Global Logistics in August 2026: global logistics searches for a new balance
In August, global logistics operated under pressure from several factors at once: restricted transit through the Strait of Hormuz, congestion at Asian ports after a series of typhoons, and low water levels on the Rhine and Danube. In response, carriers increasingly returned to the Suez Canal route, though it can hardly be called stable yet. The causes varied, but the outcome was the same — all month, companies kept switching between routes instead of following their usual pattern. On top of this came a change in EU customs rules, which within a few weeks affected the economics of air freight from Asia. A plan built around one main route and one backup option proved insufficient this time — businesses need to keep several alternatives in view at once.
Reshaping of energy routes is changing the conditions for global shipping
Because vessel traffic through the Strait of Hormuz is restricted, part of the energy flows has already been rerouted via alternative paths. Saudi Arabia and the UAE increased exports via the Red Sea, while some vessels used a route along the coast of Oman.
Against this backdrop, Iran and Oman are discussing the creation of a temporary joint maritime corridor and demining the strait to restore safe navigation. A separate risk factor has been transit fees: Iran has charged some vessels up to $2 million per voyage, and in August eight major shipping associations called on the UN and IMO to oppose mandatory payments, warning of a possible precedent for other strategic straits.
A physical bottleneck on a single route changes the logistics of energy flows: longer alternative paths, limited vessel availability, and heightened security risks affect shipping economics. Businesses therefore need to assess:
- Vessel availability.
- Insurance coverage.
- Alternative routes.
- Potential additional costs.
Traffic falling to a three-month low shows the scale of the restrictions: the strait is still handling far fewer vessels than before the crisis began.
Suez Canal: carriers return to the route, but risks remain
Carriers have begun more actively shifting services back to the shorter route via the Red Sea and Suez Canal. MSC is resuming Suez Canal transits for several Asia-Europe services, and overall capacity on the route is growing quickly. At the same time, a return to pre-crisis levels is still a long way off.
The return is taking place against a backdrop of new attacks in the Red Sea. Maersk already considers conditions sufficient for a return, but some services continue routing around Africa. An additional factor has been congestion at Asian ports, which is prompting carriers to reassess capacity allocation on European routes.
Logistics is gradually shifting from a ‘route around Africa no matter what’ approach to a flexible choice of route depending on security, available capacity, and port conditions. For businesses, this is an opportunity to cut transit time via the Suez Canal, but they should also be prepared for another change in route, timing, and shipping cost.
Infrastructure bottlenecks: from China and Panama to the Rhine and Danube
Over the course of the month, bottlenecks emerged in different parts of the global logistics network — from seaports and canals to inland waterways.
| Location | What’s happening | Impact on supply chains |
|---|---|---|
| Chinese ports | Typhoons caused terminal closures and vessel backlogs; some port calls were cancelled | Loss of capacity, delays, and cargo shifted to other services |
| Panama Canal | Low water levels are limiting vessel draft and throughput capacity in September | Slot shortages, rising costs, and the search for alternative routes |
| Rhine and Danube | Low water levels are limiting barge loading | Reduced river capacity and cargo shifted to other transport modes |
| Danube/Sulina Canal | Up to 70 vessels are waiting to transit due to a shortage of pilots, limited throughput capacity, and disruptions from Russian attacks in the Black Sea | Delays to Ukrainian exports and competition for capacity with priority fuel cargo |
| Jeddah | Congestion due to high volumes | Additional fees and booking restrictions |
The causes of these bottlenecks differ, but the effect is similar: delays at one node put pressure on alternative routes, driving up cost and delivery times. That’s why, when planning shipments, it’s important to consider not just the main route but also the availability of backup capacity.
Freight market: demand and capacity are distributed unevenly ahead of peak season
Ahead of peak season, the situation in the ocean freight market varies considerably by route. On the Asia–US route, the market remains tight: the transpacific lane shows sustained demand, with additional pressure coming from restrictions at the Panama Canal and higher-than-expected import volumes.
On the India–Europe route, demand westbound remains high: major European carriers’ services were already fully booked through the end of August, and on some sailings through the start of September. Meanwhile, demand on the transatlantic route is softening, but carriers continue cutting capacity, which is supporting a gradual rise in rates and attempts to introduce seasonal surcharges.
On intra-Asian routes, rates are rising again after an earlier decline, driven by stronger demand. The situation is being shaped by disruptions in the Middle East and weather issues causing delays at Chinese ports. Maersk also notes high demand, higher spot rates, and increased market volatility.
New EU rules are changing demand for air freight from Asia
As of July 1, the EU abolished the customs duty exemption for imported shipments valued under €150. The rule change is already affecting behavior in the Asia air freight market, where e-commerce accounts for a significant share of low-value shipments.
In July, air freight rates from China to Western Europe fell 22% compared to June, and shipment volumes also declined. That said, only a month has passed since the rule change, so it’s still too early to assess its long-term impact on air cargo volumes.
A reduced flow of low-value shipments from China to Europe could also affect how air cargo capacity is allocated across routes and cargo categories. For businesses working with Asian suppliers, this means factoring in customs rules alongside cost and shipping availability: regulatory changes can alter the economics of individual shipments, cargo flow patterns, and demand for air delivery.
Risks and opportunities for business: flexibility becomes part of logistics strategy
August’s developments show that relying on a single route, node, or delivery scenario increases risk for supply chains.
Key risks for business:
- Delivery delays due to congestion and route restrictions.
- Rising costs due to capacity shortages, additional fees, and rate fluctuations.
- More difficult budgeting due to unstable rates and shipping availability.
- Regulatory changes capable of quickly altering shipment economics.
- Concentration on a single route, port, carrier, or mode of transport.
At the same time, flexibility creates opportunities to reduce these risks. Dynamic route selection makes it possible to compare options by cost, timing, availability, and risk, while pre-defined backup scenarios allow for a faster response to change.
Regulatory changes should also be factored into planning. The EU’s removal of the customs exemption for small shipments has already affected demand and rates in air freight from Asia. Logistics decisions therefore need to account not only for transport parameters but also for customs rules and the economics of the entire shipment.
SYNEX Logistics: how to plan shipments amid unstable routes
Under current conditions, shipment planning should start not with finding a single optimal route, but with defining the critical parameters of the shipment: the deadline, acceptable cost, required capacity, and the consequences of delay. This makes it possible to determine in advance where the company can compromise on time or cost, and where strict control is needed.
For long international supply chains, it’s also worthwhile to define triggers for switching the logistics scenario: a significant rate increase, reduced available capacity, port closure, or a change in customs rules. That way, decisions to adjust a shipment are made based on pre-defined criteria rather than after a problem has already occurred.
For critical cargo, it’s worth regularly checking key shipments against three parameters — timing, cost, and route reliability. This kind of monitoring helps spot deviations from planned targets and assess in a timely manner whether the current transport scheme remains optimal.
