CLECAT — 2025-06-20
News from Brussels
In recent months, Europe’s maritime logistics system has come under increasing strain, with congestion becoming a widespread and persistent challenge across major European ports. CLECAT has been alerted by its members of the severe operational disruptions affecting the fluidity of container flows, despite an absence of major global crises. This raises urgent concerns about the preparedness for future disruptions and points to systemic vulnerabilities that must be addressed.
Congestion and structural weaknesses threaten the stability of European supply chains
One of the most pressing issues is the geographical scope of the congestion, which leaves little room for manoeuvre. The entire Zeebrugge–Hamburg port range is affected, making it difficult, if not impossible, to resolve delays by switching terminals. Inland container yards and off-dock facilities can offer temporary relief, but they do not resolve the root inefficiencies. The absence of a viable ‘Plan B’ exposes the fragility of the current system, raising serious concerns about its ability to cope with future disruptions.
The situation is further exacerbated by volatile vessel schedules leading to operational difficulties for freight forwarders and customs agents are piling up due to this situation. Unpredictable port calls force them to cancel and re-submit customs declarations - a process that is not only administratively burdensome but often comes at a cost borne by the intermediary. Moreover, such last-minute changes disrupt inland logistics chains, particularly when relying on rail or barge services, which are far less flexible than road transport. In several Northern European countries, recent disruptions have already compelled companies to shift volumes to less optimal routes or modes of transport. The ripple effects of these disruptions are straining commercial relationships across the supply chain.
The current situation reflects an accumulation of longstanding structural inefficiencies: Booking processes are increasingly unpredictable, with freight forwarders reporting modified cut-off dates even after a booking is confirmed, primarily due to unpredictable vessel arrival times, with cascading impacts on transport planning. Export containers are often loaded by road carriers but cannot be delivered to port terminals due to last-minute changes, exposing shippers to significant costs, including detention fees.
The shift from “just in time” to “just in case” logistics has become a reality due to current export processes in Europe. Verified Gross Mass (VGM) documentation, customs and physical delivery require multiple closing dates often occurring five or more days before vessel departure. If containers are not delivered within the narrow and shrinking window between detention-free periods and the closing date, they incur additional fees and risk missing their sailing slot altogether.
This paradox, where increasing digitalisation and automation should lead to greater efficiency, yet is accompanied by worsening delays and continues to challenge the maritime logistics chain. Terminals are increasingly caught between the operational need for early container arrival to prepare vessels on time and the physical constraints of limited yard space, which is strained by extended container dwelling times.
As a result, European exports have suffered from this situation with reduced volumes on the Europe-Asia and trans-Atlantic trade lanes. While European companies are currently affected by international trade tensions, this additional obstacle risks undermining overall European competitiveness signals a dramatic situation for certain economic sectors if the situation does not improve.
The current crisis in European port congestion is the result of a series of structural shifts that have steadily reshaped the maritime logistics landscape over the past decade. What was once a more diverse and competitive market with over twenty major carriers has evolved into a structure dominated by just three alliances. This has led to a significant concentration of market power in the hands of a few operators, reducing the ability of shippers and freight forwarders to access alternatives or negotiate service conditions, particularly in times of disruption.
In parallel, the relentless upscaling of container vessels has placed extraordinary pressure on port infrastructure. Ultra large container vessels now dominate key trade lanes, delivering massive volumes in concentrated timeframes. Large container ships, many exceeding 24,000 TEU, now berth in ports like Antwerp for up to five days. The sheer volume handled by these mega-vessels overwhelms inland infrastructure and creates bottlenecks that ripple across the supply chain. As argued by the International Transport Forum (ITF), this has created peak loads that the landside infrastructure, roads, terminals, rail links, was never designed to absorb. Truck queues, traffic jams, warehouse congestion, and rescheduling of pre-carriage are becoming the norm rather than the exception. As a result, even minor disruptions can trigger cascading delays across the entire system, which often serve as the final stop in complex rotation schedules.
Exporters Face Shrinking Compliance Windows Amid Growing Pressures
Issues are also exacerbated by commercial practices that increasingly shift risk onto cargo owners. While fair practices and their understanding by all actors of the supply chain – including Demurrage and Detention (D&D) charging – would support better long-term planning and ultimately provide a fairer commercial environment, D&D free-time periods have been shortened, while cut-off times for delivering containers and documentation have moved earlier. The result is a narrower window for exporters to comply with all requirements - creating a high-pressure environment with little flexibility. Yet despite these growing demands, carriers face few incentives to improve predictability or transparency in their operations, especially as their service levels are rarely subject to binding performance criteria.
The lack of effective real-time communication between terminals, carriers, and shippers is also a prominent issue to tackle. What was once a supply chain built on agility and responsiveness has become a system of rigid cut-off points, longer lead times, and costly inefficiencies.
Better visibility into the entire supply chain helps secure improved contractual terms and enables long‑term planning, paving the way for a shift to sustainable inland transport like rail and waterways. In this context freight forwarders and logistics service providers are more than just operators: they’re indispensable coordinators. Their ability to respond and plan effectively depends on access to information that is predictable, timely, and transparent.
Rebuilding trust through transparency and accountability in maritime logistics.
CLECAT echoes the warning voiced by its members: the current dysfunction is occurring without a major external shock. What happens if geopolitical tensions escalate, or if demand surges similar to those seen during the pandemic return? The anticipated reopening of the Suez Canal could send a fleet of vessels towards already overstretched North European ports. Renewed labour unrest at US West Coast ports and trade measures impacting global trade could further aggravate global imbalances. These risks should not be underestimated.
Performance benchmarking and greater transparency, such as proposed by the ITF, could play a crucial role in helping public and private stakeholders identify bottlenecks and share responsibility for resolving them. CLECAT therefore calls for renewed attention to the initiative previously undertaken with the ITF to develop harmonised definitions and performance indicators for the maritime logistics chain. While the earlier work stalled due to limited engagement from key industry parties, the current situation highlights the urgency of picking it up again.
CLECAT believes it is time to return to the discussion on maritime logistics chain performance and governance. The issue of fairer D&D charging practices – long advocated by CLECAT – must be re-evaluated to relieve pressure on land-based infrastructure. Ultimately, restoring resilience in Europe’s maritime system will require coordination and dialogue between parties. Data transparency, fairer contract terms, diversification of port calls, and a level playing field for independent service providers are all necessary steps. Without such efforts, the sector remains exposed and unprepared for the next crisis.