Commentary

By Robbert van Trooijen

We are, quite literally, building a fleet for which there may soon be no room at the inn.

In his recent work, Chokepoints: American Power in the Age of Economic Warfare, Edward Fishman argues that while great powers once rose by controlling geographic straits like the Bosphorus, modern power relies on different, often digital, levers. Today, we are reminded that even in the Digital Age, physical chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz can still disrupt supply chains to the extent that they threaten global recession.

But looking toward a post-2026 horizon— assuming current geopolitical fires are eventually extinguished— a more systemic bottleneck looms: stagnant global port infrastructure.

The math of global trade is currently heading toward a collision course. Available ocean terminal capacity at major gateways and hubs is reaching a saturation point. While the industry has leaned heavily on efficiency gains and automation to squeeze more“ moves per hour” out of existing footprints, there is a lack of new physical capacity being added to the global map.

We see a flurry of merger and acquisition activity— such as the planned sale of assets such as Hutchison Port Holdings— but shifting ownership of an existing facility does nothing by itself to accommodate the actual growth of global trade. The strongest evidence of this disconnect lies in the shipyards. The current pipeline of newbuilding programs for ultra-large container vessels vastly outstrips the construction of new berths intended to receive them.

We are, quite literally, building a fleet for which there may soon be no room at the inn.

Margins vs. cargo flow

The hesitation to build is certainly not due to a lack of profitability. The investment case for terminal infrastructure is, in fact, staggering.

APM Terminals, a subsidiary of Danish conglomerate A. P. Moller Maersk, reported a return on invested capital( ROIC) of no less than 16.1 % in the 2025 fourth quarter, a figure that outperforms almost every other sub-sector in the maritime industry.

So, why the inertia? There is no simple answer, but part of the answer lies in a classic“ incumbent’ s dilemma.”

While new capacity would benefit the global economy by increasing competitiveness, it would also— at least temporarily— dilute the high returns currently enjoyed by existing operators. In some markets, bottlenecks are not just a nuisance; they are lucrative. This creates a perverse incentive for incumbents to lobby against greenfield projects, effectively protecting their margins at the expense of trade fluidity.

The investment gap is most visible in the Southern Hemisphere. As industry analyst Lars Jensen highlighted at TPM26 in early March, demographic shifts identify Latin America and Africa as the next great trade frontiers.

Yet, these are the very regions where the pushback against“ carrier-owned” terminals is loudest. Local players often lobby against the participation of ocean carriers, arguing that vertical integration is anti-competitive.

This is an understandable yet somewhat protectionist stance. Ocean carriers possess the most direct incentive to drive capacity growth; they are the ones who need the berths to keep their growing fleet of vessels moving. The“ dominance” argument falls flat when compared with the alternative: an expensive status quo maintained by local( family-owned) oligopolies.

Any legitimate anti-competitive concerns can be easily mitigated through clear, enforceable neutrality clauses within concession agreements. These clauses ensure that while a carrier may own the terminal, it remains an open-access utility for the broader market.

The construction of a greenfield site takes three to five years. If we do not break ground today, the“ landside chokepoint” of 2028 and beyond could very well make today’ s Red Sea and Strait of Hormuz disruptions look like a minor logistical hiccup.

To secure the future of global trade, we must look past the protectionist rhetoric of local incumbents and embrace the capital and operational drive of carrier-terminal combinations. The returns are there and the demand is there. But the berths are not. It is time for a virtuous cycle to take over the industry.

email: robbert @ inceptionpartners. org

Travel Faery / Shutterstock. com

68 Journal of Commerce | June 1, 2026 www. joc. com