The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has recently adopted short-term measures introducing technical standards for existing ships and a labeling system reflecting their operational carbon intensity. This paper investigates the relevant techno-economic implications from a shipowner's perspective and estimates the effect of six compliance options on six sample containerships. The study applies a new evidence-based bottom-up approach, and the results show that compliance, when possible, is not straightforward and costly. Engine power limitation is the most cost-effective option, but low power limits can lead to substantially increased sailing times (up to 793.92 h/year), which can be prohibitive. The option favors older ships with oversized engines as its effectiveness is mainly determined by the main engine load profile. In general, the effectiveness of the measures is not without limits, particularly concerning older ships and those that have already installed several options. Solutions such as market-based measures and alternative fuels, classed by IMO as medium- and long-term measures, must be considered soon.
The content of Resolution MSC.473(ES.2) can be summarized in five main points and one invitation to IMO Member States.
The first point pertains to the implementation of the Framework of Protocols. The second point pertains to the designation of seafarers as 'key workers' in order to facilitate safe and unhindered movement for embarking or disembarking a vessel. The third point pertains to the consideration of temporary migration measures to ease mobility of seafarers, eg waivers or relaxations of visa or documentary requirements. The fourth point is on the use of prevention measures such as testing crews before embarkation; this requires active conduct by port states, namely providing access to personal protective equipment and testing facilities. The fifth point is on providing seafarers with immediate access to medical care and facilities, as well as with evacuation when the assistance required cannot be provided on board or at port; this aims to prevent humanitarian situations such as casualties on board vessels due to lack of access to intensive care units.
Furthermore, the Resolution invites Member States to designate a National Focal Point on Crew Change and Repatriation of Seafarers ('National Focal Point').
Background:
The third edition of the International Medical Guide for Ships (IMGS) was published in 2007 and supported a main principle of the newly adopted International Maritime Labour Convention (MLC) 2006: to ensure that seafarers are given health protection and medical care as comparable as possible to that which is available to workers ashore. In 2021, the revisions and drafting of the fourth edition of the IMGS began. Taking the COVID-19 pandemic into consideration, it was decided that a stakeholder study was necessary to ascertain the usefulness and practicality of the guide as well as provide input for which new topics to include.
Materials and methods:
The study applied data triangulation, with respondents from a geographically
broad sample of the International Maritime Organization‘s five regional areas of the world. The data was analysed using thematic analysis.
Results:
The results show that the IMGS is widely known and used among persons involved in medical care on board ships, but the IMGS is not as practical as stakeholders would wish it to be. For the guide to be useful, it must be ensured that telemedical advice information is included and if possible, ensure there is one single and global medical guide. Also, there is a need for new medical information, and respondents pointed to pandemic information, medicines list, medical chest, mental health issues, a women’s section, updated cardiopulmonary resuscitation instructions, human immune defect virus information (human immune defect-virus) and information on how seafarers may self-monitor and be monitored on board in relation to chronic diseases.
Conclusions:
Respondents understand a medicine chest on board is mandatory according to the MLC 2006, 98% are familiar with its content, and 86% use the IMGS.
Knowledge of ecosystem services (ES) and the benefits provided by offshore marine areas, including the welfare impacts from the establishment of marine protected areas (MPAs) is still limited. In the present study we evaluated benefits from ES, citizens' willingness-to-pay for potential changes in the provision of ES, and welfare losses to citizens due to restrictions on economic activities from establishing new offshore MPAs in Latvian waters. The scenarios for the economic valuation were based on analyzing the supply of ES from the protected marine habitats, showing changes in the ES supply in policy relevant scenarios of the MPA size. Our study evaluates a wide array of ES delivered by offshore protected habitats and reveals that citizens' willingness-to-pay for preserving habitats and ES supply exceeds their welfare losses from restrictions in economic activities. Our approach supports the prioritization of habitat types according to their contribution to ES supply and benefits for citizens. The analysis can be complemented with spatial data regarding the distribution of habitats, providing an opportunity to identify areas with the highest ES benefits to support marine protection and spatial planning.
The purpose of this paper is to describe the impact assessment of a mandatory operational goal-based short-term measure to reduce green house gas (GHG) emissions from ships. The specific measure has been proposed by Denmark and other co-sponsors in the context of the relevant discussion at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and in particular the so-called Initial IMO Strategy. The IMO is a specialized United Nations agency that regulates shipping. The Initial IMO Strategy, adopted in 2018, has been the most recent major international environmental agreement on how to reduce GHG emissions from ships at a global level. The central research question in this paper is to ascertain the potential impacts of the aforementioned measure to least developed countries (LDCs) and small island developing states (SIDS). There are concerns that such states may be negatively impacted, or even disproportionately negatively impacted, by whatever measure is decided by the IMO. After gaps in the literature and data are identified, our methodology develops a list of potential negative impacts, and looks at a set of factors that may influence these impacts. Then, we discuss how the goal-based measure may impact LDCs/SIDs as regards each of the identified negative impacts. The analysis argues that for LDCs and SIDS a risk for negative and disproportionately negative impacts exists. The only negative impact of which both the probability and the consequence are considered high is the difficulty to finance retrofitting of old ships or investment in new ships. As such, this is likely a disproportionally negative impact. At the same time, the degree of share (or responsibility) of the goal-based measure with respect to such potential negative impacts, vis-à-vis the share of other factors contributing to these impacts, cannot be precisely ascertained, even though we conjecture this share to be low.
The 76th session of the Marine Environment Committee (MEPC 76) of the International Maritime Organization adopted several mandatory measures in June 2021 to reduce carbon emissions from ships. One of the measures is the carbon intensity indicator (CII), which is the carbon emissions per unit transport work for each ship. Several options of CIIs are available and none of them is chosen to be applied yet. We prove that, at least in theory, requiring the attained annual CII of a ship to be less than a reference value, no matter which CII option is applied, may increase its carbon emissions. Therefore, more elaborate models, combined with real data, should be developed to analyze the effectiveness of each CII option and possibly to design a new CII.
The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview and discussion of potential Market Based Measures (MBMs) under the Initial IMO Strategy for the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from ships. In this context, some related developments are also seen as directly relevant, mainly in the context of the possible inclusion of shipping into the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS). A comparative evaluation of maritime MBMs is made using the following criteria: GHG reduction effectiveness, compatibility with existing legal framework, potential implementation timeline, potential impacts on States, administrative burden, practical feasibility, avoidance of split incentives between ship-owner and charterer, and commercial impacts. The paper breaks down potential MBMs into the following classes: Bunker levy/carbon levy MBMs, ETS (global and/or EU ETS) MBMs and other MBM proposals.
This article contributes to the accelerating development of methods for sustainability assessment (SA) to support maritime spatial planning (MSP), by proposing an ecosystem services based framework for SA. MSP is generally seen as an important approach to promote a more sustainable use of sea space. However, so far all sustainability concerns are not equally well represented in planning practice; in particular, social sustainability aspects such as social justice and sociocultural values related to human-nature connectedness receive less attention. We first explored concepts and principles related to sustainability assessment and social sustainability in the scientific literature. Based on this, we analyzed how far the present approaches to assessments in Baltic Sea EU Member States have been extended from environmental concerns to towards broader sustainability concerns so far. Using current best practice in two pioneering countries (UK and Sweden), we illustrated how social sustainability principles could match with applied social impact criteria, and further, how such criteria can inform an ecosystem services-based impact assessment framework. Based on existing frameworks, including the DPSIR (driving forces, pressures, state, impact, response) environmental assessment framework and the ecosystem service cascade, we propose a sustainability impact assessment framework for MSP (MSP-SA) integrating across sustainability dimensions and including assessment of distributional aspects of marine ecosystem service benefits. Finally, we discuss the applicability and further development of the framework in relation to present day sustainability assessment practice in MSP.
The implementation of marine spatial plans as required by the Directive on Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) of the European Union (EU) poses novel demands for the development of decision support tools (DST). One fundamental aspect is the need for tools to guide decisions about the allocation of human activities at sea in ways that are ecosystem-based and lead to sustainable use of resources. The MSP Directive was the main driver behind the development of spatial and non-spatial DSTs for the analysis of marine and coastal areas across European seas. In this research we develop an analytical framework designed by DST software developers and managers for the analysis of six DSTs supporting MSP in the Baltic Sea, the North Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea. The framework compares the main conceptual, technical and practical aspects, by which these DSTs contribute to advancing the MSP knowledge base and identified future needs for the development of the tools. Results show that all of the studied DSTs include elements to support ecosystem-based management at different geographical scales (from national to macro-regional), relying on cumulative effects assessment and functionalities to facilitate communication at the science-policy interface. Based on our synthesis we propose a set of recommendations for knowledge exchange in relation to further DST developments, mechanisms for sharing experience among the user-developer community, and actions to increase the effectiveness of the DSTs in MSP processes.
The latest IPCC report on Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, which builds upon previous IPCC's reports, established a causal link between anthropogenic impacts and ocean acidification, by noting a significant decrease in the Ocean's uptake of CO2, with consequent damage to Earth's ecosystems, which in turn has traceable repercussions on the Arctic Ocean and then from the Arctic to the Planet Earth. The impact of ocean acidification is not only in the biological ecosystem but also on human activities, such as livelihood, food security, socio-economic security and developing communities. However, who can possibly be held ethically/legally responsible for ocean acidification from a climate justice perspective? Since what happens in the Arctic does not stay there, a more systematic law and policy approach to study options and responses in a multi-level, climate-ethical, global perceptive is needed. This paper sheds light on the legal responses available at global, regional and national levels to ocean acidification in a law of the sea and ocean context, both in the Arctic and from the Arctic. The gaps in legal and policy responses in connection to the ethical climate component will be identified. It will shed light on the planetary limits that humanity needs to stay within in order to maintain the future of the Earth. Since it touches upon questions of legal responsibility, on who is responsible for ocean acidification, it will connect to the “supply side” of fossil fuels production and global extraction projects causing anthropogenic CO2 emissions, one of the major causes of ocean acidification. It will also identify which actors, be they "officials" or "non-officials" (such as international organizations, states, regional institutes, Arctic citizens or even forums) should be held ethically responsible, and who should take action.