The International Maritime Organization’s Net-Zero Framework remained largely unchanged after four days of technical negotiations in London, although governments continue to disagree over carbon pricing, implementation costs and the distribution of revenues.
According to meeting observers, 38 countries that spoke during the talks explicitly supported retaining carbon pricing and the associated revenue mechanism as central elements of the framework. Seventeen countries, mainly oil-producing states, opposed the approach because of concerns about its potential cost impact.
Context: IMO Net-Zero Framework explained
The framework would progressively tighten limits on the greenhouse gas intensity of marine fuels. It would also introduce an economic mechanism under which ships would face charges for emissions, while cleaner fuels would receive incentives. The mechanism is expected to generate about $10 billion to $15 billion annually, making the collection and allocation of those funds a major issue in the negotiations.
Related context: earlier IMO / Regulation coverage · earlier IMO / Regulation coverage · earlier IMO / Regulation coverage · Singapore Warns Shipowners Over False Vessel Data
Operational context
Jamie Yates, Climate & Renewable Energy Manager at Pacific Environment, said the discussions showed that IMO member states remained committed to reaching an agreement by the end of 2026. Yates added that none of the alternative proposals had attracted a clear majority, leaving the existing framework as the most viable option.
Several countries have proposed revisions. Liberia has called for emissions requirements to be linked more closely to the availability and affordability of cleaner fuels. Its plan would largely replace the IMO Fund-based system with transferable Surplus Units that vessels could trade, save or borrow.
Brazil has proposed retaining most of the framework while reducing its initial targets, whereas Tuvalu is seeking stronger requirements. Australia, Canada, South Africa and the United Kingdom have broadly supported the existing structure, alongside further rules for collecting and distributing revenues.
China has sought additional flexibility, including greater recognition for wind propulsion, shore power and solar power. European states, Pacific Island countries and Norway have argued that weakening carbon pricing could discourage investment in alternative fuels and make the IMO’s climate objectives more difficult to achieve.
What it means for maritime operators
Liberia, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have warned that a global emissions price could increase transport costs, particularly for remote economies and countries heavily dependent on trade. The United States has also been a leading opponent of the framework.
The IMO agreed the Net-Zero Framework in April 2025, but formal adoption was subsequently delayed following a 57-49 vote amid pressure from the United States and Saudi Arabia. The measure is designed to support the IMO’s 2023 objective of bringing international shipping to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by or around 2050.
Further technical talks are scheduled for November 23-27, followed by the Marine Environment Protection Committee’s MEPC 85 session from November 30 to December 3. The framework is expected to be considered for adoption at an extraordinary MEPC meeting on December 4.
While key details remain disputed, the latest negotiations left the existing framework intact and still positioned as the main proposal for a global shipping emissions regime.