The power to regulate on-board protection of merchant vessels lies with the flag state. However, the national models of regulation are not developed in a unilateral vacuum. In fact, the whole concept of flag state jurisdiction and legislative power has to be understood and exercised on the national level in close relation with the general regime of the international law of the sea. The aim of the article is therefore two-fold: first, it aims to provide a background for the country reports in this special issue by giving a brief insight into the problem of piracy in the twenty-first century and the international approaches towards this problem. Here the article also provides an insight into the legal background by presenting the concept of piracy in the law of the sea and connected law enforcement powers. Thus, this part of the article provides the overall context in which the discussions concerning on-board protection and the development of national regulations have occurred. Second, the article analyses the issue of on-board protection from the perspective of the legal framework in international law, as well as relevant international soft-law instruments, influencing the development on the national level. On-board protection of vessels as such is not regulated in the international law; however, international law provides a form of general legal setting, in which flags states navigate. Thus, this article aims to draw a picture of the international context in which flags states develop their specific legal approach.
The purpose of this chapter is to present some basics as regards the energy efficiency of ships, including related regulatory activity at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and elsewhere. To that effect, the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) is first presented, followed by a discussion of Market Based Measures (MBMs) and the recent Initial IMO Strategy to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from ships. The discussion includes commentary on possible pitfalls in the policy approach being followed.
The capacity to act as a port state in international law is best described by the specific powers exercised over foreign ships, namely inspection, detention, expulsion or request of any type of information prior to the entry into the port. Many of these powers are explicitly attributed to the state in multilateral instruments, whereby the flag state consents to having its ships subject to the jurisdiction of the port state. Notwithstanding the consensus around the complementary nature of port state jurisdiction with respect to certain obligations of the flag state, the port state is not limited to fulfilling a secondary role. This is especially visible in the prevention, reduction and control of ship-source pollution, where some port states have not hesitated in acting regardless of an expressed consent by the flag state to the rule or standard being applied with the support of port powers. Not only do port states use more stringent enforcement powers to ensure that international treaties are effective, but they also prescribe novel rules and standards upon any foreign ship that approaches the port, often as a means of breaking an international negotiation deadlock. This study discusses the international legal basis for such unilateral jurisdiction by analyzing the principles of state jurisdiction under the dichotomy parochial/cosmopolitan. By interpreting the stated and implicit purposes of port state actions under that dichotomy, this study proposes that states are finding a legal ground to act based on certain legal functions they fulfill in the international legal order. This argument puts into perspective the assumed self-sufficiency of territoriality and shows how unilateralism may also serve to seek to set universally applicable norms.
Irregular migration by sea leads states such as Italy and Australia to conduct maritime rescue operations involving refugees and other migrants. During these operations, states must deal with the question of where to disembark survivors. The law of the sea regime obliges states to ensure survivors are delivered to a 'place of safety', arguably requiring maritime officers to merely consider the physical safety of survivors immediately on disembarkation. Non-binding International Maritime Organization guidelines state that the need to avoid disembarking refugees and asylum-seekers in the states of departure or origin is also a consideration. The guidelines refer to other 'relevant' international law, including treaties dealing with 'refugee refoulement' or refoulement in connection with a risk of torture. Under the international human rights law regime, including international refugee law, states' obligations in relation to non-refoulement are broader and prohibit the return of refugees and migrants to states where they directly or indirectly face persecution, torture or other serious harm. In interpreting 'place of safety', this work argues that there is insufficient consensus to integrate the two legal regimes. Nevertheless, states can be under co-existing human rights obligations that place limits on the disembarkation of rescued refugees and migrants.
The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the concept of Market Based Measures (MBMs) to reduce Green House Gas (GHG) emissions from ships, and review several distinct MBM proposals that were under consideration by the International Maritime Organization (IMO). The chapter then moves on to discuss the concept of Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) of CO2 emissions and the distinct mechanisms set up the European Union (EU) and the IMO for MRV. The reason the MBM and MRV subjects are treated in the same chapter is twofold: (a) the MRV discussion essentially started when the MBM discussion was suspended in 2013, and (b) MRV is a critical step for any eventual MBM implementation in the future.
The International Maritime Organization (IMO) is a specialized United Nations (UN) agency regulating maritime transport. One of the very hot topics currently on the IMO agenda is decarbonization. In that regard, the IMO decided in 2018 to achieve by 2050 a reduction of at least 50% in maritime green house gas (GHG) emissions vis-à-vis 2008 levels. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the possible role of Market Based Measures (MBMs) so as to achieve the above target. To that effect, a brief discussion of MBMs at the IMO and the EU is presented, and a possible way forward is proposed, focusing on a bunker levy.
The 0.1% sulphur limit within Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECA) has made compulsory the use of either pricier ultra-low sulphur fuel, or the installation of abatement technologies that require significant capital investments. Due to the unexpectedly low fuel prices, Ro-Ro operators have been able to cope with the new sulphur limits, but recent research has shown that if fuel prices increase some Ro-Ro services may face the risk of closure. This paper proposes three key performance indicators (KPIs) to enable the asssessment of the impact of SECAs on Ro-Ro shipping. The KPIs are used on a set of case studies for services of a leading European Ro-Ro operator, and allow benchmarking of a series of operational and policy measures that aim to reverse the negative impacts of SECAs. The operational measures consider speed reduction, new sailing frequency, fleet reconfiguration, as well as investments in abatement technologies. Policy measures include the options of either subsidizing shippers or ship operators, or alternatively introducing new taxes on landbased options. The KPIs can be useful to ship operators seeking to improve the resilience of their network, as well as to regulatory bodies designing new environmental policies and understanding any negative implications these may have on ship operators.
The international Maritime Organization (IMO) Weather Criterion has proven to be the governing stability criteria regarding minimum metacentric height for e.g., small ferries and large passenger ships. The formulation of the Weather Criterion is based on some empirical relations derived many years ago for vessels not necessarily representative for current new buildings with large superstructures. Thus, it seems reasonable to investigate the possibility of capsizing in beam sea under the joint action of waves and wind using direct time domain simulations. This has already been done in several studies. Here, it is combined with the first order reliability method (FORM) to define possible combined critical wave and wind scenarios leading to capsize and corresponding probability of capsize. The FORM results for a fictitious vessel are compared with Monte Carlo simulations, and good agreement is found at a much lesser computational effort. Finally, the results for an existing small ferry will be discussed in the light of the current weather criterion.
In an effort to reduce the environmental impacts of maritime transportation, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) designated special Sulphur Emission Control Areas (SECAs) where ships are required to use low-sulphur fuel. In January 2015, the sulphur limit within SECAs was lowered to 0.1%, which can only be achieved if vessels are using pricier ultra-low sulphur fuel, or invest in abatement technologies. The increased operating costs borne by Ro-Ro operators in SECAs due to the stricter limits can result in the shutting down of some routes and a redistribution of cargo flows with land-based alternatives. The exact repercussions of the new sulphur limits are difficult to identify in the wake of significant recent reductions of the fuel prices for both low-sulphur and heavy fuel oil. This paper presents a modal split model that estimates modal shifts vis-a-vis competing maritime and land-based modes available to shippers. This allows examining the implications of the recent low prices to modal choice, and the influence a potential increase in fuel prices may have. The model is applied to seven routes affected by the regulation based on data from a leading European Ro-Ro operator. Sensitivity analyses on market share data, cargo values, freight rates, and haulers rates are conducted. Emissions inventories are constructed to assess the environmental efficacy of the SECA regulation. The novelty of the proposed model lies in the examination of the ex-post implications of shutting down a service and the redistribution of transport. Recommendations to mitigate and reverse the negative side-effects of such environmental legislation are proposed.
The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the concept of Market Based Measures (MBMs) to reduce Green House Gas (GHG) emissions from ships, and review several distinct MBM proposals that have been under consideration by the International Maritime Organization (IMO). The chapter discusses the mechanisms used by MBMs, and explores how the concept of the Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) can be linked to MBMs. It also attempts to discuss the pros and cons of the submitted proposals.