Lecture Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou EU-Business Regulation_Jacobs Bremen University

EU Business Regulation, does it matter? – A Public Affairs Perspective Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou Head of Association of Northern German Chambers of Commerce and Industry Brussels

Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou

Master Course Spring 2012

March 2012

1

Contents I. II.

Introduction

Different Ways Tasks Tools Profile Stakeholders

Lobbying: Conclusions & Key Messages

VI.

Case Study: „EU Commission Proposal on Sulphur Emissions from Maritime Transport” a) The Case b) The Facts c) The EU Decision-Making Process

VII. Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou

Relevance International Comparison EU Lobby Scene EU Political System Effectiveness

V.

Working as a Lobbyist a) b) c) d) e)

Lobbying in Brussels a) b) c) d) e)

Lobbying a) Historical Background b) Definition c) Added Value

III.

IV.


Case Study: Evaluation & Key Messages March 2012

2

Contents I. II.

Introduction



VI.




V.




III.

IV.



3

I. Introduction



March 2012

4

I. Association of Northern German CCIs – IHK Nord Association of Northern German CCIs… • comprising 13 Northern German CCIs from • 5 Northern German Federal States („Länder“)

…within a strong economic area • including more than 650.000 member companies • representing 18 % of Germany‘s GDP …with its own representation in Brussels since 1959



March 2012

5

Customers

I. IHK Nord Representation in Brussels – Our Services IHK Nord CCIs and Member Companies Macro-Lobbying (MAL) • Proactive monitoring of political

Products

developments and EU legislation (Focus: maritime economy

& logistic, foreign trade) • Institution Building in the CCIs • Creating strategic networks • Public relations


Micro-Lobbying (MIL)

EU-Funding Programs

• Proactive Corporate Diplomacy

• Screening of possibilities

• Monitoring of EU legislation • Support in case of problems with EU tenders • Anti-Dumping register and newsletter • Intervention in case of trade barriers and restrictions to market access • Providing high-level contacts to EU decision-makers • Workshops and Seminars

• Negotiation in


international consortium • Claims • Project management

• Accounting

March 2012

6

Contents I. II.

Introduction



VI.




V.




III.

IV.



7

II. Lobbying



March 2012

8

a) Lobbying – Historical Background



March 2012

9

b) Lobbying for Business – Definition

Lobbying for business is… … manipulative at best and sleazy at worst ?



March 2012

10

b) Lobbying for Business – Definition Lobbying for business is… …Professional representation of private and public interests towards decision makers …Proactive shaping of the political environment



March 2012

11

b) Lobbying for Business – Definition

Procedural & Strucutral Tools

Lobbying = Public Affairs

Roadmap / Lobby Plan Filter / Issues-Management Monitoring / Intelligence Public Relations Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou


March 2012

12

c) Lobbying for Business – Added Value Systematic analysis and proactive shaping of the business environment create

More solid planning basis minimise

maximise

Risks Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou

Chances Master Course Spring 2012

March 2012

13

c) Lobbying for Business – Added Value Lobbying for Business… … increases success … enlarges and secures room for manoeuvre … optimises planning … creates best possible framework conditions  Power Lobbying is value for money! Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou


March 2012

14

Contents I. II.

Introduction



V.


VI.

Case Study: „EU Commission Proposal on Sulphur Emissions from Maritime Transport”


a) The Case b) The Facts c) The EU Decision-Making Process VII.




III.

IV.



15

III. Working as a Lobbyist



March 2012

16

a) Different Ways

Internal


External


Personal

March 2012

17

b) Tasks Monitor relevant developments Identify the problem Consequences for your business? Define objective & strategy  Lobby Plan Implement objective & strategy  Action / Advocacy Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou


March 2012

18

c) Tools Procedural Tools

Structural Tools

National Associations

Networks & Alliances

Conferences / Workshops

European Associations

(Lunch briefings, on-site visits…)

Meetings

Consultancies

Media & Press

Written Briefings

Law firms

Events



March 2012

19

d) Profile Expertise/ / Expertise Know-How know-how

Soft Skills Negotiation Skills

Management Skills

Strategic Thinking

CommunicationSkills


Emotional Intelligence / Body Language


Representation Skills

March 2012

20

e) Stakeholders Direct Stakeholders Competitors Holders, shareholders, investors Suppliers Customers

Indirect Stakeholders

C O M P A N Y

Employees Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou

Associations

Political decision makers on local, national, European & international level Media Public NGOs


March 2012

21

Contents I. II.

Introduction



V.


VI.







III.

IV.



22

IV. Lobbying in Brussels



March 2012

23

a) Relevance Budget/Funding Possibilities

Regulation

84% Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou

Budget 2012: € 147,2 billion ~ 46% Sustainable growth ~ 41% Natural resources ~ 6 % EU as a global player ~ 6% Administration ~ 1% Citizenship, freedom, security and justice


March 2012

24

b) International Comparison

Lobbying in Berlin

Lobbying in Brussels

Lobbying in Washington D.C.

• 4.500 estimated Lobbyists



• 2.026 offices

• 3.050 offices

• 16.000 offices

Source: Graphic DIPA (2006)



March 2012

25

c) EU Lobby Scene Accredited lobbyists in the European Parliament:

4.570 Total estimated amount of full-time lobbyists in Brussels:

~ 15.000 Source: European Parliament (2008)



March 2012

26

c) EU Lobby Scene Type

~ Number

Associations and other business representations

1.200

Companies

500

NGOs

750

Regional representations

200

Law firms

200

Consultancies Think Tanks (Research on European topics)

150 50

In total

3.050 Source: Guégen (2007)



March 2012

27

c) EU Lobby Scene: German Representation of Interests in Brussels 180 160

154

140 Representatives of German Companies 120

Representatives of German Associations 100

93 82

Representatives of European Associations

80 Offices of the German Länder 60 Representatives of Municipal Offices 40 20

15

13

0 Source: Permanent Representation of the Federal Republic of Germany to the European Union (2009)



March 2012

28

c) EU Lobby Scene: German Companies in Brussels 45

42

40 35

39 34 Industry

30 25

Consultancies 24

Law Firms

20

Services 15

15

Banks and Financial Services

10 5 0 Source: Permanent Representation of the Federal Republic of Germany in the EU (2009)



March 2012

29

d) EU Political System European Commission

European level (EU institutions)

Decision

Subnational / regional level Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou

Economic and Social Committee

People

Court of Auditors

Council of the EU Committee of the Regions represented in

elect

European Parliament

represented in

National level (27 Member States)

European Court of Justice

National Governments

Regional Governments


March 2012

30

e) Effectiveness of Lobbying (EU Commission) Extremely useful

10 9 8

20%

7

21%

6

21%

5

16%

4

11%

3 2

Not useful at all

5% 1%

1 0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Source: Burson-Marsteller (2003)



March 2012

31

e) Effectiveness of Lobbying (EU Parliament) Extremely useful

10 9

5%

8

19%

7

19%

6

19%

5

15%

4

3%

3

7%

2

Not useful at all

5%

1

7% 0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Source: Burson-Marsteller (2001)



March 2012

32

Contents I.

Introduction

II.


III.

IV.



V.


VI.








33

V. Lobbying: Conclusion & Key Messages Lobbying is a legitimate and necessary element of democracy  Public Affairs are a strategic core function for business developments  Lobbying requests pronounced management, strategic and communication skills Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou


March 2012

34

Contents I.

Introduction

II.


III.

IV.



V.


VI.








35

VI. Case Study: „EU Commission Proposal on Sulphur Emissions from Maritime Transport”



March 2012

36

a) The Case Background: Regulation, International Maritime Organisation (IMO) Legal basis: MARPOL Convention, Annex VI (Air Pollution from Ships), 2008 Contents: Limits on Sulphur Content in Marine Fuels Worldwide: Starting 2012 max. 3,5 %; Starting 2025 max. 0,5 %. Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou

SECAs (Sulphur Emission Control Areas): (North Sea, Baltic Sea & the English Channel): Starting 2015 max. 0,1%.


March 2012

37

a) The Case

EU

The Aim of the European Commission: Alignment of Directive 1999/32 with the most recent IMO rules on fuel standards notably on prevention of air pollution from ships, as well as to strengthen the EU monitoring and enforcement regime.  Accordingly: revision of the EU Directive on the sulphur content in marine fuels (1999/32/EC) Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou


March 2012

38

b) The Facts The U.S. Approach

Movie

(http://www.epa.gov/international/fuelswitch.html )

The United States Environmental Protection Agency:

„Reducing Emissions from Ships – U.S.-Mexico Fuel Switching Demonstration“



March 2012

39

b) The Facts The shipping industry is currently a major source of SO2 in the EU; it is responsible for 75% of the total land-based emissions. (Source: Communication from the European Commission "A European Union strategy to reduce atmospheric emissions from seagoing ships", 2002)

The Baltic and North Sea are among the most overloaded seas; 80% of shipping occurs near the coast.



March 2012

40

Sulfur Dioxide and its Effects: Health

b) The Facts

Source: World Health Organization European Center for Environment and Health (Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, part A, vol 68, p 1301)



March 2012

41

Sulfur Dioxide and its Effects: Environment

b) The Facts Source: Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Journal, 2009

 Ship emissions worldwide: Responsible for 5% of sulphur dioxide-induced acid rain.  Emissions from ships in coastal regions: Responsible for acid rain and for more than 25% of tropospheric ozone.

.  50% of acid rain in North European coastal regions is attributed to ship emissions.



March 2012

42

b) The Facts Shipping Compared to Other Modes of Transport regarding Atmospheric Pollution Comparative exhaust gas emissions Comparative CO emissions 2

Source: NTM (Swedish Network for Transport and the Environment)

The shipping industry is a small contributor to the total volume of atmospheric emissions compared to road vehicles and air transport. In terms of CO2 emissions per ton of cargo transported one mile, shipping is recognized as the most efficient form of commercial transport. Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou


March 2012

43

b) The Facts Shipping Compared to Other Modes of Transport regarding Energy and Cost Efficiency

In terms of energy consumption, shipping compares very favorably with other transport modes. Sea Freight is the cheapest transport mode. Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou


March 2012

44

b) The Facts Possible Economic Impacts (According to the study of the Bremen Institute of Shipping Economics and Logistics)

 

• Costs Increase: rising prices for currently used fuels from € 400 per ton to more than 700 € per ton for low-sulfur fuel and the following increase of the cost of freight. • Modal shifts from road to sea caused by rising costs. • Volume losses of 820,000 standard containers (TEUs) per year for seaports. • New business opportunities for marine equipment industry ("scrubber" / sulfur treatment equipment), shipyards (adjustment of vessels), refineries (production of new fuels) and classes (certification of new vessel components). • Reduction of sulphur emissions and health risk.



March 2012

45

b) The Facts Improving Air Quality: Sulphur Emission Control Areas on the Planet



March 2012

46

Who are the different stakeholders in this case



March 2012

47

b) The Facts 27 Member States / Permanent Representations:  Member States bordering the Baltic Sea, North Sea and English Channel  Member States not bordering the Baltic Sea, North Sea and English Channel

EU Commission:  DG ENV  DG CLIMA  DG MOVE  DG ENTR  DG RTD  DG MARE  …..

Brussels Sulphur Stakeholders

Third Countries / Embassies:  Norway  Russia Regional Representations:  Dutch Provinces  Region of Venice  Stockholm Region  Barcelona City  Association of Finnish Local & Regional Authorities (AFLRA) South East England Development Agency (SEEDA)  …..

EU Parliament:  Political Groups (Conservatives, Socialists, Liberals, the Greens, the Left)  Parliamentary committees (ENVI, TRAN…)  Parliamentary Intergroups (Baltic Europe, Seas and Coastal Areas…)


Lobbyists: (Shipbuilding) suppliers Classification societies Shipowners Ports Shipyards Paper industry …..


March 2012

48

How and when can stakeholders influence the EU decision-making process



March 2012

49

c) The EU Decision-Making Process – Institutional Triangle of the EU Lobby

European Commission

Lobby

Lobby Lobby

Lobby

European Parliament

European Council Lobby



March 2012

50

c) The EU Decision-Making Process – Co-Decision Procedure



March 2012

51

c) The EU Decision-Making Process – Co-Decision Procedure Commission Proposal

EP First Reading

Lobby

Lobby Council First Reading

Lobby

Lobby A: Act adopted


B: Act not adopted

EP Second Reading

Lobby

…..


Conciliation Committee

A: Act adopted B: Act not adopted March 2012

52

52

c) The EU Decision-Making Process – Time Line Proposal on Sulphur Emissions from Maritime Transport 15th July 2011 Draft Report, MEP Satu Hassi, ENVI Committee of the European Parliament

Influence

100%

Draft Opinion, MEP SavisaarToomast, TRAN Committee of the European Parliament

0% COM Idea

Stakeholder- Impact Consultation Assessment Procedure

Inter-service consultation

Internal Commission Work Duration: ≈ 1-3 Years


The College of Commissioners

Legislative 1st Reading 2nd Reading Conciliation EP & Committee Adoption Proposal EP & Council Council

Comitology & Implementation at national level

EU Legislative Procedure (so-called Co-Decision Procedure) Duration: ≈ 1-3 Years


March 2012

53

Contents I.

Introduction

II.


III.

IV.



V.


VI.








54

IV. Case Study: Evaluation & Key Messages  No sector can afford to ignore regulation – lobbying is indispensable!

 Lobbying anticipates and manages regulatory risks for business! Lobbying gives business a competitive edge – regulation can be proactively shaped!



March 2012

55

Thank you for your attention! Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou Representation of IHK Nord Avenue des Arts 19 A-D B-1000 Brussels Telephone: +32 2 209 12 80 Telefax: +32 2 209 12 89 E-mail: [email protected]



March 2012

Lecture Dr. Mary Papaschinopoulou EU-Business Regulation_Jacobs Bremen University

Recommend Documents