"The three alliances - 2M, Ocean Alliance, and THE Alliance- do not expire until the second half of the decade. Despite this, it is increasingly likely that the agreements will be terminated on mutual agreement and new alliance constellations will emerge," said Mr Jensen.

The current alliance structure was formed in a period when freight rates were historically low and carriers struggled with managing vessel overcapacity, he said.

"But we are now at a different point in the market evolution. Carriers are increasingly making different choices related to their commercial and operational future," Mr Jensen said.

"Some focus on improving profitability on existing vessels while others invest to grow volumes significantly. Some focus on end-to-end logistics where others want to remain ocean carriers. Some increase their share of customers with whom they have long-term contracts where others focus on reaping the benefits of the spot market. Some increasingly shun small and medium-sized forwarders whereas others embrace them.

"All of these are perfectly fine business choices ！ and from a competitive perspective, it is good to see that the carriers indeed do choose different approaches," said Mr Jensen.

These arrangements work best when all alliance members have aligned strategic interests.

"The current alliance structure was formed in a period when freight rates were historically low and all carriers struggled with managing vessel overcapacity," he said.

"The strategic interests were mainly aligned across all carriers in the alliances: How does one reduce the operating costs of the networks and absorb the new generation of ultra-large container vessel?

However, the different choices also lead to a misalignment in an alliance when it comes to network design, blank sailings, etc.

Continuing with the current alliances means that each alliance will have to make a network which is a compromise stretching across quite different strategic choices - and as such a network not fully satisfactory to any member.