Analyzing Container Shipping Resilience Amid Red Sea Disruptions

IntroductionMaritime chokepoint disruptions can substantially degrade shipping services even when the underlying network remains structurally connected. This study examines the Red Sea–Suez disruption and evaluates alternative recovery strategies.MethodsWe develop a time-varying weighted shipping-network model incorporating load–capacity constraints, distance impedance, residual-capacity attraction, and cascading functional degradation, together with a route-reconfiguration model balancing transport cost, delay, and resilience. A synthetic scenario network calibrated with public data comprises 32 major Asia–Europe container ports and 134 directed links. Twenty simulations combine five disruption intensities with four operationally defined recovery strategies. An equal-budget capacity allocation experiment is also conducted under 75% corridor loss.ResultsUnder complete corridor loss, passive diversion reduces the service level Q to 0.827 and the effective-capacity index to 0.609, although the largest connected component remains intact and no port completely fails. Under 75% loss, joint optimization achieves the highest Q, whereas Cape rerouting has a lower generalized cost. Neither uniform nor alternative-path-targeted capacity expansion improves Q at three-decimal precision under the equal budget.DiscussionThe capacity allocation result does not imply that port expansion is generally ineffective. Under the present model calibration, port handling capacity is not the binding constraint; fleet turnover emerges as the principal operational bottleneck. The framework provides a mechanism-based scenario platform that can be further validated using observed Automatic Identification System (AIS) and liner-schedule data.