As disruption in the Strait of Hormuz sends early shockwaves through global shipping networks, Taiwan Business TOPICS reached out to global supply expert Alicia Heavisides to unpack what it could mean for Taiwan.
How could disruption in the Strait of Hormuz translate into supply chain risks for manufacturing hubs like Taiwan?
The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most critical trade corridors, particularly for energy but also for a wide range of intermediate goods. Countries in the region account for an estimated 36% of global crude oil exports, alongside refined fuels, petrochemicals, fertilizers, and metals. When disruption occurs at this chokepoint, the impact tends to propagate upstream into energy-intensive and import-dependent manufacturing ecosystems across Asia.
For advanced manufacturing hubs such as Taiwan, the risk is not limited to oil supply alone. Dun & Bradstreet’s data show that a significant share of exposure sits in transportation services and wholesale trade, highlighting how disruption often first surfaces in logistics and distribution networks rather than directly within manufacturing. When these intermediary layers are affected, delays and cost pressures can cascade through production systems.
While sectors such as chemicals, plastics, and metals represent a smaller share of Taiwan’s overall exposure, they play a critical upstream role as essential inputs. Even relatively modest disruption in these areas can feed into higher production costs, tighter inventory planning, and longer delivery timelines across electronics, machinery, and other advanced manufacturing supply chains.
What early signals indicate where global logistics disruption is heading?
We focus less on isolated events and more on behavioral patterns in shipping activity. One of the clearest early indicators is the relationship between new bookings and cancellations. In early March, containerized import flows linked to the Strait of Hormuz showed cancellations exceeding new bookings by more than 250%, with cancellations rising sharply while new bookings fell to levels not seen since early 2024.
When these patterns persist over consecutive days rather than correcting quickly, it suggests that firms are pausing, reassessing, or struggling to secure viable routes. Experts also monitor changes in port-level connectivity and rerouting behavior, which can signal stress spreading beyond a single corridor.
What do current shipping patterns suggest about the severity and likely duration of the disruption?
It is still too early to put a definitive timeline on how long disruption will last, but the scale and persistence of the patterns we are observing are notable. On several days in early March, booked volumes dropped to a fraction of levels seen just a week earlier, while cancellation volumes reached their highest single-day totals since early 2024.
These patterns are consistent with what we would typically classify as medium- to high-disruption scenarios, based on observed behavior rather than forecasts. The key signal is persistence — when abnormal booking and cancellation dynamics continue over multiple days, it points to more structural disruption rather than a short-term adjustment.
Which industries appear most exposed based on the data?
The exposure we see in containerized trade is broad-based. The highest concentrations of impacted entities are in transportation services, wholesale trade — both durable and nondurable goods — and food-related industries. Together, these sectors account for just over half (55%) of the entities linked to disrupted shipments.
It is also important to note that around 80% of impacted businesses are micro and small enterprises. This matters because smaller firms often have less flexibility to absorb delays, higher costs, or sudden changes in routing, which can amplify disruption as it moves through complex manufacturing supply chains.
Are companies already shifting routes or sourcing strategies?
What we are seeing so far points more toward tactical adjustments than wholesale structural change. Booking and cancellation data show sustained cancellation pressure alongside early signs of routing adjustments within Gulf-linked networks. Together, these patterns indicate that firms are pausing shipments or trialing alternative routes, rather than making full, permanent substitutions.
Large-scale sourcing shifts typically lag initial disruption. Companies tend to wait for clearer signals on duration before committing to more permanent changes, such as onboarding new suppliers or relocating production.
Which indicators should supply chain managers watch most closely in the coming weeks?
Several signals are particularly important during periods like this. Monitoring booking-to-cancellation ratios over time helps distinguish between short-term volatility and more persistent disruption. Tracking port-level connectivity and routing changes can reveal whether pressure is spreading across trade lanes.
Beyond that, companies should assess exposure beyond tier-one suppliers. Disruption often emerges first in tier-two and tier-three networks, especially where time-sensitive or business-critical shipments are involved. Visibility across extended supply networks becomes increasingly important when uncertainty persists.
Alicia Heavisides is the Global Supply Strategy Lead at Dun & Bradstreet, a global company offering B2B data, analytics, and AI‑driven platforms that support organizations in areas such as risk management, compliance, business development, as well as providing research and insights on global business issues.
