Jakarta — In a landmark decision, the UN’s International Maritime Organization (IMO) on Friday, April 11, adopted the world’s first global carbon pricing scheme targeting the shipping industry. The framework, approved during the closing plenary of the IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 83), will require vessels to transition to cleaner fuels or pay emissions fees starting in 2028.
The agreement is expected to raise USD30–40 billion by 2030 to fund maritime decarbonisation. Ships using conventional fossil fuels will face fees of USD380 per tonne for the highest-emitting portion of their emissions and USD100 per tonne on other excess emissions. However, the revenue will be reserved for industry decarbonisation efforts, not broader climate finance—disappointing many developing nations.
The policy passed with support from 63 countries, including China, India, the EU, and Japan. It faced opposition from 16 countries, including Saudi Arabia and the UAE, while 25 nations—including several Pacific Island states—abstained, citing concerns over lack of transparency and exclusion from key negotiations.
While the carbon tax sets a global precedent, critics warn it falls short of the IMO’s climate targets. It is projected to achieve only a 10% emissions reduction by 2030—half of the agency’s minimum goal. Vulnerable countries also lamented the absence of funding for adaptation and mitigation in climate-affected regions.
Island States reject deal, vow to keep fighting for climate justice
Ministers from the Republic of Fiji, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Republic of Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, and the Republic of Vanuatu, as well as a representative of the Republic of Palau, abstained from the IMO’s final carbon pricing agreement, rejecting what they described as an inadequate and unjust deal. The group had championed a more ambitious proposal: a universal carbon levy on shipping emissions that would accelerate decarbonisation and channel climate finance to vulnerable countries.
Manasseh Maelanga, Solomon Islands’ Minister of Infrastructure Development, said: “We cannot support an outcome that does not live up to the agreed strategy. We will seek to improve this deal that unchanged will cause greater instability, and force shipping to continue polluting – that we can not accept.”
Disappointed by the final outcome, island leaders said the agreed deal fails to align with the IMO’s own climate strategy or the 1.5°C target, and excludes meaningful support for communities hardest hit by climate impacts. They criticised major economies—particularly fossil fuel producers—for weakening the agreement and sidelining proposals that would have ensured an equitable transition.
Simon Kofe, Tuvalu’s Minister for Transport, Energy, Communication and Innovation, said “We came as climate vulnerable countries—with the greatest need and the clearest solution. And what did we face? Weak alternatives from the world’s biggest economies—alternatives that won’t get us on a pathway to the 1.5°C temperature limit. They asked us to settle for less, while we are the ones losing the most. We will not negotiate away our future.”
Calling the final offer a “take-it-or-leave-it” deal, ministers from the Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, and others emphasized that they could not accept a framework that delays action. At the same time, their nations bear the brunt of climate change. Despite the setback, they pledged to return to the IMO in October, determined to push for a stronger and fairer outcome.
“We were fighting not only for our countries’ economic interests, but also for the safety of our people and our homes,” said Hilton Kendall, Minister of Transportation, Communication and Information Technology of the Republic of the Marshall Islands.
The agreement will be formally adopted in October 2025, though unresolved issues—especially revenue distribution—remain a source of contention. (nsh)
Banner photo: Opening of the IMO Legal Committee (112th session) (24-3-25). Source: IMO
