Uruguay’s Ports in South America’s Changing Trade Corridors

At the Uruguay Logistics Forum on 28 October 2026, the government set out an ambition to attract more regional trade through the country’s transport network. The following day, authorities from Uruguay, Paraguay and Bolivia met in Asunción to discuss ports, waterway navigation, multimodal connections and energy. These were closely related efforts to strengthen Uruguay’s position as an Atlantic gateway for inland South America. [1] [2]

The cargo figures show why that ambition requires a closer look. Montevideo’s container activity weakened in 2025, while bulk operations grew elsewhere in the port system. A national logistics strategy therefore has to address several markets with different customers, infrastructure and route choices.

Sources: ANP annual and first-half container tables and its 30 April 2026 results release. Container tables are preliminary. Periods and geographic coverage differ; these are separate indicators. [3] [4] [5]

Uruguay seeks a larger role in inland South America’s trade

The government’s October agenda links port competitiveness with cooperation along the Paraguay–Paraná Waterway, the river system through which inland cargo reaches Atlantic shipping services. URUPABOL, the cooperation framework between Uruguay, Paraguay and Bolivia, gives that agenda an institutional channel. The Asunción meeting covered navigation, port operations, air connections and combinations of transport modes. [2]

These connections serve different economic functions. A grain cargo moving downriver, a container transferred to an ocean vessel and an industrial input distributed inland do not use the network in the same way. Their choices depend on origin, destination, handling requirements, sailing frequency and the cost of the complete journey.

The wider geography is explained in Econosur’s analysis of the Paraguay–Paraná Waterway. Uruguay’s own production base adds another layer: the territorial map of Uruguay’s exports shows why domestic cargo demand varies across agriculture, forestry and industry.

Montevideo’s statistics separate national trade from regional services

Argentina comparison: Container handling in Montevideo and regional transshipment should be compared with the cargo system, maritime services and terminal investments on the other side of the Río de la Plata. Econosur’s 2026 review of Argentina’s ports examines Dock Sud’s container upgrades alongside Gran Rosario’s grain terminals and new Atlantic oil-export infrastructure. Announced terminal capacity in one country does not by itself explain realised shipping-line calls or cargo diversions in another.

ANP, Uruguay’s National Ports Administration, records 479,392 containers, equivalent to 857,491 TEU, at Montevideo in 2025. For January–June 2026, it records 244,534 containers and 439,464 TEU. A TEU is a twenty-foot equivalent unit: a forty-foot container counts as two TEU. Both series include loaded and empty equipment. [3] [4]

The tables also distinguish ordinary loading and unloading from transit and transshipment operations. This matters because throughput is a measure of port handling. A container unloaded from one vessel and subsequently loaded onto another contributes to more than one handling operation; the port total cannot be read as a count of unique shipments.

Source: ANP’s preliminary tables. Loading and unloading rows reproduce the operational grouping; detailed customs categories appear separately in the originals. The six-month total is not compared with the annual total as a growth rate. [3] [4]

ANP’s annual results release gives a useful distinction: the authority reports a 25% reduction in container movement in 2025, while its domestic foreign-trade container aggregate rose 5% to 463,677 TEU. The latter corresponds to ordinary loading and unloading in the annual table. It is not the monetary value of all Uruguayan trade. Separately, ANP’s Cifras Portuarias 2025 gives a 23.1% fall in total TEU, from 1,115,417 to 857,491. The release’s rounded container-movement statement and the statistical presentation’s TEU comparison are retained as distinct source statements. Both show that lower aggregate handling can coexist with growth in the domestic-trade component. [5] [10]

Shipping lines help decide where Paraguayan cargo changes vessels

January reporting by El Observador links the diversion of Paraguayan transshipment business to Buenos Aires and Zárate with commercial negotiations between Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC), the ocean carrier, and Katoen Natie, the majority owner of Montevideo’s Terminal Cuenca del Plata (TCP). The report describes disagreements over operating terms and MSC’s use of alternative regional ports. [11]

Paraguay’s ambassador to Uruguay, Didier Olmedo, told the newspaper that the change reflected ocean carriers’ decisions rather than a change in preference among Paraguayan importers and exporters. That is an attributed account of the diversion. It does not establish that every cargo moved for the same reason.

The commercial implication is broader: demand in the inland economy is only one determinant of port traffic. Shipping schedules, terminal agreements and the organisation of carrier networks influence where cargo is transferred to ocean services. A port can retain physical capacity and geographic advantages while losing a particular service or flow.

Nueva Palmira and Punta del Arenal tell a different cargo story

Nueva Palmira sits at the downstream interface between the regional river system and ocean shipping. ANP’s 2025 results record 2,258,264 tonnes of bulk cargo at the public wharf, up 8% from 2024. The scope is important: this is the public-wharf series, not a total for every private terminal in the Nueva Palmira complex. [5]

ANP’s June presentation, Cifras Portuarias 2025, reports a different Nueva Palmira bulk series: 2,216,382 tonnes and growth of 13%, against 1,961,907 tonnes in 2024. The documents reviewed do not explain the difference from the April release. The +8% indicator above therefore refers specifically to the 30 April release; the two series are not merged or treated as an established revision. [10]

At the separate Punta del Arenal Norte transfer area, ANP records 2,698,437 tonnes of iron-ore transshipment in 2025, compared with 215,681 tonnes in 2024. These tonnes cannot be added to Montevideo’s TEU figures or treated as a national iron-ore export measure. They show a substantial expansion in one specific transfer operation.

ANP’s October strategy describes repairs, additional moorings and anchorage capacity, new liquid-bulk transfer business and efforts to attract cargo from Bolivia. The direction is consistent with a port system seeking a greater role in the river economy. Projected volumes remain forecasts until actual movements confirm them. [6]

Paraguayan investment adds an ownership dimension. InfoNegocios Paraguay reported on 13 October that Grupo Zapag was promoting a multipurpose terminal in Soriano, with estimated investment of US$150 million. The report states that the project had received prior environmental authorisation from Uruguay’s Ministry of Environment. That is a more advanced stage than an unapproved proposal, but does not establish completion, commissioning or commercial operation. The planned terminal would create another transfer option on the Uruguay River. [13]

Uruguay’s position is consequently more varied than a single national port-growth figure suggests. Container services can move to Argentine terminals while river-borne bulk business expands at other Uruguayan locations.

Capricornio adds a Pacific option with an unfinished operating timetable

The Capricornio Bioceanic Corridor links Brazil’s central-west through Paraguay and northern Argentina to ports in northern Chile. Uruguay is outside its main alignment. The relevance for Uruguayan ports lies in the wider set of routes available to regional producers and traders. [9]

The distinction between physical connection and commercial service is still material. July reporting documented the joining of the bridge between Porto Murtinho in Brazil and Carmelo Peralta in Paraguay. A more recent official update, published by Mato Grosso do Sul on 29 October 2026, still identifies access roads and integrated border controls as prerequisites for full operation. [14] [8]

That update gives February 2027 as the Paraguayan government’s expected access-opening date and 2027 for completion of Brazilian accesses. It also reports a September estimate by Brazil’s federal revenue authority that full commercial operation could occur in 2028. These are dated expectations, not opening guarantees.

For Uruguay, the possible effect will depend on the cargo and its destination. A road route to a Pacific port may improve some journeys, while waterway and Atlantic services remain relevant to others. The comparison has to include inland transport, border waiting, ocean services, handling and reliability. The sources reviewed do not demonstrate that Capricornio has caused the recent diversion of Paraguayan containers from Montevideo.

Construction and border-system dependencies are examined in Econosur’s analysis of the Brazil–Paraguay bridge and corridor readiness. The comparison of the Central and Capricornio corridors explains why different bioceanic proposals should not be treated as one route.

Service reliability and environmental performance need route-level evidence

ANP’s September presentation identifies operational continuity as a competitive factor. It warns that interruptions can create extra costs and put shipping calls at risk, and calls for dialogue on minimum services during labour disputes. This is the authority’s stated concern; it does not quantify how much traffic any individual dispute caused Uruguay to lose. [7]

River navigation adds another dependency. Water levels, usable draft, dredging and terminal access influence how much cargo can move and when. The economic importance of those variables extends beyond the port boundary, as discussed in the analysis of deeper Paraná navigation and Mercosur trade.

Environmental comparisons require the same care. A shorter route on a map does not establish lower emissions per delivered tonne. A defensible assessment would include the distance by road, river and sea, vessel or truck utilisation, empty movements, handling, maintenance works and effects on affected ecosystems. The reviewed sources do not provide a comparable emissions balance for the alternative routes discussed here.

Econosur Research Services: Ports, Logistics and Trade Corridors

Econosur researches South American trade networks, companies and infrastructure for a defined economic or commercial question. A study can examine an existing route, a proposed investment, sourcing conditions or changes in regional competition.

Relevant formats include Custom Market Analysis South America, Company Reports and research within the Logistics and Waterways industry hub.

Primary and Secondary Sources

Marcus A. Volz

Marcus A. Volz is a market analyst and international B2B consultant based in Argentina since 2006. He researches South American companies, projects, industries, infrastructure and cross-border economic structures.