The data bottleneck at the quay: Why ports are holding back maritime digitalisation
Date: 06.08.26
In this interview with Digital Ship, Tommy Mikkelsen, Managing Director of Navigation and Piloting business at Trelleborg Marine & Infrastructure, discusses the state of digitalization at the port interface, covering data fragmentation across vendor and organizational boundaries, the barriers to just-in-time arrivals, and the role of port call optimization in reducing emissions.
By Arnel Murga
The maritime industry often speaks of digital progress as though it were a vessel already underway. Ships today are equipped with increasingly sophisticated platforms, sensors and optimisation tools. Yet, as Tommy Mikkelsen reveals, that progress slows sharply at the point where it arguably matters most: the port.
Mikkelsen, Managing Director of Navigation and Piloting at Trelleborg Marine & Infrastructure, describes a sector divided between a handful of advanced hubs and a long tail of ports still operating with analogue habits. “Tier one ports have done this,” he notes, referring to digital integration and coordinated arrivals. “But outside that, operators are still relying on phone calls, PDFs, Excel and emails.”
The consequence goes beyond administrative inconvenience; it is operational inefficiency on a global scale.
Fragmented ports, stranded efficiency
Despite years of discussion around just-in-time (JIT) arrivals, the reality remains inconsistent. Ships continue to burn fuel while waiting offshore, caught in a cycle of uncertainty driven by poor coordination with port systems.
Mikkelsen points to a fundamental issue: fragmentation. Data, he argues, is still “confined within a vendor boundary or an organisational boundary”, with little incentive or capability for ports, particularly smaller ones, to demand interoperability from suppliers. Even where APIs and cybersecurity frameworks exist, they are not being leveraged to create genuinely connected ecosystems.
This fragmentation is most acute beyond the largest ports. Many lack the internal expertise or financial capacity to manage complex IT deployments, leaving them dependent on closed systems that cannot easily communicate with vessels or other stakeholders.
This results in structural inefficiency. Ships must make speed decisions without reliable information about berth availability or port readiness. “The greatest cost is not when they are at the terminal,” Mikkelsen explains. “It’s those 12 hours of uncertainty during the approach.”
In theory, the tools to resolve this already exist. In practice, adoption has stalled because incentives are misaligned. Ports and shipowners operate under separate commercial frameworks, making it difficult to justify shared investment in digital infrastructure. Without a clear financial case for both sides, progress remains incremental at best.
Ports as the missing driver of decarbonisation
If digitalisation has lacked urgency, decarbonisation may provide it. Mikkelsen identifies port call optimisation as one of the most immediate and cost-effective ways to reduce emissions, arguably more so than the industry’s current focus on alternative fuels.
Around 9% of vessel time is spent at anchor, often with engines still consuming fuel. Eliminating or reducing this idle time through better scheduling and coordination could deliver significant gains. Some estimates suggest that optimising speed, routing and port waiting time could cut emissions by as much as 30%.
Crucially, this is not a technological challenge, but an organisational one.
“All the technical ingredients are there,” Mikkelsen says. “So why is it not happening?” His answer is blunt: the industry has yet to recognise the commercial impact. Until ports can demonstrate clear value, such as fuel savings for operators or improved throughput for terminals, digital coordination will struggle to scale.
This shifts the centre of gravity firmly towards ports. While shipowners may demand efficiency, it is port authorities that must implement the systems capable of delivering it. A port that can offer reliable JIT arrivals, supported by open and interoperable platforms, gains a competitive advantage in an increasingly cost- and carbon-conscious market.
At the same time, the industry must confront its approach to data. A “security-first” mindset, where organisations default to withholding information, is limiting progress. Mikkelsen argues for a more nuanced view: distinguish between commercially sensitive data and operational data that can safely be shared to improve efficiency.
Without this shift, the risk is not just stagnation but regression. As digital systems proliferate without standardisation, complexity could increase rather than decrease, particularly for operators navigating multiple ports with incompatible platforms.
The maritime sector often looks to global bodies for standardisation, but progress there remains slow and uneven. In the absence of strong regulatory enforcement, change is more likely to be driven by competitiveness.
Ports that embrace openness, interoperability and data sharing will not simply modernise their operations; they will reshape expectations across the supply chain. Those that do not risk becoming bottlenecks in an otherwise advancing system.
For the first time, the industry has the technical capability to create what Mikkelsen describes as a “shared digital nervous system” connecting ships and ports. Whether that vision becomes reality will depend less on innovation at sea and more on transformation at the quay.
The maritime industry often speaks of digital progress as though it were a vessel already underway. Ships today are equipped with increasingly sophisticated platforms, sensors and optimisation tools. Yet, as Tommy Mikkelsen reveals, that progress slows sharply at the point where it arguably matters most: the port.
Mikkelsen, Managing Director of Navigation and Piloting at Trelleborg Marine & Infrastructure, describes a sector divided between a handful of advanced hubs and a long tail of ports still operating with analogue habits. “Tier one ports have done this,” he notes, referring to digital integration and coordinated arrivals. “But outside that, operators are still relying on phone calls, PDFs, Excel and emails.”
The consequence goes beyond administrative inconvenience; it is operational inefficiency on a global scale.
Fragmented ports, stranded efficiency
Despite years of discussion around just-in-time (JIT) arrivals, the reality remains inconsistent. Ships continue to burn fuel while waiting offshore, caught in a cycle of uncertainty driven by poor coordination with port systems.
Mikkelsen points to a fundamental issue: fragmentation. Data, he argues, is still “confined within a vendor boundary or an organisational boundary”, with little incentive or capability for ports, particularly smaller ones, to demand interoperability from suppliers. Even where APIs and cybersecurity frameworks exist, they are not being leveraged to create genuinely connected ecosystems.
This fragmentation is most acute beyond the largest ports. Many lack the internal expertise or financial capacity to manage complex IT deployments, leaving them dependent on closed systems that cannot easily communicate with vessels or other stakeholders.
This results in structural inefficiency. Ships must make speed decisions without reliable information about berth availability or port readiness. “The greatest cost is not when they are at the terminal,” Mikkelsen explains. “It’s those 12 hours of uncertainty during the approach.”
In theory, the tools to resolve this already exist. In practice, adoption has stalled because incentives are misaligned. Ports and shipowners operate under separate commercial frameworks, making it difficult to justify shared investment in digital infrastructure. Without a clear financial case for both sides, progress remains incremental at best.
Ports as the missing driver of decarbonisation
If digitalisation has lacked urgency, decarbonisation may provide it. Mikkelsen identifies port call optimisation as one of the most immediate and cost-effective ways to reduce emissions, arguably more so than the industry’s current focus on alternative fuels.
Around 9% of vessel time is spent at anchor, often with engines still consuming fuel. Eliminating or reducing this idle time through better scheduling and coordination could deliver significant gains. Some estimates suggest that optimising speed, routing and port waiting time could cut emissions by as much as 30%.
Crucially, this is not a technological challenge, but an organisational one.
“All the technical ingredients are there,” Mikkelsen says. “So why is it not happening?” His answer is blunt: the industry has yet to recognise the commercial impact. Until ports can demonstrate clear value, such as fuel savings for operators or improved throughput for terminals, digital coordination will struggle to scale.
This shifts the centre of gravity firmly towards ports. While shipowners may demand efficiency, it is port authorities that must implement the systems capable of delivering it. A port that can offer reliable JIT arrivals, supported by open and interoperable platforms, gains a competitive advantage in an increasingly cost- and carbon-conscious market.
At the same time, the industry must confront its approach to data. A “security-first” mindset, where organisations default to withholding information, is limiting progress. Mikkelsen argues for a more nuanced view: distinguish between commercially sensitive data and operational data that can safely be shared to improve efficiency.
Without this shift, the risk is not just stagnation but regression. As digital systems proliferate without standardisation, complexity could increase rather than decrease, particularly for operators navigating multiple ports with incompatible platforms.
The maritime sector often looks to global bodies for standardisation, but progress there remains slow and uneven. In the absence of strong regulatory enforcement, change is more likely to be driven by competitiveness.
Ports that embrace openness, interoperability and data sharing will not simply modernise their operations; they will reshape expectations across the supply chain. Those that do not risk becoming bottlenecks in an otherwise advancing system.
For the first time, the industry has the technical capability to create what Mikkelsen describes as a “shared digital nervous system” connecting ships and ports. Whether that vision becomes reality will depend less on innovation at sea and more on transformation at the quay.