The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has confirmed its Council membership for the 2026 to 2027 biennium, concluding a closely watched election cycle marked by geopolitical manoeuvring and intensifying debate over the future of global climate regulation for shipping. The outcome has done little to ease industry anxiety over the one-year delay to the IMO’s Net Zero Framework, a pause that is catalysing a wave of regional carbon measures which could reshape compliance requirements for shipowners.
Member States elected under Categories A and B remain broadly consistent with previous cycles, reflecting the continued dominance of leading maritime and trading nations. China, Greece, Italy, Japan, Liberia, Norway, Panama, the Republic of Korea, the United Kingdom and the United States secured seats among the ten states with the largest interest in providing international shipping services. Australia, Brazil, France, Germany, India, the Netherlands and the United Arab Emirates were elected among the ten states with the largest interest in international seaborne trade.
Category C, which ensures broad geographic distribution, saw three changes. Belgium, Nigeria and South Africa joined the group, while Bangladesh, Denmark and Kenya lost their seats. The United Kingdom also highlighted that it had successfully campaigned to keep Russia off the Council, framing the result as evidence of a unified stance against Russia’s continued violations of international law, including at sea.
The newly elected Council will convene for its 136th session in early December, where it will set its programme of work for the next two years, including how to approach the delayed Net Zero Framework. At the opening of the IMO Assembly earlier in the week, Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez told delegates that the sector was navigating a ‘complex international environment marked by geopolitical tensions, evolving trade patterns, and an accelerating global transition towards decarbonization and digitalization.’ He reiterated his commitment to transparency and indicated that substantial policy decisions lie ahead.
However, the pause in IMO-level climate regulation is already having immediate consequences. According to Philippos Ioulianou, Managing Director of EmissionLink, the delay is widening a regulatory vacuum that national governments are rapidly moving to fill. He warned that the IMO’s decision had opened the door for states to introduce their own carbon pricing schemes, noting developments such as the UK Emissions Trading Scheme, which will come into force in June 2026, Türkiye’s early preparations for a national system, and Gabon’s discussion of a local carbon levy.
These moves, he said, risk creating a fragmented patchwork of overlapping carbon rules that will increase compliance costs and introduce new commercial exposure. ‘What looks like a pause is, in reality, an open door for national governments to move ahead with their own systems. Instead of gaining clarity, we risk creating a patchwork of unaligned carbon schemes that will make global compliance significantly harder for shipowners,’ he said.
Ioulianou cautioned that some shipowners are already modifying trade patterns to avoid regulatory overlap, and that manual monitoring of emerging schemes is becoming impractical.
He added that there is no guarantee that revenue from new national carbon mechanisms will be used for decarbonisation, highlighting the fiscal pressures many governments face.
For the maritime sector, the strategic risk is that continued divergence could make it more difficult for the IMO to eventually restore a coherent global framework. The next two years of Council activity will therefore shape not only the organisation’s governance, but also the broader trajectory of maritime climate regulation.
With national and regional carbon schemes accelerating and political consensus at the IMO still unsettled, the operating environment for international shipping is becoming increasingly fragmented. Until the Net Zero Framework returns to the IMO’s agenda with a realistic pathway to adoption, the industry may be forced to navigate a growing array of localised regulations that challenge both commercial planning and long-term decarbonisation strategy.
