Disruptions in shipping threaten new costs for global trade
Global trade is once again showing how much it depends on a few narrow maritime passages, and every more serious disruption at those points very quickly turns into a broader economic problem. When carriers have to change routes, pay more expensive insurance, consume more fuel and keep goods in transit longer, the consequences do not remain confined only to shipping companies. Higher costs gradually spill over to importers, manufacturers, traders and ultimately to end customers. In such a chain reaction, not only energy products are exposed anymore, but also food products, chemicals, industrial components, textiles, consumer electronics and a wide range of goods that enter shops and factories every day.
Maritime transport is therefore not merely one of the topics in logistics, but one of the most sensitive indicators of the condition of the world economy. The International Monetary Fund reminded that before the wave of disruptions, around 15 percent of global maritime trade passed through the Suez Canal, while the Panama Canal carried approximately 5 percent of such flows. As soon as security, climate or political risks hit those routes, not only transport prices but also delivery deadlines, production planning, inventories and the liquidity of companies that depend on import chains come under pressure.
Why maritime bottlenecks have become a question of prices and inflation
The shipping problem today can no longer be viewed separately from the general economic picture. The UN Conference on Trade and Development warned already during the previous wave of disruptions that simultaneous pressures on the Red Sea, the Suez Canal, the Black Sea and the Panama Canal create overlapping shocks for world trade. Such shocks do not mean only that a particular shipment will be delayed by a few days, but that the whole system has to operate at a higher cost: ships sail on longer routes, consume more fuel, burden ports that were not planned for such pressure, and insurance premiums rise when security risk increases.
In a more recent analysis, the OECD warns that shocks in container shipping prices remain important for economic policymakers because they can spill over into import prices and core inflation. This is especially important at a time when many countries are only trying to return to a more stable price environment after a multi-year period of rising prices. According to the OECD, annual inflation in member states in January 2026 fell to 3.3 percent, but overall price levels are still around 35.6 percent higher than at the end of 2019. In other words, although the pace of inflation has slowed, economies remain sensitive to new cost shocks, and shipping is one of the channels through which such shocks spread the fastest.
That is precisely why transport cost is not a technical detail reserved for logistics experts. When a container on the Asia – Europe route becomes more expensive, for European importers this means more expensive goods at entry, more working capital tied up in inventories and greater pressure to pass rising costs on to wholesale and retail. Companies with a strong negotiating position can absorb part of the shock, but smaller companies and economies heavily reliant on imports usually do not have much room for manoeuvre.
The Red Sea and the Suez Canal remain a key source of uncertainty
Attacks on merchant vessels in the Red Sea area changed the calculations of the world’s shipping companies already at the end of 2023 and during 2024, and the effects remained visible afterward as well. The IMF calculated that in the first two months of 2024, trade through the Suez Canal fell by 50 percent compared with the year before, while traffic around the Cape of Good Hope rose sharply because carriers chose the longer but safer route. That change is not merely a geographical curiosity. Diverting ships around the south of Africa lengthens the voyage by ten or more days on average, disrupting berthing schedules, the return of empty containers and precisely timed supply chains on which retail, the automotive industry, the chemical sector and consumer goods manufacturers depend.
UNCTAD additionally warned that during the period of the strongest disruptions both the Suez and Panama Canals fell by more than 40 percent compared with their earlier peaks in the number of transits. Such a decline in traffic at two strategic hubs clearly shows that the problem was not an isolated incident, but a systemic blow to the logistics infrastructure of world trade. Even when part of transport adapts to alternative routes, the total cost of the system rises because every replacement option is, as a rule, slower, more expensive or more operationally demanding.
This is still visible on the market. Drewry’s World Container Index of 12 March 2026 showed a weekly increase of 8 percent, to 2,123 dollars for a 40-foot container. Even more important is the direction of movement on the routes that directly connect Asia and Europe: the freight rate on the Shanghai – Rotterdam route rose by 19 percent, to 2,443 dollars, and on the Shanghai – Genoa route by 10 percent, to 3,120 dollars. Drewry states that capacity management and supply chain pressures linked to the current situation in the Middle East are affecting the increase. This means that the market is still pricing in security risk and the possibility of new disruptions.
The Panama Canal is recovering, but the climate risk has not disappeared
While the Suez Canal is most often in focus because of security, the Panama Canal remains a reminder that world trade can also be disrupted by climatic conditions. Drought and low water levels in previous years limited the number of daily transits and forced carriers to plan bookings, vessel draft and surcharges more carefully. On its official pages, the Panama Canal Authority states that in 2025 the canal had 13,404 transits, connected 170 countries and 1,920 ports through more than 180 maritime routes. This shows that it is infrastructure of enormous global reach, but also a system that continues to be strongly affected by hydrology and water resource management.
The fact that the canal’s official pages are still full in 2026 of operational notices, booking rules and hydrological indicators indicates that normalization cannot be understood as a complete return to the old state. Even when traffic looks more stable than in the hardest period of restrictions, shipping companies and clients still have to include in their calculations the possibility of seasonal restrictions, changes in available draft and administrative adjustments. For global trade, this means that the Panama Canal remains a risk factor, especially for transport between the east coast of the United States, Latin America and Asia.
The climate dimension of this problem is especially important because it shows that shipping is no longer exposed only to geopolitical shocks. One part of the costs arises because of conflict and security, and another because of drought, water levels and climate instability. When those two types of risk overlap, the market gets a more lasting sense of uncertainty, and companies find it increasingly difficult to plan contracts, deadlines and inventories over the longer term.
Who pays the highest price of disruptions
The most exposed are countries and companies that depend on imports, especially those with a smaller domestic market, more modest inventories and greater dependence on one or two main maritime routes. In such economies, every new increase in freight rates, insurance or port costs more easily enters the final price of products. At the same time, financing costs also rise, because goods travel longer, are sold later and are converted into cash more slowly. This can be especially sensitive for small and medium-sized importers, food distributors, manufacturers working with imported semi-finished products, and industries that cannot easily replace supply routes.
Not only developing countries are affected. In January 2026, the World Bank estimates that global growth this year will amount to 2.6 percent, amid continued trade tensions and political uncertainty, and warns that the world economy is more resilient than expected, but still fragile. It is precisely in such an environment that logistical shocks have a greater effect than in a period of strong growth. When growth is weaker, companies have less room to absorb additional costs, and governments have less fiscal capacity to soften the blow to households and the economy.
An additional layer of pressure comes from trade policy. In December 2025, the WTO announced that the value of world merchandise imports affected by new tariffs and other import measures had more than quadrupled compared with the previous review period. This means that global trade simultaneously bears the burden of more expensive logistics, security risks and political barriers. When these factors are added together, it becomes considerably harder for companies to predict the real cost of goods that have yet to arrive at their destination.
Consequences for industry, traders and consumers
For industry, the biggest problem is that maritime disruptions rarely remain limited to one type of goods. If chemicals, industrial gases, machine parts or electronic components are delayed, then it is not only one shipment that is delayed, but also the production that depends on it. If food transport, refrigerated logistics or packaging costs rise, the pressure is transferred to retail prices. If ship and container rotations are prolonged, bottlenecks are then created on other routes that at first glance are not directly connected with the crisis area.
Traders therefore increasingly choose more expensive safety stocks, earlier orders or additional supplier diversification. But each of those measures has a price. Larger inventories mean more tied-up capital and more expensive storage. Diversifying suppliers reduces dependence on one route, but often means more complex contracts and a higher procurement price. A shift to alternative transport options, such as a combination of sea and rail or a greater share of air freight, is possible only for part of the goods and is almost always more expensive.
For consumers, such changes are not immediately visible in one item on a bill, but over time they appear through a wide range of prices. The impact is not necessarily spectacular as in energy crises, but it can be persistent and widespread: slightly more expensive household appliances, more expensive clothing, a higher price for part of food products, more expensive construction materials or longer delivery times for goods imported from Asia. It is precisely this dispersed nature of the effect that makes shipping one of the more important economic topics, although it often remains outside the main focus of public debate.
Shipping is once again a strategic economic topic
All available estimates point to the same thing: when insurance, routes and passages through key maritime points become complicated, not only transport but almost the entire supply chain becomes more expensive. Because of that, shipping is no longer a narrow sectoral issue, but a topic that affects inflation, industrial competitiveness, trade policy and the resilience of states to external shocks. In a world in which supply chains are still global, and political and climate risks are simultaneously high, the safety of navigation and the reliability of transit through the Suez and Panama Canals remain among the most important economic variables of 2026.
Sources:- UNCTAD – analysis of disruptions in the Red Sea, the Black Sea and the Panama Canal and their effects on global trade (link)- IMF – overview of the impact of attacks in the Red Sea on trade through the Suez and Panama Canals (link)- Drewry – World Container Index of 12 March 2026 with freight rate movements on the main routes (link)- OECD – analysis of the pass-through of container shipping costs to import and consumer prices (link)- OECD – statistical release on inflation in January 2026 (link)- Panama Canal Authority – official data and operational information about the canal (link)- WTO – Global Trade Outlook and Statistics and monitoring of new trade restrictions (link; link)- World Bank – estimate of global economic growth and trade uncertainty for 2026 (link)
Find accommodation nearby
Creation time: 3 hours ago