Some of the biggest names in shipping today called on the industry to take far-reaching action to create a maritime sector which is socially and environmentally responsible and profitable.

Members of the Sustainable Shipping Initiative, a global coalition drawn from across the sector, launched a Case for Action analysing the global trends which will shape the future of shipping, and announced: “Our goal is to transform the global shipping industry and the wider maritime sector, establishing a new, sustainable approach as the norm.”

They called on industry leaders to:

• create a shared vision of how the industry should develop over the next 30 years;
• prepare for greater scrutiny and demands from customers and society with regard to social and environmental performance;
• build and convert ships to the highest standards of energy efficiency in anticipation of high and volatile fuel prices and demands for low-carbon performance;
• drive the development of co-ordinated, progressive legislation that rewards sustainability;
• develop innovative business models that encourage long-term investment and take into account social and environmental obligations.

Soren Stig Nielsen, Head of Sustainability, Maersk Line, said: “By creating a shared vision for sustainable growth, we can plot a new ambitious course. A course where shipping is viewed as a key enabler of responsible and sustainable economic development.”

The Sustainable Shipping Initiative brings together leaders from across the maritime sector with Forum for the Future and WWF. Its members are: ship owners and charterers BP Shipping, Cargill, Gearbulk, IMC, Maersk Line, Morgan Stanley, Rio Tinto Marine and Tsakos Energy Navigation; shipbuilders, engineers and service providers Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering and Wartsila; ABN Amro bank; RSA insurance; and the classification society Lloyd’s Register.

Tom Boardley, Marine Director at Lloyd’s Register, emphasised the importance of commercial interests working with technical expertise. “One of the real strengths of this initiative is the marriage of ship operating and ship engineering capability –  we all need to work together to help make shipping more sustainable,” he said.

Board level representatives launched the Sustainable Shipping Initiative Case for Action today at a summit chaired by Jonathon Porritt, founder director of Forum for the Future. It is designed as a resource for the entire industry and warns that companies should be ready for three key challenges over the next 30 years.

• Continued growth of free trade and strong global governance cannot be guaranteed. A decline in global trade would lead to greater competition and magnify competitive advantages. Companies should be prepared for this and work with the IMO on progressive regulation to anticipate future challenges.
• Shipping is likely to face increased scrutiny of its social and environmental performance, mirroring trends seen in other industries. Companies which can demonstrate a strong record on working conditions, fuel efficiency, prosecutions and similar factors are likely to be favoured by customers and suppliers, including ports, financiers and insurers.
• Volatile and rising oil prices will push up costs significantly while climate change is increasing pressure on shipping to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  Companies can gain competitive advantage by investing in energy efficiency and the transition to new fuels.

The Sustainable Shipping Initiative Case for Action explores the risks and opportunities around each of these three challenges. It also warns that companies which do nothing may face serious consequences. The US auto industry came close to collapse in 2008, partly by failing to adapt to rising oil prices, and was only saved by a $25 billion government bailout.

In the next stage of the Sustainable Shipping Initiative, members will create a shared vision of an industry in 2040 which is resilient, socially and environmentally responsible and profitable, and will commit to a set of actions to achieve this. The ultimate aim is to mobilise industry support for an action plan to achieve this vision, including engineering and technical initiatives, policy proposals and marketing and communications plans.

Jonathon Porritt said: “The leaders involved in this Initiative understand that success and sustainability must go hand in hand.  These practical actions which they will help deliver will not only make their businesses more robust, but will ensure a more secure future for all of us.”

The report and further resources are available at www.forumforthefuture.org/projects/sustainable-shipping-initiative

Via Forum For the Future

Denmark’s A.P. Moeller-Maersk A/S, the world biggest container carrier by volume; No. 2 CMA-CGM SA of France; and No. 4 Hapag-Lloyd AG of Germany said officials visited their headquarters unannounced on Tuesday and requested documents.

The commission said it “has reason to believe that the companies concerned may have violated the antitrust rules that prohibit cartels and restrictive business practices and/or abuse of a dominant market position.”

The subject of the search: a rebound in container shipping rates in 2009 that confounded simple supply and demand.

Maersk, CMA and Hapag said they were cooperating with the investigation and that they comply with competition rules. A smaller line, Hamburg Süd, issued a similar statement. No. 3 shipping company Mediterranean Shipping Co. of Switzerland couldn’t be reached.

‘For several years we have implemented our compliance programme which includes guidelines and training of employees etc. in order to ensure, to the widest extent possible, that our employees are aware of legislation and how to adhere to it,” Maersk said.

The investigation, in cooperation with national authorities, “are a preliminary step into suspected anticompetitive practices,” the commission said. The inspections don’t mean that the companies are guilty, said the commission, the EU’s executive arm.

Since China revved up its export machine in the 1990s, the container-shipping sector has been one of the world’s fastest growing businesses, expanding around 10% a year.

Increasingly, transporting 20- and 40-foot steel containers across oceans has become the standard for moving everything from bananas to electronics around the globe. Ports built new docks. Canals were widened. Carriers ordered hundreds of bigger ships. The number of ships at sea able to carry over 10,000 20-foot containers or their equivalents increased to 48 this year from 15 in 2009. Next year, it will be 61.

But amid that growth came the global financial crisis. Trade in 2009 suffered its worst decline, 12% by value, since World War II. That led analysts to predict a collapse in rates and that at least one shipping line in the top 20 would fail.

That didn’t happen. In January 2009, the index price for shipping a 40-foot container was $1,603. A year later it was $2,517. It has since softened slightly, to $2,436.

“Traditional rules of economics have long not applied to the shipping industry,” said Ashley Craig, a transportation lawyer with Washington-based Venable LLP.

That triggered the curiosity of antitrust investigators in Brussels and Washington, as The Wall Street Journal reported last June. The U.S. Justice Department and Federal Maritime Commission have cooperated with European Union officials, but haven’t announced their findings. EU cartel investigations, which are run by the European Commission, can take years to conclude.

Shipping-industry customers, freight forwarders and other middle men have filed complaints with the EU and the U.S.

According to shipping-industry executives, rates increased because shipping lines laid up vessels, levied surcharges and cut the speed of their ocean crossings, a practice known as slow steaming, which can cut capacity by 5%.

The question, investigators said, is whether the companies acted alone or together. The shipping companies said they acted independently.

The EU in 2008 abolished a long-standing price-fixing exemption for shipping companies. “After the lifting of the exemption, carriers have continued announcing what they want to do their rate levels in the press, which has been described as signaling,” said Dirk Visser, an analyst with Netherlands-based Dynamar BV.

(c) 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

The Journal of Commerce has just released it’s rankings of the Top 40 Container Lines by import and export volumes based on data from the first nine months of 2010.  While the JoC website strictly restricts it’s content to “member’s only”, here is the press release telling a little about this year’s list.  If any of its dedicated members want to hint at the top 10 in the comments, we won’t tell anyone.

The Journal of Commerce Ranks US Top 40 Container Carriers, MSC Rises to No. 1 in Exports, Maersk Holds Imports Lead

NEWARK, N.J.:  U.S. import and export volume carried by top ocean carriers expanded a combined 12.2 percent this year, shifting market share percentages and highlighting capacity concerns for 2011, reports The Journal of Commerce today in its Top 40 Container Lines ranking and special report.

Total exports increased by 8 percent and imports by 15.3 percent, but overall trade still lags pre-recessionary 2008 numbers by 6.4 percent. Based on exclusive data from PIERS, a sister company of The Journal of Commerce, the ranking Top 40 carriers moved 98.2 percent of the United States’ 8.6 million TEUs of containerized exports and 99 percent of the 12.4 million TEUs of containerized imports.

Mediterranean Shipping Co.’s exports market share grew to 11.8 percent from January to September 2010, bringing it above Maersk Line into No. 1. In import volumes, Maersk grew 6.5 percent and maintained its top position, but growth from MSC in imports narrowed its previous market share lead.

APL, Hanjin and Hapag-Lloyd also experienced market share gains that pushed their rankings higher. Hainan PO Shipping — a carrier operating between China and Southern California — began U.S. service in September and joined the list at No. 40.

Port changes to chassis handling and expansion projects currently under way will produce expanded footprints and capacity for 2011. But, with U.S. trade volume predicted to grow 7 to 8 percent a year, a rapid return to the overload felt a few short years ago may be an inevitable compromise for recovery.

by Ian Bowles

During the glory days of empire and famous shipping lines, it would have been easy for nationalistic tendencies to come to the fore. Easy to look down one’s nose at others, but at the same time though, have a mutual respect for one’s equals. Thus it came to be that there could be two main types of national ensign; one that is of a major seafaring nation and the other that is of not such a nation, and so entered the “flag of convenience” or as it was often also called, “foreign flag”. That is, a foreign flag was a bad flag.

Now fast forward to a few years ago and the Connecticut Maritime Association’s annual Shipping event. Your author had a great chat with a young man fresh out of King’s Point, his 2nd Mates ticket still in the wrapper, although he was old enough to drink! When I asked him what his plans were he said he was going to have either join some domestic tug company or a domestic tanker company, both trading up and down the US coast. Is that all that is on offer I asked and he said yes, without going foreign flag.

Apparently, all through college they drummed into him how bad (or is that unpatriotic?), foreign flag is….aaahhh, the “F” word! Well at this point I must say I took umbrage, climbed on to my high (and cynical) horse and gave my 2¢ worth. To defend [some] foreign flags as truly worthy flags to sail under…in the interests of industry.

And before you rush to admonish me, let me say in my defense how much I love this (soon to be “my”!) country and will always support it in any way possible. But, this is the land of opportunity, the land where hard work and entrepreneurship are duly rewarded…that is why I want to call it my home for sure. I am not saying that coastal trading is bad or in any way demeaning of professional character, I certainly did my share of it, but only once my youthful exuberance was waning.

But this young man, with beer in hand, was silently crying out for something more. What he really needed was some good old fashioned global tramping bulk carrier with mixed nationality crew and no stern alcohol restrictions. A few years in that fun environment would have set him up nicely for quick promotion and with a world of experience under his belt, then come back to the US flag and help fix what is wrong, if indeed there is anything wrong.

The Merchant Marine is a passionate industry in any language and is stymieing that passion the right way to protect our own little corner of it?

About the author:

Capt. Ian Bowles, MNI
VP Sales & Marketing, FarSounder, Inc.

Bowles is a Master Mariner with 30 years of industry experience. He went to sea in 1978 with the UK Merchant Navy and rose to the rank of Master. After 13 years he came ashore and for the last 17 years has been involved in senior international sales and marketing roles with major marine electronic manufacturers, (Raytheon Marine, Rutter Technologies and Japan Radio Co., Ltd.). He is currently VP of Sales & Marketing with FarSounder.

Our favorite new industry blog MarineBuzz.com brings us news of a new way to avoid the courts and reduce Admiralty Lawyers fees with Maritime Arbitration. They tell us:

Good news for the Shipping companies in the USA.Settlement of marine disputes through courts is a cumbersome process. THE MARITIME ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES (MAA) is the national organization of the maritime community for alternative dispute resolution. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR), including arbitration and mediation, is faster and less expensive than courtroom litigation.

1.The Maritime Arbitration Association of the United States (MAA):

• As a nonprofit organization, the MAA educates the maritime community about ADR and administers cases under its Rules. Maritime disputes require specialized legal expertise. The MAA is the only national ADR organization whose arbitrators and mediators are maritime lawyers. They are peer-reviewed for the highest standards of ethics, impartiality and competence. To ensure predictability and fairness, cases are handled in appropriate U.S. venues, rather than distant cities or foreign countries.
• The MAA helps achieve the fair and just resolution of maritime disputes, whether they are related to cargo, marinas, passengers, shipyards, or vessels.

To continues reading their article CLICK HERE then head over to the homepage for other great stories: MarineBuzz.com