Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Seca Regulatory Impact Assessment: Administrative Burden Costs in the Baltic Sea Region Cover

Seca Regulatory Impact Assessment: Administrative Burden Costs in the Baltic Sea Region

Open Access
|Mar 2019

References

  1. 1. AirClim (2011) Air pollution from ship. Air Pollution & Climate Secretariat Seas at Risk Bellona Foundation, North Sea Foundation Transport & Environment European Environmental Bureau. - https://www.transportenvironment.org/publications/air-pollution-ships-0, last accessed 2016/05/21.
  2. 2. Barro, R.J. (1991) Economic growth in a cross-section of countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106:40755.10.2307/2937943
  3. 3. Blind, K. (2012) The influence of regulations on innovation: A quantitative assessment for OECD countries. Research Policy, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 391-400.10.1016/j.respol.2011.08.008
  4. 4. Bourlès, R., Cette, G., Lopez, J., Mairesse, J. and Nicoletti, G. (2013) Do product market regulations in upstream sectors curb productivity growth? Panel data evidence for OECD countries. Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 95, No. 5, pp. 1750-1768.10.1162/REST_a_00338
  5. 5. Charité, D., Kirkegaard, P., Svensson, G. and Greve, J. (2015) Das Standard-Kostenmodell – Konzept zur Definition und Quantifizierung des Verwaltungsaufwandes für Unternehmen durch staatliche Regulierung.
  6. 6. Clark, V.L.P., Creswell, J.W., Green, D.O.N. and Shope, R.J. (2008) Mixing quantitative and qualitative approaches. Handbook of emergent methods, 363.
  7. 7. Coase, R. (1998) The new institutional economics. The American Economic Review, Vol. 88(2), pp.72-74.
  8. 8. EfficienSea2 (2016) Report on the available technologies and sensors that can be utilized in the new system and on a business model on incentives for monitoring and enforcement. - http://efficiensea2.org/publications/. Accessed on 12/08/2016.
  9. 9. Eiteman, D.K., Stonehill, A.I., and Moffett, M.H. (2007) Fundamentals of multinational business finance. Addison-Wesley.
  10. 10. EU Directive (2014) 2014/94/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the deployment of alternative fuels infrastructure. Official Journal of the European Union, L307/1-20
  11. 11. European Union (2015) Commission implementing the decision (EU) 2015/253 of 16 February 2015 laying down the rules concerning the sampling and reporting under Council Directive 1999/32/EC as regards the sulphur content of marine fuels, February 17, 2015, - http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32015D0253, access on 12/02/2018.
  12. 12. European Union (2018) Report on implementation and compliance with the sulphur standards for marine fuels set out in Directive (EU) 2016/802 relating to a reduction in the sulphur content of certain liquid fuels, Brussels, 16.4.2018, COM (2018) 188 final.
  13. 13. Fung, F. (2016) Enforcement of Fuel Switching Regulations – Practices adopted in the US, EU and other regions, and lessons learned for China. NRDC.
  14. 14. Gillham, B. (2000) Case study research methods. Bloomsbury Publishing
  15. 15. HELCOM (2018) Maritime Assessment 2018, “HELCOM Assessment on maritime activities in the Baltic Sea 2018”, Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No.152. Helsinki Commission, Helsinki. 253pp.
  16. 16. Hunke, K., Prause, G. (2014) Sustainable supply chain management in German automotive industry: experiences and success factors. Journal of Security and Sustainability Issues, 3 (3), 15−22.10.9770/jssi.2014.3.3(2).10.9770/jssi.2014.3.3(2)
  17. 17. IMO (2013) Sulphur oxides (SOx)—Regulation 14. http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Pages/Sulphur-oxides-(SOx).Regulation-14.aspx. Accessed 2016-09-20.
  18. 18. IMO (2014) Third IMO GHG Study, International Maritime Organisation, London, UK (2014).
  19. 19. IMO (2016) IMO sets 2020 date for ships to comply with low sulphur fuel oil requirement. Press briefing release, - http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/PressBriefings/Pages/MEPC-70-2020sulphur.aspx. Accessed 2016/11/30.
  20. 20. ISL (2010) Reducing the sulphur content of shipping fuels further to 0.1% in the North Sea and Baltic Sea in 2015: Consequences for Shipping in this Area. Commissioned by the German Shipowners Association and Association of German Seaport Operators. Institute of Shipping Economics and Logistics, Bremen.
  21. 21. Jaffe, A.B., Peterson, S.R., Portney, P.R. and Stavins, R.N. (1995) Environmental regulation and the competitiveness of US manufacturing: what does the evidence tell us? Journal of Economic Literature, Vol 33, No. 1, pp. 132-163.
  22. 22. Jiang L., Kronbak J., Christensen L.P. (2014) The costs and benefits of sulphur reduction measures: Sulphur scrubbers versus marine gas oil. Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 28, pp. 19–27.10.1016/j.trd.2013.12.005
  23. 23. Keskonna inspektsioon (2017) - www.kki.ee, Tallinn, accessed on 27/06/2018.
  24. 24. Klein, H.K. and Myers, M.D. (1999) A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 67-93.10.2307/249410
  25. 25. Marshall, C. (1995) Designing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, Calif.; London: Thousand Oaks, Calif.; London: Sage.
  26. 26. Martin, R. and Sunley, P. (1998) Slow convergence? The new endogenous growth theory and regional development. Economic geography, 74(3), 201-227.10.2307/144374
  27. 27. Mkansi, M., Acheampong, E.A., Qi, B. and Kondadi, K.R. (2012) Research philosophical debates and classifications: Students’ dilemma’. In Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Research Methods in Business and Management, University of Bolton, Bolton, UK, pp. 277-284.
  28. 28. Notteboom, T. (2010) The impact of low sulphur fuel requirements in shipping on the competitiveness of roro shipping in Northern Europe. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 63–95.10.1007/s13437-010-0001-7
  29. 29. O’Leary, Z. (2017) The essential guide to doing your research project. Los Angeles, [Calif.]; London: Los Angeles, Calif.; London: SAGE.
  30. 30. OECD (2005) Network, Standard Cost Model. International standard cost model manual. Measuring and reducing administrative burdens for businesses.
  31. 31. OECD/ITF (2016) Reducing Sulphur Emissions from Ships: The Impact of International Regulation. - http://www.itf-oecd.org/reducing-sulphur-emissions-ships-impact-international-regulation accessed on 10/06/2016.
  32. 32. Olaniyi, E. O. and Reidolf, M. (2015) Organisational Innovation Strategies in the Context of Smart Specialization. Journal of Security and Sustainability Issues, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 213−227.10.9770/jssi.2015.5.2(7)
  33. 33. Olaniyi, E., Prause, G. and Boyesen, J. (2018b) The impact of SECA regulations on clean shipping in the BSR. In: Ölçer, A, Kitada, O., Dalaklis, D., Ballini, F., (eds.) Trends and Challenges in Maritime Energy Management book series of WMU Studies in Maritime Affairs. Vol 6 (1) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-74576-3. Springer international publishing.10.1007/978-3-319-74576-3.
  34. 34. Olaniyi, E.O. and Prause, G. K. (2016) Baltic-Russian Innovation Cooperation in the Context of EU Eastern Partnership. In T. Kerikmäe & A. Chochia (Eds.), Political and Legal Perspectives of the EU Eastern Partnership Policy. Switzerland, Springer International Publishing, pp.257-279.10.1007/978-3-319-27383-9_17
  35. 35. Olaniyi, E.O., Atari, S. and Prause, G. (2018c) Maritime energy contracting for clean shipping. Transport and Telecommunication, 19 (1), 31−44.10.2478/ttj-2018-0004 (2018).10.2478/ttj-2018-0004
  36. 36. Olaniyi, E.O., Gerber, P. and Prause, G. (2018a) Strategic Energy Partnership in Shipping. In: Kabashkin, I., Yatskiv, I., Prentkovskis, O. (Ed.). Reliability and Statistics in Transportation and Communication (102−111). Berlin: Springer (Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems; 36).10.1007/978-3-319-74454-4_10
  37. 37. Prause, G., Hunke, K. (2014) Sustainable Entrepreneurship along green corridors. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, Vol. 1 (3), 124−133, 10.9770/jesi.2014.1.3 (1).10.9770/jesi.2014.1.3(1)
  38. 38. Rebelo, S. (1991). Long-run policy analysis and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 99, No.3, pp. 500-521.10.1086/261764
  39. 39. Renda, A., Schrefler, L., Luchetta, G. and Zavatta, R. (2013) Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Regulation. Brüssel: Centre for European Policy Studies. Online erhältlich unter - http://ec.Europa.eu/smartregulation/impact/commission_guidelines/docs/131210_cba_study_sg_final.Pdf, on accessed 01/06/2014.
  40. 40. Scandlines (2017) Annual Report, Copenhagen - https://www.scandlines.com/about-scandlines/about-scandlines-frontpage/finance, accessed on 29/062018.
  41. 41. Solow, R.M. (1994) Perspectives on growth theory. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 8(81) pp. 45-54.10.1257/jep.8.1.45
  42. 42. Unctad (2015) Legal Issues and Regulatory Developments Ship-source pollution and protection of the environment, - unctad.org/en/PublicationChapters/rmt2015ch5_en.pdf Feb 25, 2015 - Chapter 5: legal issues and regulatory developments.
  43. 43. Wegrich, K. (2009) The administrative burden reduction policy boom in Europe: comparing mechanisms of policy diffusion. Centre for Analysis of Risk and Regulation, London School of Economics and Political Science.
  44. 44. Wiśnicki, B., Czermański, E., Droździecki, S., Matczak, M. and Spangenberg, E. (2014) Sulphur Regulation–technology solutions and economic consequences for the Baltic Sea Region shipping market. In: Ernest Czermański (ed.) Institute of Maritime Transport and Sea-borne Trade, University of Gdańsk.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ttj-2019-0006 | Journal eISSN: 1407-6179 | Journal ISSN: 1407-6160
Language: English
Page range: 62 - 73
Published on: Mar 2, 2019
Published by: Transport and Telecommunication Institute
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2019 Eunice O. Olaniyi, Gunnar Prause, published by Transport and Telecommunication Institute
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.