However, that trend is counterbalanced by economic uncertainty driven by geopolitics, which is prompting many companies to diversity their supply chains, Dun & Bradstreet said in its “Q4 2024 Global Business Optimism Insights” report, which was based on research conducted during the third quarter.
“While overall global business optimism has increased and inflation has abated, it’s important to recognize that geopolitics contribute to economic uncertainty,” Neeraj Sahai, president of Dun & Bradstreet International, said in a release. “Industry-specific regulatory risks and more stringent data requirements have emerged as the top concerns among a third of respondents. To mitigate these risks, businesses are considering diversifying their supply chains and markets to manage regulatory risk.”
According to the report, nearly four in five businesses are expressing increased optimism in domestic and export orders, capital expenditures, and financial risk due to a combination of easing financial pressures, shifts in monetary policies, robust regulatory frameworks, and higher participation in sustainability initiatives.
U.S. businesses recorded a nearly 9% rise in optimism, aided by falling inflation and expectations of further rate cuts. Similarly, business optimism in the U.K. and Spain showed notable recoveries as their respective central banks initiated monetary easing, rising by 13% and 9%, respectively. Emerging economies, such as Argentina and India, saw jumps in optimism levels due to declining inflation and increased domestic demand respectively.
"Businesses are increasingly confident as borrowing costs decline, boosting optimism for higher sales, stronger exports, and reduced financial risks," Arun Singh, Global Chief Economist at Dun & Bradstreet, said. "This confidence is driving capital investments, with easing supply chain pressures supporting growth in the year's final quarter."
“The past year has been unprecedented, with extreme weather events, heightened geopolitical tension and cybercrime destabilizing supply chains throughout the world. Navigating this year’s looming risks to build a secure supply network has never been more critical,” Corey Rhodes, CEO of Everstream Analytics, said in the firm’s “2025 Annual Risk Report.”
“While some risks are unavoidable, early notice and swift action through a combination of planning, deep monitoring, and mitigation can save inventory and lives in 2025,” Rhodes said.
In its report, Everstream ranked the five categories by a “risk score metric” to help global supply chain leaders prioritize planning and mitigation efforts for coping with them. They include:
Drowning in Climate Change – 90% Risk Score. Driven by shifting climate patterns and record-high temperatures, extreme weather events are a dominant risk to the supply chain due to concerns such as flooding and elevated ocean temperatures.
Geopolitical Instability with Increased Tariff Risk – 80% Risk Score. These threats could disrupt trade networks and impact economies worldwide, including logistics, transportation, and manufacturing industries. The following major geopolitical events are likely to impact global trade: Red Sea disruptions, Russia-Ukraine conflict, Taiwan trade risks, Middle East tensions, South China Sea disputes, and proposed tariff increases.
More Backdoors for Cybercrime – 75% Risk Score. Supply chain leaders face escalating cybersecurity risks in 2025, driven by the growing reliance on AI and cloud computing within supply chains, the proliferation of IoT-connected devices, vulnerabilities in sub-tier supply chains, and a disproportionate impact on third-party logistics providers (3PLs) and the electronics industry.
Rare Metals and Minerals on Lockdown – 65% Risk Score. Between rising regulations, new tariffs, and long-term or exclusive contracts, rare minerals and metals will be harder than ever, and more expensive, to obtain.
Crackdown on Forced Labor – 60% Risk Score. A growing crackdown on forced labor across industries will increase pressure on companies who are facing scrutiny to manage and eliminate suppliers violating human rights. Anticipated risks in 2025 include a push for alternative suppliers, a cascade of legislation to address lax forced labor issues, challenges for agri-food products such as palm oil and vanilla.
That percentage is even greater than the 13.21% of total retail sales that were returned. Measured in dollars, returns (including both legitimate and fraudulent) last year reached $685 billion out of the $5.19 trillion in total retail sales.
“It’s clear why retailers want to limit bad actors that exhibit fraudulent and abusive returns behavior, but the reality is that they are finding stricter returns policies are not reducing the returns fraud they face,” Michael Osborne, CEO of Appriss Retail, said in a release.
Specifically, the report lists the leading types of returns fraud and abuse reported by retailers in 2024, including findings that:
60% of retailers surveyed reported incidents of “wardrobing,” or the act of consumers buying an item, using the merchandise, and then returning it.
55% cited cases of returning an item obtained through fraudulent or stolen tender, such as stolen credit cards, counterfeit bills, gift cards obtained through fraudulent means or fraudulent checks.
48% of retailers faced occurrences of returning stolen merchandise.
Together, those statistics show that the problem remains prevalent despite growing efforts by retailers to curb retail returns fraud through stricter returns policies, while still offering a sufficiently open returns policy to keep customers loyal, they said.
“Returns are a significant cost for retailers, and the rise of online shopping could increase this trend,” Kevin Mahoney, managing director, retail, Deloitte Consulting LLP, said. “As retailers implement policies to address this issue, they should avoid negatively affecting customer loyalty and retention. Effective policies should reduce losses for the retailer while minimally impacting the customer experience. This approach can be crucial for long-term success.”
Keep ReadingShow less
This image generated by artificial intelligence provides an idea of the effect that flooding could have on distribution operations.
The nearly consecutive landfalls of Hurricanes Helene and Milton made two things clear: disasters are inevitable, and they’re increasing in frequency, scope, and severity. As logistics and supply chain leaders look toward 2025, disaster recovery planning should be top of mind—not only for safeguarding business operations but also for supporting affected communities in their recovery efforts. (For a look at lessons learned from 2024, please refer to the sidebar below.)
To ensure that they have a comprehensive plan in place, supply chain professionals should take a three-pronged approach that incorporates working with local emergency organizations, nonprofits, and internal partners.
Build relationships with local organizations
A critical first step in disaster readiness is identifying and establishing relationships with local emergency management organizations. Local emergency managers specialize in coordinating immediate disaster responses on the ground in their communities. While they’re well-versed in terms of supporting the continuity of critical infrastructure like hospitals, fire stations, and city services, they’re often less acquainted with the important connection between healthy supply chains and community resilience.
When local officials have a limited understanding of the critical role that distribution centers, manufacturing plants, or food suppliers play in disaster response, it can delay restoration of the flow of supplies to grocery stores, big box stores, and similar locations. For example, ensuring that debris on roads to a warehouse is cleared rapidly following a storm may not be high on the government’s priority list. However, doing so can help keep grocery stores stocked and supply chains intact, reducing the burden on the government to provide those resources.
With this in mind, invite local emergency management officials to tour your logistics facilities and explain the critical role your organization plays in maintaining the flow of goods within the broader community. This firsthand look will help them understand how your operations contribute to community resilience and support the local economy.
ALAN has been helping to connect nonprofits with logistics resources since 2005. Here supplies are packed up for transport and distribution to Hurricane Maria survivors in 2017.Photo courtesy of ALAN
Partner with nonprofits
There are many reasons why it makes sense for members of the logistics community to build partnerships with nonprofits before disasters hit. But one of the most important is this: Even the most well-organized of them usually experience logistics gaps. Many nonprofits lack a comprehensive understanding of how to create an effective logistics organization. Even if they do have logistics staff, they will often need additional logistics resources once a disaster hits to meet surging demand for services. However, after a disaster most nonprofits are usually operating at such a high capacity that they don’t have the time or bandwidth to onboard new logistics partners.
These logistics gaps—and the onboarding challenges that disasters create—are a key reason why the American Logistics Aid Network (ALAN) exists. The organization has spent 19 years connecting nonprofits with the logistics services and expertise they need with the help of a well-established network and preplanned resources. ALAN works to make it easy for logistics professionals to support disaster-stricken areas with everything from warehousing to transportation to material handling equipment.
Like all nonprofits, ALAN is able to carry out its work even more effectively when organizations reach out to ask, “How can we help?” long before a disaster occurs. The most effective disaster response is based on the preparation and strong relationships that have been built during quieter times.
Companies can offer their services ahead of time via ALAN’s webform (www.alanaid.org/volunteer/). ALAN then meets with each business to determine what services and equipment it can offer in tmes of need. When there is a request that matches a business’ profile, ALAN will reach out to see if the organization can assist.
By onboarding new partners when things are calm, ALAN can ensure that resources and logistics networks are primed, optimized, and ready for immediate action. This proactive approach makes sure that critical supplies and aid can reach those in need without delay. As a result, itprovides quicker support for affected residents and businesses alike and strengthens the resiliency of communities.
The nonprofit Unity in Disasters needed 30 pallets of food transported to Jackson, Miss., to help Hurricane Ida survivors in 2021. ALAN was on hand to coordinate a response.Photo courtesy of ALAN
A culture of safety, preparedness
While community preparedness is crucial, building a strong culture of personal and corporate readiness within your organization is equally important. A preparedness culture can safeguard employees and ensure operations can resume as quickly as possible after a disaster.
In light of this, encourage your personnel to identify safe locations for shelter or evacuation, assemble emergency supply kits, and follow advice from local officials during a crisis. This responsibility typically falls to a corporate safety officer, but for smaller organizations, supervisors or administrative staff may have to coordinate the efforts.
Just as important, consider taking a page from the book of the many logistics companies that have already begun offering training sessions to help employees prepare for various disaster scenarios. Some of these training sessions are as simple as start-of-shift conversations about shelter-in-place locations or evacuation routes. Other organizations do full-scale exercises. There are lots of resources companies can pull from to develop these training sessions, including businesses that specialize in corporate crisis training. The Association of Continuity Professionals has resources, as does the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), via their Ready Business website.
Some businesses even partner with local first responders to conduct walkthroughs of their facilities, ensuring firefighters and paramedics are familiar with the layout. These partnerships provide vital information that enables emergency crews to navigate facilities more effectively in a crisis, further safeguarding employees and reducing potential downtime.
Strengthening community resilience
When disasters strike, logistics and supply chain organizations have the ability to be game changers in the best possible way, strengthening community resilience.
By building relationships with local emergency management and nonprofit organizations, they can contribute to considerably more efficient and coordinated disaster response. Likewise, sharing their supply chain resources with nonprofits ensures help will arrive faster and allows each donated dollar to go farther. And by doing what they can to protect themselves and restore the ability to deliver food, water, and medical supplies to disaster survivors, they can make the difference between stability and prolonged hardship.
Working collaboratively, logistics and supply chain organizations can help communities withstand and recover from the worst, enabling a faster, stronger return to normalcy.
Learning from 2024
By looking back on the logistics challenges of the 2024 hurricane season and reflecting on the responses to Hurricanes Helene and Milton, we can gain valuable lessons for the future.
North Carolina faced severe infrastructure damage, including to roads, bridges, and utilities. Prioritizing road and rail rebuilding became paramount in order to reestablish connections between cities and manufacturing hubs.
Similarly, pharmaceutical facilities in affected areas needed clean water sources restored to resume production. When two separate IV fluid suppliers’ facilities—one in North Carolina and one in Florida—could not gain access to clean water due to hurricane damage, hospitals across the country experienced shortages. This disruption highlighted the importance of immediate utility restoration for critical industries.
Effective disaster preparedness must include insight into each community’s unique infrastructure and supply chain risk factors. It comes as no surprise that logistics organizations with strong ties to a community are especially qualified to help other business and government professionals understand these dynamics, which help to effectively allocate and position recovery resources.
Maersk’s overall view of the coming year is that the global economy is expected to grow modestly, with the possibility of higher inflation caused by lingering supply chain issues, continued geopolitical tensions, and fiscal policies such as new tariffs. Geopolitical tensions and trade disruptions could threaten global stability, climate change action will continue to shape international cooperation, and the ongoing security issue in the Red Sea is expected to continue into 2025.
Those are difficult challenges, but according to Maersk, a vital part of logistics planning is understanding where risk and weak spots might be and finding ways to dampen the impact of inevitable hurdles.
They include:
1. Build a resilient supply chain As opposed to simply maintaining traditional network designs, Maersk says it is teaming with Hapag-Lloyd to implement a new East-West network called Gemini, beginning in February, 2025. The network will use leaner mainliners and shuttles together, allowing for isolation of port disruptions, minimizing the impact of disruptions to supply chains and routes. More broadly, companies should work with an integrated logistics partner that has multiple solutions—be they by air, truck, barge or rail—allowing supply chains to adapt around issues, while still meeting consumer demands.
2. Implementing technological advances
A key component in ensuring more resilience against disruptions is working with a supply chain supplier that offers advanced real-time tracking systems and AI-powered analytics to provide comprehensive visibility across supply chains. An AI-powered dashboard of analytics can provide end-to-end visibility of shipments, tasks, and updates, enabling efficient logistics management without the need to chase down data. Also, forecasting tools can give predictive analytics to optimize inventory, reduce waste, and enhance efficiency. And incorporating Internet of Things (IoT) into digital solutions can enable live tracking of containers to monitor shipments.
3. Preparing for anything, instead of everything Contingency planning was a big theme for 2024, and remains so for 2025. That need is highlighted by geopolitical instability, climate change and volatility, and changes to tariffs and legislation. So in 2025, businesses should seek to partner with a logistics partner that offers risk and disruption navigation through pre-planned procedures, risk assessments, and alternative solutions.
4. Diversifying all aspects of the supply chain Supply chains have felt the impact of disruption throughout 2024, with the situation in the Red Sea resulting in all shipping having to avoid the Suez Canal, and instead going around the Cape of Good Hope. This has increased demand throughout the year, resulting in businesses trying to move cargo earlier to ensure they can meet customer needs, and even considering nearshoring. As regionalization has become more prevalent, businesses can use nearshoring to diversify suppliers and reduce their dependency on single sources. By ensuring that these suppliers and manufacturers are closer to the consumer market, businesses can keep production costs lower as well as have more ease of reaching markets and avoid delay-related risks from global disruptions. Utilizing options closer to market can also allow companies to better adapt to changes in consumer needs and behavior. Finally, some companies may also find it useful to stock critical materials for future, to act as a buffer against unexpected delays and/or issues relating to trade embargoes.
5. Understanding tariffs, legislation and regulations 2024 was year of customs regulations in EU. And tariffs are expected in the U.S. as well, once the new Trump Administration takes office. However, consistent with President-elect Trump’s first term, threats of increases are often used as a negotiating tool. So companies should take a wait and see approach to U.S. customs, even as they cope with the certainty that further EU customs are set to come into play.
For an island measuring a little less than 14,000 square miles (or about the size of Belgium), Taiwan plays a crucial role in global supply chains, making geopolitical concerns associated with it of keen interest to most major corporations.
Taiwan has essentially acted as an independent nation since 1949, when the nationalist government under Chiang Kai-shek retreated to the island following the communist takeover of mainland China. Yet China has made no secret of the fact that it wants to bring Taiwan back under its authority—ambitions that were brought to the fore in October when China launched military drills that simulated an attack on the island.
If China were to invade Taiwan, it could have serious political and social consequences that would ripple around the globe. And it would be particularly devastating to our supply chains, says consultant Ashray Lavsi, a principal at the global procurement and supply chain consultancy Efficio. He specializes in solving complex supply chain, operations, and procurement problems, with a special focus on resilience. Prior to joining Efficio’s London office in 2017, he worked at XPO Logistics in the U.S. and the Netherlands.
Lavsi spoke recently with David Maloney, Supply Chain Xchange’s group editorial director, about what might happen if China moves to annex Taiwan—what shortages would likely arise, the impact on shipping lanes and ocean freight costs, and what managers should be doing now to prepare for potential disruptions ahead.
It’s no secret that China has ambitions on Taiwan. If China were to attempt to seize control of Taiwan, how would that affect the world’s supply chains?
There would be wide-ranging disruptions around the world. The United States does a lot of trade with both China and Taiwan. For example, the U.S. imports about $470 billion worth of goods from China, while China imports about $124 billion from the U.S. Meanwhile, Taiwan is the No. 9 trading partner for the U.S. So all of this trade could come to a halt, depending on the level of conflict. Supplies would likely be disrupted, and trade routes could be affected, resulting in delays and higher shipping costs.
Furthermore, there would likely be disruptions to trade not just between the U.S. and China, but also across the board. It could very well be that the NATO members get involved, that South Korea gets involved, that Japan gets involved, the Philippines get involved, so it could very quickly spiral into widespread disruptions.
We’ve seen big changes in the way businesses in Hong Kong operate since Britain handed control of Hong Kong over to China nearly 30 years ago. If China were to succeed in bringing Taiwan under its authority, would we see a similar outcome?
Indeed, I would expect so. I read recently that since around 2020, foreign direct investment in Hong Kong has dropped by nearly 50%, from $105 million to $54 million. The drop was primarily because of increased regulatory oversight. There are now a lot of restrictions on freedom of speech as well as tighter control over business operations. Something similar could very well happen in Taiwan if China were to succeed in taking over the island.
As you mentioned, the United States conducts a lot of trade with both Taiwan and China, and both countries have become strategic supply chain partners. Beyond the diplomatic considerations, what would a military or economic conflict mean for the United States?
There is a lot of trade in goods like agricultural products, aircraft, electronic components, and machinery, and our access to all of those items could be cut off. On top of that, China controls 70% of the world’s rare earth minerals [which are crucial for the production of a wide variety of electronic devices]. So any conflict in the region would almost certainly result in many disruptions, particularly in critical sectors like technology and electronics—disruptions that would lead to shortages and increased costs.
Trade routes would also be affected, resulting in delays and higher shipping costs. U.S. companies would need to seek out alternative suppliers for critical materials or components they currently source in China, if they haven’t already. And if they haven’t lined up alternative suppliers, any hostilities could result in a complete halt in production.
What effect would such a move have on the global economy?
It’s been quite a few years since economies have just been localized. Any disruption now has widespread ripple effects across the world. As we discussed, any conflict between the United States and China naturally pulls in countries like Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and the NATO countries, and it can very quickly spiral out.
Look at the semiconductor, or chip, shortages. If you recall, back in 2021, those shortages led to almost a half-trillion-dollar loss for the automakers, who lost out on sales of 7.7 million vehicles because they couldn’t meet demand. We could see a repeat of that situation—maybe even on a larger scale.
I found this statistic interesting—we often talk about the semiconductor shortages during the pandemic, but if you look at true production numbers, the actual production of chips went up from 2020, to 2021, to 2022. The shortage was driven not by a drop in production, but rather, by a surge in demand for PCs from people working from home. That demand has since dwindled, but we’d still face a major semiconductor shortage if much of the production were halted. So that’s going to be a very big change, a very big disruption.
Of course, the United States, along with a number of other countries, has taken steps to reduce its exposure to risk by bringing some semiconductor production back to its own shores. But it will take time to get those operations up and running, and their output would still be just a drop in the bucket compared to what’s needed. So what would a takeover of Taiwan mean for the overall semiconductor flow?
It essentially stops, right? Let me paint a picture that illustrates the importance of the Taiwanese semiconductor industry to global manufacturing. Semiconductors go into everything from cars to military equipment to computers to data centers to microwaves—they are in everything around us. Taiwan produces 60% of the world’s semiconductors and more than 90% of the advanced chips. Just let that sink in: More than 90% of all the advanced chips produced worldwide come from Taiwan, primarily from a big fabrication company called TSMC.
So the complexity and the precision required to make advanced semiconductors, combined with the limited number of companies around the world, make Taiwan’s position unmatched. The second-largest producer after TSMC is South Korean-based Samsung, which produces 18%, so that’s the gap that we are talking about.
As you rightly said, there are efforts by governments across the world to reduce their reliance on Taiwan. For example, TSMC is building three fabrication facilities in Arizona—the third with funding from the U.S. government. The first plant is set to go live next year and the third by 2030. But even once all three plants are up and running, the production volumes won’t be close to what TSMC produces in Taiwan. It’s going to take years to reduce our reliance on production in Taiwan. If that supply is cut off, the ripple effect will be tremendous.
Setting aside the historical and political claims China has made on Taiwan, is Taiwan’s dominance in the semiconductor industry a main reason why China has set its sights on it?
It could be. China has been investing heavily in chip production—for instance, today, most, if not all, of the chips in the latest Huawei phones are locally produced in China. But China is still quite a few years behind TSMC. So that’s definitely going to be one of the big factors, right? One article that I found very interesting declared that chips are the new oil. If you control chip production, you control the global market.
Let’s talk about the implications for shipping lanes. If you take a look at the map, you realize that the Taiwan Strait is a very important shipping lane for containerized goods coming out of both China and Taiwan. If China were to institute a military blockade, how would that affect the world’s container flows?
That flow would be affected tremendously. The Taiwan Strait plays a crucial role in global shipping, particularly for goods moving between Asia and the rest of the world. It is one of the busiest shipping lanes, and any blockage would severely disrupt global container flows.
Now let me put that into perspective. Fifty percent of the world’s containerships pass through the Taiwan Strait—50%. That’s a huge number. By comparison, the Suez Canal handles about 20% of global trade. Or to use another measure: 88% of the world’s largest ships by tonnage passed through the Taiwan Strait in 2022.
I’ve been reading up on this in the past few months and it seems that a military blockage is a very likely scenario—one that would cripple Taiwan’s economy without a full-scale invasion. So instead of a mounting a full-on attack, China might just block the strait, which would lead to delays in the delivery of goods, affecting global supply chains and causing shortages across Asia and the U.S.
Given the escalating tensions between China and Taiwan, should shippers and manufacturers be preparing today for a potential conflict?
Businesses have to begin preparing today. If businesses were to say, “Okay, I’m going to wait until the conflict breaks out, and then figure out what I’ll do,” it will be too late. You’re done. Your production comes to halt. You can no longer satisfy your customer requirements. So proactive measures are an absolute requirement.
What should they do to prepare?
I would urge manufacturers and shippers to take what’s essentially a two-pronged approach.
First, you need to segment and identify your critical components, based on how crucial they are to your production operations and the risk associated with their sources, where they’re coming from. After you segment them, you list your top-priority items—the critical components that you absolutely cannot do without. You then split your supply chain into two, so that you have a much more redundant supply chain built for those critical items and then a second supply chain for everything else.
To build redundancy, you establish multiple suppliers and diversify them geographically. You also build in stringent contingency measures, which could include strategic stockpiling, nearshoring, and friendshoring, which is where you store inventory with an ally or in a friend consortium, as well as buying alternative components wherever possible. So all of those measures need to be put in place for the components that you’ve identified as absolutely critical for your production.
What is the second prong?
The second prong is the need to manage increased costs. There’s no getting away from higher costs, right? If you’re holding more inventory, you have higher inventory carrying costs. And if you’re diversifying your supply base, that means you don’t have as much leverage [with individual suppliers]. You’re also going to be managing multiple supply chains, which requires an increase in human capital because you’ll need more people to manage the more complex supply chains that you’re putting in place.
One way to manage costs could be by implementing strategic sourcing programs across the board that are aimed at mitigating some of the expenses. By taking these steps, manufacturers can safeguard their operations against potential disruptions and ensure continuity.
A lot of U.S. companies have been nearshoring to Mexico, which has now become the United States’ leading trade partner. Is that a simple solution for companies looking to reduce their reliance on Asia?
It is one of the solutions. But you won’t be able to replace your Asian supply base immediately—as with semiconductors, it may take a few years to build out that capacity.
So you need to start stockpiling essential components now—particularly if you won’t be able to find alternatives. You want to make sure that you’re holding the right amount of inventory of the components that you absolutely need. So nearshoring is an option, but you need to be careful what you move to Mexico.
Is that because moving production to Mexico will raise your costs compared to sourcing in Asia?
Yes, production costs will be higher compared to a place like Vietnam, where wages are currently lower than in Mexico. It might reduce the logistics cost, but I think there’s still a net increase overall because you’ll have higher expenses for things like regulatory compliance. Plus you’ll have the one-time cost of setting up the facilities.
Ideally, you’ll never have to face these problems we’ve been talking about, but it’s always better to be prepared.
Editor’s note:This article first appeared in the November 2024 issue of our sister publication DC Velocity.