IMO is at risk of unresolved conflicts of interest due to shortcomings in its governance, according to a new study by Transparency International. The anti-corruption organisation noted that private shipping-industry concerns could have undue influence over the policymaking process at the IMO, which could impede actions against GHG shipping emissions.
Transparency International’s study, which will be published in full in May 2018, assesses three dimensions of the IMO’s governance structure: transparency, accountability and integrity.
Findings
The summary report released today raises the following concerns:
- Journalists indicate that they are unable to report freely on IMO meetings. Non-profit organisations with consultative membership of the IMO can face expulsion if they criticise the agency or report on country views, for example.
- The majority of the world’s commercial fleet (52%) is registered in only five states – Panama, Liberia, the Marshall Islands, Malta and the Bahamas – many of which are known as tax havens for ships. Together, these five states contribute 43.5% of the total funding from the IMO’s 170 member states. These countries potentially have exaggerated weight in the IMO policymaking processes, particularly when no mechanism exists to protect against undue influence.
- Governments are able to appoint employees of corporations, including shipping companies, to their delegations, and they have dominated some delegations. These private-sector delegates can determine their government’s position on IMO policy and are not subject to conflict of interest rules nor to a code of conduct.
The appointment of companies to represent and determine their government’s position on behalf of national delegations leads to a partial privatisation of intergovernmental policy-making in shipping.
The report however notes that, even in the absence of a comprehensive access to information policy, transparency about the IMO’s administration is high, and that information about the remit, powers and rules of procedure of its assembly, council and committees is easily accessible. The IMO itself is not responsible for who member states appoint to their delegations.
Brice Böhmer, coordinator of the Climate Governance Integrity Program at Transparency International, said:
The IMO was assigned the task of limiting and reducing emissions from shipping under the Kyoto Protocol back in 1997. However, it took until 2016 for the IMO to even agree on a roadmap towards an initial strategy, due in 2018, and a revised strategy, due only in 2023. A well-functioning organisation’s governance structure should enable decisive action, but the governance flaws identified by our research suggests that this is not happening at the IMO because policy-making could be overly controlled by private companies.
Recommendations
Transparency International urges the IMO to establish a stronger governance framework so that the action against climate change will not be delayed. IMO is urged:
- to engage in a transparent process of open dialogue with its external stakeholders (including civil society and industry), to improve transparency, ensure decision-making processes reflect the public interest, and apply robust integrity rules and measures.
- to take steps to ensure that its decision-making processes better reflect the public interest
- to should ensure that all those who engage in decision-making are subject to robust integrity rules and measures
The Intersessional Working Group on GHG Emissions from Ships meeting in London today should set ambitious targets for reducing emissions in line with the Paris Agreement, and begin taking measurable action now.
Rueben Lifuka, vice chair of Transparency International and an environmental consultant, said:
The IMO has an integral role in helping the shipping industry meet UN Sustainable Development Goal 13 on climate change, and Goal 14 on oceans. Ultimately, it must reform its governance structure to promote transparency and ensure the voices of citizens – alongside industry – are heard.
A report released by InfluenceMap in October 2017 claimed that the shipping industry had deliberately blocked international efforts towards climate change, by creating lobby groups to keep shipping out of the Paris Agreement.
According to a report by the European Parliament, the shipping industry could contribute up to 17% of global CO2 emissions by 2050 if left unregulated.
Explore more herebelow:
