The UK cannot achieve resilience if its own ports remain vulnerable to climate risks
Following the 1805 Battle of Trafalgar, Britain established itself as a global maritime power. Through global supply routes and extensive trade networks, the UK built its economy on naval superiority. Today, climate change is disrupting global trade networks and reshaping shipping routes, demanding a reconsideration of how the UK conducts its trade. Without any policy change, these risks will undermine both economic stability and national security. The UK’s supply chain resilience depends on climate-proofing global shipping routes and domestic port infrastructure, treating maritime climate risk not only as an economic challenge but as a core security issue.
Two hundred years later, the UK’s economic prosperity still rests on maritime trade; however, the challenge faced today stems from climate instability rather than rival fleets. The UK’s reliance on maritime chokepoints makes it especially exposed to climate-driven disruptions far beyond its borders. With the 2023-24 drought, the Panama Canal authorities limited vessel transits from 34-36 to just 24 per day, leaving more than 160 boats waiting to cross the chokepoint in August 2023. (1) While not directly affecting the UK, the impact on import prices was nevertheless felt as more goods had to be sent through other chokepoints, such as the Suez Canal, which led to an increase in overall prices (1). Any indirect consequence should be perceived as a vulnerability in the UK supply chain because these disruptions drive global freight costs up and alter energy flows, which ultimately impact British consumers and industries. The Panama incident illustrates how even disruptions of the supply chain across the world cause ripple effects that are felt in the UK, reinforcing the need to treat maritime climate risk as a strategic vulnerability, not just an economic inconvenience.
Even if global chokepoints were protected, the UK cannot achieve resilience if its own ports remain vulnerable. Despite its long-standing dependence on maritime trade, the UK still has no integrated strategy to address climate risks to its maritime supply chains. According to the CCC, “Responsibilities are dispersed across departments without strong central oversight or clear.” (2) Namely, the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA), the Department for Transport, the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS), and the Ministry of Defence without a single cohesive framework. The result is a departmental approach as an environmental concern, a transport inefficiency, or a defense matter. These different approaches have led to mass underinvestment and have forced the UK to be reactive to crises rather than proactively building resilience and finding solutions. With a clear framework and set of directives, each department could consolidate resources to better anticipate for future challenges.
One of the most significant climate-related threats to British trade comes from rising sea levels. In their 2021 Climate Change Adaption Report, Associated British Ports (ABP) cited increasing sea levels and storm-inflicted infrastructure damage as their main sources of concern. (3) These risks translate to other challenges such as broken cranes, inundated quays, and disrupted vessel operations which can trigger large scale interruptions in the domestic supply chain network. Additionally, global warming can alter sedimentation patterns. As stated in the Port of Felixstowe climate assessment (4), this means that navigation routes around the UK will be interrupted, but it might also require new dredging regimes. Even if the ports could remain in use, the effects of climate change would be felt inland too. Railroads and road links are especially susceptible to flooding and overheating. Over time, repeated stress from storms, flooding, and temperature changes can lead to asset degradation and increased repair costs. Some companies such as ABP are already implementing climate resilience into their business plans, which can help to decrease future costs. Ports, especially main container hubs like the Port of Felixstowe, are critical parts of the UK’s infrastructure with deep vulnerabilities that, if left unaddressed, directly threaten UK supply chain resilience.
Not only does climate change jeopardize current shipping routes, it also opens new lanes, specifically in the Arctic, where countries like China are poised to take control of melted ice lanes to expedite shipping. Currently there are two main passageways through the Arctic namely, the Northwest Passage and the Northern Sea Route. However, according to research conducted in 2020, “A seasonal ice-free shipping route via the North Pole may open by mid-century.” (5) This further highlights the strategic importance of a resilient supply chain. If the Arctic route shortens Asia-Europe shipping by thousands of miles, but the UK has no part in shaping its governance or making trade partnerships, then Britain’s supply chains could become increasingly vulnerable to geopolitical pressure. This reinforces the idea that the UK needs to consider maritime climate change as not just an economic or environmental problem, but also as a serious security issue.
The UK must replace its current approach to supply chain protection. Instead of a departmental approach, the British government should appoint a member of the cabinet as the Maritime Climate Resilience Coordinator. This could ensure long term planning, investment, and coordination on the impacts of climate change on maritime security and resilience. Additionally, the UK government should invest in climate proofing ports and improving the country’s rail network. This would include upgrading flood defenses around major container ports like Felixstowe or Southampton, investing in quay systems and adaptable cranes, and reinforcing rail networks to withstand drastic changes in weather and temperature. Public-Private partnerships could help spread the costs and companies like ABP are already investing in climate proofing their assets. Globally, the UK should build resilience by diversifying its reliance on maritime chokepoints, making trade agreements with states along alternative trade routes and pushing for international cooperation to keep chokepoints like the Panama and Suez open for trade use. Diplomatic participation through the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and bilateral agreements could help secure Britain’s access and reduce the risk of supply chain bottlenecks driving up costs. Ultimately, supply chain resilience is not only about adaptation but also deference. Strong, well-built ports; investment in redundancies; and actively shaping shipping governance signals to allies and rivals that the UK’s economic lifelines cannot be disrupted easily. Therefore, investing in maritime climate resilience is both a matter of economic prudence and strategic defense - a modern echo of the naval dominance that once secured the country’s prosperity.
William McAndrew is a English-American student currently studying for a degree in International Business Management from ESCP Business School. He currently serves as Head of Conferences at the ESCP International Politics Society, where he develops and hosts discussions with industry leaders and political figures to foster meaningful dialogue between students and professionals. He has a strong interest in foreign policy and energy security, exploring issues such as strategic energy dependence, the implications of global supply-chain shifts, and the role of diplomatic engagement in strengthening national resilience.
Sources:
1. U.S. Energy Information Administration (2023). Panama Canal Drought Restricts Ship Traffic. [Online] Available at: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=60842 2. Climate Change Committee. Progress in Adapting to Climate Change: 2023 Report to Parliament. Climate Change Committee, 2023,
https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/progress-in-adapting-to-climate-change-2023- report-to-parliament.
3. Associated British Ports (2021). Climate Change Adaptation Report Update. [Online] https://www.abports.co.uk/media/jq2gxtyk/associated-british-ports-climate-change adaptation-report-update-2021.pdf
4. UKCIP (2020). Port of Felixstowe Climate Assessment.
https://www.ukcip.org.uk/learning/arp/port-felixstowe-arp/
5. Melia, N. et al. (2020). Opening of New Arctic Shipping Routes Under Climate Change. Marine Policy, Vol. 118.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0308597X2030453X#:~:text=the %20TSR's%20opening.-,Abstract,the%20new%20Arctic%20shipping%20corridor.
Cover Image Courtesy of IMO via Flickr.