From Policy to Practice: What Maritime Decarbonisation Means Operationally

From Policy to Practice: What Maritime Decarbonisation Means Operationally

7 September 2026 · Maritime Insight

The direction of maritime decarbonisation is increasingly clear.

The IMO's 2023 GHG Strategy established the ambition of reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping by or around 2050, alongside interim targets for 2030 and 2040. The strategy also envisages a significant increase in the use of zero- and near-zero-GHG fuels and technologies.

But setting the direction is one thing.

Turning that direction into workable decisions on vessels, in fleets and within ship-management organisations is another.

For maritime operators, the important question is therefore no longer simply what does the regulation say?

It is increasingly:

What does it mean for the way we operate?

From regulatory text to operational reality.

The IMO Net-Zero Framework is a useful example.

The draft framework is intended to combine a goal-based marine fuel standard with an economic element based on greenhouse-gas emissions pricing. The draft amendments to MARPOL Annex VI were approved in 2025, but formal adoption was deferred and discussions resumed during 2026.

Following MEPC 84 in May, an intersessional working group was established to address outstanding concerns and work towards broader convergence.

That process continued at ISWG-GHG 22 from 1–4 September 2026. The group reported constructive discussions and a willingness to make further progress, while inviting continued work on the remaining concerns. The next intersessional meeting is scheduled for 23–27 November, immediately ahead of MEPC 85 on 30 November–3 December.

This means that the regulatory picture is still developing.

For operators, that creates a familiar challenge: how do you prepare for change when some of the details are not yet final?

1. Understand what actually applies

The first operational task is not choosing a technology.

It is understanding applicability.

Different vessels, trading patterns, machinery arrangements, cargoes and operational profiles can create different implications. Regulatory requirements also interact with existing requirements such as energy-efficiency and carbon-intensity measures.

For a ship manager, this means that regulatory monitoring needs to go beyond receiving a circular or reading a summary.

The relevant question is:

Which part of this development affects which vessel, activity or process — and when?

A useful regulatory process should therefore connect the requirement with the vessel profile and the operational context.

2. Translate requirements into procedures

Once applicability is understood, the next challenge is implementation.

A regulatory requirement may ultimately influence:

operational procedures; voyage planning; fuel management; maintenance and machinery operation; monitoring and reporting; procurement; documentation; crew familiarisation and training; shore-based decision-making.

This is where implementation can become more difficult than interpretation.

A requirement may be technically clear but still require several departments to change the way they work.

The objective should not be to create another layer of paperwork.

It should be to make the required change part of the existing operating system of the vessel and the organisation.

3. People remain part of the system

Decarbonisation is often discussed through the language of fuels, engines, efficiency and technology.

But every operational change eventually reaches people.

Crew members need to understand what is changing and what is expected from them. Shore teams need to understand the operational consequences. Technical, safety, crewing, procurement and commercial functions may all need to work from the same understanding.

This is particularly important when new requirements interact with established procedures.

A technically correct solution can still create operational difficulty if the people expected to apply it do not have sufficient understanding, training or context.

For this reason, implementation should include the human element from the beginning — not as the final stage of compliance.

4. Data needs to support decisions

Decarbonisation is also becoming increasingly data-intensive.

IMO requirements already rely on operational data, while MEPC 84 adopted additional measures and guidelines relating to areas including continuous methane and nitrous oxide emission monitoring, engine-load monitoring, SEEMP and CII.

But collecting data is not the same as understanding performance.

Operators need to know:

What does the information tell us?

Is it reliable enough to support a decision?

Can it be compared consistently?

What operational action should follow?

This distinction will become increasingly important as reporting requirements, monitoring technologies and alternative-fuel pathways develop.

The value of digitalisation is not simply that more information becomes available.

Its value is that better information can support better operational decisions.

5. Consider the operational consequences

The final question is perhaps the most important.

What happens to the actual operation of the vessel?

A decarbonisation measure may affect fuel availability, voyage planning, machinery operation, maintenance requirements, port arrangements, training, cost structures or commercial flexibility.

These effects cannot always be assessed independently.

A decision that appears attractive from an environmental perspective may introduce other operational constraints. Conversely, an operational improvement may deliver environmental benefits without requiring a fundamental change in technology.

This is why decarbonisation decisions should be considered across the whole operating system of the vessel rather than through a single technical or financial lens.

Preparing without pretending that everything is known.

The current IMO process illustrates an important principle for maritime operators.

Preparation does not necessarily mean making irreversible decisions before the regulatory framework is final.

It can mean building the capability to respond intelligently.

That includes:

understanding the regulatory direction; identifying which vessels and operations may be affected; improving the quality of operational data; reviewing existing procedures; identifying training and competence requirements; assessing technology and fuel options realistically; and maintaining enough flexibility to adapt as the regulatory picture develops.

This approach is particularly relevant now.

The September ISWG-GHG meeting has moved the discussion forward, but the IMO process is not yet complete. Further work is expected in November before MEPC 85 considers the next stage.

The operational question matters most.

Maritime decarbonisation is often presented as a regulatory or technological challenge.

In practice, it is both — and also an operational one.

The success of new requirements will ultimately depend on how effectively they can be translated into decisions, procedures, systems and behaviour on board and ashore.

The regulatory framework establishes the direction.

Operational competence determines how that direction becomes reality.

PSM SHIPS perspective:

For ship managers, the most useful approach to regulatory change is rarely to wait for every detail to be settled.

It is to understand the direction, identify the operational questions early, and build the information and organisational capability needed to make sound decisions as the framework develops.

That is where regulation becomes practice.

Sources IMO — ISWG-GHG 22 meeting summary IMO — MEPC 84 meeting summary IMO — GHG emissions from ships IMO — Net-Zero Framework FAQs