Strategic Positioning in Energy: What Mexico Can Adapt from the Dutch Model

By Cesar Vera – Founder & Principal at Inner & Strategic | Vice President of the Board of Advisors at Holland House Mexico

Energy transition is not about choosing sides. It is about positioning with discipline. During my recent participation as a panelist at the Congreso Internacional de Energía, I shared a reflection that remains central to how I see the current moment. The countries that will lead in the coming decade are not those that move the fastest, but those that align infrastructure, regulation, capital, and execution with clarity.

The Netherlands offers a compelling reference.

It is a relatively small country in territory, yet it plays a decisive role in global energy and maritime systems. This did not happen by accident. It reflects decades of coordinated strategy and institutional alignment.

One of the clearest strengths of the Dutch model is integrated infrastructure thinking. The Port of Rotterdam is far more than a logistics hub. It operates as a fully connected energy and industrial ecosystem. Oil refining, LNG terminals, petrochemicals, storage facilities, offshore wind logistics, hydrogen initiatives, and carbon capture projects coexist within one coordinated platform. According to the Port of Rotterdam Authority, it handles close to 470 million tons of cargo annually and serves as a primary gateway to Europe’s industrial core.

What makes this model resilient is not just scale. It is diversification combined with integration. Conventional fuels continue to operate efficiently while new technologies are piloted and scaled carefully. This layered approach reduces systemic risk and preserves competitiveness during transition.

Mexico has similar geographic advantages. With strategic access to both the Gulf and Pacific and strong trade links to North America, it has the foundation to think in integrated clusters. Energy, logistics, ports, and industrial development can be approached as one coordinated system rather than separate agendas. That shift alone would unlock significant structural value.

A second pillar of the Dutch approach is regulatory clarity. Investors do not expect perfection. They expect predictability. Large scale infrastructure requires long horizons. Offshore wind projects in the North Sea have advanced through structured processes with transparent frameworks and defined expectations. That clarity lowers uncertainty and attracts sustained capital.

Global energy investment has surpassed two trillion dollars annually in recent years, with significant capital flowing into both renewables and conventional energy. The message is practical. Markets reward stability. When governance sends consistent long-term signals, capital responds.

For Mexico, strengthening institutional predictability is essential. Energy transition is not only technological. It is governance driven. Clear frameworks encourage private investment while supporting national priorities.

The third dimension is maritime capability. Energy systems depend on maritime strength. Offshore wind requires specialized vessels. LNG depends on shipping and port infrastructure. Emerging hydrogen corridors will move through sea lanes and industrial ports. The Netherlands has long understood this connection. Maritime excellence amplifies energy competitiveness.

Throughout my career across maritime and energy markets, I have seen how operational discipline in fleets and ports directly impacts broader economic performance. Efficiency, fuel optimization, emissions control, and digital transparency are not marginal improvements. They influence margins, environmental credibility, and investor confidence at scale.

What stands out in the Dutch model is its pragmatism. Transition is treated as a managed sequence of decisions. New technologies are tested, measured, and expanded when viable. Existing systems are optimized rather than abruptly discarded. This balanced execution reduces volatility and builds confidence.

Mexico does not need to replicate the Netherlands. Context, resources, and social priorities differ. But the principles are adaptable.

• Treat ports as integrated energy and industrial platforms.
• Provide regulatory clarity that reduces hesitation.
• Develop maritime capability alongside energy ambition.
• Balance transition with energy security and competitiveness.
• Execute with discipline rather than rhetoric.
  

During the panel discussion, I emphasized that the coming years will not be defined by ideology but by positioning. Global volatility will persist. Supply chains will evolve. Capital will remain selective. Countries and companies that think structurally will outperform those that react tactically.

In my advisory work through Inner and Strategic, I often return to one core idea. Sustainable performance comes from alignment. When policy, infrastructure, capital, and execution move in coherence, resilience follows. The Dutch example illustrates how that alignment can operate at national scale.

For Mexico, the opportunity is real. It sits at a strategic crossroads of global trade and energy flows. With coordinated action, it can strengthen its role as a competitive and reliable energy platform for the region.

Transition is not a slogan. It is a disciplined sequence of choices.

Positioning requires clarity. And clarity requires strategy.

Inner and Strategic is an executive advisory practice focused on strategic positioning, leadership alignment, and sustainable high performance across energy, maritime, and industrial sectors. Learn more at www.innerandstrategic.ca.