Table of contents:
Entering any major port today, the dominance of container traffic is undeniable. Standardised containers move predictably, supported by highly optimised systems and an increasingly automated infrastructure. Against this backdrop, the breakbulk cargo terminal almost seems like a relic—an outlier in an industry built on uniformity.
This impression, however, is deceptive. Breakbulk hasn't disappeared, and it is expected to grow: from USD 13.82 billion in 2026 to USD 21.07 billion in 2035. (1) It has simply become more selective and specialised. And it remains crucial for industries such as renewable energy, heavy machinery manufacturing, construction, and oil and gas, which continue to rely on the transport of goods: wind turbine blades, transformers, steel structures, and oversized machinery simply don't fit into any standard container model.
This presents a unique opportunity for terminal operators: they can distinguish themselves through their ability to handle irregularities. Every shipment can test their adaptability. There are no standard solutions for unusual dimensions, non-standard lifting points, complex load securing requirements, or tight project schedules. Every operation is, in a sense, a first.
This has direct consequences: The terminal's success lies in its effective support of controlled variability, as the exception is the rule. Systems designed for repeatability reach their limits here. The projects often require flexibility during the planning phase because not all data is yet available. This means that the execution, and therefore the success of the transport, often depends heavily on human expertise.
Breakbulk cargo is strategically important. The expansion of renewable energy infrastructure and large-scale industrial investments is increasing the need for flexible freight handling. Delays or inefficiencies at the terminal impact construction schedules and installation deadlines, ultimately affecting the financial outcome of the undertakings.
This transforms the terminal into an active partner in project execution. Expectations of it regarding coordination, transparency, and reliable planning are rising, and these are the areas where IT can bring about measurable improvements.
What all terminals have in common is that cargo arrives, cargo departs, and in between, it is stored, transshipped, and documented. In the container sector, standardised container dimensions define almost everything—from the terminal layout and facility design to the planning logic and system architecture. Even in dry and liquid bulk operations, there are only a limited number of variables. These allow for a high degree of predictability, which can be optimally utilised in IT systems to sequence and automate transhipment processes.
At breakbulk terminals, it's different. Here, cargo is defined by its uniqueness. A steel coil behaves differently from a wind turbine blade. A transformer requires different handling than bundled timber. Parameters such as dimensions, weight, lifting points, weather sensitivity, and storage requirements can vary significantly—not only between individual shipments but also within the same ship call.
The immediate consequence of these circumstances is that planning now focuses on developing tailored handling strategies for each type of cargo. When allocating storage space, the space must adapt to the cargo, not the other way around. Equipment selection depends on specific requirements and often necessitates a combination of cranes, spreaders, and specialised rigging. Even the sequence of operations can change depending on the cargo.
For IT, this means:
Another crucial factor is the role of human expertise. In terminals handling standardised cargo, experience is increasingly being incorporated into algorithms. In breakbulk terminals, however, it still largely rests in human hands. Planners, crane operators, and supervisors draw on accumulated knowledge to manage cargo that may never have passed through the terminal before. Their decisions are often based on incomplete data, visual assessment, and practical judgment.
The physical layout of infrastructure, the choice of equipment, and the operational logic at the breakbulk terminal reflect a central principle: the terminal must adapt to the cargo—not the other way around.
At the quayside, they typically have reinforced berths suitable for handling heavy cargo and irregular load distributions. To be prepared for a variety of vessel types and lifting operations, mobile harbour cranes are preferred over stationary gantry cranes.
The space behind the quayside is used dynamically. Open storage areas predominate to allow for the storage of oversized cargo. There are also covered warehouses for sensitive cargo. Since steel coils for one order and project cargo such as transformers and generators for another can be handled on the same site shortly afterwards, flexibility for different handling strategies and safety precautions is essential.
The equipment must also be versatile. A modern terminal operates with a mix of:
With equipment, not only availability but also compatibility is crucial. Many processes require the coordinated use of multiple pieces of equipment, often under tight spatial and temporal constraints.
This environment operates without a fixed allocation of infrastructure and operations. A berth is not tied to a specific crane type. A storage location is not assigned to a single cargo category. Equipment is not assigned to standardised transport methods. Everything is conditional.
This has two consequences. First, digital representations must be significantly more flexible than in container environments. The systems must allow for the reconfiguration of space, equipment, and processes—often at short notice.
Second, the value of real-time transparency increases even further. Because the infrastructure used is constantly changing, an accurate and up-to-date picture of the processes on-site is essential, not only for monitoring but also for decision-making.
In container terminals, transparency typically means knowing the location of each container, its status, and when it will be moved onward. Each unit has a unique, globally recognised code, standardised sizes exist, the flow of goods is predictable, and the system can track progress with high accuracy.
With breakbulk cargo, there are no uniform units to track. One shipment might consist of a single oversized piece, another of hundreds of loosely grouped items. Identifiers are not always standardised, and physical markings can be inconsistent. Even defining the location of a cargo item can be ambiguous—especially in open storage areas where spatial boundaries are fluid.
The processes themselves don't necessarily follow fixed procedures. Cargo can be loaded directly from the ship onto the truck, bypassing the warehouse entirely. It can be repositioned multiple times to facilitate other operations. And, it can be partially processed—modularised, inspected, repackaged, or prepared for shipment—before being transported further. Each of these steps increases the complexity of what "status" actually means.
When defining visibility requirements, the first step is to determine precisely what you want to see – and why. The goal is to gain a sufficient understanding of the current situation to make informed decisions, even if the picture is incomplete. This typically involves three levels:
1. Cargo awareness: What has arrived, what is expected, and what are its key characteristics? This is less about precise positioning and more about reliable, structured information that supports planning and execution decisions.
2. Activity awareness: What is happening right now? Which processes are underway, delayed, or completed? In a dynamic environment, real-time updates—however simple they may be—are often more valuable than perfectly detailed plans.
3. Recognising the impact: What does the current situation mean for the next steps? Are there risks to ship handling, yard capacity, or project schedules? Here, transparency goes beyond mere monitoring and supports decision-making.
Improved transparency in breakbulk cargo handling doesn't require perfect data collection, but rather relevant data collection. This means capturing the data that actually influences decisions and then updating it at operationally relevant moments. Its presentation must reflect real-world conditions, not idealised workflows. This also means accepting a certain degree of imperfection – provided it's reduced to a manageable level.
The honest answer is: not as far as in container terminals – but further than many think. The crucial point is not to view digitalisation as an all-or-nothing transformation. Breakbulk operations may not be suitable for full automation or rigid system control, but they can clearly benefit from targeted, well-designed digital tools.
Instead of minimising human intervention, it is meaningfully complemented by digital support.
For planning, this means, for example:
The final decision remains human, but is more informed and faster.
During execution, digital systems improve situational awareness. Mobile applications, real-time updates, and simple data collection tools enable operators to report progress, flag problems, and adjust plans as needed.
Data standardisation is another area where digitalisation can make a lasting contribution. While the cargo itself cannot be standardised, the recording, structuring, and transmission of cargo information can. Even partial improvements such as uniform naming conventions, defined data fields, and basic validation rules can significantly improve planning quality and operational coordination.
Complete process automation is limited by highly context-specific decisions, practical experience, and coordination between personnel and technology, which often make such systems too inflexible or too complex.
However, new technologies, such as digital twins, advanced visualisation tools, and improved integration platforms, are beginning to close some of these gaps—not by eliminating complexity, but by making it more manageable. The challenge of digitising breakbulk terminals is to find the right balance – and to accept that progress in breakbulk shipping is gradual and not absolute.
One mistake must be avoided: attempting to copy the container terminal model. The conditions are too different; a forced, unsuitable standardisation will only lead to problems. Complexity cannot be eliminated, only managed effectively.
Step one is building a flexible data foundation. Usable data, not perfect data, is what matters. Cross-system conventions for business attributes and mandatory key fields can significantly improve planning reliability and coordination.
Step two is integration. Minimising the multitude of systems by completely replacing them is often costly and associated with considerable disruption. The greater benefit lies in networking the existing systems—in ensuring that planning tools, execution systems, and communication platforms exchange relevant information.
The third step is to expand operational transparency where it has an impact. Critical milestones should be visible in real time. Transparency should be driven by decisions, not by technical capabilities.
In all these efforts, the focus must remain on supporting human decision-making. The handling of breakbulk cargo will continue to depend to a significant extent on experience and judgment, and the systems should reflect this. This means providing context: visualisations, alerts, and scenario analyses.
Closely related to this is the need to capture and formalise operational knowledge. Much of what makes a breakbulk cargo terminal effective exists informally – in the knowledge of experienced employees. Terminals should, where possible, transfer this knowledge into digital structures: handling guidelines, best practices, and historical references that support less experienced teams and improve consistency over time.
Interacting with external stakeholders is also crucial. Providing timely and relevant information to customers, project managers, and transport partners becomes a decisive competitive advantage. In this context, transparency is not only operationally but also economically relevant.
These priorities point in a clear direction. Progress on breakbulk terminals doesn't mean large, disruptive transformations, but rather targeted improvements that reduce uncertainty, enhance coordination, and enable better decision-making.
In other words: Standardise where it makes sense, remain flexible where it matters – and develop systems that understand the differences.
The term "breakbulk" originates from the historical practice of unloading cargo that was individually stowed in the ship's hold. The freight was packed in crates or barrels, and larger goods were handled individually rather than in standardised units.
Dry bulk, on the other hand, refers to large quantities of loose, unpackaged goods such as coal, grain, or ore. These are shipped as a homogeneous mass and poured or conveyed directly into the ship's hold. This is done using high-volume conveying systems such as conveyor belts, silos, and automated loading facilities.
Examples of liquid bulk are oil or chemicals. These goods are typically pumped directly from the terminal or other ships into the tanks of tankers via pipeline systems using specialised pumps.
Breakbulk terminals will never reach the level of digitalisation of container terminals—nor should they even try. Their strength lies in their versatility.
The goal is not to impose rigid processes, but to create structure where it is crucial: reliable data and relevant transparency to support decision-making.
Progress through targeted improvements—better integration, clearer information flows, and the translation of operational complexity into actionable insights—is the premise.
Modularisation in the context of breakbulk terminals refers to the practice of pre-assembling or consolidating cargo into larger, more manageable modules before shipping. This approach is increasingly popular for handling complex or oversized cargo, such as industrial equipment, construction materials, or infrastructure components (e.g., wind turbines, power plants, or oil rigs). (2)
Rigging refers to the lifting and securing arrangement used to handle individual heavy or oversized pieces that cannot go into standard containers. It includes slings, shackles, hooks, spreader beams, lifting points, and sometimes specialised frames or bridle systems. The rigging plan determines how the load is picked, balanced, moved, and set down safely, based on weight, centre of gravity, cargo shape, and surface fragility. Good rigging prevents shifting, damage, and accidents during crane operations, vessel loading, and terminal handling, and it is often paired with lashing and dunnage for sea transport. (3)
Reference:
(1) https://www.businessresearchinsights.com/market-reports/break-bulk-shipping-market-117591
(2) Michael Kluck, Jin Ouk Choi (2023). Modularization: The Fine Art of Offsite Preassembly for Capital Projects. Wiley.
(3) David House (2020). Cargo Work: For Maritime Operations. Elsevier.
Note: This article was partly created with the assistance of artificial intelligence to support drafting.