Environmental Best Practice Port Development: An Analysis of International Approaches

14.

- Summary of Consultation

Consultation Process

A number of key stakeholders were consulted in preparation of this report, including relevant Australian Government and state government departments, industry representatives including Ports Australia and several port authorities, as well as marine scientific experts (see full list below).

Consultation included a stakeholder workshop to discuss the report in detail, identify any additional examples of international best practice that should be included, benchmark current Australian management approaches against the international examples, and discuss the applicability of findings in the report to an Australian context. Workshop attendees were also invited to provide additional information following the workshop. Five submissions were received and comments are included in the summary below.

List of stakeholders consulted

• 
  Australian Government
  

Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority

Department of Infrastructure and Transport

Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Infrastructure Australia

Australian Maritime Safety Authority

Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism

• 
  Queensland Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning
  
• 
  Academic and industry experts from the Gladstone Independent Review / University of Wollongong, James Cook University, Pollution Research P/L, Independent Science Panel – Gladstone Healthy Harbour Partnership
  
• 
  Ports Australia
  
• 
  Queensland Ports Association
  
• 
  North Queensland Bulk Ports
  
• 
  Port of Townsville
  
• 
  Port of Brisbane
  
• 
  Port of Newcastle
  

The purpose of this report was to identify examples of international environmental best practice port development, and benchmark current Australian management approaches against these with consideration to the relevant opportunities and constraints for implementation in Australia.

Examples of Australian management approaches were identified during stakeholder consultation for the purpose of further understanding the context of these international practices. Following this process, Australian practices have been included within the report, however a detailed review of best practice in Australia was outside the scope of this particular piece of work.

A number of themes were raised during the stakeholder consultation process. These include:

• 
  There is a strong interest from key stakeholders to further understand and work towards environmental best practice port development.
  
• 
  The potential benefit of integrating management and planning for port development in Australia, particularly in relation to port master planning.
  
• 
  This report is current now, but will need to be reviewed in the future and progressively updated to keep up with changing technology and practices.
  
• 
  Difference between maximising environmental outcomes and best practice port development.
  
• 
  Monitoring and independent auditing is an important component of undertaking best practice adaptive management at ports (in addition to publishing successes), and should be part of the management cycle.
  
• 
  Management of holding and anchorages.
  
• 
  Management of terrestrial noise and shipping.
  
• 
  Further work is required in future to consider ports in a world heritage area context.
  
• 
  Port practices are site specific to an extent but still enable capturing of lessons and identification of best practice.
  

• 
  Community empowerment, transparency and public reporting as important components of best practice ports governance, planning and environmental management.
  
• 
  The need to engage with port tenants to achieve improved environmental performance and outcomes at ports.
  
• 
  Need for certainty and consistency in regulation.
  

• 
  There are potential legacy issues associated with past site selection of ports. Significant port expansions should consider broader environmental consideration in terms of avoiding irreversible impact, and ultimately revisit if development at the site is still appropriate.
  
• 
  Strategic environmental assessments need to be adaptive and respond to the changing nature of what is acceptable in terms of environmental best practice, by way of adaptive management and established review periods. For example, include conditions that require continuous improvement.
  
• 
  Consideration could be given to the use of strategic environmental assessments to form a model for a more integrated planning and whole-of-government approval process for port development.
  
• 
  Ports master planning needs to clearly articulate short, medium and long-term development vision and intentions. However, long-term planning needs to be coupled with adaptive management and opportunities for review.
  

• 
  Discussion was held on the importance of innovation for developing technology for beneficial re-use of large volumes of clean dredge material. Regulations need to focus on outcomes, not the practice, so that innovation is not stifled.
  
• 
  Need for a risk-based approach to environmental management rather than a ‘one size fits all’ approach.
  
• 
  Need for transparency of assessment decisions for dredging in regulatory processes.
  
• 
  What is best practice in terms of offshore disposal?
  
• 
  There is no Australia-wide organisation that has responsibility or funding for management of monitoring data, or for monitoring requirements of sea dumping and disposal sites. Need for long term monitoring to be conducted and made publically available.
  

• 
  Port monitoring on invasive species is highly beneficial if it is done nationally at all ports, as this data can then be used to inform domestic biosecurity and ballast water risk assessments.
  

• 
  Provision of waste reception facilities alone at ports is not best practice- ports need a segregated recycling and waste management system.
  

• 
  Best practice is a multi-tiered governance response to oil spills. Australia in general is lacking a framework for assessment of risk, and understanding of risk including how long port authorities need to manage emergency situations before further support can arrive.
  
• 
  First strike capability and response time needs to match and be proportional to the local environment and sensitive environmental receptors.
  
• 
  There is a difference between major incident spills, and minor but chronic spills; and subsequently a difference in the appropriate management response.
  
• 
  Further work should be done in this area on best environmental outcomes beyond MNES.