Economic importance of the Flemish maritime ports: Report 2002

TABLE 36 SUMMARY OF THE CHANGES IN EMPLOYMENT AT ZEEBRUGGE FROM 1995 TO 2002(continued)(FTE)Sectors(indirect effects 57 )1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Relativeshare in2002(in p.c.)Changefrom 1995to 2002(in p.c.)Annualaveragechange(in p.c.)Total maritime............. 2,225 2,126 2,306 2,305 2,501 3,007 3,015 3,107 40.5 39.7 4.9Total non-maritime ..... 4,270 3,993 3,853 4,067 4,385 4,658 5,126 4,574 59.5 7.1 1.0Indirect effects............ 6,495 6,119 6,159 6,371 6,886 7,665 8,141 7,681 100.0 18.3 2.4Total employment....... 16,331 15,419 15,539 15,742 16,662 17,784 18,334 17,465 - 6.9 1.0Source: NBB.General changesTotal employment at the port of Zeebrugge increased by 6.9 p.c. between 1995 and 2002, which corresponds to+ 1.0 p.c. per annum on average (table 36). The growth pattern is very similar to that for Ghent: it is actuallyindirect employment which increased the most (+ 18.3 p.c., or + 2.4 p.c. per annum on average), while directemployment decreased on average by 0.1 p.c. per annum. The biggest increase was recorded in 2000 (increasein total employment of 6.7 p.c.), mainly due to a rise in subcontracting (+ 11.3 p.c.), linked to the growth inemployment in the metal-working industry and fishing, sectors which are heavily dependent on external labour.On the other hand, in 2000 direct employment only rose by 3.5 p.c. as opposed to + 4.3 p.c. in 1999. The mostsignificant fall in employment occurred in 2002, when total employment dropped by 4.7 p.c. to 17,465 FTE (directand indirect employment were down by 4.0 p.c. and 5.6 p.c. respectively).In contrast to the observations made for VA, there was no major change to the ratio of indirect to directemployment in 2002. This had increased on an almost constant basis since 1995, peaking in 2001 (79.9 p.c.). In2002, this ratio dipped to 78.5 p.c.Changes by cluster in direct effectsThe most marked growth in employment at the port of Zeebrugge was in 1999, one year after the best year interms of production growth. After a period of relative stagnation between 1996 and 1998, the three following yearswere characterised by an increase in employment until 2001, when the total of 10,193 direct FTE was reached.2002 was characterised by a fall of 4.0 p.c., mainly in industry (- 12.3 p.c.), but also in logistics services(- 8.5 p.c.). However, a slight rise was noted in the wholesale trade (+ 2.0 p.c.) and in transport (+ 7.3 p.c.).Changes by sector in direct effectsMost of the employment related to the operations of the port of Zeebrugge is concentrated in the followingsectors: the public sector (the Navy), cargo handling firms, other services, other industries and, to a lesserdegree, the electronics and metal-working industries, road transport and fishing (table 36). In 1999, the mostsubstantial increases in employment were recorded in cargo handling (+ 13.4 p.c.), the electronics industry(+ 4.7 p.c.), fishing (+ 13.5 p.c.), etc. The increase continued to a moderate extent in 2001.At the port of Zeebrugge, the major changes recorded in 2002 for the direct employment in the main sectors wereas follows:• Public sector employment (main employer in the port), stagnated in 2002 at 2,244 FTE;• Employment in cargo handling, a sector undergoing restructuring, fell by 0.9 p.c. to 1,291 FTE;• Employment in other services grew by 6.7 p.c. to 1,242 FTE, as a result in particular of the increases instaff at Group 4 Total Security and SNCB;• Employment in other industries fell by 7.5 p.c. to 1,126 FTE. By way of example, there have beenconsiderable decreases in the number of employees at Deme Environmental Contractors;• Following several years of growth, employment fell by 13.7 p.c. in the electronics industry to 657 FTE.The workforce at Philips Industrial Activities, the largest private employer at the port of Zeebrugge,decreased from 719 to 595 FTE;57The breakdown of the indirect effects by sector for the period 1995 - 1999 can be found in annex 5 (table 56).NBB WORKING PAPER No. 56 - JUNE 2004 61