1

Maritime Information Management

Information services in port

Ørnulf Jan Rødseth, MSc

MARINTEK, Project manager WP1.3

2

Contents

MarNIS Cluster 1 and WP1.3

The problems (some of them!)

Some existing (part) solutions

MarNIS approach

3

Cluster 1 - overview

Maritime Information Management WP1.1: Preventive and safety related

information management WP1.2: Information management for

authorities with a degree of maritime responsibility

WP1.3: Information services in port

Duration: 18 monthsEffort: 152 PM (+5 for last 18 months)14 partners

4

Cluster 1 - Partners

AVV: Adviesdienst voor Verkeer en Vervoer (NL) AWZ: Administratie Waterwegen en Zeewezen (BE) CETEMAR: Centro Estudios Técnico-Maritimos S.L. (ES) EHMA: European Harbour Masters' Association (EU) IFN: Institut Francais de Navigation (FR) KSD: Koninklijke Scheepsagentuur Dirkzwager (NL) LogIT: LogIT Systems AS (NO) NCD: Norwegian Coastal Administration (NO) Portel Servicios Telematicos S.A. (ES) Sequoyah International Restructing N.V. S.A. (BE) SET: Sistemi e Telematica (IT) SINTEF / MARINTEK (NO) SMA: Swedish Maritime Adminstration (SE) SSPA Sweden AB (SE)

5

Cluster 1 – work packages

Preventive and safetyrelated information

management

AVVEHMA

IFN

NCDKSDSMA

SafeSeaNetAIS, LRIT

Port State Control

Information managementfor authorities with a

degree of maritime resp.

AWZIFN

NCD

PortelSET

Information managementfor:

Customs, immigrationAgriculture, fisheries,

environ.Veterinary, health

Information services inport

CETEMARKSDLogIT

Sequoyah

SETSINTEF

SMASSPA

One stop shoppingOne window conceptSmall and large portsplanning, PCS, CCS

WP1.1: 49 PM WP1.2: 43 PM WP1.3: 65 PM

6

Cluster 1 – Information services overlap Information flows related to

WP1.1: Preventive and safety issues,SafeSeaNet – AIS and LRIT

WP1.2: Other authorities, port clearance

WP1.3: Commercial actors (port, pilots, cargo ...)

7

Contents

MarNIS Cluster 1 and WP1.3

The problems (some of them!)

Some existing (part) solutions

MarNIS approach

8

Information management for ships

AccountingAccounting

CRM

Comms

TrainingTraining

R&D

Marketing

Logistics

Operations

Reporting

InvoicingInvoicing ArchiveArchive

PersonnelPersonnel

© Iver Ships/Brostrøm, MariNet

9

Some other problems

Resource management and better planning: Timely and correct information

Timely and relevant information to flag and port state (certificates, inspections, dangerous goods ...)

More efficient information management (data stored in one place, availability ...)

”Single Window” for ship and ship owner ”Single Window” for port organisations

Exploit SafeSeaNet infrastructure, better use of AIS/LRIT

10

Contents

MarNIS Cluster 1 and WP1.3

The problems (some of them!)

Some existing (part) solutions

MarNIS approach

11

EDI and EDIFACT

Virtuele Haven, 1.5 – March 2001:E – EDI/EDIFACT, E-I - Internet/EDIFACT, p-I – Proprietary over InternetE-MI – E-I and WAP, e – proprietary electronic solution, Ep-I – e and EDIFACT

Imp

ort

Re

lea

se

Cu

sto

ms

Imp

ort

Pa

yme

nts

Inla

nd

Tra

nsp

ort

Da

nge

rou

s G

oo

ds

Exp

ort

Bo

oki

ng

Cu

sto

ms

Exp

ort

Rotterdam E-I E p-I E-MI E Ep-I E

Hamburg E e E E

Felixstove E e E E E

Antwerp E E E E

Barcelona E E ? E E ? E

12

Benefits of EDI/EDIFACT

Established standard Formally recognized XML is in many ways too open

Significant installed base Many users exists Changes do not generate revenue in

themselves

13

Drawbacks to EDI/EDIFACT

High installation costs. Special software and hardware.

High operational costs. EDI runs on private networks, the transaction costs of which can be significant.

Requires dedicated services, which apart from installation costs consume considerable repeat expenditure by way of maintenance.

More difficult to get persons with skills in EDI than in XML.

XML has many ”companion standards” as, e.g., XSL, XPath,XML schemas ...

”EDI users represent 95% of revenue,but only 5% of companies”

14

XML is being used and considered

SafeSeaNet (EU) Vessel reporting systems (most European

nations?) EPC2 (Singapore, Norway) China XML Port Manifest Project (TW) Port of Hong Kong National Vessel Movement Centre (USCG) ...

15

Other electronic systems

Web interfaces, interactive

Text files over e-mail

...

16

Contents

MarNIS Cluster 1 and WP1.3

The problems (some of them!)

Some existing (part) solutions

MarNIS approach

17

The cluster 1 ”full picture” ...

OneWindow

Port/flag state auth.

Port administration

Customs

Portplanning

tool

SafeSeaNet

Navigationalinformation

Weatherservices

Commercialproviders

Other authorities

PSC tool

PCS CCS

VTM

RIS

ENC, SENC

Owner/Management WP1.1

WP1.2

WP1.3

Other

Equasis

18

Main issues to be investigated

Common to cluster: Information requirements One Window Concept

Specific to WPs:

1.1: Port state control, flag/port state coordination, SafeSeaNet

1.2: Coordination of other authorities 1.3: Port resources, Architecture for one window concept

Other clusters: VTM, Weather, ENC ...

19

Solution: Cooperation

Geographically oriented SoA collection Message flow requirements One window concepts and architectures Port planning tools Port inspection tools

Cooperation between partners in cluster Regions/ports divided between partners

20

Use of workshops to analyze informationOpen to all participants

SoA

Information req.

Improve

One Wind. arch.

WP specific

0 6 12 18

KO SoA

12.05

WS

22.09

MW

15.12

PM

17.02 15.05

21

Results?

Yet another information flow analysis ?

or

Useful contribution to European maritime industry?

22

Results?

Yet another information flow analysis ?

or

Useful contribution to European maritime industry?

Good coverage in Europe International orientation (Shipping is international!) Knowledgeable partners Good cooperation in cluster “Time is right”