"Politics and policy remain the main bottleneck to decarbonisation" (L. Gilliam / One Planet Port)

What is your view of the Port of Rotterdam?

My view has evolved since the launch of « One Planet Port » in September 2024. Indeed, I realised that Rotterdam is a part of an ecosystem, including the city, territory and other ports. Rotterdam is a transshipment port, so when we think about what challenges the Port of Rotterdam faces, we need to consider the impacts on the hinterland and the wider networks.

You co-founded One Planet Port. What are your aims?

We have two main missions: first, to understand the emissions and industries within the port, and second, to offer solutions to facilitate transitions. We are interested in both decarbonisation and dematerialisation. Our concern is: “How can we transform Rotterdam, which is currently a fossil-dependent ecosystem, into a circular one that respects planetary boundaries without offshoring our impact to other countries, as is happening right now?”. The Netherlands is quite resource-poor and has traditionally relied on acquiring and processing resources from other parts of the world. Therefore, it will be challenging to determine how to achieve this in a post-colonial world, where the Global South will likely have greater control over its resources and the ability to determine its own future. Our goal is to decarbonise and dematerialise Rotterdam's Port in a manner that respects human rights and addresses global inequality.

What are your current projects related to the Port of Rotterdam?

Our main focus over the past year has been to prepare a map showing all the ways in which the Port's current activities are impacting the Planetary Boundaries. The Planetary Boundaries Framework from the Stockholm Resilience Institute has been a huge source of inspiration for us. Of the nine boundaries established, we have transgressed seven, which is terrifying, and we need to bring them back within safe limits. These boundaries are assessed regularly, but what does this mean for a place like Rotterdam and its port? What recommendations can we make to bring the port ecosystem back within these boundaries?

What recommendations can we make to bring the port ecosystem back within the planetary boundaries? »

Tracking material and energy flows associated with port operations, as well as monitoring emissions across supply and value chains, will provide a laying ground for the port to adjust its activities and support businesses that contribute to net-negative emissions and regenerative material cycles. Furthermore, it is essential to ensure that improvements in one planetary boundary—such as climate—do not inadvertently undermine others, such as nitrogen cycles or biodiversity. For this, we need an integrated decision-making framework capable of assessing cascading impacts across systems.

Precisely, what are the existing solutions to achieve decarbonisation?

We will publish our recommendations in a near future. While working on shipping policy, I realised that changing the fuel on board would not be enough. Even if we manage to produce enough renewable fuel, what is the point if the ships continue to carry goods with a high material and climate footprint? However, if we succeed in implementing policies that encourage society to live within 1.5°C and reduce its consumption and production to safe levels, it would have a significant impact. Therefore, one of our key recommendations in the report is that the principles of efficiency must guide the port's transformation.

We want to create sufficiency-based policies  »

We refuse to grow just for the sake of it, to line the pockets of multinational companies and encourage constant consumption, processing, and waste. We want to create sufficiency-based policies. This means, of course, ensuring people have the materials they need for housing, food and clothing, without creating unnecessary waste or maritime transport. Sufficiency calls for a critical distinction between essential trade that supports collective well-being and resource-intensive consumption that accelerates overshoot. I think we really need to ask ourselves: Do we need more?

So, according to you, the solution to facilitate transitions relies more in sufficiency than in technology?

Yes, exactly. Much of the infrastructure in ports is publicly funded, which is why we want to foster a broader discussion about priorities. Is public money truly well spent on expanding container terminals, or should it instead support other circular activities that are more critical for long-term ecological resilience and societal well-being? We advocate a complete phase-out of fossil fuels. We must abandon prolonged or incremental transition pathways, and instead design systems aligned with full fossil-fuel elimination, including scenarios that do not rely on continued fossil fuel use in transport. A second principle is that this transition must be pursued entirely and urgently.

Much of the infrastructure in ports is publicly funded, which is why we want to foster a broader discussion about priorities »

A third is the need for full value-chain responsibility: each activity must be assessed across its entire value chain, recognising the cumulative pressures embedded in global production and trade systems. The idea is similar to the EU’s deforestation-free supply chain framework: cargo entering or leaving a port should be demonstrably free from environmental degradation and human-rights abuses.

Do you also propose infrastructural changes—for instance, electrification of shipping or the use of green hydrogen?

Yes. We believe that virtually everything that can be electrified should be electrified, within the limits of current technologies. The pace of electrification in places like China’s inland waterways has been remarkable, and Europe could follow this lead. There is considerable potential to electrify inland and coastal shipping through fully electric or hybrid operations and through maximising the role of advanced battery technologies. Rotterdam is well positioned for such developments: several companies are already deploying battery-swap technologies and exploring ways to manage grid impacts. EU regulation AFIR Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation (Regulation for the deployment of alternative fuels infrastructure) also requires the Port of Rotterdam to provide shore-side electricity to the largest vessels by 2030, which will accelerate electrification. However, technological innovation must be accompanied by new business models and financial instruments to support the very diverse Dutch inland fleet.

We believe that virtually everything that can be electrified should be electrified, within the limits of current technologies »

Electrification must be complemented by the direct use of wind energy wherever possible. Much greater reductions are possible with vessels designed from the outset to integrate wind propulsion, batteries and alternative fuels. The ships of the future will not follow a single model. Different regions will pursue distinct pathways, depending on their resource base. Ports must therefore enable a range of solutions, rather than invest in a single fuel technology.

Ultimately, we must return to first principles: What is being transported? If so, what is the most efficient and sufficient mode of transport, and what kind of vessel is required for that specific loop?

What do you expect from the upcoming EU Ports Strategy?

The European Commission is currently preparing its long-awaited EU Ports Strategy, which will address circular economy issues, pollution, safety, defence, and more. A major conference is expected. My concern is that increased political fragmentation in Europe may undermine efforts to create a unified European vision for ports. Yet such a unified framework is essential. Ports currently compete aggressively—Rotterdam with Antwerp, Hamburg, Le Havre—especially over who is “the biggest.” This competition incentivises ever-increasing trade volumes, which exacerbates environmental impacts. It also discourages environmental leadership, because any port that raises standards risks losing traffic to less stringent neighbours. We therefore need a coordinated European strategy that rationalises material and energy flows, integrates decarbonisation with dematerialisation, supports circularity, and shortens supply chains through regionalisation. As the maritime economist Martin Stopford recently pointed our, regional distribution models could reduce emissions by 40-60% without fully green vessels.

How long would it take to fully decarbonise the Port of Rotterdam if work started today?

It depends, in part, on whether we include measures to reduce demand for shipping services. With ambitious action, I believe a full transition before 2050 is achievable. The main challenge is not technological capacity but political will and the ability to understand the systemic nature of the transformation required. Technical knowledge exists, and many promising initiatives are underway, including digitalisation to better monitor port activities. But politics and policy remain the bottleneck.

Politics and policy remain the bottleneck »

Right now in the Netherlands, the political environment is challenging. A significant portion of the electorate supports far-right parties due to housing shortages, pollution, rising costs, pressures on health care, and growing frustration over data-centre expansion and competition for water and energy. In many respects, Dutch society is encountering its own ecological and social limits. Speaking personally, I believe many of these problems stem from an economy designed primarily for multinational corporate interests, rather than for the well-being of residents. Our work aims to rebalance this. Unfortunately, many political parties still promote a growth-driven agenda that prioritises expanding trade and industrial throughput.

However, I am coutiously optimistic. More experts, academics, and industry leaders recognise the need to challenge narratives of uncontrolled growth. Our “one-planet” framing helps shift the debate away from the polarised “growth versus degrowth” narrative. We all live on one finite planet; within that constraint, we must make sober, strategic decisions about investment and resource use.The challenge is to move these conversations from private discussions to well-informed public debate—before vast sums are invested in infrastructure that locks us into unsustainable futures.