Economic importance of the Flemish maritime ports: Report 2002

More documents

Recommendations

Info

5 SUMMARY OF THE MAIN RESULTS AND PROSPECTS FOR THE FLEMISHMARITIME PORTS5.1 Summary5.1.1 Value addedFor the companies under review, 2002 was a year marked by recovery, with direct VA growing by 2.9 p.c.(1.6 p.c. in constant terms as against 2001, a level above the growth recorded in Belgium for 2002: 0.7 p.c.). ThisVA totalled almost 11.0 billion euro. It was also a positive year for production among the suppliers of thesecompanies, since indirect VA increased, all levels taken together, by 4.9 p.c. and, at the first level, by 5.0 p.c. Itthus totalled 11.3 billion euro, of which 6.3 billion was at the first level. In 2002, the ratio of indirect VA to direct VAincreased by 1.9 p.c., all levels taken together, to reach 102.7 p.c.Total VA – indirect effects included – associated with the ports came to 22.2 billion euro in 2002, or 8.6 p.c. ofGDP 58 . This proportion falls to 4.2 p.c. if only the companies in the study are taken into account (direct effects).This gives an indication as to the importance of the ports for the Belgian economy.From 1995 to 2002, the port of Antwerp, which accounts for 66.5 p.c. of the maritime traffic recorded in the fourports and 62.3 p.c. of the total VA, is the port sector’s engine of development. The increase in « Naties » (cargohandlers) and the chemicals industry (the most important port sector) particularly explains the success ofAntwerp, which thus maintained its position as European leader in general cargo, and experienced a 14.2 p.c.increase in container traffic in 2002.At Ghent, after several difficult years, production recovered in the metal-working industry during 2002. Total VAfor the port as a whole thus increased by 5.3 p.c., all effects taken together. However, traffic in general cargofailed to keep up with this trend (- 48.4 p.c.).Between 1995 and 2001, the growth in traffic and direct VA was most remarkable at the port of Ostend. Total VAwas, however, curbed by the structural fall in subcontracted production. In 2002, production on the part ofcompanies established within the port was in decline, particularly in fishing and the metal-working industry. Incontrast, Ro-Ro continued to increase (+ 42.1 p.c.).At the port of Zeebrugge, it was the shipowners, cargo handling and metal-working sectors that were, amongothers, responsible for the increase in total VA during 2002. Container transport increased by 12.1 p.c., boosted,among other things, by initiatives such as PortConnect.5.1.2 EmploymentDuring 2002, the gains achieved in the previous year in terms of jobs were lost, direct employment in the fourports thus falling from 106,199 to 102,942 FTE. On average, Antwerp port accounted for 57.6 p.c. of the staff ofthe sector as a whole reviewed over the period 1995 – 2002: it employed 59,472 FTE in 2002 (direct effects only).Having peaked at 117,959 units in 2001, indirect employment, all levels taken together, fell to 110,242 FTE in2002, including 62,720 FTE for first-line suppliers. For the four ports in total, the ratio of indirect jobs to direct jobswitnessed its sharpest decline in 2002, falling from 111.1 p.c. to 107.1 p.c., a level slightly less than the averagefor the period in question. Subcontracting of jobs thus seems to be in slight decline, particularly in Antwerp, wherethere are numerous indirect jobs associated with the cargo handling sector.A decline in total employment can be noted in the four ports in question. It is fairly limited, if only employment inthe ports is considered (direct employment in the port area), as it amounts to - 2.6 p.c. at Antwerp, - 3.5 p.c. atGhent, - 0.5 p.c. at Ostend and - 3.9 p.c. at Zeebrugge, or - 3.1 p.c. in total. If the allocation of data from maritimecompanies not located in the ports and indirect effects are taken into account, the fall in total employment inrelation to 2001 is, for the same ports, 5.9, 3.2, 0.4 and 4.7 p.c. This decline in employment is, above all, due tothe cargo handling, chemicals and car manufacturing industries sectors at Antwerp, the metal-working and, to a58Source: NBB, Annual Report 2002, Part 1.68 NBB WORKING PAPER No.56 - JUNE 2004
lesser extent, car manufacturing and chemicals industries at Ghent, and the electronics industry at Zeebrugge. AtOstend, job losses in fishing were partly offset by recruitment in the chemicals industry.In 2002, direct port employment accounted for 2.5 p.c. of the total active population 59 . If indirect employment isalso taken into account, this share increases to 5.1 p.c.Apart from a fall in employment in the port companies under review - particularly due to early retirement plans anddismissals - , an increase in part-time work and a continuing fall in the appointment of low-qualified staff, it can beseen that, despite a decline in 2002, the proportion of working time devoted to training remained above thenational average. These companies are thus continuing to invest in skills management, focusing on highlyqualified staff who require ongoing training. In this context, efforts are being made with regard to women, whoformed a relatively higher proportion of those undertaking training in 2002 than in 2001.5.1.3 InvestmentThe years 2000 to 2002 were very favourable for port investment. With total investment of more than 1.5 billioneuro at Antwerp, 2001 was a record year during the period 1995- 2002. This upward trend began in 2000, after arather modest 1999.At the port of Antwerp, investments increased by 4.4 p.c. per annum on average. A fall was, however, noted in2002 in the chemicals and cargo handling sectors.From 1995 to 2002, investment more than doubled at the port of Ghent. As far as 2002 is concerned, thesignificant increase in amounts invested in the car manufacturing industry and in Stora Enso Langerbruggeshould be noted.In 2002, after increasing for several years, investments in the port of Zeebrugge returned to their 1995 level. 2002was disappointing for the fishing and energy industries.At Ostend, investment fell by 2.9 p.c. per annum on average between 1995 and 2002. This was largely due to thecessation of trading at RMT. 2002 was marked by a fall in investment within the metal-working and fishingindustries.In total, the amounts invested in the ports increased by 2.6 p.c. in 2002, to 2.5 billion euro for all of the ports,whilst the investment price index fell by 0.4 p.c.Finally, public services, particularly the Flemish Region, continued to invest in major projects for portdevelopment: such was the case of Deurganckdok at Antwerp, Kluizendok at Ghent, the Plassendale 1 industrialzone at Ostend and the outer port at Zeebrugge.59Source: NBB, Annual Report 2002, Part 1NBB WORKING PAPER No. 56 - JUNE 2004 69
Page 3:
AbstractThis paper provides an exte
Page 8 and 9:
conditions than those in Europe in
Page 10 and 11:
1 INTERNATIONAL CONTEXTIn 2002 the
Page 12 and 13:
average 41.1 p.c. of the traffic in
Page 14 and 15:
The study goes on to describe some
Page 16 and 17:
3.1.2 Changes in indirect VAAs poin
Page 18 and 19:
3.3 Comparison of change in value a
Page 20 and 21:
3.5.1 Contract type and human resou
Page 22 and 23:
GRAPH 4TOTAL NUMBER OF STAFF EMPLOY
Page 24 and 25: as a whole (0.8 p.c. in 2002). Desp
Page 26 and 27: • A slight decline in solvency wa
Page 28 and 29: 4.1.2 Value addedTABLE 7 SUMMARY OF
Page 30 and 31: • The car manufacturing rose by 4
Page 32 and 33: TABLE 9 SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN EMPLO
Page 34 and 35: TABLE 11 SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN INVE
Page 36 and 37: 4.1.5 Financial ratios (private com
Page 38 and 39: 4.2 Port of Ghent4.2.1 Significant
Page 40 and 41: TABLE 16 SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN VALU
Page 42 and 43: 4.2.3 Salaried employmentTABLE 18 S
Page 44 and 45: At the port of Ghent, the major cha
Page 46 and 47: investments was seen (+ 26.9 p.c.),
Page 48 and 49: Binnenvaart Bulk en Container Trans
Page 50 and 51: 4.3 Port of Ostend4.3.1 Significant
Page 52 and 53: TABLE 25 SUMMARY OF THE CHANGES IN
Page 56 and 57: Changes by sector in direct effects
Page 58 and 59: continued in 2002. Hence, investmen
Page 60 and 61: TABLE 32RATIOS BY SECTORSectorsRetu
Page 62 and 63: 4.4 Port of Zeebrugge4.4.1 Signific
Page 64 and 65: TABLE 34(continued)SUMMARY OF THE C
Page 68 and 69: • Following two good years for th
Page 70 and 71: 36.0 p.c. in industry and by 51.9 p
Page 72 and 73: By sectorTABLE 41RATIOS BY SECTORSe
Page 76 and 77: 5.2 Prospects for the Flemish marit
Page 78 and 79: List of abbreviationsd.w.t.ESA 95EU
Page 80 and 81: TABLE 45CLUSTERSClustersNACEcodesDe
Page 82 and 83: 3.2 SelectionNon-maritime companies
Page 84 and 85: Comment: This is why there is a two
Page 86 and 87: o 3413 early retirement (*)o 3423 d
Page 88 and 89: 5.2 Estimation of indirect effects5
Page 90 and 91: means that this value grew by 4.0 p
Page 92 and 93: 86 NBB WORKING PAPER No.56 - JUNE 2
Page 94 and 95: - ten zuiden: het kanaal Plassendal
Page 96 and 97: Haven van Gent - Port de Gand - Por
Page 98 and 99: Haven van Zeebrugge - Port de Zeebr
Page 100 and 101: Suttak Nace-bel Cluster Sector Defi
Page 102 and 103: Suttak Nace-bel Cluster Sector Defi
Page 104 and 105: ANNEX 4:LIST OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATI
Page 106 and 107: 1.2 EMPLOYMENTTABLE 50SUMMARY OF TH
Page 114 and 115: TABLE 59BREAKDOWN OF FINDINGS BY CL
Page 116 and 117: TABLE 63BREAKDOWN OF FINDINGS BY CL
Page 118 and 119: Table 65(continued)SOCIAL BALANCE S
Page 120 and 121: ANNEX 8: MARITIME TRAFFIC BY PORT I
Page 122 and 123: ANNEX 9:GLOSSARY AND MARITIME TRANS
Page 124 and 125:
3 Intermodality 86In the transport
Page 126 and 127:
KB Weekly Bulletin no. 51/16 (May 1
Page 128 and 129:
NATIONAL BANK OF BELGIUM - WORKING
Page 130:
53. « Does Financial Liberalizatio
show all

Economic importance of the Flemish maritime ports: Report 2002

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?