Pilot boat underway in the Baltic Sea Pixabay/Conzales
Pilotage

Pilotage association warns of deregulation's impact on safety and efficiency

Jens Karsten

The International Maritime Pilots’ Association (IMPA) has warned that deregulation and competition in maritime pilotage undermine safety, efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

IMPA said that evidence from multiple jurisdictions shows that such approaches can lead to higher costs, increased incident rates and reduced service quality.

The association commented that pilotage should remain a well-regulated public service, as competition may weaken professional standards, discourage investment in training, and ultimately require greater government intervention.

In contrast, properly regulated systems deliver significant economic, safety and environmental benefits, IMPA added.

"Maritime pilotage is a public, not commercial, service that exists for safety of navigation — protecting people, the environment and trade," IMPA said in a press release published on Tuesday, March 17. "Some jurisdictions are tempted by the idea that deregulation and competition deliver a better service at a lower cost. This is a mistake, and the evidence agrees."

IMPA said decision-makers need to understand that deregulation and competition are not sound policies in pilotage and expose the public and the shipping industry to unnecessary and avoidable risk.

“Where deregulation and competition have been introduced, we see increasing costs and reductions in safety and efficiency," said Captain Simon Pelletier, IMPA President. "In the worst cases, we see systems that fail to adequately protect the public.

"To capture the economic, social and environmental benefits from maritime pilotage, governments must create the right environment. This is what the overwhelming majority of jurisdictions do. The few jurisdictions that have introduced deregulation and competition need to change course."

IMPA said that in one jurisdiction where competition in service delivery was introduced, pilotage fees have doubled since 2018, while the incident rate per port call is 41 times the international average. In another, 60 per cent of maritime safety incidents under pilotage occurred in areas where providers compete against one and other to provide the service.

In another, the main provider's efficiency has declined by nine per cent, and the service's ability to meet total demand has been compromised. In another, deregulation and government profiteering, in combination with a dilution of training and licensing standards, "make it hard to say the service is pilotage," said IMPA.

"Deregulation and competition are not features of mature, high-performing pilotage systems. Because of this, some jurisdictions are very explicit in their position. The European Union’s Port Services Regulation safeguards against competition in maritime pilotage. Alaska and Florida, having experimented with competition in the past, explicitly prohibit the practice because of the threat to public interest."

IMPA added that the systemic risks arise from the negative impact of competition on pilots' professional independence and the incentive for commercial service providers to underinvest in training and professional development. In 2018, KPMG identified under-investment in safety and quality as a reason why competition can be more damaging than a natural monopoly.

"When multiple operators must replicate infrastructure – pilots, pilot boats, training programs and facilities and seek to recover costs from a divided market, costs inevitably go up, not down."

The association said that when the prospect of profit is insufficient, there can be under-provision of pilotage, necessitating government intervention. When providers abuse their market power, the government must intervene again. Deregulation in pilotage therefore creates a greater need for intervention, not less.

"The benefits of a well-regulated system of pilotage are clear," said IMPA. "The most detailed study by economists on the subject, published in 2023, found that every US$1 invested in a well-regulated system returns US$60 in safety and efficiency benefits. Deregulation and competition are the surest route to governments locking themselves and their public out of that opportunity."