The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
46
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
TYPE
Original Research
PAGE NO.
46-55
10.37547/tajmei/Volume07Issue03-07
OPEN ACCESS
SUBMITED
27 January 2025
ACCEPTED
25 February 2025
PUBLISHED
29 March 2025
VOLUME
Vol.07 Issue03 2025
CITATION
Semeniak Mykyta. (2025). Global Trends in Logistics: The Impact of
Geopolitical Factors on Supply Chains. The American Journal of
Management and Economics Innovations, 7(03), 46
–
55.
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajmei/Volume07Issue03-07
COPYRIGHT
© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.
Global Trends in Logistics:
The Impact of Geopolitical
Factors on Supply Chains
Semeniak Mykyta
Head and owner of the leading logistics company Weiz Logistics in
Ukraine Dnipro Ukraine
Abstract:
This article examines key geopolitical factors
influencing global supply chains in the modern world. It
analyzes trade wars, sanctions, and political tensions
that disrupt logistics operations and compel companies
to reconsider their production and distribution
strategies. Special attention is given to risk mitigation
mechanisms,
including
supplier
and
market
diversification, the formation of strategic reserves, the
implementation of new monitoring technologies, and
the reconfiguration of supply chains through
regionalization
and
nearshoring.
The
study
consolidates recommendations to enhance the
resilience and flexibility of logistics systems in an
environment of increasing geopolitical uncertainty. The
scholarly contribution of this work lies in the
systematization of contemporary approaches to
managing geopolitical risks in logistics and the
development of an integrated model for a resilient
supply chain.
Keywords:
Agile methodologies, customer orientation,
massage studio, operational process, optimization,
resource management, digitalization, workplace
ergonomics.
Introduction:
Global supply chains have become an
integral part of the modern economy due to decades of
globalization. Production and trade are now distributed
across multiple countries; for example, product
development may take place in the United States,
components may be manufactured in Japan, and final
assembly may occur in China [1]. This fragmentation of
production, known as global value chains, has enabled
companies to achieve high efficiency and cost
reduction. However, growing interdependence has also
made supply chains vulnerable to external shocks,
particularly geopolitical factors. Political tensions, trade
conflicts, and sanctions can instantly disrupt
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
47
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
established logistics networks.
In recent years, the geopolitical landscape has
significantly intensified. Trade wars, primarily between
the United States and China, have resulted in the
imposition of reciprocal tariffs on goods worth
hundreds of billions of dollars [1]. Sanctions have
become a widely used tool for exerting pressure in
international conflicts and disputes. For instance, in
2023, the United States tightened export restrictions on
semiconductor supplies to China, prompting China to
impose export limitations on rare earth materials,
which are critical for electronics [2]. Such events have
increased uncertainty in global trade and forced
companies to reconsider their global logistics
strategies. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic and its
related cargo movement restrictions have exposed the
fragility of existing just-in-time models. As a result,
ensuring supply chain resilience in the face of
geopolitical instability has become a priority for
businesses and governments alike.
The relevance of this topic is supported by research
findings. Smyrnov et al. (2025) note that in recent years,
international conflicts, political changes, and economic
sanctions in Europe have had a significant impact on
global transport and logistics networks, creating
various obstacles [3]. According to another study,
geopolitical tensions and the pandemic have dealt a
severe blow to global supply chains, causing
unprecedented disruptions, rising costs, and situations
where some countries found themselves nearly
powerless in the face of large-scale challenges [4].
Specifically, increasing tariffs, trade restrictions, and
sanctions are fragmenting supply chains, driving up
costs, and limiting companies' access to markets [4].
These findings indicate that geopolitical risks are no
longer an abstract threat but have become tangible
factors shaping global logistics strategies.
The objective of this study is to conduct a
comprehensive analysis of global logistics trends under
the influence of geopolitical factors. The main section
examines how specific geopolitical events
—
such as
trade wars and sanctions
—
impact international supply
chains, with a focus on examples from the United States
and the European Union. Additionally, strategies
employed by companies and governments to mitigate
these risks and enhance the resilience of logistics
networks are analyzed.
The scholarly contribution of this work lies in
synthesizing contemporary data and forming a holistic
view of the impact of geopolitics on logistics, as well as
interpreting the findings from a risk management
perspective.
Generalized
recommendations
are
proposed to improve supply chain resilience in the
evolving global landscape. Thus, this study integrates
an analysis of current sources, which holds significance
for both logistics management theory and practice.
1. Geopolitical challenges and their impact on global
supply chains
Foreign policy decisions of states directly affect global
trade and logistics. Key geopolitical risk factors include
international conflicts (military actions, border
disputes), economic sanctions, trade and tariff policies
(tariff increases, trade restrictions), as well as broader
phenomena such as the rise of protectionism and the
breakdown of international agreements. Unlike
traditional risks (e.g., natural disasters), geopolitical
risks involve deliberate human intervention and can
have long-term consequences. Politically motivated
trade barriers can restructure trade and raw material
flows that have been developed over decades.
Recent studies highlight the growing role of geopolitics
in supply chain disruptions. According to Smyrnov et al.,
political instability, armed conflicts, and sanctions lead
to direct failures in global supply chains, forcing
companies to reroute shipments and seek alternative
suppliers and logistics routes [3]. Similarly, Incekara &
Incekara indicate that geopolitical tensions, including
trade conflicts and regulatory changes, are among the
main drivers of rising supply chain costs [4]. In other
words, political decisions by states have direct
economic effects, disrupting the rhythm of
international logistics.
One of the most striking examples of geopolitical
influence on logistics is the trade war between the
United States and China, which began in 2018. Between
2018 and 2019, the two largest economies in the world
imposed reciprocal tariffs on nearly half of their
bilateral trade. The weighted average tariffs imposed
by the United States on Chinese goods increased from
3.1% to 19.3%, while Chinese tariffs on American goods
rose from 8% to 20.3% [1]. These tariffs affected
approximately $550 billion worth of Chinese imports
into the United States and $185 billion worth of
American exports to China [1]. These measures
significantly increased costs for companies whose
supply chains relied on bilateral trade. The most
affected sectors included high-tech industries, where
production chains are deeply integrated across
countries,
from
electronics
to
automotive
manufacturing.
The consequences of the trade war were reflected in
global logistics flows. Companies with production
operations in China faced rising costs and delays. Many
were forced to urgently shift orders to other countries
or pay surcharges for emergency adjustments to supply
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
48
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
routes [2]. As a result, China’s share in U.S. foreign
trade began to decline. In 2018, China accounted for
more than 21% of U.S. merchandise trade, but by 2023,
this figure had dropped to approximately 14% [5]. At
the same time, trade volumes between the United
States and neighboring countries increased. Mexico
emerged as the United States’ largest trading partner,
surpassing both China and Canada [5].
Figure 1. Share of China (red line), Mexico (green), and Canada (blue) in total U.S. trade, 2000
–
2022. After 2018
—
the start
of the trade war
—China’s share declined, while Mexico’s share increased, reaching the top position. Source: U.S. Census
Bureau, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas data [6].
Figure 1 illustrates how geopolitical decisions, such as
the introduction of tariffs in 2018, reshaped supply
chain structures: China’s share in U.S. trade sharply
declined, while closer partners such as Mexico and
Canada filled the gap. This shift indicates a trend
toward regionalization of supply chains driven by
political risks. U.S. companies began restructuring their
supply chains by switching to suppliers from countries
with more predictable trade policies or geographical
proximity. For example, electronics and apparel
manufacturers relocated part of their orders from
China to Vietnam, India, and Mexico [2]. A similar
process occurred in the European Union following
Brexit: The
United Kingdom’s exit from the EU
introduced customs formalities, prompting European
firms to seek new logistics partners within the bloc or
redirect trade flows.
Another powerful geopolitical factor affecting logistics
is sanctions. Sanctions impose restrictions on trade,
investments, and financial operations, introduced by
states or international organizations in response to
specific actions by violating countries. In recent years,
sanctions regimes have affected major economies and
key resources, which has inevitably impacted global
supply chains.
For example, U.S. and EU sanctions against Iran and
Venezuela restricted oil exports from these countries.
For global supply chains, this meant a restructuring of
energy commodity flows: European consumers had to
replace Iranian oil with supplies from other regions,
increasing the burden on tanker transportation and
altering traditional routes. Sanctions against Chinese
high-tech companies, such as Huawei, limited their
access
to
critically
important
components
(semiconductors, software) [2], forcing Chinese
companies to seek new suppliers and develop their
own solutions. In response, China threatened to restrict
the export of rare earth elements, which are almost
monopolized in its territory and are critically important
for electronics and electric vehicle production [2]. This
escalation of sanctions threatens entire industrial
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
49
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
supply chains, from smartphone manufacturing to
green energy, which depends on rare materials.
Military conflicts and political instability also severely
impact logistics. Armed clashes near key trade routes,
such as the Suez Canal or the Strait of Hormuz, can
disrupt shipping and cause delivery delays across
thousands of kilometers of supply chains. Geopolitical
conflict zones force multinational companies to
develop more flexible and resilient supply chain
management strategies
—
diversifying their supplier
base, establishing alternative routes, and maintaining
backup logistics solutions in case of crisis [3]. For
example, conflicts in the Middle East or Eastern Europe
lead to the redistribution of energy supply flows:
European countries urgently restructure gas and oil
supply chains, switching to alternative suppliers and
other types of fuel to ensure energy security. This leads
to a transformation of related infrastructure, from LNG
terminals to railway routes for fuel transportation.
A common denominator among various geopolitical
shocks is their negative impact on the efficiency and
reliability of supply chains. First and foremost, delivery
timeliness suffers: border delays, increased customs
control, and route changes all prolong cargo transit
times. For example, after the introduction of tariffs and
retaliatory inspections between China and the U.S.,
average delivery times increased, and companies were
forced to hold larger in-transit inventories. In the EU,
following
unexpected
political
events (Brexit,
sanctions), companies reported longer customs
clearance times and frequent supply schedule
disruptions.
At the same time, costs are rising. Geopolitical
turbulence increases logistics expenses through several
channels:
1.
Direct increases in tariffs and duties (in the case of
trade tariffs, goods become more expensive for the
importer by the amount of the imposed tariff).
2.
Higher transportation costs due to longer or
suboptimal routes.
3.
The need to insure additional risks or maintain
reserve stockpiles.
Studies indicate that in recent years, political risks
rather than traditional factors, such as fuel prices, have
become the primary driver of rising logistics costs [4].
Incekara & Incekara conducted an econometric analysis
demonstrating that the increase in transportation costs
from 2020 to 2023 was driven not so much by oil prices
as by geopolitical and economic risks
—
trade conflicts,
sanctions, and political instability [4].
Another consequence is the shortage of certain goods
and raw materials. If a country falls under sanctions or
trade restrictions, its products may disappear from the
global market, causing supply disruptions for
dependent companies. A classic example is the
semiconductor shortage in 2020
–
2021, exacerbated by
trade restrictions: U.S. sanctions against Chinese chip
manufacturers and Taiwanese equipment, combined
with the pandemic, led to global automotive
production halts due to a lack of semiconductors. This
chain reaction illustrates the link between geopolitics
and logistics: a seemingly localized political decision
(sanctions in the technology sector) resulted in a global
logistics crisis in a related industry.
Finally, geopolitical risks have exposed the need for
supply chain resilience. Just-in-time inventory
management models, which minimize warehouse
reserves, proved inadequate in the face of politically
driven disruptions. When supplies are suddenly cut off
due to sanctions or border closures, companies lack
time buffers or stockpiles, leading to rapid production
shutdowns. According to Smyrnov et al., sudden supply
chain breaks due to geopolitical events can result in
production stoppages and multimillion-dollar losses
[3]. Their study shows that supply chain disruptions
caused by geopolitical crises lead to cost increases,
delivery delays, and even factory shutdowns [3]. As a
result, the business community has begun discussing a
shift from a just-in-time strategy to a just-in-case
approach, which involves maintaining larger reserves
and redundant resources.
These examples demonstrate that geopolitical factors,
such as trade wars, sanctions, and conflicts,
significantly disrupt global supply chains. Companies
and entire industries are forced to respond to these
challenges. The second part will examine the risk
mitigation and resilience strategies firms and
governments use to adapt to the new geopolitical
reality.
2. Strategies for minimizing geopolitical risks in supply
chains
Geopolitical disruptions in recent years have forced
supply chain participants to rethink the organization of
global logistics. While efficiency
—
cost minimization,
inventory optimization, and fast delivery
—
was
previously the primary criterion, resilience and
flexibility have now taken precedence [7]. This refers to
the supply chain's ability to withstand external shocks
and recover quickly. Governments and companies are
implementing a range of strategies aimed at reducing
dependence on geopolitically vulnerable links and
creating reserves for crisis situations. Below are the
main approaches to risk minimization, supported by
examples from the United States and the European
Union.
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
50
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
One of the fundamental principles of risk management
is not to put all eggs in one basket. In logistics, this
translates to supply chain diversification: using multiple
sources of raw materials and components instead of
relying on a single supplier, distributing production
across various countries, and developing alternative
transportation routes. The goal is to avoid critical
dependence on a single partner or region, which could
become a bottleneck in the event of a geopolitical crisis.
In recent years, many companies have adopted
"China+1" strategies, seeking to reduce reliance on
Chinese production sites while retaining the
advantages of the Asian manufacturing base. According
to surveys, firms with a high share of procurement from
China are the most active in diversifying suppliers [8].
The China+1 approach involves developing significant
production capacity in at least one additional country
besides China, such as Vietnam, India, or Mexico.
According to the International Trade Council, since
2018, many businesses have relocated part of their
production from China to Vietnam, India, Mexico, and
other Southeast Asian nations to reduce tariff costs and
geopolitical risks [2]. As a result, Vietnam, Malaysia,
and
Thailand
have
experienced
growth
in
manufacturing and exports in categories affected by
the trade war.
A similar trend is observed in Europe. Companies
dependent on imports from a single non-EU country are
securing secondary suppliers within the single market
or in other stable jurisdictions. For instance, European
electronics manufacturers that previously sourced rare
earth materials exclusively from China have begun
investing in extraction and processing projects in Africa
and Australia to establish alternative supply channels.
Statistical data confirms the effectiveness of regional
diversification: 44% of EU companies importing from
China experience significant logistics disruptions,
whereas only 22% of firms working solely with suppliers
within the EU report similar issues (Figure 2) [8]. The
EU's internal market serves as a buffer, reducing
vulnerability to external shocks [8]. Thus, diversifying
the geographical distribution of supply sources is a key
tool for mitigating geopolitical risks.
Figure 2. Major trade disruptions for EU firms (share of firms, %) [8]
The trend toward regionalizing supply chains
—
relocating production and inventory closer to end
markets or friendly countries
—
is gaining momentum
alongside geographical diversification. The terms
nearshoring (shifting production to nearby countries)
and reshoring (bringing production back to the home
country) have become firmly embedded in business
terminology. This strategy partially contrasts with
globalization: instead of manufacturing in the cheapest
locations, often on the other side of the world,
companies are willing to sacrifice some efficiency in
favor of locating production where geopolitical risks are
lower, and logistics are more predictable.
In response to the trade war and other factors, many
American firms relocated production lines from Asia to
North America. By 2023, Mexico had surpassed China
and Canada to become the United States' largest
trading partner [5]. It also became the primary foreign
supplier of industrial goods to the U.S. [6]. Mexico's
growing industrial sector has positioned it as an
attractive alternative to China: its proximity to the U.S.
reduces delivery times and costs, while its participation
in the USMCA (formerly NAFTA) ensures predictable
trade conditions. As noted by the Federal Reserve Bank
of Dallas, "the expansion of Mexico’s manufacturing
base has offered an alternative to production in China,"
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
51
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
particularly in industries oriented toward the American
market [6]. Additionally, even Chinese companies have
begun establishing factories in Mexico
—
such as
appliance and auto parts manufacturers
—
to serve the
U.S. market without tariff risks [6]. This phenomenon
has been termed friend-shoring, where Western
corporations and Asian firms alike are leveraging
Mexico and other Latin American countries as secure
platforms for accessing U.S. markets.
A similar trend, referred to as "de-risking" by the
European Commission, is unfolding in Europe, focusing
on reducing dependence on specific foreign countries
while maintaining openness to trade [9]. The EU aims
to bring the production of critical goods, such as
microchips and pharmaceuticals, back within the Union
or to neighboring friendly states. Supported by
government programs, such as EU semiconductor
funds modeled after the U.S. CHIPS Act, new
manufacturing facilities are opening across EU
countries to make European supply chains less
susceptible to external pressure. A notable example is
the construction of semiconductor plants in Germany
involving companies from Asia and the U.S., designed
to reduce the EU’s reliance on chip imports from
Taiwan and South Korea.
Executive surveys confirm a widespread shift toward
regionalization. According to Bain & Company, in 2024,
81% of global companies planned to move supply
chains closer to their primary markets, up from 63% in
2022 [10]. At the same time, the share of firms reducing
their presence in China increased from 55% in 2022 to
69% in 2024 [10]. These figures highlight the business
sector’s commitment to restructuring logistics in
response to geopolitical realities. This transformation is
also supported at the governmental level: in the U.S.,
the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA, 2022) provides
subsidies and loans to
firm’s
reshoring production,
particularly in strategic sectors such as microelectronics
and renewable energy [10]. Similarly, the EU is
considering offering incentives to companies that
localize critical manufacturing within the Union.
Another pillar of resilience strategies is stockpiling. This
involves both creating additional safety reserves of
materials and components and maintaining backup
production capacities that can be quickly activated in
case of supply chain disruptions. This approach
contrasts with the minimalist just-in-time model that
previously dominated. Although stockpiling increases
storage costs, it serves as a buffer against disruptions.
Companies affected by shortages of essential
components,
such
as
semiconductors
or
pharmaceutical ingredients, due to geopolitical
conflicts are reevaluating their inventory policies.
Expanding safety stocks is now seen as a necessary cost
for reliability. For example, after the semiconductor
crisis, automakers started signing long-term supply
contracts and keeping more chips in stock than before.
Research by the International Trade Council indicates
that many firms are increasing reserves of critical
components to mitigate trade-related disruptions [2].
Strategic stockpiling became widespread between
2020 and 2022, with some governments even creating
national reserves of medical supplies, rare earth
metals, and other essential materials to safeguard
strategic supply chains.
Maintaining large inventories is expensive, so
businesses aim to apply this selectively for the most
critical materials. Analytics play a crucial role in this
process: companies use algorithms and scenario
modeling to identify the most vulnerable bottlenecks in
the supply chain. Based on these insights, contingency
plans are developed, such as securing alternative
suppliers in different countries, maintaining inventory
for a specified number of production days, or
contracting additional freight capacity to handle peak
demand [3]. Essentially, companies are shifting from
reactive to proactive risk management
—
preparing
response strategies for geopolitical disruptions in
advance. According to the European Investment Bank,
the businesses that navigate crises most successfully
are those that have preemptively diversified their
sources, increased stockpiles, or digitized their supply
chains [8]. Thus, building redundancy, whether in
inventory or production, has become a critical strategy
for ensuring supply chain continuity.
Advanced technologies are playing an increasingly
significant role in managing global supply chains. In an
environment of geopolitical uncertainty, companies
seek greater supply chain visibility to track goods
movement, inventory status, and potential disruptions
in real time. To achieve this, digital platforms,
monitoring systems, and data analytics tools are being
implemented. Blockchain-based solutions are used to
track product origins and identify bottlenecks quickly,
artificial intelligence is employed to predict risks and
optimize routes, and cloud systems facilitate
information exchange among all supply chain
participants [2]. Deloitte notes that many firms are
investing in digital solutions that enhance visibility and
responsiveness, allowing them to react more quickly to
sudden changes [2].
Beyond monitoring, technologies are also being
leveraged to increase supply chain autonomy. The
development of additive manufacturing (3D printing)
enables the production of components closer to the
point of consumption, reducing dependence on distant
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
52
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
suppliers and potential trade barriers [11]. Warehouse
and production automation decrease reliance on
human labor, which is particularly crucial during
political disruptions, such as border closures affecting
migrant workers. Scenario modeling tools allow
companies to test various stress scenarios
—
including
geopolitical risks such as tariff impositions, sanctions,
or strait closures
—
and prepare contingency plans in
advance [3].
Coordination with partners and governments is
another important aspect. Many corporations are now
engaging more closely with government agencies on
trade policy matters, attempting to anticipate and
mitigate the impact of new regulations. Major industry
associations
lobby
for
agreements
ensuring
uninterrupted trade, and international mechanisms for
risk information exchange are being established. The
previously mentioned concept of friend-shoring
essentially involves alliances between like-minded
countries to support mutual supply chains. An example
of such collaboration is the U.S.-EU initiative to create
an early warning system for disruptions in critical goods
supply chains (Trade and Technology Council), which
reflects joint governmental efforts to strengthen
logistics resilience.
Below is a summary of key strategies for ensuring
supply chain resilience against geopolitical risks, along
with examples of their implementation.
Table 1. Key strategies for minimizing geopolitical risks in supply chains and their implementation examples
Strategy
Description and examples
Supplier
diversification
Utilizing multiple sources of raw materials and components instead of relying
on a single supplier. Reducing dependence on any single country. For instance,
many companies implement the "China+1" policy by adding suppliers in
Southeast Asia (Vietnam, India, etc.) alongside Chinese suppliers. This ensures
an alternative in case of trade barriers with China.
Regionalization
(nearshoring,
reshoring)
Relocating production closer to primary markets or bringing it back to the home
country. Reducing transcontinental supply chains in favor of regional networks.
For example, U.S. firms are shifting part of their manufacturing to Mexico or
the U.S., leading to Mexico becoming the United States’ largest trading partner,
surpassing China. In the EU, investments are being made in semiconductor
plants within the Union.
Stockpiling
Building reserve inventories of essential materials and components. This helps
withstand temporary supply disruptions. For instance, automakers began
stockpiling semiconductors after shortages to prevent production halts during
future disruptions. Governments in several countries are establishing strategic
reserves of oil, medical equipment, and other critical supplies.
Digitization and
monitoring
Implementing digital technologies to enhance real-time supply chain
transparency and management. Companies are investing in blockchain and AI
systems to track goods movement and perform predictive risk analytics. These
technologies enable faster detection of border delays or regulatory changes and
allow for immediate route adjustments.
As shown in Table 1, these strategies are
comprehensive, ranging from structural changes
(production and supply geography) to operational
measures (inventory, technology). It is important to
note that improving supply chain resilience is most
effective when these approaches are combined. For
example, diversification alone may not be sufficient
without transparency
—
having multiple suppliers is
ineffective if there is no system in place to detect issues
with one supplier and switch to another in a timely
manner. Leading companies are therefore developing
integrated Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM)
systems [12], which include risk identification,
probability and impact assessment, mitigation
measures, monitoring, and continuous improvement.
Research confirms the effectiveness of these strategies.
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
53
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
According to a review by Bednarski et al., which
analyzed multiple studies on the topic, adapting supply
chain configurations (regionalization, reshoring,
moving away from strict just-in-time models) and
implementing new technologies (blockchain, 3D
printing, AI) are key methods for mitigating the impact
of geopolitical disruptions [11]. In other words,
restructuring supply chains and adopting technological
advancements significantly reduce vulnerability to
political risks. Specifically, shifting from extreme
optimization toward a balance of redundancy and
flexibility has become a new trend, with companies
incorporating resilience costs into their business
models.
It is essential to consider that these measures are
neither cost-free nor immediately effective. Relocating
production is a complex and expensive process,
stockpiling increases working capital requirements, and
digitalization demands investments in IT infrastructure.
As a result, firms often combine a “risk mitigation”
strategy with an “adaptation” strategy. The latter
implies an acceptance of some level of disruption while
having rapid recovery plans in place, such as pre-
established crisis protocols and insurance mechanisms.
However, managerial surveys indicate that most global
companies have recognized the critical importance of
investing in supply chain resilience. According to
Economist Impact (2024), 97% of companies worldwide
reported taking steps to reorganize their supply chains
by the end of 2023, up from 92% the previous year [5].
This figure represents nearly all major companies,
demonstrating that resilience has become a
mainstream element of logistics strategy.
At
the
intergovernmental
level,
international
cooperation has emerged as a distinct strategy for
ensuring supply chain resilience. Countries are forming
bilateral and multilateral agreements aimed at
maintaining the uninterrupted flow of key goods, even
in times of crisis. One example is energy-sharing
agreements between European nations to mitigate
supply disruptions, as well as the inclusion of special
force majeure clauses in trade agreements that allow
for flexible responses to sanctions. The World Trade
Organization (WTO) has also urged governments to
exercise restraint in imposing trade restrictions and to
collaborate on global supply challenges [13]. At the
same time, regional economic blocs are strengthening
their cooperation; for instance, the Indo-Pacific
Economic Framework (IPEF) includes joint initiatives to
reinforce supply chain stability among participating
nations. Thus, supply chain resilience has become a
priority not only for businesses but also for high-level
policy initiatives.
CONCLUSION
Over the past decade, geopolitical factors have shifted
from being a peripheral concern to becoming one of the
key drivers of global logistics evolution. The analysis has
demonstrated that trade wars, sanctions, and political
conflicts can fundamentally reshape the configuration
and efficiency of international supply chains. The U.S.-
China trade confrontation illustrates how protectionist
measures lead to shifts in trade flows and compel
companies to seek new partners. Sanctions and
conflicts have exposed the fragility of the existing global
outsourcing system, revealing critical dependencies on
specific supplier countries, transportation corridors,
and other logistical factors. As a result, both businesses
and governments have been forced to rethink their
approaches to supply chain management.
A clear global trend has emerged: a shift in priorities
from maximum efficiency to resilience and controlled
risk. Companies are actively diversifying production
across multiple countries, relocating it closer to
consumers,
stockpiling
critical
supplies,
and
implementing
digital
tools
for
monitoring.
Governments are supporting these efforts through
incentives for key industries, such as subsidies for
semiconductor plant construction in the U.S. and the
EU, international coordination efforts, such as U.S.-EU
supply chain dialogues, and regulatory updates. A new
paradigm of global logistics is taking shape
—
"resilient
globalization," where trade remains international, but
supply chain elements are more distributed,
duplicated, and insulated from disruptions. In the
coming years, global trade is expected to resemble a
network of interconnected regional supply chains
rather than a single ultra-long chain, as was the case
under the previous wave of globalization.
The academic and practical contributions of this study
lie in the systematization of knowledge on the impact
of geopolitics on supply chains and the consolidation of
best practices for managing these risks. The examples
from the U.S. and the EU demonstrate shared trends:
both American and European companies are
undergoing similar transformations in logistics models,
albeit with regional variations. This supports the
conclusion that supply chain resilience is not just a
temporary reaction by specific regions but a new global
norm.
Successful adaptation to geopolitical challenges
requires a comprehensive approach that combines
technical, organizational, and strategic measures.
Companies are advised to integrate geopolitical risk
management into their overall risk management
systems, alongside financial and operational risks.
Scenario planning should be developed, including
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
54
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
"what-if" models for various geopolitical scenarios,
such as the imposition of new tariffs or escalations of
conflicts in specific regions. Such planning will facilitate
the development of response strategies and enable
quicker supply chain adjustments when disruptions
occur. Strengthening collaboration along the entire
supply chain
—
from raw material suppliers to
distributors
—
is also recommended to ensure that the
costs and risks of resilience are shared equitably.
Collective initiatives, such as shared stockpiles or
mutual assistance agreements, can enhance overall
industry resilience.
Despite the inevitable costs, investments in supply
chain resilience are justified by the prevention of losses
due to disruptions. Experts emphasize that in the long
term, companies with robust and adaptive supply
chains will gain a competitive advantage, ensuring
uninterrupted service for customers while competitors
face delays and shortages. Moreover, resilient supply
chains are not only better equipped to handle
geopolitical shocks but also more adaptable to other
disruptions, such as future pandemics or climate-
related disasters. Thus, a focus on resilience enhances
overall crisis preparedness for businesses.
In conclusion, global supply chains will always be
subject to external influences, including geopolitical
factors. While risks cannot be entirely eliminated, they
can be anticipated, distributed, and mitigated. Modern
logistics is evolving in response to global uncertainty,
and the success of this evolution will determine not
only the stability of individual companies but also the
economic security of entire nations and regions. Given
the global nature of these challenges, equally global
and innovative solutions are required. Understanding
and accounting for geopolitical factors in supply chain
management is essential for ensuring the sustainable
development of the world economy in the 21st century.
REFERENCES
Zhou, Y. (2023). The US-China Trade War and Global
Value Chains. Working paper, Fudan University. URL:
https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/3e5537ac17a7
95823a3e3c46b12c0351-0050022023/related/54-The-
US-China-Trade-War-and-Global-Va
lue-
Chains.pdf#:~:text=1%20Introduction%20Globalization
%20enables%20countries,strengthen%20the%20conn
ection%20between%20countries
International Trade Council. (2024, August). The Impact
of Ongoing U.S.-China Trade Tensions on Global Supply
Chains
(White
Paper).
URL:
https://tradecouncil.org/wp-
content/uploads/2024/11/THE-IMPACT-OF-ONGOING-
U.S.-CHINA-
TRADE.pdf#:~:text=the%20United%20States%20Trade
%20Representative%2C,Reuters%2C%202023
Smyrnov, I., Mylnychuk, T., Tokarchuk, O., Berezivskyi,
Y., & Gron, O. (2025). The impact of geopolitical risks on
global supply chains. Journal of Information Systems
Engineering and Management, 10(12s), 582
–
589.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.52783/jisem.v10i12s.1866
İncekara, R., & İncekara, B. (2024). EFFECTS OF
ECONOMIC AND GEOPOLITICAL RISKS ON THE SUPPLY
CHAIN: AN ECONOMETRIC ANALYSIS. Journal of
Management Marketing and Logistics, 11(2), 131-141.
Deloitte. (2024). Global supply chain resilience amid
disruptions: Balancing performance and cost. Deloitte
Insights.
URL:
https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/
manufacturing/global-supply-chain-resilience-amid-
disruptions.html
Tan, H. (2023, August 22). 2 charts that show how
Mexico overtook China as America’s top global trade
buddy.
Business
Insider.
URL:
https://www.businessinsider.nl/2-charts-that-show-
how-mexico-overtook-china-as-americas-top-global-
trade-
buddy/#:~:text=Now%2C%20Mexico%27s%20in%20th
e%20top,in%20a%20July%2011%20post
Schneider-Petsinger, M. US and European strategies for
resilient supply chains. Chatham House Report. URL:
https://www.chathamhouse.org/2021/09/us-and-
european-strategies-resilient-supply-chains
Arjona, R., & Revoltella, D. (2024, November 12).
Enhancing the resilience and security of EU supply
chains.
VoxEU/CEPR.
URL:
https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/enhancing-resilience-
and-security-eu-supply-
chains#:~:text=supply%20chains%20%28Figure%205%
29,vulnerabilities%20and%20import%20dependencies
%20through
Future Shocks 2023: De-
risking Europe’s global critical
supply
chains
[Policy
podcast].
URL:
https://epthinktank.eu/2023/08/18/future-shocks-
2023-de-risking-europes-global-critical-supply-
chains/#:~:text=,points%20towards%20a%20more
Bain & Company. (2024, November 14). Businesses
accelerate reshoring and near-shoring amid heightened
geopolitical uncertainties and rising costs (Press
Release). URL: https://www.bain.com/about/media-
center/press-releases/2024/businesses-accelerate-
reshoring-and-near-shoring-amid-heightened-
geopolitical-uncer
tainties-and-rising-costs-bain--
company-
finds/#:~:text=Bain%E2%80%99s%20findings%20show
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
55
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajmei
The American Journal of Management and Economics Innovations
%20that%20the,having%20fully%20completed%20thei
r%20plans
Bednarski, L., Roscoe, S., Blome, C., & Schleper, M. C.
(2025). Geopolitical disruptions in global supply chains:
a state-of-the-art literature review. Production
Planning
&
Control,
36(4),
536
–
562.
URL:
https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/211323/#:~:text=
demarcates%20geopolitical%20disruptions%20and%2
0the,of%20geopolitical%20disruptions%20on%20supp
ly
Supply Chain Risk Management
–
Cheat Sheet. URL:
https://www.supplychaintoday.com/supply-chain-risk-
management/#:~:text=A%20robust%20Supply%20Chai
n%20Risk,resilience%20of%20their%20supply%20chai
ns
Report shows increase in trade restrictions amidst
economic
uncertainty,
multiple
crises.
URL:
https://tmdb.wto.org/en/reports/report-shows-
increase-in-trade-restrictions-amidst-economic-
uncertainty-multiple-crises-
en#:~:text=Report%20shows%20increase%20in%20tra
de,and%20the%20food%20security%20crisis
