Author
Listed:
- Sun, Ruikai
- Abouarghoub, Wessam
- Demir, Emrah
- Potter, Andrew
Abstract
This study examines the environmental, operational and economic implications of crisis-induced rerouting in maritime shipping, focusing on the 2024 Red Sea crisis as a case study. Contributing to the literature by linking operational modelling with transition theory, offering new insights into how geopolitical crises can accelerate or constrain sustainability transitions in global shipping. Within the socio-technical transitions framework, it explores how landscape-level geopolitical disruptions interact with regime inertia and create opportunities for niche innovation. Using an activity-based bottom-up model integrated with AIS data, the study quantifies GHG emissions, costs and voyage durations for vessels rerouting via the Cape of Good Hope, covering three major Eurasian routes (Asia–West Europe, Asia–West Mediterranean, and Asia–East Mediterranean). Emissions cost analysis is combined with scenario modelling to assess trade-offs between environmental and economic impacts across different innovation pathways. Results show that rerouting increases GHG emissions at least 46 %, economic cost at least 51 % of entire route fleet and extends round-trip durations by 20–34 days. Despite this, most shipping companies increased vessels’ speeds, reflecting institutional inertia that prioritises short-term efficiency over sustainability. Scenario simulations reveal that incremental innovations (e.g. operation optimisation) reduce excess emissions by 8–10 %. Whereas, transformative innovations such as LNG fuel and shore power cut emissions by up to 23 %, with combined deployment achieving up to 33 % reductions. These findings highlight the limited impact of incremental measures under sustained disruption and underscore the potential of transformative innovations to accelerate sustainability transitions in global shipping.
Suggested Citation
Sun, Ruikai & Abouarghoub, Wessam & Demir, Emrah & Potter, Andrew, 2026.
"Geopolitical disruptions and maritime transitions: Environmental and economic costs of rerouting,"
Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
Handle:
RePEc:eee:transa:v:203:y:2026:i:c:s0965856425003702
DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2025.104737
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:203:y:2026:i:c:s0965856425003702. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.