The IMO has postponed the decision on the Net Zero Framework for the decarbonization of shipping by one year. Associations and environmental organizations are disappointed – the industry remains without a clear climate strategy.
After a week of intensive negotiations in London, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) has surprisingly postponed the decision on the Net Zero Framework for global shipping by a year. Representatives from industry and environmental associations are disappointed.
A milestone for international climate protection in shipping was supposed to be set this week in London: The member states of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) wanted to adopt the so-called Net Zero Framework – the world’s first global regulatory framework for limiting and pricing greenhouse gas emissions in shipping. However, expectations were not fulfilled. After tough and sometimes controversial consultations, the states postponed their decision until next year. As a result, the maritime industry remains without a clear compass on the path to climate neutrality for the time being. While industry representatives such as ICS, WSC, CESA and the German Shipowners’ Association see the delay as a setback for planning security and investments, environmental organizations such as NABU are calling for more determination.
VSM: “Phase of uncertainty prolonged”
“The decision taken today in London not to adopt the Net Zero Framework and to suspend the meeting for a year is a bitter setback for the entire maritime industry and global climate protection,” commented VSM CEO Reinhard Lüken on the postponement. “It prolongs the period of uncertainty for all stakeholders and will further delay urgently needed investments – so we are losing valuable time on the path to climate-neutral shipping. Nevertheless, we are certain that the German shipbuilding industry will not let up in its efforts to drive forward innovative, sustainable technology. We as an association will also continue to advocate for the rapid implementation of the NZF.”
VDR: “The EU remained too quiet”
“This is a setback. It is highly doubtful that a consensus will be reached in the coming year,” says Martin Kröger, Managing Director of the German Shipowners’ Association (VDR). “A pause can help, but it must not become permanent. If the decision is postponed further and further, the process risks getting stuck altogether.”
“The shipping industry has had a clear position for a long time,” emphasizes Kröger: “We need a global, uniform set of rules for climate protection in shipping.” But in the IMO, decisions are made by the states, and while some countries, such as the USA, have been vocal and pushed hard against a global framework, the EU has remained too quiet. “Right now, the EU could have turned the tide with clear words and a willingness to adapt its regional regulations to a global system. Instead, it remained silent and completely underestimated the changing mood of some states in the plenary”, Kröger continued.
The negotiations were at a turning point and a clear signal from the EU could have enabled a breakthrough: Perhaps an agreement would have been more likely if the EU had been prepared to put aside its regional measures in favor of an effective, global instrument under the umbrella of the IMO and to communicate this clearly. Instead, there were vague announcements that existing EU regulations such as emissions trading (ETS) or FuelEU Maritime would be examined for compatibility with future IMO requirements. Unfortunately, there was no clear commitment.
Every additional special regulation means more bureaucracy, less clarity and ultimately harms effective climate protection. Kröger continued: “It was a great opportunity for the EU to finally follow up its announcements with action: Reduce bureaucracy, end duplicate structures and put Europe’s competitiveness back at the center. But it remained unused.”
The VDR is calling for talks at the IMO to be resumed swiftly and for agreement to be reached on a global framework for the decarbonization of shipping despite the pause in the agreement announced today. Shipping is global and climate protection in shipping must be too. If every country and every region sets its own targets, climate protection will become more expensive, more complicated, less effective and fair competition will be thrown out of balance. Shipping finally needs a clear global framework.
NABU: Years of negotiations, no result
NABU President Jörg-Andreas Krüger said: “It is bitter that the member states were unable to agree on a concrete package of measures to protect the climate in the shipping industry today. In times of geopolitical uncertainty, today’s decision could have been a strong signal for global climate protection and multilateralism. Instead, we are left without a result after years of negotiations.”
NABU is now calling on the IMO to resume the course it set years ago. Lukas Leppert, NABU spokesperson for climate and transport, emphasizes: “A package of measures to gradually replace fossil fuels and technologies and relieve the climate and environment is on the table. A majority voted in favor of this in April. The member states have a responsibility to fulfill their national and international obligations and adopt the agreement.”
ICS: Industry needs clarity
“We are disappointed that Member States could not agree on a way forward in this meeting,” said Thomas A. Kazakos, Secretary General of the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS). “The industry needs clarity to make the investments needed to decarbonize the maritime sector – in line with the IMO’s greenhouse gas reduction strategy. We will continue to work closely with the IMO, which is the best organization to create global rules for a global industry.”
WSC calls for the “extra” time to be used
The industry association World Shipping Council (WSC) called for the extra time to be used to close remaining gaps and reach an effective global agreement. “The negotiations have been challenging and complex,” said the WSC. “The coming year must be used to flesh out the Net Zero framework and lay the foundations for a globally agreed set of rules.” Liner shipping companies have already invested $150 billion in ships designed to use green fuels. “The IMO remains the right place to develop a global solution.”
CESA: Delay slows down investment
The European shipbuilders’ association Comité Européen des Constructeurs de Navires (CESA) also expressed regret at the postponement: “Today’s decision is a bitter setback. The adoption of the international climate agreement for shipping would have been crucial to enable the transition to climate neutrality and create a globally uniform set of rules.” The delay prolongs uncertainty and slows down investment. “We will continue to work with the IMO and its member states and support a global approach.”
ECSA: Uniform regulations are essential
The European Community Shipowners’ Associations (ECSA) also criticized the decision: “We regret today’s postponement of the adoption of the international climate agreement for shipping. The IMO Net Zero framework is crucial to provide the industry with the necessary planning certainty and to send a strong signal to the market to drive forward the production of clean fuels for the path to climate neutrality,” said ECSA Secretary General Sotiris Raptis.
Shipping is an international industry that requires global and effective regulations for its decarbonization. Standardized global regulations are essential to create a level playing field and promote the energy transition in international shipping.
“We will continue to work closely with our international partners to ensure that agreement can be reached on the IMO Net Zero Framework,” said Raptis.
