06 August 2026
Ports under pressure amid a rising tide of exposures
With their position on the front lines of global trade, port operators face a unique challenge: building resilience in the face of cascading threats from geopolitics, intensifying climate extremes and organised criminal gangs.
The rise in geopolitical risks is having a profound impact on the ports and terminals sector. The ongoing conflict in the Middle East has not only seen the Strait of Hormuz blocked, but Iran is also insisting that any peace deal will include recognition of its sovereignty over the Strait and the ability to charge vessels for transit.
At the time of writing, there were hundreds of vessels stranded to the west of the Strait, with estimates that it would take between 2 and 3 months for the backlog to normalise once the shipping channel reopens.
“Ports are operating in an environment where disruption rarely stays contained,” observes James Richardson, managing director, Marine - Ports, Terminals and Liabilities at Gallagher Specialty. “A blockage at a major chokepoint, a shift in trade policy or a climate-related delay can quickly cascade through shipping schedules, cargo flows and inland supply chains.”
“The challenge for port operators is not only managing individual risks but understanding how those risks interact and where pressure is likely to build next,” he adds.
With the Suez Canal still viewed as a major risk, transit vessels have decided to transit via the southern part of Africa, adding weeks to journeys and additional costs. Longer journeys mean more wear and tear on vessels and additional efforts to protect them.
While the views are that these route changes will be short-term, they are creating new demands at alternative ports, leading to risks of congestion, delays and more opportunities for theft by organised criminal gangs. More frequent disruptions and ongoing tariff disputes have created new stresses for ports as businesses look to stockpile goods rather than rely on the ‘just-in-time’ system of global trade.
Shifting spheres of influence
These ongoing shifts in the global shipping network are redefining the port ecosystem. Recent analysis by the Bank of Canada, based on datasets on ship movements between 2016 and 2023, concluded that North American ports have become less directly connected to global shipping networks, compared to ports in other countries.
This has increased the chances that foreign supply disruptions — especially at distant hubs — impact domestic markets and prices.
In 2016, three ports in the US were among the top ten most connected ports in the world, but none remained in the top ten by 2023. Meanwhile, eight of the ten most connected ports in 2023 were located in East Asia, up from six in 2016.
These shifts are a reflection of growing trade between developing economies and serve as a stark warning that supply routes are being redrawn, as are the risks which come with it.
A relatively small handful of major ports continue to control much of the world’s tonnage. The past year has seen an increase in the involvement of major nations as they seek to secure and control the world’s supply lines amid changing trade routes and an increasingly fragmented world order.
China is becoming the dominant force in the world’s ports. Chinese firms now operate or have a financial stake in at least 129 ports outside China and have spent at least USD80 billion on port construction. As part of the country’s long-standing Belt & Road Initiative, many of the investments are tied to bilateral trade and regional shipping agreements.
Interestingly, almost four in ten of the country’s overseas ports are near maritime chokepoints, including the Strait of Malacca, the Strait of Hormuz and the Suez Canal, making them indispensable operators in strategic areas.
Chokepoint disruptions concentrate risk but distribute impact. For port operators, resilience depends on understanding not just local operations, but where global trade flows originate, transit and how they might be rerouted under stress.
The shape of the world’s biggest ports: In numbers
In 2024, the world’s ports processed the equivalent of
shipping containers, and more than half passed through just 20 ports.
Unsurprisingly, China accounts for over
of global container traffic, reflecting its central role in global manufacturing and export supply chains. Of the six busiest ports worldwide, five are in China, led by the Port of Shanghai. Shanghai processed over 51.5 million 20-foot equivalent units (TEUs) in 2024, making it by far the busiest port worldwide. Singapore, in second place, processed more than 10 million fewer TEUs that year.
Asia is home to
of the world’s busiest ports, including Singapore, Busan (24.4 million TEUs) and Port Klang (14.6 million TEUs).
The rapid and significant investment in new port infrastructure is a global practice. India continues in its massive programme of port construction, which is expected to last until well into the next decade.
In October, Saudi Arabia signed a
deal for the Jeddah Islamic Port. Singapore is building a USD20 billion automated port and shipping hub. Dubai’s port company, meanwhile, has signed deals to invest and expand its positions at ports in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Callao in Peru.
Why chokepoints matter for port operators
Through its partnership with Oxford University’s Programme for Sustainable Infrastructure Systems, Gallagher Re has been studying maritime chokepoints. These trade bottlenecks don't just disrupt shipping lanes — they directly reshape activity, risk and revenue at ports and terminals. Here’s how:
Volume volatility and congestion risk: When a key route is disrupted, vessels are delayed, rerouted or arrive in surges. Ports can face sudden congestion, berth shortages and operational bottlenecks, or, conversely, sharp drops in throughput if traffic bypasses the region entirely.
Knock-on network effects: Disruption in one location ripples across global shipping schedules. Delays, vessel bunching and longer transit times can cascade into missed slots, inefficient yard utilisation and strained landside logistics.
Rerouting shifts trade flows: The availability, or absence, of alternative routes is critical. Chokepoints with limited rerouting options can divert large volumes of traffic to secondary ports, creating unexpected demand spikes that infrastructure and labour may not be equipped to handle.
Cost and risk transfer pressures: Increased fuel costs, insurance premiums (including war risk) and longer journeys flow through to port users. Operators may face pressure on pricing, contract performance and service levels as shipping lines seek to manage these higher costs.
Exposure to contingent business interruption: Even without physical damage at the port, disruptions elsewhere in the network can reduce cargo volumes, delay throughput or interrupt customer operations, highlighting gaps in traditional insurance coverage for non-physical disruption.
Why predictions for a super El-Niño will further test ports
The changing climate is delivering significant risks for ports. The partial closure and significant restrictions on transit through the Panama Canal 2 years ago were a clear sign of the threat that climate change is and will continue to pose for ports and broader supply chains.
Forecasters are expecting El Niño to strengthen over the rest of 2026, with warnings it could be the strongest in decades, with extreme temperatures amplified by global warming. There are broad implications for food security and global supply chains.
The El Niño pattern of the ENSO climatic cycle is associated with driving more extreme weather, including droughts. Following historic low water levels in Gatun Lake in 2024, the main reservoir supplying the Panama Canal, the canal’s operators reduced daily transits to 24 ships per day, down from the pre-drought capacity of 35–40, resulting in marine transportation bottlenecks and delays.
With all the data pointing to more frequent and more intense weather events, climate-related disruptions will continue to affect shipping routes and port operations. In all, 90% of major ports already face threats from sea level rise, storms and flooding, yet long-term resilience planning remains limited.
According to research from the University of Oxford, most of the world's 1,340 major ports weren't designed with climate change in mind. The exposure is significant: more than 70% of global terminals lie in areas exposed to sea‑level rise or severe weather, and port downtime puts an estimated USD67 billion of global shipping trade at risk annually.
Windstorms can be particularly destructive. An estimated 38% of global container port activities take place in regions prone to high hurricane risk, with the American Eastern Seaboard, coastal China, Japan and the Republic of Korea most exposed. Inland from ports, damage from storms to surrounding infrastructure, such as flooded road and rail connectors, can result in further operational disruption.
More broadly, ageing port infrastructure remains a risk, with much of the world’s current port infrastructure not designed for growing climate extremes. With the debate around new fuel facilities, the major concern is the inability of many ports to retrofit their current facilities to enhance resilience.
“A vast number of ports around the world find themselves struggling with ageing infrastructure, which is both more susceptible to changing environmental trends and evolving cargo demands," says Richardson. "This infrastructure is both highly vulnerable and costly to upgrade."
Understanding where risks are concentrated will be central to building more resilient infrastructure and financial systems, but uncertainty is impairing the ability to understand and identify the risks.
Why a lack of consensus over future fuels is impeding futureproofing at ports
Concurrently, the drive for a net-zero maritime fleet is creating new risks and opportunities for port operators. The inability of the maritime community to agree on a sustainable fuel of the future is creating uncertainty at a time when ports are under pressure to invest in new fuel facilities.
"Port operators are being asked to invest ahead of certainty," says Richardson. "Until there is greater consensus around future fuels, there is a real risk of fragmented infrastructure, uneven port readiness and assets that may not align with where demand ultimately settles."
The push for clean fuels and net-zero shipping also introduces technical and safety risks. These alternative fuels — ammonia, hydrogen, small nuclear — create liability and security concerns, including the potential for vessels to be compromised by bad actors.
Marine insurers have sought to engage with regulators over the risks posed by each alternative, but the creation of new fuel facilities is time-consuming. With significant lead times for new vessels, shipowners and port operators are keen for more clarity.
There are rising concerns from shipowners and charterers that ports may soon restrict access, allowing only certain ships based on new regulations or fuel types.
Skills shortages and strike action are ongoing sources of operational disruption
Most ports and terminals are heavily reliant on the availability of skilled workers to maintain daily operations. While COVID-era port lockdowns and backlogs are a distant memory, talent gaps and strike action are workforce-related exposures that haven’t gone away.
Both have caused operational disruption at ports and terminals in recent months. During the labour strikes that brought several North American ports to a standstill in October 2024, analysis suggested that even when factoring in excess cargo-handling capacity in port systems, each day the North American ports were closed equated to 5 days on average for supply chains to return to normal.
In March 2025, industrial action disrupted major European ports. Strikes at Rotterdam’s Delta II terminal and trade union action at French ports led to delays and logistical bottlenecks, with many vessels rerouted. There was major congestion and yard space constraints at other European hubs as cargo was diverted due to the strike action.
The changing nature of cargo crime
Physical theft is still a major issue for port operators, especially in regions like Mexico and Africa’s Copper Belt. The increasing involvement of sophisticated criminal gangs has prompted the International Union of Marine Insurers (IUMI) and the Transported Asset Protection Association (TAPA) EMEA to issue new guidance to highlight the risks and the need for risk management.
“Although conventional theft from trucks and warehouses are still prevalent, cargo crime is evolving,” says Thorsten Neumann, president & CEO of TAPA EMEA. “We are seeing criminals using digital tools to conceal their true identities, the creation of shell companies and legitimate firms being cloned using stolen credentials.”
“Our concern is that artificial intelligence will accelerate these activities, making deception easier to scale and significantly driving up losses.”
Criminal gangs are using technology to create more sophisticated ways to steal cargo, including accessing manifests and cargo systems to replicate documentation and steal goods from under the noses of the authorities. Cyber threats are increasingly relevant as logistics systems become more digitalised.
Ports and cargo owners have not been idle with risk management and the use of technology to better track their goods. Many are implementing advanced GPS tagging to discreetly track shipments and reduce the likelihood of tampering.
However, the accumulation of cargo at port facilities caused by delays driven by geopolitical risks, and the decision by businesses to look to stockpile goods to mitigate supply chain disruption, create greater risks with goods left at ports for longer periods of time.
Rising demand for risk insights and data
The convergence of climate change, geopolitical instability, infrastructure decay and people risk presents a lasting structural shift for the ports and terminals sector.
Port operators require more comprehensive risk solutions at a time when those risks remain fast-moving and dynamic. The need for an experienced partner who truly understands the risks will be pivotal if clients are to navigate the risks and their interconnections to determine the most effective solutions.
Making decisions armed with data and insights can support resilience and growth. "The more we can offer our clients in terms of advice around not just insurance, but around mitigating risk, the better we are at our roles," explains Alec Russell, managing director of Marine - Cargo at Gallagher Specialty.
"Our view at Gallagher Specialty is that we want to be able to provide underwriters with information and data faster and more accurately, and we welcome a conversation with others who see this need."
This information is not intended to constitute any form of opinion or specific guidance and recipients should not infer any opinion or specific guidance from its content. Recipients should not rely exclusively on the information contained in the bulletin and should make decisions based on a full consideration of all available information. We make no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, reliability or correctness of the information provided. We and our officers, employees or agents shall not be responsible for any loss whatsoever arising from the recipient’s reliance upon any information we provide and exclude liability for the statistical content to fullest extent permitted by law.
The Walbrook Building 25 Walbrook London, EC4N 8AW
Privacy Policy - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information (U.S. Residents Only)
Arthur J. Gallagher (UK) Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered Office: The Walbrook Building, 25 Walbrook, London EC4N 8AW. Registered in England and Wales. Company Number: 119013.