Negotiations are resuming at the UN on the Net-Zero Framework (NZF) for international shipping, a landmark climate agreement that would introduce the world's first global carbon pricing applied to any polluter. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) will meet in London from 1–4 September in a working group (ISWG-GH-HG-22).

The talks take place against a backdrop of geopolitical conflict exposing shipping's reliance on fossil fuels and worsening climate disruption. The ongoing war in the Middle East continues to disrupt oil flows and keep shipping fuel costs elevated. Meanwhile, severe drought at the Panama Canal and on the Rhine River — conditions worsened by the climate crisis — has significantly limited ship passage through these critical trade routes in recent days. The stakes are high: international shipping accounts for roughly 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to IMO estimates, and its emissions have been rising as trade volumes grow.

Why this matters: The upcoming meeting is a major test of whether a critical majority at the IMO still supports the NZF in its current form, including a revenue-generating carbon price, ahead of discussions on adoption later this year. At the last round of negotiations in April (MEPC 84), 55 countries supported the NZF as it stands, while 51 countries favoured re-opening the Framework for substantial changes (weaker targets and no carbon price).

The NZF is designed to bring the industry closer to achieving the IMO's 2023 climate commitment: reaching net-zero by or around 2050 in an equitable way.

At ISWG-GHG-22, countries will debate key policy details that remain undecided, such as clean energy and how carbon pricing revenues — worth an estimated $10–15 billion a year — would be managed and spent. Several countries (Brazil, Kenya, DRC, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Kiribati, Nauru, Palau, and Vanuatu) have put forward their visions for the future IMO Fund.

Governments will also consider proposals for alternative paths forward on the NZF: strengthening it into a flat levy (Tuvalu); moving forward with the Framework as is (Australia, Canada, South Africa, the UK); delaying ambition while preserving the carbon price (Brazil); weakening carbon intensity targets and removing the carbon price (Japan); or essentially abandoning any meaningful global climate regulation (Liberia).

Experts have consistently warned that removing the carbon price would seriously harm the sector's energy transition and increase the vulnerability of developing countries to economic shocks. Without a carbon price, fuel price volatility would rise, clean energy adoption would slow, and revenues for a just and equitable transition would disappear. Removing the carbon price is also likely to fail to win support from developing countries that would lose access to critical finance, maintaining the deadlock in which the IMO currently finds itself.

Honourable Simon Kofe, Minister for Transport, Energy, Communication and Innovation, Tuvalu, said: "Tuvalu firmly supports the adoption of the Net-Zero Framework this year. The agreement is a compromise that took years of gruelling negotiations to build, and frankly, we don't have the time to wait any longer. If we are to negotiate the NZF once again, it should only be to increase the climate ambition and not to weaken it further. Tuvalu's NZF proposal is based on what science says is necessary to help limit the climate crisis in a meaningful way for the climate most-vulnerable."

Kristina Vogt, Senator for Economic Affairs, Ports and Transformation of the Free Hanseatic City of Bremen, Germany, said: "Climate protection in shipping is how we secure the future of a port location like Bremen. Investing now in clean propulsion and green fuels safeguards value creation and jobs for decades to come. That is why we support the call for an ambitious and binding Net-Zero Framework. Bremen is actively helping to shape this transformation."

Sapphire Ross, Policy Officer, Opportunity Green, said: "This week's meetings at the International Maritime Organisation are where the plan to clean up shipping emissions – the Net-Zero Framework – either takes shape or gets watered down. Governments must look to develop smooth implementing guidelines of the NZF as approved in April 2025, not find ways to dilute it. Shipping cannot claim to be on a credible net-zero pathway while continuing to rely on solutions that don't meaningfully cut emissions. At the same time, the transition must keep real incentives in place to move away from fossil fuels, while ensuring money reaches developing countries – particularly Small Island Developing States and Least Developed Countries – who did the least to cause this crisis but face its greatest impacts. The choices made in this room will have consequences far beyond shipping."

Lukas Leppert, President, Clean Shipping Coalition, said: "While less ambitious than we had hoped for, the NZF's broad political support from member states means it remains the best tool available to meet the IMO's Greenhouse Gas Strategy goals on climate, decarbonisation and a just and equitable energy transition for the shipping industry, and must be adopted by the IMO this December. The result of multiple rounds of negotiations, the NZF is already by any measure, an acceptable compromise. Any further weakening would lead to a less effective, slower, and costlier transition."

Dr. Dola Oluteye, Senior Fellow at the University College London Energy Institute and Founder of the Professional African Technical Network Advisory (PATNA), said: "Africa's growing support for the Net-Zero Framework as agreed last April comes as no surprise. The ability to generate a predictable stream of revenues is what gives the Framework a clear edge against all other options on the table. African countries are coming to the IMO this September with concrete proposals on how this future fund should operate, demonstrating their will to get the agreement adopted this year."

Boudewijn Siemons, CEO, Port of Rotterdam, said: "The Port of Rotterdam strongly encourages continued discussions about a global framework for greenhouse gas emissions in the maritime sector, which will help to achieve the goals set out in the International Maritime Organization's 2023 GHG Strategy. Given the inherently international nature of shipping, it is crucial to establish a level playing field worldwide. We greatly appreciate the IMO's dedication and leadership in driving collective progress towards a sustainable maritime future. We trust the delegations to continue working constructively towards reaching a broad consensus that reflects our shared ambitions and responsibilities."

Dirk Claus, CEO, Port of Kiel, said: "Port of Kiel has already invested in shore power, digital infrastructure and smart port operations because we believe the future of shipping must be climate-neutral. We now call on the IMO to deliver an ambitious global framework at MEPC 85 that provides long-term investment certainty and avoids further delays. The decisions taken this year must accelerate the commercialisation of zero-emission fuels, vessels and infrastructure by 2030 and keep the maritime sector on track to achieve full decarbonisation by 2050. Ports are ready to deliver – now the global regulatory framework must do the same."

Alexander Saverys, CEO, CMBTECH, said: "The Net-Zero Framework will create a decisive boost to the decarbonisation of the shipping industry. The maritime sector already has the technology, the expertise and the ambition to take action on a large scale. What we need now are partners prepared to take the lead, to invest and to act with determination."

Andreas Enger, CEO, Höegh Autoliners, said: "Laying the regulatory foundation now is critical to ensuring that these investments take shipping into the right direction. We strongly support the IMO in its work towards ambitious mid-term measures that can meet the 2023 IMO GHG strategy and give the long-term certainty and credibility needed for the transition."

Felix Leworthy, COO, ETFuels, said: "A strong IMO Net-Zero Framework, with meaningful rewards targeted at scalable zero-emission fuels, can turn billions of dollars of planned e-fuel investment into projects under construction. Delay or dilution risks doing the opposite."

Sources: Opportunity Green, Clean Shipping Coalition