Posts to appear on the #DidYouKnow section of the website

Beyond Intelligence: What Should We Teach When Thinking Is No Longer Scarce?

/in , , , ,

Odiseo · Issue 60 | Autumn 2026

In the third issue of Garimau, the communication scholar Salvador Doblas Arrebola reflects on young people, education and artificial intelligence. His answers are worth reading slowly, and worth arguing with.

Written by: Eduard Rodés, Director of the Escola Europea

Before writing about education and artificial intelligence, it is worth asking who will read this. You are probably reading on a screen, between two other things. You may already have asked an AI a question this week. And there is a fair chance you are giving these lines less attention than you would like, because everything around them is competing for it too.

That is not a complaint. It is simply where we are, and it should change how an article like this is written. If the reader lives in noise, the text cannot add to it. It should slow down, ask more than it answers, and leave some room to think. McLuhan told us the medium is the message. An article about critical thinking that only delivered conclusions would contradict itself before the second paragraph.

So this is less a summary than a conversation with a friend’s ideas.

A line of free verse

Salvador Doblas Arrebola holds a doctorate in Communication and a Master’s in Strategic Management and Innovation in Communication. He teaches Advertising Creativity at the Faculty of Communication and Marketing, and on the Master’s in Cognitive Sciences, both at the University of Málaga. He is also someone who walks, dances, meditates and gives time to philanthropic projects, and who says, without irony, that teaching, research and communication are not three jobs but one vocation.

Salvador Doblas Arrebola with his students

Salvador Doblas Arrebola with his students.

He is, in the Spanish expression, a verso suelto: a line of free verse that refuses to rhyme with the rest. That is exactly why he fits so naturally in Garimau, a magazine that lives somewhere between art and thought. His interview in issue no. 3 is gentle in tone and demanding in substance. What follows is my reading of it, and my own translations of his words.

Doubt as a method

As freethinkers and, I hope, as humanists, we look at the world in order to keep doubting. Doubt is not a weakness. It is the force that sends us looking for new answers when the old ones stop working. It is also the right way to read Salvador: not to agree with him, but to think alongside him.

His starting point is Paulo Freire’s idea that nobody educates anybody else; people educate one another, through the world they share. From there he draws a clear picture of what young people need. Information is not enough; it is everywhere. They need orientation, meaning and ethical references, and help to think, discern and build a conscious relationship with themselves and with the world. Every student, he says, brings a story, a question and a particular way of looking.

This is where critical thinking stops being a subject and becomes a condition. Without it, everything else a young person learns is exposed to manipulation, to the bubble, to the slow flattening of thought that Salvador warns about later in the interview.

And there is an uncomfortable consequence. If we want young people to think critically, we need teachers who do, and who know how to pass it on. These are competences, not personal virtues, and they can be trained. Yet teacher training rarely addresses them. So the question is not only what we teach young people. It is who teaches the teachers to doubt.

Here a little Socratic irony is useful. Can we really change people, and the world? Every educator hopes so. But transformation has an uncomfortable twin, and its name is indoctrination. History is full of people who knew exactly how humanity should be improved, and who were capable of the worst precisely because they were so sure. Socrates’ way out was to know that he did not know. Perhaps the only legitimate way to change someone is to help them resist being changed, including by us.

Salvador’s own formula for the teacher is elegant: demanding but close, clear but flexible, able to build trust without losing depth. Each pair holds two forces in balance, and I would sign it. But I wonder whether balance is enough. Today’s teacher may need to be more polyfaceted:

  • able to say “I don’t know” in public
  • able to be wrong in front of a class, and to show how one corrects oneself
  • able to cause useful discomfort, not only to build trust
  • present with the body as well as the word
  • able to listen, which is more than being close

Salvador himself says that the teacher learns in every classroom. That idea deserves to be the formula’s first line, not its footnote.

Connection is not conversation

Salvador is precise about technology. The medium, he reminds us, is never a neutral channel: it shapes how we look and what we pay attention to. With Sherry Turkle, he warns that constant but fragmented connection can quietly replace conversation, and with it the human density of real encounter, which needs time, attention and a certain vulnerability. His conclusion is not to reject technology. It is to stop it from replacing the most valuable part of what happens between people.

Beyond intelligence

On artificial intelligence, Salvador’s stance is prudence and interest at once. It is a powerful tool for analysis, production and organisation, but it cannot replace human perspective or critical judgement. The question, he says, is not what technology can do, but what we decide to do with it. Used with judgement, it expands what we can do. Adopted without reflection, it impoverishes language, homogenises thought and weakens us as subjects.

In Odiseo we asked, in the spring of 2023, what AI would cost us. This autumn we explained why the Escola now teaches it rather than ignoring it. I want to push the question one step further, because most of today’s debate quietly assumes that AI will stay roughly as it is: a tool, in our hands.

What if it doesn’t? What if its cognitive capacity keeps growing, and matches or overtakes ours in more and more fields? Then the question changes.

It is no longer how to use the tool well, but what education is for, once intelligence is no longer scarce.

That is the question behind Education Beyond Intelligence, the programme we will run on board this October. Its modules are about what lies beyond intelligence:

  • theatre, to work on body, presence and action
  • music, to work on listening, attention and inner discipline
  • ethics and emotions, to work on responsibility and the common good
  • learning how to learn, and understanding how teams actually work

None of this competes with a machine. All of it becomes more important as machines improve. Salvador asks what place we want to keep for consciousness, creativity and human responsibility. I cannot think of a better syllabus.

Did you know?

Odiseo first asked what artificial intelligence would cost us in its Spring 2023 issue. Three years later, the question has changed: not what AI costs, but what education is for.

On what ground do we build?

Salvador believes the future will be different and more mediated by technology, but not automatically better or worse. The challenge, he says, is human rather than technical: what kind of coexistence do we want?

It is worth noticing what he does not mention. There is no religion in his answers. His foundations are education, judgement, responsibility, and a sensitivity that is almost spiritual. For centuries, religions provided much of the shared ground on which values were built. If that ground is no longer common, what replaces it? Can humanism alone carry the weight? I do not know. I suspect the question matters more than any quick answer.

What I do see is that the ground is shifting. More and more is built on fictitious realities. Truth risks becoming whatever the majority happens to believe. Reactionary movements grow by offering simple certainties in an uncertain world. The information bubbles Salvador cites from Eli Pariser are not a technical detail; they are the machinery of this process, because they only let us meet people who already agree with us.

On board, we will try something modest in response. Each participant will write before reading anyone else, so that every voice exists before the group can absorb it. People will be paired for contrast, not affinity. Disagreement will be recorded and kept, not dissolved into consensus. And signing the final declaration will be voluntary, with declining counted as a legitimate choice. None of this hands anyone the truth. It builds the conditions for people to think for themselves in front of others. That may be the only foundation that does not harden into dogma.

Building paths

At the Escola we try to build paths with teachers and with students, rather than handing them a route already drawn. Our scale is limited, and so is our capacity. But every achievement counts, and there is one way to multiply it: through teachers. Each teacher who learns to doubt, to listen and to accompany will reach students we will never meet. That is why training trainers matters so much to us, and why our CHIRON network of specialised teachers exists.

From where I stand, training professionals in logistics, transport and trade, AI is already changing jobs and skills. The answer cannot only be technical. It has to be humanist: educating people who can judge, decide and take responsibility, precisely because machines will increasingly do the rest. Caminante, no hay camino, se hace camino al andar, wrote Machado. There is no path; the path is made by walking.

A serene resistance

Salvador closes his interview with an idea I would like to keep. In times of haste, noise and excess stimulus, defending sensitivity, beauty and critical thinking is a form of serene resistance. He borrows a question from Manly P. Hall: what could be nobler than to bring light to ignorance? And he adds that knowledge only reaches its true height when it becomes wisdom, understanding and a more lucid life.

Next month we set sail for Civitavecchia, Palermo and Genoa. Cavafy would remind us that the voyage matters more than the arrival. The same is true of this question. We will not settle what education is for once intelligence is no longer scarce. But we can keep asking it well, in good company, one classroom at a time.

Visit - Energy Transition course

800,000 Seafarers Short: The Workforce Question Behind Shipping’s Net-Zero Bet

/in , , , , , ,

Sailing Ahead — Research

Shipping is placing one of the biggest regulatory bets in its history. Almost nobody is talking about who’s actually going to run the ships once it lands.

Written by Lidia Slawinska, Communications Manager – Escola Europea Intermodal Transport

In April 2025, the International Maritime Organization approved the first global framework requiring the shipping industry to cut its greenhouse gas emissions on a legally binding timeline — a Net-Zero Framework covering every oceangoing ship over 5,000 gross tonnage. Ships will have to report their fuel emissions intensity annually, meet progressively stricter limits, and either adopt cleaner fuels or pay into a compliance fund that finances the transition industry-wide. Formal adoption, originally expected in October 2025, has since been pushed into 2026, but the direction isn’t in question: the industry is decarbonizing, on a clock it doesn’t fully control.

What the framework’s supporters rarely dwell on is who’s going to crew this transition.

That’s not a hypothetical for some future decade, either. The industry’s own 2026 Seafarer Workforce Report, published by BIMCO and the International Chamber of Shipping in June, puts the current global seafarer workforce at 2.57 million people crewing 85,148 merchant ships — and finds it’s already short by 39,100 STCW-certified officers this year. Demand for officers has climbed 23.1% since 2021, for ratings 46.3%. Left unaddressed, the same report projects the industry will need 113,735 additional officers by 2030, just to keep the existing fleet running — before a single net-zero fuel enters the equation.

Research commissioned for the Maritime Just Transition Task Force estimates that

roughly 800,000 seafarers will need additional training by the mid-2030s to safely operate vessels running on zero or near-zero emission fuels.

That’s not a rounding error, on a workforce that’s already stretched thin. It’s a training and hiring problem roughly the size of a mid-sized country’s active military, layered on top of a shortage the industry hasn’t solved yet.

Not just new fuels — new skills

The gap isn’t just about learning to handle ammonia or methanol instead of heavy fuel oil, either. A 2026 academic study mapping “twin transition” skills — green and digital competencies together — across maritime firms in Bulgaria, Cyprus and Greece found that 83% of the skills most in demand for the industry’s highest-priority roles combine environmental knowledge with technical or digital ones: reading emissions data, managing automated systems, understanding regulatory standards well enough to keep a ship compliant, not just afloat.

Roughly a third of in-demand skills were purely environmental, another quarter purely digital, and the rest — the hardest roles to hire for — required both at once. Employers in the study reported persistent difficulty recruiting for exactly these blended positions, at every level from engineering officers with master’s degrees to vocationally trained technical crew.

Did you know?

The Maritime Just Transition Task Force was established at COP26 in 2021 by shipowners, seafarer unions and the IMO together — built on the principle that decarbonization should leave “no one behind.”

The fleet is already changing

The pressure isn’t waiting for the mid-2030s to arrive. DNV’s newbuild data shows alternative-fuel vessels accounted for 38% of the gross tonnage ordered in 2025 — 188 LNG-fuelled ships alone made up 31% of that, alongside 61 methanol orders (down from 149 the year before) and only limited uptake so far for ammonia and LPG. Compare that to the ships already on the water: as of August 2025, DNV counted 1,794 alternative-fuel-capable vessels in operation, against a global fleet of over 85,000 merchant ships — roughly 2%. Every new vessel ordered today needs a crew that can run it safely well before its keel is even laid, which means the training has to arrive faster than the ships do, not after them.

Regulators are racing the same clock

To their credit, regulators and unions both seem to know the clock is the problem. The IMO is revising the STCW — the international treaty setting minimum seafarer training standards — with input from shipowners and the International Transport Workers’ Federation, whose General Secretary Stephen Cotton has framed the moment as an opportunity rather than a threat:

“Seafarers are ready to lead, they are ready to shape the training frameworks for the zero carbon fuels of the future.”

A baseline training framework was slated for completion by mid-2025, with pilot testing beginning in Asia ahead of wider rollout. Whether “no one is left behind” turns out to be true will depend less on the regulation itself than on how fast training capacity can actually scale to meet it.

Training is starting to catch up

Some of the response is already visible. The IMO’s GreenVoyage2050 programme, working with GIZ’s International Power-to-X Hub, launched a Training-of-Trainers programme in July 2025 to build local capacity for teaching alternative-fuel safety in developing countries. Alongside it, the Global Industry Alliance to Support Low Carbon Shipping has built an Alternative Fuels Learning Portal for seafarers, harbour masters, shore staff and policymakers — its methanol module went live at the end of 2025, with ammonia and hydrogen modules due through 2026. Classification societies are moving in parallel: DNV runs its own Maritime Academy with dedicated alternative-fuels coursework for the surveyors and crew who’ll certify and operate these ships. None of it closes a six-figure gap by itself. But it’s a reasonable sketch of what closing it will actually take: coordinated, sustained, and running years ahead of the regulation’s own deadlines.

A logistics problem, in the most literal sense

It’s a useful reminder, for anyone in the business of training people for ports and ships, that the hardest problems in a transition like this one aren’t only technical. They’re logistical, in the most literal sense: getting the right training to the right people before a deadline that’s already been set — and, increasingly, before a shortage that’s already here.

Phygital learning - theory, simulation and experience

#DidYouKnow: The Future of Education Is Phygital

/in , , ,

Future of Education

Why tomorrow’s learning will be shorter, more simulated, more personalised, and more connected to real professional environments.

By Lidia Slawinska

Written by Lidia Slawinska, Communications Manager – Escola Europea Intermodal Transport

Did you know that the most important classroom of the next decade may not be a classroom at all?

It may be a short online module completed before work. A simulator where a learner can make decisions without real-world risk. A practical workshop where professionals test what they have learned together. A digital platform that follows their progress. A face-to-face discussion where information becomes judgement.

For years, the conversation about education has been framed as a choice between two worlds: online or in person. Digital or physical. Flexible or human. Efficient or experiential.

But I increasingly think this is the wrong question.

The future of education will not be defined by whether learning happens on a screen or in a room. It will be defined by how intelligently we connect different learning spaces. In other words, the future of education is not simply digital. It is phygital.

And no, I do not mean that every course needs an app, a headset, or a virtual campus. The word can easily become another piece of innovation jargon. But used properly, it describes something very practical: a learning model that combines the flexibility of digital tools with the depth of physical experience.

A phygital approach asks a simple question:

What should happen online, what should happen in simulation, and what must still happen face to face?

That question matters more than ever.

Phygital learning - theory, simulation and experience

Shorter does not mean shallower

One of the clearest changes in education today is the move towards shorter, more modular learning. Traditional degrees and long programmes still matter, of course. They provide structure, depth and recognised qualifications. But professional life no longer waits patiently for people to update their knowledge every five or ten years.

Skills expire faster. Technologies change faster. Regulations evolve faster. Entire sectors are being reshaped by artificial intelligence, climate transition, digitalisation and new forms of work.

The World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs Report 2025 identifies technological change, geoeconomic fragmentation, economic uncertainty, demographic shifts and the green transition as major forces expected to reshape labour markets by 2030.

In that context, education cannot only be something we complete before entering the workforce. It has to become something we return to continuously.

This is one reason why micro-credentials and short learning experiences are gaining momentum. The European Commission defines micro-credentials as certifications of learning outcomes from short-term learning experiences, such as short courses or training, designed to offer flexible and targeted ways to develop knowledge, skills and competences.

But shorter learning should not mean lighter learning.

A short course can be superficial if it is just content compressed into fewer hours. But it can also be powerful if it is carefully designed around one clear competence, one professional challenge, or one operational decision. The question is not how long learning lasts. The question is whether it changes what the learner can understand, decide or do.

In the future, the strongest learning journeys may not be the longest ones. They may be the best sequenced ones.

The simulator as a third space

Between the classroom and the workplace, another learning environment is becoming increasingly important: the simulator.

Simulation is not new. Aviation, healthcare, maritime operations, emergency response and industrial training have used simulation for years. What is changing is its relevance beyond highly specialised technical training.

Simulators offer something that traditional education often struggles to provide: consequence without catastrophe.

Learners can test a decision, see what happens, repeat the scenario, compare outcomes and reflect on their choices. They can experience complexity earlier, but without the real-world risk.

That makes simulation particularly relevant for the future of professional education.

Many of the skills we now need are not purely theoretical. They are situational. They involve coordination, timing, judgement and communication. You cannot fully learn them by reading a manual. You have to practise them in a context that feels close enough to reality to matter.

This is where the phygital model becomes interesting. The online module can prepare the learner. The simulator can create the scenario. The face-to-face session can turn the experience into shared reflection. The workplace can then become the place where learning is applied.

Each space has a role.

Did you know?

Simulation-based learning allows professionals to practise decisions in complex environments before applying them in real operations. In sectors where mistakes are costly, dangerous or difficult to reverse, this can make learning both safer and more meaningful.

Online learning is not the enemy of human learning

After the pandemic, many people became tired of online learning. Understandably so. Too many digital courses were simply classroom sessions moved onto a screen, with little redesign. Too many webinars confused attendance with engagement.

But that does not mean online learning failed. It means that poor design failed.

Digital learning works best when it does what the physical classroom does not need to do. It can prepare, personalise, archive, repeat, translate and support. It can give learners access to material before they meet. It can help people learn at different speeds. It can reduce unnecessary travel. It can make international and cross-sector learning more accessible.

The OECD’s Trends Shaping Education 2025 asks how advances in artificial intelligence, virtual reality and other technologies could transform teaching and learning in the years ahead.

That question should not lead us to adopt technology for its own sake. A PDF uploaded to a platform is not digital transformation. A recorded lecture is not necessarily innovation. A multiple-choice quiz is not automatically assessment.

The real opportunity is to use digital tools to support a wider learning architecture. Online learning should not replace human contact where human contact matters. It should protect it.

If learners arrive in the room already prepared, the physical session can be used for discussion, debate, practice and reflection. The classroom no longer has to be the place where information is delivered. It can become the place where meaning is created.

Face-to-face learning becomes more valuable, not less

There is a paradox in the future of education: the more digital learning becomes, the more precious good face-to-face learning may become.

Not every meeting needs to be physical. Not every explanation needs to happen in person. Not every lecture deserves a room.

But some things are still deeply human.

Trust. Mentoring. Conflict resolution. Professional identity. Negotiation. Leadership. Informal exchange. The confidence that comes from standing next to someone experienced and seeing how they read a situation.

These things are difficult to download.

So perhaps the future is not about defending the classroom as it was. It is about using physical learning moments more intentionally.

The classroom of the future may be less about rows of people receiving information and more about groups of people solving problems together. It may be less about presentation and more about participation. Less about the teacher as the only source of knowledge, and more about the educator as a designer of learning experiences.

That is a much more demanding role.

When information becomes abundant, the educator’s role shifts from delivering content to helping learners make sense of it.

AI will change education, but not in the way we think

No reflection on the future of education can ignore artificial intelligence.

AI will undoubtedly change how people learn. It can help generate explanations, translate content, provide feedback, adapt exercises, summarise materials and support learners outside formal teaching hours.

But AI also forces us to be honest about what education is for.

If a machine can produce an answer, then education cannot only be about producing answers. It must be about asking better questions, evaluating sources, recognising bias, applying knowledge, making ethical decisions and understanding consequences.

In this sense, AI may make human judgement more important, not less.

The educator’s role will change from delivering information to helping learners navigate abundance. When content is everywhere, curation becomes essential. When answers are instant, critical thinking becomes essential. When tools are powerful, responsibility becomes essential.

The future learner will not simply need to know how to use AI. They will need to know when not to trust it.

From courses to learning journeys

The word “course” may also need to evolve.

A course suggests a beginning and an end. A learning journey suggests progression, return, connection and accumulation. This is closer to what professional development now requires.

A learner might begin with a short online introduction, complete a simulation, attend a workshop, receive feedback, apply the knowledge at work, return later for a more advanced module, and eventually build a recognised pathway of competences.

This is not less rigorous than traditional education. If well designed, it can be more relevant.

But it requires a different mindset from institutions, companies and learners. We need to stop thinking of learning as a product that is delivered once and start thinking of it as a system that supports people over time.

UNESCO’s Futures of Education initiative argues that education must be reimagined with a long-term view of its purposes, functions and processes, especially as societies face technological, environmental and social transformation.

That wider perspective is important. The future of education should not only be about efficiency, employability or technology. It should also be about participation, resilience, cooperation and the ability to live and work responsibly in complex systems.

The phygital promise

The phygital future of education is not about choosing between old and new. It is about designing better connections between them.

The screen can prepare.

The simulator can test.

The classroom can connect.

The workplace can transform.

That, for me, is the real promise.

Not education that is shorter for the sake of being short. Not digital because digital sounds modern. Not in-person because that is how things have always been done.

But learning that is more intentional.

Learning that understands when people need flexibility and when they need presence. When they need information and when they need practice. When they need speed and when they need depth. When they need technology and when they need another person beside them.

The future of education is not online.

It is not in person.

It is not even hybrid, if hybrid only means dividing hours between a platform and a classroom.

The future of education is phygital: connected, practical, human, flexible and designed around the way people actually learn.

And if we get it right, it will not make education less human.

It will make the human moments matter more.

Port decarbonisation is, before anything else, a transition of competences

/in , , , , ,

Voices from the Field · Port2Zero · Mediterranean

Short-sea shipping is paying the cost of a poorly calibrated regulatory transition. Eduard Rodés argues that the real test of Europe’s maritime climate agenda will not be settled only in Brussels, but in the classrooms, terminals and engine rooms where the people who make decarbonisation work are being trained — or not.

By Eduard Rodés, Director of the Escola Europea – Intermodal Transport

“Port decarbonisation is, before anything else, a transition of competences. Without prepared professionals, no policy works — however well calibrated.”

A regime change, not a downturn

The numbers from the 2025 Short Sea Shipping Statistical Observatory leave little room for ambiguity. Between 2013 and 2019, short-sea traffic in Spain grew by an average of 7.8% a year, slightly ahead of road haulage; the correlation between the two modes ran at +0.95. From 2021 onward the picture inverts: short-sea contracts by 2.3% annually while road grows by 2.1%, and the correlation turns negative.

The timing is precise. It coincides with the entry into force of IMO 2020, the maritime ETS and FuelEU Maritime. “It is not a cyclical adjustment,” says Eduard Rodés, Director of the Escola Europea – Intermodal Transport. “It is a regime change. And denying the correlation would be naïve.”

The reading is uncomfortable but lucid. The maritime ETS is not, in his words, a bad instrument: the principle of internalising the cost of emissions is sound. The problem is asymmetry. The ship already pays 70% of the carbon cost in 2025 and 100% from January 2026, while road haulage still does not internalise its externalities at the same intensity. The mode that is most efficient per tonne-kilometre is becoming the most penalised per regulated tonne of CO2. That paradox, Rodés insists, is what the 2026 ETS review must resolve.

If it does not, sector estimates point to up to a quarter of short-sea traffic potentially returning to the road. “If that happens, the Union’s climate balance gets worse, not better. No sensible policy should allow that.”

The geography moves south

The data also tells a story of redistribution. Belgium falls 26%, France 10%, Italy 6%; Morocco grows 5%. The Atlantic loses more than the Mediterranean because Atlantic distances are longer — and the ETS penalises both distance and consumption. But there is a deeper signal: the southern shore of the Mediterranean is gaining weight because its traffic does not yet enter the same European regulatory cost regime, and because the underlying economic demand is real, tied to near-shoring and to the growth of Maghreb economies.

“Short-sea shipping is not disappearing,” Rodés says. “It is reorganising. The centre of gravity of Spanish short-sea is tilting southward, and for ports that read it well, that is an opportunity.”

That reading is not abstract. The Escola has been building a Mediterranean training network for two decades, with active programmes in Tangier Med, Tunisia, Algeria and Senegal, and a co-founding role in PLIKA — an international collaborative network of training centres anchored in port communities. The Mediterranean is not, in this view, a market to be exploited from the north shore: it is a single basin whose decarbonisation will only succeed if both shores advance together.

“The most fuel-efficient mode per tonne-kilometre is becoming the most penalised per regulated tonne of CO2. That is the paradox the 2026 review has to resolve.”

The point regulation cannot reach

There is, however, a part of the transition that no carbon pricing scheme can deliver on its own. It is the part that happens after the policy is written.

A vessel cannot connect to onshore power supply unless the crew knows how to do it safely. A FuelEU Maritime compliance file does not produce itself: it requires port operators who understand the regulation, technicians who can manage the documentation, and shipping agents who can advise their clients on pooling and banking mechanisms. Alternative fuels — methanol, ammonia, hydrogen — are not deployed by infrastructure alone; they are deployed by people who know how to bunker them, store them, account for them and certify them. Eco-incentives are designed by administrations but applied by professionals who must understand exactly what qualifies and what does not.

Port professionals participating in technical training at a modern Mediterranean port
The transition to greener ports is not only about infrastructure and regulation — it also depends on the people who operate, manage and maintain increasingly complex systems.

“This is what we call, at the Escola, the transition of competences,” Rodés explains. “Port decarbonisation is, before anything else, a transition of competences. Without prepared professionals, no policy works — however well calibrated.”

The phrase is more than a slogan. It is the diagnosis on which the Escola has been building its programmes for twenty years, and the spine of where it is heading now.

Key idea

Regulation can set the direction of the energy transition, but it cannot implement it alone. The decisive question is whether port communities have the competences to turn climate policy into operational reality.

A training architecture for the transition

The Escola’s response to the energy transition takes shape in PORT2ZERO, a portfolio of four courses designed to prepare professionals for the operational realities of decarbonising ports. PORTPLUG covers onshore power supply. FUELSHIFT addresses alternative marine fuels. GREENPORT OPS focuses on port energy efficiency. PORTGRID tackles the governance of port energy communities and smart grids — the area where ports stop being passive consumers and become active nodes in regional energy systems.

PORT2ZERO does not stand alone. It connects to a wider training architecture that the Escola has been building for two decades: MOST for short-sea shipping, SURCO for rail intermodality, Forma’t al Port for port vocational pathways, Port Virtual Lab for the digital layer that all of the above increasingly require. The logic is to treat decarbonisation not as a vertical specialism but as a competence running across every layer of a port community — from dockers to traffic managers, from customs agents to shipping company directors.

This logic is also the one informing the Escola’s reference framework, the EEIT-CSTP Competence and Skills Training Programme, which maps eight thematic areas across four EQF levels and gives institutional ports, companies and training providers a common language for what a professional should know and be able to do at each stage of their career. Energy transition, connectivity, environment and resilience are not separate silos in that framework — they are the axes along which the same person must grow.

“The Atlantic loses more than the Mediterranean. But the deeper signal is that the southern shore is gaining weight — and Spanish ports that read it well will find an opportunity there.”

The question Europe will have to answer

The European Union has spent twenty years saying it wanted more short-sea shipping. The 2026 ETS review is the moment to demonstrate whether the policies being applied are coherent with that discourse — whether they include a safeguard mechanism against modal back-shift, a visible reinvestment of maritime ETS revenue into port decarbonisation, and a consistency between the cost burden placed on the mode and the strategic role assigned to it in the TEN-T network and the Motorways of the Sea.

But there is a part of the answer that does not depend on Brussels. It depends on whether, when those policies are properly calibrated, there will be enough trained professionals on the quayside, on the bridge, in the control rooms and in the corridors of the port authorities to make them work in practice.

“That is what the Escola can guarantee,” Rodés concludes. “When the policies are calibrated well, there will be people prepared to make them work. The transition of competences is not a consequence of the energy transition. It is its condition.”

Escola Europea – Intermodal Transport · Voices from the Field

MSC joins Escola Europea’s “Forma’t al Port” programme as a new sponsor

/in , , ,

MSC joins the Escola Europea’s Forma’t al Port programme as a new sponsor, strengthening collaboration between the logistics sector and education to support young talent.

Read more

The Invisible Infrastructure of the Blue Economy

/in , , , , , ,
Written by Lidia Slawinska

Written by Lidia Slawinska, Communications Manager – Escola Europea Intermodal Transport

When we think about ports, the images that come to mind are often physical ones: cranes moving containers across terminals, vessels docking along quays, trucks and trains carrying cargo inland. For centuries, maritime logistics has been defined by these visible infrastructures—steel, concrete, and water routes connecting continents.

Yet today, much of the real infrastructure that makes global maritime trade possible is no longer visible.

Behind the movement of ships and cargo lies a rapidly expanding layer of digital systems, shared data platforms, and collaborative networks. These systems do not move containers directly, but they increasingly determine how efficiently, safely, and sustainably those containers move through the global supply chain. In other words, the digital blue economy is building a new kind of maritime infrastructure – one that exists largely in the background, but increasingly shapes the way ports function.

Ports as Information Hubs

Modern ports generate enormous volumes of data. Vessel arrival times, cargo documentation, terminal operations, customs procedures, and hinterland transport movements all create information that must be coordinated among multiple stakeholders.

To manage this complexity, many ports have developed Port Community Systems (PCS) – digital platforms that allow port authorities, shipping companies, freight forwarders, customs agencies, and logistics operators to exchange information in real time. According to the World Bank, these systems act as collaborative digital environments that streamline communication and coordination between the many actors operating within a port ecosystem.

The impact can be significant. By centralising and standardising information flows, PCS platforms reduce paperwork, accelerate decision-making, and improve visibility across the supply chain. They transform ports from places where information is fragmented into integrated digital hubs.

In many ways, this invisible infrastructure is becoming just as important as the physical one.

From Terminals to Digital Ecosystems

The digitalisation of ports is part of a broader transformation taking place across maritime logistics. Researchers increasingly describe this process as a systemic shift in the way port logistics are designed and coordinated, driven by data integration and digital technologies embedded across supply chain operations.

Leading ports around the world – from Singapore and Rotterdam to Los Angeles – are now developing what are often referred to as “smart port ecosystems.” These combine automation, artificial intelligence, data integration, and digital platforms to improve operational efficiency and resilience.

But the most important change is not technological alone. It lies in how these systems enable collaboration.

Ports are complex environments involving public authorities, shipping lines, terminal operators, logistics companies, and transport providers. Digital platforms allow these actors to share operational data, coordinate schedules, and anticipate disruptions in ways that were difficult to achieve just a decade ago.

In this sense, the digital blue economy is not simply about installing new technologies—it is about creating shared information environments that support collective decision-making across the maritime ecosystem.

A Growing Sector

The importance of these developments becomes clearer when viewed within the broader context of the blue economy.

According to the European Commission’s EU Blue Economy Report, maritime sectors – from transport and shipbuilding to renewable energy and coastal tourism – represent a significant economic ecosystem within Europe. Established blue economy sectors alone employed around 3.6 million people across the EU in recent years, highlighting the scale and economic relevance of these activities.

Within this landscape, ports play a central role as gateways between maritime and land-based logistics systems. As digitalisation advances, their ability to manage data, coordinate stakeholders, and integrate technologies will increasingly determine how competitive and resilient maritime trade networks become.

In other words, the digital layer supporting port operations is no longer optional – it is becoming foundational.

The Human Element Behind the Digital Port

Despite the technological emphasis often associated with smart ports, digital transformation is not simply about installing platforms or adopting new tools.

Successful digital ecosystems depend on people who understand how to use data, interpret complex systems, and collaborate across institutional boundaries. Governance structures, shared standards, and trust between stakeholders remain essential elements of any digital infrastructure.

Technology can connect systems, but it is collaboration that allows them to function effectively.

This is perhaps one of the most important lessons emerging from the digital blue economy: innovation in maritime logistics does not happen in isolation. It happens when ports, companies, and institutions work together to build shared environments where information can move as freely as cargo.

Seeing the Unseen

The cranes and vessels will always remain the most visible symbols of maritime trade. But increasingly, the efficiency of ports depends on something less tangible: the invisible architecture of data, platforms, and collaboration networks operating behind the scenes.

As maritime logistics continues to evolve, the challenge will not only be to invest in physical infrastructure, but also to strengthen these digital foundations.

Because in the ports of the future, the most important infrastructure may be the one we cannot see.

Sources

Don’t just take our word for it – explore the sources shaping this conversation:

Editorial note
This article was developed with the assistance of AI-based writing tools and verified against the sources listed above.

The Human Side of Digitalisation: A Conversation with Jaime Luezas

/in , , , ,

As the maritime and logistics sectors accelerate their digital transition, one idea is becoming increasingly clear: true transformation is not about technology alone. While systems become more advanced and interoperability grows more feasible, the real barriers – and opportunities – lie elsewhere.

To understand where the future is headed, Odiseo spoke with Jaime Luezas, Head of Port Community Services at Puertos del Estado (Spain) and one of the leading voices in port digitalisation. In this conversation, he reflects on the shift from documents to data spaces, the critical role of semantic standards, and why emotional intelligence may be just as important as artificial intelligence.

 

De izquierda a derecha: Antonio Vargas, Alexandre Ariza y Jaime Luezas durante el curso MOST

Below is the full interview.

Conversation with Jaime Luezas, Head of Port Community Services, Puertos del Estado (Spain)

Q: We often talk about sharing, committing and cooperating, yet when it comes to sharing data, there seems to be a reluctance. From your perspective, what is the current state of play, and how should we approach the future?

Jaime Luezas:
In my view, the technical problem has already been solved. Today, interoperability between different systems is technologically possible—even if those systems were developed separately or use different architectures. The real challenges are semantic interoperability and trust.

Semantic interoperability means that we all understand data in the same way. This requires ontology, common definitions and international standards, which are still under development. And then there is trust—not only between companies, but between people. Digitalisation also involves emotional management.

Q: In the past, initiatives like eb-XML attempted to create data dictionaries and harmonisation mechanisms. Is that approach still relevant?

Jaime Luezas:
The technology may have evolved, but the principle remains the same: either we agree on a common data standard, or we build translation mechanisms. Artificial intelligence can help automate translations, but the underlying semantic exercise still needs to be done.

Q:There is often confusion between digitisation and digitalisation. How should we define these concepts?

Jaime Luezas:
In English, we differentiate between digitization and digitalization.

Digitization is simply converting analog information, such as paper documents, into digital form.

Digitalization is much deeper—it means structuring business processes around data, rather than documents. That is where true transformation happens.

Q: You have worked extensively on the concept of data as the fundamental unit, beyond traditional documents like the customs declaration (DUA). How should we think about that?

Jaime Luezas:
Exactly. The DUA is a document, yes, but ultimately it is just a set of data elements. The future lies in exchanging those data elements directly, rather than sending whole documents.

Q: We are moving toward smart ports and increasingly complex logistics environments. What role does training play in this transition?

Jaime Luezas:
Training is essential. First, to understand the technology and governance models of data exchange, and to remove the fear of sharing information. Second, because training creates human connection. It builds trust and emotional intelligence—without that, digitalisation will not succeed.

Q: Simple has been a key driver of recent developments. Will it also transform logistics chains and sustainability efforts?

Jaime Luezas:
Yes. Simple provides the platform that connects systems and enables interoperability. Its success will be reinforced by new legislation such as the Sustainable Mobility Law and the mandatory use of electronic control documents. These changes will accelerate digital transformation across the logistics chain.

Q: What do you think are the main challenges for port communities over the next five years?

Jaime Luezas:
The main challenge is to transition from document-based processes to data spaces. This will fundamentally change how we operate. Additionally, ports must understand that they are not isolated hubs. They are nodes within global supply chains and must be fully integrated with broader logistics ecosystems.

Q: Jaime, thank you for your insights. Before we close, is there anything else you would like to add—something you feel is important to highlight, given the opportunity?

Jaime Luezas:
I would just say that the only real, practical experience I have seen of genuine coexistence and emotional collaboration is the Escola Europea. I have known it for many years, and I truly see it as a model of what we are talking about: emotional intelligence in logistics communities. Every time I have participated, I have seen people leave more open, more human, and more willing to collaborate.

Odiseo:
That is exactly what we aim for. Thank you, Jaime.

The 5 Most Common Mistakes in Cold Chain Management – and How to Avoid Them

/in ,

At the Escola Europea we have had the opportunity to work with many professionals in the logistics and transport sector who are looking to optimise their operations and adapt to the demands of an ever-evolving market. Among the topics that consistently spark both interest and challenges is temperature-controlled logistics — an area where precision and coordination are everything.

Over the years, we have observed that even well-established companies tend to make the same kinds of mistakes. Some stem from poor planning, others from over-reliance on technology, and others still from a lack of communication between stakeholders.

In this article, we wanted to share the five most common errors in cold chain management and offer a few best practices for avoiding them – using real examples from Barcelona, one of the most dynamic logistics hubs in the Mediterranean.

Because in temperature-controlled logistics, success isn’t just about keeping things cold — it’s about keeping control.

Lack of planning from the start

Temperature control doesn’t begin when the product enters a truck or refrigerated container — it starts long before that.
An efficient chain requires strategic planning from the outset: route design, transit time forecasting, choice of transport modes, and coordination with storage and distribution points.

In Barcelona, companies like MBCOLD Logistics exemplify integral planning. With more than 6,500 m² of facilities and capacity for thousands of pallets across different temperature ranges (+2 °C to -21 °C), MBCOLD plans each shipment based on the sensitivity of the cargo, ensuring stability and traceability throughout the journey (mbcold.com).

In an increasingly interconnected sector, anticipating needs is key. That includes adopting intermodal transport solutions — combining rail, road, and sea to reduce costs, time, and emissions.

1. Relying on equipment without ongoing verification

A common mistake is assuming that once the refrigeration system is installed, the job is done. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Refrigeration units require regular calibration, maintenance, and verification. A minor sensor fault or a poorly closed door can have irreversible consequences.

At Frimercat Logística de la Cadena de Frío, located within Barcelona’s Food Unit, continuous monitoring is standard practice.
With more than 115,000 m³ of refrigerated chambers, the company uses automated systems to record every temperature fluctuation and issue immediate alerts when something deviates from target conditions (frimercat.es).

Their guiding principle is simple but powerful: “What is not measured, is not controlled.”

2. Incomplete documentation and traceability

Maintaining the right temperature is only part of the challenge — being able to prove it is just as essential.
Each shipment must be accompanied by accurate documentation: temperature logs, certificates of origin, time-in-transit records, and customs or health inspections.

The Port of Barcelona has made significant progress in this area. Through its Canal Frío initiative, it facilitates the flow of perishable and pharmaceutical goods thanks to specialised infrastructure and digital processes that improve traceability and customs efficiency (portdebarcelona.cat).

Incomplete or outdated documentation can lead to delays, penalties, or even cargo rejection. In the end, traceability is the language of trust among all the actors involved.

3. Poor communication between transport modes and operators

The cold chain isn’t linear — it’s a complex intermodal network involving carriers, port terminals, rail operators, warehouses, and distributors.
When communication between these players breaks down, efficiency suffers.

In Barcelona, the BEST Terminal (Hutchison Ports) has invested heavily in increasing its capacity for refrigerated containers, integrating systems that enhance coordination between sea, rail, and road transport (railfreight.com).
Such infrastructure shows that collaboration and shared information are just as crucial as technical capacity.

Every link — no matter how small — plays an essential role. The difference between a seamless delivery and a failed one often lies in communication.

4. Underestimating the human factor

In an era of automation and data-driven logistics, the human element remains the decisive link.
Even the most advanced technology loses value if the people operating it don’t understand how to use it or how to interpret the data it provides.

A recent report by Logista on frozen goods transport in Spain highlights that success comes from combining technology with human expertise, through continuous training and awareness (logista.com).
At the Escola Europea, we share this philosophy: a resilient chain is built by informed, motivated professionals who can act decisively when things don’t go as planned.

5. Learning from real-world experience

Barcelona offers a unique environment to understand the complexities of cold chain logistics in depth. From the Port of Barcelona to Mercabarna, the city is a living laboratory of innovation, intermodality, and sustainability. That’s why the Course on Temperature-Controlled Supply Chains, taking place from 17 to 22 November 2025, combines theory and practice in this very ecosystem:

  • Online sessions with international experts.
  • In-person workshops and site visits to terminals, warehouses, and cold-chain operators in Barcelona.
  • Real case studies reflecting the challenges faced by today’s industry.

The course is eligible for FUNDAE funding, and Alumni of the Escola benefit from a €100 discount.

Learn more and register here