SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT across the chemicals sector, supported where appropriate by verified external sources. The survey captured data on the frequency and financial impact of logistics disruptions, as well as the level of investment made across different logistics areas.
To build the model, cost ranges were converted into single values using midpoints, enabling calculation of both total annual costs and average cost per disruption. These were then linked to other variables, such as investment levels, company size and reported reputational impacts. Correlations were calculated to identify the relationship between investment in specific logistical areas and cost reduction, while also examining how reputational damage compounds financial losses.
At the beginning of 2025, the chemicals industry anticipated a gradual recovery, with global chemical production projected to grow by 3.5 %. 4 Instead, the industry entered a prolonged down cycle, with forecasts dropping to 1.9 % for 2025 and 2.0 % for 2026.5
Myriad disruptions compound in this challenging market and the majority of cargo owners have, to some extent, experienced them all:
• 89 % report that COVID-19 legacy issues affected their business between 2022 and 2023, from sudden demand swings to missed sailings and plant outages
• 83 % were hit by congestion in major global ports over the same period
• 70 % have felt the impact of the Russia-Ukraine war on routes, availability and energy costs
• 63 % say US tariffs have also disrupted their flows
Beneath those headline shocks sits a dense layer of routine disruption. In the last three years, 92 % of chemicals cargo owners have experienced customs or border clearance delays at least once, making it the most widespread source of disruption in the sector.
PERCEPTION VS REALITY
Agility: 82 % say they are agile enough to respond quickly to unexpected changes
Resilience: 78 % believe they recover wmore quickly from major disruptions than competitors and are more resilient than most companies in the sector
Reliability: 43 % rank“ ensuring reliable delivery and minimising disruption” as a top-three priority
Figure 3 – Perception v. reality in impacts of disruption
Climate-related incidents have affected 89 %, geopolitical restrictions 91 %, port congestion 90 % and container shortages 86 %. For many, these are not oneoff events: around a third have faced climate, geopolitical or portrelated disruption six times or more in three years.
Taken together, the survey and external evidence show a sector living with layered uncertainty: global shocks on top of repeated, localised disruption in the everyday movement of hazardous goods.
The cost of inaction
Time loss is just as damaging. Just over half of chemicals cargo owners said that disruption costs them less than a month of operational time in a typical year. For the rest, it consumes more than a month. One in ten lose six months or more and this has reputational impacts( Figure 1)
A third take longer than a month to recover fully from a major disruption; for 15 %, the recovery extends beyond three months. During these periods, most see their networks slow visibly: three in four report transit times lengthening by at least 11 % during major events, and just over seven in ten see product lead times stretch by a similar margin.
33 % take more than a month to recover from a major disruption, including 15 % who take over three months
49 % lose more than a month of operational time in a disrupted year
92 % say disruption or unreliability from suppliers is a challenge, and it is one of the issues most often rated moderate or severe
Value of strategic investment
For chemical cargo owners, the most persistent pressure point is not moving product but planning around disruption. Almost all say they struggle with forecasting and planning( 94 %), and this is also the challenge most likely to be rated as moderate or severe( 61 %).
Difficulty responding quickly to disruption( 92 %/ 56 % moderate / severe) and unreliability from suppliers( 92 %/ 59 %) sit close behind, alongside limited visibility across the supply chain( 87 %/ 54 % moderate / severe). In other words, the pain is concentrated in the parts of the system that should anticipate and absorb shocks.
The way chemical cargo owners respond underlines this. When disruption hits, most turn first to external partners: 62 % have used freight forwarding to recover and roughly half have called on sea-based transport services, contract logistics, customs brokerage, ports and terminals, supply chain technology or land transport services.
This blend of physical capacity and intelligence services is where logistical investment starts to translate directly into resilience. An
MAY / JUN 2026 SPECCHEMONLINE. COM
55