The dredging industry and the European port system: challenges and opportunities Prof. Dr. Theo Notteboom President, ITMMA - University of Antwerp Part-time professor in Maritime Transport - Antwerp Maritime Academy CEDA Dredging

1
The dredging industry and the European port
system challenges and opportunities Prof.
Dr. Theo Notteboom President, ITMMA - University
of Antwerp Part-time professor in Maritime
Transport - Antwerp Maritime Academy CEDA
Dredging Days Antwerp, 1-3 October 2008
2
Dredging companies have been involved in major
port-related projects in Europe, but its seems
the center of activity is shifting to elsewhere
3
Some relevant questions to the dredging industry

• What about the growth path for European port
  activities ? In what sectors ?
• Where are the growth markets for port development
  in Europe ?
• Do upstream river ports have a future ? What
  about transhipment ?
• Are we slowly approaching the end of an era of
  large port infrastructure works in Europe ?
• What role for the dredging industry in
  sustainable port development ?

4
General observations

• European ports find themselves embedded in
  ever-changing economic and logistics systems.
• The European port industry overall is a healthy
  industry
• A blend of different port types and sizes
• No lack of port competition in Europe

5
General observationsEuropean port traffic - 2005
6
For more details on European port
volumesESPO/ITMMA reports (www.espo.be)
7
Port competition is changingCargo concentration
but more ports
8
(No Transcript)
9
The challenge of the peripheryEvolution of the
share of the market leader in each gateway region
(in )
10
The North-South balance in perspective
Iso-distance zone 250 km
Hamburg-Le Havre range 2005 (1996) of
population EU27 19 (19) of GDP EU27 25
(28) of TEU traffic EU27 43 (39)
Algeciras-Livorno range 2005 (1996) of
population EU27 13 (12) of GDP EU27 15
(14) of TEU traffic EU27 16 (16)
11
Port competition is changing Port
regionalization is unfolding
Source Notteboom Rodrigue (2005)
12
Port dynamics in the Med
. Odessa
Trieste .
. Koper
. Ilyichevsk
Venice.
. Ravenna
Genoa .
. Constanza
. La Spezia
Fos .
Leghorn .
. Varna
. Ancona
. Bar
. Civitavecchia
. Armaport
. Barcelona
Haydarpasa .
. Kumport
Naples .
. Thessaloniki
Salerno.
. Valencia
Gemlik
. Izmir
. Piraeus
Mersin .

Lattakia .
Limassol .
.Tartous
Beirut .
Haifa .
Ashod .
12
13
Transhipment hubs under scrutiny and its impact
on inland freight distributionThe market shares
of ports in the West Mediterranean. Ports grouped
according to the diversion distance from the main
shipping route (1975-2007)
14
Port competition and the role of upstream
portsEvolution of the market shares in the Le
Havre-Hamburg range
15
Ports live in a turbulent world
16
The environment is changing

• Fear for impact of economic downturn
• Impact of high fuel costs
• Pressure on (infrastructural) capacity
• Environmental and security issues are omnipresent

17
Fear for impact of economic downturnWorld
Container Traffic, 1980-2008. Reaching Peak
Growth?
18
Rising bunker pricesBunker price for CST 380 in
Rotterdam ( per ton)
Source based on data Clarksons Research Services
Ltd
19
Pressure on infrastructural capacityNew large
port infrastructure projects are still coming on
stream, but it takes much longer than expected
and less projects make it to the finish
Development of initial plans Proposed date for start operations (first phase) Date for start terminal operations
Le Havre Port 2000 France 1994 2003 2006
Antwerp Deurganck Dock - Belgium 1995 2001 2005
Rotterdam Euromax Terminal the Netherlands 2000 2004 2008
Rotterdam Maasvlakte II the Netherlands 1991 2002 2013/2014
Deepening Westerscheldt -the Netherlands/Belgium 1998 2003 2008
Wilhelmshaven/JadeWeserPort - Germany NA 2006 2010/2011
Cuxhaven - Germany NA 2006 Never
Dibden Bay UK NA 2000 Never
London Gateway UK NA 2006 2013
Felixstowe South UK NA 2006 2008
Hull Quay 2000/2005 NA 2000 2011
20
Realising terminals takes (more) time

• Environmental considerations are prominent in
  port planning balancing of economic, social and
  environmental values
• Emancipation process and local rationality (cf.
  NIMBY) of pressure groups
• (Pitfalls in) regulations and procedures slow
  down decision-making process
• Port managers spend a lot of time in embedding
  the port in local community

21
Securing port capacity

• Notwithstanding new capacity will come on stream
  in the coming years, delays due to port
  congestion could become a structural problem in
  the longer term
• Limitations to terminal productivity increases
• Public support for port development is lacking
• Rules and procedures
• Governments retreat in the funding of ports
• Investment climate
• Weak support for port co-opetition-model
• The battle for securing port capacity will
  continue

22
Sustainability is key to allow further port
development

• The sustainability objective has given rise to
  important spin-off activities for the dredging
  industry.
• Environmental impact of port projects not only
  one-sided negative port projects can be
  instigator of environmental initiatives that
  would otherwise not develop.

23
Sustainability is key to allow further port
developmentHarmonizing ecology and economy the
Antwerp co-habitation model (compensation 6-7
of total cost price!)
Source Port of Antwerp
24
Sustainability is key to allow further port
development

• The dredging industry plays a key role
• Technological innovation to secure port
  expansion
• Disposal of dredged material (e.g. La Spezia,
  Antwerp)
• Assist in environmental planning linked to port
  expansion projects
• Coordinate with port authorities, terminal
  operators, government departments and
  organisations (e.g. Ecoports/Green Ports) to help
  legislators in setting realistic environmental
  targets
• Share best practices to help develop
  environmental standards taking into account the
  unique nature of each port and each dredging
  project

25
(No Transcript)