Divisions over carbon pricing and fuel standards are set to dominate negotiations at the forthcoming meeting of the IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC), as governments attempt to revive momentum behind the Net-Zero Framework.
Scheduled for 27 April to 1 May in London, MEPC 84 will be the committee’s first formal return since an extraordinary session in October 2025, when adoption of the framework was deferred amid sharp disagreements. A total of 57 submissions from member states is indicative of the high degree of polarisation over carbon pricing and the pace of emissions reductions.
A bloc of climate-vulnerable states, including Pacific Island nations and Brazil, is continuing to push for the framework to be adopted largely unchanged. These countries have also suggested that reopening negotiations could prompt them to insist on more stringent proposals, including a flat global carbon levy on shipping emissions.
By contrast, several hydrocarbon-producing economies, including Saudi Arabia, Russia and the UAE, have called for the current framework to be abandoned. Their submissions reject a centrally administered carbon price and instead favour alternative approaches that avoid explicit financial penalties.
The US has taken a firmer position by proposing that any further exploration of the Net-Zero Framework be halted. Its conditions for any future agreement include no economic penalties, no multilateral fund and a technology-neutral approach that does not disadvantage specific fuels.
Several flag states and other member states are pushing compromise proposals. Liberia and Panama, alongside Argentina, have suggested replacing fixed emissions reduction trajectories with a system based on ships’ Global Fuel Intensity, with targets linked to the availability, affordability and scalability of low-carbon fuels. Compliance would rely on tradable surplus units rather than penalties or mandatory contributions.
Japan has put forward a separate ‘middle path’ that retains the framework’s overall architecture but tries to modify its most contentious element by reducing reliance on a global carbon pricing mechanism. This proposal would allow ships to meet compliance deficits through the purchase of surplus units, thereby limiting the need for mandatory payments into a central fund. Tokyo has also argued for less stringent targets in the near term, citing concerns over fuel availability and the risk of premature asset stranding.
A number of submissions emphasise the need to align emissions targets with realistic projections for fuel supply, energy efficiency gains and life-cycle emissions accounting. Japan has emphasised the importance of updating assessment methodologies to reflect technological advances, including carbon capture in upstream fuel production.
The committee is also expected to advance technical work that will shape the maritime sector’s carbon value chain, including further development of life-cycle assessment guidelines and draft rules for the certification and approval of onboard carbon capture and storage systems.
