Oracle of the economy: interview with Walter Kemmsies
If politicians paid more attention to the transportation infrastructure—and its effect on supply chains and job creation—the U.S. economy would be stronger in the long term, argues economist Walter Kemmsies.
Mitch Mac Donald has more than 30 years of experience in both the newspaper and magazine businesses. He has covered the logistics and supply chain fields since 1988. Twice named one of the Top 10 Business Journalists in the U.S., he has served in a multitude of editorial and publishing roles. The leading force behind the launch of Supply Chain Management Review, he was that brand's founding publisher and editorial director from 1997 to 2000. Additionally, he has served as news editor, chief editor, publisher and editorial director of Logistics Management, as well as publisher of Modern Materials Handling. Mitch is also the president and CEO of Agile Business Media, LLC, the parent company of DC VELOCITY and CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly.
In today's wired world, social trends, government investment and regulation, and national and global economies are connected in a web of complex relationships—and they all impact logistics and supply chains, says Walter Kemmsies. As chief economist at the engineering firm Moffatt & Nichol, it's part of his job to understand how those factors affect the way we source, make, move, and consume products worldwide.
Kemmsies directs the firm's market studies, financial analyses, and global trade and economic trend forecasts relative to investment in transportation infrastructure, with a focus on maritime facilities. Since joining Moffatt & Nichol in 2006, he has helped ports and port-related businesses formulate strategic development plans, among other projects. He also serves as an adviser to executives at port authorities, and transportation and manufacturing companies.
The well-traveled economist has earned his global credentials. He's lived in Europe and Latin America and has undertaken work assignments throughout Asia. Prior to joining Moffatt & Nichol, he was the head of European strategy at J.P. Morgan in London, which he joined after leading the global industry strategy team for UBS.
Kemmsies is a frequent speaker at industry conferences and international economic forums, and his research has been published by investment banks, in business periodicals, and in academic journals. He is a member of the National Association for Business Economics, the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP), and a member of the advisory board of the Center for Advanced Infrastructure and Transportation at Rutgers University.
Kemmsies received his doctorate in economics from Texas A&M University, and his master's and bachelor's degrees in economics from Florida Atlantic University.
In a recent conversation with DC Velocity Group Editorial Director Mitch Mac Donald, he discussed the economic outlook for the United States, its implications for supply chains, and the critical need for a national infrastructure policy.
Q: The U.S. economy is very dependent on retail sales. What is your outlook for U.S. consumer spending, and how will it affect retail supply chains in the years ahead? A: We have a situation where a very large number of people are turning 65 every year. The first baby boomers turned 65 last year, and the number of people turning 65 will increase every year until about 2025. As people age, they spend increasingly more of their budget on services than they do on goods, so I expect to see slower growth than we've had in the last 30 years.
A lot of these retiring baby boomers were affected by the collapse of Wall Street back in 2008. Their financial wealth is less than it was four years ago. Their homes are worth less, and some are underwater. Many people weren't really on track to be able to retire at age 65 four or five years ago, and after the events on Wall Street, fewer are able to retire. The baby boomers who are retired already have to build their savings. So we can't expect very high growth in retail sales.
I believe that the retail sector became overinvested. There are too many outlets in too many places. ... As a result, I believe that in the retail sector, we are going to see consolidation, where we will have a smaller number of players and a smaller number of locations. Market power will increase and will be in the hands of those companies, but because of the low retail sales growth that we expect over the medium to long term, the emphasis on cost savings will be greater than it has been even in the last four or five years. ... Anybody who supports retailers will have a smaller list of companies to go after. Those companies have to keep their costs down, so it will really be tough on the import side for retail.
Q: There seems to be more manufacturing coming back to the Western Hemiäphere. What are the implications for supply chains that people are overseeing in the United States? A: There are two main ones. The first is that Mexico is sitting close to the crossroads of the East-West trade. It is a good place for [Asian manufacturers] to send components to be assembled into finished goods that can be sent by rail or truck into the United States, or put on ships in, say, Veracruz or Lázaro Cárdenas and sent to places like Colombia, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, and Peru. In fact, that is what is happening.
Mexico is close to us, so we can send raw materials very cheaply there; use the Mexican labor, which is roughly the same cost as in China but less than U.S. labor; and then have the goods shipped back to the United States. The total contribution of transportation costs to the price of the product is much lower that way.
The second is that, independent of whether [goods and raw materials] move to Mexico or not, the United States has some comparative advantages in things like energy, agriculture, and high-end capital goods. What those things have in common is that they use very little labor and they use a lot of capital. U.S. labor expense is high, and our interest rates are very low. So automation and [highly automated manufacturing processes like 3-D printing] come back to the United States, which is good for a company but is not necessarily good for creating jobs.
Q: Do you see virtue in establishing a cohesive national transportation policy, and how might such a policy support freight and help strengthen our economy overall? A: The real wealth of the nation is nourished by its infrastructure. It is something that we learned, and then everybody learned from us—but we seem to have forgotten what we knew. Why did we grow so strongly in the '60s up until 10 years ago? We built the interstate system. We put the Internet in place. We built modern ports. We managed the Mississippi waterway.
Since then, we have neglected this kind of thing. Quite frankly, without infrastructure, you can't have an economy. If you have infrastructure that's not very good, then you have an economy but you are poor. That is Brazil. If you have really good infrastructure—first-rate, like Japan does and Korea does—then you become very wealthy. That's what China did 20 years ago. They started building infrastructure. It's the main thing that we should be focusing on, but we are not. Look at the political debates during the November election. Infrastructure was mentioned, but only in passing.
Q: What should we do, then? A: First, we should identify our comparative advantages. Then you understand the bottlenecks; or not necessarily the bottlenecks, but what a transportation infrastructure that would enhance exports would look like. Instead of giving subsidies to companies, put them all into the infrastructure. Then, anybody who wants to make a good living can use the infrastructure we are providing them. The important thing is to make sure we are not doing this in a way that favors one region of the country over others.
Q: That gets to the need for a more cohesive national infrastructure plan, then? A: Exactly. If that is what you are doing, then you are creating jobs. The exports that we produce are not necessarily what creates the jobs. It is the entire supply chain. For example, agriculture is a natural source of exports for the United States. There are jobs in bringing in seeds and fertilizer, in water management. There are jobs in bringing the product from the farm. There are jobs in inspecting the quality of the product. The financial sector gets supported by this. You need price-risk management for the future contracts. Agriculture generates a huge number of jobs, and it could generate even more if we emphasize that. And world food prices have shot up a lot, and you can actually hold back world economic growth if households in many parts of the world can't afford a basic diet. So those are cornerstones for a transportation policy.
Q: How do we go about making the development of a national transportation policy a priority among our elected officials? A: We need a champion, a true champion. In many ways, President Obama has tried to push for something to emerge. There is a mandate for the Department of Commerce, the Department of Transportation, the USDA, and a few other agencies to work together to establish the priorities.
Transportation infrastructure is very tangible. It creates jobs in the near term in construction, and once you put that infrastructure in place, it supports increased exports and therefore, creates jobs in the long run. But I don't see an accurate analysis of that type coming out of places like the Office of Management and Budget. We don't see the Council of Economic Advisers talking about that. Among the academic advisers on the economy, talk of infrastructure doesn't really exist.
We look at our infrastructure, and we take roads for granted and take all our ports for granted. ... The problem is, there is a lack of awareness about how much transportation contributes to employment in this country.
Q: Any closing thoughts? A: We live in a world where policy has such a huge effect. The economists get clobbered when they get the forecast wrong. But the main reason forecasts often don't pan out has to do with non-market criteria. The market models that are used when there are no external effects like policy tend to forecast very accurately. So policy actions really throw us off when we try to do pure market analysis.
The problem I have in trying to do forecasts is that not only do you have to forecast what the supply side and the demand side are going to do, but also what the policy actions are going to be. Predicting that is like predicting a coin toss.
Most of the apparel sold in North America is manufactured in Asia, meaning the finished goods travel long distances to reach end markets, with all the associated greenhouse gas emissions. On top of that, apparel manufacturing itself requires a significant amount of energy, water, and raw materials like cotton. Overall, the production of apparel is responsible for about 2% of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions, according to a report titled
Taking Stock of Progress Against the Roadmap to Net Zeroby the Apparel Impact Institute. Founded in 2017, the Apparel Impact Institute is an organization dedicated to identifying, funding, and then scaling solutions aimed at reducing the carbon emissions and other environmental impacts of the apparel and textile industries.
The author of this annual study is researcher and consultant Michael Sadowski. He wrote the first report in 2021 as well as the latest edition, which was released earlier this year. Sadowski, who is also executive director of the environmental nonprofit
The Circulate Initiative, recently joined DC Velocity Group Editorial Director David Maloney on an episode of the “Logistics Matters” podcast to discuss the key findings of the research, what companies are doing to reduce emissions, and the progress they’ve made since the first report was issued.
A: While companies in the apparel industry can set their own sustainability targets, we realized there was a need to give them a blueprint for actually reducing emissions. And so, we produced the first report back in 2021, where we laid out the emissions from the sector, based on the best estimates [we could make using] data from various sources. It gives companies and the sector a blueprint for what we collectively need to do to drive toward the ambitious reduction [target] of staying within a 1.5 degrees Celsius pathway. That was the first report, and then we committed to refresh the analysis on an annual basis. The second report was published last year, and the third report came out in May of this year.
Q: What were some of the key findings of your research?
A: We found that about half of the emissions in the sector come from Tier Two, which is essentially textile production. That includes the knitting, weaving, dyeing, and finishing of fabric, which together account for over half of the total emissions. That was a really important finding, and it allows us to focus our attention on the interventions that can drive those emissions down.
Raw material production accounts for another quarter of emissions. That includes cotton farming, extracting gas and oil from the ground to make synthetics, and things like that. So we now have a really keen understanding of the source of our industry’s emissions.
Q: Your report mentions that the apparel industry is responsible for about 2% of global emissions. Is that an accurate statistic?
A: That’s our best estimate of the total emissions [generated by] the apparel sector. Some other reports on the industry have apparel at up to 8% of global emissions. And there is a commonly misquoted number in the media that it’s 10%. From my perspective, I think the best estimate is somewhere under 2%.
We know that globally, humankind needs to reduce emissions by roughly half by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050 to hit international goals. [Reaching that target will require the involvement of] every facet of the global economy and every aspect of the apparel sector—transportation, material production, manufacturing, cotton farming. Through our work and that of others, I think the apparel sector understands what has to happen. We have highlighted examples of how companies are taking action to reduce emissions in the roadmap reports.
Q: What are some of those actions the industry can take to reduce emissions?
A: I think one of the positive developments since we wrote the first report is that we’re seeing companies really focus on the most impactful areas. We see companies diving deep on thermal energy, for example. With respect to Tier Two, we [focus] a lot of attention on things like ocean freight versus air. There’s a rule of thumb I’ve heard that indicates air freight is about 10 times the cost [of ocean] and also produces 10 times more greenhouse gas emissions.
There is money available to invest in sustainability efforts. It’s really exciting to see the funding that’s coming through for AI [artificial intelligence] and to see that individual companies, such as H&M and Lululemon, are investing in real solutions in their supply chains. I think a lot of concrete actions are being taken.
And yet we know that reducing emissions by half on an absolute basis by 2030 is a monumental undertaking. So I don’t want to be overly optimistic, because I think we have a lot of work to do. But I do think we’ve got some amazing progress happening.
Q: You mentioned several companies that are starting to address their emissions. Is that a result of their being more aware of the emissions they generate? Have you seen progress made since the first report came out in 2021?
A: Yes. When we published the first roadmap back in 2021, our statistics showed that only about 12 companies had met the criteria [for setting] science-based targets. In 2024, the number of apparel, textile, and footwear companies that have set targets or have commitments to set targets is close to 500. It’s an enormous increase. I think they see the urgency more than other sectors do.
We have companies that have been working at sustainability for quite a long time. I think the apparel sector has developed a keen understanding of the impacts of climate change. You can see the impacts of flooding, drought, heat, and other things happening in places like Bangladesh and Pakistan and India. If you’re a brand or a manufacturer and you have operations and supply chains in these places, I think you understand what the future will look like if we don’t significantly reduce emissions.
Q: There are different categories of emission levels, depending on the role within the supply chain. Scope 1 are “direct” emissions under the reporting company’s control. For apparel, this might be the production of raw materials or the manufacturing of the finished product. Scope 2 covers “indirect” emissions from purchased energy, such as electricity used in these processes. Scope 3 emissions are harder to track, as they include emissions from supply chain partners both upstream and downstream.
Now companies are finding there are legislative efforts around the world that could soon require them to track and report on all these emissions, including emissions produced by their partners’ supply chains. Does this mean that companies now need to be more aware of not only what greenhouse gas emissions they produce, but also what their partners produce?
A: That’s right. Just to put this into context, if you’re a brand like an Adidas or a Gap, you still have to consider the Scope 3 emissions. In particular, there are the so-called “purchased goods and services,” which refers to all of the embedded emissions in your products, from farming cotton to knitting yarn to making fabric. Those “purchased goods and services” generally account for well above 80% of the total emissions associated with a product. It’s by far the most significant portion of your emissions.
Leading companies have begun measuring and taking action on Scope 3 emissions because of regulatory developments in Europe and, to some extent now, in California. I do think this is just a further tailwind for the work that the industry is doing.
I also think it will definitely ratchet up the quality requirements of Scope 3 data, which is not yet where we’d all like it to be. Companies are working to improve that data, but I think the regulatory push will make the quality side increasingly important.
Q: Overall, do you think the work being done by the Apparel Impact Institute will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions within the industry?
A: When we started this back in 2020, we were at a place where companies were setting targets and knew their intended destination, but what they needed was a blueprint for how to get there. And so, the roadmap [provided] this blueprint and identified six key things that the sector needed to do—from using more sustainable materials to deploying renewable electricity in the supply chain.
Decarbonizing any sector, whether it’s transportation, chemicals, or automotive, requires investment. The Apparel Impact Institute is bringing collective investment, which is so critical. I’m really optimistic about what they’re doing. They have taken a data-driven, evidence-based approach, so they know where the emissions are and they know what the needed interventions are. And they’ve got the industry behind them in doing that.
The global air cargo market’s hot summer of double-digit demand growth continued in August with average spot rates showing their largest year-on-year jump with a 24% increase, according to the latest weekly analysis by Xeneta.
Xeneta cited two reasons to explain the increase. First, Global average air cargo spot rates reached $2.68 per kg in August due to continuing supply and demand imbalance. That came as August's global cargo supply grew at its slowest ratio in 2024 to-date at 2% year-on-year, while global cargo demand continued its double-digit growth, rising +11%.
The second reason for higher rates was an ocean-to-air shift in freight volumes due to Red Sea disruptions and e-commerce demand.
Those factors could soon be amplified as e-commerce shows continued strong growth approaching the hotly anticipated winter peak season. E-commerce and low-value goods exports from China in the first seven months of 2024 increased 30% year-on-year, including shipments to Europe and the US rising 38% and 30% growth respectively, Xeneta said.
“Typically, air cargo market performance in August tends to follow the July trend. But another month of double-digit demand growth and the strongest rate growths of the year means there was definitely no summer slack season in 2024,” Niall van de Wouw, Xeneta’s chief airfreight officer, said in a release.
“Rates we saw bottoming out in late July started picking up again in mid-August. This is too short a period to call a season. This has been a busy summer, and now we’re at the threshold of Q4, it will be interesting to see what will happen and if all the anticipation of a red-hot peak season materializes,” van de Wouw said.
The report cites data showing that there are approximately 1.7 million workers missing from the post-pandemic workforce and that 38% of small firms are unable to fill open positions. At the same time, the “skills gap” in the workforce is accelerating as automation and AI create significant shifts in how work is performed.
That information comes from the “2024 Labor Day Report” released by Littler’s Workplace Policy Institute (WPI), the firm’s government relations and public policy arm.
“We continue to see a labor shortage and an urgent need to upskill the current workforce to adapt to the new world of work,” said Michael Lotito, Littler shareholder and co-chair of WPI. “As corporate executives and business leaders look to the future, they are focused on realizing the many benefits of AI to streamline operations and guide strategic decision-making, while cultivating a talent pipeline that can support this growth.”
But while the need is clear, solutions may be complicated by public policy changes such as the upcoming U.S. general election and the proliferation of employment-related legislation at the state and local levels amid Congressional gridlock.
“We are heading into a contentious election that has already proven to be unpredictable and is poised to create even more uncertainty for employers, no matter the outcome,” Shannon Meade, WPI’s executive director, said in a release. “At the same time, the growing patchwork of state and local requirements across the U.S. is exacerbating compliance challenges for companies. That, coupled with looming changes following several Supreme Court decisions that have the potential to upend rulemaking, gives C-suite executives much to contend with in planning their workforce-related strategies.”
Stax Engineering, the venture-backed startup that provides smokestack emissions reduction services for maritime ships, will service all vessels from Toyota Motor North America Inc. visiting the Toyota Berth at the Port of Long Beach, according to a new five-year deal announced today.
Beginning in 2025 to coincide with new California Air Resources Board (CARB) standards, STAX will become the first and only emissions control provider to service roll-on/roll-off (ro-ros) vessels in the state of California, the company said.
Stax has rapidly grown since its launch in the first quarter of this year, supported in part by a $40 million funding round from investors, announced in July. It now holds exclusive service agreements at California ports including Los Angeles, Long Beach, Hueneme, Benicia, Richmond, and Oakland. The firm has also partnered with individual companies like NYK Line, Hyundai GLOVIS, Equilon Enterprises LLC d/b/a Shell Oil Products US (Shell), and now Toyota.
Stax says it offers an alternative to shore power with land- and barge-based, mobile emissions capture and control technology for shipping terminal and fleet operators without the need for retrofits.
In the case of this latest deal, the Toyota Long Beach Vehicle Distribution Center imports about 200,000 vehicles each year on ro-ro vessels. Stax will keep those ships green with its flexible exhaust capture system, which attaches to all vessel classes without modification to remove 99% of emitted particulate matter (PM) and 95% of emitted oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Over the lifetime of this new agreement with Toyota, Stax estimated the service will account for approximately 3,700 hours and more than 47 tons of emissions controlled.
“We set out to provide an emissions capture and control solution that was reliable, easily accessible, and cost-effective. As we begin to service Toyota, we’re confident that we can meet the needs of the full breadth of the maritime industry, furthering our impact on the local air quality, public health, and environment,” Mike Walker, CEO of Stax, said in a release. “Continuing to establish strong partnerships will help build momentum for and trust in our technology as we expand beyond the state of California.”
That result showed that driver wages across the industry continue to increase post-pandemic, despite a challenging freight market for motor carriers. The data comes from ATA’s “Driver Compensation Study,” which asked 120 fleets, more than 150,000 employee drivers, and 14,000 independent contractors about their wage and benefit information.
Drilling into specific categories, linehaul less-than-truckload (LTL) drivers earned a median annual amount of $94,525 in 2023, while local LTL drivers earned a median of $80,680. The median annual compensation for drivers at private carriers has risen 12% since 2021, reaching $95,114 in 2023. And leased-on independent contractors for truckload carriers were paid an annual median amount of $186,016 in 2023.
The results also showed how the demographics of the industry are changing, as carriers offered smaller referral and fewer sign-on bonuses for new drivers in 2023 compared to 2021 but more frequently offered tenure bonuses to their current drivers and with a greater median value.
"While our last study, conducted in 2021, illustrated how drivers benefitted from the strongest freight environment in a generation, this latest report shows professional drivers' earnings are still rising—even in a weaker freight economy," ATA Chief Economist Bob Costello said in a release. "By offering greater tenure bonuses to their current driver force, many fleets appear to be shifting their workforce priorities from recruitment to retention."