A report published by reports on 5 November 2026 warns that growth in global trade is outstripping the landside capacity that threads ports into the wider supply chain.
Container terminals can now lift, stack and move more boxes than at any previous point, yet shippers and receivers still face waits at the gate. Larger ships and more efficient maritime networks have increased the flow of cargo across oceans, but the infrastructure that carries those goods inland has lagged behind.
For much of the past 15 years investment in roads, rail and inland freight connections has not matched the pace of change at the quay. The consequence is that terminals able to handle greater volumes are sometimes unable to clear them, producing queues of trucks and congestion that ripple back to customers and carriers.
Ports themselves have often modernised on a technical level, installing automation and expanding yard capacity, but the report notes that those improvements are only part of the picture. Without commensurate investment in hinterland links the throughput gains achieved at terminals will be constrained by bottlenecks beyond the berth.
Bottlenecks beyond the quay
Roads and railways are central to the problem because they determine how quickly containers can be moved out of the port precinct and into distribution networks. In many cases the rail connections, road capacity and inland terminals that should soak up the increased seaborne volume remain inadequate, creating predictable choke points even when berth productivity is high.
These constraints do not affect terminals uniformly. The interaction between vessel size, call schedules and hinterland capacity varies by trade lane and region, meaning that some supply chains will experience more frequent and longer delays than others. The practical result for shippers is additional dwell time and uncertainty in delivery timetables.
The investment gap and competing priorities
The report highlights a prolonged period in which landside infrastructure investment has underperformed relative to maritime-capacity upgrades. Public funding cycles, competing budgetary demands and the complexity of coordinating multiple authorities and private operators have all contributed to slower progress behind the quay.
Private investment has targeted terminals because the returns are clearer and the assets are contained, but the returns on landside projects are often dispersed across users and jurisdictions. That structural mismatch discourages some forms of long-term financing and complicates the prioritisation of projects that would relieve port-side pressure.
The mismatch also has operational consequences for terminals and carriers. When boxes cannot be moved inland promptly the cost of handling rises, yard utilisation becomes less efficient and scheduling advantages created by larger vessels are partially eroded. That dynamic can feed back into container availability and shipping schedules.
Addressing capacity beyond the quay will require joined-up planning between port authorities, national and regional transport agencies and private logistics operators. The report’s findings underline the need for coordinated policy and financing instruments that recognise the entire door-to-door chain rather than treating port productivity in isolation.
A combination of measures is likely to be needed, including targeted upgrades to rail and road access, investment in inland terminals and more flexible operating arrangements at ports to smooth peak demand. Improved data sharing between terminals, carriers and hinterland operators can also help to match capacity with demand more precisely and reduce idle time for equipment and vehicles.
The picture painted by reports is not of terminal failure but of misaligned capacity. As vessels grow and maritime networks deepen their efficiencies, the challenge for the coming decade will be to bring the infrastructure behind the quay into the same cycle of modernisation so that the gains made at sea are not lost once cargo reaches land.