meed-logo

line1 line2 line3
SIGN IN / REGISTER

Region prepares for circular plastics economy

23 June 2023

 

Representatives from the Gulf petrochemicals industry, plastics manufacturers and wider derivatives producers gathered at the Gulf Petrochemicals & Chemicals Association plastics conference in Saudi Arabia in May. There, it was agreed that while a “demonisation” of the plastics industry had indeed taken place, this was not entirely unjustified.

The Gulf region is a major producer of plastic products, among other petrochemicals derivatives. Furthermore, the GCC has been investing significantly in building large production complexes for petrochemicals – the basic feedstock for the manufacturing of plastics. 

However, despite irresponsible plastics usage and wastage being major environmental pollution issues worldwide, only about 10 per cent of plastics are recycled at present. This is due to the variability of plastics waste, contamination and gaps in the existing infrastructure.

“Every person on this planet is probably horrified by the pictures of plastic objects floating in the ocean, wildlife entangled in or ingesting plastic and mountains of plastic on dump sites and littered everywhere,” says Martyn Tickner, chief adviser of circular solutions for Alliance to End Plastic Waste, an industry-funded non-profit organisation based in Singapore. 

“Such pollution is a problem of lack of basic waste management. Three billion people – more than 35 per cent of the global population – are considered to lack access to adequate solid waste collection and properly managed disposal.”

Major pollution source

About half of global plastic waste is sent to landfill, about 20 per cent is incinerated, and the rest is either littered or burned in the open, causing severe pollution both on land and in the seas.

“Plastic, due to its non-biodegradable nature and potential toxicity, demands responsible usage and disposal,” says Hani Tohme, managing director – Middle East and head of sustainability in the Middle East and North Africa (Mena) region at Roland Berger, an international management consultancy headquartered in Germany. 

“However, current consumption patterns – particularly the reliance on single-use plastics – coupled with often insufficient waste management infrastructure, lead to widespread environmental pollution. 

“When not properly managed, plastic contributes significantly to land litter, marine pollution, and overall environmental degradation,” he says.

The need for recycling

Many of the severe environmental pollution problems arising from unsustainable plastics utilisation and the consumption of single-use plastics can be mitigated through the adoption of a circular plastics economy.

This is a system aimed at “reducing plastic waste globally”, say Devesh Katiyar, principal, and Jayanth Mantri, manager, at Strategy& Middle East, part of the PwC network. 

“It involves products designed for recyclability, efficient collection and sorting of plastic waste, advanced recycling technologies and policies to promote recycling.” 

They add that the scope of a circular plastics economy is global. “Annually, about 400,000 tonnes of plastic waste is traded globally, despite several restrictions. Driving circularity in plastics helps to reduce waste, conserve resources and avoid emissions and energy use associated with virgin plastics production, thereby promoting a sustainable and eco-friendly approach to managing plastics.”

Roland Berger’s Tohme adds that a circular plastics economy “disrupts the traditional linear model of ‘take-make-waste’ by adopting a restorative and regenerative approach”. 

“This framework incorporates the principles of ‘reduce, reuse and recycle’, along with strategies for designing out waste and pollution, maintaining products and materials in circulation and regenerating natural systems.”

Developing a circular and low-carbon economy for plastics requires changes at every stage of the plastics value chain, both upstream and downstream, says Tickner.

“Upstream solutions are those that endeavour to reduce the magnitude of the problem through the elimination of unnecessary use, the adoption of more sustainable alternatives and the redesigning of supply chains and delivery models to encourage reuse.” 

These solutions disrupt the root causes of today’s environmental crisis, he adds. “Reuse within the commercial, business-to-business supply chains – for example of packaging used to deliver from factory to warehouse – can be adopted quite quickly.”

Downstream solutions, meanwhile, are post-use. “Here, 100 per cent collection is a basic requirement to eliminate leakage into the environment,” Tickner explains.

The successful implementation of a circular plastics economy requires systemic changes and collaboration among stakeholders, including governments, businesses and consumers
Hani Tohme, Roland Berger

Open or closed loop

The plastics recycling process can be categorised as open-loop or closed-loop. 

Open-loop recycling is typically mechanical – converting plastic waste into less demanding plastic applications or using it in other material economies, such as the construction industry.

Closed-loop recycling means returning plastic back into high-value plastic applications, either directly, through advanced mechanical or dissolution technologies, or back to chemicals feedstock via chemical recycling. 

The technologies required to recycle almost all types of materials are available, or are rapidly emerging. As a result, overcoming the recycling challenge is primarily an issue of creating the right financial environment to enable major investment in the collection, sorting and recycling infrastructure.

The commercial case for plastics recycling 

Role of governments

Regional governments and regulatory authorities will need to play a role in supporting the growth of the plastics industry, as well as in ensuring the effective and sustainable consumption of plastics.

“A circular plastics economy offers a transformative approach to addressing the plastic waste crisis, promoting economic growth while reducing environmental impact,” says Tohme. “However, the successful implementation of this model requires systemic changes and collaboration among stakeholders, including governments, businesses and consumers.” 

Robust frameworks and proven best practices “play a pivotal role in guiding organisations to develop sustainable strategies, innovative business models and effective operational transformations, ultimately determining the success of their transition to a circular economy”, he says.

Strategy& Middle East’s Katiyar and Mantri note that governments and regulatory authorities can support the sustainable growth of the plastics industry in several ways. 

“They can implement policies and regulations such as bans and taxes on single-use plastics, extended producer responsibility programmes and incentives for advanced recycling and imports of plastic waste destined for recycling.

“In addition, they can create global closed-loop supply chains and material marketplaces to gain access to feedstock. And they can develop infrastructure for the collection, sorting and recycling of plastic waste – both within the region and abroad,” they continue. 

“The Mena region has the potential to attract investments of between $30bn and $40bn over the next two decades,
to build a truly world-class recycling infrastructure.”

The problems with plastics
  • Non-biodegradable: The environmental concerns surrounding plastic stem largely from its non-biodegradable nature. Most plastics take hundreds of years to decompose naturally. This inherent property means that plastic waste tends to accumulate in the environment over time rather than breaking down and returning to the ecosystem.
  • Microplastics and toxic chemicals: When plastics degrade, they break into tiny particles known as microplastics rather than biodegrading. These particles can be ingested by wildlife, with detrimental and often fatal results. Moreover, certain types of plastics contain chemicals that can leach out over time, particularly when exposed to heat or sunlight. These chemicals can contaminate soil and water, posing risks to wildlife and potentially infiltrating the food chain.
  • Greenhouse gas emissions: The impact of emissions is related on the one hand to the production of plastics – making virgin plastics, for instance, from oil – and on the other hand to the open burning and incineration of plastics after they have been disposed of in systems that lack proper waste management. This is happening in both developing and developed countries.
Addressing the environmental impact of plastics
  • Reusability: Most plastics consumed today are single-use plastics, in packaging and fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) products such as plastic bags, straws and cutlery. A shift from single-use to reusable plastics is an important way to reduce the volume of plastic being consumed, thus reducing the overall impact. 
  • Light-weighting: Another key way to reduce the volume of plastic consumed is to reduce the weight of the plastics in products. This has been an area in focus for FMCG and packaging companies in recent years.
  • Design: Plastic packaging and products that are made of plastic layers glued with other fibres and laminates cannot be recycled easily, or at a cost that does not exceed the actual value of the material. Therefore, designing plastics products and packaging that are recyclable is another way to address the environmental impact of plastics.
  • Inadequate waste management and resulting pollution: Compounding these issues, an inadequate waste management infrastructure in many parts of the world is unable to effectively handle the volume of plastic waste. This leads to widespread littering of landscapes and waterways, accumulation of plastic in landfills and marine pollution. About 8-12 million metric tonnes (mt) of plastic enters our oceans each year, significantly threatening marine life – some estimates are even as high 14 million mt. On land, plastic waste similarly disrupts habitats and negatively impacts wildlife.

 

https://image.digitalinsightresearch.in/uploads/NewsArticle/10962800/main.gif
Indrajit Sen

Register for MEED's guest program now to access this article.

Click here to register
Exclusive from Meed
Related Articles
  • Local firm wins Riyadh water operations contract

    9 April 2026

    Saudi-based Alkhorayef Water & Power Technologies (AWPT) has won a contract to operate and maintain treated sewage effluent (TSE) networks and facilities in Riyadh.

    The contract was awarded by the Royal Commission for Riyadh City (RCRC) on 5 April, according to a market filing by the company.

    The scope covers the operation and maintenance of TSE networks and facilities under Group 1 in Riyadh City. The contract is valued at SR69.6m ($18.5m) and has a duration of 30 months.

    The deal follows a recent five-year contract from Jeddah Municipality for the operation and cleaning of stormwater networks in the airport’s sub-municipality area of Jeddah.

    According to regional projects tracker MEED Projects, RCRC has $1.19bn-worth of water transmission projects under execution.

    In 2024, RCRC appointed the local Mutlaq Damook Al-Ghowairi Contracting for the construction of a $100m heat pumping station as part of the Green Riyadh project.

    RCRC designed Green Riyadh in 2018 to improve liveability standards in Riyadh. As MEED understands, the pumping station project will begin construction this year.

    Elsewhere, in January, AWPT won another contract with state-owned utility National Water Company to operate and maintain water assets in Tabuk City.

    The scope of work includes the operation and maintenance of water networks, pump stations, wells, tanks and related facilities over a 36-month period.

    READ THE APRIL 2026 MEED BUSINESS REVIEW – click here to view PDF

    Economic shock threatens long-term outlook; Riyadh adjusts to fiscal and geopolitical risk; GCC contractor ranking reflects gigaprojects slowdown.

    Distributed to senior decision-makers in the region and around the world, the April 2026 edition of MEED Business Review includes:

    > GCC CONTRACTOR RANKING: Construction guard undergoes a shift
    To see previous issues of MEED Business Review, please click here
    https://image.digitalinsightresearch.in/uploads/NewsArticle/16320466/main.jpg
    Mark Dowdall
  • Force majeure will not cure pre-existing construction industry breaches

    9 April 2026

    As the 2026 Iran War disrupts critical maritime chokepoints and aviation corridors, the GCC construction sector faces unprecedented logistical challenges. Consequently, regional engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractors are being inundated with force majeure notices.

    International suppliers claim the geopolitical crisis prevents them from fulfilling contracts, arguing this shields them from liability and allows them to retain massive advance payments. However, a contentious legal dilemma has emerged: Can a supplier weaponise an active conflict to camouflage a pre-existing breach, such as manufacturing defective materials or missing critical deadlines before the crisis erupted?

    For construction executives, GCC civil law provides a highly unforgiving answer. By examining a landmark judgment from the Dubai Court of First Instance (Judgment No. 695/2023) concerning the 2023 Sudan war, contractors can find a definitive legal playbook for the current environment.

    The Sudan precedent

    The factual matrix of the 2023 Sudan dispute serves as a perfect analogue for today’s supply chain fracturing. A regional contractor paid a 30% advance ($1.27m) for the offshore manufacture of structural steel water tanks destined for Sudan. In March 2023, an independent SGS inspection revealed critical life-safety and structural defects in the steel columns.

    Faced with a formal breach notice, the supplier proposed a “fix-it on-site” workaround, planning to fly engineers to Khartoum to alter concrete foundations to compensate for the defective steel. Just two days before this site visit, the Sudanese civil war erupted, shutting down airports.

    The supplier preemptively sued in Dubai, claiming the sudden outbreak of war was an unforeseeable event that made it physically impossible to rectify the defects or deliver the goods. They demanded to terminate the contract under force majeure and keep the advance payment.

    The Dubai Court fundamentally rejected this conflation. Relying on UAE Civil Transactions Law, the court established a bright-line rule: a subsequent force majeure event cannot cure, excuse or erase a pre-existing contractual breach.

    The supplier had breached the contract the moment the SGS report confirmed the defects. The fact that war broke out subsequently, preventing their travel for an ad-hoc fix, was legally irrelevant. The court ordered the supplier to refund the entire $1.27m advance payment, alongside a 5% annual delay interest.

    The bank guarantee trap

    The judgment also highlights a profound warning regarding financial hygiene. The contractor initially attempted to liquidate the supplier’s unconditional bank guarantee but failed.

    The contractor had erroneously wired the advance payment to the supplier’s Bank of China account, rather than the specific Abu Dhabi Islamic Bank account explicitly stipulated in the guarantee draft. This simple administrative routing error meant the guarantee was technically never activated, forcing the contractor into a lengthy substantive lawsuit to recover its funds.

    Wider GCC implications

    While originating in Dubai, this jurisprudential DNA applies universally across the GCC. The newly codified Saudi Civil Transactions Law, alongside Qatari and Omani civil codes, views construction supply contracts as rigid obligations of result.

    Across the region, courts uniformly reject the concept of “concurrent excuse”. If a supplier fails to build structural steel correctly in March, they cannot blame airspace closures in April for their failure to deliver.

    A strategic playbook for 2026

    For conglomerates battling the commercial fallout of the 2026 Iran War, this precedent offers a clear risk mitigation roadmap:

    • Eradicate the “fix-it on-site” culture: In wartime, accepting minor manufacturing defects with a promise of on-site rectification is a fatal misallocation of risk. If borders close, projects are left with unusable materials. Acceptance must be explicitly tied to absolute conformity prior to embarkation.
    • Elevate Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT): Never allow suppliers to ship materials blindly to beat port closures. Mandate strict third-party inspections at the point of origin. A failed FAT report legally severs the supplier’s access to a subsequent force majeure defence.
    • Issue immediate breach notices: Timing is the difference between a total loss and a full refund. Do not engage in informal workaround discussions while a crisis escalates. Issue formal legal default notices immediately to paper the breach before the fog of war obscures the facts.
    • Strict guarantee hygiene: Ensure finance departments route advance payments exactly to the SWIFT text or IBAN stipulated in the guarantee. A minor error can leave millions unsecured.
    • Draft pre-existing breach carve-outs: New contracts must explicitly state that suppliers cannot invoke force majeure to excuse delays or non-conformities that originated prior to the onset of the military event.

    The escalation of the 2026 conflict offers failing suppliers a tempting shield to hide supply chain mismanagement. However, regional jurisprudence sees through this illusion. By enforcing rapid default notices and rigorous inspections, project owners can ensure the financial risk of non-conformity remains exactly where it belongs: with the defaulting supplier.

    https://image.digitalinsightresearch.in/uploads/NewsArticle/16320104/main.gif
  • Saudi Arabia’s foreign property ownership milestone

    9 April 2026

    Saudi Arabia’s Real Estate Ownership Law, which came into force in January 2026, represents a significant and long-anticipated development in the kingdom’s approach to foreign ownership of real estate.

    It forms part of a broader evolution of the regulatory framework governing the sector, aimed at enhancing transparency, strengthening investor confidence, and supporting long-term market development in line with Vision 2030.

    As the framework begins to be implemented, market participants are increasingly focused on how these provisions will operate in practice and the implications for structuring real estate investments in the kingdom.

    Under the previous legislative framework, introduced in 2000, foreign ownership of Saudi property was more restricted. Ownership was generally limited to individuals or entities authorised to carry out professional or commercial activities in the kingdom, with property rights closely linked to those activities rather than broader investment or personal use.

    The law builds on this position by expanding both the categories of eligible owners and the scope of permitted real estate rights.

    The new law applies a broad definition of “non-Saudi”, encompassing foreign individuals, companies, non-profit organisations and other legal entities, within a structured and regulated framework.

    Expanding ownership rights

    Non-Saudi individuals, whether resident in the kingdom or abroad, may own real estate or acquire real property rights within designated geographical areas, as provided for under the implementing regulations.

    The law permits both ownership and the acquisition of other real property rights in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. In practice, this provides a clearer basis for foreign investors to assess how real estate interests may be structured within the kingdom.

    Non-Saudi residents are also permitted to own one residential property outside those designated areas. This does not extend to cities of religious significance, including Mecca and Medina, except where permitted under the applicable legal and regulatory framework.

    Foreign-owned Saudi companies may own real estate and acquire other real property rights necessary to conduct their licensed activities and to provide housing for employees, both within and outside designated geographical areas. This may, subject to applicable regulatory conditions, extend to properties in Mecca and Medina.

    While ownership in the holy cities remains subject to specific regulatory controls, the new law provides a more clearly defined framework under which foreign participation may be permitted in accordance with applicable requirements.  

    With respect to publicly listed companies, Saudi firms with foreign ownership listed on the Saudi Stock Exchange (Tadawul), as well as investment funds and special purpose entities, may own and acquire real property rights in the kingdom, including in Mecca and Medina, subject to compliance with the relevant regulatory framework.

    Registration, compliance and transactional framework

    The new Real Estate Ownership law introduces a structured compliance framework for foreign investors. It provides that all non-Saudis, whether corporations or individuals, are required to comply with applicable registration requirements with the competent authorities prior to owning real estate or acquiring other real property rights in the kingdom.

    The implementing framework sets out procedures that vary depending on the type of investor. For example:

    • Non-resident individuals are required to obtain a valid digital identity profile through the Ministry of Interior’s “Absher” platform, open a Saudi bank account, and obtain a Saudi contact number.
    • Foreign companies are required to register with the Ministry of Investment, ensure that their legal representatives hold valid identification issued in accordance with the kingdom’s regulations, disclose their ownership structures, and open a Saudi bank account.

    Ownership of real estate and the acquisition of related property rights will only be legally recognised once registration has been completed with the Real Estate Register in accordance with the applicable legal provisions. This reinforces transparency and legal certainty within the market.  

    The law also regulates the disposal of property interests. Where a non-Saudi sells, transfers or otherwise disposes of a real property right, a disposal fee capped at 5% of the transaction value is payable to the Real Estate General Authority. This fee applies in addition to any other taxes or charges. The applicable rate may vary depending on the type, purpose and location of the property right, as set out in the relevant regulations.

    Investors should also be aware of the law’s tiered penalty regime. Depending on the nature of the violation, penalties may range from a warning to fines capped at SR10m, with multiple penalties potentially applied for separate breaches.

    The law reflects the kingdom’s continued focus on enhancing the regulatory environment for real estate, within a structure designed to balance market access with appropriate regulatory oversight. For investors and developers, the practical significance of the law lies in the clarity it provides on how foreign ownership can be structured and implemented. In particular, requirements relating to registration, ownership eligibility and permitted use will be key considerations when assessing transactions and investment structures.

    As the implementing framework continues to develop, further detail, particularly in relation to designated geographical areas and the application of ownership rules in specific locations, will be important in shaping how the framework operates in practice.

    More broadly, the law forms part of a wider programme of reforms aimed at supporting the sustainable development of Saudi Arabia’s real estate market and reinforcing its long-term attractiveness for investment, in line with the objectives of Vision 2030.

    https://image.digitalinsightresearch.in/uploads/NewsArticle/16318609/main.gif
  • War in the Middle East recalibrates global energy markets

    9 April 2026

     

    The US and Israel’s war with Iran, and the disruption it is causing to oil and gas shipping, are having a deep impact on global energy markets and will have lasting effects on how decisions are made about energy production and consumption.

    In March, the director of the Paris-based International Energy Agency, Fatih Birol, said the world was “facing the greatest global energy security threat in history”, eclipsing even the 1973 oil crisis triggered by Opec’s oil embargo against countries that supported Israel during the Yom Kippur War.

    Iran’s effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz has highlighted the fragility of the Middle East oil and gas supply chain, and will incentivise import-dependent economies to pursue greater energy security.

    There are already signs around the world that this is taking place in a range of ways, including developing domestic fossil fuel reserves, accelerating nuclear projects, and investing in renewables and battery storage.

    At the same time, high oil and gas prices are spurring fossil fuel producers to increase investment in boosting output and protecting export routes, as they seek to maximise profits amid reduced global supplies.

    The oil price shocks of the 1970s shaped key oil and gas partnerships between Saudi Arabia and the US, and helped drive the development of strategic petroleum reserves, energy-efficiency policies and broader efforts to diversify energy supply.

    In a similar way, the current crisis is dramatically reshaping the global energy landscape, potentially eroding some of the key agreements that emerged in the 1970s and accelerating a new wave of diversification.

    Unparalleled crisis

    The scale of the current energy crisis is unprecedented, with global markets losing 11 million barrels a day (b/d) of oil supply due to the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

    On top of this, 20% of the world’s LNG production cannot be shipped.

    This combined drop in available oil and gas is far larger than during the price shocks of the 1970s.

    In the 1973 crisis, the world lost around 5 million b/d of oil; the same was true of the second shock in 1979, following the Iranian Revolution.

    Deepening the current crisis, significant damage is being inflicted on oil and gas infrastructure across the Middle East, which is likely to take years to repair.

    Refineries have been attacked across the region, including in Iran, Kuwait, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. There have also been multiple strikes on storage facilities, oil fields, gas processing facilities and shipping terminals.

    While the price shocks of the 1970s led to a global recession and had sweeping, long-term consequences for businesses and consumers worldwide, the latest crisis has the potential to be even more severe and is already causing major disruption in energy markets.

    Advisory firm Oxford Economics has forecast that, if the war is prolonged and the Strait of Hormuz remains closed for between three and six months, the result would be a global recession and world GDP growth would slow to 1.4% in 2026.

    Demand destruction

    Experts say the war is already driving oil and gas “demand destruction”, as governments, companies and households respond to price spikes and supply-chain fragility by reducing reliance on hydrocarbon imports.

    Decisions being made now to reorient away from oil and gas could have a lasting impact on future import demand worldwide.

    Even though it is less than two months since the war started, choices are already being made that could reduce demand for oil and gas in the years ahead.

    In Vietnam, conglomerate Vingroup has asked the government to allow it to replace a planned $6bn liquefied natural gas (LNG) power project – which would have been the country’s largest – with a renewable energy project, citing surging fuel prices linked to the Middle East conflict.

    Similarly, in New Zealand, plans to develop a new LNG import terminal on the country’s North Island are becoming increasingly uncertain. On 30 March, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said the government would only approve the project if the business case stacked up, and it has been reported that officials are considering replacing it with a large hydroelectric project.

    Christopher Doleman, a gas specialist at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (Ieefa), said: “There were existing concerns about the high price of LNG and potential volatility and these concerns have increased significantly since the war began – leading several developers to consider other options, which in some cases include renewables projects.”

    At a consumer level, demand destruction is also taking place, as high prices for oil- and gas-linked products drive increased sales of solar panels and electric vehicles.

    In March, Octopus Energy, the UK’s largest supplier of domestic electricity and gas, said it had seen a sharp rise in solar panel sales during the price shock, with purchases up 54%.

    Also in the UK, March set a monthly record for electric car sales, with 137,000 vehicles sold — a 14% increase on the same period in 2025. Rising electric vehicle sales were also reported in the US and the EU.

    French used-car dealer Aramisauto said the share of its total sales accounted for by electric vehicles rose from 6.5% to 12.7% within three weeks of the start of the war. In Germany, the share of electric car search queries on the platform mobile.de rose from 12% to 36%, with dealers reporting 66% more enquiries for used electric cars than in February.

    Some Asian countries are also seeing a shift away from gas for cooking. In India, amid an ongoing liquefied petroleum gas shortage, electric stoves have seen a surge in demand, with some retailers reporting they sold three times their usual monthly volume in just a few days.

    The global shift away from fossil fuels — both in major power and import projects and at the consumer level — is likely to have significant long-term implications for energy demand.

    That would fundamentally alter demand forecasts for Middle East producers and could weigh on revenues in the years ahead.

    What we are seeing in the global energy sector is that there are very clear beneficiaries of the ongoing conflict … exporters that aren’t reliant on the Strait of Hormuz can take advantage of high oil prices to post profits and sanction new projects
    Slava Kiryushin, HFW

    Bolstered prospects

    While many Middle East oil and gas producers are seeing their exports severely restricted due to attacks on infrastructure and the disruption of shipments via the Strait of Hormuz, the war is bolstering the prospects of producers in other regions.

    High prices are delivering windfall profits, while investment is flowing towards projects perceived as less exposed to future attacks or a renewed blockade of the strait.

    Over time, these forces could contribute to a global divergence: Middle East producers could miss market-share targets, while suppliers elsewhere outperform.

    Commenting on the implications of the conflict, Slava Kiryushin, an international oil and gas lawyer and partner at London-headquartered law firm HFW, said: “There has already been a massive impact from this conflict on global energy markets. Producers in the GCC have been impacted more than others.

    “The most important factors right now are the damage caused to infrastructure from strikes on energy facilities and how quickly those can be remedied,” he said. “Even if this war ends tomorrow, many will remain concerned about political tensions in the region and the potential for future disruptions.

    “What we are seeing in the global energy sector is that there are very clear beneficiaries of the ongoing conflict … exporters that aren’t reliant on the Strait of Hormuz can take advantage of high oil prices to post profits and sanction new projects.”

    As revenues fall, repair costs rise and projects stall for national oil and gas companies in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iraq, Kuwait and Bahrain, companies active in regions including the US, Australia, Russia and Africa are seeing significant benefits.

    Despite Ukrainian strikes on key Russian oil infrastructure, Moscow has reported surging oil revenues as the war in Iran drives up global crude prices and boosts demand for Russian crude.

    In March, Ukraine’s Kyiv School of Economics (KSE) estimated Russia was earning about $760m a day from oil exports, benefitting from high prices and US sanctions waivers.

    Even if the conflict ends in the coming weeks, Russia’s annual oil and gas export revenues are projected to reach $218.5bn this year, up 63% from a scenario in which Middle East energy supplies remain uninterrupted, KSE said. That would amount to an additional $84bn in windfall revenue.

    US oil companies are also seeing bumper profits and higher share prices. Even as the broader US stock market has moved lower, ExxonMobil and Chevron shares have risen by more than 20% since the start of the year.

    Market research firm Rystad Energy has estimated that US oil producers could earn an additional $63bn in profit this year due to elevated prices.

    As producers outside the Middle East record large profits and ramp up output, some analysts argue the region’s future standing in global energy markets could be undermined.

    Commenting on the outlook for Qatari LNG, Doleman said: “Over the long term, the ongoing conflict could weaken Qatar’s bargaining position when the country is negotiating long-term gas contracts due to perceived risk associated with using the Strait of Hormuz.

    “Exports from other suppliers such as producers in the US or Australia could be viewed as more reliable and this could lead to the removal of resale restrictions and other elements that customers in Asia have been pushing back against for some time now.”

    Structural changes

    While uncertainty remains over how the war will end and how extensive future disruptions to energy supplies may be, it is increasingly likely the crisis will bring structural changes to global energy flows.

    There have already been shifts in energy relationships, with clients of GCC oil and gas producers seeking alternative suppliers and sanctions on Iranian and Russian oil being temporarily eased.

    While many of the arrangements made in the short period since the war began are likely to be temporary, some could become more durable over time.

    Iran has made the removal of sanctions one of its key demands to end the conflict with the US and Israel.

    With oil prices remaining high, many countries hit by rising energy costs would welcome the extension of sanctions waivers beyond existing deadlines, to keep crude supplies to global markets as high as possible.

    The scale and permanence of these changes will depend on how quickly the conflict can be resolved, and what assurances can be put in place to prevent it flaring up again.

    If the conflict is resolved quickly, it is possible that oil and gas sectors in Iraq and the GCC could see a significant rebound, returning towards pre-war operations.

    Prior to the war, low production costs in countries such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq made them among the most profitable exporters in the world, and analysts believe that cost advantage will support a recovery once the Strait of Hormuz reopens.

    “Though a lot of damage is being done, Middle East producers still have the advantage of some of the world’s cheapest and easiest-to-produce oil and gas,” Doleman said. “This means they are likely to retain their clients and a functioning business model once the Strait of Hormuz reopens.”

    However, if the conflict continues for an extended period, the prospect of a swift recovery would diminish and more dramatic structural changes to the global oil and gas industry would become more likely.

    That, in turn, could make the Middle East’s future role in global energy markets significantly smaller than previously forecast.

    https://image.digitalinsightresearch.in/uploads/NewsArticle/16317884/main.png
    Wil Crisp
  • Kuwait floats Doha Port feasibility tender

    9 April 2026

    Register for MEED’s 14-day trial access 

    Kuwait Ports Authority has floated a tender inviting consultants to bid for a contract to undertake feasibility studies for the development of the Doha Port project, located on the southern side of Kuwait Bay in the Capital Governorate.

    The tender was issued on 5 April, with a bid submission deadline of 5 May.

    Doha Port is a key regional trade port in Kuwait that was handed over to Kuwait Ports Authority in 1977.

    The port primarily serves small ships and traditional vessels, facilitating trade with the GCC and other nearby countries.

    According to Kuwait Ports Authority, the port spans more than 388,000 square metres and currently has nine berths.

    The port’s storage area is over 270,000 sq m and it handles cargo volumes of about 115,869 tonnes, with capacity for 878 vessels.

    According to regional projects tracker MEED Projects, Kuwait completed construction works on the second phase of the port’s berths in 2021.

    Local firm Specialities Group Holding was awarded the construction contract in 2017.

    UK-headquartered analytics firm GlobalData expects Kuwait’s construction industry to record an average annual growth rate of 4.9% between 2026 and 2029, supported by investments in the oil and gas and renewable energy sectors.

    The infrastructure construction sector was expected to expand by 4% in real terms in 2025, before stabilising at an annual average growth rate of 5.1% from 2026 to 2029, supported by the government’s focus on cross-border projects to develop the country’s transport infrastructure.

    READ THE APRIL 2026 MEED BUSINESS REVIEW – click here to view PDF

    Economic shock threatens long-term outlook; Riyadh adjusts to fiscal and geopolitical risk; GCC contractor ranking reflects gigaprojects slowdown.

    Distributed to senior decision-makers in the region and around the world, the April 2026 edition of MEED Business Review includes:

    > GCC CONTRACTOR RANKING: Construction guard undergoes a shift
    To see previous issues of MEED Business Review, please click here

     

    https://image.digitalinsightresearch.in/uploads/NewsArticle/16318227/main.jpg
    Yasir Iqbal