Extreme weather in Q1 made an existing capacity shortage worse. To prepare for more challenges to come, shippers should secure more reliable capacity and reconsider their modal choices.
Logistics managers, always under stress, got no relief in the first quarter of 2014 as they grappled with unprecedented weather-related challenges across the northern half of the country. How bad was it? Here are just a few records that were set in key U.S. transportation hubs, according to the National Weather Service:
Detroit—Snowiest winter recorded, with more than 91 inches, shattering a 133-year-old record
Philadelphia—Second snowiest winter on record, with 69 inches
Chicago—Third snowiest winter ever, with more than 80 inches
The record-setting snowfalls, along with extreme cold and other weather events, resulted in delayed shipments, missed pickups and deliveries, inventory backlogs, and higher costs for both shippers and carriers.
To make matters worse, the spot-market demand for truckload (TL) capacity, as measured by the Internet Truckstop Market Demand Index, reached more than 27 loads per truck in March. That dipped to only 23.6 in April as shippers continued to deal with the aftermath of heavy snowfalls and extreme cold, in some locales even after the snow had melted. Both months were well above their normal ranges over the past five years. As those statistics suggest, demand for transportation services was there, but the capacity to deliver was, literally, snowed in.
Not only did the weather impact shipping, it affected the U.S. economy as well. Although many economists had forecast real gross domestic product (GDP) growth of 1 percent in the first quarter, real GDP instead contracted by 1 percent.
All this followed a pretty uneventful 2013. Data collected by the American Trucking Associations suggests that supply and demand last year were in balance (see Figure 1). Accordingly, freight rates remained stable and the "epic capacity crunch" shippers had expected failed to materialize. As a result, many shippers have been left to wonder whether the first quarter of 2014 was an omen of market conditions to come or an anomaly. Should they gird their organizations for the epic capacity crunch, or merely blame the extent of the capacity shortage on the weather?
The short answer is, probably neither. The likely outcome for 2014 is somewhere between Armageddon and "just another stable year in the market." Nonetheless, market dynamics do appear to be shifting, and shippers need to be prepared.
Modest rate increases likely
From a demand perspective, the slow and bumpy pace of the U.S. economic recovery may last for some time to come. The Congressional Budget Office projects the U.S. gross domestic product will increase by roughly 3 percent per year for the next four years—hardly a blockbuster growth outlook for the world's biggest economy. The housing market, a key indicator of truckload volumes, has stabilized but remains near 40-year lows. Sales in the automotive sector—another bellwether of TL market health—have leveled off after seeing a strong recovery from the depths of the recession in 2008.
The supply side of the truckload market is under considerable and increasing pressure, partly as operators struggle to keep pace with regulations that are adding cost and creating extra constraints on an already tight market for drivers. Let's consider what that means for shippers in terms of rates, and how they can respond.
Many industry analysts are forecasting a modest increase in linehaul rates this year, somewhere between 2 and 4 percent. Diesel fuel costs also are forecast to increase, albeit gradually, in the immediate future. With costs appearing to be on the rise, smart shippers have been budgeting accordingly.
Weather could still be a factor in the truckload market for the rest of the year. The Atlantic hurricane season officially started on the first of June and will last through November. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has predicted that 2014 will be a "normal" year, with three to six hurricanes, of which one or two will qualify as major. But let's not forget that it only takes one major storm to upset the domestic transportation network, causing freight rates to increase because the government tends to pays top dollar for capacity to aid in disaster-relief efforts.
Suggested strategies
To prepare for these challenges—both market-driven and otherwise—savvy shippers should expand their carrier base and their routing guides. A larger list of vetted carriers allows shippers to tap into more capacity in a calculated progression through trusted partners and, ideally, favorable rate schedules.
They can also include more nonasset-based providers in their carrier base. These brokers can "shop" for trucking capacity when there is excess demand. Fortunately, the increasing popularity of these types of service providers has coincided with a healthy dose of scrutiny from both regulators and investors, which has made using a broker less risky for shippers.
Shippers might also want to consider dedicated contract carriage arrangements. Those with smaller fleet operations (typically fewer than 20 trucks) may benefit from outsourcing to providers of dedicated contract carriage arrangements through cost improvements, access to technology, backhaul opportunities, and the flexibility to expand capacity. Larger fleet operators, meanwhile, are looking to expand their private fleet programs to secure access to capacity and achieve economies of scale on their own.
Finally, shippers should be embracing intermodal and rail transportation. This may sound like common sense, but the reality is that although they are more economical and less capacity-constrained, these modes are underutilized by many shippers.
The trucking market promises to be challenging for shippers on many fronts for some time to come. However, those shippers that invest the time and resources in being prepared will be well-positioned to weather any storm.
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.”
Economic activity in the logistics industry expanded in November, continuing a steady growth pattern that began earlier this year and signaling a return to seasonality after several years of fluctuating conditions, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index report (LMI), released today.
The November LMI registered 58.4, down slightly from October’s reading of 58.9, which was the highest level in two years. The LMI is a monthly gauge of business conditions across warehousing and logistics markets; a reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
“The overall index has been very consistent in the past three months, with readings of 58.6, 58.9, and 58.4,” LMI analyst Zac Rogers, associate professor of supply chain management at Colorado State University, wrote in the November LMI report. “This plateau is slightly higher than a similar plateau of consistency earlier in the year when May to August saw four readings between 55.3 and 56.4. Seasonally speaking, it is consistent that this later year run of readings would be the highest all year.”
Separately, Rogers said the end-of-year growth reflects the return to a healthy holiday peak, which started when inventory levels expanded in late summer and early fall as retailers began stocking up to meet consumer demand. Pandemic-driven shifts in consumer buying behavior, inflation, and economic uncertainty contributed to volatile peak season conditions over the past four years, with the LMI swinging from record-high growth in late 2020 and 2021 to slower growth in 2022 and contraction in 2023.
“The LMI contracted at this time a year ago, so basically [there was] no peak season,” Rogers said, citing inflation as a drag on demand. “To have a normal November … [really] for the first time in five years, justifies what we’ve seen all these companies doing—building up inventory in a sustainable, seasonal way.
“Based on what we’re seeing, a lot of supply chains called it right and were ready for healthy holiday season, so far.”
The LMI has remained in the mid to high 50s range since January—with the exception of April, when the index dipped to 52.9—signaling strong and consistent demand for warehousing and transportation services.
The LMI is a monthly survey of logistics managers from across the country. It tracks industry growth overall and across eight areas: inventory levels and costs; warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices; and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The report is released monthly by researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP).
"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.