple organizations?
Transparency How open is the organization regarding its financial, social, and
environmental performance?
Source: Adapted from Mirvis and Googins (2006) Pages 107-108.

An organization’s response to these dimensions changes and evolves over time through
the stages of growth or maturity of corporate citizenship (sustainability) within an organization.
Mirvis and Googins (2006) define five major stages of evolution:
• Stage 1 – Elementary: sustainability activities are episodic and programs are
undeveloped. There is little understanding of the concept within the organization, top
management is not an advocate, and there are limited or one-way interactions with
stakeholders. Simple legal compliance and risk management drives action (109).
141

• Stage 2 – Engaged: Senior management begins to adopt a new approach, often “policy-
based,” to address risks of litigation or damage to its public image. Resources and time
are invested in the organization to learn more about pressing community,
environmental, and social issues. Responses are more “reactive” to emerging issues and
take the form of “crisis management.” “Two-way communication with stakeholders” is
increased, and staff may begin to generally feel overwhelmed without support
structures in place. The strategic intent of this stage is to preserve the organization’s
social and environmental “license to operate” (110-111).
• Stage 3 – Innovative: In this stage the organization will embrace a more comprehensive
approach to the concept of sustainability and broaden its agenda and the commitment
of top leadership. High levels of innovation and learning occur, along with extensive
dialogues with external and sometimes internal stakeholders. There is a challenge to
build the “business case” for pursuing sustainability and develop a rationale for
increased investments in technology, infrastructure, and program support. Program
management approaches are used to organize previous adhoc or reactive initiatives.
Public reporting of environmental and social performance occurs. However, Mirvis and
Googins (2006) found that most organizations at this stage are “simply compiling data
prepared by operating units and presenting it with a corporate overlay” (113).
• Stage 4- Integrated: In this stage, the Triple Bottom Line sustainability perspective is
integrated throughout the organization from top to bottom and throughout the various
business units. Leadership is vocal and active within industry on sustainability topics and
142

organizational structures, processes, and systems are integrative. Moving from
coordination to collaborative efforts can be challenging. Company-wide efforts to
integrate approaches include sustainability training for managers and employees and
stakeholder issue management frameworks (115). Measuring sustainability
performance becomes more important, and organizations focus on setting targets,
establishing key performance indicators, and creating balanced scorecards (115).
• Stage 5- Transformative: The strategic intent of organizations in this development
stage is to create new market opportunities by integrating sustainability into their
business strategy. These innovative organizations are often led by visible, visionary
leaders that can become global spokespeople for their industry (118). These
organizations partner extensively with others to address problems, reach new markets,
and develop local economies (118). Mirvis and Googins (2006) note that this is not
necessarily the “end” stage of development as scholars are still studying how
organizations that embrace sustainability may continue to evolve (118).

Table 29 illustrates what each of the dimensions may look like through the various
stages of growth, although they may not all develop and advance at the same pace.

143

Table 29: Mirvis and Googins (2006) Stages of Corporate Citizenship
Stage 1 –
Elementary
Stage 2 –
Engaged
Stage 3 –
Innovative
Stage 4 –
Integrated
Stage 5 -
Transformative
Corporate
Citizenship
Concept

Jobs, Profits,
Taxes
Philanthropy,
Environmental
Protection
Stakeholder
Management
Sustainability or
Triple Bottom
Line
Change the
Game
Strategic Intent

Legal
Compliance
License to
Operate
Business Case Value Proposition Market
Creation or
Social Change
Leadership

Lip Service,
Out of Touch
Supporter, in
the Loop
Steward, on
top of it
Champion, in
front of it
Visionary,
Ahead of the
Pack
Structure

Marginal;
Staff Driven
Functional
Ownership
Cross-
Functional
Coordination
Organizational
Alignment
Mainstream:
Business
Driven
Issues
Management
Defensive Reactive,
Policies
Responsive,
Programs
Pro-Active
Systems
Defining
Stakeholder
Relationships

Unilateral Interactive Mutual
Influence
Partnership Multi-
Organization
Alliances
Transparency Flank
Protection
Public
Relations
Public
Reporting
Assurance Full Disclosure
Source: Mirvis and Googins (2006), Figure 1: Stages of Corporate Citizenship, Page 108.

How do organizations evolve from one stage to the other? What are the developmental
challenges and triggers that spur this organizational growth? Figure 3 provides an illustration:

144

Figure 3: Five Stages of Development and Triggers for Change
Adapted from Mirvis and Googins (2006)

Development Triggers
Mirvis and Googins (2006) have identified the following triggers or developmental
challenges that when addressed or achieved advance sustainability within an organization.

Gain Credibility
An organization’s search for credibility and legitimacy is what typically motivates an
organization to become engaged in a sustainability issue. This is usually in response to a crisis
or catalyst event, the risk of litigation, a threat to the organization’s reputation, increased
political and social pressure, or a confluence of these factors.
Build Capacity
Building institutional capacity is required to become innovative. Once the organization
has decided how to respond to various or specific sustainability issues, draft appropriate
policies, and engage with stakeholders to learn more about their concerns and suggested
approaches, everyone from top management to technical staff begins a learning curve
regarding how to adapt and implement new approaches to meet higher standards. Keeping
--- Credibility
Elementary
---Capacity
Engaged
---Coherence
Innovative
-Commitment
Integrative
Transformative
145

pace with the array of new demands and building the institutional capacity to learn, cope, and
excel with a coordinated response is the main developmental challenge. Once senior managers
become more deeply involved and staff implements more extensive and comprehensive
programs, the organization is able to broaden its knowledge base and abilities and move into a
stage of innovation.
Create Coherence
Organizations that have made investments and are engaged with widespread activities
to address sustainability on multiple fronts can be challenged to create alignment among the
programs and ensure strategic purpose and potential synergies among them. The organization
is lacking a coordinated, strategic framework to address sustainability in an integrated way.
Efforts to systematize, coordinate, and manage these activities begin to occur to address this
developmental challenge. However, to be successful, staff must see the necessity and value of
integrating their efforts and managers must see the importance of creating holistic
organizational processes rather than just meeting short-term priorities for specific projects
(114). Most importantly, a comprehensive view of sustainability must be articulated and
shared throughout the organization, linked to corporate strategy, and embedded in the culture
of the organization (114). Creating coherence is needed to move from the innovative to the
integrative stage of development.
Deepen Commitment
Sustainability is truly embedded within an organization when it is expressed,
aligned, and reflected in the business model. This deepening of commitment is what is needed
146

to trigger evolving into the Transformative stage of development. New business strategies and
opportunities arise when organizations consider and understand the complexity of the
sustainability issues in their industry and they are able to find willing partners to create new
market solutions, policy infrastructures, and organizational structures to help create system-
wide change for sustainability (116).

Drivers
In addition, Mirvis and Googins (2006) note the following drivers that prompt
organizations to embrace sustainability:
• Internal motivators that push action – values, reputation, image, business strategy,
recruiting and retaining employees (123).
• External pressures that pull responses – requests or inquiries from customers and
consumers, expectations from community stakeholders, political or regulatory pressure,
scandals, crises, and criticism from non-profits or the media (122-123).

Next, the sustainability story of the Port of Los Angeles will be discussed and the framework
Mirvis and Googins (2006) provide will be applied to better understand the organizational
change processes that have occurred.

147

B. POLA’s Sustainability Story – Past and Present
The following passage is excerpted from the book chapter “Managing Sustainability: The
Port of Los Angeles Among an Ecology of Organizations” that I coauthored with Dr. Hilary
Bradbury-Huang in 2011:
THE SUSTAINABILITY STORY FOR AMERICA’s PORT: HOW BREAKTHROUGHS HAPPEN
The Port of Los Angeles (POLA), America’s busiest port, is part of a port complex located in the
San Pedro Bay, twenty miles south of downtown Los Angeles. Over 40% of the nation’s
containerized imported goods move through the global gateway created by the Ports of Los
Angles and Long Beach. A major economic engine, POLA contributes to over 900,000 jobs in the
region and over three million nationwide (POLA, 2010). POLA is a public enterprise, a
proprietary department of the City of Los Angeles that operates on the revenue generated from
lease agreements related to its 7,500 acres of land and water along 43 miles of waterfront.
Increases in US consumer spending starting in the 1990s led to a sharp increase in imports from
China. These cargo volumes grew exponentially through 2007, when throughput reached 8.4
million Twenty-foot Equivalent Units (TEUs) compared to 2.9 million TEUs in 1997. POLA was
concerned about constructing enough infrastructure capacity to accommodate the growth, as
cargo volumes in the region were expected to triple or at least double by 2025. This level of
forecasted growth has since been revised and is now expected to occur in 2035. Regardless,
past unmitigated growth has created cumulative negative environmental impacts and increased
health risks to the region and local community.
POLA is a major node within the global goods movement system with mobile emissions sources
from ships, trucks, trains and cargo handling equipment that have historically been unregulated
and run on diesel fuel. It is located in an area with the poorest air quality in the nation and a
high regional background residential cancer risk. In 1998, diesel particulate matter (DPM) was
designated by state regulatory agencies as a toxic air contaminant (cancer-causing agent). The
San Pedro and Wilmington communities adjacent to the Port became concerned about the
public health impacts of the increasing diesel emissions created by goods movement. Over
time, the regional air quality agency conducted two studies (Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study
(MATES) II (2000) and MATES III (2008) regarding the increased cancer risk to residents
associated with DPM from diesel exhaust and identified the Ports of Los Angeles and Long
Beach as major contributors. Regulatory and political pressure, combined with community and
environmental group opposition through an environmental lawsuit, prevented any major port
expansion projects from moving forward between 2000 and 2007.
Green Growth Challenge
POLA’s evolving journey to become a sustainable organization began in response to the
increase in cargo imports, the inability to expand, and need to improve existing infrastructure.
148

Therefore POLA was forced to focus on addressing the cumulative impacts of existing port
operations and planned expansion efforts. A settlement agreement in 2003 that resulted from
the China Shipping lawsuit (filed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA))
established a port community advisory committee, which forced more transparency and
community input into Port decision-making, along with a $50 million dollar mitigation fund for
community aesthetic and air quality projects. Specifically, as a result of the settlement
agreement, POLA committed to researching and developing technologies that could be used
within the port to reduce air emissions from port operations. POLA also began to conduct port-
wide studies on a range of environmental issues related to light and glare, noise,
transportation, biological resources, and historical resources.

As the major public health impacts from goods movement were related to air quality, POLA
started to address these concerns by conducting inventories for all mobile sources of air
emissions within the port. Partnering with adjacent Port of Long Beach for the first time on
environmental policy, in 2006 both Ports released a joint Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP), which
provided a comprehensive approach to aggressively reduce air emissions by 45% within the
world’s seventh busiest container port complex as capital projects moved forward. POLA’s
move toward sustainability began with the philosophy of Green Growth: implement aggressive
environmental mitigation policies and programs and allow for continued port expansion and
investment in infrastructure. The CAAP is considered a living document that is updated every
five years to guide policies and investment towards reinvention as a zero emissions port.

Emissions reductions were achieved by a combination of voluntary market-based incentives,
new POLA tariffs and policies, and contractual requirements integrated into the lease
agreements for new capital development projects. A 2010 POLA air quality report card shows
that significant voluntary reductions of overall air emissions have been achieved since 2005,
with a 52% reduction in DPM port-wide. Between 2007 and 2009, POLA approved six major
capital improvement projects. In 2008, $383 million in construction contracts were awarded for
these projects. Port-wide, over 18 multi-year construction projects are currently underway,
including a cargo terminal expansion project, a road-widening project, a new marina, channel
deepening project, and a large 30-acre community park (161-163).

So where is the Port of Los Angeles now on this journey to green growth and
sustainability? The following table lists the numerous sustainability initiatives the Port of Los
Angeles has pioneered or been engaged in between 2006 and 2013 and illustrates how
sustainability guides many of the organization’s decisions:

149

Table 30: POLA Sustainability Initiatives
Sustainability Initiatives and Best Practices that demonstrate the
Port of Los Angeles Commitment to Sustainability
• Clean Air Action Plan; A comprehensive programmatic approach to air quality
management for the San Pedro Bay Ports
• Water Resources Action Plan; Joint water management plan with the Port of Long
Beach
• Sustainable Lease Agreements with CAAP measures and other environmental
requirements for new tenants and renewals of terminal operating agreements
• San Pedro Baywide Health Risk Reduction Standard; the goal is 85% reduction in
residential cancer risk due to diesel particulate matter (DPM) by 2020
• Project Incremental Residential Health Risk Threshold; No project shall be
approved unless it complies with the CAAP, and no incremental increase in
residential health risk created by the project shall exceed 10 in a million.
• Increased Community Engagement in environmental review and port planning
processes
• Community Mitigation Agreements; China Shipping Settlement mitigation
projects and TraPac Community Benefits Fund total almost $100 million
• Clean Trucks Program; 98% of truck trips meet or exceed the 2007 engine
standard
• Technology Advancement Program; In the process of testing the world’s first
zero-emissions drayage truck
• Promoting International Adoption of Clean Technologies; Working with the ISO
for standardizing shore power or alternative maritime (AMP) protocols
• PortTech LA; Development of human capital and local economic development
• LA Waterfront Redevelopment; Includes 50 acres of new open space and several
miles of waterfront promenade
• International Collaboration and Leadership through IAPH, WPCI, PPCAC, and
PIANC
• Renewable Energy Construction; 1 MW of solar power capacity has been installed
on roof of the cruise terminal
• Environmental Management System for the maintenance and construction
division was maintained and recertified ISO 14001
• Habitat Restoration Projects that have created over 450 acres of wetlands and
shallow water habitat
• Sustainability Assessment; Was conducted in 2008 and recommended the
creation of a sustainability plan
• Sustainability Report; A public report was released in 2011
• Project Labor Agreements to boost local employment for construction projects

150

How does the Port of Los Angeles manage all of these initiatives? The Mirvis and
Googins (2006) framework is used to examine the POLA’s approach to each dimension of
sustainability:

Table 31: POLA Assessment of Mirvis and Googins (2006) Dimensions of Sustainability

Dimension

Defining Questions

POLA Assessment

Concept
How is sustainability defined?
How comprehensive is the
organizations’ understanding
of it? How integrated is the
framework that guides
corporate action?
General understanding of the TBL concept by leadership, but
this hasn’t diffused throughout the organization. The org
hasn’t created an integrated framework that guides corporate
action to reflect the perspective of leadership.

Strategic
Intent

What is the purpose of
sustainability in the company?
What is it trying to achieve
through the pursuit of
sustainability? How does this
guide action and investments?
POLA came to accept environmental sustainability as a
required component of its business philosophy through its
challenges in environmental management of air quality, public
health impacts, traffic and rail impacts, aesthetics, and habitat
issues. An understanding of social sustainability related issues
came through public engagement related to proposed capital
development projects to expand port operations and
understanding how to be a better neighbor to adjacent
communities by contributing to local economic development,
education, and the quality of life of its residents. The need to
demonstrate to policy regulators, political leaders, and the
adjacent community that it had a plan to achieve responsible
growth in the future is what drove initial investments in green
technology development, customer incentive programs, and
community engagement processes. An understanding that
market changes needed to occur to implement mitigation
strategies is what drove increased engagement with the goods
movement industry and collaboration with other ports.
Achievements in these areas put POLA in a leadership position
in the port sustainability field.

Leadership
Do top leaders support
sustainability? Do they lead
the effort? How much
leadership do they exercise
and to what extent do they
exemplify behavior?
Yes, top leadership drove the initial change to incorporate
sustainable practices into the organization. External efforts
have been exemplary. However, there is more work to do to
create an internal commitment throughout the organization to
implement existing sustainability policies, truly integrate
sustainability into the decision-making processes of the
organization, and create a framework to address current and
future challenges in a synergistic way. Efforts need to focus on
organizational learning and sustainability training for all staff.
151

Source: Adapted from Mirvis and Googins (2006)

Given the assessment above, using the Mirvis and Googins (2006) framework, at what
development stage is the organization?

Structure
How are responsibilities for
sustainability managed? Are
there “islands” within the
organization, or is there
formal integration through
cross-functional committees
and a combination of
structures, processes, and
systems?

There are mostly islands with a few cross-functional teams that
come together on a project-level basis. The robustness of
structures, processes, and systems to advance and measure
sustainability performance in an integrated way are severely
lacking.

Issues
Management
How does the organization
deal with sustainability issues
as they arise? How responsive
is the organization in terms of
sustainability policies,
programs, and performance
measurement and
management?
Based on its years of experience, in general the organization is
fairly proactive regarding the management of individual issues.
Improvement is needed regarding sustainability program
management, performance measurement, and addressing
issues with a more holistic and integrated strategy.
Stakeholder
Relationships
How are stakeholders
engaged? Does the company
take unilateral actions, have
interactive dialogue, create
partnerships or align with
multiple organizations?
Depending on the issue, the organization has employed all of
these approaches. However, two-way dialogue is most
common with community stakeholders, and POLA is engaged
with multiple organizations to share best practices, encourage
the diffusion of green technologies, and shape goods
movement planning locally, regionally, and globally.

Transparency How open is the organization
regarding its financial, social,
and environmental
performance?
POLA is open about sharing financial data, economic
development efforts, and the results of environmental
initiatives and programs. However, POLA is still struggling with
the implementation of their mitigation monitoring and
reporting programs to achieve compliance and ensuring
commitments contained in the sustainable lease agreements
are met.
152

Table 32: POLA Assessment of Mirvis and Googins (2006) Stages of Sustainability
Stage 1 –
Elementary
Stage 2 –
Engaged
Stage 3 –
Innovative
Stage 4 –
Integrated
Stage 5 -
Transformative
Sustainability
Concept

Jobs, Profits,
Taxes
Philanthropy,
Environmental
Protection
Stakeholder
Management
Sustainability or
Triple Bottom
Line
Change the
Game
Strategic
Intent

Legal
Compliance
License to
Operate
Business Case Value Proposition Market Creation
or Social Change

Leadership

Lip Service,
Out of Touch
Supporter, in
the Loop
Steward, on
top of it
Champion, in
front of it
Visionary,
Ahead of the
Pack
Structure

Marginal;
Staff Driven
Functional
Ownership
Cross-
Functional
Coordination
Organizational
Alignment
Mainstream:
Business Driven
Issues
Management

Defensive Reactive,
Policies
Responsive,
Programs
Pro-Active
Systems
Defining
Stakeholder
Relationships

Unilateral Interactive Mutual
Influence
Partnership Multi-
Organization
Alliances
Transparency Flank
Protection
Public
Relations
Public
Reporting
Assurance Full Disclosure

In Table 32 above, the dots notate the various responses or perspectives to the
dimensions of sustainability that POLA has exhibited. Using this framework for evaluation, the
Port of Los Angeles is generally at Stage 3, Innovative, but unlike its air and water quality
management programs, it has yet to take a programmatic approach to sustainability. It does
exhibit many of the attributes of an organization at Stage 4, and even 5, but these are pursued
in a disparate way. Regarding the concept of sustainability, not everyone in the organization
understands or embraces the TBL approach, and many revert to weaker versions of the
concept. POLA continues to preserve its social and environmental license to operate and pursue
153

expansion plans by its promotion of sustainability, but it is also motivated to create changes
within the goods movement industry as a whole that will reduce negative environmental and
social impacts. The structural lynchpin that is missing for POLA to evolve further in its efforts to
a truly more integrated approach is organizational alignment. Both a strategic programmatic
approach to sustainability, instead of having adhoc initiatives, and structured organizational
alignment for better integrated sustainability performance, would be achieved through the
adoption and implementation of a Port Sustainability Plan.

C. POLA’s Potential Future – A Sustainability Plan for 2035

In 2012, POLA’s environmental management division held a series of workshops over
several months with technical staff and managers to scope out a sustainability plan for review
and consideration by Port senior management. There were several drivers for this action: the
responsibility for sustainability reporting was within the division, yet there were was not a good
framework for measuring performance and reporting progress, and POLA was lacking in the
development of sustainability metrics. POLA’s first sustainability report, released in 2011, was a
good first effort, and the first POLA publication that thematically reported on the range and
scope of the Port’s environmental and social sustainability achievements. But even if the
various sustainability initiatives were presented in a programmatic way, they certainly weren’t
managed or integrated in that way, and it was hoped that creating a sustainability plan would
address these gaps in organizational processes and create better alignment across the
organization, as well as answer the question “what’s next?” in the Port’s advancement of
sustainable operations, both internally and throughout the port complex. Figure 4 presents the
154

proposed framework of the Draft Sustainability Plan (Plan) that was presented in January 2013
to gather feedback from a working group of managers and senior staff from various divisions of
the Port, including planning, engineering, public affairs, real estate, marketing, and finance.

Figure 4: Framework for Draft Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Plan, 2013 – 2035

Source: Port of Los Angeles 2013

The major components of the draft Plan include a Vision Statement, Port Sustainability
Goals, Material Issues, and Actions, Metrics, and Targets with a Timeline. These are supported
and implemented by existing or new sustainability programs. The material issues identified in
the Plan are defined and reflect POLA’s strategic intent toward sustainability for each issue area
155

and help focus action around these needs. Appendix D presents a draft copy of the
comprehensive Plan through 2035. Based on feedback from the working group meeting, a
short-term Plan that identifies high priority actions between 2013 and 2014 was also prepared
(Appendix E), as some participants found the long-term comprehensive plan to be
overwhelming. When POLA is ready to focus internally on programmatic sustainability planning
for its own future, hopefully these unpublished plans will serve as a resource.

D. Discussion of POLA’s Sustainability Maturity and Strategy Profile

As discussed in Chapter 3, the assessment of the sustainability maturity of the Port of
Los Angeles using the adapted framework from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010) was that POLA’s
approach to sustainability was somewhat holistic, but improvement is needed to work on
internal integrative processes to achieve a Systemic Visionary sustainability strategy. So what
might help spur the Port in this direction?

Using the Mirvis and Googin’s framework, it is apparent that the developmental
challenges the Port must confront are creating coherence (through programmatic sustainability
management and structural organizational alignment) and deepening the organization’s
commitment for managing and measuring organizational performance based on the Triple
Bottom Line as it better integrates existing initiatives and processes. In addition to simply
adopting the strategic organizing framework that the proposed sustainability plan offers, there
are many actions contained in the draft plans (both the Priority Actions and the comprehensive
one through 2035) and the programs list that could help this occur. While a variety of drivers
156

could make sustainability planning resurface eventually as a priority for POLA (such as requests
from a new mayoral administration), it is hoped that internal motivators such as organizational
values, business strategy, and a drive to maintain leadership for the advancement of
sustainability will be the ultimate triggers for its implementation.

E. Findings Related to POLA’s Organizational Change for Sustainability
POLA needs to achieve coherence to advance to the next stage of sustainability
maturity. This can be achieved through organizational alignment and programmatic
sustainability management. Deepening the organizational commitment to sustainability by
drawing better connections to business strategy and core business functions (through better
integration into strategic and business planning) will help POLA reach a transformative state. A
sustainability plan for the organization can make this happen by addressing these gaps and
providing a framework for measuring and reporting performance.

157

Chapter 5:
Inter-organizational Collaboration and Learning Efforts among Ports
and the Goods Movement Industry

Many sustainability challenges are system problems requiring the participation of
multiple stakeholders within the system to engage in problem-solving. Addressing air emissions
from ocean-going vessels is one such example, requiring several parties to work together: the
ocean carriers who own the vessels, terminal operators who load and unload the vessels while
at berth, and port authorities, who are often held responsible by local communities for the
health impacts that result from port-related air emissions. Making changes within ports and the
global goods movement industry requires coordination and collaboration to encourage the
adoption of policies and technologies that reduce environmental and social impacts from
operations and avoid competitive disadvantages among ports. Many ports have started to work
together directly or through industry organizations to share technical expertise and best
practices and create new tools to advance port sustainability. This chapter will discuss these
collaborative learning efforts and how they can influence system-wide change at the
organization and industry level.

A. Pacific Ports Clean Air Collaborative

The Pacific Ports Clean Air Collaborative (PPCAC), composed of ports, private industry,
environmental agencies, and non-profit organizations located around the Pacific Rim, is focused
on sharing information about common air quality and environmental issues, learning from
colleagues, and working together to jointly develop and evaluate potential mitigation
strategies. The first PPCAC conference occurred in Los Angeles in 2006, sponsored by the Port
158

of Los Angeles (POLA), the Port of Shanghai (Shanghai Port), the US Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), and the U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD). Approximately 150 participants
from over twenty-five ports and other organizations attended. In 2008, Shanghai Port hosted a
second conference, focused on the topic of climate change. In February 2012, POLA hosted a
third conference, “Challenges for a Sustainable Future.” Presentations focused on the concept
of a sustainable port, business cases for sustainability, sustainable management practices,
corporate social responsibility, and climate change assessment approaches and responses for
ports. Working group topics for the future were discussed, but none were pursued.
As part of the 2012 conference registration, POLA conducted a sustainability survey that
I helped design. Fifty-seven organizations participated in the survey, fifteen of which were
ports. Other respondents were from government agencies, shipping companies, marine
terminal operators, and others (non-profits, universities, trade associations, and consulting
firms). Issues most important to participants included technology, reducing waste, local
economic development, and community involvement. Seventy-nine percent of participants
believed their organization could impact sustainability efforts in the goods movement supply
chain, and seventy percent of participants reported that sustainability was a high priority for
their organization (Green Rebstock 2012).
The main hurdles ports and government agencies identified for developing sustainability
policies were the following: lack of organizational strategy and alignment, short-term thinking,
inconsistent leadership, lack of political will and involvement, collaboration, and cost/economic
factors. Shipping lines and marine terminal operators found cost, lack of training and education,
technology and regulations not in synch, and the effectiveness of new technologies for a
159

marine port environment to be major factors. Non-profits and others felt diverse and
competing interests, cost effectiveness, lack of data, the challenge of aligning long-term
benefits with short-term costs, and feeling overwhelmed or not directly responsible to be major
hurdles to developing sustainability policies (Green Rebstock 2012).
On May 10, 2013, in conjunction with an International Association of Ports and Harbors
(IAPH) annual conference, a PPCAC working group meeting was convened to discuss proposals
for the future evolution of the collaborative. Approximately thirty people, myself included,
attended. A U.S. EPA representative presented a proposal to broaden the scope of the
collaborative to address challenges and needs in achieving sustainability in goods movement.
He highlighted the need to strengthen the organizational structure, improve services and
resources for members, and leverage other initiatives. The purpose for evolving would be to
enhance the ability of the group to meet the demand for knowledge and experience from ports,
port cities, and governments related to the goods movement sector, help members achieve the
Triple Bottom Line, and become a model for other regions. The proposed new mission was
“advance development and implementation of sustainable practices that balance economic,
environmental, and health benefits in ports and the goods movement industry.” Suggested new
objectives for the enhanced collaborative were improving information transfer through synergy
and dialogue between stakeholders, promoting a common language and comparable metrics,
recognizing environmental performance, and improving economic and environmental results
through complementary or consistent sustainability practices. It was suggested that a steering
committee, working group structure, and third party operational support be integrated into the
collaborative governance structure.
160

Some of the feedback from the crowd, which was regrettably thin after lunch, included
the following comments:
• There was a fear of a loss of focus from the group – sustainability is so broad and
air quality is still a major issue (Port of Seattle official)
• Still need to make progress on unresolved air issues (MARAD official)
• The speed of development in this group is slow over the last 8 years; many of the
issues alluded to would be out of the jurisdiction of the Port and better dealt
with by the Environmental Bureau; There are questions about how to choose the
right partners, how to position this collaboration; Suggest looking back at the
charter created for the group to refocus efforts instead of evolving the purpose
of the group; Environmental Protection should not be the main business of the
Port; It should be thought of within the context of doing business (Shanghai Port
official)
The meeting closed with the EPA’s commitment to review the original charter, prioritize
air quality issues, and conduct outreach efforts to individual ports to continue the dialogue
about the PPCAC’s future and find a sponsor for the 2014 PPCAC meeting.
While garnering lots of attention in the beginning as a major partnership between East
and West that bridged the Pacific Ocean on air quality issues, the PPCAC is going through a
transition and it is hoped that it can stay intact. Collaborative efforts, while they can be
incredibly rewarding if carefully facilitated, require large investments of staff time and financial
resources, and without sustained leadership have the danger of fizzling out. The conferences
usually have timely technical and policy information and there is a thoughtful mix of presenters.
161

It is hoped that they continue to provide a forum for information exchanges among
professionals in the ports and goods movement industry.
One important initiative that has grown out of the PPCAC is the technical staff exchange
program between Shanghai Port and POLA. Professional and management staff from both ports
have spent at least a week on two occasions each visiting the administrative centers and
terminal operations within each other’s port. I was fortunate enough to attend the most recent
staff exchange trip to Shanghai in October 2012. The Shanghai Port staff were gracious hosts
and I was impressed by many things, including the trip to the Shanghai Transport and Port
Research Center. My role in the delegation was to make a presentation regarding POLA’s recent
sustainability initiatives and planning efforts. Even if the format and structure of the PPCAC
must end due to its unwieldiness, it is hoped that international bilateral collaborations like the
technical exchange will strengthen and grow.

B. International Association of Ports and Harbors (IAPH) World Ports Climate Initiative

The Worlds Ports Climate Initiative (WPCI) is composed of over sixty-one member ports
of the IAPH. The group is dedicated to addressing climate change and using their ability to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions within the global supply chain. Dr. Geraldine Knatz, Executive
Director of POLA and Chair of the IAPH Port Environment Committee, was chosen to chair the
organization at its inception in 2008. Working groups have been created to develop greenhouse
gas reduction tools and strategies, and since development of the WPCI, the collaborative has
created the following learning tools and incentive program:
 Published a carbon footprinting guidance document for ports (led by POLA);
162

 Created two carbon calculators to calculate Scope 1&2 and Scope 3 emissions (led by
POLA);
 Created a website that provides technical specifications, costs, and case studies for the
use of Onshore Power Supply (OPS), also known Alternative Maritime Power (AMP), to
reduce emissions from vessels at berth (led by the Port of Gothenburg); and
 Launched the Environmental Ship Index (ESI) incentive program to reduce the emissions
from ocean-going vessels while in transit (lead by the Port of Rotterdam) (WPCI 2013).

In collaboration through the WPCI, many ports have come together to create some great
working tools to address the reduction of greenhouse gases and other air emissions. The
committee working group structure, which PPCAC lacks, has focused action into measurable
outcomes, such as practical assessment tools, sharing awareness and technical information
about available technologies, and the creation of an incentive program, the Environmental Ship
Index.

C. Environmental Ship Index (ESI)

Launched in January 2011, the Environmental Ship Index (ESI) is a voluntary incentive
program that focuses on reducing emissions from ocean-going vessels. Only vessels that
perform above current international maritime legislation, as set by the International Maritime
Organization (IMO), are eligible to participate. The incentive program is based on a points
163

system where vessels are rewarded for the use of clean fuels, having newer, cleaner engines, or
having a carbon management plan. Specifically, the plan rewards:
 Reductions in nitrogen oxides (NOx) – based on tested emissions from the
vessel’s main and auxiliary engines, as shown with vessel documentation;
 Reductions in sulfur oxides (SOx) – based on the amount of sulfur content in the
fuel being used; Additional points are provided if the ship uses Onshore Power
Supply; and
 Reductions in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions – based on the vessel having a
Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP) (WPCI 2013b).

The scale for the points system is 0 to 100, with 0 being at compliance and 100 being a
zero emissions vessel with a carbon management plan. The best performing vessels have
reached a score as high as 60, while LNG vessels that use boil-off gases as fuel have reached a
score of 80 (WPCI 2013b). Vessel operators register their ships with the ESI program and then
collect incentives from participating ports. There are over 23 incentive providers, 17 of which
are port authorities, with some participation by foundations and terminal operators (WPCI
2013b). Incentive providers are able to customize incentive levels, while maintaining the
integrity of the points system. POLA was the first seaport in North America to join in July 2012
and offers incentives up to $1250 per vessel call for scores over 40, with an additional $3250
per call for vessels with IMO Tier 3 main engines (POLA 2012b).

164

So how effective has the incentive program been? Tiedo Vellinga, Administrator of the
ESI Program for the IAPH and Director of Environmental Monitoring at the Port of Rotterdam,
says that customers have been pushing for ports to participate (Vellinga 2012). The Port of
Rotterdam joined in June 2011, soon after the program’s launch. Shipping companies are driven
to participate because the program improves their image and the financial incentives help
offset increased fuel costs for their vessels (Vellinga 2012). In general, the ESI program is
designed to incentivize the early adoption of future IMO regulations (WPCI 2013b). Over the
past two years, 186 companies that operate 1769 vessels have participated (Vellinga 2012).

D. PIANC Sustainable Ports Guide

PIANC, the World Association for Waterborne Transport Infrastructure, is a non-profit
organization focused on collecting and sharing expert advice from practitioners regarding the
design, development, and maintenance of sustainable infrastructure for ports, waterways, and
coastal areas (PIANC 2013b). A working group was created in January 2011 to prepare a report
that discusses the concept of a sustainable port for port authorities that are transitioning from
the traditional land lord role to a facilitator of sustainable operations within their port areas
and need an integrated understanding of environmental and social issues that can impact their
business.
The WG150 group meets quarterly, typically in Europe, to review and discuss the
ongoing work. I participated in one of the working day sessions that took place in Los Angeles
in March 2012. PIANC WGI50 has partnered with the International Association of Ports and
Harbors (IAPH), the European Sea Ports Organization (ESPO), the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers,
165

the Ports of Rotterdam, Antwerp, Los Angeles, Lagos, among others, and universities,
consultants, terminal operators, and others to prepare the report. Participating countries
include Australia, Belgium, China, Germany, the United States, Japan, the Netherlands, Nigeria,
Spain, and others.
The forthcoming report, expected in December 2013, discusses how sustainability is “an
economic choice based on a proactive long term vision” and the role ports must play to
negotiate the natural, social, and physical transport infrastructure systems they are located
within to pursue green growth and cope with decreasing environmental space and increasing
interactions between ports and cities (PIANC 2013, 7). The report’s purpose is to create
awareness about the advantages of implementing a sustainable port philosophy, present case
studies, and provide guidance and tools for realizing green growth.
Key elements of the Sustainable Port concept presented include:

 “Defining a long term vision that arrives at an acceptable ecological footprint;
 Transparent stakeholder involvement, with approved strategies for operations
and growth;
 An industry understanding of sustainability as an economic driver, that
complements economic development and is not just a legal obligation;
 Sharing knowledge with other ports and stakeholders; and
 Continuous improvement by innovating through processes and technology”
(PIANC 2013, 10).

Based on these concepts, the WG150 offers the following definition of a sustainable port:
A sustainable port is one in which the port authority together with port users,
proactively and responsibly develops and operates, based on an economic green
growth strategy, on the working with nature philosophy and on stakeholder
participation, starting from a long term vision on the area in which it is located and from
its privileged position within the logistic chain, thus assuring development that
anticipates on the needs of future generations, for their own benefit and the prosperity
of the region that it serves (13).

166

Aside from offering a definition of a sustainable port, the report also advances the concept of
“Working with Nature,” a PIANC initiative that promotes the perspective of the natural system
should lead the technical design of infrastructure (22). In this way we are better able to
integrate natural and socio-technical systems and identify solutions that benefit nature,
navigation, and transport rather than simply minimize ecological harm (22).
The group selected the following topics for inclusion in the guide: environmental quality
(soil, water, air, noise); habitat management; energy efficiency and renewables; materials and
waste management; climate change mitigation and adaptation; stakeholder involvement and
corporate responsibility; and cross-sectoral collaboration with the private sector, public actors,
NGOs, academia, and other ports. For each topic, challenges, issues to consider, potential
response options, and the various potential roles and perspectives of the port authority are
presented (as landowner, enforcing agent, operator, infrastructure developer, etc.), along with
case studies.
Once released, the sustainable ports guide is expected to serve as a practical technical
resource for port authorities globally, including those in transitional economies. It can spread
awareness about the perspective and actions that port organizations will need to implement to
achieve more sustainable operations and pursue green growth strategies in the future. The
draft report contains over seventeen case studies across the globe that can serve as resources,
add to the community of practice for sustainable operations among ports, and demonstrate
steps toward green growth in the port sector.
167

The PIANC Guide provides guidance on many of the aspects included in the adapted
framework to evaluate port sustainability (fourteen out of twenty-one); see Table 1 in Chapter
2 for a comparison. However, it does not provide any discussion about how to build momentum
internally within port organizations to implement the various strategies and approaches
discussed and manage this process in a holistic way. There is an acknowledgement that port
authorities need to shift their perspective about the roles they play in regards to stakeholder
management, but it doesn’t offer any support on how to create the organizational and cultural
changes that need to occur within port organizations to pursue the realization of a sustainable
port.

E. ESPO Green Guide

The European Sea Ports Association (ESPO), in an effort to update its Environmental
Code of Practice from approximately ten years ago, published “The ESPO Green Guide: towards
excellence in port environmental management and sustainability” in October 2012. While the
guide focuses on five major environmental issues: air quality, energy conservation and climate
change, noise management, waste management, and water quality and consumption
management, the major contribution is the framework it introduces for port authorities to
respond to these challenges.
The framework consists of the 5Es: Exemplify, Enable, Encourage, Engage, and Enforce
(ESPO 2012a). These approaches require the role of the port authority to transform from a
passive landlord to a port organization that sets a good example with their own environmental
168

management and performance; facilitates enhanced performance by port users; incentivizes
behavioral changes and induces continuous improvement; collaborates with others to share
knowledge, skills, and support towards joint projects that create environmental benefits; and
uses mechanisms that obtain good environmental behavior and ensure compliance with local
port requirements (ESPO 2012a). While ESPO expects to provide updates to the guide over time
to capture new response options as they are implemented by port authorities, the initial
version contains 70 examples of good practices within the 5E framework. These were collected
from 23 European port authorities across 11 countries. In addition, contact information and
reference links are provided as a resource for each best practice.
While the ESPO guide only focuses on environmental sustainability, the 5E framework is
a helpful way to focus action internally and externally to advance sustainability within ports.

F. BSR Performance Metrics for Supply Chain and Terminal Operators

Businesses for Social Responsibility (BSR), based in San Francisco, is a group that works
with businesses in various sectors to develop sustainable business strategies through
consulting, research, and collaboration. To improve sustainability performance of ports in
southern China, the group has recently produced two reports that focus on applying
sustainability metrics to cargo terminal operations. A May 2011 report identifies over 17
existing supply chain sustainability initiatives that have a wide range in focus, from
environmental management system standards like ISO 14001 that are used by global
companies to the Carbon Disclosure Project, which facilitates reporting on greenhouse gas
169

emissions from operations. National and regional efforts were included, such the EcoPorts’ Port
Environmental Review System (PERS), a port-sector environmental management standard, and
the Port of Los Angeles and the Port of Long Beach’s Clean Air Action Plan. The report
concluded that no single assessment framework covers the full spectrum of material issues
encountered by terminal operators, such as local impacts on air quality and public health,
water, waste, chemicals, noise, traffic, and biodiversity (BSR 2011).
The report also summarized common data needs for users across the transportation
supply chain, such as terminal operators, port authorities, ocean carriers, and shippers/cargo
owners, to track their environmental performance. This information allows for benchmarking
against peers and gives retailers and manufacturers the ability to calculate greenhouse gas
emissions for their supply chains. However, there is currently no single assessment framework
that provides holistic environmental performance data for terminal operators and aligns with
supply chain data needs (BSR 2011).
In 2012, BSR developed a pilot tool for terminal operators to track and report on their
environmental performance across nine categories (GHG and Energy, SOx, NOx, Waste, Water,
Chemicals, EMS, Biodiversity, and Community) with a total of 51 different aspects. Three
terminal operators tested the tool. Over twenty-three major shipping companies, industry
organizations, ports, and non-profits were involved its development, including APL, Maersk
Line, APM Terminals, DP World, Modern Terminals, Civic Exchange, the European Sea Ports
Organization (ESPO), World Ports Climate Initiative (WPCI), and the International Association of
Ports and Harbors (IAPH).

170

The tool allows terminal operators to:
 Conduct a self-assessment of their environmental performance and understand
the maturity of their data quality, systems, processes and calculation methods;
 Communicate their impacts and initiatives to other stakeholders in the supply
chain (ports, ocean carriers, business partners, etc.) and engage with them on
these issues; and
 Start to identify a standard set of metrics for the industry (BSR 2012, 14).

Many shipping lines and supply chain partners have already collaborated through BSR’s
Clean Cargo Working Group to identify protocols for reporting supply chain carbon emissions.
The Terminal Operator Environmental Assessment Tool is a way to integrate more terminals
into these efforts and provide the foundation for creating and verifying “green shipping”
market options in the future.

G. West Coast Ports Technical Committee Sustainable Infrastructure Design Tool

The West Coast Ports Technical Committee, composed of representatives from the Ports
of Los Angeles, Long Beach, Portland, Seattle, Tacoma, Vancouver US, and San Diego, in
partnership with the International Institute for Sustainable Seaports (I2S2), convened in 2011 to
address the following objectives:
• Examine sustainable marine infrastructure development at the project level;
• Build upon the sharing of best practices, technologies, successful mitigation measures,
and lessons learned;
• Allow for flexibility and adaptability by individual ports;
• Establish objective guidance and measurement of port sustainability; and
171

• Create a learning tool for project engineers and managers (WCPTC 2011).

The group, of which I was a member, was composed of technical specialists and
managers from the planning, environmental, engineering, and real estate divisions of the
participating ports. Using the framework of the Port of Long Beach Sustainable Design and
Construction Guidelines (2010) as a starting point, the committee chose to focus on the
following topics: air, public outreach, water, natural resources, economy, transport, safety and
security, site development, waste, energy, materials, and maintenance, monitoring, and
reporting. Within the context of these focus areas, over a series of meetings in 2011 and 2012
the committee started to pool together best practices, design approaches, and mitigation
strategies that they were aware of or had implemented within their own ports.
In addition to global strategies, these design and construction approaches were also
anchored to specific project types that were relevant to ports, such as dredging, wharf
construction, landscaping, remediation, and cargo terminals. Using a General Checklist format,
over 250 sustainability strategies are organized across the 13 aspects (air, water, etc.) and
cross-referenced with 8 major project types to create Project-Specific Checklists as needed.
With grant money received from San Diego Gas and Electric, an Excel-based tool is being
developed to create a software platform and user interface for the checklists to pre-populate
the strategies and automate the calculating and reporting process.
The General Checklist is designed in a way that makes the engineer or project manager
completing the list consider how the project might impact each environmental resource or
aspect, consider each strategy presented if there is a potential impact, and note why the
172

strategy is not applicable or feasible to pursue. For each strategy implemented, there is a
notation of whether an environmental, social, or economic benefit would be created. See
Figure 5 for an example of the General Checklist format.
Figure 5: West Coast Ports Sustainable Design and Construction Tool Format

The tool has the capability to assign values to these benefits and create reports for each
project that summarize the number of sustainability strategies considered and implemented
and the number of environmental, social, and economic benefits created based on the
strategies employed. With this approach, the projects could actually be ranked with a
sustainability index score based on a Triple Bottom Line approach if the port chose to create
such a system.
In addition to the General and Project-Specific Checklists, the group also included a
checklist related to project procedures to ensure communication across the project team
regarding the evaluation and implementation of the various strategies. This includes steps like
ensuring construction documents and bid specifications clearly identify the sustainability
Focus
Area

Strategy Y/N? Why Notes Strategy
Weight
Environ Economic Social

Air
Use an
electric
dredge
No No
power
source
was
available
Next time
coordinate
construction
crews better
with
infrastructure
design team
1 +1 +1
173

attributes of the project correctly prior to bid and verifying proper execution for documentation
in the project file.
Public demonstration of the tools occurred in August 2013 at the Ports 2013 conference
in Seattle. The software will be available for distribution on the Association of American Port
Authorities (AAPA) website. West Coast Ports Committee members plan to pilot the tool over
the next year and continue to meet and share their results. The hope is that each port will use
the tool for the design and construction of multiple projects and will be able to compare project
performance and improvement over time.
The project-based learning tool has great promise to create behavioral changes across
multiple divisions within port organizations. The key will be the level of coordination that occurs
when deciding which strategies to pursue or dismiss and ensuring they are actually
implemented during the design and construction process.

H. Findings related to Inter-organizational Learning Efforts

Some practical dynamic assessment tools have been created collectively (carbon foot
printing methodologies, calculators, sustainable design and construction tool) and mitigation
strategies (technologies, incentive programs) are being shared and diffused among ports. The
collaborative efforts discussed in Chapter 5 are hard to sustain without the right organizational
structure. Among these efforts, no guides or tools specifically address how to create or enhance
the organizational culture needed to support and advance sustainability in port organizations.
Specifically no activities are discussing the organizational change efforts or structure needed.
174

One particular project discussed, the West Coast Ports project-based learning tool, has great
potential to advance the TBL framework for measuring project performance and decision-
making at the project level.

175

Chapter 6:
A Change-Management Guide to
Advance Sustainability within Port Organizations

176

Forward
Ports serve a vital function within the global economy as international trade gateways.
Ninety percent of world trade is estimated to be transported through maritime ports (AAPA
2009). Creating sustainable seaports “through a balance of environmental, economic, and
social responsibility initiatives” has been identified by the American Association of Port
Authorities as a major port issue that should become “fundamental business practice” (Nagel
2008, 8).
As the Sustainability Liaison for the Port of Los Angeles, I defined sustainability for the
organization as the Triple Bottom Line approach (People-Plant-Profit) combined with the
concept of green growth. In the 2011 Sustainability Report for the Port of Los Angeles, I
presented the following explanation, “Through green growth, the Port is able to expand
operations while aggressively reducing past and present impacts to the community and the
environment. Through a comprehensive approach to balancing environmental, social, and
economic impacts, the Port is able to identify the need for new initiatives and ways to modify
existing operations to be more sustainable” (POLA 2011, 10). Although a recognized global
leader in port sustainability, like many others, the Port of Los Angeles is still struggling with how
to use sustainability as a framework for measuring organizational performance and truly embed
this perspective throughout the organization.
The purpose is of this guide is to help you begin to create an organizational culture that
promotes sustainability and to identify processes that can assist in institutionalizing
sustainability as an organizing management principle within your port. The guide is directed
toward change agents within port organizations who are usually tasked with designing and
177

implementing sustainability initiatives and realize that broader, more holistic approaches are
needed to truly be successful.
The guide provides a model example of a sustainable port organization, introduces
change management processes that can help further embed sustainability within your port,
includes a self-assessment tool to help you diagnosis your current efforts and help you target
future planning, and outlines what your Port Sustainability Plan could include to help you create
a sustainable organization.

178

A. Introduction

What does a model sustainable port organization look like? Figure 6 offers us an
illustration of how things would work in an ideal world if the Port you serve had decided to use
the Triple Bottom Line as its major framework for decision-making. In the model, there is a core
commitment throughout the organization to using the TBL approach to sustainability as the
major framework for decision-making. Specifically, all employees would consider and balance
the economic, environmental, and social impacts and benefits of the decisions they were
confronted with in their daily work. This development of integrative thinking and decision-
making is a key skill that must be mastered to truly implement the TBL approach at any scale.
The Port’s sustainability commitment is reflected in the organization’s global business
strategy and all policies, programs, internal processes, and practices. This commitment is then
reinforced through its stakeholder relationships, leadership within the industry, measuring
organizational performance, and reporting.

179

Figure 6: Model of a Sustainable Port Organization

Source: Adapted from Corporate Sustainability Management – A Reference Model. Center for Sustainable
Organizations. 2006.

180

B. Sustainability Wheel of Change

How might you help manage the change needed to create such an organization? Bob
Dopplet (2010) offers a change management process that he calls “The Wheel of Change
toward Sustainability.” Dopplet (2010) advises that you can start anywhere on the wheel, since
the process of change is circular and will require constant assessment and reinvestment. It is
important to consider that many of these interventions will need to happen simultaneously.
Below is a discussion of the major leverage points and solutions Dopplet (2010) has identified
that can help create the conditions needed to support a sustainable organization. We will start
at the top of the wheel to begin the needed paradigm shift in the organizational perspective.
The suggested order of the steps below follow traditional strategic planning processes.

1. Change the mindset – Help senior executives create an understanding of the
compelling need to change current approaches and commit to advancing sustainability within
the organization. The support of top management is crucial to get effective leadership and the
broad-based involvement of employees needed for this effort to be successful. Potential
strategic motivations for your port to pursue sustainability could be preserving your social and
environmental license to operate and building a business case where cost efficiencies and
reduced long-term risks will result, along with potential new market opportunities. Identifying
money lost due to inefficient energy, water, or waste management practices or using an
existing crisis or political challenge as evidence for the need to change can help strengthen your
arguments.
181

CASE IN POINT: To build its case among tenants that environmental policy and business policy
must be considered in tandem when measuring organizational performance, in 2010 the Port of
Antwerp facilitated a collaborative process with its tenants to produce the first ever GRI
compliant Port Community Sustainability Report .

2. Alter the goals of the system – by adopting a vision and guiding principles that
advance sustainability within the organization. Ideally this change-management process would
be integrated into the port’s strategic planning process, and the strategic vision and
sustainability vision statement for the Port would be the same. However the two can be
complementary if that is not possible. This effort is usually led by senior executives or their
management team.

CASE IN POINT: To alter the goals of its organization, The Port of Rotterdam adopted the vision
to “develop the port of Rotterdam into the most sustainable port in the world in 2015” (page 17,
2011 Annual Report). To do this the Port has adopted Port Vision 2030, a strategic mid-term and
long-term spatial business plan that incorporates the Triple Bottom Line approach to
sustainability (focus on people, profit, and planet). Sustainability criteria is used in spatial
planning and land allocation and management policies (such as their Front Runners Policy), and
sustainability metrics are used to measure organizational performance in the company’s GRI
compliant A+ integrated annual report.

182

3. Rearrange the parts of the system by organizing the appropriate cross-functional
transition teams to create new organizational processes or structures. The teams should have
representation from technical experts, someone to help manage the work, someone with good
leadership skills, and a sponsor from senior management to ensure vitality of the effort.

4. Restructure the rules of engagement internally among employees and externally
with tenants and other stakeholders by creating new strategies, tactics, and implementation
plans.

CASE IN POINT: The Port of Shanghai has a port development research institute that focuses on
transportation and maritime industry policy research, technologies, and recommendations. The
scope also includes academic exchanges and assessing the environmental effects of
development projects within the industry. The organization has a research arm, management
services arm, and an investment arm that focuses on technology. Major studies underway
include a pilot study for carbon emissions trading and a feasibility study for electric and LNG
trucks.

5. Adjust the parameters by changing policies and procedures. Be sure to formalize the
new protocols and train employees to reinforce the new approach.

6. Shift the flows of information so that there is continuous communication for
improvement. Managers and technical experts across divisions should chat or convene to share
183

information regarding common issues and the effectiveness and challenges of existing or
proposed organizational processes.

CASE IN POINT: To reduce energy consumption and facilitate more efficient freight movements
across modes, the Port of Hamburg participates in the Port Community System – an information
sharing system among port users and logistics companies. In fact the Port of Hamburg has
merged multiple IT database systems to share data, manage traffic flows throughout the port
area, and measure the effectiveness of financial incentives that shorten rail cargo storage and
idling times.

7. Correct the feedback loops by improving learning and motivation.

8. Review and repeat where appropriate.

The Wheel of Change discussed above is illustrated in Figure 7. The order of the steps
presented above may not be the right one for you to pursue, so you will have to judge based on
your own organizational needs. Your port might not be a total beginner to sustainability and
may have already addressed some of these components (such as establishing an initial
commitment to pursue sustainable practices, with a few policies and programs in place), so
consider challenges you might be having and how to improve the organizational design and
processes.

184

Figure 7. The Wheel of Change toward Sustainability (Dopplet 2010)

Source: Dopplet 2010 Figure II.1, Page 107

By implementing these changes at key structural and process leverage points, it is hoped
that you will help create an organizational culture that supports transparency, learning,

185

collaboration, innovation, and integrative thinking and decision-making to achieve an
integrative approach to sustainability management.
One approach to begin this process is to create a Sustainability Performance Group that
performs a stakeholder analysis, an internal audit of existing practices and operations, and an
external audit of environmental and social risks, market trends, and upcoming regulations.
Employees could be surveyed about the organization’s social and economic performance and
this could be compared with the perspectives from senior executives. The group could
benchmark the Port’s efforts against other sustainability leaders in the port industry (such as
the Ports of Rotterdam and Los Angeles) and then create a Port Sustainability Plan to organize
and direct future initiatives.

186

C. Self-Assessment

To begin your internal audit (which could be a group exercise), consider using the
framework below to identify stakeholders of the organization, your Port’s current concept of
sustainability, and the presence of the following economic, environmental, and social
sustainability aspects. Maturity tables for the economic, environmental, and social
sustainability aspects are provided so you can assess your Port’s level of sophistication for each
aspect.
If you are just beginning your sustainability initiatives, you will not be able to excel at
every aspect and you will need to prioritize your efforts. This can best be done by defining the
material issues that have the most impact on the sustainability performance of your
organization, and then directing your initial new strategies and actions around addressing those
issues. Completing the following assessment questions 1-5 related to stakeholders,
sustainability aspects and maturity levels, and material issues will help you through this
process.

187

Stakeholders
To better inform the discussion of port sustainability, it is important to understand who
the stakeholders are related to port operations. Figure 8 illustrates a typical group of port
stakeholders.
Figure 8: Typical Port Stakeholders

Source: Adapted from Port of Los Angeles (2011, Figure 1: Port of Los Angeles Stakeholders

188

The interests of the local community are usually focused on economic benefits and
impacts to the local and regional environment (air, water, traffic, etc.), including public health
impacts. Local, state, and national policy regulators tend to focus on compliance with
environmental, health and safety regulations and addressing emerging issues in these areas.
Non-governmental organizations typically engage the port on environmental, ethics, social
justice, and education, research or work-force development issues.
Employees and their unions generally care about career opportunities, pay and benefits,
health issues and working conditions. Port tenants and business partners focus on the financial
health of the port, any prospects or constraints for future growth, the quality and cost of port
services, security, and requirements to address environmental issues. Local officials in the port
city or region tends to be concerned with economic benefits, integration of port and city
infrastructure, social integration with the community, political governance issues, and
management of the environmental impacts of port operations.
Finally, the ports and goods movement industry (industry trade organizations, other
ports, shipping companies, terminal operators, rail and truck operators, equipment and engine
manufactures, warehouses and distribution centers, along with business and engineering
consulting firms) tend to focus on local versus national or global regulations, technology,
market and economic trends, and facilitating the efficient movement of goods along the supply
chain for their customers.

189

1. Who are the stakeholders of your Port? What stakeholders are impacted by Port
operations? What are their concerns? Consider the stakeholders identified in Figure 8 when
completing your assessment in Table 33.

Table 33: Stakeholder Analysis Assessment

Stakeholder Interest/Objective/Concern Port Issue/
Perspective
Potential for
alignment/mutual
benefit

190

Sustainability Aspects and Maturity Levels

As a starting point, it is important to understand your organization’s general concept of
sustainability. The most advanced organizations have an integrated and holistic concept of
sustainability, understanding that it incorporates considerations of environmental, economic,
and social performance. Statements regarding positions on sustainability may be found in
corporate reports, on the port website, or within documented port policies.

2. How does my Port currently view the concept of sustainability? Note who has this view –
is it held by senior executives? Mid-level managers? Is this view held broadly across the
organization?

Table 34: Concept of Sustainability Assessment
Source: author
Concept of Sustainability Assessment
1. Economic sustainability only – financially sustain business
operations

2. Environmental sustainability only – need to address
environmental impacts of business operations; balancing
economic and environmental concerns in making business
decisions

3. Environmental and social license to operate now and in the
future; Need to consider and address environmental and social
impacts of business operations; Business profitability still
maintained; People/Plant/Profit

4. Measuring organizational performance by considering
economic, environmental, and social performance; Integrated
Triple Bottom Line approach to business model, strategy, and
decision-making; This is reflected by integrated systems,
processes, and governance structures within the organization;
integrated corporate reporting and accounting; Identification of
material issues most important to sustainability performance
and establishing related sustainability goals. Understanding that
actions must focus on improving port area and global goods
movement industry.

191

As discussed, holistic concepts of sustainability include three dimensions: economic,
environmental, and social. The following framework adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner
(2010) offers 21 different economic, environmental, and social sustainability aspects to
measure port sustainability. Figure 9 lists the aspects included in the adapted framework that
will be the basis for your assessment.

Figure 9: Port Sustainability Aspects
Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010)

Economic Aspects Environmental Aspects Social Aspects
Financial Strength
Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives

Collaboration

Knowledge Management

Processes

Purchases

Sustainability Reporting
Existence of Aspects
Inventory; Monitoring and
Management

Resource Use
Emissions into air, water,
ground

Waste and hazardous waste

Biodiversity/Habitat
Management

Environmental Issues related
to Goods Movement Supply
Chain; Traffic, Noise,
Light/Glare, Visual, Public
Health Impacts
External
Ethical Behavior/No
corruption/Human Rights;
Public Health & Safety

Community
Engagement/Manage
Community Relations

Corporate Citizenship –
Quality of Life, Livability,
Social Integration

Employment/Workforce
Development – External

Internal

Corporate Governance

Motivation and Incentives -
Internal

192

2. What aspects of economic sustainability does my Port have and to what extent are these
oriented towards promoting sustainability? Complete the following assessment Table 35 with
the help of Table 36: Maturity Levels of Port Economic Sustainability Aspects as a reference to
describe the level of activity regarding these aspects in your Port. Be sure to note what you
are doing and what you may be lacking. You can rate the maturity level (1-4) for each aspect
to quickly identify areas of strength and weakness for your Port.

Table 35: Port Economic Sustainability Assessment
Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010) Table 1, Page 79

Description
My Port
Assessment

Financial Strength Container cargo volumes measured in twenty-foot equivalent
units (TEUs), Rank/Market Share; Total cargo volumes; Cargo
mix and sources of revenue

Innovation,
Technology,
Investment &
Incentives
Investments made in research and development to create new
technologies, reduce environmental impacts, improve business
operations; Use of best available control technologies (BACTs),
focus on cleaner production and zero-emissions; Investments in
financial incentives to customers to reduce impacts of
operations. Innovative policy structures and approaches.

Collaboration Cooperation and collaboration with business partners,
networks, and stakeholders.

Knowledge
Management
Actions and approaches to obtain, share and retain
sustainability-related knowledge in the organization. Use of
systemic approaches, organizational learning; Methods to plan,
develop, organize, apply, and measure specific knowledge and
to improve the organizational knowledge base. Database
systems.

Processes Sustainability issues considered in business processes; Clear
processes and roles are defined so that business activities are
efficiently conducted and every employee understands what is
expected of him or her; Implementation of sustainability
systematically throughout the business units and operations.
Integration of sustainability into daily business life.

Purchases Social and environmental criteria are considered when making
purchases. Relationship with suppliers and consultants also
focuses on sustainability.

Sustainability
Reporting
Sustainability issues are considered in corporate
communications or in annual reports. Options include a
separate sustainability report or corporate social responsibility
(CSR) report, or an integrated annual report.

193

Table 36: Maturity levels of port economic sustainability aspects (Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010) Table 5, 82)

Financial
Strength
Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives
Collaboration
Knowledge
Management (KM)
Processes Purchases
Sustainability
Reporting
Beginning

1
Low rank or %
of TEU market
share; cargo
mix not
diversified
Follows laws and regulations
regarding Best Available Control
Technologies (BACT).
The org is not an active
partner in networks.
No systematic approach
towards KM
Sustainability issues are
not considered in business
processes
Sustainability
issues are not
considered in
making purchases
No sustainability
report; No
consideration of
sustainability in
annual report
Elementary

2
Low to
competitive
rank or % of
TEU market
share; cargo
mix not
diversified
Has made a first effort in Research
& Development (R&D) to create
new technologies, reduce
environmental impacts, or improve
business operations; Use of BACT.
Integrated environmental
technology is partially used.
Communication and
collaboration with most
customers and some
port stakeholders
Specific actions and
approaches to obtain,
share and retain
sustainability-related
knowledge in the org
occurs (mostly database,
IT based)
Some sustainability issues
are considered in business
processes and project
planning activities
Some
environmental
criteria is defined
and considered
when making
purchases
Most relevant
sustainability issues
are addressed in
corporate
communications
(one-way) or in a
sustainability report
and/or an annual
report
Satisfying

3
Consistently
competitive
rank or % of
TEU market
share;
Diversified
cargo mix and
sources of
revenue
Higher effort in sustainability
related R&D than industry average.
Proactive investments in BACT and
use of integrated environmental
technologies and/or cleaner
production. Innovative policy
structures and approaches. Some
financial incentives are offered to
customers to improve
environmental performance.
Communication and
collaboration with
stakeholders (customers,
community residents,
Non-Governmental Orgs
(NGOs), labor, R&D
institutions, etc.)
regarding sustainability
issues
Broad actions and
approaches to obtain,
share and retain
sustainability-related
knowledge in the org
occurs; Some human
capital development and
org learning occurs
Sustainability issues are
integrated into strategic
planning and are
considered in business
processes; Clear processes
and roles are defined so
that business activities are
efficiently conducted and
every employee
understands what is
expected in daily
operations and future
project planning
Some
environmental and
social criteria is
defined and
considered when
making purchases
from direct
suppliers and
throughout the
whole supply
chain
Sustainability issues
are addressed in
corporate
communications
(one-way) and in a
distinct sustainability
report or within an
annual corporate
report; Also,
sustainability goals
and measures are
defined and
communicated
Sophisticated

4
High rank or %
of TEU market
share;
Diversified
cargo mix and
many sources
of alternative
revenues
Significantly higher effort in
sustainability related R&D than
industry average. BACT is
proactively used, also integrated
environmental technologies,
cleaner production. There is a focus
on zero emissions. Innovative
policy structures and approaches.
Financial incentives are offered to
customers to improve
environmental performance.
Consistent
communication and
collaboration with
stakeholders
((customers, residents,
NGOs, labor, R&D
institutions, etc.) is
conducted. Org has a
proactive and leading
role in creating these
networks related to
sustainability.
A systemic and
comprehensive
approach, with broad
activities related to
sustainability KM, is
implemented. Methods
to plan, develop,
organize, apply and
measure specific
knowledge and improve
org knowledge base are
used.
Implementation of
sustainability
systematically throughout
business units and
operations and future
project and capital
program planning;
Integration of
sustainability into daily
business life and decision-
making
Social and
environmental
criteria are
defined,
considered, and
actively verified
within the supply
chain
Sustainability issues
are addressed in
corporate
communications
(two-way) and in a
distinct sustainability
report or within an
annual corporate
report; Sustainability
goals and measures
are defined and
communicated.
194

3. What aspects of environmental sustainability does my Port have and to what extent are
these oriented towards promoting sustainability? Complete the following assessment Table
37 with the help of the environmental sustainability maturity Table 38 as a reference to
describe the level of activity regarding these aspects in your Port. Be sure to note what you
are doing and what you may be lacking. You can rate the maturity level (1-4) for each aspect
to quickly identify areas of strength and weakness for your Port.

Table 37: Port Environmental Sustainability Assessment
Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010), Table 2, Page 79

Environmental
Aspects

Description
My Port
Assessment
Existence of Aspects
Inventory;
Monitoring and
management
Org knows material issues, has done an inventory of
environmental issues and potential impacts; has
prioritized, with monitoring and management
systems in place

Resource Use Use of land, materials, energy, water; resource
consumption and efficiency measured; Recycling
tracked and measured; Issues related to carbon
footprinting, climate action planning, and measuring
land productivity.

Emissions into air,
water, ground
Emissions from operations (including construction
activities) into the air, water, and ground are
avoided, measured, controlled, or mitigated.
Regulatory compliance, reduction goals, cleaner
production. Issues related to traffic management
and efforts to reduce congestion are also considered
to reduce idling of mobile sources.

Waste and Hazardous
Waste
Reduce and manage waste and hazardous waste due
to past, present, and future operations. Issues
related to ship waste, contaminated sediment
disposal, minimizing landfill needs.

Biodiversity/
Habitat Management
Considers and reduces impacts to species, habitats,
and biodiversity through strategy, process, policy,
and actions. Issues related to invasive species during
construction and operations.

Environmental Issues
related to the Goods
Movement Supply
Chain; Traffic, Noise,
Light/Glare, Visual,
Public Health Impacts
Considers and addresses environmental impacts
resulting from the goods movement supply chain
(beyond emissions) within the vicinity of the port,
which could include traffic congestion, noise,
light/glare, visual impacts, and public health impacts.

195

Existence of Aspects
Inventory, Monitoring,
and Management
Resource Use
Emissions into Air, Water,
Ground
Waste and Hazardous
Waste
Biodiversity and
Habitat Management
Envr Issues related to
Goods Movement
Supply Chain beyond
emissions (Traffic,
Noise, Light/Glare,
Visual, Public Health
Impacts)
Beginning

1
Org is not aware of material
issues ; There is no
inventory of environmental
issues and potential
impacts
For the use of resources (land,
materials, energy, and water),
only economic and technical
criteria are considered
Org conforms with laws and
regulations related to emissions
from operations into the air,
water, or ground
Org conforms with laws
and regs related to
hazardous waste
Org conforms with laws
and regs related to
biodiversity,
endangered species and
habitat management
Not considered or only in
conformity with laws and
regulations
Elementary

2
Org is aware of material
issues; There is a general
inventory of environmental
issues and potential
impacts from operations
Economic, technical, and/or
environmental and social criteria
are partially considered in
resource use; Resource
consumption and efficiency is
partially measured
Org conforms with laws and regs;
Emissions from operations
(including construction activities)
are avoided, measured,
controlled, or mitigated;
Reduction goals are defined for
major emissions
Org conforms with laws
and regs related to
hazardous waste; Has
quantified major waste
flows and has some
reduction goals
Org conforms with laws
and regs; Biological
impacts from
construction activities
and operations are
identified and
considered
Some environmental
impacts associated with
the supply chain within
the vicinity of the port
are identified and
acknowledged; Some
efforts are made to
reduce impacts
Satisfying

3
Org is aware of material
issues; There is an
inventory of environmental
issues and potential
impacts; Has prioritized
issues, created programs to
address issues, and has
monitoring and
management systems in
place
Economic, technical, and/or
environmental and social criteria
are considered in resource use;
Resource consumption and
efficiency is measured; Recycling
is tracked and measured; Goals
for resource management are
defined and sustainability is
partially considered;
Org conforms with laws and regs;
Emissions from operations
(including construction activities)
are avoided, measured,
controlled, or mitigated;
Reduction goals are defined for
most emissions; Cleaner
production technologies are used;
Issues related to traffic
management and efforts to
reduce congestion occur.
Org conforms with laws
and regs related to
hazardous waste; Has
quantified waste flows
and has reduction goals
for most waste; Focus on
recycling and cleaner
production technologies;
Addresses issues related
to ship waste &
contaminated sediments
Has baseline/inventory
of biological and habitat
resources; Considers
and reduces impacts to
species, habitats, and
biodiversity through
strategy, process,
policies, and actions;
Issues related to
invasive species are
addressed
Most environmental
impacts associated with
the goods movement
within the vicinity of the
port are identified,
acknowledged, and
addressed in some way
to reduce impacts
Sophisticated

4
Org is aware of material
issues; There is an
inventory of environmental
issues and impacts; Issues
are prioritized, programs
are in place with
monitoring, management,
and reporting systems;
There is a symbiotic
programmatic approach to
measuring environmental
performance
Economic, technical,
environmental and social criteria
are considered in resource use;
Resource consumption and
efficiency is measured; Recycling
is tracked and measured; Long-
term resource management is
aligned with sustainability; Issues
related to carbon or eco
footprinting, climate action
planning, and land productivity
are addressed.
Conforms with laws and regs;
Emissions from operations
(including construction) are
avoided, measured, controlled, or
mitigated; Ambitious reduction
goals for air and water emissions
are defined; Zero emissions
strategies are pursued;
Collaboration and/or enforcement
with port tenants and along the
supply chain to reduce emissions
Org conforms with laws
and regs related to
hazardous waste; Has
quantified waste flows
and has ambitious
reduction goals for most
waste; Waste is avoided
due to zero-emissions/
zero-waste activities;
Addresses issues related
to ship waste &
contaminated sediments
Significant efforts
implemented and
results achieved to
avoid, reduce, or
mitigate biological
impacts from
construction activities
and operations
Environmental impacts
associated with the
goods movement within
the vicinity of the port
(beyond emissions) are
identified,
acknowledged, and
either avoided or
mitigated to reduce
impacts
Table 38: Maturity levels of port environmental sustainability aspects (Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner 2010, Table 6, 83)
196

4. What aspects of social sustainability does my Port have and to what extent are these
oriented towards promoting sustainability? Complete the following assessment Table 39 with
the help of the social sustainability maturity Table 40 as a reference to describe the level of
activity regarding these aspects in your Port. Be sure to note what you are doing and what
you may be lacking. You can rate the maturity level (1-4) for each aspect to quickly identify
areas of strength and weakness for your Port.

Table 39: Port Social Sustainability Assessment

Social Aspects

Description
My Port
Assessment
External
Ethical Behavior/No
Corruption/ Human Rights;
Public Health & Safety
Conducting business fairly, no manipulation of
business practices; No corruption to gain a
competitive advantage; Conducting operations
in a way that respects human rights and does
not endanger public health and safety.

Community Engagement/
Manage Community
Relations
Role and venues for community stakeholders to
participate in port planning processes, projects
and decision-making.

Corporate Citizenship -
Quality of Life,
Livability, Social integration
Sponsorships, grants, volunteering, community
events hosted by port organization; Projects
that contribute to better quality of life of
nearby residents and community stakeholders.

Employment/Workforce
Development – External
Local or regional jobs created related to the
port or goods movement industry; Direct &
indirect jobs, including construction;
Partnerships with educational/ training
institutions or non-profits to identify and
prepare future port workers with technical and
management skills; Focus on hiring local
residents for port-related jobs.

Internal
Corporate Governance Focus on transparency and giving insight to all
relevant data that guides decision-making;
Develop initiatives ahead of regulations to
manage risks appropriately; Extent of
performance management; Existence of
performance measurement.

197

Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010), Tables 3 and 4, Page 80

Motivation and Incentives -
Internal
Management provides leadership and engages
employees on sustainability topics; Active
involvement and awareness of needs and
motivation factors of employees by
management to implement sustainability
successfully in the organization; Development
of incentives and reward systems (recognition,
performance reviews).

Health & Safety;
Emergency/Disaster
Management
Programs to help employees prevent risks, stay
healthy, be prepared for emergencies;
Operations don’t negatively impact employee
health.

Human Capital Development
– Training and Education
Developing capacity of employees to
successfully address sustainability issues
through training and education programs;
Tuition support/reimbursement for higher level
education or technical training; Mentoring and
cross-training programs throughout the
organization is offered. Resource experts are
groomed within the organization.

198

Table 40: Maturity levels of port social sustainability aspects (Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner 2010, Tables 7 and 8, 84-85)
Ethical Behavior/No
Corruption/Human
Rights; Public Health &
Safety
Community
Engagement/
Manage
Community
Relations
Corporate Citizenship –
Quality of Life,
Livability, Social
Integration
Employment/
Workforce
Development –
External
Corporate
Governance
Motivation &
Incentives – Internal
Employee Health,
Safety & Wellness;
Emergency/
Disaster
Management
Human Capital
Development
– Training and
Education
Beginning

1
Human Rights are generally
respected; Conforms with
laws and regs for corruption;
No corporate statement or
guidelines regarding ethics or
protection of public health &
safety
There is no
engagement with the
community on port
issues
Corporate Citizenship (CC)
or socially integrating
within the port city is not a
focus of the organization
No specific
employment targets
or measures are set;
these numbers are
not captured or
reported
Conforms with
mandates regarding
transparency; risk
management
Motivation of employees
toward sustainability is not
considered or has
dysfunctional impact on
org
Meets legal
requirements; Not an
active major focus
No specific
human capital
development
measures are set
regarding
sustainability
Elementary

2
Human Rights are generally
respected; Compliance with
laws and regs; Impacts
regarding corrupt practices
are identified and measures
set to avoid them; Rules for
how Board and top senior
managers to behave ethically
in the org are defined
There is some one-
way public
communication
regarding port
projects; There are
limited opportunities
for feedback from
the public on specific
issues
Money is donated by the
org to a few projects or
organizations; The link
between corporate
business and the
donations is rarely given or
explained
Some job numbers
are captured to
understand impact
on economy and
community; Some
efforts made to hire
local
Some additional
measures to ensure
transparency are set;
Some measures
regarding performance
management
Some incentive measures
to improve motivation
toward sustainability are
established
Legal requirements
met; Measures
toward health &
safety of employees
are set in reaction to
threats or events
Some measures
are set; Limited
training for
certain
personnel
occurs.
Satisfying

3
Conducts business fairly, no
manipulation of business
practices; No corruption to
gain a competitive
advantage; Designs and
conducts operations in a way
that respects human rights
and does not endanger public
health and safety
There is a role and
many venues and
opportunities for
community
stakeholders to
participate in port
planning processes,
projects, and
decision-making;
Both one and two-
way communication
occurs
Org hosts events/projects
and provides
sponsorships, grants, and
volunteers to community
orgs; Contributions are
systematically planned and
chosen; The link or
rationale is mostly given;
Org conducts projects that
contribute to better
quality of life of nearby
residents and community
stakeholders
Employment
numbers are
routinely tracked and
reported, including
construction; Local
hire preference
policies are in place;
Partnerships with
non-profits/schools
for job training and
outreach
Increased focus on
transparency;
Additional measures
regarding performance
management and
measurement;
Proactive approach to
risk management
In most areas of the
organization, employees
are motivated by incentive
measures to focus on
sustainability; Top
management exemplifies
the approach to
sustainability for
employees
Systematic approach
to planning for
health & safety &
emergency
preparedness of
employees is used an
deployed throughout
org; Proactive
measures are taken
to avoid long-term
health & safety risks
Various
education
programs and
training
opportunities are
made available.
Most employees
are trained
regarding
sustainability
issues.
Sophisticated

4
Conducts business fairly;
Designs and conducts
operations in a way that
respects human rights and
does not endanger public
health and safety; Codes of
conduct and guidelines
regarding ethics, human
rights, and public health &
safety are proactively
improved to respond to
emerging issues.
On-going dialogue
with community
stakeholders on port
policy issues, through
port planning
processes, and port
decision-making;
Two-way
communication is
most common
CC is systemically planned
and conducted; focus is on
long-term commitment
and relationships. Most
employees are integrated
or have an opportunity to
participate; The link
between these projects
and core business is
provided and understood.
Local benefits are
observed.
Initiatives focus on
boosting local hire
numbers;
Partnerships with
non-profits/schools
for job training and
outreach are
effective and focus
on preparedness for
future technologies
and market
approaches
High level of
transparency - giving
insight to all relevant
data; Effectively
develops proactive
initiatives ahead of
regulations to manage
risks; Performance
measurement and
management result in
continuous
improvement
Top management
exemplifies the approach
to sustainability for
employees and provides
sustained leadership;
Employees are effectively
supported by appropriate
motivation and incentives;
Sustainability principles
are internalized in the org
culture and behavioral
changes are observed.
Health & safety
approach supports
organizational goals
towards
sustainability;
Systematic approach;
Measures are met
and improved; There
is a focus on
employee wellness
Various
education
programs and
training
opportunities are
made available;
Every employee
is trained
regarding
sustainability
issues.
199

Now use Table 41 below to summarize your rankings from assessment Tables 35, 37,
and 39 to quickly identify the strongest and weakest sustainability aspects for your Port.

Table 41: Sustainability Maturity Summary Table

Source: Adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010), Figure 2

Sustainability Aspects
Level 1:
Beginning
Level 2:
Elementary
Level 3:
Satisfying
Level 4:
Sophisticated
Concept of Sustainability
Economic
Financial Strength
Innovation, Technology,
Investment & Incentives

Collaboration
Knowledge Management
Processes
Purchases
Sustainability Reporting
Environmental
Existence of Aspects Inventory; Monitoring
and management

Use of Resources
Emissions into air, water, ground
Waste and Hazardous Waste
Biodiversity/
Habitat Management

Environmental Issues of Goods Movement
Supply Chain; Traffic, Noise, Light/Glare,
Visual, Public Health Impacts

Social
Ethical Behavior/No Corruption/ Human
Rights; Public Health & Safety

Community Engagement/Manage
Community Relations

Corporate Citizenship - Quality of Life,
Livability, Social integration

Employment/Workforce Development
Corporate Governance
Motivation and Incentives – Internal
Employee Health, Safety & Wellness;
Emergency/Disaster Management

Human Capital Development – Training and
Education

200

Keep the results of Table 40 in mind and your notes on the previous assessment tables,
including the stakeholder analysis, when completing the final question regarding material
issues.

Material Issues

Under Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) protocols, “materiality” is the threshold at which an
issue or impact indicator becomes important enough to stakeholders that it should be included
in sustainability performance reporting. Factors to consider when identifying the material issues
for your Port include:
 What issues are important to stakeholders regarding the environmental, economic, and
social impacts of port operations?
 What is the overall mission of your Port and competitive strategy?
 What key organizational values, policies, strategies, operational management systems,
goals, and targets are important?
 What future challenges might your Port and the goods movement industry face?

201

An example of what a material issues framework might look like is presented in Figure 10.

Figure 10: Draft Material Issues Framework for the Port of Los Angeles (2013)
Material Issues
To inform this Plan, Port staff drew from the GRI framework for material issues, which encourages an
organization to thoughtfully consider the numerous opportunities and risks presented by sustainability,
and to identify, measure, and report on those issues that are most important to the organization, its
stakeholders, the economy, the environment and society.
The Port has defined five material issues that are most important to the organization’s progress toward
sustainability. These material issues will provide guidance for future sustainability planning and
reporting.
1. Community Investment: Building healthy and strong local and regional communities through
economic and workforce development, provision of community benefits and public space
amenities, and improving quality of life and mitigating environmental impacts.

2. Land Use and Infrastructure: Managing Port land for its highest and best use; developing and
maintaining world-class infrastructure to meet the current and future needs of customers,
community and environmental protection; and providing for the integration of industrial,
commercial, recreational, and ecological spaces and facilities.

3. Public Health: Preventing and progressively reducing health-related impacts from Port
operations to the greatest extent feasible.

4. Energy and Resource Conservation: Conserving energy, water and land-based resources to the
greatest extent possible through responsible stewardship, adaptive planning, technology
advancement and operational best practices; generating renewable energy for Port operations.

5. Financial Strength: Securing, managing and deploying resources to meet financial performance
goals in order to invest in, grow and maintain a world-class sustainable Port

Source: Port of Los Angeles 2013

202

When considering what material issues are relevant to your Port, think about what the
major drivers for pursing sustainability might be (as discussed in the Change the Mindset step
on the Sustainability Wheel of Change). Is the port facing political pressure because of
environmental or social impacts from its operations? Is there pressure to be more fiscally
responsible about future capital investments and managing risks due to climate change? What
do port stakeholders want?

Mirvis and Googins (2006) note the following drivers that prompt organizations to embrace
sustainability:
• Internal motivators that push action – values, reputation, image, business strategy,
recruiting and retaining employees (123).
• External pressures that pull responses – requests or inquiries from customers and
consumers, expectations from community stakeholders, political or regulatory pressure,
scandals, crises, and criticism from non-profits or the media (122-123).
4. What issues Material Issues might be appropriate for your Port to consider?

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

203

After completing the self-assessment, you should have a better understanding of your
port stakeholders, how your Port understands the concept of sustainability, and how mature
your Port is related to various aspects of economic, social, and environmental sustainability.
Based on this information you should be able to identify five priority material issues that are
most important to the organization’s progress toward becoming a sustainable organization. All
of this information is extremely helpful in preparing a Port Sustainability Plan, which can guide
short-term and long-term strategic sustainability planning in the organization and help better
integrate existing efforts.

204

D. A Port Sustainability Plan: A Strategic Framework for Success

The Port of Los Angeles is a recognized leader in sustainability. A broad list of the Port’s
various sustainability initiatives, plans, and programs is provided in Table 42.

Table 42: Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Initiatives
• Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP); A comprehensive programmatic approach to air quality
management for the San Pedro Bay Ports
• Water Resources Action Plan (WRAP); Joint water management plan with the Port of Long Beach
• Sustainable Lease Agreements with CAAP measures and other environmental requirements for
new tenants and renewals of terminal operating agreements
• San Pedro Baywide Health Risk Reduction Standard; the goal is 85% reduction in residential
cancer risk due to diesel particulate matter (DPM) by 2020
• Project Incremental Residential Health Risk Threshold; No project shall be approved unless it
complies with the CAAP, and no incremental increase in residential health risk created by the
project shall exceed 10 in a million.
• Increased Community Engagement in environmental review and port planning processes
• Community Mitigation Agreements; China Shipping Settlement mitigation projects and TraPac
Community Benefits Fund monies total almost $100 million
• Clean Trucks Program; Reduced diesel emissions from trucks serving the port region
• Technology Advancement Program; Provided funding and development assistance for new
technologies that reduce impacts from port operations
• Promoting International Adoption of Clean Technologies; Working with the ISO for standardizing
shore power or alternative maritime (AMP) protocols
• PortTech LA; Development of human capital and local economic development
• LA Waterfront Redevelopment; Includes 50 acres of new open space and several miles of
waterfront promenade
• International Collaboration and Leadership through IAPH, WPCI, PPCAC, and PIANC
• Renewable Energy Construction; 1 MW of solar power capacity has been installed on roof of the
cruise terminal
• Environmental Management System for the maintenance and construction division was
maintained and recertified ISO 14001
• Habitat Restoration Projects that have created over 450 acres of wetlands and shallow water
habitat
• Sustainability Assessment; Was conducted in 2008 and recommended the creation of a
sustainability plan
• Sustainability Report; A public report was released in 2011
• Project Labor Agreements to boost local employment for construction projects
205

If your Port is like the Port of Los Angeles, with various policies, initiatives, and programs
in place that address environmental, social, and economic sustainability issues, then you are
likely facing similar management challenges: how to create coherence and synergy among the
various efforts, how to create better alignment across organizational people and processes,
how to create effective metrics for measuring performance, and how to advance sustainability
deeper within the organization.
A Port Sustainability Plan can provide a strategic framework for an integrated approach
to the management of port sustainability issues and help Port staff develop skills for integrative
thinking that is needed to apply the TBL when planning and executing their daily work. The
framework below, illustrated in Figure 11, is offered as one model.

Major components of a framework for port sustainability can include:

1. A vision statement that orients the organization towards sustainability, hopefully that is
provided by the Port’s strategic plan.

2. Port-wide sustainability goals that help fulfill the vision and serve to guide efforts in an
overarching way.

3. Material Issues that express the Port’s values, address major issues or challenges, and
anchor the focus of the Port’s sustainability efforts. These should be well defined.

206

Figure 11: Port Sustainability Plan: A Framework for Strategic Sustainability Management

Source: Port of Los Angeles 2013a

207

4. Actions, Metrics, and Targets that address the material issues, measure performance, and
provide timeframes for action and outcomes. See Table 43 for an illustration of a matrix that
tracks these things for the material issue of community investment. When designing actions
and orienting programs, consider how targeting multiple material issues can create co-benefits
and synergies among these efforts and document them.

Table 43: Material Issue, Action, Metrics, Targets, and Timeline Matrix Example

Material
Issue

Aspect Action Metrics Targets and Timeline

Community
Investment
Economic and
Workforce
Development
Provide jobs for local*
and regional residents
through technology
development,
construction, and
contracting for local
services
Percentage of
jobs created or
percentage of
hours worked
by local or
regional
residents
20% jobs/hours by local or
regional workers on Port
Organization contracts by
2023

208

5. Sustainability programs or initiatives to implement the desired actions. Figure 12 outlines
what a new employee training program to help create organizational alignment might look like.

Figure 12: Example of a Proposed Program

Sustainability Training Program
Provide support to Port employees in their efforts to develop a more holistic concept of sustainability
related to environmental, economic, and social performance of the organization. The Port will provide
resources, guidance, and a venue for employee input on how to integrate sustainability into their daily
work. Potential activities could include sustainability awareness seminars, making case studies of Port
projects available for reference on the Port intranet, and creating a sustainability guide for Port
employees that summarizes the Port’s material issues and key policies, programs, and technical
resources, such as Port personnel with sustainability expertise.
Material Issue: Financial Strength
Metric: # of trainings, creation of sustainability guide for employees
Targets & Timeline: Conduct X trainings by May 2014; Complete guide by Dec 2014
Implementation: Environmental Management Division and Public Relations
Source: Port of Los Angeles 2013b

Don’t forget to continue to refer to the Sustainability Wheel of Change as a guide for
identifying leverage points to implement the organizational change processes needed to fulfill
your new Port Sustainability Plan.

209

E. Resources & Tools

To better complete the sustainability self-assessment or to start preparing a draft
sustainability plan, be sure to identify the technical experts within your organization and the
project or program managers for any existing sustainability initiatives. These people will be your
on-going resources. The following web resources are also available regarding port sustainability
programs, practices, and reports:
 PIANC Guide
http://www1.iaphworldports.org/pdf/PIANC_WG150.pdf
 ESPO Green Port Guide
http://www.espo.be/images/stories/Publications/codes_of_practice/espo_green%20gu
ide_october%202012_final.pdf
 World Ports Climate Initiative
http://wpci.iaphworldports.org/
 Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Report 2011
http://www.portoflosangeles.org/DOC/REPORT_Port_Sustainability_Report_2011.pdf
 Port of Antwerp Port Community Sustainability Report 2010
http://www.portofantwerp.com/en/sustainability-report

210

F. Conclusion

This guide provided a model example of a sustainable port organization, introduced
change management processes that can help further embed sustainability within your port,
included a self-assessment tool to help you diagnosis your current efforts and help you target
future planning, and outlined what your Port Sustainability Plan could include to help you
create a sustainable organization. Hopefully by implementing some of the approaches in this
guide, you will help create an organizational culture that promotes sustainability and begin to
institutionalize sustainability as an organizing management principle within your Port.

211

References
Abbot, Paul Scott. 2011. “Port community investments generate significant rewards.” AAPA
Seaports Magazine. 23, 9-14.
Ameer, R. and Othman, R. 2011. “Sustainability Practices and Corporate Financial Performance:
A Study Based on Top Global Corporations.” Journal of Business Ethics. Published Online:
October 15, 2011.

American Association of Port Authorities. 2009. US Public Port Facts. Accessed at:
http://www.aapaports.org/Industry/content.cfm?ItemNumber=1032&navItemNumber=
1034

Armitage, D., and Plummer, R. 2010. “Chapter 14: Adapting and Transforming: Governance for
Navigating Change.” In Adaptive Capacity and Environmental Governance. Berlin:
Springer.

Babiak, K. and Trendafilova, S. 2010. “CSR and Environmental Responsibility: Motives and
Pressures to Adopt Green Management Practices.” Corporate Sociality Responsibility
and Environmental Management. 18: 11-24.

Barboza, D. 2005. “A New Port in Shanghai, 20 Miles Out to Sea.” New York Times. Published
December 12, 2005. Accessed at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/12/business/worldbusiness/12port.html?_r=1&

Baumgartner, R. and Ebner, D. 2010. “Corporate Sustainability Strategies: Sustainability Profiles
and Maturity Levels.” Sustainable Development, 18: 79-89.

Becker, A., Inoue, S. and Fischer, M. 2011. “Climate change impacts on international seaports:
knowledge, perceptions, and planning efforts among port administrators.” Climatic
Change, Published Online: March 5, 2011.

Bettignies de, H.C. 2002. “Reviewing Meanings and Contexts of Role of Business in Society,”
Presentation at the launch of the European Academy of Business in Society,
Fontainebleau, France, July 5, 2002.

Birke, Lutz. 2012a. “Hamburg Port Authority Port Development Plan 2025.” Presentation.
September 18, 2012.
212

Birke, Lutz. 2012b. “Overview of HPA.” Presentation. September 18, 2012.

Bradbury, H. 2007. “Learning with the Natural Step: Action Research to Promote
Conversations for Sustainable Development.” Handbook of Action Research London:
Sage Publications.

Bruntland Commission. 1987. "Our common future: The world commission on environment and
development."

Businesses for Social Responsibility. 2011. “Extending Supply Chain Sustainability Metrics to
Terminal Operations.” May 2011.

Businesses for Social Responsibility. 2012. “Assessing Terminal Operator Environmental
Performance.” May 2012.

Campbell, J.L. 2007. “Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An
institutional theory of corporate social responsibility.” Academy of Management
Review. 32(3):946-967.

Carpenter, Stephen and Brock, William. 2008. “Adaptive Capacity and Traps.” Ecology and
Society. 13(2):40-56.

Center for Sustainable Organizations. 2006. “Corporate Sustainability Management – A
Reference Model.” Accessed at: http://www.sustainableorganizations.org/Corporate-
Sustainability-Management-Model.pdf

Chouinard, Y., Ellison, J. and Ridgeway, R. 2011. “The Sustainable Economy.” Harvard Business
Review, October 2011, 52 – 62.

Colantonio, A. 2011. “Social Sustainability: Exploring the Linkages Between Research, Policy,
and Practice.” European Research on Sustainable Development. Berlin: Springer.

Daly, Herman. 1996. Beyond Growth: The Economics of Sustainable Development. Boston:
Beacon Press.

213

De Crane, Kris. 2012. “Port of Antwerp Sustainability.” Presentation by Kris De Crane,
Manager of Environment and Spatial Planning for the Port of Antwerp. September 20,
2012.

Dienhart, J.W. and Ludescher, J.C. 2010. “Sustainability, Collaboration, and Governance: A
Harbinger of Institutional Change?” Business and Society Review, 115, 4, 393-415.

Dietz, T. et al. 2003. “The Struggle to Govern the Commons.” Science 302(5652):1907-1912

Dobers, P. and Springett, D. 2010. “Corporate Social Responsibility: Discourse, Narratives, and
Communication.” Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 17:
63-69.

Doppelt, B. 2010. Leading Change Toward Sustainability: A Change-Management Guide for
Business, Government, and Civil Society. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing Limited.

Elkington, J. 2004. “Enter the Triple Bottom Line.” Accessed at:
http://www.johnelkington.com/TBL-elkington-chapter.pdf

European Sea Ports Organization (ESPO). 2012a. “ESPO Green Guide: Annex 1: Towards
excellence in port environmental management and sustainability.” Accessed at:
http://www.espo.be/images/stories/Publications/codes_of_practice/espo_green%20gu
ide_october%202012_final.pdf

European Sea Ports Organization (ESPO). 2012b. “ESPO Green Guide: Annex 2: Legislation
Influencing European Ports.” Accessed at:
http://www.espo.be/images/stories/Publications/codes_of_practice/annex%202_legisl
ations_version%201_october2012.pdf

European Sea Ports Organization (ESPO) and EcoPorts Foundation (EcoPorts). 2009. “Port
Environmental Review 2009: European Sea Ports Organization’s Review of
Environmental Benchmark Performance in collaboration with the EcoPorts Foundation
(EPF).” Accessed at:
http://www.espo.be/images/stories/Publications/studies_reports_surveys/ESPOEcoPor
tsPortEnvironmentalReview2009.pdf

European Sea Ports Organization et al. 2012. “Port Performance Indicators Selection and
Measurement (PPRISM) Project Executive Report.”
214

European Union (EU). 2012. “The EU Climate and Energy Package.” Accessed September 18.
http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/package/index_en.htm

Folke, C. et al. 2003. “Synthesis: building resilience and adaptive capacity in social-ecological
systems.” In: Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (eds) Navigating social-ecological systems.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 252-387.

Folke, C. et al. 2005. “Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems.” Annual Review
Environmental Resources 30:441-473.

George, Clive. 2001. "Sustainability appraisal for sustainable development: integrating
Everything from jobs to climate change." Impact Assessment and Project
Appraisal 19(2): 95-106.

Green Rebstock. 2012. “PPCAC Sustainability Survey Results Presentation.” Pacific Ports Clean
Air Collaborative Conference. February 22, 2012

Green Rebstock, J. and Bradbury-Huang, H. 2011. “Chapter 6: Managing Sustainability: The Port
of Los Angeles Among an Ecology of Organizations.” In Organizing for Sustainable
Effectiveness, Vol 1, 155-185. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Hamburg Port Authority (HPA). 2011a. “Annual Report 2010.”

HPA. 2011b. “The Port of Hamburg Rides the Green Wave. Sustainable
Concepts of the Hamburg Port Authority.” Print Brochure. September 2011.

HPA. 2013a. “Company Strategies: All signs point to green.” Accessed at:
http://www.hamburg-port-authority.de/en/hamburg-port-
authority/companystrategies/Seiten/default.aspx

HPA. 2013b. “Environmental Policy.” Accessed at:
http://www.hamburg-port-authority.de/en/hamburg-port
authority/companystrategies/environmental-policy/Seiten/default.aspx

HPA. 2013c. “Corruption prevention at the Hamburg Port Authority.” Accessed at:
http://www.hamburg-port-authority.de/en/hamburg-port-
authority/companystrategies/corruption-prevention/Seiten/default.aspx
215

HPA. 2013d. “Hafen TV wins Award for Best Port Communication.” Press release. Accessed at:
http://www.hamburg-port-authority.de/en/press/Press-archive/Seiten/Press-release-
09-05-2013.aspx

Heuer, M. 2011. “Sustainability Governance Across Time and Space: Connecting Environmental
Stewardship in the Firm with Global Community.” Business Strategy and the
Environment. Wiley Online Library.

Humphrey, Watts. 1987. “Characterizing the Software Process: A Maturity Framework.”
Software Engineering Institute. Carnegie Mellon University.

International Ports and Harbors Association. 2011a. “Annual Report 2010-2011.”
International Ports and Harbors Association. 2011b. “Emission Control: Tightening up for
greener ports.” Official Journal of the International Association of Ports and Harbors,
56:5-12.

Journal of Commerce. 2012. “Top World Container Port Rankings.” Journal of Commerce. V 13.
N. 29.

Jun, Hu Tie. 2012. Meeting with Hu Tie Jun, Director, Investment Promotion Bureau, Zhoushan
Port and Shipping Administration Bureau. May 22, 2012.

Loorbach, D. et al. 2011. “A Transition Research Perspective on Governance for Sustainability.”
European Research on Sustainable Development. Berlin: Springer

McKinsey and Company. 2011. “McKinsey Global Survey results: The business of sustainability.”
October 2011. Accessed at:
http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/energy_resources_materials/the_business_of_susta
inability_mckinsey_global_survey_results

Milne, M. J. et al. 2005. “Wither Ecology? The Triple Bottom Line, the Global Reporting
Initiative, and the Institutionalization of Corporate Sustainability Reporting.” Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American Accounting Association, Anaheim,
California, August 3-6 2008. Accessed at:
http://www.acis.canterbury.ac.nz/documents/Markus_Milne_Research_Programmes/
Wither_Ecology_TBL,_GRI_and_Corporate_Sustainability_Reporting.pdf

Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP), The People’s Republic of China. 2012a. “The State
Council Distributes the 12
th
Five-Year National Plan for Environmental Protection to
Reduce Total Amount of Major Pollutants, Improve Environmental Quality and Prevent
Environmental Risks.” News Release. January 18, 2012.

216

MEP, The People’s Republic of China. 2012b. “Wen Jiabao Chairs an Executive Meeting of the
State Council to Discuss and Approve the 12
th
Five-Year Plan for Energy Saving and
Emission Reduction.” News Release. July 13, 2012.

Mirvis, P. and Googins, B. 2006. “Stages of Corporate Citizenship.” California Management
Review 48: 104-126

Morhardt, J.E. et al. 2002. “Scoring Corporate Environmental and Sustainability Reports using
GRI 2000, ISO 14031 and Other Criteria.” Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management. 9: 215-233.

Nagle, Kurt. 2008. “Viewpoint – Kurt J. Nagle, President of AAPA” in Ports Growing Greener:
AAPA Seaports Magazine. Fall 2008: 8.

Ning, Luo. 2012. Meeting with Luo Ning, Vice Director, Zhoushan Port and Shipping
Administration Bureau. May 29, 2012.

Ningbo Binhai New City. 2012. Meishan Island Development Catalogue.

Ningbo Port Co., Ltd. 2013a. “Ningbo Port. Co., Ltd. Vigorously Advanced Construction of
‘Environment-Friendly’.” News Release. January 22, 2013. Accessed at:
http://www.nbport.com.cn/portal/wps/wcm/connect/webcontent/71550e90-64b3-
43a8-925f-785e5057a3c2/fac2ed9f-fb9e-4fd7-8903-2ea89f4bd5ab/bbe338e2-cf34-
4843-83d1-ed20211b36db/2013_01_24_13_15_48_048

Ningbo Port Co., Ltd. 2013b. “Code of Professional Ethic – Daily Work.” Accessed at:
http://www.nbport.com.cn/portal/wps/wcm/connect/webcontent/71550e90-64b3-
43a8-925f-785e5057a3c2/4e2cf7f3-aa31-4c13-8397-0e1d17fea636/670c0147-b350-
425d-971f-98daf5cbe9b1/2009_07_16_15_50_14_014

Ningbo Port Co., Ltd. 2013c. “Our beliefs and concepts.” Accessed at:
http://www.nbport.com.cn/portal/wps/wcm/connect/webcontent/71550e90-64b3-
43a8-925f-785e5057a3c2/4e2cf7f3-aa31-4c13-8397-0e1d17fea636/6639b77b-f332-
4ae7-804f-2ef308579f79/2009_07_16_16_13_28_028

Ningbo Port Co., Ltd. 2013d. “Safety Concept.” Accessed at:

Ningbo Port Co., Ltd 2013e. News Center. Rolling News. Accessed at:
http://www.nbport.com.cn
217

North, Douglas. 1990. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge
University Press. 1990.

Kolk, A. and Pinkse, J. 2009. “The Integration of Corporate Governance in Corporate Social
Responsibility Disclosures.” Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management 17:15-26.

Kuhler, E. 2012. “Management of Stakeholder Relationships in the Context of Sustainability
Reporting.” Thesis, University of Applied Sciences Van Hall Larenstein.

Lingbing, Han. 2012. Meeting at Shanghai Transport and Port Development Research Center.
October 19, 2012.

Lu, Ping. 2012. Meeting at Shanghai Port Administrative Center. October 30, 2012.

National Research Council. 1999. Our common journey: A transition towards sustainability.
Washington DC.: National Academy Press.

PIANC. 2013a. Working Group 150. ‘Sustainable Ports’ A Guide for Port Authorities. April 28,
2013. Accessed at: http://www1.iaphworldports.org/pdf/PIANC_WG150.pdf

PIANC. 2013b. “What PIANC stands for.” Accessed at: http://www.pianc.org/aboutpianc.php

Pietsch, Jan Hendrik. 2012. Interview with Jan Hendrik Pietsch, Hamburger Hafen und Logistik
(HHLA) Sustainable Manager. September 18, 2012.

Plummer, R. and Armitage, D. 2010. “Chapter 1: Integrating Perspectives on Adaptive Capacity
and Environmental Governance.” In Adaptive Capacity and Environmental Governance.
Berlin: Springer.

Port of Antwerp. 2011. “Port of Antwerp Sustainability Report 2010.” Accessed at:
http://www.sustainableportofantwerp.com/en/

Port of Antwerp. 2012. “Port of Antwerp Annual Report 2011.” Accessed at:
http://www.portofantwerp.com/en/annual-report-2011

218

Port of Los Angeles (POLA). 2011. “Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Report 2011.” Accessed at:
http://www.portoflosangeles.org/DOC/REPORT_Port_Sustainability_Report_2011.pdf

POLA. 2012a. “Port of Los Angeles Strategic Plan 2012-2017.” Accessed at:
http://www.portoflosangeles.org/pdf/strategic_plan_2012_lowres.pdf

POLA. 2012b. “Environmental Ship Index Fact Sheet.” Accessed at:
http://www.portoflosangeles.org/pdf/esi_fact_sheet.pdf

POLA. 2012c. “Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Report 2012.” Unpublished Draft.

POLA. 2013a. “Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Plan 2013 – 2035.” Unpublished
Draft. January 2013.

POLA. 2013b. “Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Plan. Material Issues and Priority Actions 2013-
2014.” Unpublished Draft. April 2013.

POLA. 2013c. “Third Amendment to Agreement No. 08-2702 to Administer the Clean Truck
Program.” Executive Director’s Report. July 30, 2013.

Porschke, Alexander. 2012. Interview with Alexander Porschke, Vorsitzender of
Naturschutzbund Deutschland Landesverband (NABU) Hamburg. September 19, 2012.

Port of Rotterdam (PoR). 2011a. “Port of Rotterdam Authority Annual Report 2011.”

PoR. 2011b. “Port of Rotterdam Statistics.”

PoR. 2012a. “Maasvlakte 2: The sustainable port.” Brochure. June 2012.

PoR. 2012b. “Port of Rotterdam Authority Annual Report 2012.”

Quental, N. et al. 2010. “Sustainability: characteristics and scientific roots.” Environment,
Development and Sustainability. 13: 257-276.

Searcy, C. 2012. “Corporate Sustainability Performance Measurement Systems: A Review and
Research Agenda.” Journal of Business Ethics 107(3): 239-253.

219

Senge, P. et al. 2007. “Collaborating for Systemic Change.” MIT Sloan Management Review
Winter 2007. 44-53.

Shanghai Port Administrative Center (SPAC). 2012a. “Port of Shanghai Environmental
Protection, Energy Saving, and Emissions Reductions Summary.” Presentation. February
2012.

SPAC. 2012b. Meeting and Presentation. June 2012.

SPAC. 2012c. Meeting and Presentation. October 2012.

SPAC. 2013a. "On Further Improving the Shanghai port operations of dangerous goods
declaration to inform the work.” Posted January 29, 2013. Accessed at:
http://www.shanghaiport.gov.cn/infopub/xxgkml/zcgd/ghzc/info_0162.html

SPAC. 2013b. Accessed March 29, 2013.
http://www.shanghaiport.gov.cn/html/index.html

Shanghai International Port Group (SIPG). 2012a. Meeting and Presentation. October 2012.

SIPG. 2012b. “Intelligent Management System of Container Operation.” Accessed March 19
2013. http://www.portshanghai.com.cn/en/channel5/channel52.html

Sibenhuner, B. and Arnold, M. 2007. “Organizational Learning to Manage Sustainable
Development.” Business Strategy and the Environment 16:339-353.

Smith, P. A. C. and Sharicz, C. 2011. “The shift needed for sustainability.” The Learning
Organization 18:73-86.

Team, Won. 2012. “Ningbo’s exports of aquatic products soar to nearly $US700 million in
2011.” What’s on Ningbo. Accessed February 2013.
http://www.whatsonningbo.com/news-6882-ningbo-s-exports-of-aquatic-products-
soar-to-nearly-us700-million-in-2011.html

van Dijk, Marielle. 2012. “Rotterdam World Class Port.” Presentation and Meeting with
Marielle van Dijk, Sustainability Project Manager with the Port of Rotterdam Authority.
September 21, 2012.

Van Marrewijk, Marcel and Hardjono, Teun W. 2003. “European Corporate Sustainability
Framework for Managing Complexity and Corporate Transformation.” Journal of
Business Ethics 44: 121-132.
220

Vellinga, Tiedo. 2012. Interview with Tiedo Vellinga, Project Manager of Maasvlakte 2
and Administrator of the Environmental Ship Index Program. September 21, 2012.

Vidaver-Cohen D. and Simcic Bronn, P. 2008. “Corporate Citizenship and Managerial
Motivation: Implications for Business Legitimacy 113(4):441-475

Wackernagel, M. 2002. “Comments on Draft GRI Sustainability Reporting Guidelines.”

Walker, B.H. and Salt, D. 2006. Resilience Thinking: Sustaining Ecosystems and People in a
Changing World. Washington D.C.: Island Press.

Wang, Ren-Xiang. 2012. Meeting with Professor Ren-Xiang Wang, Ningbo International Port and
Logistics Research Center Director. Ningbo University of Technology; Transportation and
Logistics College. May 22, 2012.

Want China Times. 2011. “China halts airport, harbor projects over environmental concerns.”
Want China Times. December 8, 2011. Accessed:
http://www.wantchinatimes.com/newssubclasscnt.aspx?id=20111208000054&cid=1102

Wei, Ye Wen. 2012. Chief of Business Section for Ningbo Port Administration. Presentation.
May 22, 2012.

West Coast Ports Technical Committee (WCPTC). 2011. “Joint West Coast Ports Technical
Committee for Development of Sustainable Design and Construction Guidelines:
Charter.”

World Ports Climate Initiative. 2013a. http://wpci.iaphworldports.org/index.html

World Ports Climate Initiative. 2013b. “Environmental Ship Index.”
http://www.environmentalshipindex.org/Public/Home

Zhixiong, Gao. 2012. “Ningbo International Trade and Its Influence on the Ningbo Economy.”
Presentation at Ningbo University of Technology, School of Economics and Management.
May 24, 2012.

221

APPENDICIES

222

Appendix A:
List of Site Visits and Stakeholder Interviews

China
Port of Ningbo/Zhoushan: May 21 – May 31, 2012
 Ningbo Port Company Limited
o Ye Wen Wei, Commerce Section of Business Division Chief
o Site visit of Beilun container terminal
 Zhoushan Port and Shipping Administration Bureau
o Hu Tie Jun, Director, Investment Promotion Bureau
o Luo Ning, Vice Director
 Ningbo University of Technology; Transportation and Logistics College
o Ren-Xiang Wang, Professor; Ningbo International Port and Logistics Research
Center Director
 Investment Cooperation Bureau, Meishan Free Trade Port Zone
o Director & Assistant Director
o Site visit to Meishan Island
 Ningbo Environmental Protection Bureau

Port of Shanghai: June 5 – June 7, 2012
 Shanghai Environmental Protection Bureau, International Cooperation Division
o Yang Chun Lin, Chief
o Tang Wei
 Shanghai Port Administration Center
o Yu Xiao, Deputy Chief of Port Administration Division
o Lu Ping, Director, Senior Engineer
o Zhang Fuxian, Office Vice Director
 Shanghai Municipal Transport and Port Authority; Yangshan Deepwater Port
Administrative Office
o Liu Guocheng, Comprehensive Administration Department
o Site visit to Yangshan Deepwater Port Container Terminal
 Shanghai Environmental Monitoring Center
o Shen Yin; Zhang Jian, Vehicle Pollution Monitoring Division Vice Director

223

 Inchcape Shipping Services
o David Young, General Manger - China
 Shanghai International Port Group (SIPG)
o Site visit to Waigaoqio Phase IV
o Interview with Bo Hai Hu, Deputy General Manager; Ding Songbing, Senior
Analyst of Strategy & Research; Li Shi Wei, Supervisor of Foreign Affairs

Port of Shanghai: October 22 – 30, 2012
 Shanghai Port Administration Center
o Yu Xiao, Deputy Chief of Port Administration Division
o Lu Ping, Director, Senior Engineer
o Zhang Fuxian, Office Vice Director
 Shanghai International Port Group (SIPG)
o Site visit to Waigaoqio Phase 2 and 4
o Interview with Bo Hai Hu, Deputy General Manager; Ding Songbing, Senior
Analyst of Strategy & Research; Li Shi Wei, Supervisor of Foreign Affairs
 Shanghai Municipal Transport and Port Authority; Yangshan Deepwater Port
Administrative Office
o Liu Guocheng, Comprehensive Administration Department
o Site visit to Yangshan Deepwater Port Container Terminal

224

European Union

Port of Hamburg: September 18-19, 2012
 Hamburg Port Authority (HPA)
o Lutz Birke, Head of Corporate and Port Strategy
o Hendrik Hollstein, Environmental Strategy
 Hamburger Hafen und Logistik AG (HHLA)
o Jan Hendrik Pietsch, Sustainable Manager of HHLA
o Site visit to HHLA Container Terminal Altenwerder (CTA) automated terminal
 NABU, Naturschutzbund Deutschland Landesverband Hamburg
o Alexander Porschke, Vorsitzender

Port of Antwerp: September 20, 2012
 Port of Antwerp
o Kris De Crane, Manager Environment and Spatial Planning
o Danny Deckers, Senior Advisor
o Tim Verhoeven, Assistant
 Port tour and site visit to DP World automated container terminal

Port of Rotterdam: September 21, 2012

 Port of Rotterdam
o Marielle H. Van Dijk, Project Manager, Sustainable Development
o Prof. Tiedo Vellinga, Director of Environmental Monitoring
 Port tour and site visit to Maasvlakte 2 terminal construction and Futureland

225

Appendix B: Case Studies Site Visit Photos

Ningbo/Zhoushan, China

Site visit to Ningbo Beilun Container Terminal on May 22, 2012. Note
shellfishing near terminal operations in bottom photo, which is prohibited.
Note also the extended wharf from the backlands reach deeper water and
reduce the need for dredging.
226

Note the power lines and infrastructure needed to support the Electric Rail Mounted Gantry Cranes
(RMGs) used in the terminal backlands at the Ningbo Beilun Container Terminal. This technology is not
currently used in the United States. A senior electrical engineer at the Port of Los Angeles has commented
that this infrastructure design would never be approved by LA Building and Safety due to safety issues.

Industrial stationary sources are the major drivers of air
pollution in the Ningbo region.
227

Ningbo/Zhoushan – Meishan Island
Site visit to Meishan Island on
May 23, 2012. Photos (source:
author) include views from
administration observation
tower of projects currently
under construction and
remaining indigenous farming
population. A showroom nearby
displays a model of the future
development.
228

Shanghai’s Yangshan Deepwater Port: Aerial photo of current
development at left (source: asiapacificgateway.gc.ca ).
Photos of scale model showing the future expansion by 2025 at
Shanghai Urban Planning Museum below (source: author). Note
the new city center to support the logistics park and terminal
expansion to an adjacent island.
Shanghai
229

Site visit to Yangshan Deepwater Port on June 5, 2012.

230

Right: The Donghai Bridge,
approximately 19.5 miles long, spans
Hangzhou Bay and connects the
Yangshan Deepwater Port terminal
with Shanghai. Below: Panorama
view to the North of highway
approach to terminal through
wetlands, truck entrance gate,
backlands, and berths.

Above: Undeveloped natural
topography of the island,
compared to the industrialized
portions for cargo operations
(Above Right). Right:
Construction that has started on
the city center to support the
new logistics park, as shown in
the development model.
Construction is expected to be
complete by 2020. Wetlands
still surround the area for now.
Source of photos: Author
231

Shanghai’s Bund and Huangpu River with container vessel and barge traffic. Source: Author, June 2, 2012.

232

Meeting between author and Shanghai Port Administration Center officials on June 5, 2012. Top
officials pictured include Yu Xiao, Deputy Chief of Port Administration Division (left of author), Zhang
Fuxian, Office Vice Director (right of author), and Ping Lu, Director and Senior Engineer.
Meeting with Shanghai Environmental Protection Bureau officials on June 5, 2012. Representatives
with the Foreign Cooperation Office and Vehicle Pollution Monitoring Division were present.
233

SIPG Waigaoqio Container
Terminal Phase IV

This terminal also has an extended wharf
design for 5 vessel berths and 25 quay cranes
(pictured above, right, and below left).
Below: There are 80 sets of diesel- electric
rubber-tired gantry (RTG) cranes in the
backlands to move and sort cargo. Cargo
throughput for the terminal in 2011 was
5.71M TEUs. The target for 2012 was 5.85M.
Berths are occupied with vessels 80 percent
of the time.
234

Author with Bo Hai Hu, Deputy General Manager of Shanghai International Port Group (SIPG)
(left) on June 6, 2012 on a visit to SIPG Waigaoqio Terminal Phase IV.

235

Hamburg

Above: Hamburg Port Authority (HPA) headquarters; Right: Author with
Lutz Birke, Head of Corporate and Port Strategy for HPA; Below: HHLA
CTA automated container terminal; Author with Jan Hendrick Pietsch, CTA
Terminal Manager. Note electric freight rail in port area.
236

Antwerp

Visit to DP World Antwerp Gateway with Katera
Nastie, DP World Health and Safety Coordinator
(far left), Tim Verhoeven, Technical Associate,
and Denny Deckers, Senior Advisor with the Port
of Antwerp (far right). Located on the banks of
the river Scheldt, the automated terminal has a
capacity of 1.8M TEUs. Opened in 2005, this is
the newest facility in the port. The yard uses a
combination of straddle carriers and fully
automated stacking cranes (see far bottom right
photo for comparison – the straddle carriers are
yellow). Below: Automated truck transfer facility.
Far left bottom: river traffic through the locks.

237

Rotterdam

Appendix C:

Site visit to Maasvlakte2 under construction, with a ride on the FutureLand Express Bus for a tour and visit to the
onsite visitors center. Maasvlakte 1 in the background (right). Top Far Right: “A Box of Environmental Measures” –
the 6000 page environmental impact assessment prepared for the planning and construction of the site was on
display.
238

Appendix C: Port Authority and Terminal Operator Interview Questions

Jan Green Rebstock Port of Los Angeles
扬. 格林. 雷布斯托克洛杉矶港
Port Sustainability Case Study – Shanghai
港口可持续性案例研究--- 上海港
Interview Questions for Port Authority/Terminal Operator
对于港务局/ 码头经营人的采访问题
Approach to sustainability
实现可持续性发展
1. What issues are important to your port or organization? – Economic prosperity, community
involvement, air quality, water quality, soil quality, effects on marine life, historic resources,
others?
什么问题对于你们港口或机构来说是重要的？ -- 经济繁荣，社会参与，空气质量，水质，
土质，海洋生物的影响，历史资源，或者其它？
2. What do you consider to be the major challenges related to environmental and social impacts
resulting from port operations?
你们认为港口生产而造成的有关环境和社会影响的主要问题是什么？
3. How do you balance achieving growth in port operations with managing environmental and
social impacts?
你是怎么实现平衡港口发展与处理其产生的环境、社会负作用的？
4. How do you define Sustainability? Does it apply to environmental, economic, and social
objectives and impacts? Or just environmental? Do you consider yourself a sustainable port?
你们是怎么定义可持续发展的？它适用于环境，经济和社会的可持续性目标和影响吗？或
者仅仅指环境可持续发展？你们认为自己的港口是一个可持续发展的港口吗？
5. What environmental and social impacts result from your port operations?
在你们的港口生产中都产生了哪些环境和社会负面影响？
6. What are you doing to address these issues? Who is responsible for making sure these goals are
achieved?
你们正采取哪些措施来解决这些问题？谁来负责保证实现这些目标？
7. What motivates your organization to address this issue? What are the drivers for your
approach?
是什么促使你们的机构去解决这些问题的？什么是你解决问题办法的推进器？
239

8. How important is reducing environmental impacts relative to other strategic priorities? How
important is sustainability in your organization? How does it impact your decision-making
process?
减少负面环境影响对于其他战略重点有多重要？可持续发展对于你们机构有多重要？它是
怎么影响你们的决策过程的？
9. Please give examples of achievements, success stories, and best practices in sustainability at
your port.
请举例说明你们在港口可持续发展上实现的成就，成功的故事和最好的方法。
10. Who is leading this effort?
谁在领导这些为实现目标而做的努力？
11. What do you feel are the main hurdles for developing environmental/sustainability initiatives
and policies? What are the major challenges for implementation and compliance?
你感觉对于发展环境可持续发展倡议和政策的主要障碍是什么？实施和遵守这些政策的重
大挑战是什么？

Reporting
报告
12. Have you documented any cost savings or avoided costs due to sustainability efforts like energy
efficiency, water efficiency, recycling, waste reduction, or cleaner fuel projects?
你们是否已证明由于在可持续性发展方面的努力，例如节能节水，循环利用，减少浪费，
或清洁燃料项目等已经实现了节约成本或直接避免了花费？
13. How do you share this information with environmental regulators? How do you share it with the
public? Do you see a benefit in sharing this information with the public?
你们是怎么与环境管理者和公众共享这些信息的？你们是否看到了与公众共享这些信息的
益处？
14. Is there a person in your organization that is responsible for managing, communicating, and
educating the employees about the environmental and social impacts from port operations?
在你们的单位中是否有人负责管理，宣传并培训员工有关港口生产造成的环境和社会影
响？
15. Have you created an annual sustainability report? Do you create environmental reports? How
often do you report? Is the reporting mandated? By who?
你们是否编写了可持续发展的年度报告？你们是否编写环境报告？多长时间汇报一次？汇
报是在执行命令吗？是的话，是谁命令执行的？
16. What metrics do you use to measure success related to environmental performance and
sustainability? Are there things that are important to your success that you do not have metrics
for yet?
你用什么指标来衡量有关环境成效和可持续发展成功与否？是否还有其它对于你们取得成
功来说很重要但又无法用指标衡量的因素？
17. Regarding specific targets from the Ministry of Transport, what is your progress related to:
240

a. Overall energy consumption of total cargo handling
b. Energy efficiency
c. Emission reduction technologies (for SO2, NOx, and CO2)
d. renewable and alternative energy
e. overall particulate mitigation
f. reducing pollutant discharges
g. treating port wastewater
针对交通部的具体目标，有关以下几点你们都取得了哪些进展？
a. 所有货物操作的能源消耗总量
b. 能源节约
c. 减排科技（针对二氧化硫，氮氧化物，和二氧化碳）
d. 可再生和可替代能源
e, 缓解颗粒污染总量
f. 减少污染物的排放
g. 治理港口废水
18. How do you measure impacts to fisheries and biological habitat?
你们怎么衡量对于渔业和生物栖息地产生的影响？
19. How do you measure and address vessel emissions?
你们怎么估量和解决船舶排放的污染物？
20. How do you design transportation infrastructure to avoid environmental impacts?
你们怎么设计交通基础设施以便避免环境污染的？
21. Who participates in port planning decisions? What role do non-governmental organizations play
in your decision-making process related to environmental or social issues? Do you consult with
them about how your policies may impact them?
都有谁参与了港口发展的决策？非政府组织在关于环境或社会问题的决策过程中都发挥了
什么样的作用？你们是否咨询他们关于政策对其产生的影响？

Organizational Change
机构转变
22. Do you have a department for environmental management? Communications? Technology
advancement? What are the responsibilities of each department?
你们是否有环境管理部门，宣传部门，科技研发部门？每个部门的责任分工都是什么？
23. How did you choose the indicators to measure environmental and social performance of your
organization? Who is in charge of meeting these targets? Who do they report to? What level are
they at in the organization?
你们是怎么选择参照物来衡量你们机构在环境和社会方面取得的成效？谁在负责实现这些
目标？他们都向谁进行汇报？他们在你们机构中的水平如何？
24. What are the prevalent attitudes in the port employees and management toward sustainability?
港口员工和管理层对于可持续性的普遍态度是什么？
241

25. Do you share your approaches to these challenges with other ports? Are there opportunities for
other ports to share information and discuss common challenges? Do you participate and how?
What is the motivation for your collaboration?
你们是否与其它港口共享迎接这些挑战的方法？其它港口是否有机会共享信息并探讨共同
面临的挑战？你们是否分享了并且是怎么分享的？促使你们合作的动机是什么？
26. Do you pay attention to what other ports are doing related to environmental performance and
sustainability? If so, please give examples.
你们是否关注其它港口在环境成效和可持续性发展上所采取的措施？如果是的话，烦请举
例。

242

Appendix D

Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Plan
2013 - 2035

DRAFT - UNPUBLISHED January 2013

243

Table of Contents

Introduction: A Sustainability Plan for the Port of Los Angeles................................................. 244
The Sustainability Context .............................................................................................................. 244
Why create a Sustainability Plan for the Port of Los Angeles? ..................................................... 246
Supporting Port-wide Strategic Planning ................................................................................................. 246
Sustainability Governance at the Port of Los Angeles ................................................................... 246
A Framework for Port Sustainability ........................................................................................................ 247
Developing the Sustainability Plan ................................................................................................. 248
The Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Plan ................................................................................. 249
Scope .............................................................................................................................................. 249
Overview of the Sustainability Plan ................................................................................................ 250
Figure 2: Sustainability Plan Framework ................................................................................................. 251
Figure 2: Alignment of Strategic Plan and Sustainability Plan ................................................................. 251
Vision............................................................................................................................................... 251
Port-wide Sustainability Goals ........................................................................................................ 252
Material Issues, Actions, Metrics and Targets ............................................................................... 252
1. Community Investment ....................................................................................................................... 255
2. Land Use and Infrastructure ................................................................................................................ 257
3. Public Health ....................................................................................................................................... 259
4. Energy and Resource Conservation ................................................................................................... 261
5. Financial Strength ............................................................................................................................... 263
Port Sustainability Programs: A Holistic Perspective ..................................................................... 265
Implementing the Port’s Sustainability Plan ................................................................................. 265
Back Cover:................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

244

Introduction: A Sustainability Plan for the Port of Los Angeles
The Sustainability Context

For over a century, the Port of Los Angeles (the Port) has been an engine of global trade and
commerce. As the North American leader in containerized cargo, the Port is continuously
seeking to improve its own practices and to demonstrate leadership on issues of global
importance to the maritime industry, including sustainability. The Port has long been committed
to innovative action and outreach to promote sustainable maritime operations. To continue to
grow operations and provide national, regional and local economic benefits, the Port knows it
must continue to proactively and aggressively mitigate impacts to communities and the
environment.

The Port’s focus on sustainability grows out of its past leadership on environmental
management issues and experience with community engagement and public involvement in
Port planning and operations. The Port realizes that a more holistic and cohesive effort is
needed to plan for sustainable operations in the future.

The Port’s approach to sustainability combines a green growth philosophy with the Triple
Bottom Line (TBL). The TBL broadens the traditional perspective for evaluating business
performance that typically focuses solely on financial indicators and criteria; instead, the Port
also takes into account the environmental and social impacts and benefits associated with
business activities. The TBL approach is a more progressive and integrative way to measure
performance overall and requires the Port to balance the environmental, social, and economic
impacts and benefits of port operations in future planning and decision-making to achieve
sustainable green growth.

Figure 1: Green Growth Pyramid

The Port’s operations involve many diverse stakeholders including tenants, local communities,
regulators, non-governmental organizations, employees and unions, business partners and
vendors, the City of Los Angeles and industry associations. By preparing a Sustainability Plan
(Plan), the Port is committing to its stakeholders to achieve measurable progress on
245

sustainability. Through this roadmap, the Port is providing clarity to its efforts in the future and
increased transparency into its sustainability planning and implementation process. The Port will
rely on the help of its stakeholders to implement the activities detailed here, and to provide input
on future activities to be undertaken through the Plan.

As global resources become increasingly constrained, the imperative for the Port of Los
Angeles to embed sustainability into all facets of its operations is intensified. It is becoming
increasingly apparent that organizations that truly integrate sustainability into their core business
practices have a greater likelihood for sustained growth and long-term financial success.

Sustainability is taking root across all levels of the goods movement industry. Globally, the
International Association of Ports and Harbors (IAPH) has acknowledged environmental
responsibility as an indispensable factor of sustainable economic growth, and in 2008 created
the World Ports Climate Initiative in recognition of the important role ports can play to combat
climate change. Nationally, the American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) adopted a
resolution in 2007 encouraging members to adopt sustainability as a standard business practice
and to adhere to a set of sustainability guidelines. Locally, the Port is a significant contributor to
the City’s ambitious Green LA plan that aims to turn Los Angeles into one of the greenest big
cities in the nation. A strong commitment to sustainability, therefore, is essential for leadership
at the local, national and global scales.

Other ports are also starting to respond to the calls for advancing sustainability by implementing
sustainability programs and producing annual progress reports. Increasingly, port authorities
have begun to adopt the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) framework, the universally accepted
standard for sustainability measurement and reporting. By incorporating elements of the GRI
into this Plan, the Port is positioning itself among global ports and demonstrating sustainability
leadership by using this internationally accepted standard.
246

Why create a Sustainability Plan for the Port of Los Angeles?
Supporting Port-wide Strategic Planning

In early 2012, the Port of Los Angeles released a Strategic Plan outlining the Port’s guiding
vision, key result areas, priority objectives, and supporting initiatives for 2012 through 2017. The
Port’s vision statement, as articulated in the Strategic Plan, is to be “America’s Port
®
– the
nation’s #1 container port and the global model for sustainability, security and social
responsibility”. This Sustainability Plan has been developed to support the implementation of the
Strategic Plan and provides a detailed and adaptive framework for fulfilling the Port’s vision to
be the global model for Port sustainability.

To inform this Plan, Port staff drew from the GRI: an internationally accepted standard for
measuring and reporting on organizational sustainability. Central to the GRI framework is the
concept of measuring and reporting efforts to address the impacts of operations related to
material issues. The purpose of selecting material issues is to encourage an organization to
thoughtfully consider the numerous opportunities and risks presented by sustainability, and to
identify those issues that are most important to the organization, its stakeholders, the economy,
the environment and society.

The Port of Los Angeles embraced the concept of material issues in 2011, and identified twelve
issue areas ranging from health risk reduction to local economic development. In developing
this Plan, the Port revisited these material issues with a focus on refining or combining
overlapping issues and identifying potential gaps. The Port’s five new material issues are the
result of this work: Community Investment, Land Use and Infrastructure, Public Health, Energy
and Resource Conservation, and Financial Strength. This Plan is centered on these material
issues and the actions, metrics, targets and programs that support progress in these areas. In
addition to supporting the achievement of the objectives in the Strategic Plan, this Plan will drive
the progressive adoption of sustainability principles into Port planning, operations and
organizational structure.

Sustainability is a dynamic and evolving concept. This Plan will be revised periodically as new
sustainability challenges, priorities, and opportunities develop for the Port.

Sustainability Governance at the Port of Los Angeles

At the Port of Los Angeles, the Sustainability Team will be responsible for providing leadership,
reinforcing the commitment of the Port’s management to sustainability goals, and defining the
workgroup structure through which sustainability initiatives are implemented and tracked. The
five main components of the Sustainability Team and their core roles and responsibilities are
depicted in the diagram below.

247

Figure 2: Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Team

This Team will promote continuous improvement on sustainability practices at the Port of Los
Angeles.
A Framework for Port Sustainability

The Port has a long history of landmark environmental management and formulating successful
programs, plans, agreements and partnerships to tackle specific sustainability issues. The
Port’s 2011 Sustainability Report was its first effort to bring all of these programs together in one
document and explain the Port’s integrated Triple Bottom Line (TBL) approach to sustainability.

The process of cataloguing the Port’s numerous sustainability-related programs revealed the
need for a more comprehensive and strategic approach to sustainability. Though the Port’s
existing collection of sustainability-related polices, programs, and initiatives is extensive, the
Port lacked a cohesive vision, overarching sustainability goals, and a consistent and transparent
methodology for creating a strong sustainability program. The framework presented in this Plan
will improve the way the Port manages, implements, and measures sustainability performance,
and support the Strategic Plan vision.

The Port’s purpose for developing the Plan was to:

1. Create a dynamic planning framework that identifies port-wide sustainability goals and
significant or material sustainability issues on which to focus efforts;
2. Develop specific actions to address material issues, set metrics and targets for the
actions, and develop a system for tracking progress;
3. Understand how the Port’s current programs support the achievement of sustainability
material issue targets and identify new activities that may be required to support
progress towards these targets; and
248

4. Begin the transformational process of integrating sustainability more deeply into Port
decision-making and the organizational culture.

A mature sustainable organization that has successfully achieved integration of sustainability
into its decision-making processes looks like Figure 3 below.

Figure 3: Model of a Mature Sustainable Organization

Source: Adapted from Corporate Sustainability Management – A Reference Model. Center for
Sustainable Organizations. 2006.
In a mature sustainable organization, there is a core commitment to using the TBL
approach to sustainability as the major framework for decision-making. This
sustainability commitment is then reflected in the organization’s business strategy and
all policies, programs, and practices. The organization’s commitment to sustainability is
then reinforced through stakeholder relationships, leadership within the industry,
measuring performance, and reporting.

249

Developing the Sustainability Plan

In mid-2012, the Port’s Environmental Management Division (EMD) began to develop the
Sustainability Plan to advance the commitment to sustainability as articulated in the Strategic
Plan.

A series of workshops were held with EMD staff in order to create an overarching framework for
the Port’s sustainability planning process. The team reviewed best practices for sustainability
planning from similar organizations and contributed their ideas and recommendations based on
their experience and expertise.

EMD staff created an outreach and feedback process to ensure that ideas from within the Port
organization would also inform the Plan. Other divisions and senior management leadership
were involved to provide input on the Sustainability Plan through meetings and independent
review. Concerns from external stakeholders informed the selection and prioritization of Port
material issues and actions. The Plan has benefited from external sustainability expert review,
and public stakeholders will have the opportunity to comment on the final Plan.

Ultimately, the Port intends for this process and Plan to serve as the catalyst for embedding
sustainability into daily operating practices across all Port operations, as depicted in Figure 3.
Ongoing input from internal and external stakeholders will be integral into ensuring that the
Sustainability Plan becomes and remains a relevant, credible and actionable framework for
improving sustainability at the Port of Los Angeles.

The Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Plan
Scope

As a landlord port, the Port of Los Angeles leases its property to tenants who operate their own
facilities. The Port of Los Angeles owns facilities and employs staff to support goods movement
activities and manage commercial, retail, and recreational uses within the LA Waterfront.
However, the activities under direct control of the Port of Los Angeles itself are of small scale in
comparison with the activities undertaken by tenants on Port lands and the cumulative impacts
from the goods movement industry.

With this Plan, the Port has established ambitious plans to evolve its own operations to achieve
sustainability goals, but also to work with supply chain and regional partners to make
sustainability a key driver in planning and decision-making. At the level of Port-controlled
facilities and operations, the Port intends to work diligently to integrate sustainability into
business practices, core operations and Port culture. At the level of the Port complex, the Port
intends to increase collaboration with tenants and business partners on sustainability programs
of mutual interest, and to provide incentives and recognition to tenants and business partners
whose actions support Port sustainability goals and issues. Within the broader regional and
global goods movement industry, the Port pledges to promote concepts of sustainable
transportation systems and guidance in sustainability policy and planning decisions. To be the
global model for port sustainability, efforts at all three of these levels will be required.
250

Overview of the Sustainability Plan

The major components of the Plan are the:
 Vision;
 Port-wide Sustainability Goals;
 Material Issues, Actions, Metrics, and Targets; and
 Sustainability Programs.

Figure 4 below illustrates the framework and structure of the Plan. Figure 5 shows how the Plan
supports implementation of the Strategic Plan.

251

Figure 4: Sustainability Plan Framework

Figure 5: Alignment of Strategic Plan and Sustainability Plan

Vision

The vision statement serves as the guiding philosophy behind all Port activities. It directly
supports the vision of the Port’s Strategic Plan, as illustrated in Figure 5.

The Port’s Vision: Be the Global Model for Port Sustainability
252

Port-wide Sustainability Goals

Port-wide sustainability goals represent the aspirations of the Port of Los Angeles as a global
model. They provide direction and focus for activities at the material issue level and directly
support the Key Result Areas in the Port’s Strategic Plan. The Port will evaluate new projects
and initiatives based on their contribution to Port-wide sustainability goals.

Port-wide Sustainability Goals:

1. Competitive Operations:
 Become a showcase for sustainable infrastructure design and operations by
deploying innovations such as zero emissions technology to enhance global
competitiveness.

2. Strong Relationships:
 Facilitate greening of the goods movement industry through leadership, transparency
and stakeholder collaboration.
 Increase benefits to Port communities from the Port’s role as a global trade gateway.

3. Financial Strength:
 Ensure financial strength by integrating sustainability into business practices, core
operations and Port culture.

Material Issues, Actions, Metrics and Targets

The Port’s Sustainability Plan is structured around the material issues identified as significant for
fostering and integrating sustainability within the organization. The Port has developed actions,
metrics, and targets to ensure progress on each material issue.
Material Issues

As discussed earlier, the concept of materiality is drawn from the GRI, and its intent is to
encourage organizations to identify those issues that are most important to the organization, its
stakeholders, the economy, the environment and society.

The Port’s Material Issues:

 Community Investment: Building healthy and strong local and regional
communities through economic and workforce development, provision of community
benefits and public space amenities, and improving quality of life and mitigating
environmental impacts.

 Land Use and Infrastructure: Managing Port land for its highest and best use;
developing and maintaining world-class infrastructure to meet the current and future
needs of customers, community and environmental protection; and providing for the
integration of industrial, commercial, recreational, and ecological spaces and
facilities.

253

 Public Health: Preventing and progressively reducing health-related impacts from
Port operations to the greatest extent feasible.

 Energy and Resource Conservation: Conserving energy, water and land-based
resources to the greatest extent possible through responsible stewardship, adaptive
planning, technology advancement and operational best practices; generating
renewable energy for Port operations.

 Financial Strength: Securing, managing and deploying resources to meet financial
performance goals in order to invest in, grow and maintain a world-class sustainable
Port.

Level of Influence

Actions to address material issues are classified according to the Port’s level of influence. The
Port’s level of influence over the actions listed is highest for Port-controlled Facilities and
Operations (Level 1), mid-range for actions within the Port Complex (Level 2), and lowest for
actions within the Regional and Global Goods Movement Network (Level 3). However, while the
Port’s control at Levels 2 and 3 is lower, if successful, engagement in these areas can have a
higher impact toward sustainability by contributing to system-wide change in the goods
movement industry.

Figure 6: The Port’s levels of sustainability influence and effect

Aspects
Aspects are elements of a material issue for which the Port can define actions, metrics and
targets. This designation has been included to provide an easy way for readers to identify
activities related to specific subtopics encompassed by each material issue. For example,
aspects of the Financial Strength material issue include human resources, customer
collaboration, and organizational integration.
Actions
Actions are initiatives that the Port pledges to undertake to ensure progress toward a material
issue.
254

Metrics, Targets & Timeline
Together, the metrics, targets and timelines identified for each material issue action represent a
consistent and transparent system for measuring and tracking the Port’s progress toward
sustainable operations.
Programs
Programs include all implementation mechanisms – plans, agreements and collaborations – that
allow the Port to improve sustainability performance. Programs are the backbone of this action
plan, enabling the Port to achieve its sustainability vision and goals, and to achieve the targets
for each material issue.

The effectiveness of Port programs is essential to ensuring progress on sustainability. Some
Port programs have their own performance goals. These goals provide a systematic way for the
Port to track the strength of these programs and their contribution toward achieving progress on
sustainability. Through this sustainability planning process, Port has also committed to creating
a number of new programs for which goals and tracking mechanisms will need to be defined.
The Port will develop performance goals for all programs (proposed and existing) to better track
future performance and effectiveness.

255

1. Community Investment
Definition
Building healthy and strong local and regional communities through economic and workforce
development, provision of community benefits and public space amenities, and improving
quality of life and mitigating environmental impacts.
Strategic Plan Alignment
Community Investment supports the following strategic objectives articulated in the Port of Los
Angeles Strategic Plan:

 Increase Stakeholder & Community Awareness and Support
 Strengthen Financial Performance
Actions
The chart below details the Port’s planned actions and targets for achieving progress on
Community Investment:

Level of
Influence Aspect Action Metrics
Targets and
Timeline
Port-
controlled
Facilities and
Operations
Economic and
Workforce
Development
Provide jobs for local* and
regional** residents through
technology development,
construction, and contracting for
local services
Percentage of jobs
created or percentage
of hours worked by
local or regional
residents
20% jobs/hours by
local or regional
workers on Harbor
Department
contracts by 2023
(consider removing
percentage/TBD)
Port-
controlled
Facilities and
Operations
Community
Benefits and
Public Space
Amenities
Progressively develop the Los
Angeles (Wilmington & San
Pedro) Waterfront including
commercial, recreational
(walkability/accessibility) and
research uses, and community
events
Number of projects
constructed; Number of
events sponsored
70% of projects in
the LA Waterfront
plan developed by
2023; Target for
number of events
sponsored TBD
Port-
controlled
Facilities and
Operations
Community
Benefits and
Public Space
Amenities
Partner with CMTF
administrators and other
stakeholders to develop and
implement methods to assess
effectiveness of trust fund in
improving community quality of
life
Development of
assessment tool
Develop
assessment tool by
one year from the
adoption of this plan
256

Level of
Influence Aspect Action Metrics
Targets and
Timeline
Port-
controlled
Facilities and
Operations;
Regional
Goods
Movement
Network
Community
Engagement
Enhance quality of dialogue with
public to inform Port and
regional planning and decision-
making
Level and quality of
public dialogue
Develop
recommendations
to enhance level
and quality of public
dialogue by July
2013
Port
Complex
Mitigation of
Environmental
Impacts
Evaluate improvements to
terminal lighting, railroad noise
and other potential cumulative
impacts
TBD in phase II of this
plan
TBD in Phase II of
this Plan

*Wilmington & San Pedro
**Five counties region
Supporting Programs
The following programs will support the Port in achieving progress on Community Investment. A
description of each program can be found in the programs catalogue on page TBD of this plan.

 Community Benefits Assessment Program
 Community Mitigation Trust Fund
 Community Aesthetic Mitigation Projects
 LA Waterfront Program
 Port Boat Tours
 POLA Charter High School
 International Trade Education Program
 Project Labor Agreements
 Trade Connect Program
 Student Employment Programs

257

2. Land Use and Infrastructure
Definition
Managing Port land for its highest and best use; developing and maintaining world-class
infrastructure to meet the current and future needs of customers, community and environmental
protection; and providing for the integration of industrial, commercial, recreational, and
ecological spaces and facilities.
Strategic Plan Alignment
Land Use and Infrastructure supports the following strategic objectives articulated in the Port of
Los Angeles Strategic Plan:

 Develop and Maintain World Class Infrastructure
 Optimize Land Use
Actions, Metrics, and Targets
The chart below details the Port’s planned actions and targets for achieving progress on Land
Use and Infrastructure:

Level of
Influence Aspect Action Metrics
Targets and
Timeline
Port-
controlled
Facilities
and
Operations
Land Use
Optimization
Implement Port Master Plan
Update and adhere to its guiding
principles in future project
planning
Number of land use
decisions made in
adherence to Port
Master Plan
guidance
100% consistency
starting in July 2013
Port-
controlled
Facilities
and
Operations
Land Use
Optimization
Develop and implement PDC and
CIP criteria that reflect Port
material issues for project start
decisions and ensure in-progress
consistency with criteria at
designated milestones
Development of
criteria; Number of
projects that utilize
adopted criteria
Develop criteria by
July 2013; 100%
consistency thereafter
Port-
controlled
Facilities
and
Operations
Contamination
Prevention
and
Remediation
Develop a plan including cost
benefit valuation for restoring
contaminated sites within the Port
to put them into revenue-
generating service
Creation of plan;

Cumulative revenue
generated and
avoided liability from
reclaimed sites
compared to cost of
reclamation
Create plan by
September 2013
Port
Complex
Contamination
Prevention
and
Remediation
Prevent land, water and sediment
contamination through proactive
tenant audits
Number of audits
conducted that
resulted in corrective
action; Revision of
leasing policy as
required
Stormwater audit
targets TBD;

Comprehensive
Environmental
Compliance
Assessments (ECAs)
at 3 facilities per year
annually by 2014
258

Level of
Influence Aspect Action Metrics
Targets and
Timeline
Regional
Goods
Movement
Network
Regional
Infrastructure
Planning
Work with regional partners to
ensure sustainable infrastructure
planning at a regional scale (to
integrate zero emissions
technologies, meet capacity
needs, reduce congestion,
leverage other regional partners;
and ensure harmonization of
infrastructure to support regional
and Port ZE Tech)
Travel time to
downtown railroads,
travel time to
regional distribution
centers; miles of
infrastructure with
zero emission
vehicle facilities
Travel time targets
TBD - need to
establish benchmark
and target by 2014;
miles of zero emission
infrastructure TBD
Port
Complex
Biological
Resources
Management
Implement biological resources
management plan including the
mitigation banking instrument that
ensures that ecological impacts
from projects are fully offset and
existing biological resources are
maintained and enhanced
TBD in Phase II of
this Plan
TBD in Phase II of this
Plan
Regional
Goods
Movement
Network
Regional
Infrastructure
Planning
Formulate and implement
collaborative agreements with
local governments for
development of distribution
infrastructure and foreign trade
zones to support forecasted
regional capacity needs
TBD in Phase II of
this Plan
TBD in Phase II of this
Plan

Supporting Programs
The following programs will support the Port in achieving progress on Land Use and
Infrastructure. A description of each program can be found in the programs catalogue on page
TBD of this Plan.

 Tenant Auditing Program
 Contaminated Sediment Management Plan
 Onsite Drayage Parking Program
 Climate Adaptation Study
 National Freight Policy Collaboration
 Port-wide Site Cleanup Standards
 Port Master Plan
259

3. Public Health
Definition
Preventing and progressively reducing health-related impacts from Port operations to the
greatest extent feasible.
Strategic Plan Alignment
Public Health supports the following strategic objectives articulated in the Port of Los Angeles
Strategic Plan:

 Advance Technology and Sustainability
 Increase Stakeholder & Community Awareness and Support
 Strengthen Financial Performance
Actions
The chart below details the Port’s planned actions and targets for achieving progress on Public
Health:

Level of
Influence Aspect Action Metrics
Targets and
Timeline
Port-controlled
Facilities and
Operations; Port
Complex Air Quality
Maintain, enforce, and report
on the implementation of state
of the art sustainable
construction guidelines and
mitigation monitoring
Percentage of active
projects compliant with
construction mitigation
measures and best
practices
100%
compliance by
end of 2014
Port-controlled
Facilities and
Operations; Port
Complex Air Quality
Implement and augment
environmental programs to
progressively reduce health-
related impacts (Use EI to
ensure achievement of air
quality standards)
Percent reductions in
emissions and health risk
Meet bay-wide
standards
Port Complex Air Quality
Enforce sustainable lease
agreements through mitigation
monitoring
Percent of active projects
compliant with
operational mitigation
measures contained in
leases
100%
compliance by
end of 2014
Regional Goods
Movement
Network
Health
Standards
Actively work with LA City
Planning on methods to
assess community health and
measures to be included in
Health and Wellness chapter
of the municipal General Plan.
Upon establishment of a
model, promote within the
state.
Number of plans/zoning
decisions made applying
guidance from adopted
Health and Wellness
chapter of municipal
General Plan
See Health and
Wellness
chapter to
completion;
Commence use
of guidance in
2016 and
benchmark
utilization
Port-controlled
Facilities and
Operations
Ecosystem
Health
Reduce fish impairments from
contaminated sediments to be
consistent with consumption
guidelines
TBD in phase II of this
plan
TBD in phase II
of this plan
260

Level of
Influence Aspect Action Metrics
Targets and
Timeline
Port Complex
Community
Benefits and
Public Space
Amenities
Increase walkability and bike
access within LA waterfront
development
TBD in phase II of this
plan
TBD in phase II
of this plan
Supporting Programs
The following programs will support the Port in achieving progress on Public Health. A
description of each program can be found in the programs catalogue on page TBD of this plan.

 Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
 Public Health Information Provision
 Fugitive Dust Control
 Fish Tissue Impairment Research and Plan Development
 Sustainable Lease Agreements
 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
 Vessel Speed Reduction Program
 Environmental Ship Index
 Marine Engine Exchange Program
 Climate Leadership Awards
 World Ports Climate Initiative - Carbon Calculator
 Clean Truck Program
 Alternative Marine Power
 Air Quality Mitigation Incentive Program
 CAAP Air Quality Excellence Awards
 Pacific Ports Clean Air Collaborative

261

4. Energy and Resource Conservation
Definition
Conserving energy, water and land-based resources to the greatest extent possible through
responsible stewardship, adaptive planning, technology advancement and operational best
practices; generating renewable energy for Port operations.
Strategic Plan Alignment
Energy and Resource Conservation supports the following strategic objectives articulated in the
Port of Los Angeles Strategic Plan:

 Advance Technology and Sustainability
 Optimize Land Use
 Strengthen Financial Performance
Actions
The chart below details the Port’s planned actions and targets for achieving progress on Energy
and Resource Conservation:

Level of
Influence Aspect Action Metrics
Targets and
Timeline
Port-
controlled
Facilities and
Operations;
Port Complex
Renewable
Energy
Generation
Implement port-wide
renewable energy plan
to support Port
operations and
emergency energy
supply.
Percentage of energy
consumed generated
from renewable sources
Offset 40% of Port
load with
renewables
(purchased and
generated) by 2020
Port-
controlled
Facilities and
Operations;
Port Complex
Responsible
Stewardship;
Operational
Best
Practices
Develop a port-wide
plan for resource
conservation and
efficiency for energy,
water and waste
Percent reductions in
energy consumption,
water consumption, and
waste over baseline;
Percent beneficial reuse
of contaminated
sediments
TBD based upon
completion of
assessment and
plan development
Port-
controlled
Facilities and
Operations;
Port Complex
Operational
Best
Practices
Benchmark and
improve terminal
efficiency
TBD in conjunction with
customers
Initiate near-term
strategies starting
in 2014
Port
Complex;
Regional
Goods
Movement
Network
Technology
Advancement
Implement zero
emission and hybrid
technologies in Port-
related operations and
throughout the region
% of ZE drayage trucks
total or % of ZE truck
trips to near-dock rail; %
of ZE CHE; % of ZE
truck trips on I-710
50% of total Port
drayage fleet or
100% of trucks
calling near-dock
rail by 2020; 50%
CHE by 2020; I-
710 target TBD
Port-
controlled
Facilities and
Operations
Operational
Best
Practices
Continue
implementation of
LEED for new
construction and
expand green building
policy to include
strategy for retrofitting
TBD in phase II of this
plan
TBD in phase II of
this plan
262

Level of
Influence Aspect Action Metrics
Targets and
Timeline
existing facilities
Port
Complex;
Regional
Goods
Movement
Network
Operational
Best
Practices
Optimize mode shift to
rail
TBD in phase II of this
action plan
TBD in phase II of
this action plan
Supporting Programs
The following programs will support the Port in achieving progress on Energy and Resource
Conservation. A description of each program can be found in the programs catalogue on page
TBD of this plan.

 Resource Conservation Plan
 Port Electrification Plan
 Terminal Efficiency and Automation Measurement
 Terminal Efficiency Improvement Plan
 Terminal Automation Research
 Energy, Water and Waste Best Management Practices Engagement Plan
 Environmentally Preferable Purchasing
 Technology Review Lease Measure
 Technology Action Plan
 Green Building Policy
 Sustainable Construction Guidelines
 Sustainable Design Guidelines
 Water Resources Action Plan
 Tenant Stormwater Outreach Program
 Cabrillo Beach Water Quality Improvement Study
 Clean Marinas Program
 PortTechLA
 Zero Emission Roadmap
 Cabrillo Shallow Water Habitat
 California Least Tern Site Program
 Biological Surveys
 Hybrid Tour Boat
 Cabrillo Saltwater Marsh
 Voluntary Tenant Participation
 Expanded Emissions Inventory
 Environmental Management System

263

5. Financial Strength
Definition
Securing, managing and deploying resources to meet financial performance goals in order to
invest in, grow and maintain a world-class sustainable Port.
Strategic Plan Alignment
Financial Strength supports the following strategic objectives articulated in the Port of Los
Angeles Strategic Plan:

 Retain and Grow Market Share
 Strengthen Financial Performance
 Create a Positive Workplace Culture
Actions
The chart below details the Port’s planned actions and targets for achieving progress on
Financial Strength:

Level of
Influence Aspect Action Metrics
Targets and
Timeline
Port-
controlled
Facilities
and
Operations
Sustainability
Integration
Integrate sustainability in
Port financial decision-
making (project approvals),
accounting and reporting
TBD upon development
and implementation of
stepped integration
program
Develop and implement
stepped program by
June 2014
Port-
controlled
Facilities
and
Operations
Human
Resources
Recruit and invest in the
most highly skilled
personnel in order to
maintain financial strength
of the organization
HR benchmark of
organizational skills,
education and expertise;

Implementation of a
staffing plan to address
gaps or weaknesses in
sustainability
competencies;

Implementation of
sustainability training
Achieve HR benchmark
by TBD;

Complete staffing
assessment and plan by
TBD;

Develop training
program by TBD;

Fully operational
program by TBD
Port
Complex
Customer
Collaboration
Leverage sustainability
efforts with existing
sustainability-minded
customers and to attract
new customers
Customer
engagement/partnership
on sustainability;

Level of customer
sustainability activities
Conduct pilot outreach
program to sustainable
Port businesses by Fall
2013;

Develop recognition
program by June 2014

264

Supporting Programs
The following programs will support the Port in achieving progress on Financial Strength. A
description of each program can be found in the programs catalogue on page TBD of this Plan.

 Sustainability Integration Report
 Sustainability Integration in Decision-Making
 Financial Opportunities through Sustainability Research Project
 Economic Valuation Process Development
 Integrated Reporting
 Sustainability Training Program
 Professional Advancement Ladders
 Staff Competencies for Sustainability Gap Assessment
 Consumer Recognition Program
 Pilot Outreach Program
 Tuition Reimbursement Program
 POLA Leadership Academy
 Employee Engagement

265

Port Sustainability Programs: A Holistic Perspective

Programs (including other environmental management plans, agreements and partnerships)
serve as the major engine behind this Plan, as they provide the implementation mechanisms to
support the vision, goals and material issue targets. This Plan presents all of the Port’s existing
and proposed sustainability-related programs classified according to the material issue they
most directly affect.

Sustainability issues are inherently intertwined, however, and more often than not Port
programs that support one material issue will also contribute to progress in other areas of
sustainability. A catalogue of programs is available that describes all current and planned
sustainability-related programs at the Port of Los Angeles, and cross-references all programs
according to the material issues they benefit, both directly and indirectly.

Implementing the Port’s Sustainability Plan

This Sustainability Plan is an iterative document, and will be updated periodically. The actions
and programs described within this framework may fluctuate in response to the changing
context for sustainability, but the Plan will remain the governing strategic document to support
ongoing sustainability efforts at the Port of Los Angeles. Over the next few years, the primary
function of the Plan will be to guide the Port toward a more concerted institutionalization of
sustainability into operations, business practices and Port culture.

For more information or to provide comments on the Port’s Sustainability Plan, please contact
Jan Green Rebstock at jgreenrebestock@portla.org.

266

Appendix E

Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Plan
Material Issues and Priority Actions for 2013-2014

DRAFT – UNPUBLISHED - April 2013

267

Introduction: A Sustainability Plan for the Port of Los Angeles

The Sustainability Context

The Port of Los Angeles hosts a variety of mixed uses, from cargo-handling operations and
commercial and retail developments to educational and recreational facilities. The Port has long
been committed to innovative action and outreach to promote sustainable maritime operations
and balance the needs of tenants, customers, and community stakeholders. To continue to
grow operations and provide national, regional and local economic benefits, the Port knows it
must continue to proactively and aggressively mitigate impacts to communities and the
environment.

The Port’s focus on sustainability grows out of its past leadership in environmental management
and experience with community engagement and public involvement in port planning processes.
As sustainability is a more holistic approach to addressing and balancing complex and
interrelated community, environmental, and economic issues, the Port realizes that a more
comprehensive and cohesive effort is needed to plan for sustainable operations in the future.

The Port uses the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) approach to sustainability. The TBL broadens the
traditional perspective for evaluating business performance that focused solely on financial
criteria; instead, the Port also takes into account the environmental and social impacts and
benefits associated with business activities. The TBL approach is a more progressive and
innovative way to measure performance overall and requires the Port to balance the
environmental, social, and economic impacts and benefits of port operations in future planning
and decision-making to achieve sustainable green growth.

Greening Ports and the Goods Movement Industry

Organizations that truly integrate sustainability into their core business practices have a greater
likelihood for sustained growth and long-term financial success. To this end, sustainability is
taking root among ports and across all levels of the goods movement industry. Globally, the
International Association of Ports and Harbors (IAPH) has acknowledged environmental
responsibility as an indispensable factor of sustainable economic growth. Nationally, the
American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) approved a resolution encouraging members
to adopt sustainability as a standard business practice and to adhere to a set of sustainability
guidelines. Locally, the Port is a significant contributor to the City’s Green LA plan that aims to
transform Los Angeles into one of the greenest big cities in the nation. A strong commitment to
sustainability, therefore, is essential for local, national and global leadership among ports.

Many ports, terminal operators, and vessel carriers are starting to advance sustainability by
implementing sustainability programs and producing annual progress reports. Increasingly, port
authorities have begun to adopt the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) framework, the universally
accepted standard for sustainability measurement and reporting. By incorporating elements of
the GRI into this Plan, the Port is positioning itself among global ports and demonstrating
leadership by using this internationally accepted standard.

268

Why create a Sustainability Plan for the Port of Los Angeles?
A proactive sustainability plan will improve how the Port integrates sustainability into its
organizational thinking and will guide the Port on how to approach, implement, and measure
sustainability performance now and in the future. The short-term roadmap contained in this Plan
provides a thoughtful framework for evaluating future initiatives and programs and provides a
strong foundation for supporting the Port’s vision for sustainability contained in the Strategic
Plan.

Supporting Port-wide Strategic Planning

In 2012, the Port of Los Angeles adopted a Strategic Plan outlining the Port’s guiding vision, key
result areas, and objectives for 2012 through 2017. The Port’s vision is to be “America’s Port
®
–
the nation’s #1 container port and the global model for sustainability, security and social
responsibility”. This Sustainability Plan has been developed to support the implementation of the
Strategic Plan and provides an adaptive framework for fulfilling the Port’s vision to be the global
model for Port sustainability. It also identifies specific actions to address Strategic Objective 3:
Advance Technology and Sustainability.

A Framework for Port Sustainability

The Port has a long history of landmark environmental management and formulating successful
community programs, plans, and agreements to tackle specific sustainability issues. The Port’s
2011 Annual Sustainability Report was its first effort to bring all of these programs together in
one document and explain the Port’s integrated Triple Bottom Line approach to sustainability.

The process of cataloguing the Port’s numerous sustainability-related programs revealed the
need for a more comprehensive and strategic approach to sustainability. Through the Port’s
existing collection of sustainability-related polices, programs, and initiatives is extensive, the
framework presented in this Plan will improve the way the Port manages, implements, and
measures sustainability performance in a consistent and transparent manner.
Background - Developing the Plan
The Port embraced the GRI concept of material issues in 2011, as reflected in the 2011 Annual
Sustainability Report. In developing this Plan, the Port revisited these material issues – issues
that are significant to addressing sustainability within an organization - with a focus on refining
or combining overlapping issues and identifying potential gaps. This Plan is centered on these
material issues and the actions, metrics, targets and programs that support progress in these
areas over the next two years. In addition to supporting the achievement of the objectives in the
Strategic Plan, this Plan will drive the progressive adoption of sustainability principles into Port
planning, operations and organizational structure.

In developing the Sustainability Plan, the Port’s purpose was to:

5. Create a dynamic planning framework to focus efforts around the material issues that
are significant for fostering and integrating sustainability within the Port;
6. Develop specific actions to address these material issues, set metrics and targets for the
actions, and develop a system for tracking progress over the next two years;
269

7. Understand how the Port’s current programs support the achievement of material issue
targets and identify new activities that may be required to support progress towards
these targets; and
8. Begin the transformational process of integrating sustainability more deeply into Port
decision-making and the organizational culture.
270

The Port of Los Angeles Sustainability Plan: 2013-2014

In mid-2012, the Port’s Environmental Management Division (EMD) began to develop the
Sustainability Plan to support the Port’s commitment to sustainability as articulated in the
Strategic Plan. Port staff held a series of internal workshops over several months in order to
create an overarching framework for the Port’s sustainability planning process. The team
reviewed best practices for sustainability planning from similar organizations and contributed
ideas and recommendations based on their experience and expertise.

Overview

The Port’s 2013-2014 Sustainability Plan is based on material issues, priority actions, and
supporting programs that help measure and ensure progress toward realizing the Port’s
strategic vision. The Port has developed actions, metrics, and targets to ensure progress on
each material issue. Upon successful implementation, we anticipate the Plan will be updated in
the future with additional long- and medium-term actions and goals. Figure 3 below provides a
graphic representation of the plan structure.

Figure 3: Sustainability Plan Framework (NOTE: Update “Who we Are” to “Strategic Plan Vision”)

271

Material Issues

To inform this Plan, Port staff drew from the GRI framework for material issues, which
encourages an organization to thoughtfully consider the numerous opportunities and risks
presented by sustainability, and to identify, measure, and report on those issues that are most
important to the organization, its stakeholders, the economy, the environment and society.

The Port has defined five material issues that are most important to the organization’s progress
toward sustainability. These material issues will provide guidance for future sustainability
planning and reporting.
6. Community Investment: Building healthy and strong local and regional communities
through economic and workforce development, provision of community benefits and
public space amenities, and improving quality of life and mitigating environmental
impacts.

7. Land Use and Infrastructure: Managing Port land for its highest and best use;
developing and maintaining world-class infrastructure to meet the current and future
needs of customers, community and environmental protection; and providing for the
integration of industrial, commercial, recreational, and ecological spaces and facilities.

8. Public Health: Preventing and progressively reducing health-related impacts from Port
operations to the greatest extent feasible.
9. Energy and Resource Conservation: Conserving energy, water and land-based
resources to the greatest extent possible through responsible stewardship, adaptive
planning, technology advancement and operational best practices; generating renewable
energy for Port operations.
10. Financial Strength: Securing, managing and deploying resources to meet financial
performance goals in order to invest in, grow and maintain a world-class sustainable
Port.

272

Priority Actions for 2013-2014

For each material issue area, the Port has identified priority actions for the organization to
undertake over 2013 and 2014. These actions are detailed below, along with suggested key
Port divisions that should lead or participate on the implementation teams.

1. Mitigation Funding Assessment Tool
Develop an assessment tool to measure the effectiveness of Port mitigation funds and use of
future trust funds to improve community quality of life. This is a new initiative for the Port.

Material Issue: Community Investment
Metric: Development of assessment tool
Targets & Timeline: Develop tool by August 2014
Implementation: External Relations, EMD, Planning and Economic Development, City
Attorney

2. Sustainability Criteria for Project Planning & Approvals
Develop and implement sustainability criteria for use by the Project Development Committee
(PDC) and management of the Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) budget for project start
decisions and ensuring in-progress consistency with criteria at designated milestones. This is a
new initiative for the Port.

Material Issue: Land Use and Infrastructure
Metric: Development of Criteria, Number of projects that utilize adopted criteria
Targets & Timeline: Develop criteria by August 2013; 100% consistency thereafter
Implementation: Engineering, EMD, Planning and Economic Development, Real Estate

3. Friendly Tenant Audits
Prevent land, water, and sediment contamination through proactive tenant audits. This is an
enhancement to an existing initiative.

Material Issue: Land Use and Infrastructure
Metric: Number of audits needing corrective action, revision of leasing policy as
needed
Targets & Timeline: Comprehensive Environmental Compliance Assessments (ECAs) at 3
facilities per year annually by 2014; Stormwater audit targets TBD
Implementation: EMD
273

4. Sustainable Lease Agreements
Develop improved enforcement measures within sustainable lease agreements and through
mitigation monitoring of operations. This is an enhancement to an existing initiative.

Material Issue: Public Health
Metric: Percent of active projects compliant with lease mitigation measures
Targets & Timeline: 100% compliance by end of 2014
Implementation: Real Estate, EMD

5. Sustainable Construction Guidelines
Update, enforce, and report on the implementation of state of the art sustainable construction
guidelines and mitigation monitoring during construction. This is an enhancement to an existing
initiative.

Material Issue: Public Health
Metric: Percentage of active projects compliant with sustainable construction
guidelines, construction mitigation measures, and best practices
Targets & Timeline: 100% compliance by end of 2014
Implementation: EMD, Construction Management, Engineering

6. Port-Wide Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Plan
Develop a plan to identify opportunities to expand renewable energy generation onsite and
conserve energy throughout the Port. This is a new initiative for the Port.

Material Issue: Energy and Resource Conservation
Metric: Percent reductions in energy consumption over baseline
Targets & Timeline: Baseline audits on Port and customer facilities by June 2014; Plan by Dec
2014
Implementation: Engineering, EMD, Real Estate, Construction and Maintenance

7. Pilot Customer Outreach Program
Create a sustainability dialogue with port customers to identify common areas of interest,
potential project partnership opportunities, and to attract new customers that see working with a
sustainable port as a competitive advantage to their supply chain. This is a new initiative for the
Port.
Material Issue: Financial Strength
Metric: Level of customer engagement and # of partnership projects
Targets & Timeline: Conduct pilot outreach program by May 2014; Recognition program by
Dec 2014
Implementation: Marketing, EMD

274

8. Sustainability Training Program
Provide support to Port employees in their efforts to develop a more holistic concept of
sustainability related to environmental, economic, and social performance of the organization.
The Port will provide resources, guidance, and a venue for employee input on how to integrate
sustainability into their daily work. Potential activities could include sustainability awareness
seminars, making case studies of Port projects available for reference on the iPOLA intranet,
and creating a sustainability guide for POLA employees that summarizes the Port’s material
issues and key policies, programs, and technical resources, such as Port personnel with
sustainability expertise.

Material Issue: Financial Strength
Metric: # of trainings, creation of sustainability guide for employees
Targets & Timeline: Conduct X trainings by May 2014; Complete guide by Dec 2014
Implementation: EMD, Public Relations

Port Sustainability Programs

Programs (including other environmental management plans, agreements and partnerships)
serve as crucial implementation mechanisms to support the Port’s progress toward sustainable
operations. The chart below presents all of the Port’s existing and proposed sustainability-
related programs classified according to the material issue they most directly affect. Over time,
the Port will add and may modify metrics to measure performance at the program level. These
changes will be reflected in our annual sustainability reporting.

Material
Issue Programs
Community
Investment
 Community Benefits Assessment Program - Mitigation Funding
Assessment Tool (proposed)
 Community Mitigation Trust Fund
 Community Aesthetic Mitigation Projects
 LA Waterfront Program
 Port Boat Tours
 POLA Charter High School
 International Trade Education Program
 Project Labor Agreements
 Trade Connect Program
 Student Employment Programs
Land Use and
Infrastructure
 Sustainability Criteria for Project Planning & Approvals (proposed)
 Friendly Tenant Audits
 Climate Adaptation Study
 Port Master Plan
 AAPA West Coast Ports Sustainable Design Guidelines and Planning Tool
275

Material
Issue Programs
Public Health
 Sustainable Lease Agreements
 Sustainable Construction Guidelines
 Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP)
 Public Health Information Provision
 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
 Vessel Speed Reduction Program
 Environmental Ship Index
 Marine Engine Exchange Program
 Climate Leadership Awards
 World Ports Climate Initiative - Carbon Calculator
 Clean Truck Program
 Alternative Marine Power
 Air Quality Mitigation Incentive Program
 CAAP Air Quality Excellence Awards
 Pacific Ports Clean Air Collaborative
Energy and
Resource
Conservation
 Port-Wide Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Plan (proposed)
 Environmentally Preferable Purchasing
 Technology Review Lease Measure
 Technology Action Plan
 Green Building Policy
 POLA Sustainable Design Guidelines
 Water Resources Action Plan
 Tenant Stormwater Outreach Program
 Cabrillo Beach Water Quality Improvement Study
 Clean Marinas Program
 PortTechLA
 Zero Emission Roadmap
 Cabrillo Shallow Water Habitat
 California Least Tern Site Program
 Biological Surveys
 Hybrid Tour Boat
 Cabrillo Saltwater Marsh
 Voluntary Tenant Participation
 Emissions Inventory
 Environmental Management System
Financial
Strength
 Pilot Customer Outreach Program (proposed)
 Sustainability Training Program (proposed)
 Tuition Reimbursement Program
 POLA Leadership Academy
 Employee Engagement

276

Implementing the Plan
Sustainability requires transparency, collaboration, learning, holistic thinking, and the capacity to
innovate and respond to change. While the Port has successfully achieved many of these
things, implementing the Plan will stimulate future integrative thinking and decision-making
around the Port’s material issues to strengthen the foundation needed for a sustainable
organizational culture.

For each priority action, divisions within the Port have been identified to lead and assist with
implementation of key initiatives over the next two years. As we implement these priority
actions, we will build on our skills and successes and use the framework of the Plan to identify
new long-term goals and actions in the future.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract To advance and embed sustainability within port organizations, this paper offers an organizational change management guide for port practitioners. A framework from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010) is adapted to evaluate the maturity level of sustainability within six of the world’s top container ports: Shanghai, Ningbo/Zhoushan, Rotterdam, Hamburg, Antwerp, and Los Angeles. Port organizations are then classified by a sustainability strategy typology adapted from Baumgartner and Ebner (2010). Through this process and by highlighting the most advanced practices among ports, we are better able to understand the aspects and influences that contribute to the evolution of a mature sustainable port organization. Applying the framework from Mirvis and Googins (2006), an organizational change case study of the Port of Los Angeles offers a look at the triggers, drivers, successes, and remaining challenges of integrating sustainability into the organization’s culture and decision-making processes. This analysis is supplemented by examining inter-organizational learning efforts that endeavor to drive change for sustainability among ports and within the goods movement supply chain. Building on these approaches, the final chapter provides a guide for change agents who want to further advance and institutionalize sustainability within their port organizations and the ports industry.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The role of CALGreen codes and sustainable rating systems in practicing sustainability

PDF

Evergreen economies: institutions, industries and issues in the green economy

PDF

Green healthcare, an environmentally sustainable methodology: an investigation of the ecological impacts of the healthcare industry and the role of green initiatives in sustainable medical services

PDF

Intradepartmental collaboration in the public organizations: implications to practice in an era of resource scarcity and economic uncertainty

PDF

Structure, agency, and the Kuznets Curve: observations and implications for sustainability planning in U.S. cities

PDF

Organizational spiritual maturity (OSM)

PDF

A public sector organizational change model: prioritizing a community-focused, inclusive, and collaborative approach to strategic planning

PDF

San Francisco Recreation & Park Department Climate Action Plan: repositioning to a sustainable parks & open space system

PDF

The impact of social capital: a case study on the role of social capital in the restoration and recovery of communities after disasters

PDF

Water security, national security and MCIWest: a grounded theory for operationalizing risk management

PDF

The institutionalization of nonprofit management: emergence, development, and legitimization

PDF

A miracle or a mirage? A study to evaluate the impacts of microfinance

PDF

A research on water conservation and governance networks in Southern California

PDF

Why go green? Cities' adoption of local renewable energy policies and urban sustainability certifications

PDF

Resilient and equitable urbanism by design: insights from the collaborative process to reimagine the SF Bay Area

PDF

Collaboration: is it worth it? The Magnolia Community Initiative from the perspective of initiative partner participants

PDF

Does organizational culture play a role in aviation safety? A qualitative case study analysis

PDF

A learning model of policy implementation: implementing technology in response to policy requirements

PDF

Governing regional collaboratives: institutional design, management and leadership

PDF

Resilience by anticipating change: simple and robust decision making for coastal adaptation planners, communities and elected officials

Asset Metadata

Creator Green Rebstock, January (author)

Core Title Embedding sustainability: a change management guide for ports

School School of Policy, Planning and Development

Degree Doctor of Policy, Planning & Development

Degree Program Policy, Planning, and Development

Publication Date 11/27/2013

Defense Date 06/11/2013

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational change,Ports,sustainability,sustainable organizations

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Mazmanian, Daniel A. (committee chair), Adler, Paul S. (committee member), Knatz, Geraldine (committee member), Robertson, Peter John (committee member)

Creator Email greenreb@usc.edu,janrgreen@msn.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-353342

Unique identifier UC11288285

Identifier etd-GreenRebst-2193.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-353342 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-GreenRebst-2193.pdf

Dmrecord 353342

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Green Rebstock, January

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA