Skip to content
The Netherlands: a high-exposure logistics environment
Having spent the last several years building Evolution’s presence across the Benelux market, I have had this conversation with logistics operators more times than I can count. Cargo crime across Europe is no longer opportunistic. It is organised, targeted, and increasingly sophisticated. In the EMEA region alone, TAPA’s Intelligence System recorded over 157,000 cargo crime incidents across a three-year period, and the association believes this represents only a fraction of actual incidents, since reporting remains voluntary and fragmented. The estimated annual cost to European supply chains exceeds €8 billion.
For transport and logistics operators, particularly those managing high-value goods, pharmaceutical shipments, electronics, or fast-moving consumer goods, the question is whether the security infrastructure in place is actually fit for the threat environment in 2026.
The Netherlands occupies a unique position in European supply chains. Rotterdam is Europe’s largest port. Schiphol is one of its busiest air cargo hubs. The road network connects the country to virtually every major distribution corridor in Western Europe. That connectivity is an enormous commercial asset, and an equally significant security exposure.
The value per cargo theft incident in the Netherlands has risen sharply in recent years, even as reported incident volumes have fluctuated. Criminals are no longer targeting volume; they are targeting value — and they are doing so with inside information, GPS jamming, logistics database intrusion, and the kind of planning that characterises organised crime rather than opportunism. Heavy goods vehicle thefts in the Netherlands increased by 44% in the first half of 2024 compared to the prior year.
Distribution centres, bonded warehouses, consolidation facilities, and cross-docking operations are all in the frame. TAPA data consistently identifies warehouses and freight facilities as the most targeted locations for cargo theft in Europe, accounting for over 40% of recorded incidents.
TAPA standards: the industry benchmark
The Transported Asset Protection Association’s standards FSR (Facility Security Requirements), TSR (Trucking Security Requirements), and PSR (Parking Security Requirements) have become the effective benchmark for supply chain security in high-value logistics. Designed by the industry, for the industry, TAPA standards set minimum requirements for physical security, operational procedures, staff training, and risk management across warehousing, transport, and parking operations.
TAPA certification matters for two reasons. First, it gives logistics operators a structured, independently verified framework for identifying and closing security gaps. Second, it increasingly matters commercially: manufacturers and shippers of high-value goods frequently require TAPA-certified facilities and carriers as a condition of doing business. The competitive advantage of certification is real.
The next revision of TAPA’s standards is scheduled for 2026 as part of the regular three-year update cycle. Operators who achieved certification under 2023 standards should begin assessing readiness for the revised requirements now.
What TAPA FSR certification requires and where gaps typically appear
TAPA Facility Security Requirements (FSR) cover three certification levels, with requirements escalating in line with the security risk profile of the goods being handled. The framework addresses:
- Physical perimeter security: fencing, barriers, gatehouse controls, lighting standards, and intrusion detection across the facility boundary.
- Access control: management of personnel, visitor, vehicle, and contractor access, including identification, credentialing, and audit trails.
- CCTV coverage: camera placement, recording quality, retention periods, and monitoring arrangements both during and outside staffed hours.
- Alarm systems: detection coverage, monitoring arrangements, and response procedures.
- Staff security awareness: documented training requirements for all personnel with access to the facility.
- Management systems: risk assessment processes, incident recording, audit trails, and governance procedures.
The gaps Evolution most commonly identifies in logistics facilities seeking TAPA compliance are not in the headline systems – most operators have cameras and alarms. The gaps appear in integration, coverage quality, and documentation. CCTV systems that lack adequate resolution or coverage angles. Access control that does not record visitor and contractor movements with sufficient granularity. Alarm systems that are not connected to a monitored response service. And compliance documentation that exists in principle but has not been maintained in practice.
Beyond the perimeter: the insider threat
TAPA’s own intelligence consistently highlights insider knowledge as a factor in a significant proportion of organised cargo thefts. The most financially damaging cargo crimes in Europe are enabled by people within the supply chain who understand what is being stored, when it moves, and where the security weaknesses are.
Mitigating insider threat requires layered access control: not simply restricting who can enter a facility, but controlling what areas individuals can access, recording all access events, and generating alerts for unusual access patterns. It requires background screening protocols and a security culture that is embedded at operational level, not just documented in a policy.
Technology alone does not solve this. But technology that generates the right audit trails, and that is integrated with operational procedures, creates the visibility that makes detection and deterrence possible.
Remote monitoring for logistics sites
Many logistics facilities operate around the clock but are not staffed at full capacity overnight. Remote monitoring services where a professional monitoring centre watches live feeds, verifies alarms, and coordinates response have become the standard approach for maintaining security coverage outside core hours, without the cost of on-site guarding.
For TAPA compliance purposes, the quality and response capability of the monitoring arrangement matters. A monitored alarm service that meets the certification’s requirements for response times and escalation procedures supports compliance directly. An unmonitored system, or one connected to a centre without documented response procedures, does not.
My team at Evolution works directly with logistics and distribution operators across the Netherlands, Belgium, and the UK. We understand the TAPA framework in depth. Not just the standard requirements, but how auditors interpret them in practice, where gaps typically appear, and how to close them efficiently. Our remote monitoring services are built to support FSR compliance requirements, and we can guide operators through the certification process from initial gap assessment to audit readiness.
Practical priorities for logistics security managers in 2026
- Audit your CCTV coverage against TAPA FSR requirements for your certification level: resolution, angles, retention, and monitoring arrangements.
- Review your access control system’s audit trail capability: can you produce a complete record of who accessed which area, at what time, if required?
- Assess whether your current alarm monitoring arrangement meets documented response time requirements.
- If you are targeting TAPA FSR certification for the first time, begin a gap assessment now — the revised 2026 standards will be in force before mid-year.
- For multi-site logistics operations, evaluate whether your security platforms are integrated, or whether you are managing separate systems at each location without consolidated visibility.
Evolution works with logistics and distribution operators across the Netherlands, UK, and Norway to design and deliver TAPA-aligned security programmes. Contact us to arrange a site security assessment.