Street turns as cooperation problem

In most markets, the economic rationale for street turn* is clear. Fewer empty repositioning moves, reduced terminal handling, lower emissions, better asset velocity. The arithmetic works. Yet adoption remains uneven and episodic. The constraint is not cost; it is cooperation and coordination.

A street turn sits at the intersection of multiple operating entities: ocean carrier, importer, exporter, transport provider, empty depot, terminals and logistics facilities. Each has its own objectives, systems, risk tolerances, performance metrics and data-sets. The transaction only succeeds when these actors align, within a narrow time window, adding an element of chance incompatible with strategic operations.

From a game theory perspective, this resembles a classic coordination problem. The collective outcome is superior when parties cooperate, but the individual risk of disruption is non-trivial. If one party misses its window, provides incomplete data, or fails to meet equipment standards, the downstream consequences are borne disproportionately by others. The rational response, in the absence of enforceable coordination mechanisms, is to default to the more certain path: return it to the empty depot.

Information asymmetry compounds the issue. Container handover condition, release status, detention exposure and cargo readiness are often managed in separate systems with limited interoperability. Where data is fragmented, predictability erodes. Operators are left managing unknowns around delays, cleaning requirements, or damage attribution - unknowns that are not inherent to the move itself, but to the absence of shared, timely information. In that environment, perceived risk outweighs theoretical savings.

Predictability is the quiet requirement of high-performing supply chains. Transport providers optimise driver hours and slot bookings based on schedule confidence. Exporters plan pack windows around equipment certainty. Ocean carriers manage asset pools against forecast flows. Street turns introduce variance when visibility is partial and confirmation cycles are manual. Without reliable, standardised and timely data exchange and visibility, even participants committed to the economic potential of street turns are hesitant to take the risk.

There is also a structural dimension. Many stakeholders optimise for throughput within their own node of the network. Empty depots are measured on turn time and yard occupancy. Ocean carriers prioritise equipment control and compliance. Transport providers manage utilisation and schedule stability. Street turns cut across these optimisation boundaries and can disrupt otherwise predictable workflows.

Solving this requires more than bilateral agreements. It demands shared digital infrastructure, standardised condition capture at handover, and clear liability frameworks that reduce perceived downside risk. Most importantly, it requires aligned incentives - metrics that reward network efficiency rather than local optimisation.

*A street turn is a logistics practice where the operator uses an empty import container for immediate outbound export, rather than returning it to a container depot.

Further information

Lessons from Port Botany is an interactive data story that uses Port Botany (Sydney, Australia) as a real-world case study to reveal the scale, cost, and environmental impact of empty container movements in inland logistics. It shows how redirections, staging, congestion, mismatched operating hours, and fragmented systems create delays, detention fees, wasted trips, and significant CO₂ emissions. While focused on Sydney, these inefficiencies are structural and global in nature, highlighting the broader supply chain impact and the opportunity to improve coordination and container reuse.