Environmental reform of West and Central Africa ports: the influence of colonial legacies

ABSTRACT

West and Central Africa ports have historically not paid much attention to environmental issues. In the past decade, however, environmental concerns are beginning to emerge with pockets of innovative responses to environmental risks as the ports undergo institutional and infrastructural reform – most notably, with concessions to multinational terminal operators. In this article, environmental management processes in the ports of Abidjan (Ivory Coast), Douala (Cameroon), Lagos (Nigeria) and Tema (Ghana) are compared. Three aspects of ecological modernization theory: changing role of the state, growing involvement of economic actors and economic incentives, and shifting roles for civil society organizations are focused on to analyse the dynamics of their environmental reform. Findings suggest that globalization processes are a common major trigger in enhancing a gradual but still fragmented and limited process of environmental reform in West and Central Africa ports, but paces and pathways of the reform are influenced by national politico-administrative arrangements rooted in colonial legacies. Consequently, understanding and advancing environmental reform processes of West and Central Africa ports requires following trends and significant developments but also taking into account national historical trajectories.

KEYWORDS:

• West and Central Africa ports
• environmental risks
• environmental reform
• politico-administrative arrangements
• colonial heritage

View correction statement:

Erratum

1. Introduction

West and Central Africa (WCA) economies are heavily dependent on international trade, 90% of which is by the maritime route. Efficient ports and shipping are therefore very significant to the region’s trade and economic growth. Ports in the region are predominantly state-owned and have been plagued by operational inefficiencies. To overcome their inefficiencies and promote economic competitiveness through positive changes in operational productivity, most of the ports have undergone institutional and infrastructure reforms since the turn of the millennium. Container terminal operations have been improved through concessions, a world-wide phenomenon stimulated by globalized economic liberalization, which has attracted private investment in new port installations and equipment. This has resulted in increasing autonomy of the ports from the state. With service delivery in WCA ports becoming more efficient (UNCTAD 2003; Pálsson, Harding, and Raballand 2007; Drewry, 2008; Ocean 2009; Foster and Briceño-Garmendia 2010), shipping traffic is also increasing (Fouda 2012).

Increasing shipping, besides driving economic development, gives rise to increased marine and port environment risks that can threaten economic development. Table 1 gives an overview of the environmental impacts from port area activities and from shipping. This article concentrates on the latter, and more in particular on ship wastes, oil spill, ballast water discharge, and hazardous wastes. These problems have transboundary aspects and are regulated by international agreements. Coping with them poses major challenges to WCA ports.

Table 1. Overview of environmental issues for WCA ports.

Port area generated			Shipping generated
Water	Air	Soil
Rainwater Port garbage Industrial effluent Municipal waste Washing water from warehouses/workshops Runoff from wharves, stockpile of bulk cargo as manganese, bauxite, manganese, iron ore, shea-butter, etc.	Industrial emissions Odour Ship blasting Trucks/cargo handling equipment emissions Dust from bulk cargo as manganese, bauxite,iron ore, wheat, clinker, etc.	Oil spill/leakage from tank farms Chemical spills Dredged material Port garbage Washing water from terminals Pipeline punctures Sewage overflow	Ships’ wastes Ballast water Oil spill Antifouling Hazardous waste Accidental collision Ships’ emissions

Provision of reception facilities for ship generated wastes by ports is a requirement by the MARPOL 73/78 Convention. These are becoming available in varying forms in some WCA ports but remain inadequate. Ship waste collection processes in the ports are not only inefficient but also their management remains poor. Hazardous and non-hazardous wastes were for instance found in this study not separated but bundled and disposed of together. Declarations by ships on the nature and quantities of waste are not verified, recorded, nor controlled (Tema port, personal communication, 2010). This makes illegal discharge of ships’ waste in the region’s seas more probable and also provides ample opportunity for waste dumping through the mixing of garbage with hazardous waste. Next, increasing dependence of WCA economies on fuel imports to meet energy needs (Adenikinju 2008) exposes the region to oil spill pollution risk. Some of the ports are adopting oil spill response preparedness as required by the International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Cooperation (OPRC’90). Capacities, however, remain weak. Some ports have had to struggle to deal with major incidents that have required major response efforts. Tema port in 2005 for instance experienced a major oil spill that led to fire outbreak and loss of human lives (Tema port, personal communication, 2014). Also, bulk carrier ships calling WCA ports to load cargo discharge large amounts of ballast water (with potentially harmful invasive organisms) regulated by the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments (BWMC ’04). This is yet to come into force though, and most WCA ports indicate they do not encourage in-port de-ballasting as a preventive measure. Regulatory guidelines for checking how vessels de-ballast, however, remain generally ad hoc. This puts the region’s seas at the risk of invasive marine species. Finally, stringent laws in industrialized economies on safe disposal of hazardous wastes as regulated by Basel Convention (BC’89) have made sub-Saharan Africa a sought-after disposal ground. Some WCA ports are seeking to tackle the menace, however the needed mechanisms and capacity for detecting and handling hazardous waste shipments are lacking. Two prominent issues emerge regarding hazardous wastes. First, the lack of a precise definition of hazardous waste for proper identification, and second, the lack of information sharing among neighbouring ports on the presence of suspicious vessels in their waters. The latter is particularly evident in the 2006 Probo Koala toxic dumping in Abidjan, in which the ship first called at Lagos port to discharge gasoline.

Such environmental risks make environmental protection a key issue for the further development of WCA ports. Already multilateral bodies, global economic investors and global civil society actors are stimulating global attention to port environmental management.

How ports are addressing their environmental concerns has been documented by many scholars (Wooldridge, Mcmullen, and Howe 1999; Gupta, Gupta, and Patil 2005; Lam and Van De Voorde 2012; ESPO 2012; Dinawoodie et al. 2012; Homsombat et al. 2013; Lou and Yip 2013). There are studies focusing on European ports (Verhoeven 2009; Darbra et al. 2009), North American ports (Bailey and Solomon 2004), Baltic ports (Klopott 2013; Gritsenko and Yliskylä-Peuralahti 2013), and Asia ports (Lam and Notteboom 2014). Literature on environmental protection in Africa ports, however, is scarce. Existing studies on African ports (such as Wood and Dibben 2005; Notteboom 2011; Gekara and Chhetri 2013) and WCA ports specifically (Addico 2000; Ugboma et al. 2007) have largely missed out on environmental problems and their management (Ognibene 2007; Eze 2008). Regardless this absence in the literature, the institutional reforms of WCA ports at the turn of the millennium came along with increasing attention to port environmental risks and with the development of environmental risks mitigation strategies. Against this background, this paper researches on two questions: (i) how and to what extent do WCA ports address environmental risks in ports; and (ii) do different political–administrative settings result in different environmental risk management strategies? In answering these questions, four WCA ports, Abidjan, Douala, Lagos and Tema (Figure 1), are investigated. Applying key elements of ecological modernization theory, we compare environmental reform in the four ports and identify institutional factors that explain similarities and differences among them.

Figure 1. The West and Central Africa coastline showing the four ports studied.

The ports represent WCA’s differing national politico–administrative arrangements structured after colonial legacies of the French (Abidjan and Douala) and British (Lagos and Tema) empires. In the period of 2010–2015, primary information was collected through semi-structured questionnaires administered among 45 key persons drawn from environmental managers of the ports, private terminal and port reception facility operators, officials of environment ministries and agencies, maritime administrations, national shipping authorities, shipping agents, officials of the Regional Maritime University in Accra, officials of the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Regional Office in Accra, the Port Management Association for West and Central Africa’s (PMAWCA) office in Nigeria, and the Maritime Organization for West and Central Africa’s (MOWCA) office in Abidjan. Some data were gathered through participation in the first West and Central Africa Ports Environment Conference which was co-organized by the first author. In addition, observations and personal interviews were made on field visits to the case study ports. Secondary information was obtained through literature, internet review, newsletters, and management and operational reports.

After introducing port management models for WCA ports in the next section, ecological modernization theory is presented as the conceptual framework for our study. This is followed by an analysis of environmental processes in our case study ports. Mechanisms and dynamics influencing environmental reform in the ports are then discussed, and the main conclusions for the study are drawn.

2. Management models for West and Central Africa ports

Institutionally, WCA ports are predominantly state-owned and structured on colonial legacies from either the French or British empires. This is reflected in the characteristics of our case study ports in Table 2. The French under civil law with a policy of rigid centralization (LLSV, 1999) designed and operated French WCA (French-model) ports as government agencies with centralized and hierarchical planning. The British, under common law with higher levels of freedoms and autonomous institutions (North 2005), structured British WCA (British-model) ports as public bodies with some decentralized and flexible planning. While the French-model ports operated a form of hybrid management (landlord and service) in which port authorities leased land to licensed private stevedore and cargo handling companies, British-model ports operated the service management model with port authorities controlling and managing cargo handling and stevedoring.

In recent years however, following global economic liberalization, the typical colonial institutional set up of WCA ports as state agencies and public bodies has been blurred. WCA ports (our four cases included) have become more autonomous, shifting from state dominance toward increased private sector participation. Though remaining state-owned, the ports have mostly reformed into the landlord model, concessioning their container terminals to multinational terminal operators, particularly, AP Moeller-Maersk and Bollorè Groups. But Tema operates as a hybrid: the port authority is in joint venture with its multinational terminal operator with private sector domination rather than the state. The landlord port model has generally emerged the most prominent globally for its operational efficiency and productivity (ADB, 2010) and for re-organizing port governance (Ng, Hall, and Pallis 2013) and reform (World Bank 2007).

Table 2. Port characteristics.

Characteristics	French-model ports		British-model ports
	Abidjan	Douala	Lagos	Tema
National politico-administrative system	Centralized port planning	Hierarchical port planning	Decentralized port planning	Decentralized port planning
Management model	Landlord	Landlord	Landlord	Hybrid
Size	34 Berths 888.9 m long^a; 13.5 m draft; 25 ha total area^a; 143.5 m^2 closed storage; 407.6 m^2 open storage	11 Berths 507.8 m long^a, 8.5 m draft; 21 ha total area^a; 58,000 m^2 closed storage; 380,000 m^2 open storage	43 Berths 4221.5 m long^a, 10.5 m draft; 240 ha total area^a; closed and open storage: no data	13 Berths 2413 m long^a, 11.5 m draft; 25 ha total area^a; 25,049 m^2 closed storage; 77,200 m^2 open storage
Total container traffic 2006–2011 (TEUs)	3291.037^b	1577.4 ^b	5,498.347 ^b	3003.2^b
Cargo throughput 2006–2014 (tonnes)	–^c	–^c	180,927,335	83,770,685
Vessel calls 2006–2014 (units)	–^c	–^c	13,124	16,634
Total export 2006–2014 (tonnes)	–^c	–^c	10,039,411	12,442,288
Total import 2006–2014 (tonnes)	–^c	–^c	161,279,407	57,324,575
Specialized Facilities	Timber, fruits, fish, offshore tanker mooring	Timber, fruits, fish, bauxite, petroleum	Wheat, fish, petroleum	Alumina, fruits, fish, petroleum
Competing ports	Cotonou, Dakar, Lagos, Lomé, Tema	Calabar, Lagos, Port Harcourt	Abidjan, Cotonou, Douala, Tema	Abidjan, Cotonou, Lagos, Lomé
Concession year term	2003 for 15 years	2004 for 15 years	2006 for 25 years	2003–2004 for 20 years
Country international trade (%)	90%	95%	75%	70%
Landlocked transit	Burkina Faso, Niger, Mali	Chad, Central Africa Republic	Chad, Eastern Niger	Burkina Faso, Niger, Mali

Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

^a Trujilo et al. (2013).

^bMLTC/CATRAM (2013).

^cAll four ports were contacted for these data, but due to procedural reasons Abidjan and Douala could not provide them within the period of this study.

Though this landlord shift has blurred the typical colonial institutional set up of WCA ports, it does not imply that colonial heritage has ceased to influence the governance style of our case study ports and creating homogeneity in environmental interventions among them as will be elaborated in Section 5.

3. Innovations in environmental protection: ecological modernization

Ecological modernization ideas emerged in Western Europe from analysing the new directions and strategies that came up from the late 1980s onwards to address environmental problems. Since then a wide array of theoretical and empirical studies have elaborated on what Albert Weale called ‘the new politics of pollution’ (Weale 1992). The new environmental policies deviate from conventional state-led command-and-control strategies in three main ways.

• Changing role of the state. A shift from bureaucratic and centralized regulatory styles of environmental protection toward flexible, decentralized, and consensual approaches often referred to as political modernization (Jänicke 1993; Arts et al. 2006). Some nation-state environmental roles and responsibilities become transferred to non-state actors including (multi)national companies, (inter)national NGOs, multilateral organizations and hybrid partnerships. Also, the dominancy of the state in environmental control and protection is contested by vertical shifts in authority: upwards, to international and supra-national institutions as a consequence of globalization, and downwards, to local authorities in processes of decentralization.

• Growing involvement of economic actors and incentives. Related to the changing role of the state, economic actors gain ground in environmental reform (Mol and Sonnenfeld 2000). Economic actors increasingly and systematically take up and institutionalize environmental interests through innovative approaches both within nation–states and across borders. Policy makers turn to economic and monetary mechanisms rather than direct regulation to articulate and push for environmental objectives (Mol and Spaargaren 2000)

• Shifting roles for civil society organizations. In the process of environmental institutionalization, new roles for environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs) emerge. They shift from their traditional posture of public opinion formation and environmental protesting toward cooperative partnerships with state and economic actors in solving environmental problems (Mol 2002; Sonnenfeld 2002; Young 2000).

Given the ever more global character of environmental risks, policies for environmental protection are affected by international political and economic pressure. Ecological modernization processes are therefore increasingly becoming interdependent with globalization processes and going beyond the confines of one nation-state (Mol 2001). In this article, ecological modernization processes described above are used as a sensitizing framework to investigate in what ways different WCA ports have changed and innovated their policies and management in addressing environmental risks.

4. West and Central Africa ports: a wave of environmental reform?

This section analyses environmental reform in four case study WCA ports over the last decade.

4.1. Abidjan port

4.1.1. Role of the state

The institutional framework for environmental protection in Abidjan port is linked to Ivory Coast’s (Côte d’Ivoire in French) centralized politico-administrative system. The National Environmental Code, Law No. 96–766 [1996] gives formal authority for port environmental protection to the Ministry of Environment, Waters and Forests (MinEEF) and its agencies, the National Environmental Agency (ANDE) and the Ivorian Antipollution Centre (CIAPOL). ANDE has responsibility for environmental impact assessments (EIA) and audits, while CIAPOL has responsibility for ships’ waste and ballast water issues, with its Environmental Police Unit controlling ships’ waste discharge. Oil spill response is coordinated by MinEEF and CIAPOL.

In 2004, pursuant to directives from MinEEF asking all parastatal agencies to create environment departments, the port authority’s environmental affairs unit was transformed into an environment department (Abidjan port, personal communication, 2010). Hitherto the unit only monitored water pollution issues but now has a broader role including participating in meetings of state agencies with private port economic actors to agree on yearly environmental targets. Outcomes of these meetings are used as formal reference for port environmental monitoring. This marks a shift in environmental control from the state to the port authority. However, state environmental agencies have not been eager in giving up direct relations with port economic actors. Both CIAPOL and ANDE deal directly and individually with private port economic actors in environmental inspections, assessments and audits. The centralized state environmental protection mode makes it difficult for the port authority to assert any authority and have stringent environmental controls.

Despite this challenge, the port authority taking advantage of its new landlord status with greater autonomy, is engaging in new environmental roles in ways that hitherto would not have been possible. It has moved on to become ISO 9001 and 14 001 certified (Abidjan port, personal communication, 2015). It is advocating for add-on technologies to process and reduce wastes from port industries, although limited economic feasibility, poor political support and inadequate expertise restrict enforcement. Additionally, the port authority has established parallel collaboration with the multinational terminal operator beside the state. This horizontal shift remains ad hoc and does not engage in state domain issues like permitting. It focuses on day-to-day operational issues, environmental briefings, training, and information sharing.

Also, the 2006 Probo Koala dumping has opened the port environmental space to multilateral bodies including UNEP, IMO, and the Basel Convention Secretariat. These multilateral bodies have taken environmental roles organizing stakeholder workshops and assisting with building port environmental capacity.

4.1.2. Economic actors and incentive

Since beginning operations, the multinational terminal operator from its corporate policy has mainstreamed environmental practices. The operator’s focus has been on reducing its carbon footprint which is expressed in increasing fuel efficiency and reducing CO₂ emissions. In the first five years of operation the multinational terminal operator invested in fuel-efficient rubber tyre gantry cranes that reduced diesel consumption by 30% (Abidjan port, personal communication, 2010). Operational moves of equipment are also calculated to reduce CO₂ emissions.

Already in the 1990s, MinEEF instituted environmental taxes as part of port dues contrary to the view then held by neighbouring ports that it would make them expensive and unattractive. Abidjan port however did not lose business. Additionally, ships’ waste fees have been instituted by the port authority under a ‘direct charge’ system to receive oily waste and garbage from ships in the port in compliance with MARPOL. Since the 2006 Probo Koala dumping however, there has been a state moratorium on oily waste discharge in the port.

4.1.3. Civil society organizations

The 2006 Probo Koala dumping drew civil society attention to Abidjan port. Remarkably, Trafigura, the company involved, paid the Ivorian government 198 million US dollars in an agreement to drop legal action (Fraser 2010). CSOs including the Abobo Car Mechanics Cooperative and le Mouvement Ivorien Des Droits de l’Homme were subsequently formed to protest against the dumping and the government’s position. The groups attracted support from an NGO (Informer, Sensibiliser, Eduquer sur les Pollutants Organiques Persistants en Cote d’Ivoire) which held Trafigura and Tommy (the local waste disposal company) accountable. International media interest and legal action led to victims being paid a compensatory settlement of 30 million British pounds (Fraser 2010; Evans 2010), and a thorough clean-up of the affected area. The protest, though a reactive form of articulating environmental interest by civil society, played out in nurturing port environmental attention.

4.1.4. Progress of reform

An environmental shift is evident in Abidjan port. Initiated with introduction of environmental taxes in the 1990s, the shift is progressing rather stressfully. Even though the port authority’s greater autonomy from the state under its institutional reform has given it new environmental roles, the state continues to dominate port environmental protection. The port authority has institutionalized environmental interests by establishing an environment department. The multinational terminal operator has also taken up environmental role and voluntarily adopted initiatives, thus taking over certain roles of the state in port environmental protection. There is also a modest political modernization process emerging – a horizontal shift with ad hoc collaboration between the port authority and the multinational terminal operator alongside conventional state arrangements, and also an upward shift with multilateral international bodies taking up roles supporting port environmental capacity besides the state. Ships’ waste fees as an indirect regulation serve as economic incentive in controlling shipping pollution and contributing to environmental reform of the port. While this measure is in line with ecological modernization’s emphasis on using economic mechanisms, there is a caveat here. Given the poor state of monitoring and control, the direct charges offer ships an incentive to dump their waste as they only pay for what they discharge in the port. Additionally, the state moratorium on receiving oily wastes from ships with no alternative mechanism for checking how ships are handling such wastes weakens the port’s environmental reform. Finally, civil society organizations are not systematically cooperating with the port in the environmental reform process. Nevertheless they have contributed to environmental attention. Altogether, the progress of Abidjan port’s environmental reform process can be said to be moderately progressive but stressed by state-centrism.

4.2. Douala port

4.2.1. Role of the state

Douala port’s institutional framework for environmental management follows a hierarchical politico-administrative arrangement with multiple and overlapping state institutions. The port authority reports to the National Ports Authority (NPA) which is supervised by the Ministry of Transport (MinT). The Ministry of Environment and Nature Protection (MinENP) is the competent state environmental authority, but the MinT has responsibility for ships’ waste. Oil spill response is the responsibility of oil companies and coordinated by the National Hydrocarbons Company under the Prime Minister’s office. The Prime Minister’s office also has responsibility for EIA. Ballast water is not addressed by regulation or inspection. Responsibility for hazardous waste is shared between the Prime Minister’s office and MinENP. Independent of each other, MinENP and MinT carry out ship inspections on waste (hazardous).

With Cameroon’s omnipresent state (ICG, 2010), non-state actors barely have any formal role in port environmental protection. Although the Douala port authority has awareness of its environmental risks, it seems inert toward them. Policies to address environmental risks are routed through the NPA to the MinT which then takes it up with MinENP and other appropriate institutions.

After becoming landlord in 2006 however, the port authority has established an environment committee and initiated an ad hoc environmental role for itself. The initiative came after the passing of the 2005 EIA Decree Nº 2005/0577/PM and Order Nº 0070/MINEP. The port authority, though not having the mandate, used the environmental committee as a mechanism alongside existing state procedures to get port economic actors to comply with the national EIA regulations. Following this, industrial effluent and discharges into the port basin received attention. Industries including electroplating and oil refinery initiated action on treatment options incorporated into their environmental management plans in the EIA process. Also the port authority through inter-personal relations and the environment committee as a platform, has initiated ad hoc collaboration with the multinational terminal operator on port environmental risks side-by-side state arrangements (Douala port, personal communication, 2010).

The World Bank through its mandatory environmental requirement for infrastructure development assistance has also influenced Douala port’s environmental practices. Unfortunately, such international influence has been rather ad hoc and not institutionalized. It usually terminates with the completion of projects (Douala port, personal communication, 2010) in a reversal to business-as-usual.

4.2.2. Economic actors and incentives

Douala’s multinational terminal operator has adopted voluntary environmental initiatives independent of state regulations. Their focus has been on increasing fuel efficiency, reducing CO₂ emissions, and promoting recycling and reuse. Working together with the port authority, the operator has adopted measures for improving vehicular flows within the port (DIT, n.d.). This has reduced dwell time of vehicles entering the port. Also in promoting recycling, waste oil from cargo handling equipment is for instance sold to recycling companies to processes it for foundries, metallurgical furnaces and diverse small scale applications. Bocom Recycling, a recycling company, also buys used batteries from forklifts and other mobile equipment and recycles the lead and plastic parts. Used tyres are often recycled into door mats and sandals.

There is a ‘direct charge’ system in implementing MARPOL. Here, private waste companies pay negotiable sums to ships to receive their oily wastes for recycling, and ships in turn, pay waste companies that receive their garbage for disposal. This generates competition among waste companies, with the highest bidder getting the waste from ships.

4.2.3. Civil society organizations

Civil society organizations (local or international) are not particularly found to be engaged with Douala port on environmental issues. ENVIREP-Cameroon, a local NGO involved in marine research, gathers scientific information on pollution issues but has no working relationship with the port.

4.2.4. Progress of reform

In environmental reform context, an environmental differentiation in organizational practices is evident in Douala port, though in a less systematic mode. The state remains dominant in port environmental protection. But environment has been institutionalized in the port with the establishment of an environment committee. The multinational terminal operator has also taken up environmental roles. The committee’s existence and operation, though ad hoc, without state interference is symbolic of decentralization and a changing role of the state. Likewise, the ad hoc collaboration between the port authority and multilateral terminal operator is a token of political modernization. There is also an incidental role for international actors such as the World Bank. Economic incentives have been adopted via direct ships’ waste fees, giving ships the discretion to discharge or not and also in quantities they want. As there is little control, the effectiveness of such fees is doubtful, like it is in Abidjan. Though the hierarchical national politico-administrative setting does not support easy integration of new actor roles and innovations for environmental reform, new forms of port environmental management are emergent. The absence of civil societal involvement in dealing with port environmental risks deprives this emergent environmental reform of the ‘conscience of society’ which may be significant in environmental policy-making. The environmental reform process of Douala port can, therefore, be said to be limited.

4.3. Lagos port

4.3.1. Role of the state

Institutional arrangements for environmental protection in Lagos Port is rooted in Nigeria’s colonial legacy of flexible politico-administrative system. However, as stated by a local interviewee, Nigeria’s bureaucratic system is ‘laden with too many regulators with similar and identical responsibilities’ (Lagos port, personal communication, 2012). The National Environmental Standards Regulations and Enforcement Agency (NESREA) is the apex environmental regulator. The Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) has responsibility for ships’ waste, ballast water, and oil pollution offshore beyond three nautical miles. Oil spill pollution on land and inland waters is controlled by the National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency (NOSDRA).

The port authority after becoming landlord in 2006 transformed its pollution control unit, which hitherto only monitored oil spill pollution from vessels, into an environment department (Lagos port, personal communication, 2012). The department has since engaged in new environmental roles including some overlapping with the state. The department’s responsibility for oil spill response in the port area for instance overlaps with NOSDRA’s similar responsibility on land and inland waters, given that the port basin is part of Nigeria’s inland waters. The relatively young and less experienced environment department has oversight environmental responsibility for the multinational terminal operator with huge environmental knowledge and experience. Other state institutions including the Ministry of Transport also exercise similar responsibility, with a duplication that often leaves the terminal operator without any effective control (This Day 2013). To be effective in its role, the port authority has established a collaborative environmental relationship with the terminal operator alongside state relations. Lessons from the collaboration are sometimes replicated for other port economic actors, and thus feeding into the overall port environmental policy-making (Lagos port, personal communication, 2012).

Other states and multilateral bodies have also influenced environmental performance in Lagos port. The Netherlands together with the Basel Convention Secretariat have supported NESREA working together with the port authority and other state institutions in developing Waste Shipment Guidelines and National Environmental Regulations SI No. 23. This international cooperation has opened the port to international practices for detecting and handling electronic wastes to curb electronic wastes dumping in Nigeria.

4.3.2. Economic actors and incentives

Subject to corporate policy, the multinational terminal operator in Lagos port has taken up voluntary environmental practices. Aimed at being carbon neutral, they are promoting fuel efficiency and reducing oil spills. They have provided oil spill containment devices in their operational areas and also introduced oil recycling measures to reduce dumping. They plan to convert their rubber tyre gantry cranes from diesel to electric power and also fit them with automatic idle shut down devices. This is to reduce fuel consumption and CO₂ emissions by 60–80% (Lagos port, personal communication, 2012). Another pending initiative is to install solar panels for lighting the terminal.

The port authority has also adopted economic incentives as indirect environmental regulation. As part of port dues, ships pay environmental levies for environmental improvements. Additionally they pay waste fees under an ‘indirect fee’ system for the discharge of their wastes into port reception facilities. Under this system, ships pay irrespective of use of the facilities or not.

4.3.3. Civil society organizations

Like Douala, no civil society organization is involved with Lagos port. An NGO, Esuene Foundation, with dealings with the Guinea Current Large Marine Ecosystem project rather focuses on coastal human development and not on with port environment (GCLME, Personal communication, 2011).

4.3.4. Progress of reform

Shifts toward environmental reform are evident in Lagos port. Environment has been decentralized and institutionalized with the transformation of the pollution control unit into an environment department to better address port environmental risks. The multinational terminal operator has taken up environmental roles with voluntary initiatives. These developments have shifted the role of the state in port environmental protection. The port authority’s embryonic environmental department is overcoming its inexperience through collaboration with the multinational terminal operator in a political modernization mode. But the multiplicity of state environmental institutions and overlapping roles with the port authority stabs the decentralization process for the port’s environmental reform. That notwithstanding, the flexible politico-administrative system enables collaboration between state, port authority, non-state and international actors in contributing to the port’s environmental reform. And likewise is the use of indirect ship waste fees as indirect environmental regulation. It offers ships no incentive to illegally discharge their waste at sea since they have to pay irrespective of discharging their wastes or not. However, as in Douala, the absence of civil society organizations in all these new roles and collaborations takes away societal conceptions in the port’s environmental reform progress. The environmental reform process for Lagos port can therefore be said to be fragmented.

4.4. Tema port

4.4.1. Role of the state

Tema port’s institutional framework for environmental management follows a flexible politico-administrative system linked to Ghana’s colonial heritage from the British. Ghana’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the state environmental regulator. The EPA operates with a co-management approach that involves both state and non-state actors. The Ghana Maritime Authority (GMA), an agency of the Ministry of Transport (MoT) which supervises the port, is the competent authority for marine pollution issues, but due to lack of capacity it leaves the coordination and collaboration to the EPA.

The port authority set up its environment department in 2002 after becoming landlord. Until then environmental issues were dealt with as a matter of course through an environment committee set up in 1998 and existing mostly in name (Tema port, personal communication, 2014). The environment department now has responsibility for the effective management and coordination of port environmental issues. It has used the port authority’s landlord status to push for environmental compliance by port tenants in ways that have hitherto not been possible. Of particular note has been problems of air pollution (clinker dust) from Ghacem Company which persisted despite several complaints to the EPA. But the port authority has been able to get the company to remedy its dust emission. Scrubbers have been installed in the plant, their conveyors have also been fitted with trappings, and automatic water sprinklers installed at the cement terminal in the port (Tema port, personal communication, 2014). Precipitated by a major oil spill with a resultant fire incident that claimed five lives, the port authority’s environment department has instituted a collaborative platform, the Port Environmental and Safety Network (PESN). PESN brings together port stakeholders, state and non-state, to deliberate on and address environmental and safety risks (PESN 2005). The port authority in 2004 established port reception facilities in the absence of national regulations for MARPOL. Similarly, though Ghana has not ratified IMO’s ballast water management convention (BWMC ’09) and has no national guidelines to that effect, the port authority initiated port biological surveys in 2009 to establish and monitor the characteristics and quality of its basin as required by BWMC ’09.

Other states and multilateral bodies have also taken up environmental roles in Tema. Similar to Lagos port, Tema has collaborated with Basel Convention and Netherlands on electronic wastes shipment prevention. These international actors supported the capacity building of the EPA, Ghana Customs, and the port authority to collaborate in developing national regulations and guidelines on hazardous waste shipment prevention.

4.4.2. Economic actors and incentives

Since taking over Tema port’s container terminal in 2003, the multinational terminal operator has initiated a number of environmental measures that hitherto did not receive attention in the port. For instance, to reduce energy consumption and CO₂ emissions, the terminal and cranes have been fitted with energy-efficient lighting. Other equipment such as reach stackers, top lifters and empty handlers ran on engines with automatic shut-down features (Tema port, personal communication, 2014).

The port authority like Lagos, charges ship waste fees under an ‘indirect fee’ system. It is a ‘compulsory user’ system under which ships pay regardless of their use or not of the port’s reception facilities, with no incentive to dump wastes at sea. Regular ships enjoy rebate (PRF Guidelines, s.a).

4.4.3. Civil society organizations

Tema port has no institutionalized cooperative dealings with civil society groups but has had its environmental reform influenced by various environmental protests mobilized by local civil society groups. In 2002, the port faced resistance from a community-based group over plans to build a new cement plant anticipated to cause air pollution from clinker dust. This was resolved by the port authority in collaboration with the EPA and the cement company, which together reviewed the original design to accommodate the installation of emission reduction technologies. A recent protest has been over environmental impacts from the siting of an oil palm processing plant in 2010 near Tema New Town, a fishing community adjoining the port. The state intervened by stopping the project.

4.4.4. Progress of reform

Tema port shows an emergence of environmental reform. Environment has been decentralized and institutionalized with the establishment of an environment department and the taking up of some roles ahead of the state. The multinational terminal operator has also voluntarily taken up roles in enhancing the port’s environmental reform. Various collaborative arrangements are emerging in a political modernization process, some of which, boosted by EPA’s co-management approach, include state environmental officials but are steered by the port authority. Also, international actors have taken up roles in contributing to the port’s environmental reform. There is indirect environmental regulation through economic incentives for ships’ waste collection that prevents probable waste dumping by ships at sea. The role of civil society, however, is incidental and protest-oriented rather than cooperative, as ecological modernization would assume. Altogether, the co-management approach flowing from Ghana’s flexible politico-administrative system amply accommodates new actors and innovations in harnessing Tema port’s environmental reform. The environmental reform progress can be said to be progressive.

4.5. Ecological modernization in the ports

Overall, our four studied ports can be seen as being at a crossroad facing a changing reality from the typical state-led command-and-control approaches toward decentralized and various forms of collaborative approaches and economic incentives in addressing their environmental risks. The essential architecture of environmental management in the ports remain predominantly state-centric but actual practices generating solutions are no longer so. Three major shifts are occurring in the ports investigated. First, the role of the state is changing with a decentralization and institutionalization of environmental management in the ports and with port authorities gaining greater autonomy and becoming sub-state actors. Second, varying forms of collaboration (institutionalized and ad hoc) emerge alongside the state, with non-state actors playing defining roles in establishing the direction of port environmental management. In particular multinational terminal operators, as private economic actors, are taking up new environmental roles. Third, other states and multilateral bodies are increasingly also involved in port environmental management, and influencing state policies. In addition, we see modest forms of indirect regulation using economic incentives gaining ground, particularly in the area of ships’ waste, where charges are being adopted to prevent particularly shipping pollution. Civil society actors are also influencing environmental reform in some of the ports but in a protestation style, and deviating from ecological modernization’s cooperative approaches in finding environmental solutions.

Altogether, as shown in Table 3, a gradual, unsystematic, heterogeneous environmental reform is emerging in WCA ports, be it in different forms and on uneven scale among the ports. In the next section, these differences are further explored and mechanisms and dynamics driving or hindering this emergent environmental reform in WCA ports are discussed.

Table 3. Environmental reform dynamics in studied ports.

Environmental reform dynamics		French model ports		British model ports
		Abidjan (Ivory Coast)	Douala (Cameroon)	Lagos (Nigeria)	Tema (Ghana)
Changing role of the state	Approach	Centralized	Hierarchical	Flexible multiple institutions	Flexible co-management
	Environmental authority	Specialized environment unit; limited role for port authority	Environment committee; no formal role for port authority	Specialized environment unit; formal role for port authority with overlaps	Specialized environment unit; formal role for port authority
	State/non-state actors collaboration	State controlled collaboration; ad hoc parallel port authority and private economic actor collaboration alongside state	Inter-personal relations between port authority and private economic actors alongside state	Institutionalized collaboration between state, port authority, other states and multilateral bodies; parallel collaboration between port authority and private economic actors alongside state	Institutionalized collaboration between state, port authority, private economic actors, other states and multilateral bodies; parallel collaboration between state, port authority and private economic actors steered by the port authority alongside state
	Role for international actors	Multilateral bodies taking up roles	Ad hoc role for multilateral bodies	Other states and multilateral bodies taking up roles	Other states and multilateral bodies taking up roles
Economic actors and incentives	Economic actors (multinational terminal operators)	Reducing carbon emissions; increasing fuel-efficiency	Reducing fuel consumption; promoting recycling and reuse; vehicle access plan	Converting diesel cranes to electric with idle shutdown devices; reducing oil spill; recycling reused oil	Reducing carbon emissions and energy consumption; terminals and cranes fitted with energy efficiency lights; cargo equipment with idle shutdown devices
	Economic incentives	State instituted environmental taxes; free-market or direct charge system for ships’ wastes^a	State controlled free-market or direct charge system for ships’ wastes	Port authority initiated environmental levies; indirect fee for ships’ wastes	Port authority initiated indirect fee for ships’ wastes; rebate for frequent ships
Civil society organizations	Partnership	Incidental protests for environmental justice	Not observed	Not observed	Incidental protests for environmental compliance
	Globalized civil society support	International legal assistance and support	Not observed	Not observed	Local civil society
Environmental reform progress		Moderate	Limited	Fragmented	Progressive

Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

^aCurrently applies to garbage.

5. Discussion

As our findings suggest, the environmental reform process in WCA ports can be inferred to be driven or hindered by three key institutional factors: globalized economic and political dynamics, national politico-administrative structures, and local conditions and port institutions.

5.1. Globalized economic and political dynamics

Changes in the role of the state in environmental protection and management of WCA ports have been precipitated by globalization-induced economic liberalization. First, concern for global environmental degradation has moved environment from the periphery to centre stage. In this development, environment has become inextricably linked with economic processes. For ports globally, their economic competitiveness has become associated with positive environmental practices (Lou and Yip 2013). It, therefore, stands to reason that to be competitive and not lag behind, the environment nexus becomes inevitable for WCA ports. Hence, even though the objective of their institutional reform was to overcome operational inefficiencies, the need for modernizing port environmental approaches is simultaneously triggered. From this has emerged a shift in the environmental policy style of the ports from conventional state-led command-and-control approaches toward decentralization and collaboration. The state is no more the sole source of port environmental direction as the ports have begun connecting to global demands and practices. Abidjan port in the face of state-centrism has gone beyond national standards to pursue international environmental management standards – ISO 9001 and 14 000 certification. Tema port embraced international regulatory demands to implement MARPOL and also initiated action for the yet-to-come-to-force BWMC ’04 in the absence of national regulations. Likewise in Abidjan, civil society used global interconnectedness to successfully fight for environmental justice. The presence of multinational terminal operators has also contributed to the environmental reform of WCA ports through the diffusion of environmental knowledge and new standards and practices without state reliance. Lagos port for instance adopts policy measures with knowledge gained from the multinational operator. Additionally, in a mode typical of globalization processes replacing state governance with multi-level governance, other states and multilateral bodies are co-determining environmental policy outcomes in the ports.

Also, the adoption of environmental charges following the ‘polluter pays principle’ comes at the heel of contemporary globalized practices. Ports, particularly those in advanced economies, are using the marketization of global environmental policies via various kinds of economic incentives and disincentives to respond to their increasing environmental concerns (IAPH, 2007; Lam and Notteboom 2014). And, this is exactly what can be observed emerging in WCA ports in controlling shipping pollution. It is worth noting, however, that central state authorities, MinEEF and MinENP instituted and control the charges for Abidjan and Douala, while for Lagos and Tema the port authorities themselves initiated and control the charges. In effect, globalization dynamics are substantially driving the environmental reform process in WCA ports.

5.2. National politico-administrative structures

Although globalization processes may be seen as having a homogenizing effect on environmental reform of WCA ports, the extent and pace varies greatly depending on national politico-administrative structures. The phenomenon is confirmed by Mol (2002) that even under globalization, environmental reform depends greatly on institutional circumstances of nation–states. National politico-administrative structures in WCA carry the stamp of colonial constructions. This leaves ports sharing a common colonial legacy to show similar forms of environmental governance. For Abidjan and Douala, environmental policy-making is concentrated in state institutions with environmental power drawn toward a single centralized authority. Conversely, Lagos and Tema have environmental policy-making shared between centralized and decentralized authorities, but also with some variation among them. Lagos on one hand has multiple state overlapping institutions working simultaneously with decentralized actors in environmental policy-making. Tema on the other hand has the state institution using co-management approach in defining and negotiating environmental policy-making with decentralized actors. National politico-administrative structures for French-model ports offers less flexibility in adopting new approaches to environmental reform unlike their British-model counterpart with more flexibility better suited to pursuing environmental reform in ecological modernization mode. For instance, the less willingness of the centralized national politico-administrative structure of Abidjan to give up state environmental control over port economic actors leaves the port with a limited environmental role. Furthermore, the hierarchical nature of Douala’s politico-administrative structure restrains the formalization of the port’s environmental role. However, flexible politico-administrative structures for Lagos and Tema give them formal and active environmental roles in facilitating their reform.

There is an influence of colonial legacy on the environmental reform of WCA ports but with no bearing on their colonial set up – hybrid for French-model and service for British model. That set up has become blurred by the institutional reform of the ports into predominantly landlord. The influence stems from the relationship between the ports and central state authorities. It has the capability of enabling or constraining environmental reform progress of the ports. Considering that economic profits for ports require environmental responsibility and action, and given findings on the actual environmental performance of the ports, the study suggests that when given flexibility, WCA ports can take up environmental roles and play it effectively in their endeavour to develop and become competitive.

5.3. Local conditions and port institutions

The environmental reform progress of WCA ports is sensitive and adapted to specific local problems and port institutions. The port authorities are utilizing their greater autonomy from institutional reform to adopt collaborative arrangements with their private economic actors. But there are differentiations according to given local contexts in which the ports find themselves albeit without interference from the state. Abidjan port for instance, while it is WCA ports’ environmental forerunner has its environmental reform progress rather stressed and moderate. Accario et al. (2014) assert that successful port environmental innovation is dependent on favourable institutional environment. That notwithstanding the port authority has gone ahead to initiate ad hoc collaboration with its multinational terminal operator alongside existing state arrangements. Similarly and even in a much stronger state-centric vein, Douala port authority faced with hierarchical politico-administrative arrangements is exploiting options available to it – inter-personal relations alongside existing state arrangements. Environmental reform progress for Douala port is however limited. Lagos port though having flexible politico-administrative arrangements has its environmental reform progress fragmented due to multiple institutions with overlapping roles. To overcome that, the port authority has also institutionalized collaborative arrangements side-by-side that of state institutions. Other collaborative arrangements also exist between state environmental authorities, the port authority, and other states and multilateral bodies. And Tema port, with a politico-administrative institution that co-manages environmental roles, shows a more progressive environmental reform. The port authority, taking advantage for instance of the flexibility it enjoys, has not only institutionalized its collaborative arrangements but actually steers the arrangements while the state participates as an actor. Additionally, the state environmental agency collaborates together with the port authority, and other states and multilateral bodies.

Differentiation in local conditions also applies to the use of economic incentives in ways that leave the WCA ports with the dilemma of environmental strictness. Given the lack of options for monitoring and control of illegal discharge at sea, the ‘indirect charge’ system practiced by British-model ports in which ships pay regardless of discharging their waste or not, is arguably a better incentive for preventing ships dumping their waste at sea and offer more scope for progress of environmental reform. The ‘direct fee’ of the French-model ports, though a market mechanism offering shipping companies incentive to minimize waste, makes illegal discharges at sea potentially attractive. It could be argued here that raising fees weakens competitive position, and that ports, when given more room for decision-making, will engage in a race-to-the-bottom-like regulatory competition that could reduce environmental standards among them. To counter such process, Homsombat et al. (2013) advocate inter-port cooperation to harmonize pollution control. For the case of Abidjan in this study, no competitive disadvantage was observed from installing environmental fees. Additionally, modest forms of environmental cooperation among WCA ports have been observed to be emerging (forthcoming publication). Strengthening this cooperation and harmonizing environmental standards, fees and incentives should eliminate regulatory competition among WCA ports and place them on an even playing field for their further environmental reform and development.

6. Conclusion

This article has investigated ways in which WCA ports are addressing their environmental risks. Four ports: Abidjan, Douala, Lagos and Tema, were compared. Three key elements of ecological modernization theory – changing role of the state, growing involvement of economic actors and economic incentives, and shifting roles for civil society organizations – were used as a sensitizing framework.

The institutional reform of WCA ports has brought in its wake a gradual but still fragmented and limited process of environmental reform. The ports have gained greater autonomy from the state. Environment has been decentralized and institutionalized in the ports. Port authorities and multinational terminal operators have taken up new environmental roles. Various collaborative arrangements have emerged in co-existence with conventional state arrangements. Environmental roles have also emerged for other states and multilateral actors along the state. Additionally, forms of economic incentives to prevent pollution from shipping have been adopted. Roles for civil society have however been largely absent except for incidental protests in Abidjan and Tema.

It is found that institutionally, WCA ports structure on colonial legacies from either French or British empires. While the French-model ports operated under a form of hybrid (landlord and service), the British-model operated service ports. Nonetheless, following global economic liberalization, these typical differences have blurred with the ports reforming toward the landlord management model with container terminals concessioned to multinational terminal operators.

The blurring notwithstanding, the emergent environmental reform of the ports is influenced by colonial legacy. The influence stems from the relationship between the ports and national politico-administrative structures, which have enabling and constraining capabilities for environmental reform progress. British-model ports with more flexible politico-administrative arrangements that enable the inclusion of new actors and mechanisms are better suited to pursuing environmental reform than French-model ports with centralized and hierarchical arrangements. The study therefore suggests that flexible politico-administrative arrangements are key to progress with environmental reform in WCA ports. And also with flexibility, the ports can take up and play environmental roles effectively in their endeavour to develop and become competitive. However, these arrangements are mostly beyond the influence of the ports. Another reform strategy, which is more accessible for the ports, is to direct attention at regional and international actors for co-operation and support. Additionally, partnerships with globalized civil society organizations as has been the case in some environmentally advanced ports as Rotterdam (Frantezeskaki, Wittmayer, and Loorbach 2014) can help WCA ports to advance environmentally. Globalized civil society actors can also inspire the interest of local civil society organizations in port environmental issues. Such approaches can be beneficial as WCA ports are themselves willing to address their environmental risks as part of development strategies to become competitive internationally.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.