The world’s maritime nations preserved the plan for a first-of-its-kind global carbon fee on shipping this week, agreeing at the International Maritime Organization’s headquarters to continue work on the Net-zero Framework while keeping alternative approaches under consideration, a move that drew concern from some countries and climate advocates.
The meeting, which concluded Friday, came after the United States and Saudi Arabia last year blocked adoption of the framework, as reported by the Associated Press. Chairman Harry Conway of Liberia assured delegates that the document outlining the path forward was revised to make clear that new proposals and previously submitted alternatives could still be taken up at upcoming sessions. IMO Secretary‑General Arsenio Dominguez told the gathering that “we kind of are back on track” and urged nations to rebuild trust.
Australia and other countries voiced fears that continuing to entertain alternatives would set the process back at a moment when climate impacts are accelerating and the shipping industry is calling for regulatory certainty. Em Fenton, senior director for climate diplomacy at the environmental group Opportunity Green, said the framework survived with majority support but warned that “survival is not a victory and we cannot end up in a cycle of open‑ended negotiations.” She added: “We must now look forward to moving toward adoption of the framework later this year in a way that maintains urgency and ambition, and delivers justice and equity for countries on the front lines of climate impacts.”
The Net‑zero Framework would impose a declining marine fuel standard and a pricing mechanism that charges ships for each ton of greenhouse gases they emit above an allowable threshold. The fees collected would flow into an IMO fund to finance the transition to cleaner fuels, reward low‑emission vessels, and assist developing countries so they are not left with older, dirtier ships. The proposal amounts to the first global tax on greenhouse gas emissions, and it faces stiff opposition from the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.
Negotiators had expected to adopt the framework last October, but the U.S., under President Donald Trump and backed by Saudi Arabia, upended the meeting by linking the vote to trade threats, forcing a year‑long delay. With large ships having a typical lifespan of roughly 25 years, the International Chamber of Shipping, which represents over 80% of the world’s merchant fleet, has pressed for swift adoption, arguing that the industry needs clear rules now to commit capital to alternative fuels such as ammonia.
Mark Brownstein, senior vice president for energy transition at the Environmental Defense Fund, said the regulations would put global shipping “on more sustainable footing, both environmentally and economically, than where it is today.” He noted that oil prices have kept climbing since the war with Iran began, adding pressure on the sector to move away from fossil fuels. Most commercial vessels currently burn heavy fuel oil, and shipping emissions have grown over the past decade to about 3% of the global total as trade volumes have increased.
Delegates now face a crowded autumn calendar of additional meetings ahead of a potential vote later this year. Climate advocates and industry representatives alike argue that further rounds of debate risk eroding the framework’s ambition and postponing the investments needed to begin decarbonizing a sector that moves roughly 90% of the world’s traded goods.