Why Equity is Essential in the IMO negotiations in reducing GHG emissions from ships

Atina Schutz is a law student at the University of the South Pacific who has been closely following the IMO negotiations

 The shipping industry accounts for 3% of all CO2 emissions, and is on track to grow as high as between 50% and 250% in 2050. At the International Maritime Organization (IMO), discussions on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from ships are ongoing. While progress is slowly being made, the main thing people in the Pacific, and everywhere, should be watching is equity in the progress of GHG reduction debates. 

In the global market, the Pacific is at a disadvantage. Our small economies, with distantly spread islands, are very far from the global market, which is heavily concentrated in the Global North. When it is time to decarbonize, that disadvantage will be exacerbated. As decarbonization is a highly costly and technical process, the cost will fall on governments already struggling to provide other equally important services to their citizens. Consequently, Pacific states will lag behind their international counterparts whilst having their fleets subjected to the carbon pricing scheme to come. 

To help with this, a market-based measure (MBM) must be adopted at the IMO. Experts agree that an MBM is preferred because it provides an incentive for the market to decarbonize rapidly. While there are several MBMs on the table for debate at the IMO, the one providing the most equitable solution is the mandatory levy of US$100/tonne CO2 emitted by ships. The idea behind this particular proposal by the Marshall Islands and Solomon Islands is that some of its $90B/year revenue be distributed to help developing economies in their decarbonisation efforts. 

Furthermore, the Pacific has contributed the least to global emissions, yet is the most affected by it. When the time for decarbonisation comes, our countries will inevitably be left behind unless the international community comes to the fore and supports poorer countries in their decarbonisation efforts. 

In coming months, high-ambition Pacific delegations will enter a new round of discussions on GHG issues at the IMO, such as defining disproportionate negative impact and what countries fall under it, which MBM to adopt, and what target to reach by 2050. As states deliberate on these topics, one hopes equity will be taken into account in final decisions. Which States, if any, should be given financial assistance for their decarbonisation efforts? Which MBM best provides for an equitable transition for all member states? And which target ensures the viability of states most vulnerable to climate change by 2050? These are all issues that could be resolved quickly if equity would be a key factor in decision-making