The 28th annual "State of Logistics Report" painted a somber picture of logistics activity during 2016,
with expenditures declining for the first time since 2010 and logistics spending as a percentage of U.S.
gross domestic product (GDP) dropping to its lowest level since the depths of the Great Recession.
The annual report, prepared by consultancy A.T. Kearney Inc. for the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals
(CSCMP), and presented by third-party logistics (3PL) provider Penske Logistics, found that spending last year was
constrained by uneven economic growth, overcapacity across virtually all modes, and corresponding rate weakness. Total
logistics expenditures—framed in the report as "costs"—fell 1.5 percent year-over-year, to $1.392 trillion.
The decline contrasted with a 4.6 percent increase in spending, compounded annually, from 2010 to 2015, as the U.S.
economy and the logistics businesses supporting it fitfully emerged from their worst downturn in more than 70 years.
Logistics costs as a percentage of GDP, traditionally viewed as the report's headline number, came in at 7.5 percent
in 2016, the lowest point since 2009, when the ratio stood at 7.37 percent. The ratio moved in a very tight range between
2011 and 2015, and
ended 2015 at 7.84 percent.
In years past, a ratio as low as last year's would have been viewed as positive because it underscored
the supply chain's strides towards greater efficiencies. For example, the ratio was well into double-digit
levels during the report's early years as transportation and logistics providers threw off the yoke of
regulation in the late 1970s and early 1980s and slowly adjusted their models to manage more efficiently
in a free-market environment. Indeed, the first-ever drop in the ratio below 10 percent, which occurred in the
early 1990s, was a cause for celebration at the time.
Modal spending: some up, some down
Truckload expenditures, the largest line item among the cost categories, fell 1.6 percent year-over-year
to $269.4 billion. That may not be the case by the time next year's report comes out. It is "not sustainable"
for so many carriers to accept noncompensatory margins; shippers should therefore expect to see higher trucking
prices in the fourth quarter of 2017 and first quarter of 2018, said Marc Althen, president of Penske Logistics,
at a June 20 press conference in Washington where the report was released.
Rail carload expenditures, buffeted by continued weakness in coal volumes and declines in spending on energy
exploration and development caused by lower oil prices, fell by 13.8 percent, according to the report. Intermodal
spending declined 2.5 percent. Rail demand was "anomalously low" last year, and volumes and associated spending
should rise this year, said Beth Whited, executive vice president and chief marketing officer for western railroad
Union Pacific Corp., at the press conference.
Whited said she expects single-digit volume increases in 2017, with coal and grain exports leading the way,
and "a significant jump" in 2018 as new chemical production facilities begin to pump out product.
Spending on water transportation, which covers both domestic and U.S. import and export traffic, dropped
10 percent, reflecting persistent liner overcapacity and rate pressures on international trade lanes, according
to the report. Airfreight spending, which includes domestic and U.S. export and import cargo, rose 1.5 percent.
Not surprisingly, parcel spending, supported by increases in demand for e-commerce fulfillment and delivery, jumped
10 percent, the report said. For the first time in the report's history, parcel moved ahead of rail in modal spending.
Whited cautioned shippers that rates could rise across the modal board sooner than they think. "Shippers have enjoyed
unrealistically low supply chain costs" for years, Whited said. While railroads have shown "good discipline" in pricing,
other modes have not; as a result, there will likely be "more consolidation and rationalization" in those modes, which
could raise prices, she said.
Warehouse space fell 10 percent from the first quarter of 2016 to the same period in 2017, the report said. However,
spending on warehouse services rose just 1.8 percent over 2015 levels, about half the pace of its five-year compounded
annual growth rate. A sizable decline in the weighted average cost of capital drove down the financial costs of carrying
inventory by 7.7 percent. A third category of inventory carrying costs, which include obsolescence, shrinkage, insurance,
and handling, fell 3.2 percent.
These muted levels may not last, however. Decisions by 21 states to raise their minimum wage and the need for
e-commerce warehouse operators to invest in expensive automated material handling systems will have "a significant
effect" on warehouse costs, Sean Monahan, an A.T. Kearney partner and the report's lead author, said at the press
conference.
Different directions
The decline in transportation spending came amid a rise in energy prices off of multiyear lows.
This marks the second straight year that the two trends moved in opposite directions, reinforcing
the notion that energy is no longer the primary factor driving logistics spending. Rather,
consumers have become the main influence, the report said.
The report's authors said the logistics industry "appears destined for a prolonged bout of
cognitive dissonance" as it reconciles subpar GDP growth—first-quarter output rose a scant 1.2 percent—
with rising stock market values, better consumer confidence data, and ongoing investments in information technology.
Yet the inherent uncertainty has not slowed the pace of change as newcomers challenge established players
for market share and incumbents refresh their business models, the report said. In one of the report's most
provocative forecasts, the authors said they expect more large shippers to follow the lead of Amazon.com Inc.
and either establish or expand their in-house logistics operations. Seattle-based Amazon, the nation's largest
e-tailer, has added aircraft and truck trailers. It is also constructing an air cargo hub in Cincinnati to support
its two-day delivery service, Amazon Prime.
For now, caution rules the day, reflected in declines in the closely watched inventory-to-sales ratio,
which measures on-hand inventories in comparison to sales levels, the report said. The authors acknowledged
that the declines could be attributed to more accurate forecasting tools that minimize the risk of overordering.
However, a more plausible case can be made that companies unsure about future demand are holding inventory levels
closer to actual retail sales figures instead of stocking up in anticipation of future growth, the authors said.
Editor's note: This article has been updated with quotes from the June 20, 2017 press conference.
CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly Editor Toby Gooley contributed to this report.
Companies in every sector are converting assets from fossil fuel to electric power in their push to reach net-zero energy targets and to reduce costs along the way, but to truly accelerate those efforts, they also need to improve electric energy efficiency, according to a study from technology consulting firm ABI Research.
In fact, boosting that efficiency could contribute fully 25% of the emissions reductions needed to reach net zero. And the pursuit of that goal will drive aggregated global investments in energy efficiency technologies to grow from $106 Billion in 2024 to $153 Billion in 2030, ABI said today in a report titled “The Role of Energy Efficiency in Reaching Net Zero Targets for Enterprises and Industries.”
ABI’s report divided the range of energy-efficiency-enhancing technologies and equipment into three industrial categories:
Commercial Buildings – Network Lighting Control (NLC) and occupancy sensing for automated lighting and heating; Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based energy management; heat-pumps and energy-efficient HVAC equipment; insulation technologies
Manufacturing Plants – Energy digital twins, factory automation, manufacturing process design and optimization software (PLM, MES, simulation); Electric Arc Furnaces (EAFs); energy efficient electric motors (compressors, fans, pumps)
“Both the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP) continue to insist on the importance of energy efficiency,” Dominique Bonte, VP of End Markets and Verticals at ABI Research, said in a release. “At COP 29 in Dubai, it was agreed to commit to collectively double the global average annual rate of energy efficiency improvements from around 2% to over 4% every year until 2030, following recommendations from the IEA. This complements the EU’s Energy Efficiency First (EE1) Framework and the U.S. 2022 Inflation Reduction Act in which US$86 billion was earmarked for energy efficiency actions.”
"After several years of mitigating inflation, disruption, supply shocks, conflicts, and uncertainty, we are currently in a relative period of calm," John Paitek, vice president, GEP, said in a release. "But it is very much the calm before the coming storm. This report provides procurement and supply chain leaders with a prescriptive guide to weathering the gale force headwinds of protectionism, tariffs, trade wars, regulatory pressures, uncertainty, and the AI revolution that we will face in 2025."
A report from the company released today offers predictions and strategies for the upcoming year, organized into six major predictions in GEP’s “Outlook 2025: Procurement & Supply Chain.”
Advanced AI agents will play a key role in demand forecasting, risk monitoring, and supply chain optimization, shifting procurement's mandate from tactical to strategic. Companies should invest in the technology now to to streamline processes and enhance decision-making.
Expanded value metrics will drive decisions, as success will be measured by resilience, sustainability, and compliance… not just cost efficiency. Companies should communicate value beyond cost savings to stakeholders, and develop new KPIs.
Increasing regulatory demands will necessitate heightened supply chain transparency and accountability. So companies should strengthen supplier audits, adopt ESG tracking tools, and integrate compliance into strategic procurement decisions.
Widening tariffs and trade restrictions will force companies to reassess total cost of ownership (TCO) metrics to include geopolitical and environmental risks, as nearshoring and friendshoring attempt to balance resilience with cost.
Rising energy costs and regulatory demands will accelerate the shift to sustainable operations, pushing companies to invest in renewable energy and redesign supply chains to align with ESG commitments.
New tariffs could drive prices higher, just as inflation has come under control and interest rates are returning to near-zero levels. That means companies must continue to secure cost savings as their primary responsibility.
Specifically, 48% of respondents identified rising tariffs and trade barriers as their top concern, followed by supply chain disruptions at 45% and geopolitical instability at 41%. Moreover, tariffs and trade barriers ranked as the priority issue regardless of company size, as respondents at companies with less than 250 employees, 251-500, 501-1,000, 1,001-50,000 and 50,000+ employees all cited it as the most significant issue they are currently facing.
“Evolving tariffs and trade policies are one of a number of complex issues requiring organizations to build more resilience into their supply chains through compliance, technology and strategic planning,” Jackson Wood, Director, Industry Strategy at Descartes, said in a release. “With the potential for the incoming U.S. administration to impose new and additional tariffs on a wide variety of goods and countries of origin, U.S. importers may need to significantly re-engineer their sourcing strategies to mitigate potentially higher costs.”
Freight transportation providers and maritime port operators are bracing for rough business impacts if the incoming Trump Administration follows through on its pledge to impose a 25% tariff on Mexico and Canada and an additional 10% tariff on China, analysts say.
Industry contacts say they fear that such heavy fees could prompt importers to “pull forward” a massive surge of goods before the new administration is seated on January 20, and then quickly cut back again once the hefty new fees are instituted, according to a report from TD Cowen.
As a measure of the potential economic impact of that uncertain scenario, transport company stocks were mostly trading down yesterday following Donald Trump’s social media post on Monday night announcing the proposed new policy, TD Cowen said in a note to investors.
But an alternative impact of the tariff jump could be that it doesn’t happen at all, but is merely a threat intended to force other nations to the table to strike new deals on trade, immigration, or drug smuggling. “Trump is perfectly comfortable being a policy paradox and pushing competing policies (and people); this ‘chaos premium’ only increases his leverage in negotiations,” the firm said.
However, if that truly is the new administration’s strategy, it could backfire by sparking a tit-for-tat trade war that includes retaliatory tariffs by other countries on U.S. exports, other analysts said. “The additional tariffs on China that the incoming US administration plans to impose will add to restrictions on China-made products, driving up their prices and fueling an already-under-way surge in efforts to beat the tariffs by importing products before the inauguration,” Andrei Quinn-Barabanov, Senior Director – Supplier Risk Management solutions at Moody’s, said in a statement. “The Mexico and Canada tariffs may be an invitation to negotiations with the U.S. on immigration and other issues. If implemented, they would also be challenging to maintain, because the two nations can threaten the U.S. with significant retaliation and because of a likely pressure from the American business community that would be greatly affected by the costs and supply chain obstacles resulting from the tariffs.”
New tariffs could also damage sensitive supply chains by triggering unintended consequences, according to a report by Matt Lekstutis, Director at Efficio, a global procurement and supply chain procurement consultancy. “While ultimate tariff policy will likely be implemented to achieve specific US re-industrialization and other political objectives, the responses of various nations, companies and trading partners is not easily predicted and companies that even have little or no exposure to Mexico, China or Canada could be impacted. New tariffs may disrupt supply chains dependent on just in time deliveries as they adjust to new trade flows. This could affect all industries dependent on distribution and logistics providers and result in supply shortages,” Lekstutis said.
Grocers and retailers are struggling to get their systems back online just before the winter holiday peak, following a software hack that hit the supply chain software provider Blue Yonder this week.
The ransomware attack is snarling inventory distribution patterns because of its impact on systems such as the employee scheduling system for coffee stalwart Starbucks, according to a published report. Scottsdale, Arizona-based Blue Yonder provides a wide range of supply chain software, including warehouse management system (WMS), transportation management system (TMS), order management and commerce, network and control tower, returns management, and others.
Blue Yonder today acknowledged the disruptions, saying they were the result of a ransomware incident affecting its managed services hosted environment. The company has established a dedicated cybersecurity incident update webpage to communicate its recovery progress, but it had not been updated for nearly two days as of Tuesday afternoon. “Since learning of the incident, the Blue Yonder team has been working diligently together with external cybersecurity firms to make progress in their recovery process. We have implemented several defensive and forensic protocols,” a Blue Yonder spokesperson said in an email.
The timing of the attack suggests that hackers may have targeted Blue Yonder in a calculated attack based on the upcoming Thanksgiving break, since many U.S. organizations downsize their security staffing on holidays and weekends, according to a statement from Dan Lattimer, VP of Semperis, a New Jersey-based computer and network security firm.
“While details on the specifics of the Blue Yonder attack are scant, it is yet another reminder how damaging supply chain disruptions become when suppliers are taken offline. Kudos to Blue Yonder for dealing with this cyberattack head on but we still don’t know how far reaching the business disruptions will be in the UK, U.S. and other countries,” Lattimer said. “Now is time for organizations to fight back against threat actors. Deciding whether or not to pay a ransom is a personal decision that each company has to make, but paying emboldens threat actors and throws more fuel onto an already burning inferno. Simply, it doesn’t pay-to-pay,” he said.
The incident closely followed an unrelated cybersecurity issue at the grocery giant Ahold Delhaize, which has been recovering from impacts to the Stop & Shop chain that it across the U.S. Northeast region. In a statement apologizing to customers for the inconvenience of the cybersecurity issue, Netherlands-based Ahold Delhaize said its top priority is the security of its customers, associates and partners, and that the company’s internal IT security staff was working with external cybersecurity experts and law enforcement to speed recovery. “Our teams are taking steps to assess and mitigate the issue. This includes taking some systems offline to help protect them. This issue and subsequent mitigating actions have affected certain Ahold Delhaize USA brands and services including a number of pharmacies and certain e-commerce operations,” the company said.
Editor's note:This article was revised on November 27 to indicate that the cybersecurity issue at Ahold Delhaize was unrelated to the Blue Yonder hack.