EC issues guidance on sustainability agreement to reduce CO2 emissions in European ports

The European Commission (EC) has issued an informal guidance letter offering clarity on the application of EU competition law to an agreement intended to facilitate the transition to sustainable container-handling equipment at European ports. The agreement involves the joint purchasing and setting of technical specifications for electric container-handling equipment used in ports (specifically, battery-electric straddle and shuttle carriers). Its objective is to accelerate the shift from diesel to electric equipment in EU ports, thereby contributing to the reduction of CO2 emissions.

The Sustainability Agreement

While the EC has yet to publish a non-confidential version of the guidance letter, its accompanying press release indicates that the proposed agreement aims to reduce the costs for port terminal operators by:

• allowing them to pool a part of their future demand of these products; 
• providing suppliers with more predictability about future demand; and 
• improving interoperability, in particular, between charging equipment produced by different suppliers.

According to the EC, the agreement “does not raise concerns” under EU competition rules, provided certain safeguards are included. For example, it must ensure that:

• each participating port terminal operators retains the ability to purchase the products independently;
• the volume of demand that is pooled is capped; and
• the exchange of competitively sensitive information between participating operators remains limited to what is strictly necessary for the functioning of the agreement.

First Letters Under Revised Informal Guidance Notice

The EC issued this guidance letter at the same time as another guidance letter in relation to a licensing negotiation group in the automotive sector. With the latter, the EC aims to contribute to increasing the competitiveness of the EU's automotive sector. These letters represent the first instances of guidance issued under the EC's revised 2022 Notice on Informal Guidance, which allows companies to seek informal guidance from the EC on the application of EU competition rules to novel or unresolved questions. 

The EC's approach to issuing guidance letters in respect of sustainability agreements mirrors that of several national competition agencies across Europe, which have issued similar guidance in recent years. Examples include:

• the Dutch agency's letter regarding plans by the Royal Dutch association for coffee and tea companies to collaborate with coffee producers to recycle coffee capsules; 
• the French agency's guidance to two groups representing companies in the animal nutrition sector regarding guidance for a standardised methodology for calculating a product’s environmental footprint (see our blog post: here); and
• the UK Competition and Markets Authority's guidance on environmental cooperation in the UK construction industry (see our blog post: here).

The approach of these competition agencies to ESG-related collaborations contrasts significantly with that of the US competition agencies, as discussed in our February 2025 blog post on antitrust law and Net Zero Alliances. Since then, the US agencies’ appetite for intervention against such collaborations has heightened (see for example, the Statement of Interest that the FTC, joined by the DOJ, filed in a multistate antitrust case against asset managers BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard in May 2025).

If in Doubt, Seek Guidance

The EC's guidance letters suggest that the EC has joined other competition agencies in Europe in affirming that competition rules should not stand in the way of agreements that contribute towards a more sustainable society - provided certain safeguards are observed. Businesses uncertain about whether their sustainability collaborations comply with competition law should consider discussing their proposals with competition agencies, if relevant. However, those involved in international collaborations should also be mindful of the narrower enforcement stance adopted by competition agencies in other jurisdictions, especially in the United States.