Purpose Against the backdrop of eastward shift of global refining capacity, tightening environmental regulations and shipping cyclical fluctuations, geopolitical conflicts have become the key exogenous shock reshaping tanker shipping market fundamentals. This paper aims to reveal the inner transmission logic of geopolitical shocks on global tanker market, identify long-run structural market trends, and propose adaptive strategic principles for industrial stakeholders. Design/methodology/approach Based on systems theory and maritime economics, this paper constructs an Situation-Mechanism-Trend (SMT) analytical framework for geopolitical shocks. A mixed-method approach is adopted, including systematic literature coding, event-driven comparative case analysis and descriptive statistical verification using datasets from Clarkson, IEA and Baltic Exchange. Findings Five parallel and mutually reinforcing transmission mechanisms of geopolitical shocks are identified: the trade restructuring effect, shipping lane disruption effect, operating cost escalation effect, geopolitical policy compliance constraint effect, and market expectation volatility effect. Six major structural market trends are verified: regionalized trade patterns, long-distance-oriented shipping routes, structurally differentiated tanker capacity, high-volatility freight pricing, green-oriented fleet upgrading, and digitalized shipping operations. The core contradiction of the tanker industry has transformed from aggregate supply-demand imbalance to structural matching and security risks. Six targeted strategic principles are put forward accordingly. Practical implications This study integrates scattered geopolitical shock paths into a unified analytical framework, and provides systematic decision-making references for energy traders, shipping enterprises and regulatory authorities. Originality/value This study integrates scattered geopolitical shock paths into a unified SMT analytical framework. It clarifies the interaction among multiple transmission mechanisms of geopolitical shocks, and provides systematic decision-making references for energy traders, shipping enterprises and regulatory authorities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Qiang Lu (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: