In the past, geographers have developed various ‘stages of growth’ models to analyse port development processes. Three of the most widely applied are those relating to waterfront revitalization, the evolution of internal port infrastructure and the development of complete port systems. These models share common ground in that the idea of change over time and space lies at their heart, but all three adopt quite different perspectives of scale and content. At the micro scale – that is, within the port and generally in historic docklands – waterfront redevelopment models seek to understand responses to the separation of port and other urban functions at the water-land interface, the separation that has become so common over time (Hoyle et al. 1988; Hayuth 1989). They explore the city’s rediscovery of its waterfront as old port facilities were abandoned and new cargo handling areas were built on greenﬁeld sites, usually towards the open ocean and especially on deeper water. At the city scale, meanwhile, the classic interpretation of internal port infrastructure development is Bird’s (1963) Anyport model. This postulates ﬁve stages of port development and migration, driven by the impact of growing cargo throughput and improved land transportation – especially railroads – on the demand for port facilities in the form of more and larger docks and greater storage space. And at the scale of the coastal region, various models have focused on port system development, particularly in terms of interport competition and hinterland evolution (Taaffe et al. 1963; Rimmer 1967; Hayuth 1981).