{"id":5464,"date":"2023-05-26T14:00:51","date_gmt":"2023-05-26T14:00:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/circularports.vlaanderen-circulair.be\/?p=5464"},"modified":"2026-04-03T13:19:21","modified_gmt":"2026-04-03T11:19:21","slug":"accelerating-the-circular-economy-transiton-process-for-gateway-ports-port-of-zeebrugge-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/demo.sidekick.be\/circularports\/accelerating-the-circular-economy-transiton-process-for-gateway-ports-port-of-zeebrugge-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Accelerating the circular economy transition process for gateway ports: Port of Zeebrugge case"},"content":{"rendered":"

Identifying and pursuing circular initiatives in gateway ports (GWPs) is challenging and largely unexplored. A VUB-ECSA case study of the port of Zeebrugge (BE) shows that GWPs have the potential to act as platforms for circular economy<\/strong> (CE) initiatives from other industries. GWPs should rely on their potential to attract ‘new value streams’ as the main driver of their CE strategy. Here, top-down initiatives from internal and likely external stakeholders appear to provide pathways to CE success.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>

<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/div><\/div>

Circular economy challenge for gateway ports<\/h3>\n

Haezendonck and Van den Berghe<\/a> (2020) studied the different development patterns of circular initiatives in ports and found that the importance of clustering and secondary resources for circular loops indicates the importance of proximity to either industrial or urban activities.<\/p>\n

Gateway ports (GWPs), unlike industrial ports, metropolitan (or urban) ports and diversified port hubs (which combine an industrial function with proximity to a large urban area), do not benefit from the proximity of these secondary resources (See Figure 1<\/strong>: Port typology). However, even without access to such resources, every port and port management body (PMB) needs to prepare for the changing competitive landscape with \u2018new value streams\u2019, material flows and related businesses linked to the circularity of value chains. Here, GWPs still have the potential to act as platforms for circular transition initiatives emerging in other industries, thanks to their nodal or hub position in transshipment cargo.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>

<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
\"\"<\/div><\/div>
<\/div>

Figure 1: Port typology according to the vicinity of industrial clusters and urban areas<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>

<\/div>

Source: Composed by authors, based on Faut et al. (2022). Circular Port Monitor. Explorative Research: Toward First Actionable Insights<\/u>. Report commissioned by Circular Flanders and produced by ECSA, VUB, PLA.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

<\/div><\/div>

Pathways to accelerate circular initiatives<\/h3>\n

The development of CE initiatives requires stakeholders to identify a business opportunity, and then the same or different stakeholders to commit to making this opportunity a reality. This process of identification and implementation can be influenced at different macro, sectoral or organizational levels. Two approaches to initiative development seem to prevail, depending on whether the main stakeholders are internal or external to the port itself (See Figure 2<\/strong>: Circular economy project development)<\/p>\n

In the case of internal stakeholders, a further distinction can be made between a top-down or orchestrated approach (emanating from the PMB) and an organic bottom-up approach (emanating from port users).<\/p>\n

External stakeholders can also play an important role in identifying the CE opportunity. This third party may be a government agency, a sectoral organization or a company that is not currently active in the port, but which inspires port users to seize the opportunity.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

\"\"<\/div><\/div>
<\/div>

Figure 2: Circular economy project development<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>

<\/div>

Source: Composed by authors, based on Verbeke, A. and Yuan, W. (2022). Rethinking intrapreneurship in the established <\/u>multinational enterprise<\/u>. Strategy Journal. PU: Port User; PMB: Port Management Body<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

<\/div>

Gateway port of Zeebrugge as a relevant case<\/h3>\n

In early 2021, a study was commissioned by Circular Flanders\/Flemish Public Waste Agency (OVAM) to explore the possibilities for the gateway port of Zeebrugge (before the official merger with the port of Antwerp) to initiate (more) circular initiatives in the port area. The study focused in particular on the potential of the Carcoke<\/em> site, a former industrial site (6 ha) that was the subject of a ‘blackfield’ site remediation project (See Box: <\/strong>Flanders’ blackfield approach) in the Zeebrugge port area. OVAM, as the public owner and financer of this very costly remediation project, also has a regulatory mandate to engage in a ‘conditional return’ of the site to the PMB (which would then supposedly grant new lease concessions to port users).<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>

<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Flanders\u2019 blackfield approach<\/h4>\n

The Flemish Brownfields Decree makes the remediation and redevelopment of contaminated (industrial) sites economically interesting. But what happens if the site is so contaminated that remediation costs more than the intrinsic value of the land, making private initiative impossible? In this situation we speak of ‘blackfields’ and the government intervenes.<\/p>\n

The Flemish Public Waste Agency (OVAM) has developed a set of instruments for blackfields, including the possibility of acquiring such sites for a symbolic 1 euro. As the owner of the site, OVAM can solve the soil and waste problems on these sites as efficiently and effectively as possible. It can recover some of the public funding invested by selling the site after remediation.<\/p>\n

In recent years, OVAM, together with other government partners, has sought to maximize the (interim) spatial reuse of such brownfield sites, and especially as a lever to stimulate a future-oriented (circular) redevelopment from a broader social interest.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

\"\"<\/div><\/div>

The former Carcoke blackfield site in the port area of Zeebrugge before OVAM’s remediation started in 2002.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

<\/div>

For the Zeebrugge case study, the VUB-ECSA research group developed a process-based pathway (6-step model within the CE identification process) to identify and subsequently engage with CE initiatives in ports, with a particular focus on GWPs:<\/p>\n