BALTIC Transport Communication and Regional Development fileBALTICOM Baltic Sea Spatial Development INTERREG IIC BALTIC Transport Communication and Regional Development Deliverable

BALTICOM

Baltic Sea Spatial Development INTERREG IIC

BALTIC Transport Communication and Regional Development

Deliverable D8.3 – Specification and Implementation Requirements Version 1.0 (26/01/01)

EUROPEAN Regional DEVELOPMENT FUND INTERREG II C Community Initiative concerning Transnational Co-operation Spatial Planning 1997 – 1999

BALTICOM INTERREG II C Regional Case Finland

Document Information

Document: BALTICOM

BALTIC Transport Communication and Regional Development

Deliverable 8.3 – Specification and Implementation Requirements

Date: 26/01/01

Editor: Viatek Ltd., Tampere

Authors: Jukka Siren , Jarno Kanninen

Status: Version 1.0

This report is a deliverable within the BALTICOM project. The conclusions and opinions expressed are the authors’ own

Document Releases:

Version Date Distribution

1.0 26/01/01 BALTICOM Consortium

Version 1.0, Date 2 BALTICOM


Contents

1 Introduction ............................................................................... 5

2 Technical i.e. information flow level........................................ 6

2.1 The goals of the technical level........................................................ 6

2.2 Customs case .................................................................................... 7

2.2.1 Background............................................................................... 7

2.2.2 Possible solutions ..................................................................... 8

2.2.3 Proposed solutions, specifications .......................................... 12

2.3 Future actions, implementation requirements.............................. 14

3 Spatial Case I - The Vaasa Region......................................... 15

3.1 General on the Vaasa District......................................................... 15

3.2 The Ostrobothnia Region................................................................ 15

3.3 Objectives of the Case Vaasa......................................................... 17

3.4 Work methods and result indications............................................ 19

3.5 Statistical Analysis Based on Data from Finnish Maritime Administration (FMA) ...................................................................... 20

3.5.1 Total Export and Import Tons.................................................. 20

3.5.2 Export and Import by Commodities......................................... 21

3.5.3 Load Unit Export and Import ................................................... 23

3.6 Results from the Sawmill Interviews ............................................. 25

3.7 Future Possibilities in Vaasa Region............................................. 31



4 Spatial Case II – The Baltic Sea Market Survey.................... 33

4.1 Introduction...................................................................................... 33

4.2 Reference Study Based on Internet Searches .............................. 33

4.3 Statistics from the Port of Hamburg .............................................. 33

4.4 Conclusions ..................................................................................... 34



1 Introduction

BALTICOM is an INTERREG II C Project aiming to improve maritime transport co-

operation with focus on new information and communication technologies, multimodal

centres and port-hinterland connections within the Baltic Sea Region. The objectives of

the BALTICOM project are import to all countries in the Baltic Sea Region, especially

Finland. Because of its geographical location Finland is very dependent on the Baltic

Sea and maritime transport.

The work done in the Finnish Site can be divided to the technical and spatial layers.

The technical layer could also be described as informational layer. The main results of

the technical level are related to the development of customs processes and

dangerous goods information exchange. This report period has produced a new

process that solves identified problems. The process is also accepted by the major

stakeholders of the Baltic sea transport cluster.

The main findings of the spatial layer so far are in the fields of statistics. The regional

cases are port of Vaasa hinterland (i.e. the Ostrobothnia region) and the cargo flows in

Southeast Finland (regions of Kymenlaakso and South Karelia). In case Vaasa it was

studied the possibilities of establishing a new sawn wood shipping line Vaasa - Kiel.

Statistics based on sawmills interviews show that the regular freight needed for the line

extension doesn’t exist in the port of Vaasa hinterland. Cost structure could be rather

competitive if the trailer capacity available wouldn’t be sold under real costs to southern

direction (i.e. to Central Europe).

Statistical analysis on cargo flows to and from Southern Finland will be completed

when data collecting delays will be won. The results can be expected during February

2001, which is in accordance with the original schedule.



2 Technical i.e. information flow level

2.1 The goals of the technical level

The main goal of the technical level is to promote open and electronic communication

solutions for the Baltic sea traffic. Thus the emphasis of the study is on the

communication between companies and authorities of the maritime transport.

Especially the role of the customs and the communication concerning customs issues

has considered to be important. More detailed description concerning the background

and the goals of the technical level are presented in previous deliverables (D8.1 and

D8.2).

EXPORTER TRANSPORTCOMPANY

TERMINALOPERATOR DEEP SEA

CARRIER

TERMINALOPERATOR FEEDER

CARRIER

TERMINALOPERATOR

CUSTOMS PORTAUTHORITY

FINNISHMARITIME

ADM.CUSTOMS PORT

AUTHORITY

WATERPOLICE

PORT @ NET IT SYSTEM OF AUTHORITIES

FINLAND ORIGIN / DESTINATION

BUSINESS LEVEL

AUTHORITY LEVEL

Figure 1. The field of seaborne traffic information systems.

The role of the BALTICOM Finnish Site technical level can be seen as a user

orientated catalyst of the external communication matters. BALTICOM is promoting

communication development mainly in authority but also in business level. The topics

of the development have been selected together with users: terminal operators,

feeders, customs, deep-sea carriers etc. Developed solutions are open and can thus

be utilised in the entire Baltic region.



2.2 Customs case

2.2.1 Background

Current problems were mapped during the BALTICOM technical meeting organised in Hamburg at the end of April 1999. The meeting hosted by Dakosy GmbH was attended for example by the Hamburg and Finnish Customs, Finnsteve Oy Ab and Team Lines GmbH. The same meeting offered also possibility to have discussions with P&O Nedlloyd. Each link of the chain was represented in the meeting. The meeting activated the user interaction in an unique way. The difficulties concerning the customs status of the goods were considered to be the most significant problem.

The customs status information is not following the goods travelling from Finland via Hamburg to third countries. The goods (in the case of single transport agreement) are customs cleared already in Finland and they are leaving from EU customs area while leaving from Finland. Thus these goods are under transit status (D-status) while arriving to Hamburg. However, the German customs does not have real time information whether the goods coming from Finland have the transit status or if the cargo is still under the community traffic status. Every now and then German customs requires more detailed information concerning the status of the goods (e.g. documents stamped by the Finnish customs) which causes delays to the traffic.

Meetings organised in Finland together with the Finnish users convinced that the customs issues are a major problem. Several shipping lines estimated that the current situation is causing economic losses not only to the maritime transport, but also to the Finnish export industry.

The BALTICOM technical meeting in Hamburg produced preliminary solutions for the identified problem. A bit by bit these ideas have been further developed and tested with the users in Germany and Finland. The main principles are now ready and the process can be published in this Deliverable D8.3 – Specification and Implementation Requirements. However, some development work is still needed. For example the exact data content of some messages to be exchanged are still open.



2.2.2 Possible solutions

First step: new terminal declaration in Finland

The Finnish exporters are obliged to give more detailed data concerning the customs status of goods before the unit is received into the port terminal area in Finland. The information is given by using the new terminal declaration. The Finnish customs can utilise the terminal declaration data for risk analysis. Thus the Finnish customs is able to guarantee, that units travelling to Hamburg under transit status (D-status) have left the EU customs area while leaving from Finland.

Exporter orexporter's

agent

Terminaloperator

Feeder orfeeder'sagent

Customs(FIN)

PORT @ NET-system

Roadtransportoperator

Terminal declaration

The gate of the terminal types theterminal declaration data into IT

system of terminal

FAX

Feeder makes electronic manifestto Finnish authorities via PORT @

NET

PORT @ NET receives electronicmanifest

CUSCAR CUSREP IFTDGN

RISK ANALYSIS. Finnish customsutilises the Terminal declaration

Access to the IT system

Access to the IT system

Load unit is transported to the gateof the port terminal

Load unit can access the terminalgate if the terminal declaration is

OK.

RISK?

Loading permission?

YES The loading permission is denied

NO

YES

Load unit is authorized NO

Figure 2. The new terminal declaration process.

The new terminal declaration has been in use since September 2000. Ports of Helsinki and Kotka have been the very first users of the new process. Experiences gathered are promising, and it is expected that the process can be implemented in all Finnish ports.



Second step: information flow to German customs

The second step is to send the customs status information to German customs. There were several possibilities for solving this problem. The main solutions are briefly outlined.

Proposal 1: The Port @ Net system and an Internet browser

One possibility is to publish needed data concerning every vessel call in the Port @ Net system. In this solution the German customs would be able to read the list from the Port @ Net system by using an Internet browser and a password. Thus the German customs would be able to check the customs status of each load unit.

PORT@NET-announcement

is received

Waterpolice(GER)

Customs(GER)

Feeder

systemPORT@NET-

Feeder leaves fromFinland

Port Authority

Customs (FIN)

agentFeeder

German custom is able tocheck the customs status ofthe goods from Port@Net

Customs informationto authorities of thereceiving country

IFTDGNFeeder arrives

to Germany

Dangerous cargo informationto the receiving country

PORT@NET-announcementis processed


(electronic manifest)

PORT@NET informationto customs

PORT@NETinformation

to port authority

GEGIS - systemsends / receives information

CUSCARCUSREPIFTDGN

INTERNET BROWSER

operatorTerminal

Exporter Terminaldeclaration

Data into IT-system

Riskanalysis

Figure 3. Proposal 1: The Port @ Net system and an Internet browser.

The Finnish customs was quite interested in this solution. The costs of this solution would be very reasonable and this solution could be taken in use during a short time period. However, the Finnish customs understood very well that it is not possible for the



German customs to implement this proposal. All customs data is controlled by ZAPP system and this proposal was not supporting ZAPP system.

Proposal 2: The Port @ Net system sends the data to the ZAPP system

The Port @ Net could act as a node and send data to the ZAPP system. This solution faced some economic questions, because it is not free to send information to the ZAPP system. The system has a fee for most of the messages sent and received. The Port @ Net system, however, is - at least so far - free of charges.

The technical solutions were also discussed. The normal communication with the ZAPP system has two directions: the exporter is sending in the needed data and the ZAPP system is sending back so called B-number. If the information flow via the Port @ Net would work the same way it would mean that the Port @ Net system should be able to send the B-number back to the feeder. It was understood that this solution would support the goal of the Port @ Net system to act as a node between Finnish and foreign authorities.


is received

Waterpolice(GER)

Customs(GER)

Feeder

systemPORT@NET-


Port Authority

Customs (FIN)

agentFeeder

ZAPP receives the ”D-list”from Port @ Net and sendsconfirmation back to Port @

Net

Customs informationto authorities of thereceiving country


to Germany






PORT@NETinformation

to port authority


CUSCARCUSREPIFTDGN

”D-LIST”

Customs informationconfirmation

operatorTerminal


Data into IT-system

Riskanalysis

Figure 4. Proposal 2: The Port @ Net system sends the data to the ZAPP system.



Proposal 3: Each feeder has an own connection to the ZAPP system

Feeders operating between Finland and Hamburg could consider having an own connection to ZAPP-system. This can be organised by using EDIFACT communication or so called ZAPP terminal. This solution is not supporting the goal of the Port @ Net system to act as a node between Finnish and foreign authorities. Finnlines Cargo Services (former Finncarriers) established this connection in the beginning of the year 2000.


is received

Waterpolice(GER)

Customs(GER)

Feeder

systemPORT@NET-


Port Authority

Customs (FIN)

agentFeeder


to Germany






PORT@NETinformation

to port authority


CUSCARCUSREPIFTDGN

operatorTerminal


Data into IT-system

Riskanalysis

ZAPP announcement

B-number reception

ZAPP announcement is received

B-number is sent

Figure 5. Proposal 3: Each feeder has an own connection to the ZAPP system.

These proposals were presented to the users in Germany and Finland. Discussions in

Hamburg were organised by Dakosy GmbH together with the German customs and

Team Lines. Viatek presented the ideas to Finnish customs, Team Lines Finland and

Finnsteve.



2.2.3 Proposed solutions, specifications

The solution proposed by the BALTICOM project was composed in a close co-operation with the users. Without the unique user interaction the solution would probably not be as widely accepted as it is today. It seems that

• German customs • Finnish customs • Main feeder operators • Main deep sea carriers • Main terminal operators

can agree with the proposed processes outlined for transitional and for final stage. The proposed processes are focused on the customs data but the same process is feasible for the data flow concerning the dangerous goods.

The proposed solutions are described in detailed level in annex 1 (transitional stage) and annex 2 (final stage). The content of the proposed final stage process can be summarised as follows.

1. An exporter or exporter's agent signs the Single Transport Agreement with the deep sea carrier or his agent. The agreement covers the whole transport chain from Finland to the final destination. The transport is routed via Hamburg or some other hub.

2. The exporter or exporter's agent takes care of the customs clearance. The goods are declared so that the cargo is leaving the European Union customs area while leaving from Finland. Documents to be used are Single Administrative Document (SAD) and the Single Transport Agreement.

3. The exporter or exporter's agent sends the terminal declaration to the port terminal. The new terminal declaration document developed during BALTICOM-project contains detailed customs status of the cargo. The terminal operator types the terminal declaration data into the IT system of the terminal operator.

4. The Finnish customs has access to the IT system of the terminal operator. The customs utilises the data of the system and makes risk analysis. The load unit is stopped at the port if the result of the analysis indicates something abnormal.



5. The deep-sea carrier books feeder carrier to take the load unit from Finland to Hamburg. The feeder makes electronic manifest to the Finnish customs via Port @ Net -system. The electronic manifest consists of CUSCAR, CUSREP and IFTDGN edifact messages.

6. The Finnish customs has access to the Port @ Net -system. The customs compares the data of the terminal operator's IT system and the Port @ Net system. The Port @ Net data is "freezed" by the customs. This guarantees that nobody can edit the data to be forwarded to the German customs.

7. The load unit arrives to terminal gate. The load unit can not access to the terminal area if the terminal declaration has not been received or if there is lack of information.

8. The load unit is loaded if the Finnish customs has not prevented the loading.

9. Feeder vessel leaves from Finland with the load unit.

10. The Finnish customs sends the Port @ Net -data to the ZAPP-system. The German customs has decided that Port @ Net -system will not be invoiced for sending this information. This decision was very important for the Finnish authorities responsible of the Port @ Net -system as well as to the Finnish shipping lines delivering the manifest data to the system.

The automated data flow between the Port @ Net -system and the ZAPP-system requires technical development. Thus it was estimated that there is a need for transitional stage solution which can cope the period before the final process. The transitional stage (outlined in the annex 1) is equal with the final one excluding steps 10 and 11.

10. (transitional stage) The deep sea carrier has access to the Port @ Net -system and is able to print the list (so called D-list) describing the customs status of his own traffic.

11. (transitional stage) The deep sea carrier delivers the "D-list" to the German customs.



2.3 Future actions, implementation requirements

There is still work to do although the processes are quite ready and accepted by the stakeholders. The implementation requirements are not yet fulfilled.

One of the key issues is to organise a meeting of the German and Finnish customs. It is not enough that the German and Finnish customs are in principle agreeing on the process. It is obvious that more detailed discussions are needed and an agreement between these two customs should be signed. Viatek is trying to organise the meeting in Finland but the date of the meeting is still open.

The meeting should also discuss about the data content of the messages to be sent from the Port @ Net -system to the ZAPP-system. The preliminary list describing the information available on the Port @ Net -system is described in the annex 3. However the first comments received from the German side are indicating that the data content might not be sufficient for the ZAPP-system. Negotiations will most likely provide more detailed picture of the situation.



3 Spatial Case I - The Vaasa Region

3.1 General on the Vaasa District

The Vaasa district is a complex conception. There are seven regional councils, which can be considered as potential hinterland for the port of Vaasa. These regional councils are shown in Fig. 6. as numbers 4, 6 and 13-17 (i.e. the regional councils of 4. Satakunta, 6. Pirkanmaa, 13. Central Finland, 14. South Ostrobothnia 15. Ostrobothnia, 16. Central Ostrobothnia, and 17. North Ostrobothnia).

Figure 6. The Finnish Regional Coun

3.2 The Ostrobothnia Region

The most important regional counclocated – the Regional Council ofcountry’s population, live in the 18area is 7 600 km2, water area 4 00of Vaasa with its 56 000 inhabitant

Version 1.0, Date

1. Uusimaa 2. Varsinais-Suomi3. East Uusimaa 4. Satakunta 5. Häme 6. Pirkanmaa 7. Päijät-Häme 8. Kymenlaakso 9. South Karelia 10. South Savo

cils.

il for the port of Vaasa Ostrobothnia. Some municipalities of the O0 km2 and the length os is the main city of th

15

11. North Savo 12. North Karelia 13. Central Finland 14. South Ostrobothnia 15. Ostrobothnia 16. Central Ostrobothnia17. North Ostrobothnia 18. Kainuu 19. Lapland 20. Åland

is the one in which the port is 174 000 people, 3.4 % of the strobothnia Region. The land f coastline 5 500 km. The city e Ostrobothnia Region. Some

BALTICOM


other figures describing the demographic features of the region are shown in the following list:

• Population density 23 persons / km2

• Native language Swedish 53,5 %, Finnish 46,0 %, Other 0,5 %

• Educational level (persons > 15 years) Secondary level 40 %, Higher level 11 %

• Workforce in employment: Primary industries 14 %, Processing sector 29 %, Service sector 29 %, Public sector 28 %

• Unemployment rate 14 %

A Concentration of Qualifications and Expertise

There are educational opportunities in the region at all levels. A university, two schools of higher education attached to other universities, numerous polytechnics, institutes and research centres guarantee a continuous flow of expertise. The region’s strength lies in its inhabitants’ activity and skills.

A traditionally strong entrepreneurial spirit provides the foundation for the economy of the region. One of Finland’s largest concentrations of internationally competitive companies in the metal and electronics industries can be found in the Ostrobothnia Region. The co-operation between businesses and higher education establishments provides considerable synergy effects with regard to skills and expertise.

Internationally competitive industrial firms and small-scale craft companies develop side by side in the Ostrobothnia Region. The level of specialisation within primary industries is high. Despite the education and specialisation, the unemployment in the region is relatively high. One of the most important challenges in the regional development process is to find new concrete initiatives and ideas to increase employment levels.

Per capita GNP in the Ostrobothnia region in 1996 was 16 670 €, which gives the region fifth place among Finland’s nineteen regions. The monetary value of the region’s exported industrial production was 1 600 M€ or 5.7 % of total national exports (in the year 1995).



The population in the direct hinterland of port of Vaasa is 481 000 people and if the neighbouring regions are taken into account, about 1 786 000 people. Total population in Finland in the year 2000 was about 5,1 million inhabitants, so the hinterland of Vaasa can be considered to be important. The populations of the regions, which can be seen as part of port of Vaasa hinterland, are show in Figure 7.

445 000

260 000

197 000

110 000

360 000

174 000

240 000

0

50 000

100 000

150 000

200 000

250 000

300 000

350 000

400 000

450 000

500 000

Satakunta (4) Pirkanmaa (6) Central Finland(13)

SouthOstrobothnia

(14)

Ostrobothnia(15)

CentralOstrobothnia

(16)

NorthOstrobothnia

(17)

Popu

latio

n

Figure 7. Populations of the Regions in the Port of Vaasa Hinterland.

3.3 Objectives of the Case Vaasa

The main objective in regional logistics development in Vaasa was set to research the realistic possibilities to increase cargo traffic via the port of Vaasa. There are four main points to view regional logistics in case Vaasa:

• to discover potential main traffic flows from the hinterland through the port of Vaasa

• to collect information on sawmills for better understanding the business behind the regional exporters’ needs and abilities

• to define potential infrastructural and financial resources in the port of Vaasa which have an effect on potential traffic flow via Vaasa



• to define and analyse possibilities to set a container depot in the port of Vaasa and to make comparative calculations of container deliveries via Vaasa.

St PetersburgHelsinki

Tallinn

Riga

VilniusMinsk

Kiev

Warsaw

PrahaParis

HamburgGdansk

Berlin

Frankfurt

Amsterdam

Moscow

OsloStockholm

Copenhagen

Trondheim

BratislavaVienna

Bonn

Vaasa

BELARUS

RUSSIA

FINLAND

ESTONIA

LATVIA

LITHUANIA

RUSSIA

POLAND

GERMANY

DENMARK

SWEDENNORWAY

Ventspils

Klaipeda

Rhein

Elbe

KielCanal

Kaliningrad

HaminaKotka

Figure 8. Potential area for timber traffic through the port of Vaasa.

In the Figure 8. above it is shown the main philosophy of the case Vaasa. The hinterland of the port of Vaasa has a crucial role when developing regional logistics in Ostrobothnia region.

In Finland the main cargo flows by rail are from north to south. The ports on the western coast are very interested in developing all cargo traffic (mainly by rail and road connections) between the Eastern and Western Finland. One interesting cargo flow is



transit cargo to and from Russia. At the moment Vaasa is not a transit port. If the plans related to the direct railroad connection between Vaasa and St. Petersburg come true (the rail of Lake-Finland: Vaasa – Jyväskylä - St Petersburg) the role of the port of Vaasa will change. The Lake-Finland railroad is some 730 km long. The Finnish side of the rail is 530 km. The traffic to Swedish ports of Umeå and Sundsvall was fairly important for the port of Vaasa, but the regular ferry traffic ended in the beginning of the year 2001. Some substitute lines do exist, however, i.e. the whole truck and trailer cargo does not need to be restructured.

3.4 Work methods and result indications

The operational co-operation bodies in the BALTICOM case Vaasa have been the port of Vaasa and terminal operator Backman-Trummer Ltd.. Background work for the study was done during the first half of the year 2000, whereas the statistical analysis and sawmill interviews were conducted in the latter part of the year 2000.

The results obtained showed already in early stage that a considerable increase in container or trailer traffic could be quite an optimistic expectation. Based on this the focus of test case Vaasa was aimed at timber and other wood related products. The estimated and realistic hinterland for this kind of freight is a half-circle drawn from Vaasa with a radius of 200 km (black line in Figure 8), but some important potential customers are know to be outside the mentioned area. New market potential for the port of Vaasa could be achieved e.g. in co-operation with the German wood transporter Cellpap. Some discussions between the representatives of Backman-Trummer and Cellpap have been arranged. Viatek Ltd. has also met the both parties individually.

The work method chosen was a statistical study supported by a comprehensive case study on the potential sawn wood shipments to Germany via the port of Vaasa. The group of sawmills to be interviewed was selected in co-operation with the Backman-Trummer Ltd. (the terminal operator of the port of Vaasa). Study was hoped to give answers to questions such as:

• what route,

• what kind on timber,



• how much,

• how often and

• to which final destination are the sawmills currently transporting their products.

For the port of Vaasa it serves a special interest to receive some indications of the exporters willingness to use container or bulk cargo route via port of Vaasa instead of using trucks and trailers via the ports located in the southern Finland. At the moment the import tons to Finland are greater than the exports, which has lead into a situation where trailer capacity to southern direction can be bought at a relatively cheap price. Economical competitiveness of the new shipping line Vaasa – Germany is very tightly related to two things: regular amount of cargo and total fees in the German port area.

Exports are mainly either bulk or general cargo leaving Finland by truck or trailer. Containers play a niche role in export, partly because the exports of local metal industry have a role of large project deliveries. The potential commodity types which exports could possibly be increased via port of Vaasa are sawn wood and timber.

In the import side the role of bulk is more dominant than in exports. Oil products, coal and coke, and crude minerals and cement are the largest commodity types. General cargo and other merchandise have a minor role in imports.

More precise picture on exports and imports can be obtained by viewing the following results based on refined data from the Finnish Maritime Administration (FMA).

3.5 Statistical Analysis Based on Data from Finnish Maritime Administration (FMA)

3.5.1 Total Export and Import Tons

The export/import –balance of the port of Vaasa is rather unbalanced. Freight tons imported are greater than the ones exported because of the relatively higher share of bulk. The situation is likely to stay fairly stabile also in the future, although some minor changes may occur due to the end of ferry traffic between Vaasa and Umeå (Sweden). Import and export tons are shown in Figure 9.



Export and Import in the Port of Vaasa 1993 - 1999 (FMA)

0

100 000

200 000

300 000

400 000

500 000

600 000

700 000

800 000

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Tons

Export Import

Figure 9. Export and Import 1993-1999.

Tax-free sales on passenger ferries were an important way to finance the sea lines operating in the Gulf of Bothnia. This has a lot to do with the cost structure of truck and trailer cargo over the gulf. The Swedish operator Botnia Link has a Ro-Ro -service between Vaasa and Harnosand (Sweden) and the aforementioned Vaasa – Umeå –route. Negotiations on general state subsidies are going on in both Finland and Sweden, because good connections over the Gulf of Bothnia are very important for historical reasons. There are lots of family connections over the country borders, especially amongst the Swedish speaking population.

3.5.2 Export and Import by Commodities

Commodity groups not exported or imported at all in the years 1993-1999 are not shown in the following charts. Some groups seem to have no value, but this is due to the scale used in the chart.

Commodities exported from the port of Vaasa 1993-1999 (in tons) can be seen in Figure 10. Largest group over the time is cereals, but it is very unstable. General cargo,



however, is quite stabile. Sawn wood has increased in tons rapidly, which is one reason for choosing it to be studied in the Regional case Vaasa.

Commodities Export in the Port of Vaasa 1993 - 1999 (FMA)

0

20 000

40 000

60 000

80 000

100 000

120 000

140 000

160 000

180 000

Timbe

r

Sawn w

ood

Paper

and p

aperb

oard

Venee

rs an

d plyw

ood

Ores an

d con

centr

ates

Metals

and m

etal m

anufa

ctures

Coal a

nd co

ke

Chemica

ls

Crude m

ineral

s and

cemen

t

Cereals

Genera

l carg

o

Other m

ercha

ndise

Tons

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Figure 10. Commodities Export 1993-1999.

Commodities imported to port of Vaasa 1993-1999 (in tons) are described in Figure 11. Bulk cargo is quite dominating as can be seen from the graphs. Oil, coal and coke are all related to energy production and fuel consumption of transportation. General cargo, crude minerals and cement with other merchandise are groups that are in moderate growth.

The more interesting figures of the case Vaasa are on load unit level. These are shown in paragraph 3.5.3 on the following pages.



Commodities Import in the Port of Vaasa 1993 - 1999 (FMA)

0

50 000

100 000

150 000

200 000

250 000

300 000

350 000

400 000

Sawn w

ood

Wood p

ulp

Paper

and p

aperb

oard

Metals

and m

etal m

anufa

ctures

Oil prod

ucts

Coal a

nd co

ke

Fertiliz

ers

Chemica

ls

Crude m

ineral

s and

cemen

t

Cereals

Genera

l carg

o

Other m

ercha

ndise

Tons

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Figure 11. Commodities Import 1993-1999.

3.5.3 Load Unit Export and Import

Load unit exports and imports are well balanced. This is quite natural because the containers share is rather low. Trucks dominate the cargo tons in the case Vaasa, both in export and import. Trailers have a small share and other modes of transport a varying niche position.

The trucks haven’t always been fully loaded in both directions. Exports have been greater in the year 1993, whereas imports have had a larger role in 1994 – 1997. The statistics are graphically shown in Figures 12. and 13.



0

10 000

20 000

30 000

40 000

50 000

60 000

70 000

80 000

90 000

100 000

1993 Export 1994 Export 1995 Export 1996 Export 1997 Export 1998 Export 1999 Export

Tons

Trucks tons Trailers tons Other means of transport tons

Figure 12. Load Unit Export fromPport of Vaasa 1993-1999.

0

10 000

20 000

30 000

40 000

50 000

60 000

70 000

80 000

90 000

100 000

1993 Import 1994 Import 1995 Import 1996 Import 1997 Import 1998 Import 1999 Import

Tons

Trucks tons Trailers tons Other means of transport tons

Figure 13. Load Unit Import to Port of Vaasa 1993-1999.



3.6 Results from the Sawmill Interviews

The sawmill group interviewed was a combination of two sub-groups: those sawmills who are members of the Finnish Sawmills Association and those who are not. The total number of sawmills in the study was 36, and 27 of these gave valid information and have been analysed. Sawmills interviewed were selected in co-operation with representatives of Backman-Trummer Ltd. (the terminal operator in the port of Vaasa). The selected companies can be divided into three category based on the annual production:

• > 100 000 m3 / year (10 out of 27 sawmills)

• 50 000 - 100 000 m3 / year (6 out of 27 sawmills)

• 10 000 - 50 000 m3 / year (11 out of 27 sawmills)

Typical sawmill can be described as follows:

Average Median

Production 93 481 m3 / year 60 000 m3 / year

Turnover 20 053 000 € 15 137 000 €

Turnover / m3 203,4 € 211,0 €

Personnel 75 35

Turnover / Employee 284 991 € 235 463 €

Exports / Production 61 % 70%

Spruce / Pine –relation 48 / 52 43 / 57

Production figures of the sawmills interviewed are shown in the picture below. The average production was 93 481 m3 per year whereas median production was 60 000 m3 per year. This indicated that some sawmills are considerably larger in volumes compared to others. This is the reality also according to Figure 14.



Production m3 / year

0

50 000

100 000

150 000

200 000

250 000

300 000

350 000

AKONKOSKEN SAHA OY

FORSÉN OY AB

HEIKINMÄEN SAHA O

Y

IISALM

EN SAHAT OY

ISOJOEN SAHA O

Y

JUNNIKKALA

N SAHA OY

KEITELE TIM

BER OY

KINNASKOSKI N

ENO OY

LAPPIPANELI

OY

MYLLYAHON SAHA O

Y

PÖLKKY O

Y

VIITALA

N SAHA TALVIM

ÄET OY

ALAVUDEN PUUNJA

LOSTUSTEHDAS O

Y

ER-SAHA O

Y

ESSBOARD OY AB

HAAPAJÄRVEN ja

HAAPAVEDEN H

ASA OY

IISVEDEN M

ETSÄ OY

JET-P

UU OY

KOHIWOOD O

Y LTD

KUHMON HÖYLÄ

TUOTE OY M

ARTINNIEMEN SAHA

MARTTI NURMI O

Y

PANTSARIN SAHA O

Y

PRT-WOOD O

Y

PUHOS BOARD OY

TERVOLAN SAHA JA

HÖYLÄ

ÄMÖ OY

VETELIN VEISTOSAHA O

Y

YHTYNEET SAHAT OY W

ISATIMBER

Cub

ic m

eter

s

Average 93 481 m3

Figure 14. Annual Productions of the Sawmills Interviewed.

There seems to be room for several company fusions in order to obtain economies of scale in purchasing, manufacturing and delivery logistics. One thing behind the small sawmill size is most likely their specialisation level. A study supporting the mentioned assumptions doesn’t, however, serve the objectives of the WP8 within the BALTICOM –project.

The graph describing turnovers of the sawmills is in accordance with the production volumes (Figure 15). Some sawmills have a relatively high turnover compared to production volumes, e.g. Essboard Oy and Jet-Puu Oy. In these cases the explanation is that their production also includes refined wood products. This is one factor disturbing the comparison: every sawmill has somewhat different product profile and refining level than the other.

The turnover per produced cubic metre is illustrated in Figure 16. Despite the varying product characteristics it can be stated, that the value added and refining level are quite stabile. The turnover / m3 is in average 203,4 € whereas the median is 211,0 €. These two figures do not include Essboard Oy and Jet-Puu Oy.



Turnover of the Sawmills in Vaasa region (2000)

0

10 000

20 000

30 000

40 000

50 000

60 000

70 000

80 000

AKONKOSKEN SAHA OY

FORSÉN OY AB

HEIKINMÄEN SAHA O

Y

IISALM

EN SAHAT OY

ISOJOEN SAHA O

Y

JUNNIKKALA

N SAHA OY

KEITELE TIM

BER OY

KINNASKOSKI N

ENO OY

LAPPIPANELI

OY

MYLLYAHON SAHA O

Y

PÖLKKY O

Y

VIITALA

N SAHA TALVIM

ÄET OY

ALAVUDEN PUUNJA

LOSTUSTEHDAS O

Y

ER-SAHA O

Y

ESSBOARD OY AB

HAAPAJÄRVEN ja

HAAPAVEDEN H

ASA OY

IISVEDEN M

ETSÄ OY

JET-P

UU OY

KOHIWOOD O

Y LTD

KUHMON HÖYLÄ

TUOTE OY M

ARTINNIEMEN SAHA

MARTTI NURMI O

Y

PANTSARIN SAHA O

Y

PRT-WOOD O

Y

PUHOS BOARD OY

TERVOLAN SAHA JA

HÖYLÄ

ÄMÖ OY


Y

YHTYNEET SAHAT OY W

ISATIMBER

Turn

over

(1 0

00 E

UR

O)

Average 20 053 000 €

Figure 15. Turnovers of the Sawmills Interviewed.

Turnover / m3

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

AKONKOSKEN SAHA OY

FORSÉN OY AB

HEIKINMÄEN SAHA O

Y

IISALM

EN SAHAT OY

ISOJOEN SAHA O

Y

JUNNIKKALA

N SAHA OY

KEITELE TIM

BER OY

KINNASKOSKI N

ENO OY

LAPPIPANELI

OY

MYLLYAHON SAHA O

Y

PÖLKKY O

Y

VIITALA

N SAHA TALVIM

ÄET OY

ALAVUDEN PUUNJA

LOSTUSTEHDAS O

Y

ER-SAHA O

Y

ESSBOARD OY AB

HAAPAJÄRVEN ja

HAAPAVEDEN H

ASA OY

IISVEDEN M

ETSÄ OY

JET-P

UU OY

KOHIWOOD O

Y LTD

KUHMON HÖYLÄ

TUOTE OY M

ARTINNIEMEN SAHA

MARTTI NURMI O

Y

PANTSARIN SAHA O

Y

PRT-WOOD O

Y

PUHOS BOARD OY

TERVOLAN SAHA JA

HÖYLÄ

ÄMÖ OY


Y

YHTYNEET SAHAT OY W

ISATIMBER

EUR

O

Average 203 € (excluding Essboard Oy Ab and Jet-Puu Oy)

Figure 16. Turnover per m3 in the Sawmills Interviewed.



The sawmills interviewed represent typical SMEs in Finland in average – the personnel is 75. The median amount of employees (35) shows that some sawmills are really small whereas some have a personnel of 150-200. This can be seen in Figure 17.

Personnel

0

50

100

150

200

250

AKONKOSKEN SAHA OY

FORSÉN OY AB

HEIKINMÄEN SAHA O

Y

IISALM

EN SAHAT OY

ISOJOEN SAHA O

Y

JUNNIKKALA

N SAHA OY

KEITELE TIM

BER OY

KINNASKOSKI N

ENO OY

LAPPIPANELI

OY

MYLLYAHON SAHA O

Y

PÖLKKY O

Y

VIITALA

N SAHA TALVIM

ÄET OY

ALAVUDEN PUUNJA

LOSTUSTEHDAS O

Y

ER-SAHA O

Y

ESSBOARD OY AB

HAAPAJÄRVEN ja

HAAPAVEDEN H

ASA OY

IISVEDEN M

ETSÄ OY

JET-P

UU OY

KOHIWOOD O

Y LTD

KUHMON HÖYLÄ

TUOTE OY M

ARTINNIEMEN SAHA

MARTTI NURMI O

Y

PANTSARIN SAHA O

Y

PRT-WOOD O

Y

PUHOS BOARD OY

TERVOLAN SAHA JA

HÖYLÄ

ÄMÖ OY


Y

YHTYNEET SAHAT OY W

ISATIMBER

Average 75

Figure 17. Amount of Personnel in the Sawmills Interviewed.

Average turnover per employee was 284 991 € and median 235 463 €. Small part of the sawmills had relatively high productivity when other sawmills had either too many employees related to production or inefficient way to handle operations. It would be easier to estimate these conditions if the data would also contain profit information. This was for some reason too sensitive subject for the companies to answer. It had to be left out from the interview results, because there wasn’t enough answers in order to obtain a critical mass for statistical analysis.



Turnover / Employee

0

100 000

200 000

300 000

400 000

500 000

600 000

AKONKOSKEN SAHA OY

FORSÉN OY AB

HEIKINMÄEN SAHA O

Y

IISALM

EN SAHAT OY

ISOJOEN SAHA O

Y

JUNNIKKALA

N SAHA OY

KEITELE TIM

BER OY

KINNASKOSKI N

ENO OY

LAPPIPANELI

OY

MYLLYAHON SAHA O

Y

PÖLKKY O

Y

VIITALA

N SAHA TALVIM

ÄET OY

ALAVUDEN PUUNJA

LOSTUSTEHDAS O

Y

ER-SAHA O

Y

ESSBOARD OY AB

HAAPAJÄRVEN ja

HAAPAVEDEN H

ASA OY

IISVEDEN M

ETSÄ OY

JET-P

UU OY

KOHIWOOD O

Y LTD

KUHMON HÖYLÄ

TUOTE OY M

ARTINNIEMEN SAHA

MARTTI NURMI O

Y

PANTSARIN SAHA O

Y

PRT-WOOD O

Y

PUHOS BOARD OY

TERVOLAN SAHA JA

HÖYLÄ

ÄMÖ OY


Y

YHTYNEET SAHAT OY W

ISATIMBER

Average 284 991 €

Figure 18. Turnover per Employee in the Sawmills.

All of the sawmills didn’t have a clear picture on the amounts exported per country or they were reluctant to tell. Export areas mentioned or used by the sawmills were:

Algeria, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Egypt, England, Germany, Great Britain, Holland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Morocco, Russia, Saudi-Arabia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United States, the EU countries, Far East, the Mediterranean countries, the Middle East countries and North-Africa.

Average export rate was 61 % and median rate 70%. Export shares in production are shown in Figure 19.

Traditionally large spruce share in production has been considered as an indication of export potential. The export rate can be compared to spruce - pine –relation in Figure 20. Figure is a bit complicated to read, but some general observations can be found.



Export Share in Production

0 %10 %20 %30 %40 %50 %60 %70 %80 %90 %

100 %

AKONKOSKEN SAHA OY

FORSÉN OY AB

HEIKINMÄEN SAHA O

Y

IISALM

EN SAHAT OY

ISOJOEN SAHA O

Y

JUNNIKKALA

N SAHA OY

KEITELE TIM

BER OY

KINNASKOSKI N

ENO OY

LAPPIPANELI

OY

MYLLYAHON SAHA O

Y

PÖLKKY O

Y

VIITALA

N SAHA TALVIM

ÄET OY

ALAVUDEN PUUNJA

LOSTUSTEHDAS O

Y

ER-SAHA O

Y

ESSBOARD OY AB

HAAPAJÄRVEN ja

HAAPAVEDEN H

ASA OY

IISVEDEN M

ETSÄ OY

JET-P

UU OY

KOHIWOOD O

Y LTD

KUHMON HÖYLÄ

TUOTE OY M

ARTINNIEMEN SAHA

MARTTI NURMI O

Y

PANTSARIN SAHA O

Y

PRT-WOOD O

Y

PUHOS BOARD OY

TERVOLAN SAHA JA

HÖYLÄ

ÄMÖ OY


Y

YHTYNEET SAHAT OY W

ISATIMBER

Average export 61 %

Figure 19. Export Share in the Production.

Export Share and Spruce-Pine -relation

0 %10 %20 %30 %40 %50 %60 %70 %80 %90 %

100 %

AKONKOSKEN SAHA OY

FORSÉN OY AB

HEIKINMÄEN SAHA O

Y

IISALM

EN SAHAT OY

ISOJOEN SAHA O

Y

JUNNIKKALA

N SAHA OY

KEITELE TIM

BER OY

KINNASKOSKI N

ENO OY

LAPPIPANELI

OY

MYLLYAHON SAHA O

Y

PÖLKKY O

Y

VIITALA

N SAHA TALVIM

ÄET OY

ALAVUDEN PUUNJA

LOSTUSTEHDAS O

Y

ER-SAHA O

Y

ESSBOARD OY AB

HAAPAJÄRVEN ja

HAAPAVEDEN H

ASA OY

IISVEDEN M

ETSÄ OY

JET-P

UU OY

KOHIWOOD O

Y LTD

KUHMON HÖYLÄ

TUOTE OY M

ARTINNIEMEN SAHA

MARTTI NURMI O

Y

PANTSARIN SAHA O

Y

PRT-WOOD O

Y

PUHOS BOARD OY

TERVOLAN SAHA JA

HÖYLÄ

ÄMÖ OY


Y

YHTYNEET SAHAT OY W

ISATIMBER

Export Spruce Pine

Average export 61 %

Figure 20. Export Share and Spruce vs. Pine -elation.



Sawmills that have an export share smaller than average (<61%), are more likely to saw pinewood. Companies with export rate bigger than average have specialised on spruce or pine, but it can not be stated that spruce would have a dominant role. Among the export oriented sawmills spruce and pine had equal amount of specialised producers, i.e. export usually indicated higher level of specialisation.

3.7 Future Possibilities in Vaasa Region

In order to establish a new line from Vaasa to Kiel, it would require a wood cargo of about 2 500 m3 every second week. As indicated in the study, the aforementioned amount of sawed wood going to Germany doesn’t exist in the hinterland of the port of Vaasa. The sawn wood cargo to Germany is about 2 600 m3 every second week (i.e. 744 m3 non-members + 1831 m3 members of the Finnish Sawmills Association). It is very unrealistic to expect that all exporters would start to use the new shipping line instead of contemporarily fairly cheap trailers. Competition with trailers is very intense because of the imbalance in Finnish export and import, i.e. trailer capacity going back to Central Europe is relatively cheap at the moment.

Containers are not feasible either for sawn wood transport in the case of Vaasa. There are many reasons for this. The main obstacles are:

• Price is relatively high compared to trailers

• Cargo handling equipment at sawmills and in the port of Vaasa do not support container cargo in Lo-Lo –shipping

• Current vessel types aren’t very suitable for container traffic

Container deposit for some swap lots could be needed if only there were any remarkable container traffic to Central Europe direction. The deposit would need not to be a big one, perhaps a deposit of some 10-20 containers. It should be placed in the port of Vaasa or an area nearby. In the current situation there is no immediate need for a container deposit.

Some calculations were done concerning extension of the route of a conventional vessel line from Vaasa to Denmark. The ships could go via Kiel. In this context it was also studied the possibilities of establishing a small-scale container deposit in the port



of Vaasa. Also routes via some Baltic port were discussed in early phase of the study, but these were later decided to leave out as unrealistic options.

Some inquiries made by Backman-Trummer Ltd. and Cellpap had the following results concerning the rough price of conventional shipment of wood products from sawmills to port of Kiel:

Road or rail transport in Finland 0,027 – 0,034 € / m3 / km

Cargo handling (Vaasa) and shipment 19,42 € / m3

Cargo handling and warehousing (Kiel) 6,01 € / m3

Custom clearance fee (Kiel) 1,00 € / m3

Example: A typical (trailer) lot of 60 m3 sawn wood, 150 km transport in Finland, cargo handling and fees would cost about 1 860 €. A similar trailer transport would cost 1 125 – 1 530 €.

Road or rail transport in Germany needs to be studied more, i.e. some kind of zone prising could be useful to estimate (e.g. 100, 300, 500 km). In the prevailing market situation it is anyway quite obvious that trailer are too competitive compared to conventional shipping, i.e. there is no immediate need for studying zone prising in Germany.



4 Spatial Case II – The Baltic Sea Market Survey

4.1 Introduction

There is a clear need for reliable information on the Baltic Sea cargo markets. The intense competition from the Baltic countries in transit cargo is one factor creating need for information describing the changes in freight routes and volumes.

Some difficulties in getting relevant data are e.g. the time scale of the statistic and even more important the unwillingness of many authorities to give out the statistics. Time scale can be seen as a problem because route and volume fluctuations do happen within months instead of a slow many years cycle. Statistics are usually made on annual basis and the information is often composed in many different ways, it is inaccurate (even false) and expensive to get.

4.2 Reference Study Based on Internet Searches

After having received the material from the port of Hamburg, WP8 would like to conduct a light reference study based on the Internet searches. This could be interesting in the sense that the Baltic States authorities are sometimes accused to spread too optimistic information on the cargo development and their share of the transit traffic. Preliminary research has shown that the information hardly seems to be comparable, which is not very encouraging when considering the reference study.

4.3 Statistics from the Port of Hamburg

Since the opportunity to get some data free from the marketing department of port of Hamburg was tried to exploit, WP8 hasn’t received the statistical data yet. The statistics have been ordered now by using monetary power, which means that the analysis will be done during February 2001. The structure of the report was supposed to consist of headlines something like:

Preliminary Results, Main Results, Commodities, Dry and Liquid Bulk, United Cargo vs. Bulk Cargo (Containers, Trailers, Railcars), Transit Cargo



4.4 Conclusions

The conclusions will be written after the analysis has been started and completed. Some statistics are still on the way because there dos not seem to be very great interest among the ports to deliver their market analysis information, especially when the fairly accurate information should be given at a reasonable price.

The final results will in an ideal case give an overview on the current situation in the Baltic Sea cargo markets. One interesting question, in which it would be nice to be able to answer, is the real status of the Baltic States ports’ competitiveness in transit cargo.
