Middle East container ports are the most efficient in the world

Ports in the Middle East took four of the top five spots in the second edition of the global Container Port Performance Index (CPPI) developed by the World Bank and S&P Global Market Intelligence.

 The study adds weight to the argument that much of today’s supply chain pains originate from the slow pace at American ports with US west coast ports being four times less productive than a Saudi port on the Red Sea.

Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah Port tops the ranking in 2021, with regional competitors Port Salalah in Oman, Hamad Port in Qatar and Khalifa Port in Abu Dhabi rounding out the top five. Saudi Arabia’s Jeddah Islamic Port also featured strongly in eighth place overall.

The ranking is based on time vessels needed to spend in port to complete workloads over the course of 2021, a year that saw unprecedented port congestion and disruption to global supply chains.

Inefficient ports represent a significant risk for many developing countries

“Increasing the use of digital technology and green fuel alternatives are two ways countries can modernise their ports and make maritime supply chains more resilient,” said Martin Humphreys, lead transport economist at the World Bank and one of the researchers behind the index

Three of the large Chinese gateways, Shanghai, Ningbo and the southern port of Guangzhou, feature in the top 10, while last year’s most efficient port – Yokohama in Japan – dropped to 10th place overall.

The index and underlying data are intended to identify gaps and opportunities for improvement that would benefit all key stakeholders in global trade, including governments, shipping lines, port and terminal operators, shippers, logistics companies and consumers.

The CPPI is based on total port hours per ship call, defined as the elapsed time between when a ship reaches a port to its departure from the berth having completed its cargo exchange. Greater or lesser workloads are accounted for by examining the underlying data within 10 different call size ranges.

 Five distinct ship size groups are accounted for in the methodology given the potential for greater fuel and emissions savings on larger vessels.