Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation

Cruise ships are unfortunately at the infamous forefront of the means of maritime transport emitting the largest amounts of harmful substances into the atmosphere and aquatic environment. At the initiative of IMO and the European Union, formal restrictions were introduced regarding the level of harmful emissions on the high seas and in ports generated by seagoing vessels. To meet these challenges, shipowners have invested in various technological solutions on their ships to reduce the number of harmful emissions, and by ordering new vessels; they promote the use of pro-ecological solutions related to energy saving and eliminate environmental harm. However, despite the actions taken by shipowners, seaports unfortunately lag behind the challenges and expectations of the market and are still not prepared, for example, to power the ships moored in ports with shore-side energy to reduce the environmental pollution when the ships are at berth. The aim of this paper is to identify actions taken by seaport authorities to prepare electricity infrastructure in seaports to power vessels with energy from the land. Key legal restrictions concerning reduction in pollutions emitted from ships in the ports are also described and analyzed. The results of the study also show the approach of seaports to the issue of Onshore Energy Supply for cruise ships. The research was conducted among the selected ports in the Baltic Sea Region where cruise ships are accepted. The following research questions were formulated: (1) What legal regulations oblige seaports and shipowners to reduce the level of pollutions emitted into the environment? (2) Do the ports use a benchmark to assess the level of harmful emissions when defining the amount of port fees for cruise shipowners? (3) How are cruise ships powered in the port? (4) What investments are planned in the port regarding the infrastructure related to the diversification of shore-side electricity for the ships? The studies were conducted by using a few research methods, i.e., the desk research method, the exploration method, and the CAWI Computer Assisted Web Interview. The results of this research can provide an interesting source of information both for cruise ship owners and cruise seaport authorities, but also potentially for shipyards where new vessels are constructed.

Purpose – In the Baltic Sea basin a particularly serious barrier to the development of coastal tourism is its seasonality. Its consequence is a lack of opportunities for sustainable development, which leads to imbalance in terms of local economy, the environment and social inequalities and tensions. The objective of this paper is to present the possible methods of overcoming negative effects of seasonality in the Polish coastal regions, especially in the Pomorskie Voivodship. Methodology – The study used a number of analytical methods based on sources obtained through desk research: the critical analysis of materials from the subject’s literature, statistical reports and an analysis of official documents, normative acts and regional strategies. The empirical part, presented in the form of a case study, was developed on the basis of results of expert interviews, including IDI representative of the regional tourist organization. Findings – Infrastructure used by the coastal tourism sector and the previous offer and practice of coastal tourism on the Polish coast have created mass tourism with neutral price elasticity of demand. Such a character of demand eliminates the effectiveness of some marketing tools. Contribution – Critical analysis of documents from the EU to the local levels of governance of coastal tourism has shown that there is a gap in this linkage of documents. There are not any strategies or plans at the national level dedicated to coastal tourism. This means that the framework of activity set at the supranational level is not effectively used by Poland. Local solutions without national government support may not generate the expected results.

Project management is sufficiently described in the source literature. However, numerous published scientific works refer mainly to examples of good practice in project management in business entities, and unfortunately higher education establishments (HEE) are marginally analysed. Therefore, the analyses defined in study aim to evaluate the performance indicators of project management in universities, on the example of Gdynia Maritime University. In the studies the research in action method was applied as well as the technique of direct interview with project or department managers involved in the project implementation. The analyses covered selected projects that were implemented at the University between 2017 and 2021. Moreover, research questions were formulated, i.e., 1) Which indicators are used to assess the efficiency of project management at HEE?, 2) Does the surveyed HEE analyse the project management efficiency assessment? In order to conduct the study, the Author’s indicators were proposed to assess the efficiency of process management during the implementation of projects in HEE and these were applied in the analysis presented in this article. It was found that the surveyed university does not apply indicators to assess the efficiency of project management. Whereas the usefulness of indicators proposed by the Authors to study the efficiency of project management was confirmed by calculations performed. On these grounds, the Authors recommend the University authorities should consider implementing these indicators.

The Maritime Labour Convention (MLC, 2006) was designed to harmonise minimum standards of working and living conditions at sea across jurisdictions. Despite its near-universal ratification, significant disparities in labour conditions persist, indicating limited effectiveness in the implementation of the regulatory framework. This article aims to explain this paradox by analysing the MLC through the lens of institutional economics and multi-level governance. In particular, the study examines how the institutional structure of the system—encompassing both public and private actors—affects the effectiveness of enforcement. It advances the argument that the limitations of the MLC do not stem from insufficient regulatory harmonisation, but rather from the system’s limited capacity to generate sufficiently high and consistent costs of non-compliance. The analysis demonstrates that the hybrid and multi-level governance structure gives rise to three types of institutional gaps: vertical, horizontal, and perceptual. Drawing on data from Port State Control (PSC) regimes, the study shows that deficiencies related to working conditions are relatively frequently identified, whereas detentions—representing the primary enforcement mechanism associated with significant economic costs—remain relatively limited and uneven across regions. The findings reveal a systematic asymmetry between the detection of violations and their sanctioning. This asymmetry lowers the expected cost of non-compliance, weakens the deterrent function of regulation, and creates conditions conducive to regulatory arbitrage. At the same time, the analysis suggests that, in certain contexts, market-based mechanisms may generate stronger incentives for compliance than fragmented public enforcement systems. The contribution of this article is threefold: (1) it develops a conceptual framework of three types of institutional gaps, (2) it links these gaps to regulatory arbitrage from a transaction cost perspective, and (3) it provides empirical evidence of enforcement asymmetry based on PSC data. The findings suggest that improving the effectiveness of the MLC requires strengthening enforcement mechanisms and increasing the credibility and consistency of sanctions, rather than further expanding regulatory standards alone. The aim of this study is to identify and classify the key gaps in the implementation of the MLC and to explain how the configuration of these gaps enables institutional arbitration. The identified configuration of vertical, horizontal, and perceptual gaps, reinforced by variation in enforcement capacities, explains why the MLC, despite widespread ratification, fails. Sustainable improvement requires the simultaneous closure of legal and practical gaps, as well as the limitation of institutional arbitration throughout the entire employment chain.