MASTER OF SCIENCE IN MARITIME SCIENCE
MASTER DISSERTATION
Academic year 2019 – 2020
A social and economic analysis of the
workforce in the port of North Sea Port
with a focus on the region of the port of
Ghent.
Student: Alexandra Storme
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of:
Master of Science in Maritime Science
Supervisor: Theo Notteboom
2
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank my thesis promotors Prof. Dr Theo Notteboom and Prof. Daan Schalck for making this research possible. Both professors have triggered my interest to deepen myself into the topic of ports and their economic and social impact.
I would also like to thank Voka-VeGHO and my contact person Jan Geers, for providing me the needed information regarding this research.
To an important extend I would like to thank my dad for the (early) breakfast discussions about my thesis and the support during these confusing and challenging times. To end I would also like to thank my aunt for correcting my spelling and my friends and boyfriend for supporting and giving me encouraging words.
Thank you.
3
Table of
Content
Abstract ... 7
1. Introduction ... 8
2. The market environment of North Sea Port Ghent ... 10
2.1. Sustainability ... 10
2.2. Competition ... 13
2.3. Smart integration ... 17
2.4. Future trends and developments ... 18
2.4.1. Port, port authority and infrastructure ... 18
2.4.2. Enterprises and industry... 18
2.4.3. Energy and sustainability ... 19
2.4.4. Shipping and hinterland ... 20
3. Literature on port-related socio-economic impacts studies ... 22
3.1. Socio-economic impact analysis: interest points and limitations ... 22
3.2. Port regionalization and socio-economic impact studies ... 24
3.3. Good practices for analysing socio-economic impacts studies in ports ... 25
4. Literature review on the measurements of economic importance port of Ghent and commuting in Belgium and in Flanders ... 27
4.1. Literature review on employment and added value in the port of Ghent ... 27
4.1.1. Study of the National Bank of Belgium (NBB) ... 27
4.1.2. The value added at current prices in the port of Ghent ... 30
4.1.3. The employment in Full time equivalents (FTE) in the port of Ghent ... 32
4.2. New trends in measurement of economic importance of ports ... 34
4.3. MORA Analysis of Flemish port labour ... 35
4.3.1. Dockworkers as part of the port related employment ... 35
4.4. Literature review on commuting in Belgium and in Flanders ... 38
4.4.1. SD-WORX analysis of commuting in Belgium ... 40
4.4.2. MORA – Key figures mobility in Flanders ... 44
5. Methodology on measuring characteristics of workforce in the port of Ghent ... 47
5.1. Data collection ... 48
5.1.1. Data collection gender and education of workforce ... 48
5.1.2. Data collection commuting in the port of Ghent ... 51
5.2. Data Analysis ... 52
5.2.1. Analysis of Gender and Education NBB ... 52
4
6. Results, workforce North Sea Port Ghent, characterized ... 65
6.1. Gender ... 65
6.2. Education ... 65
6.3. Commuting ... 66
7. Discussion ... 67
8. References ... 69
Appendix 1: Structure of the strategic plan towards sustainable development of the Port of Ghent (2004) ... 74
5
Tables
Table 1: Maritime Freight Volumes in Flanders ... 13
Table 2: Maritime traffic in the Hamburg- Le Havre range, in 1.000 ton ... 14
Table 3: Overview of direct value added (million €) and direct employment (FTE) in the Port of Ghent from 2012-2017 ... 28
Table 4: Overview of investments in million € in the port of Ghent form 2012-2017 ... 29
Table 5: Ghent, value added (million €) from 2012-2017 ... 30
Table 6: Top 10 value added enterprises in the port of Ghent 2017 ... 30
Table 7: Employment at the port of Ghent (FTE) from 2012-2017 ... 32
Table 8: Top 10 employment in the port of Ghent in 2017 ... 33
Table 9: Evolution dockworkers in the pool & performed tasks, North Sea Port Ghent, 1980-2018 ... 36
Table 10: Ease to get to get to work by other means of transport than car ... 43
Table 11: Top 10 combination of transport modes in Flanders ... 43
Table 12: Ten biggest enterprises in terms of FTE in the port of Ghent 2017 (NBB) ... 49
Table 13: Percentage of Men-Women in total FTE, working full-time and working part-time ... 52
Table 14: Percentage of Men-Women in total FTE, working full-time and working part-time detail .. 53
Table 15: Percentage of the total workforce per education level, detailed ... 54
Table 16: Percentage of men per education level, detailed ... 54
Table 17: Percentage of women per education level, detailed ... 55
Table 18: Origin of the workforce port of Ghent numbers and % over different communes ( & countries)... 58
Table 19: Number of workforces living in Ghent and its sub municipalities ... 59
Table 20: The average, median and mode of the home to work distance 2008, 2011, 2014 & 2017 port of Ghent ... 61
6
Table of figures
Figure 1: How is the workforce characterized in terms commuting, gender and education in North
Sea Port Ghent ... 9
Figure 2: The main seaport stakeholder groups... 11
Figure 3: The Sustainable projection of North Sea Port ... 12
Figure 4: Localization of Main Belgian Ports ... 13
Figure 5: The Europe port system and logistics core regions in the hinterland ... 15
Figure 6: The extended Rhine-Scheldt Delta and the formation of a large logistics pole ... 15
Figure 7: Value added (million €) and employment (FTE) in the port of Ghent from 2012-2017 ... 29
Figure 8: Studies about Home-to-work commuting ... 38
Figure 9: Working population according to municipality of work ... 39
Figure 10: Working population according to municipality of residence ... 39
Figure 11: Commuting time (Back and forth) ... 40
Figure 12: Commuting distance (Back and forth) ... 40
Figure 13: Commuting time and distance combined ... 41
Figure 14: Searching for a new job in combination with commuting time ... 41
Figure 15: Average saturation degree relative utilization road infrastructure normal working days 2018 ... 44
Figure 16: Modal split % (average number of displacements per person per day according to its main transport mode) ... 45
Figure 17: Modal split % (average number kilometers done per person per day according to its main transport mode) ... 45
Figure 18: The Port area of Ghent according to the port Authority of North Sea Port ... 48
Figure 19: Ten biggest enterprises in terms of FTE in port of Ghent 2017 geographically mapped... 50
Figure 20: Ratio between Men and Women in the port of Ghent ... 52
Figure 21: FTE working full-time and part-time in the port of Ghent ... 52
Figure 22: Education in FTE in port of Ghent ... 54
Figure 23: Education Men in the port of Ghent ... 55
Figure 24: Education Women in the port of Ghent ... 55
Figure 25: Percentage and number FTE active in different job categories port of Ghent ... 56
Figure 26: Origin of the workforce in the port of Ghent in % ... 57
Figure 27: Origin of the Workforce in the port of Ghent, number of workforces per postal code ... 59
Figure 28: Origin of the Workforce in the port of Ghent, number of workforces’ postal code, zoom . 60 Figure 29: Overall and cumulative percentage home-to work commuting in the port of Ghent in Km61 Figure 30: Modal split port Ghent 2017 ... 62
Figure 31: Satisfaction per transport mode ... 62
Figure 32: Modal shift compared to previous years ... 63
Figure 33: Potential use of bikes in the Future ... 63
7
Abstract
“Together. Smarter.” is the slogan of the recently merged North Sea Port (Claeys et al., 2019). To get its stakeholders along, it is always important for a port to present correct and clear data about its socio-economic situation. The present socio-socio-economic research focuses on the workforce and more specifically the commuting, gender and education of the workforce in North Sea Port Ghent. This study can serve as a steppingstone for further socio-economic studies about workforce in North Sea Port Ghent, but also in other ports. The results were derived on basis of secondary quantitative data and conclusions that could be drawn about the workforce are that the average commuting distance is 22,75 km (one way) that the commuting time is 26 minutes on average, the main transport mode is the Car (65%) and bicycle (20%) also occupies an important place in the modal split, the ratio male / female is of 86% to 14% and the most commonly enjoyed education by the workforce is secondary education.
Key words: North Sea Port, North Sea Port Flanders, Socio-economic analysis, Workforce analysis,
8
1. Introduction
“Together. Smarter.” is the slogan of North Sea Port (Claeys et al., 2019). The port was founded on January 1, 2018 as a merger between the Dutch Zeeland Seaports: Vlissingen and Terneuzen and the Flemish (Belgian) port of Ghent (North Sea Port, 2019a). This merger has led to some challenges but created at the same time a broad range of opportunities in the regions of those ports (Riemens et al., 2019). North Sea Port has the ambition to become one of the most important ports in the heart of Europe (North Sea Port, 2019a). There is an important focus on multimodality in the Port as it provides access to the hinterland through a wide range of transport options like railway and inland transport for example. This expansion could also lead to opportunities for the hinterland of the port.
The National Bank of Belgium (Gueli et al., 2019) published a report in March 2019 which states that the port of Ghent created € 4 374,20 million added value in 2017 (NBB, 2019). Next to that the employment directly linked to the port of Ghent in terms of Full Time Equivalents was equal to 28 262 FTE in 2017. Not only the report of the National Bank of Belgium, but other reports do insist on the economic importance of the port of Ghent. A study of the University of Ghent of 2018 on the relational geometry of the port-city interface mainly stressed the importance of the port of Ghent for its hinterland (Van Den Berghe et al., 2018).
The specific goal of this research is to identify and to visualize how the workforce of the port of Ghent is characterized in terms of commuting, gender and education. Next to that, it aims to investigate the differences in commuting behaviour between the workforce in the port of Ghent and the workforce in Belgium, and more specifically in Flanders. This research, due to its scope, can only be done by gathering existing data and present it in such a way that results become more understandable. Until now a lot of research about the added value of the port and the commuting activities has been carried out but no real deep socio-economic analysis has ever been made for the port of North Sea Port Flanders. Therefore, the main goal of this research is to perform such an analysis to obtain a comprehensive picture of the workforce of North Sea Port Ghent.
Looking at the World Ports Sustainability Program, research and projects around the community outreach and port-city dialogue are one of the main interest points (World Port Sustainability Program, 2020). The World Ports Sustainability Program considers the 17 United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) as a single and indivisible orientation for the sustainable development of ports. It implements the UN SDG’s along five themes, and the community outreach and port-city dialogue is one of them. Projects working on this theme focus on how port community actors can develop synergies to solve collective problems in and outside the port area. Regarding this research, it can be interesting to have an overview of the social and economic impact of the port on the workforce to develop projects relating to this topic in a better way.
Due to its scope, this paper focusses on the workforce of the region of the port of Ghent. Although the whole region of North Sea Port (Vlissingen-Terneuzen-Ghent) will be considered in (the main parts of) this research, the most important analysis will only be done for Ghent, based on the available data of the National Bank of Belgium (NBB) and other sources.
The study will analyse different socio-economic indicators of employment and added value and will provide a broad overview of the workforce in the port of Ghent. The research question of this study can therefore be translated as: “How is the workforce characterized in terms of commuting, gender
9 research question a sub question is:” What is the ratio of men to women and of low-skilled to high-skilled workers in the port of Ghent.”
Figure 1: How is the workforce characterized in terms commuting, gender and education in North Sea Port Ghent
To address this subject, at first a market environment analysis of North Sea Port will be made, focusing thereby on the aspects of sustainability, competition, smart integration, and the future trends and evolution in port activities. By discussing these themes, the links with the workforce of the port of Ghent will emerge. This will be followed by an overall picture of existing port-related socio-economic studies, their evolution over time and good practices. After that, a literature review will be made of existing socio-economic data which is linked in some way to the port of Ghent. Following that subject the methodology for answering the research question and its sub question will be highlighted. Then, the research goal of this master thesis will be fulfilled by analysing data about mobility in the port provided by Voka-VeGHO, and the socio-economic background of the workforce by analysing the social balance sheets of the ten biggest enterprises in the port of Ghent. Finally, conclusions will be drawn from this analysis to make some recommendations regarding mobility and future socio-economic analysis about the workforce in North Sea Port and more specifically of the port of Ghent.
10
2. The market environment of North Sea Port Ghent
Differences between ports do exist on various levels like: their roles, assets, functions and institutional organizations (Notteboom & Yap, 2012). This leads to many different definitions existing for ports. For this research the definition of Notteboom (2001) was used: “A logistic and industrial centre of an outspokenly maritime nature that plays an active role in the global transport system and that is characterized by a spatial and functional clustering of activities that are directly or indirectly involved in transportation and information processes in production chains.”
As stated in the slogan of North Sea Port; “Together. Smarter” (Claeys et al., 2019) and by the European Seaport Organization (ESPO, 2019), European ports are strategic partners in building a sustainable, competitive and smart Europe. To explain the market environment of North Sea Port, these three points will be highlighted, followed by an overview of future projects in the port. Not only are these subjects interesting regarding ports as strategic partners, they all have a link with the research question of this thesis, namely the workforce active in the port.
2.1. Sustainability
In 2017 a study was carried out to identify the most important sustainability topics in seaports (Wagner, 2017). Air emission and employment appeared to be the most important sustainability topics in ports. The study also stated that the European Union’s socio-economic growth for example should be pursued according to the idea of sustainable development. The question here is to understand what they mean by that and how this can be translated into practice.
Terms which are often covered by sustainability are: corporate social responsibility (CSR), environmental responsibility, sustainable development, corporate citizenship, green marketing, or triple bottom line. Regardless of the term used the idea is always the same: it intends to reflect business responsibility for the wider societal goods (Crittenden et al., 2011). When talking about employment and sustainability, a topic which is often repeated is the idea of corporate sustainability (Wagner, 2017). Corporate sustainability often is a covering term and gives a certain brand value. The growing importance of sustainability in the last decade created the need to give it a more operational character in research in order to improve implementation guidelines for organizations and enterprises (Wagner, 2017). An example of this type of research is a survey from 2010 by the University of Brussels analysing international medium-size ports on the impacts of environment, sustainability and good practices (Hens & Van Opstal, 2010). In that paper the port of Ghent was used as a case study. The study stressed that in practice material sustainability themes are often divided into three fields: economic, environmental and social (Wagner, 2017).
Many international institutions and organizations promote and support the sustainable development strategy of ports (Wagner, 2017). However, the actions undertaken and attitude of European ports towards sustainable development varies a lot. Some port-related companies and port authorities have already been engaged in environmental and social matters for years. In Europe more than 50% of the ports have set up a formal CSR strategy. The study of the University of Brussels of 2010 shows an example of the CSR strategy of the port of Ghent in 2004, this can be found in appendix 1 of this document (Hens & Van Opstal, 2010). Some ports have even been implementing the idea to include the sustainable aspect as a core activity instead of treating it as an cost-making part and obstacle (Wagner, 2017).
11 Today, dealing in a proactive and responsible way with social and environmental challenges can be a competitive advantage towards other ports (Wagner, 2017). It appears that North Sea Port applies this strategy too. The new Corporate Strategy of North Sea Port should be published this year in a strategy report. On the official website of North Sea Port, the following objectives and action can be found. The Port focusses on four main topics which are: the sustainable transport of goods, efficient spatial planning, respect for living environment and nature and collaboration with different stakeholders in the idea of together smarter (North Sea Port, 2020c). Regarding the idea of collaboration with stakeholders Notteboom and Winkelmans wrote an article in 2002 on the stakeholder relations management in ports where the interplay of forces among different stakeholders was illustrated (Notteboom & Winkelmans, 2002). This is illustrated in Figure 2 where the main seaport stakeholder groups are given with the relations existing between them.
Figure 2: The main seaport stakeholder groups
(Source: Notteboom & Winkelmans, 2002; own rework)
The interaction existing between the different stakeholder is made more concrete in the part about trends and future developments in the port of North Sea Port where different projects, touching upon different stakeholders are discussed.
When setting up its sustainability plan, North Sea Port does not only have to take into account all these different stakeholders from one port only but also all the different stakeholder of the three ports that merged together (North Sea Port, 2020a). A few actions put forward by North Sea Port in the field of sustainability are: renewable energy, the circular economy, mobility and multimodality, data management and collaboration with the stakeholders (North Sea Port, 2020c). These few actions with some underlying explanation are illustrated in figure 3.
•Community groups •Civil society organizations •The press
•Transport operators (shipowners, railway companies, trucking companies) •Terminal operators •Forwarding agencies •Shipping agencies •industrial companies •Port authority •Employees •Unions •Shareholder •Board members Internal stakeholders External stakeholders Community stakeholders Legislation and public policy stakeholders
12
Figure 3: The Sustainable projection of North Sea Port
(Source: North Sea Port, 2020b)
Overall North Sea port wishes to further develop the port in a sustainable manner and gain strategic advantage by doing this (North Sea Port, 2020c). The different stakeholders of the port strive to respect nature and the living environment, facilitate efficient spatial planning for companies in the port area, promote and facilitate more sustainable transport of goods for ambitious projects in a collaborative environment.
Renewable Energy
Wind energy Solar Power Biofuels and Biomass CO² reduction - recycling
Circular economy
Waste Flows • Fertilisers to aubergines • Hot water from paper mill
keeps car manufacturer warm Recycling
• Pipelines
Mobility and multimodality
Mutlimodal port
• > half goods to hinterland by inland barges
• Multimodal mix between Scandinavia and Southern Europe
• Trains towards Asia
Data
Data for improved planning and reduced emissions
Making the port dues greener
Collaboration with stakeholders
Sustainability Ambition 2030 Smart Delta Resources Ghent Cleantech Cluster Region Carbon Capture and Utilisation
13
2.2. Competition
Because of its complex nature, port competition is not a well-defined concept (Notteboom & Yap, 2012). Nevertheless, the characteristics and nature of the competition between ports depend on the commodities transported and the type of ports involved. Those can for example be gateway ports, local ports, or transhipment ports. For the purpose of this study the competition analysed is the one existing between West-European Ports.
Some researchers point out that terminals are the major focus on competitive strategy and not ports (Notteboom, 2015). In line with this it can be argued that port competition essentially involves a competition for trades (with terminals as the competing physical units), transport concerns and/or industrial enterprises (as the chain managers and representatives of the respective trades) and port authorities (as defenders of the port sector at a higher level engaged in offering good working conditions) (Notteboom & Yap, 2012). Ports are thus always in competition to attract traffic and the supply chains linked to that traffic (Notteboom, 2015).
The port of North Sea Port, more specifically Ghent is in some way in competition with port geographically close ports li ZeeBrugge, Antwerp and Rotterdam but also upcoming ports in other European regions. In Belgium five ports are regularly analysed by the National Bank of Belgium. Figure 4 gives a geographical overview of these ports.
Figure 4: Localization of Main Belgian Ports
(Source: Railpass)
Those often-analysed ports are the port of Antwerp, Ghent, ZeeBrugge, Ostend and in the last years Liege. The Belgian sea ports are situated along some of the busiest trade routes worldwide (Neyts et al., 2015). In Table 1 an overview is given of the Maritime freight volumes in 2018 in Flanders (Not considering the port of Liege).
Table 1: Maritime Freight Volumes in Flanders
PORT Tonnage
1. Antwerp 235 330 980
2. North Sea Port 70 443 350
3. Zeebrugge 40 101 136
4. Ostend 1 562 004
TOTAL 347 437 470
14 Antwerp has the highest freight volume in Flanders followed by North Sea Port Flanders and Zeebrugge. This data must be put in perspective as they date from 2018. The freight volumes in North Sea Port have risen by 1,15% from 2018 to 2019.
The competitive pressure ports feel increases with the capacity, economic situation and institutional changes in the port area and the hinterland (Notteboom, 2015). The port reforms taking place in a big number of European countries like France, Poland, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands and so one give form to stronger commercial strategies for ports than ever before. This is certainly true for ports who were not that well known before. This is a threat as well as an opportunity for North Sea Port.
Figure 5 geographically shows the different ports within the European continent (Alligier et al., 2014). North Sea Port can be found in the Extended Rhine-Scheldt Delta. It is also localized close to the trading route in the Hamburg-Le Havre range which extends from the Seine Estuary to Helgoland Bay in the North. The most important ports in the Hamburg-Le Havre range (in alphabetical order) are Amsterdam, Antwerp, Bremen, Dunkirk, Ghent, Hamburg, Le Haver, Rotterdam, Vlissingen, Willemshaven and Zeebrugge (Wiegmans & Dekker, 2016). The port of North Sea Port Flanders (Ghent) is most typically characterized by its steel, automotive industry, foodstuffs, paper and chemical sector. In table 2 a more detailed view is given on the maritime traffic rates in 1.000 tons for the Hamburg-Le Havre range from 2014 to 2018 onwards.
Table 2: Maritime traffic in the Hamburg- Le Havre range, in 1.000 ton
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2018%
Antwerp 199.012 208.419 214.144 223.655 235.153 19,4%
North Sea Port Flanders 25.889 26.362 29.110 32.509 32.586 2,7%
Zeebrugge 42.548 38.318 37.813 37.114 40.101 3,3% Ostend 1.431 1.295 1.464 1.374 1.509 0,1% Rotterdam 444.733 466.363 461.177 467.354 468.984 38,7% Amsterdam* 97.790 94.891 97.581 100.804 101.798 8,4% Hamburg 145.673 137.824 138.171 136.476 135.098 11,1% Bremen 78.260 73.447 74.157 73.104 74.033 6,1% Le Havre 66.886 68.317 65.409 71.932 70.852 5,8% Dunkirk 47.103 46.604 48.929 50.288 51.602 4,3% Total 1.149.325 1.161.840 1.167.955 1.194.610 1.211.716 100,0%
( Source: Port authorities Merckx, 2019))
This table must be put in a much wider perspective. North Sea Port merged end 2017 and these figures date from 2018, nowadays the port of North Sea Port ranks as the 8th European freight port and 5th port within the Hamburg-Le Havre range (North Sea Port, 2019a). The Port even ranks high in terms of value added with not less than 14,5 billion euro in value added. Still, this table gives an idea of the different ports existing in the Hamburg-Le Havre range and their freight volumes. To understand why North Sea Port has such rising importance it is interesting to look at its localization within the European continent.
15
Figure 5: The Europe port system and logistics core regions in the hinterland
(Source : Notteboom, 2009)
Figure 5 illustrates not only the maritime links the port of North Sea Port has with the other European ports, but also the logistics core regions and inland corridors are indicated on the map (Alligier et al., 2014). The Port is clearly close to a high concentration of logistics core regions and inland corridors. The evolution of intermodal corridors and inland ports leads to an evolution that ports can enter more and further into the hinterland and that this gives them a competitive position (Notteboom, 2015). In recent year, deep-sea ports in the Hamburg-Le Havre range, have also changed from public utilities that focus on transport activities solely to more advanced commercial activities such as value added logistics and industries to make profit (Wiegmans & Dekker, 2016). This way competition between further laying ports is boosting. North-European and South-European Ports are a clear example of this trend. Figure 6 gives a clearer overview of the extended Rhine-Scheldt Delta and the formation of large logistic poles in the hinterland.
Figure 6: The extended Rhine-Scheldt Delta and the formation of a large logistics pole
16 The Flemish part as well as North Sea Port in its entirety, generate a towing effect on the economic activities in the regions close to these ports and over the complete Flemish economy (Notteboom, 2015). The Flemish Seaports in combination with a couple of Dutch ports are becoming even more important catalysts for the development of logistical zones with branches in Limburg, the region of Kortrijk and Lille but also the important Belgium axes Antwerp-Brussels and Antwerp-Ghent.
The ports create a real attractivity for these locations and the strengthens the logistic zones and economic centres in the hinterland (Notteboom, 2015). On the other side, the intermodal terminals and logistic zones in the hinterland also fulfil and important satellite function with respect to ports. The reliability of the intermodal suppliers and the relationship between the various terminals in the hinterland of Flemish seaports will also partly determine their total performance in the Flemish logistics network.
In 2006 a study was made analysing how accessibility can be used as a marker of inequalities in the influence of European port cities (Chapelon, 2006). The study looked especially at the accessibility to the population and to wealth, but also the positioning of port cities regarding major road infrastructures and economic markets. The goal of the study was to see what the impact of these elements was on the influence port cities can have. The influence of port city reflects itself in the economic, political, cultural and organizational influence a city can have locally, regionally or internationally. The accessibility on the other hand is defined according to Ritsema and Van Eck (2001) as: “The extent to which the land-use transport system enables (groups of) individuals or goods to reach activities or destinations by means of a (combination of) transport mode(s)”(Ritsema & Van Eck, 2001).
In the study this approach of accessibility was used as it integrates the four major components of accessibility, namely the performance of the mobilized transport networks, the arduousness of movement, the nature and spatial distribution of the resources to be reached and the time constraints linked to transport (Chapelon, 2006). Overall, in the study it appeared that the region of North Sea Port scored very high in terms of accessibility. Still the arduousness of movement and the constraints linked to transport are put under pressure more than before. This will be discussed later in the literature review of this research.
A study of 2013 benchmarking deep-sea port performance in the Hamburg-Le Havre range resulted in interesting findings (Wiegmans & Dekker, 2016). Out of this study it appeared that the Dutch deep-sea ports are the most efficient ports in the Hamburg-Le Havre (HLH) range. Smaller deep-sea ports (with a market share of about 5% such as Amsterdam, Vlissingen and Zeebrugge) are relatively more efficient than larger deep-sea container ports (such as Antwerp, Hamburg and Rotterdam). The study also discovered possible efficiency improvement opportunities for the Belgian, German and French ports as they were less efficient and more subsidized than the Dutch ports. This means that in terms of efficiency North Sea Port scores very high.
17
2.3. Smart integration
As already seen in the part about competition, Notteboom and Rodrigue (2005) have convincingly argued that many ports become more functionally integrated with hinterland. Ports are nowadays acting as ‘impact hubs’ for a broad region (Haezendonck et al., 2014). The more spatially dispersed economic geography of port impacts is imposing new contractual relationship challenges on ports and on the various economic actors in their hinterland. By means of definition, a contractual relationship refers to any economic exchange between two or more parties, whereby these parties face the challenge of jointly selecting the most efficient ‘governance structure’ for this exchange.
Most of the large ports within the Hamburg-Le Havre range have been able to manage the contracting pressure arising from stakeholders interested in a variety of ‘societal’ economic impacts in the port or in the area close to the port (Haezendonck et al., 2014). Such societal impacts also include environmental externalities and employment, this can for example be the realm of worker compensation, contracting status, health and safety issues and so on. To achieve this stakeholder consensus an extensive, dedicated managerial attention and investments of port Authorities have been made to solve the different challenges.
Discussing the future trends and developments within North Sea Port it will become clear that the port of North Sea Port and more specifically in the port of Ghent initiatives have been launched to respond to this increasing pressure of the hinterland. The port has for example developed ambitious sustainability goals in collaboration with environmental associations and companies within the port area (North Sea Port, 2020b). In this collaboration they translate national and international themes into concrete regional actions. The collection of these six objectives and regional actions are called: ‘Sustainable Ambition 2030’. A focus is laid on the economy (employment), air quality, optimal connections with the hinterland, space for nature, circular and biobased economy, energy and efficiency.
Improving stakeholder management in ports, has also been one of the main strategies to improve hinterland connections (Merk & Notteboom, 2015). This is also the case for North Sea Port as their slogan indicates “Together. Smarter.”, but also different initiatives dealing with increasing challenges in the hinterland connection imposed by increasing traffic, shrinking public budgets, competition for road and rail use from personal and passenger vehicle and the proximity of many ports closely to densely urbanized areas. Next to improving stakeholder management the main strategies to access these challenges is the development of appointment systems to improve port gate efficiency, extending operation times, extending the borders of the port and influencing the port modal split. .
18
2.4. Future trends and developments
Rather than developing in discrete steps, port evolve continuously, adapting to new technologies, fresh legislation, revised working practices and other influences on an as-required basis (Beresford et al., 2006). In the next part it becomes clear that this is also the case for North Sea Port. By examples subdivided into port, port authority and infrastructure, enterprises and industry, energy and sustainability and shipping and hinterland this is illustrated. The examples mentioned here concern the most visible and newest evolutions, but there is a lot more happening in North Sea Port.
2.4.1.
Port, port authority and infrastructure
On the 29th of June 2018 the last signatures confirmed the creation of the juridical entity of North Sea Port (Merckx, 2019). On that date the members of the European public limited company of North Sea Port were also indicated. The company was established as a holding with two subsidiaries: Zeeland Seaports (Vlissingen, Borsele and Terneuzen) and the Port Authority of Ghent.
The Flemish authority as well as the different Flemish port authorities are pushing forward initiatives to create a modal shift from road transport to rail and barge transport (Merckx, 2019). A lot of new connections have therefore been created in recent years. Regarding North Sea Port, some examples of these of connections are:
- The creation of a new inland shipping connection to Willebroek.
- Weekly services of an already existing railway connection to Mortara in Italy were expended to also weekend services
- The creation of a direct railway link to China
There exist many more connections than these ones which can all be found on the website of North Sea Port.
Next to that, not specifically for North Sea Port, for Flemish ports commonly two projects were selected. One of these projects is that North Sea Port Flanders and the port of Antwerp try to expand their already existing inland shipping connections and try to bundle the existing container flows. The second project is that the containers transiting between North Sea Port and Zeebrugge will now be transported maximally by inland shipping instead of road.
2.4.2.
Enterprises and industry
In its evolution the port of North Sea Port does not focus on one company or sector solely. In the next part different initiatives and plans in industries are given as an example of this. There are about 350 enterprises active in the port of North Sea Port, this means that the examples mentioned here are only a little part of evolutions happening within the port area.
A first enterprise is Bio Base Europe Pilot Plant. It is a research centre in the port area of Ghent which focusses on innovative and sustainable technologies (Merckx, 2019). On the 19th February 2018, a new production hall was taken into use. It is used by enterprises to experiment with products such as bioplastics, bio solvents, bio chemicals, bio detergents and biomass materials. Its goal is to enable to make a shift to a biobased future.
A second enterprise is Oleon, which is one of the world’s biggest players in green chemistry. It opened a new production entity on the 6th June 2018 in the port area of Ghent (Merckx, 2019). This new entity created about 10 new jobs in the port area. Its production entity in Ertevelde transforms sunflower oil in ingredients for car paints, lubricants and sustainable cosmetics.
A third enterprise is Euroports it is one of the largest port-infrastructure companies in Europe (Merckx, 2019). It handles about 60 million tons of bulk, breakbulk, containerized
19 goods and liquids each year. On the 15th of June 2018 they opened a new storage facility in the port area of Ghent. An investment was also made in a new mobile crane of 100 tons.
A fourth enterprise is AcelorMittal together with Ghent, Participatiemaatschappij Vlaanderen (PMV), Euroports and North Sea Port this enterprise created an ‘All Weather Terminal’ with a covered loading dock (Merckx, 2019). The terminal will be used in first instance for the handling and storage of finished steel coils. Next to this ‘All Weather Terminal’, ArcelorMittal also invested in a new ultramodern oven. Which is known as an oven for the dip galvanizing line Sidgal 3, were Fortiform is being developed. This new steel type is very interesting for automobile industry as it is 10 to 20 percent lighter, consumes less and is by instance better for the environment.
A fifth enterprise is H.Essers who opened a new distribution centre at the Kluizendok in Ghent on the 26th of September 2018 (Merckx, 2019). The final goal is to make at least 75.000m³ storage area free. Customers that make use of this storage area are the internationally active chemical industry Eastman and the American Oil company Chevron. This investment has a cost of about 12,5 million euros and provides work to 40 people.
A sixth enterprise is DSV Global transport and Logistics. On the 13th of October 2018 it opened an extension of its logistics centre (Merckx, 2019). This extension is equipped for storage and distribution of products for the health sector. Products leaving the warehouse are transported to hospitals and medical institution in the Benelux, Europe and the rest of the world. A seventh and last enterprise that is discussed here is Volvo Trucks. On the 23rd of November 2018, the 1 millionth truck was delivered (Merckx, 2019). A new milestone for the truck manufacturer in Ghent. Volvo Trucks handed over the keys of this truck, as a symbol, to the city of Ghent. Since 1975 Volvo trucks are built in Ghent, they deliver about 40.000 trucks a year and employs about 4.500 people.
2.4.3.
Energy and sustainability
In this part about energy and sustainability only the most recent evolutions and achievements are mentioned. However, this must be seen in a much wider time perspective. Port areas close to as well as the port of Ghent itself have already been making sustainability plans for longer than a decade. This can also be seen in appendix 1 where the structure of the strategic plan towards sustainable development of the port of Ghent of 2004 is exposed. Plans to create buffers between the industry in the port of Ghent and nearby villages have already been discussed since 2005 onwards. Meanwhile, the examples mentioned here give a good idea of what is happening nowadays.
On the 5th of February 2018 the creation of a forest park close to Kerbrugge and Langerbrugge in Evergem which has a goal to create a buffer between the industry in the area of the port Ghent and nearby villages (Merckx, 2019). Together with this project the Flemish land company opened a new accesible nature area also as a buffer between the industry and nearby villages.
On the 16th of May 2018 the last works were delivered to shield the villages Rieme and Doornzele from the Kluizendok (Merckx, 2019). The goal is to develop more vegetation along the shores by planting numerous trees and plants along a path linking the village centers to the harbor road.
On the 27th of February 2018 the construction of three windturbines for the paper producer Stora Enso in Ghent was launched (Merckx, 2019). Yearly, Stora Enso produces about 540.000 tons of recycled papers and magazines which are basically made of 100% paperwaste. This paper enterprise also exploits two bio-warmth and energy centrales. These centrales provide process steam and in more
20 than 70% of the electricity requirement for production. Since 2016, Stora Enso also sends green energy through an underground heat network to Volvo Car Ghent.
On the 17th of April 2018 the port of North Sea Port announced to engage in an more CO2-emissions reducing future (Merckx, 2019). Through the Dutch-Flemish partnership ‘Smart Delta Resources’ based on three priorities work is deliverd in the field of: electricity and hydrogen, circular raw materials and CO2 storage and utilisation. These three priorities have been translated in to eight big projects. Some of these projects are the creation of a hydrogene network for an exchange of hydrogene between Vlissingen and Ghent, the installation of an 100MW electrolyser to produce hydrogene, the contstruction of a network for the storage of CO2 and als the ‘Steel to Chemicals’ project in which residuals from the steel- and chemical industry are converted into synthetic gas.
On the 7th June 2018 the enterprise Alco Bio Fuel celebrated its 10-years existence in the port area of Ghent (Merckx, 2019). This enterprise produces 250 million liter of ethanol out of 600.000 tons of grains. This ethanol is mostly mixed with gasoline. Next to producing ethanol, the enterprise also retrieves 100% of the protiens of the grains used. These residue protiens are used to produce animal food for cattle, pigs and poultry. To end Alco Bio Fuel also yearly purifies about 100.000 tons of liquid CO2 this is an activity of Joint Venture GreenCO2.
North Sea Port is also part of the ‘Charter Sustainable Business’ of Voka which is active not only in environmental matters but also in socio-economic matters (Merckx, 2019). Some actions comprised in this program are the following:
- Improve the quality of life in the port region and handle complaints in a more sustainable way (dialogue with enterprises, authorities, local residents, political groups and the civil society)
- Sustainable transport: being less dependent of fossil fuels. This project was launched by the purchase of 2 electrical cars, additional charging stations and company bicycles.
- A good dialogue between employer and employee about the fusion of the ports and the consequences of this fusion.
- Healthy and local food by local suppliers for the company refectory and -events.
2.4.4.
Shipping and hinterland
In this part different elements about shipping and hinterland will be highlighted. The hinterland can be defined as the zone of influence and economic attraction of a port. In other words, the zone in which a port supplies or from which it draws its resources.
In 2018 the cruise season was launched on the 9th of March 2018 with the arrival of ‘Swiss Tiara’ (Merckx, 2019). Ghent has a tradition of inland cruises, in 2018, 280 river cruises moored in the port of Ghent. Most cruises come from Germany and Switzerland.
On the 19th of March 2018, a new sounding boat: ‘Harmonie’ was baptized by North Sea Port (Merckx, 2019). The sounding boat makes measurement in the Dutch as well as the Belgian part of the port. In addition to gauging depths of docks and fairways the Harmony is also used for sounding dredging work during maintenance and new construction as well as all kinds of inspections and traffic management during major operations.
The ‘project cargo’ in North Sea Port consists of regular shuttle services between the port area of Ghent and Casablanca in Morocco (Merckx, 2019). These shuttle services essentially transport steel, wood and general cargo. CAMABE Line is the service provider of these shuttles and chose for a terminal management by Stukwerkers (cargo handling company in the port of Ghent) they are responsible for the treatment activities.
21 DFDS decided to develop further in the port of Ghent by signing a long-term concession and a partnership with Sea-Invest (Merckx, 2019). The main route Ghent-Göteborg / Brevik RoRo keeps existing but above this a couple of new connections to the port of Antwerp, Rotterdam and ZeeBrugge have been created. Weekly about fourteen trains filled with steel, truck cabins and palletized goods arrive in Ghent. An investment plan to renovate the facilities and terminals is now reviewed.
DFDS has also taken over a Turkish company UN Ro-Ro and has by this means created a fast intermodal connection between the Swedish Göteborg and the Italian Triëst, Greek Patras and Turkish Pendik, Ambril and Mersin (Merckx, 2019). DFDS has thus created a network connecting North-Europe to new routes in South-Europe and the Mediterranean.
On the 29th of May 2018, the two first container vessels of I-Motion Shipping departed from the port Ghent, connecting the Port of Ghent to the UK (Merckx, 2019). The enterprise Stukwerkers of Ghent and M-Source have together founded I-Motions Shipping. The containers are collected on the Interface Terminal Ghent (ITG). I-Motions sails around three times a week with a 508 TEU and a 338 TEU container vessel more specifically between the port of Ghent and the ports of Hull in the North and London Thamesport in the South.
On the 16th of October 2018 the first bunkering of Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) took place in North Sea Port from trucks to a sea vessel (Merckx, 2019). The vessel was supplied by 8 trucks with approximately 19 tons of LNG each. The trucks collected the LNG in Rotterdam and Zeebrugge. The bunkering was provided by Titan LNG.
Overall, it can be stated that the port of North Sea Port is a strategically located port that pays a lot of attention to stakeholder management, sustainability, and competitive sustainable growth. By analysing this literature, it also becomes clear that North Sea Port and the port of Ghent more specifically is an interesting area to analyse.
Yet there is very little known about the workforce active in this port area and the commuting and transport in the hinterland seems to be a challenge for the future. That is why this research will first go deeper into the existence of port-related socio-economic impact studies, why these types of studies are important, there evolution and the good practices linked to this type of studies. After that, a literature review will made of studies that are more or less linked to the port of North Sea Port and its broader region. With this knowledge it will then be the goal to make a more specific research of North Sea Port Ghent in terms of commuting, gender and education.
22
3. Literature on port-related socio-economic impacts studies
In this part the goal is to analyse existing port-related socio-economic impact studies. First an introduction will be given about the existing literature on socio-economic impacts and existing attention points when looking at this literature. Secondly the concept of port regionalization and the socio-economic impact studies will be given. The concept of port regionalization that involves the expansion of the hinterland reach through a number of strategies linking the port more closely to inland freight distribution centres in a functional way (Notteboom, 2010a), has had an important impact on definitions used within socio-economic port-related literature. To end, a list of guidelines for studies on socio-economic impacts in ports are given.
3.1. Socio-economic impact analysis: interest points and limitations
Nowadays, in order to maintain or strengthen the societal acceptance of seaport activities port authorities increasingly need to communicate with a wide range of external stakeholders (Dooms et al., 2015). These external stakeholders include local communities and governments interested in the added value, employment and fiscal revenue impacts of ports. Due to the informatization and wider availability of information a lot of misconceptions have been made on the socio-economic impact of ports.
These misconceptions have also led to misleading comparisons across ports within and between regions which can lead to problems as public agencies that are responsible for the financing of port and hinterland development projects often use the data of the socio-economic impacts of ports across regional and national borders as a benchmark for their capital budgeting and resource allocation. Next to these external stakeholders it can be observed that 91% of European ports are located in or very close to an urban areas (ESPO, 2019). European ports are very often situated next to or in big urban agglomerations and are considered by the local population as representative of the maritime sector in the city. More than ever, port authorities understand that citizens are closely following their activities. Therefore, a successful port authority must be prepared to constantly adopt new roles in order to face the changing market environment (Notteboom & Winkelmans, 2001). The response of port authorities in most cases it to show more transparency, by reaching out schools and young citizens and by involving the local community in their initiatives (to lower negative externalities and improve the environmental performance). Special attention should also be put on the type of communication, it should not be defensive: ports need to explain their role and their contribution to addressing today’s challenges. Authorities must explain that a port is not only about unloading and loading goods but has a much wider impact.
Therefore, it is important for the means of this research to use a design and application of potential best practices from an interregional perspective (mainly researched in UK, France and Belgium) (Dooms et al., 2015). This interregional perspective is based on the project ’IMPACT’ of the European commission. The IMPACT project was set up to research the impact of cultural aspects in the management of emergencies in public Transport (IMPACT, 2020). It was a coordination and support action of the European Commission and investigated the essential role played by cultural factors in managing safety and security issues related to emergencies in public transport systems.
The research of Dooms, Haezendonck and Verbeke of 2015 also highlights the fact that there are limitations to socio-economic impact analysis. In the past, in order to convince stakeholders of the necessity of port development and operations in their region or country, port performance in terms of creation of development and added value where the most important elements. In the last two decades
23 stakeholder opposition against port development has increased strongly. This is mainly due to the focus on ecological and mobility impacts that have led to complementary evaluations techniques and parameters.
Nowadays there is an on-going discussion on the ‘optimal’ scope of socio-economic impacts but also what effects this type of analysis should cover (Dooms et al., 2015). To understand better, some controversies will be put forward about parameters as employment, value added and fiscal impacts. A first controversy is that even though socio-economic impact of port activity studies and methodology have been under continuous development in attempt to be more ‘scientific’, figures are often exaggerated. These exaggerations are mainly due to the inclusion of strategic effects with unproven causality, inclusion of alleged indirect effects or double counting.
A second controversy is the fact that rise in informatization an communication technology (ICT) and Internet has made documents and studies widely available (Dooms et al., 2015). More transparency was expected but given the diversity in definition and selection of impacts and adoption of methodologies to calculate impacts. These have led to misleading comparisons and non-transparency. The third controversy is that due to a variety of macro-and micro economic trends such as de-industrialization, containerization and adoption of automated port-handling systems and technologies, local economic impacts of port activities, particularly employment creation per ton of cargo has decreased (Dooms et al., 2015). An explanation for that is that while value added per ton or Twenty Foot Unit (TEU) is increasing, employment is decreasing due to the introduction of new handling techniques.
Next to that the rise of efficient intermodal transport and spatial constraints have led to port regionalization (Notteboom & Rodrigue, 2005). This especially has led to shifted logistics activities to the hinterland of the port and reduces value added and employment per ton or TEU. As stated before, at the same time, the focus of external stakeholders such as local communities have shifted towards highlighting negative externalities and the external costs. It is important to keep in mind that the trend towards de-industrialization and port regionalization is different depending on the port. Each port is different as it has a unique mix of functions. This was also made clear for North Sea Port in the literature research.
The difficulty of comparing ports also exists due to the fact that ports use different techniques to assess their impact, impact assessments (EIA) or port impact studies (PIS) performed for ports, port projects or for specific sectors can differ a lot. By means of an example in 2010 a paper was written about the EIA system in Thailand (Saengsupavanich, z.d.). This example is given to point the fact that on a worldwide basis port impact assessment were made in the past, but that their comparability is often not that high. Out of this study in Thailand it already becomes clear that there is a complex and compromising interaction between economy and environment performing an EIA in this region. In Thailand the assessment methods are also constrained by financial and technological limitations. Therefore, the study also stressed the fact that when considering EIA reports the most important thing is to look at the extent of environmental aspects covered, environmental measures and the established monitoring programs rather than to look at the accuracy of computations.
24
3.2. Port regionalization and socio-economic impact studies
In 2005 Notteboom and Rodrigue analyzed the development of port networks and they introduced concepts such as port regionalization and sub-harborization. The concept of port regionalization as stated before involves the expansion of the hinterland reach through a number of strategies linking the port more closely to inland freight distribution centres in a functional way (Notteboom, 2010a). Most of the large sea-ports in the Hamburg-Le Havre range have been able to manage the pressures arising from stakeholders interested in environmental sustainability issues in the port area itself but much of the debate on seaport expansion has shifted towards the wider regional effect of ports development. The focus is often laid on the development of environment-friendly logistics linkages between the ports and its hinterland.
Different elements can be found in this developments but mainly the goal is to have appropriate services and infrastructure development strategies in the hinterland to allow the broader port region to build added value and employment based upon maritime traffic (Dooms et al., 2015). This is mainly done through attracting distribution centres that perform value added logistics (VAL) with a regional, national, and even continental scope all of this with due regard for environmental impacts.
Port regionalization which is stimulated by the market strategies of the public agencies and port actors involved, extends the hinterland reach of a port, and establishes closer managerial and infrastructural ties with inland freight distribution centres and other logistic services providers (Dooms et al., 2015). This also contributes to a port’s competitive position and strengthens the regional economy as well this can contribute to more environmentally friendly hinterland transport. An example of this is the ‘extended gateways of Flanders’ concept. This concept aims to define corridors in port’s hinterland that offer multimodal infrastructure and inland terminals as well as identifying the necessary land requirements to develop inland logistics parks and allocating plot of land to multinational enterprises or their third-party logistics providers, to build distribution centres offering value added logistic services.
Overall, with the recent evolutions and insights as well as practical applications like the concept of extended gateway, there is a need of more transparency in terms of definition and methods of economic impact calculations and studies of port activities (Dooms et al., 2015). This also suggests that more attention should be devoted to socio-economic impacts in the port hinterland and its network in order to strengthen and support the acceptance of port activities by external stakeholders.
25
3.3. Good practices for analysing socio-economic impacts studies in ports
In order to set up good practices for analysing socio-economic impacts in ports, a meta-analysis was done on different socio-economic analysis (Dooms et al., 2015). Ten important guidelines were drawn up to be able to reach a common standard in the future and to alleviate some of the criticisms concerning socio-economic impact studies of ports.
1. Regular assessments
Based on a review of socio-economic analysis it is advisable to perform socio-economic impact studies regularly for all ports in a ‘system’ (Dooms et al., 2015). A ‘system’ of ports can be defined on a country, regional or range level (Notteboom, 2010b). The study should systematically be done by independent experts like the National Bank of Belgium, combining a top-down (input-output analysis) and bottom-up approach, whereby the overall impact numbers are computed based on firm-level data. When doing this type of research substantial attention should also be devoted to clarity and transparency of definitions and assumptions, as well as a consistency across ports in a system and across time. When analysing socio-economic impacts, it is also important to know the relations over time between the different socio-economic impacts in ports and the underlying market, economic, technological and institutional developments. Therefore, it is important to evaluate regularly/ periodically the impacts that are considered as relevant for the socio-economic impacts within the port ‘system’.
2. Inclusion of value added and employment impact
It is necessary, where possible to include in the core of the study measures of direct value added, indirect value added and employment impacts (direct and indirect) (Dooms et al., 2015). In most cases it is possible to translate value-added data into full-time employment equivalents (FTEs) (Study of the NBB discussed in part four of this mater thesis). It is possible as well to establish some reasonable proxies (in %) for the relationship between direct and indirect value added and between direct and indirect employment (multipliers). In fact, these proxies can vary a lot per sector. In some studies they even decided to integrate the average wage level of port workers as a new performance indicator (Ducruet et al., 2007), but as consumption impact through income multipliers from workers in the industries creating direct and indirect impacts are usually very different across different industries, it is less easy to look after this data.
3. Inclusion of investment volumes
If the socio-economic impact assessment includes project evaluation objectives it is important for that purpose to include investment volumes (Dooms et al., 2015). However, investment volumes are not a measurement of the port’s present socio-economic importance. It mainly acts as a driver of the ports future socio-economic impact.
4. Treatment of macro-level data
To evaluate the ‘elasticity’ of port traffic as a function of broader economic growth, the inclusion and treatment of macro-level data such as GDP growth, growth in manufacturing levels, trade growth, … are useful to follow (Dooms et al., 2015). Still researchers must be very cautious with the assumptions of established links in the past as they can change and sometimes do not remain the same in the future. As seen in the literature study, technological changes in ports that increase efficiency but are also very capital expensive, lead to very different employment effects in function of macro-level growth.
5. Geographic boundaries of the port area
The port domain in spatial terms is usually defined explicitly in accordance with the port authority (Dooms et al., 2015). Not only is this geographic delimitation important for measuring the direct impacts of the port activities it is also important to delimit the reach of the socio-economic study. Only in exceptional cases, which then must be carefully explained by analysist of port stakeholders, there might be a deviation from this rule.
26
6. Sectoral boundaries of the port area
This is a much more difficult parameter as every country has its own sectoral definition of classification of industries (Dooms et al., 2015). This definition of sectoral (or industry) boundaries is important to measure the direct effects and is an important feature of transparency for the study. In port areas it is important to make a clear distinction between maritime cluster-related industries and non-maritime cluster-related industries as only the maritime cluster will vary directly with changes in maritime traffic volumes.
From the perspective of transparency of impacts for example in terms of determining the specific contribution of the various industries towards socio-economic impacts a clear distinction between the maritime and non-maritime cluster is important (Dooms et al., 2015). Although this distinction is important, there is also attention needing to be devoted to the interactions between industries within the port cluster.
7. Distinguishing among socio-economic impacts per broad traffic categories
A great difference can be found in the expressions in of socio-economic impacts in terms of tons of goods (Haezendonck, 2001). Therefore, it can be useful to gain insights into the value added per ton of a traffic category. As a good practice, usually a distinguishing is made among: dry bulk (tons), liquid bulk (tons), containers (tons), roro (tons), other general cargo (tons), containers (TEU), containers (number of units) and number of passengers. However, the relevant level of disaggregation depends very much on the port considered.
8. Nature of regional effects
In the context of regional effect studies sometimes misuse as the facts are often exaggerated (Dooms et al., 2015). As regional effects are often different for various traffic categories (transport industry like airports and other industries like tourism and sports) it is important to understand the prevailing logistics processes. These prevailing logistic processes can be the origin/destination of the cargo, hinterland modes and modal split, the distance the good move into the hinterland, the fact that traffic flows follow generally available generic routes, the existence of dedicated corridors with long-term contracts, strategic partnerships and joint investments linking the port and important centres in the hinterland. Knowing these processes, the regional effects can be analysed much more accurately.
9. Absence of basic measures and information
In cases where few information is known on the basic measures of socio-economic impacts like employment and added value are known from the past, only a survey instrument can lead to a reasonable approximation of the port’s direct and indirect economic impacts as well as regional impacts(Dooms et al., 2015). In that case it is important to administer one survey with the port authority and one with a limited set of key port users. The survey should thereby include a few the most important actors in the port area for each of the most important traffic categories. Also important in that case is to follow-up the results with the port authority to realize to what extent the resulting data are representative for the port as a whole and to what degree the results can be extrapolated to the port as a whole.
10. Transparency of assumptions
When the results of a socio-economic impact study are presented it is important to define in a careful way how the impacts were measured and it is also interesting to make explicit all the assumptions made with respect to the nature of these indirect effects (Dooms et al., 2015). Furthermore, a detailed overview should also be given about the sectoral and geographic boundaries adopted, the way the regional effects were assessed and if relevant also the linkage with macro-level parameters. In the case a forecast is performed of a port’s future socio-economic impacts it is also important to link those to the macro-level parameters. In all cases it is important to represent the results with a clear and transparent visual presentation if the results are to be communicated to external stakeholders.
27
4. Literature review on the measurements of economic importance port of
Ghent and commuting in Belgium and in Flanders
The economic importance of the port of Ghent has already been approached and put in numbers in different ways. As seen before this data will still have to be analysed carefully. The literature review made here is based on three sources of information. A first source of information is the data given by the National Bank of Belgium (NBB). A second source of data comes from the ‘Mobiliteitsraad Vlaanderen’ MORA. This data is interesting for this research as it goes more into detail in dockworkers labour force data and that MORA also made a study about the home-to-work commuting in Flanders. A third and last source of information is the data form SD-Worx on commuting in Belgium and in Flanders.
By means of the literature review it is the goal to get a more profound inside on the socio-economic situation in the port of Ghent on the one side and the commuting data in Belgium and Flanders on the other side. These insides will make it possible to realize the final analysis of this research. First the literature review will be more focused on the employment and added value data and in the second part the focus will be laid on the data about commuting behaviour in Belgium and in Flanders.
4.1. Literature review on employment and added value in the port of Ghent
4.1.1.
Study of the National Bank of Belgium (NBB)
Probably the most commonly used data for making socio- economic analysis in Belgium, comes from the National Bank of Belgium. The NBB makes a study on a yearly basis looking at the economic importance of Flemish Ports: Antwerp, Ghent, ZeeBrugge, Ostend and in recent years the port of Liege was added in this study (Merckx, 2019). The last rapport that has been published is from March 2019 and contains data up to 2017.
The study of the NBB measures the direct and indirect economic effects and importance of ports by using the annual accounts of enterprises in the port (which were disposed at the central office) and in addition also information about economic effects of ports (Notteboom, 2015). In order to analyse the importance of a port, it is therefore necessary to study those industries that make up or interact with the port (Merckx, 2019). The direct and indirect economic effects of these industries are then split according to ‘Maritime cluster’ and ‘Non-Maritime cluster’.
The ‘Maritime cluster’ comprises all the business activities which are essential and specific for ports (Merckx, 2019). These business activities include the maintenance and management of ports, transhipments, navigation, storage, fishing, dredging, maritime services and the operation of sea locks. The public sector involved in port operations is also integrally encompassed in the maritime cluster. The ‘Non-Maritime cluster’ includes four segments (Merckx, 2019). These four segments have no direct link with the port activities but are nevertheless important for ports because they partly depend on the geographical proximity of the port and part of its activities. Those four segments are:
- Industry: energy sector, automobile industry, metal industry and chemical industry
- Trade: the chain of intermediaries active in trade or that have a link with the port such as import-export companies, suppliers and trading companies that have a link with the segment of industry - Land transport: in this segment the different modes of transport by land are encompassed: road
transport, rail transport, pipelines, …
- Other logistics services: this segment is made up of companies that provide non-specific maritime services in port such as IT services, loss adjusters, control agencies and consultancy.
