Mint explainer: why India wants to make its own shipping containers

A shipping container is a strong, standardized steel box used to carry freight across the world. Its common dimensions make cargo easier to handle. Instead of unloading goods at every stage, the whole box can travel through ports and transport networks. That simple change made international shipping faster, cheaper and more reliable.

At a port, cranes lift containers between ships and trucks or trains. The container stays closed while the cargo moves, so workers do not need to handle each item separately at every transfer. Standard fittings and sizes allow the same box to work with ships, rail wagons and road trailers. Refrigerated containers can carry temperature-sensitive goods such as mangoes.

The article describes containers as foundations of globalization. Yet India currently makes only about 70,000 twenty-foot equivalent units, or TEUs, a small share of global output. Building domestic capacity could give exporters more dependable access to these essential boxes.

India’s new scheme is a 13-year, ₹10,000-crore package for building a domestic container industry. It combines production-linked fiscal support, concessional port lease rates and partial interest subsidies on capital loans. The goal is to make containers in India at much greater scale, rather than depending heavily on imports from concentrated overseas production.

The largest allocation is ₹8,891 crore for operating-cost support linked to production. Another ₹859 crore covers interest subsidies, while ₹150 crore supports testing and certification. Support is set at ₹49,500 for a 20-foot container, ₹86,625 for a 40-foot container and ₹37,125-74,250 for specialised 20-foot containers.

India’s annual capacity is currently about 70,000 TEUs. The scheme seeks to raise it to 7.5 lakh TEUs by FY40. The government also wants India to capture 15-20% of global container manufacturing by then, reducing dependence on one dominant producer.

The capacity gap is enormous. China produced about 6.45 million TEUs in 2025, according to the China Container Industry Association. India’s current capacity is around 70,000 TEUs. On those figures, China’s annual output was roughly 92 times India’s capacity, showing how difficult it will be to close the gap.

Their global shares are equally uneven. China accounted for more than 97% of global container production in FY26. India accounted for only 0.5%, according to the National Shipping Board’s FY26 annual report. These figures show that container manufacturing is highly concentrated in one country.

India’s scheme aims to change that position. The government wants annual capacity to reach 7.5 lakh TEUs by FY40 and hopes to capture 15-20% of global manufacturing. That would make India a significant alternative source, though still smaller than China on the stated target.

China dominates because container manufacturing is supported by a complete industrial ecosystem. Producers operate in clusters, close to steel plants and other suppliers. Steel is the key raw material, and China is the world’s largest steel producer. This proximity can make sourcing and production more efficient.

The ecosystem also includes decades-old relationships with shipping lines, logistics operators and suppliers. Those connections help manufacturers secure orders, coordinate supply and maintain scale. China’s position as a major exporter strengthens the cycle because exported goods need containers. In 2025, China exported $3.77 trillion worth of merchandise, according to the World Trade Organization.

India is starting from a much smaller base. Its capacity is about 70,000 TEUs, compared with China’s 6.45 million TEUs produced in 2025. The new scheme tries to build India’s own supporting network through production incentives, port access, financing help, testing and certification.

More Indian-made containers could reduce exporters’ dependence on overseas supply. Containers are essential equipment, not just packaging. When ships, routes or suppliers are disrupted, a shortage can delay cargo and raise prices. Local manufacturing would add another source and make India less exposed to a production system concentrated overwhelmingly in China.

The article gives a direct example. During the West Asia war in April, Indian mango exporters struggled to find refrigerated containers. They had to use more expensive alternatives while also facing higher freight rates. A larger domestic supply of refrigerated and other specialised containers could reduce that vulnerability, although the scheme’s stated support covers specialised 20-foot containers.

Industry executive Shankar Shinde said domestic containers could reduce shortage risks during supply-chain disruptions. Some could also serve local freight transportation, unlike imported containers. Higher manufacturing capacity would therefore support exporters, domestic freight and India’s wider export-led growth push.

The benefits extend well beyond container factories. Steel is a direct beneficiary because containers are made from it. Trade could also gain because stronger export activity requires more containers. That supports India’s broader export-led growth effort, alongside trade agreements with the European Union, the UK and EFTA and negotiations with the US.

Ports are another important link. India has 214 ports, including 14 designated major ports. New deep-water facilities are planned at Vadhavan in Maharashtra and Galathea Bay in Great Nicobar Island. More containers could support cargo movement through this expanding maritime network and create demand across related logistics services.

The employment effect is also significant. The scheme is expected to create about 3,000 direct jobs and more than 50,000 indirect jobs across connected industries. Its wider impact could therefore reach steel, trade, ports, logistics and freight operations, not only manufacturers assembling the containers.

Before containerization, cargo had to be handled piece by piece during transport. A standardized container changed the process by putting many goods into one durable box. The box could move through ports and onward transport systems as a single unit. This reduced handling and helped make shipping cheaper, according to economist and author Marc Levinson.

The container’s value lies less in the box itself than in the system around it. Standard dimensions allow ships, port cranes, trains and trucks to work together. Cargo can move between these modes without being unpacked at each transfer. That saves time and lowers the risk and cost associated with repeated handling.

Levinson wrote that the container “made shipping cheap” and changed the shape of the world economy. The article calls containers foundations of globalization. Their influence came from standardization and coordination, which allowed goods to travel efficiently across increasingly connected international markets.