The shipping sector's rising greenhouse gas emissions are often considered “hard-to-abate”. Some ship-owners have recently adopted or started to consider the adoption of alternative fuels, but systematic studies of this are still lacking. We address this gap by studying how ship-owners differ in both actual and intended adoption of alternative fuels. We analyze data from a unique survey with 281 ship-owners in Norway, a major ship-owning country and center for maritime technology development, with descriptive statistics and analysis of variance. We find early adopters among large and established ship-owners in offshore, international cargo and domestic passenger shipping segments, which are often subjected to specific contractual demands for alternative fuel adoption. Laggards were typically small and young ship-owners operating in shipping segments where demands for alternative fuel adoption are weak. Our findings also suggest that firms' business strategy and financial and knowledge resources may have relevance for ship-owner's adoption of alternative fuels. Our study has implications for national and international policymaking, highlighting for example how contracting mechanisms can be an effective tool in incentivizing the adoption of alternative fuels.
In this webinar, Adrienne Mannov from Aarhus University and Peter Aske Svendsen from NFA presented their research on autonomous shipping as this relates to seafaring and technology, based on their 2019 report, “Transport 2040: Autonomous ships: A new paradigm for Norwegian shipping - Technology and transformation”.
The event was organized in collaboration with MARLOG
The aim of this article is to illustrate the most important changes in the regulatory framework of the shipping sector from the 1960s to 2010, and to analyse the basis for, and effects of, these changes. In order to explain how the transformation has occurred, we use two traditional maritime nations—Denmark and Norway—as case studies. First, we introduce the two regimes of Danish and Norwegian shipping: ‘the national regime’ from the early 1960s to the mid-1970s; and ‘the competitive regime’, which was fully established by the middle of the 1990s and still persists. Then, we briefly sketch the bargaining that accompanied the shift from the national regime to the competitive regime. Specifically, we show that the new regime primarily accommodated the interests of private actors such as shipping companies, rather than the interests of the authorities and the trade unions.