Advertisement

Towards global green shipping: the development of international regulations on reduction of GHG emissions from ships

  • Hui Zhang
Original Paper

Abstract

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) promotes global “green shipping” through rule-making in accordance with its mandate under the Kyoto Protocol. The IMO rules related to reduction in greenhouse gas emissions can be divided into two types: technical and operational measures; and market-based measures. As to the former, important regulations have been adopted that are mandatory for ships irrespective of their flag. The latter are still in the drafting process, and in view of deep divisions between member states, it will be difficult to reach early agreement. In the development of rules for emissions reduction in IMO, the common but differentiated responsibility principle (CBDR) conflicts severely with the non-discrimination principle which has long been a traditional and basic principle of IMO regulation. Considering the peculiarities of the shipping industry, a fuller understanding of CBDR will be necessary in order to find a reasonable and feasible way to reconcile these two principles.

Keywords

Shipping Reduction in GHG emissions Technical and operational measures Market-based measures Common but differentiated responsibility principle Non-discrimination principle 

Abbreviations

CBDR

Common but differentiated responsibilities

CO2

Carbon dioxide

EC

Efficiency credit

EEDI

Energy Efficiency Design Index for New Ships

EEOI

Energy efficiency operational indicator

ETS

Emission trading system

GHG

Greenhouse gas

GHG-WG 3

Third Intersessional Meeting of the Working Group on GHG Emissions from Ships

IMO

International Maritime Organization

IUCN

International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources

LIS

Leveraged Incentive Scheme

MARPOL

International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships

MBMs

Market-based measures

MBM-EG

Expert Group on Feasibility Study and Impact Assessment of Possible Market-Based Measures

MEPC

Marine Environment Protection Committee

RM

Rebate mechanism

SECT

Ship efficiency and credit trading

SEEMP

Ship energy efficiency management plan

SMS

Safety management system

UNFCCC

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

VES

Vessel efficiency system

WG-AP

Working Group on Air Pollution

Notes

Acknowledgments

The article is part of research project sponsored by the National Social Sciences Fund of China (Project No. 12CFX095) and the Key Research Institutes Project of China Ministry of Education (Project No. 14JJD820003).

References

  1. Atapattu, S. A. (2006). Emerging principles of international environmental law (pp. 384–390). New York: Transnational publishers.Google Scholar
  2. Beyerlin, U., & Marauhn, T. (2011). International environmental law (p. 65). Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  3. Corbett, J. & Winebrake, J. (2009–2010). The Role of International Policy in Mitigating Global Shipping Emissions. Brown Journal of World Affairs, 16-2, 144.Google Scholar
  4. Cullet, P. (2003). Differential treatment in international environmental law (pp. 103–113). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  5. De Armas, M. & Vanko, M. (2007–2008). Mitigating black carbon as a mechanism to protect the arctic and prevent abrupt climate change. Sustainable Development Law & Policy, 8-3, 44.Google Scholar
  6. French, D. (2005). International law and policy of sustainable development (pp. 87–91). Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Goldsworthy, L. (2010). Exhaust emissions from ship engines—significance, regulations, control technologies. The Australian and New Zealand Maritime Law Journal, 24–1, 25.Google Scholar
  8. Honkonen, T. (2009). The common but differentiated responsibility principle in multilateral environmental agreements (pp. 1–4). AH Alpen aan den Rijn: Kluwer law International.Google Scholar
  9. International Maritime Organization. (2003). IMO policies and practices related to the reduction of GHG emissions from ships (pp. 2–3). Assembly, 23rd session, 4 March 2004. Assembly Resolution A. 963 (23).Google Scholar
  10. International Maritime Organization. (2011). Breakthrough at IMO. http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Pages/Default.aspx. Accessed 8 August 2013.
  11. Kumar, S., & Hoffmann, J. (2013). Chapter 2 Globalization: the maritime nexus. In C. T. Grammenos (Ed.), Handbook of maritime economics and business (p. 35). London: Lloyds List Press.Google Scholar
  12. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2000). Report on the outcome of the IMO study on the greenhouse gas emissions from ships. MEPC, 45th session, 29 June 2000. MEPC 45/8.Google Scholar
  13. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2005). Interim guidelines for voluntary ship CO2 emission indexing for use in trials. MEPC, 29 July 2005. MEPC.1/Circ.471.Google Scholar
  14. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2006a). Work plan to identify and develop the mechanisms needed to achieve the limitation or reduction of CO2 emissions from international shipping. MEPC, 55th session, 16 October 2006. MEPC 55/23, Annex 9.Google Scholar
  15. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2008). Report of the Marine Environment Protection Committee on its fifty-seventh session (p. 47). MEPC, 57th session, 7 April 2008. MEPC 57/21.Google Scholar
  16. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2009a). Second IMO GHG Study 2009 (p. 7). MEPC, 59th session, 9 April 2009. MEPC 59/INF.10, Annex.Google Scholar
  17. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2009b). Work plan for further consideration of market-based measures. MEPC, 59th session, 28 July 2009. MEPC 59/24/Add.1, Annex 16.Google Scholar
  18. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2009c). Interim guidelines on the method of calculation of the Energy Efficiency Design Index for new ships. MEPC, 17 August 2009. MEPC.1/Circ.681.Google Scholar
  19. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2009d). Interim guidelines for voluntary verification of Energy Efficiency Design Index. MEPC, 28 August 2009. MEPC.1/Circ.682.Google Scholar
  20. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2009e). Guidance for the development of a Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan. MEPC, 28 August 2009. MEPC.1/Circ.683.Google Scholar
  21. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2009f). Guidelines for voluntary use of the Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator. MEPC, 27 August 2009. MEPC.1/Circ.684.Google Scholar
  22. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2009g). An International Fund for greenhouse gas emissions from ships. MEPC, 60th session, 18 December 2009. MEPC 60/4/8.Google Scholar
  23. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2010a). Full report of the work undertaken by the expert group on feasibility study and impact assessment of possible market-based measures. MEPC, 61st session, 13 August 2010. MEPC 61/INF.2.Google Scholar
  24. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2010b). Consideration of a market-based mechanism: Leveraged Incentive Scheme to improve the energy efficiency of ships based on the International GHG Fund. MEPC, 60th session, 15 January 2010. MEPC 60/4/37.Google Scholar
  25. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2010c). Achieving reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from ships through Port State arrangements utilizing the ship traffic, energy and environment model, STEEM. MEPC, 60th session, 15 January 2010. MEPC 60/4/40.Google Scholar
  26. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2010d). Further details on the United states proposal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping. MEPC, 60th session, 14 January 2010. MEPC 60/4/12.Google Scholar
  27. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2010e). Proposal to establish a Vessel Efficiency System (VES). MEPC, 60th session, 15 January 2010. MEPC 60/4/39.Google Scholar
  28. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2010f). A global emissions trading system for greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping. MEPC, 60th session, 15 January 2010. MEPC 60/4/26.Google Scholar
  29. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2010g). Further elements for the development of an Emissions Trading System for international shipping. MEPC, 60th session, 15 January 2010. MEPC 60/4/41.Google Scholar
  30. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2010h). A further outline of a Global Emission Trading System (ETS) for international shipping. MEPC, 60th session, 15 January 2010. MEPC 60/4/22.Google Scholar
  31. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2010i). A Rebate Mechanism for a market-based instrument for international shipping. MEPC, 60th session, 15 January 2010. MEPC 60/4/55.Google Scholar
  32. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2010j). Market-Based Instruments: a penalty on trade and development. MEPC, 60th session, 13 January 2010. MEPC 60/4/10.Google Scholar
  33. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2011a). Report of the third intersessional meeting of the working group on greenhouse gas emissions from ships. MEPC, 62nd session, 8 April 2011. MEPC 62/5/1.Google Scholar
  34. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2011b). Market based measures—impact on India’s shipping trade (p. 3). MEPC, 63rd session, 23 December 2011. MEPC 63/5/8.Google Scholar
  35. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2012a). Report of the Marine Environment Protection Committee on its sixty-third session (p. 37). MEPC, 63rd session, 14 March 2012. MEPC 63/23.Google Scholar
  36. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2012b). Report of the Marine Environment Protection Committee on its sixty-fourth session (pp. 35–39). MEPC, 64th session, 11 October 2012. MEPC 64/23.Google Scholar
  37. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2012c). Comments on the feasibility study and impact assessment of the submitted MBMs (p. 2). MEPC, 63rd session, 6 January 2012. MEPC 63/5/11.Google Scholar
  38. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2012d). Draft Terms of Reference for further impact assessment of the proposed Market-based Measures for international shipping-Annex (pp. 3–4). MEPC, 64th session, 19 March 2012. MEPC 64/5.Google Scholar
  39. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2012e). Possible incompatibility between the WTO rules and Market-Based Measures for international shipping (p. 1). MEPC, 64th session, 29 June 2012. MEPC 64/5/3.Google Scholar
  40. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2013a). Report of the Marine Environment Protection Committee on its sixty-fifth session (p. 44). MEPC, 65th session, 24 May 2013. MEPC 65/22.Google Scholar
  41. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2013b). Proposal of the United states to enhance energy efficiency in international shipping. MEPC, 65th session, 8 May 2013. MEPC 65/4/19.Google Scholar
  42. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2013c). World Trade Organization’s views on document MEPC 64/5/4 submitted by India and Saudi Arabia- Annex. MEPC, 65th session, 21 February 2013. MEPC 65/INF.18.Google Scholar
  43. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2013d). Report of the Marine Environment Protection Committee on its Sixty-Fifth Session- Annex 4. MEPC, 65th session, 24 May 2013. MEPC 65/22.Google Scholar
  44. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2014a). Further Technical and Operational Measures for Enhancing Energy Efficiency of International Shipping (p. 3). MEPC, 66th session, 7 February 2014. MEPC 66/4/25.Google Scholar
  45. Marine Environment Protection Committee. (2014b). Implementation of resolution MEPC.229(65) on the “Promotion of Technical Co-operation and Transfer of Technology Relating to the Improvement of Energy Efficiency of Ships” (p. 2). MEPC, 66th session, 24 January 2014. MEPC 66/4/17.Google Scholar
  46. Moffat, J. (2010). Arranging deckchairs on the titanic: Climate change, greenhouse gas emissions and international shipping. The Australian and New Zealand Maritime Law Journal, 24–2, 108–109.Google Scholar
  47. Okur, D. A. (2011). The challenge of regulating greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping and the complicated principle of ‘Common But Differentiated Responsibilities’, 31. Retrieved December 2014, from http://webb.deu.edu.tr/hukuk/dergiler/dergimiz13-1/2-deryaaydinokur.pdf
  48. Rajamani, L. (2006). Differential treatment in international environmental law (pp. 136–158). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ringbom, H. (2011). Global Problem—Regional Solution? International Law Reflections on an EU CO2 Emissions Trading Scheme for Ships. International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 26–4, 616–617.Google Scholar
  50. Sands, P. (2003). Principles of international environmental law (pp. 285–289). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sawin, J. E. (2012). Global green: Why a global diesel regulation for mobile sources might be a good idea. Indiana International & Comparative Law Review, 22–2, 439.Google Scholar
  52. Shi, Y. (2014). Greenhouse Gas Emissions from International Shipping: The Response from China’s Shipping Industry to the Regulatory Initiatives of the International Maritime Organization. International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 29–1, 11–14.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Law and Institute of International LawWuhan UniversityWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations