2023. The revised strategy will detail measures for the short- and medium-terms,
with an indication of directions for the long-term.
In this essay we argue that the long-term challenge of regulating GHG emissions
from shipping, and especially the possible measures under consideration, will
spotlight the extent to which the current mandate and structures of the IMO are
sufficient to deliver on the strategy.
Indeed, there is already concern about the adequacy of working on the GHG issue
through existing formal working arrangements, which currently include sessional
and intersessional working groups. In the near future the MEPC is expected to
consider whether to continue its GHG work using existing formal arrangements or
perhaps establish a dedicated stand-alone group (which the committee could decide
on) or even the establishment of a new sub-committee, that would require a Council
decision, to address the volume and diversity of the tasks involved.
57 The development of the strategy was a very difficult process and we believe the detailed measures
and their implementation could produce further functional and structural stresses in
the IMO. This can be expected with respect to non-technical measures, such as port
measures and MBMs. The organization’s current regulatory mandate is focused on
the technical regulation of shipping.
There are options for managing stresses produced by strategy measures. For
example, with respect to measures and issues that are peripheral to the IMO’s
explicit mandate, they can be proposed as recommendations and in consultation
with other organizations that may be more directly concerned. This could be the case
with respect to port measures which could be coordinated with the International
Organization for Ports and Harbours. With respect to MBMs, and especially the
carbon levy or an ETS, we believe the lesson of the IOPC Funds as a separate treaty
regime is an interesting precedent and would enable the organization to maintain its
focus on technical regulation. An alternative option is to consider developing an
MBM under the umbrella of the Paris Agreement as long as there is support from
state parties. In the event that the functional and structural stresses are not easily
alleviated, the IMO may need additional powers in its mandate. The history of the
IMO shows that member states expanded the organization’s mandate and structures
to enable it address new challenges, providing ample precedent for further
institution-building in support of the long-term strategy.
57 Possible future working arrangements to support the follow-up actions of the Initial IMO Strategy
on Reduction of GHG Emissions from Ships, Note by the Secretariat, IMO Doc MEPC 74/7/1
(4 February 2019).
110
A. Chircop and D. Shan
with an indication of directions for the long-term.
In this essay we argue that the long-term challenge of regulating GHG emissions
from shipping, and especially the possible measures under consideration, will
spotlight the extent to which the current mandate and structures of the IMO are
sufficient to deliver on the strategy.
Indeed, there is already concern about the adequacy of working on the GHG issue
through existing formal working arrangements, which currently include sessional
and intersessional working groups. In the near future the MEPC is expected to
consider whether to continue its GHG work using existing formal arrangements or
perhaps establish a dedicated stand-alone group (which the committee could decide
on) or even the establishment of a new sub-committee, that would require a Council
decision, to address the volume and diversity of the tasks involved.
57 The development of the strategy was a very difficult process and we believe the detailed measures
and their implementation could produce further functional and structural stresses in
the IMO. This can be expected with respect to non-technical measures, such as port
measures and MBMs. The organization’s current regulatory mandate is focused on
the technical regulation of shipping.
There are options for managing stresses produced by strategy measures. For
example, with respect to measures and issues that are peripheral to the IMO’s
explicit mandate, they can be proposed as recommendations and in consultation
with other organizations that may be more directly concerned. This could be the case
with respect to port measures which could be coordinated with the International
Organization for Ports and Harbours. With respect to MBMs, and especially the
carbon levy or an ETS, we believe the lesson of the IOPC Funds as a separate treaty
regime is an interesting precedent and would enable the organization to maintain its
focus on technical regulation. An alternative option is to consider developing an
MBM under the umbrella of the Paris Agreement as long as there is support from
state parties. In the event that the functional and structural stresses are not easily
alleviated, the IMO may need additional powers in its mandate. The history of the
IMO shows that member states expanded the organization’s mandate and structures
to enable it address new challenges, providing ample precedent for further
institution-building in support of the long-term strategy.
57 Possible future working arrangements to support the follow-up actions of the Initial IMO Strategy
on Reduction of GHG Emissions from Ships, Note by the Secretariat, IMO Doc MEPC 74/7/1
(4 February 2019).
110
A. Chircop and D. Shan