Vol. 5 No. 10 (2025)
Articles

Reframing Modern Cargo Systems: Integrating Agility, Digital Intelligence, and Autonomy for Future-Ready Supply Chains

Ethan J. Walker
Department of Industrial Engineering and Supply Chain, Emerald University

Published 2025-10-31

Keywords

  • Supply chain agility,
  • digital intelligence,
  • IoT,
  • unmanned cargo,
  • cargo analytics,
  • SEDDS
  • ...More
    Less

How to Cite

Ethan J. Walker. (2025). Reframing Modern Cargo Systems: Integrating Agility, Digital Intelligence, and Autonomy for Future-Ready Supply Chains. Stanford Database Library of American Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 5(10), 309–316. Retrieved from https://oscarpubhouse.com/index.php/sdlajast/article/view/51

Abstract

Background: Contemporary supply chains face an unprecedented convergence of pressures: increasing demand variability, regulatory complexity, technological disruption, and the need for sustainability. Existing scholarship has separately examined agile manufacturing and supply chains, the economic feasibility of autonomous cargo transport, data-driven analyses of bulk cargo flows, and the application of intelligent sensing and IoT in warehousing. This article synthesizes these disparate strands into a coherent theoretical and operational framework for next-generation cargo and supply chain systems. The synthesis emphasizes how agility, digital intelligence (AI, data mining), and autonomy (low-manned/unmanned systems) interact to reshape tracking, inventory management, cargo handling, and the fate of complex cargo types. The article is grounded in the provided literature and integrates concepts from logistics, manufacturing theory, maritime engineering, and pharmaceutical cargo behavior to produce a cross-domain perspective (Gunasekaran, 1999; Gunasekaran et al., 2019; Kooij et al., 2021; Jörgensen et al., 2023).

Methods: Through a structured conceptual analysis, the paper constructs an integrative model by mapping theoretical constructs (agility capabilities, digital intelligence layers, autonomy spectrum) onto operational tasks (tracking, volume analysis, cargo handling, and decision-making). The approach combines task-based economic viability insights with empirical and methodological lessons from data-mining studies and IoT-enabled warehouse systems. The methods comprise systematic cross-referencing of theoretical propositions and operational evidence from the supplied references, followed by iterative model refinement through deductive elaboration (Gligor et al., 2015; Kim et al., 2021; Chowdhury, 2025).

Results: The analysis yields an operational taxonomy of agility-enabled digital systems, a layered architecture for cargo intelligence, and criteria for evaluating when to deploy low-manned or unmanned cargo systems. Key findings include: (1) explicit reconciliation of agility with digital sensing to maximize responsiveness while preserving stability (Gligor et al., 2015; Gunasekaran et al., 2019); (2) demonstration that bill-of-lading data-driven volume analytics can guide capacity and routing decisions when integrated with real-time IoT sensing (Kim et al., 2021; Chowdhury, 2025); (3) articulation of economic and safety thresholds that determine the viability of low-manned and unmanned maritime cargo concepts (Kooij et al., 2021); and (4) cross-domain insight that cargo chemical and physical behavior — illustrated by self-emulsifying drug delivery systems — can materially affect logistics handling and risk, requiring specialized digital monitoring strategies (Jörgensen et al., 2023).

Conclusions: The paper argues for an architecture that fuses agile governance, layered digital intelligence, and selective autonomy. The architecture improves supply chain resilience and responsiveness and supports sustainable performance when enacted with clear task-based economic criteria and rigorous cargo-specific sensing. Implementation requires organizational change, investment in digital skills, and policy alignment. Research implications include empirical validation of the model and development of decision-support algorithms that unify volume forecasting with autonomous routing and cargo-condition monitoring (Geyi et al., 2020; Gartner, 2021). Practical implications address managers aiming to balance agility investments against cost and safety constraints.

 

References

  1. Jörgensen, A. M., Wibel, R., Veider, F., Hoyer, B., Chamieh, J., Cottet, H., & Bernkop-Schnürch, A. (2023). Self-emulsifying drug delivery systems (SEDDS): How organic solvent release governs the fate of their cargo. International Journal of Pharmaceutics, 647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2023.123534
  2. Kim, S., Sohn, W., Lim, D., & Lee, J. (2021). A multi-stage data mining approach for liquid bulk cargo volume analysis based on bill of lading data. Expert Systems with Applications, 183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115304
  3. Chowdhury, W. A. (2025). Agile, IoT, and AI: Revolutionizing Warehouse Tracking and Inventory Management in Supply Chain Operations. Journal of Procurement and Supply Chain Management, 4(1), 41–47. https://doi.org/10.58425/jpscm.v4i1.349
  4. Kooij, C., Kana, A. A., & Hekkenberg, R. G. (2021). A task-based analysis of the economic viability of low-manned and unmanned cargo ship concepts. Ocean Engineering, 242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.110111
  5. Gartner. (2021, February 10). Gartner survey finds 87% of supply chain professionals plan to invest in resilience with the next two years [Press release]. https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/2021-02-10-gartner-survey-finds-87-of-supply-chain-professionals-plan-to-invest-in-resilience-within-the-next-2-years
  6. Geyi, D. G., Yusuf, Y., Menhat, M. S., Abubakar, T., & Ogbuke, N. J. (2020). Agile capabilities as necessary conditions for maximizing sustainable supply chain performance: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Production Economics, 222, 107501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.09.022
  7. Gligor, D. M., Esmark, C. L., & Holcomb, M. C. (2015). Performance outcomes of supply chain agility: When should you be agile? Journal of Operations Management, 33-34(1), 71-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2014.10.008
  8. Gunasekaran, A. (1999). Agile manufacturing: A framework for research and development. International Journal of Production Economics, 62(1-2), 87-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(98)00222-9
  9. Gunasekaran, A., Yusuf, Y. Y., Adeleye, E. O., Papadopoulos, T., Kovvuri, D., & Geyi, D. G. (2019). Agile manufacturing: An evolutionary review of practices. International Journal of Production Research, 57(15-16), 5154-5174. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1530478
  10. Hofman, D., & Cecere, L. (2005, November). The agile supply chain: The agile supply chain senses and responds to changes in demand quickly, easily, predictably, and with high quality. Supply Chain Management Review, 9(8), 18-19. https://www.proquest.com/docview/221236167
  11. Jawahar, J., Kumara, S. A. V., & Padmanabhan, S. (2020). Smart supply chain for agile implementation in the manufacturing industry. IUP Journal of Supply Chain Management, 17(1), 7-23. https://www.iupindia.in/0320/Supply%20Chain%20Management/Smart_Supply.asp.