Document Type
Product Taxonomy
Review of Maritime Transport
Sitemap Taxonomy
Transport and Trade Logistics
International Maritime and Transport Law
Thematic Taxonomy
Maritime law
Maritime transport
Port management
Published Date
Symbol
UNCTAD/RMT/2020
Files
File
Language
English
Restricted Document
Off
Document text
ii © 2020, United Nations rights reserved worldwide Requests reproduce excerpts photocopy addressed Copyright Clearance Centre copyright.. queries rights licences, including subsidiary rights, addressed : United Nations Publications 300 East 42nd Street York, York 10017 United States America Email: publications@.org Website: .org/publications findings, interpretations conclusions expressed author() necessarily reflect views United Nations officials Member States. designations employed presentation material map work imply expression opinion whatsoever part United Nations legal status country, territory, city area authorities, delimitation frontiers boundaries. Mention firm licensed process imply endorsement United Nations. United Nations publication issued United Nations Conference Trade Development UNCTAD/RMT/2020 ISBN 978-92-1-112993-9 eISBN 978-92-1-005271-9 ISSN 0566-7682 eISSN 2225-3459 Sales . .20.II..31 http://copyright. mailto:publications@.org http://.org/publications iiiREVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Review Maritime Transport 2020 prepared UNCTAD guidance Shamika . Sirimanne, Director Division Technology Logistics UNCTAD, coordination Jan Hoffmann, Chief Trade Logistics Branch. Administrative editorial support Wendy Juan. Regina Asariotis, Mark Assaf, Gonzalo Ayala, Ahmed Ayoub, Hassiba Benamara, Dominique Chantrel, Jan Hoffmann, Alexandre Larouche-Maltais, Anila Premti, Luisa Rodríguez, Sijia Sun Frida Youssef contributing authors. Review edited Intergovernmental Support Service UNCTAD. Magali Studer designed publication, Carlos Bragunde ópez formatting. Comments inputs reviewers gratefully acknowledged: Hashim Abbas, Gail Bradford, Pierre Cariou, Trevor Crowe, Neil Davidson, Juan Manuel íez Orejas, Goran Dominioni, Azhar Jaimurzina Ducrest, Mahin Faghfouri, Fredrik Haag, Morten Ingebrigtsen, Eleni Kontou, Andy Lane, Mikael Lind, Amparo Mestre Alcover, James Milne, Turloch Mooney, Theo Notteboom, Athanasios . Pallis, Ricardo ánchez, Alastair Stevenson, Stellios Stratidakis, Antonella Teodoro Patrick Verhoeven. Experts International Chamber Shipping contributed chapter 2. due experts contributions case studies testimonials included chapter 4: Alison Newell, Member Chartered Institute Ecology Environmental Management, Chartered Environmentalist Member management team Sailing Sustainability (Fiji), Peter Nuttall, Scientific Technical Adviser, Micronesian Centre Sustainable Transport. Contributions Permanent Secretariat Northern Corridor Transit Transport Coordination Authority; Port Authority Valencia; Mediterranean Shipping Company; Panama Canal Authority, Ilya Espino de Marotta, Deputy Administrator, Silvia de Marucci, Manager Market Analysis Customer Relations, gratefully acknowledged. Comments received UNCTAD divisions part internal peer review process, comments Office Secretary-General, acknowledged appreciation. due Vladislav Shuvalov reviewing publication full. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................. iii Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................................................... viii Note ...................................................................................................................................................................... ix Executive summary .............................................................................................................................................xi 1. International maritime trade port traffic ...........................................................1 . Volume international maritime trade port traffic ........................................................................3 . Maritime trade era pandemic ..............................................................................................19 . Outlook ...........................................................................................................................................24 . Summary policy considerations ................................................................................................28 2. Maritime transport services infrastructure supply .........................................35 . World fleet maritime workforce ..................................................................................................37 . Shipping companies, earnings revenues operations pandemic crisis ....49 . Port services infrastructure supply .............................................................................................58 . Conclusions policy considerations .............................................................................................62 3. Performance indicators ..........................................................................................67 . Port calls turnaround times ........................................................................................................69 . Container shipping: Liner shipping connectivity ................................................................................75 . Container shipping: Port performance ..............................................................................................83 . Port performance: Lessons learned TrainForTrade Port Management Programme UNCTAD ......................................................................................................................................88 . Shipping: Emissions world fleet ..............................................................................................93 . Summary policy considerations .................................................................................................97 4. coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: lessons learned -hand experiences ...........................................................................................................101 . Invited reflections coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic maritime transport hinterland connections ...................................................................................................................102 . Experience small island developing States: Small island developing States Pacific ...........104 . Experience authority coordinating transit transport corridor: Northern Corridor Transit Transport Coordination Authority, East Africa ................................................................107 . Experience authority managing international maritime passage: Panama Canal Authority .... 109 . Experience port authority: Port Authority Valencia ................................................................112 . Experience global shipping company: Mediterranean Shipping Company ................................113 5. Legal issues regulatory developments .........................................................117 . Technological developments emerging issues maritime industry .....................................119 . Regulatory developments relating international shipping, climate change environmental issues ......................................................................................................................125 . legal regulatory developments affecting transportation ...................................................132 . Status conventions .....................................................................................................................132 . COVID-19 legal regulatory challenges international shipping collaborative action response crisis ....................................................................................................................133 . Summary policy considerations ...............................................................................................138 vREVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Tables 1.1 Development international maritime trade, selected years ....................................................................4 1.2 International maritime trade 2018–2019 ...............................................................................................5 1.3 World economic growth, 2018–2021 .......................................................................................................6 1.4 Volumes exported imported goods, selected group countries, 2018–2020 ...............................6 1.5 Tanker trade, 2018–2019.......................................................................................................................11 1.6 Major producers consumers oil natural gas, 2019 ................................................................11 1.7 Dry bulk trade, 2018–2019 ...................................................................................................................12 1.8 Major dry bulk commodities steel: Producers, users, exporters importers, 2019..........................12 1.9 Containerized trade mainlane East–West routes routes, 2016–2020 .................................14 1.10 Containerized trade major East–West trade routes, 2014–2020 ........................................................15 1.11 World container port throughput region, 2018–2019 .........................................................................16 1.12 International maritime trade development forecasts, 2020–2021 ...........................................................24 2.1 World fleet principal vessel type, 2019–2020 ....................................................................................37 2.2 Age distribution world merchant fleet vessel type, 2019–2020 ......................................................39 2.3 Ownership world fleet, ranked carrying capacity dead-weight tons, 2020 ..................................41 2.4 Top 25 ship-owning economies, 1 January 2020 ..........................................................................42 2.5 Leading flags registration dead-weight tonnage, 2020 ..................................................................44 2.6 Leading flags registration, ranked principal vessel type, 2020 ...........................................45 2.7 Deliveries newbuildings major vessel types countries construction, 2019 ...........................45 2.8 Reported tonnage sold ship recycling major vessel type country ship recycling, 2019 .......46 2.9 Container freight market rates, 2010–2020 ...........................................................................................51 2.10 Crude oil product tanker spot rates time-charter equivalent earnings .......................................53 2.11 Top 21 global terminal operators, throughput capacity, 2019 ..........................................................59 2.12 Share integrated port terminals container volumes handled, selected countries Latin America Caribbean .................................................................................................................................60 3.1 Recorded port calls time port, 2018 2019 ............................................................................70 3.2 Port calls time port vessel type, 2019 .....................................................................................71 3.3 Port calls median time spent port container ships: Top 25 countries, 2019 .............................71 3.4 Port calls median time spent port, general cargo ships, 2019 ......................................................73 3.5 Correlation components liner shipping connectivity index port traffic .......................81 3.6 Weighted average port call hours top 25 economies, 2019 ................................................................85 3.7 Weighted average port call hours, top bottom 10 countries territories .........................................85 3.8 Port performance scorecard indicators, 2015–2019 ..............................................................................89 3.9 Average annual throughput volume, 2015–2019 ....................................................................................90 4.1 Examples surcharges shipping costs ........................................................................................106 4.2 Number oceangoing vessel transits Panama Canal .......................................................111 5.1 Contracting States Parties selected international conventions maritime transport, 31 July 2020 ...............................................................................................................................133 vi Figures 1.1 Development international maritime trade global output, 2006–2020 ............................................3 1.2 Participation developing economies international maritime trade, selected years ..............................7 1.3 International maritime trade, region, 2019 ...........................................................................................7 1.4 Development international maritime trade cargo type, selected years ..............................................8 1.5 Development international maritime trade cargo type, selected years ..............................................9 1.6 International maritime trade cargo ton-miles, 2000–2020 ...................................................................10 1.7 International maritime trade cargo ton-miles, 1999–2020 ..................................................................10 1.8 Global containerized trade, 1996–2020 .................................................................................................13 1.9 Market share global containerized trade route, 2019 .....................................................................14 1.10 Estimated world container port throughput region, 2019 ...................................................................17 1.11 Leading 20 global container ports, 2018–2019 ......................................................................................18 1.12 Varied forecasts gross domestic product growth 2020 .................................................................21 1.13 Containerized trade growth main East–West routes ..........................................................................25 1.14 World port-handling forecast, 2019–2021 ..............................................................................................27 2.1 Growth world fleet principal vessel type, 2014–2020 .....................................................................38 2.2 Average vessel size age distribution, selected vessel types, 2020 ...................................................40 2.3 Top 20 ship-owning economies terms carrying capacity global fleet, 2020 ...........43 2.4 World tonnage order, 2000–2020 .....................................................................................................46 2.5 Reported tonnage sold ship recycling major vessel type country ship recycling, 2017–2019 .....47 2.6 ConTex index, 2015–2020 .............................................................................................................52 2.7 Baltic Exchange dry index, 2017–2020 ..................................................................................................55 2.8 -year time-charter rates bulk carriers, 2015–2020 ......................................................................55 2.9 Top 10 deep-sea container shipping lines, ranked deployed capacity market share, 2020 ......56 3.1 Port calls, vessel types, 2019 ............................................................................................................70 3.2 Port calls container ships, 2019 ........................................................................................................72 3.3 Global change number port calls, quarters 2020 compared quarters 2019, selected vessel types .......................................................................74 3.4 Number weekly container ship port calls worldwide, moving -week average, 2019 2020 ......74 3.5 Liner shipping connectivity index top 10 economies, quarter 2006– quarter 2020...........76 3.6 Liner shipping connectivity index selected small island developing States, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 .........................................................................................................................................77 3.7 Liner shipping connectivity index top 10 ports, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 ....................78 3.8 Liner shipping connectivity index leading regional ports, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 ......78 3.9 Liner shipping connectivity index components, quarter 2006– quarter 2020, index averages country ............................................................................................................................79 3.10 Quarterly trends fleet deployment, quarter 2019– quarter 2020 ........................................79 3.11 Quarterly trends fleet deployment, selected countries, 2019–2020 .....................................................80 3.12 Liner shipping connectivity index port traffic, 2017 ..........................................................................81 3.13 Number seaports regular container vessel calls, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 ...........82 3.14 Global liner shipping network, quarter 2020 ..............................................................................83 3.15 Country averages port time ship call size, 2019 ....................................................................86 3.16 Minutes port container move average call size, 2019 ............................................................86 3.17 Minutes port container move number port calls country, 2019 ....................................87 3.18 Minutes port container move average vessel size, 2019 ........................................................87 3.19 Revenue mix ports region, 2015–2019 ..........................................................................................90 TABLE OF CONTENTS viiREVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Boxes 1.1 Blind spots risk assessment management...................................................................................20 2.1 Reducing carbon dioxide emissions: case Pacific islands ......................................................40 2.2 Shipbuilding crossroads European Union ..............................................................................48 2.3 Promoting diversity inclusion maritime sector ........................................................................50 2.4 Policies support shipping sustainable recovery pandemic crisis ...............................57 2.5 changing landscape international production, COVID-19 pandemic, resilience-building maritime transport fleet deployment .......................................................................................................57 2.6 Challenges faced ports India result COVID-19 pandemic .............................................61 2.7 Measures protect staff working port communities ensure continuity port operations: Generic guidelines .................................................................................................................................61 3.20 Earnings interest, taxes, depreciation amortization proportion revenue, 2015–2019 ......90 3.21 Labour costs proportion revenue, 2015–2019 ............................................................................91 3.22 Average wages employee, 2015–2019 ............................................................................................91 3.23 Female participation rate port workforce, 2015–2019 ...................................................................91 3.24 Share vessel arrivals select member port TrainForTrade network, 2015–2019 ......................92 3.25 Average cargo arrival departure, 2015–2019 ...............................................................................92 3.26 Maximum 20-foot equivalent unit dwell time, 2015–2019 ......................................................................92 3.27 Average box-handling rate, 2015–2019 .................................................................................................92 3.28 Annual carbon-dioxide emissions vessel vessel type, 2019 .........................................................94 3.29 Comparison dead-weight tonnage respective fleet carbon-dioxide emissions bulk carriers, container ships tankers, 2011–2019 ..........................................................................94 3.30 Annual carbon-dioxide emissions vessel vessel type, 2011–2019 ...............................................95 3.31 Annual carbon-dioxide emissions vessel flag registration, 2019 ...............................................96 4.1 Port Mombasa: Performance indicators, 2020 .................................................................................108 INTRODUCTIONviii ABBREVIATIONS BIMCO Baltic International Maritime Council COSCO China Ocean Shipping Company dwt dead-weight ton() -commerce electronic commerce FEU 40-foot equivalent unit GDP gross domestic product ICT information communications technology IMO International Maritime Organization MARPOL International Convention Prevention Pollution Ships, 1973, modified Protocol 1978 relating thereto OECD Organization Economic Cooperation Development TEU 20-foot equivalent unit United Nations Comtrade United Nations International Trade Statistics Database WTO World Trade Organization ixREVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020NOTE NOTE Review Maritime Transport recurrent publication prepared UNCTAD secretariat 1968 aim fostering transparency maritime markets analysing relevant developments. factual editorial corrections prove , based comments Governments, reflected corrigendum issued subsequently. edition Review covers data events January 2019 June 2020. , effort reflect developments. references dollars ($) United States dollars, stated. “Ton” means metric ton (1,000 kg) “mile” means nautical mile, stated. rounding, details percentages presented tables necessarily add totals. dots (..) statistical table data reported separately. websites accessed September 2020. terms “countries” “economies” refer countries, territories areas. 2014, Review Maritime Transport include printed statistical annexes. , UNCTAD expanded coverage statistical data online links: Overview: http://stats.unctad.org/maritime Seaborne trade: http://stats.unctad.org/seabornetrade Merchant fleet flag registration: http://stats.unctad.org/fleet Merchant fleet country ownership: http://stats.unctad.org/fleetownership National maritime country profiles: http://unctadstat.unctad.org/CountryProfile/en-GB/index.html Number port calls, annual: http://stats.unctad.org/portcalls_number_a Seafarer supply: http://stats.unctad.org/seafarersupply Share world merchant fleet country beneficial ownership: http://stats.unctad.org/ vesselvalue_ownership Share world merchant fleet flag registration: http://stats.unctad.org/vesselvalue_registration Shipbuilding country built: http://stats.unctad.org/shipbuilding Ship scrapping country demolition: http://stats.unctad.org/shipscrapping Liner shipping connectivity index: http://stats.unctad.org/lsci Liner shipping bilateral connectivity index: http://stats.unctad.org/lsbci Container port throughput: http://stats.unctad.org/teu http://stats.unctad.org/maritime http://stats.unctad.org/seabornetrade http://stats.unctad.org/fleet http://stats.unctad.org/fleetownership http://unctadstat.unctad.org/CountryProfile/en-GB/index.html http://stats.unctad.org/portcalls_number_a http://stats.unctad.org/seafarersupply http://stats.unctad.org/vesselvalue_ownership http://stats.unctad.org/vesselvalue_ownership http://stats.unctad.org/vesselvalue_registration http://stats.unctad.org/shipbuilding http://stats.unctad.org/shipscrapping http://stats.unctad.org/lsci http://stats.unctad.org/lsbci http://stats.unctad.org/teu INTRODUCTIONx Vessel groupings Review Maritime Transport Group Constituent ship types Oil tankers Oil tankers Bulk carriers Bulk carriers, combination carriers General cargo ships Multi-purpose project vessels, roll- roll- cargo ships, general cargo ships Container ships Fully cellular container ships ships Liquefied petroleum gas carriers, liquefied natural gas carriers, parcel (chemical) tankers, specialized tankers, refrigerated container ships, offshore supply vessels, tugboats, dredgers, cruise, ferries, -cargo ships Total ships Includes -mentioned vessel types Approximate vessel-size groups commonly shipping terminology Crude oil tankers Ultralarge crude carrier 320,000 dead-weight tons (dwt) large crude carrier 200,000–319,999 dwt Suezmax crude tanker 125,000–199,999 dwt Aframax/longe-range 2 crude tanker 85,000–124,999 dwt Panamax/long-range 1 crude tanker 55,000–84,999 dwt Medium-range tankers 40,000–54,999 dwt Short-range/Handy tankers 25,000–39,000 dwt Dry bulk ore carriers Capesize bulk carrier 100,000 dwt Panamax bulk carrier 65,000–99,999 dwt Handymax bulk carrier 40,000–64,999 dwt Handysize bulk carrier 10,000–39,999 dwt Container ships Neo-Panamax Container ships transit expanded locks Panama Canal maximum 49 beam 366 length ; fleets capacity 12,000–14,999 20-foot equivalent units (TEUs) include ships large transit expanded locks Panama Canal based current dimension restrictions. Panamax Container ships 3,000 TEUs beam 33.2 , .. largest size vessels transit locks Panama Canal. Post Panamax Fleets capacity greater 15,000 TEUs include ships transit expanded locks. Source: Clarksons Research. Note: , ships mentioned Review Maritime Transport include propelled seagoing merchant vessels 100 gross tons , excluding inland waterway vessels, fishing vessels, military vessels, yachts, fixed mobile offshore platforms barges ( exception floating production storage, offloading units drillships). xiREVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic underscored global interdependency nations set motion trends reshape maritime transport landscape. sector pivotal moment facing concerns resulting pandemic longer-term considerations, ranging shifts supply-chain design globalization patterns consumption spending habits, growing focus risk assessment resilience-building, heightened global sustainability -carbon agenda. sector dealing knock- effects growing trade protectionism - policies. pandemic brought fore importance maritime transport essential sector continued delivery critical supplies global trade time crisis, recovery stage resuming normality. , including UNCTAD international bodies, issued recommendations guidance emphasizing ensure business continuity sector, protecting port workers seafarers pandemic. underscored ships meet international requirements, including sanitary restrictions, ports remain open shipping intermodal transport operations. International maritime trade severe pressure global health economic crisis triggered pandemic upended landscape maritime transport trade significantly affected growth prospects. UNCTAD projects volume international maritime trade fall 4.1 cent 2020. supply-chain disruptions, demand contractions global economic uncertainty caused pandemic, global economy severely affected twin supply demand shock. trends unfolded backdrop weaker 2019 international maritime trade lose momentum. Lingering trade tensions high policy uncertainty undermined growth global economic output merchandise trade. Volumes expanded 0.5 cent 2019, 2.8 cent 2018, reached 11.08 billion tons 2019. tandem, global container port traffic decelerated 2 cent growth, 5.1 cent 2018. Trade tensions caused trade patterns shift, search alternative markets suppliers resulted redirection flows China markets, South-East Asian countries. United States America increased merchandise exports rest world, helped offset reduced exports China. additional tariffs estimated cut maritime trade 0.5 cent 2019, impact mitigated increased trading opportunities alternative markets. Increased supply capacity remains concern container shipping industry beginning 2020, total world fleet amounted 98,140 commercial ships 100 gross tons , equivalent capacity 2.06 billion dwt. 2019, global commercial shipping fleet grew 4.1 cent, representing highest growth rate 2014, levels observed 2004–2012 period. Gas carriers experienced fasted growth, oil tankers, bulk carriers container ships. size largest container vessel terms capacity 10.9 cent. largest container ships big largest oil tankers bigger largest dry bulk cruise ships. Experience ship types limitations affecting access channels, port infrastructure shipyards, suggest container ship sizes reached peak. Economies scale primarily benefit shipping carriers Larger ports, ship calls bigger vessels, report performance connectivity indicators. Increasing number calls 1 cent container ports , decrease time ship spends port container 0.18 cent. Similarly, increasing average vessel size port calls 1 cent decreases time ship spends port container 0.52 cent. Gains economies scale resulting deployment larger vessels necessarily benefit ports inland transport service providers, increase total transport costs logistics chain. rise average call ship size leads peak demand trucks, yard space intermodal connections, additional investment requirements dredging bigger cranes. concentration cargo bigger ships ports implies business smaller number companies. cost savings seaside passed clients form freight rates. evident markets small island developing States, service providers operation. additional costs borne shippers, ports inland transport providers. , economies scale arising deployment larger vessels accrue carriers. INTRODUCTIONxii Positive performance freight rates pandemic structural container shipping market imbalances remained concern, liner shipping carriers closely monitored adjusted ship supply capacity match demand levels 2020. Suppressed demand forced container shipping companies adopt stringent strategies manage capacity reduce costs. Carriers started significantly reduce capacity quarter 2020. Capacity management strategies suspending services, blanking scheduled sailings -routing vessels . perspective shippers, service cuts reduced supply capacity meant space limitations transport goods delays delivery dates, affecting supply chains. 2020, freight rates higher compared 2019 routes, reported profits carriers exceeding 2019 levels. keeping freight rates levels ensure economic viability sector justified crisis-mitigation strategy, sustained cuts ship supply capacity longer periods recovery phase problematic maritime transport trade, including shippers ports. High freight rate volatility dry wet bulk segments Tanker rates surged March April 2020, reflecting growing demand floating storage. oil market state super contango front-month prices prices future months, making storing oil future sales profitable. Traders chartered tankers store -cost crude oil, reducing availability vessels transport supporting tanker rates. Freight rates declined sharply 2020, total vessels locked floating storage returning active trade inflating oil supply. Dry bulk freight rates continued shaped supply demand imbalances, increased disruptions caused pandemic. result, rates shown high volatility larger vessel categories. Seafarers international cooperation: Essential critical Due restrictions relating outbreak COVID-19, large numbers seafarers service extended board ships months sea, unable replaced repatriated long tours duty – unsustainable, safety - seafarers safe operation ships. break return work, dire implications personal income. UNCTAD issued calls designate seafarers marine personnel, nationality, key workers, exempt travel restrictions, ensure crew carried . addition, temporary guidance developed flag States, enabling extension validity seafarers ship licences certificates mandatory instruments International Maritime Organization (IMO) International Labour Organization. Sustainable shipping, decarbonization ship pollution control remain priorities stringent environmental requirements continue shape maritime transport sector. Carriers maintain service levels reduce costs, time ensure sustainability operations. Greenhouse gas emissions international shipping continue rank high international policy agenda. Progress IMO ambition set initial strategy reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships. include ship energy efficiency, alternative fuels development national action plans address greenhouse gas emissions international shipping. increase vessel size, combined multiple efficiency gains recycling efficient vessels, constrained growth carbon dioxide emissions, growth total fleet tonnage. gains expected decade, modern eco-designs continue replace older efficient ships. , marginal improvements sufficient meaningfully decrease carbon-dioxide emissions IMO target reducing total annual greenhouse gas emissions 50 cent 2050 compared levels 2008. Achieving targets require radical engine fuel technology . regard protection marine environment conservation sustainable marine biodiversity, areas regulatory action . include implementation IMO 2020 sulphur limit, ballast-water management, measures address biofouling, reduction pollution plastics microplastics, safety considerations fuel blends alternative marine fuels, conservation sustainable marine biodiversity areas national jurisdiction. implementation IMO sulphur cap regulation 1 January 2020 considered smooth outset. , difficulties arose relation disruptions caused COVID-19 pandemic. March 2020, ban carriage -compliant fuel oil entered force support implementation sulphur cap. enforcement port State control authorities limited, due measures put place reduce number inspections risk spreading coronavirus. important ensure xiiiREVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 delay negative impact long-term implementation sulphur cap regulation. Sustainability resilience full meaning small island developing States Wide-ranging economic impacts COVID-19 crisis small island developing States exacerbate existing vulnerabilities, making sustainable resilient transport systems States crucial. States face unique transport logistical challenges derive inherent size geographical, topographical climate features. include significantly transport connectivity, narrow export base cargo volumes, limited economies scale, higher transport costs exposure external shocks – evidenced pandemic. small island developing States longest port ship turnaround times lowest service frequencies. States confronted diseconomies scale levels competition limited choice importers exporters. hand, small island developing States attract trans-shipment services additional fleet deployed service national trade, illustrated Bahamas, Jamaica Mauritius. serving hub ports handling countries’ trade, island countries increased liner-shipping connectivity levels, turn benefits respective importers exporters. inherent vulnerabilities small island developing States put forefront shocks disruptions, including pandemics climate- change factors. Enabling sustainable resilient maritime transportation system States requires actions investment plans promote -carbon interregional domestic shipping solutions transport connectivity. require measures anticipate mitigate disruption risks enable adaptation coastal transport infrastructure climate change impacts stressors. pandemic’ legacy Maritime transport, reiterated reflections selected stakeholders showcased publication, essential trade flowing supply chains connected crises. experiences vary depending pre-existing conditions levels preparedness, , maritime transport logistics essential goods trade flows moving pandemic. , number key trends wide-ranging policy implications maritime transport trade observed due disruption. include : paradigm shift – risk management resilience-building policy business mantras. Business continuity plans emergency-response mechanisms vital case COVID-19 crisis. experience underscored maritime transport future calibrated risk exposure enhanced risk management resilience- building capabilities ensured. Understanding exposure, vulnerabilities potential losses key informing resilience-building sector. Industry players policymakers expected increasingly focus developing emergency-response guidelines contingency plans deal future disruptions. Criteria metrics risk assessment management, digitalization, harmonized disaster emergency-response mechanisms mainstreamed relevant national regional transport policies. Early warning systems, scenario planning, improved forecasts, information sharing, - - transparency, data analytics, business continuity plans risk management skills feature prominently policy agendas industry’ business plans. Accelerated shift globalization patterns supply chain designs. slowdown globalization reflected trade--gross domestic product (GDP) ratios observed 2008 financial crisis regionalization trade accelerate, post-pandemic world featuring element shortened supply chains ( shoring, reshoring) redundancy (excess stocks inventory). Investing warehousing storage important ensure sufficient safety stocks inventories. established --time supply chain model reassessed include considerations resilience robustness. Diversification sourcing, routing distribution channels grow importance. Moving single country-centric location sourcing multiple location sourcing focused cutting costs delays risk management resilience evolve . consumer spending behaviour. tastes, consumption shopping patterns continue evolve, production transport requirements follow. Examples include rise online shopping post-pandemic world requirement customized goods. trends emphasize -mile transport leg promote shorter supply chains - dimensional printing robotics. trends trigger demand warehousing space stocks, move established patterns promoted lean inventory storage. strengthened case digitalization dematerialization. Technology, digitalization innovation permeate supply chains distribution networks, including transport logistics. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTIONxiv Adopting technological solutions keeping abreast advances field requisite longer option. pandemic demonstrated movers terms technological uptake weather storm ( , commerce online platforms, blockchain solutions information technology- enabled -party logistics companies). digitalization interactions information-sharing critical continuity maritime transport operations pandemic. helped maintain continuity transport operations trade processes reducing risk contagion. Quick deployment technological solutions ensured continuity business activities government processes. evident case cross-border trade responding consumer expectations environment characterized supply-chain disruption, remote working increased engagement business--consumer electronic commerce (-commerce) business operations. significant increase electronic trade documentation. Governments notable efforts ports operational speed technologies digitalization. addition, industry associations working promote electronic equivalents negotiable bills lading increased acceptance government authorities, banks insurers. International cooperation coordination required ensure commercial parties world readily accept electronic records legal systems adequately prepared. Capacity-building required, small medium- sized enterprises developing countries lack access technology means implementation. Standards interoperability important. ports shipping companies benefit benchmarking, data comparable, ship types, key performance indicators, definitions parameters standardized. instance, long run, UNCTAD port performance scorecard potential industry standard globally accepted benchmark, helping port sector continuously improve efficiency. UNCTAD seeks include port entities countries TrainForTrade network reporting port performance scorecard component. Cybersecurity major concern. Increased cyberattacks shipping COVID-19 crisis exacerbated limited ability companies sufficiently protect , including travel restrictions, social distancing measures economic recession. ships ports connected integrated information technology networks, implementation strengthening cybersecurity measures essential priorities. IMO resolutions encourage administrations ensure cybersecurity risks appropriately addressed safety-management systems. Owners fail exposed risks ships detained port State control authorities enforce requirement. Cybersecurity risks continue grow significantly result greater reliance electronic trading increasing shift virtual interactions levels. deepens vulnerabilities globe, potential produce crippling effects critical supply chains services. Adjustments maritime transport adapt operating landscape. addition oversupply ship capacity, remains concern carriers, pandemic fallout heighten competitive pressures drive stakeholders maritime transport sector increasingly tap business opportunities ensure relevance, profitability business continuity. shipping lines port operators greater interest potential business opportunities exist supply chain inland logistics. aim closer shippers emerge reliable -- logistics service providers. Concerns market concentration oligopolistic market structures require close monitoring trends promote rationalization, consolidation integration services ensure adequate competition levels. greater systemic coordinated policy responses global level. pandemic highlighted importance coordinated action dealing cross-border disruptions broad- ranging ripple effects. recognized widely, illustrated call action COVID-19 Task Force Geopolitical Risks Responses Sustainable Ocean Business Action Platform United Nations Global Compact. document sets recommendations urgent political action global ocean-related supply chains moving, stating “ scale, complexity urgency problem call comprehensive, systemic coordinated approach global level.”1 issues effectively dealt case--case basis, bilaterally limited number countries. policy actions prepare post-pandemic world priority areas policy action response COVID-19 pandemic persistent challenges facing maritime transport trade developing countries. 1 www.unglobalcompact.org/news/4534-05-05-2020 https://ungc-communications-assets.s3.amazonaws./ docs/publications/Call--Action_Imminent-Threats--- Integrity--Global-Supply-Chains.pdf. http://www.unglobalcompact.org/news/4534-05-05-2020 https://ungc-communications-assets.s3.amazonaws./docs/publications/Call--Action_Imminent-Threats---Integrity--Global-Supply-Chains.pdf http://www.unglobalcompact.org/news/4534-05-05-2020 https://ungc-communications-assets.s3.amazonaws./docs/publications/Call--Action_Imminent-Threats---Integrity--Global-Supply-Chains.pdf http://www.unglobalcompact.org/news/4534-05-05-2020 https://ungc-communications-assets.s3.amazonaws./docs/publications/Call--Action_Imminent-Threats---Integrity--Global-Supply-Chains.pdf http://www.unglobalcompact.org/news/4534-05-05-2020 https://ungc-communications-assets.s3.amazonaws./docs/publications/Call--Action_Imminent-Threats---Integrity--Global-Supply-Chains.pdf xvREVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 1. Support trade effectively sustain growth development. Trade tensions, protectionism, export restrictions, essential goods times crisis, bring economic social costs. , extent , avoided. , - tariff measures obstacles trade addressed, including stepping trade facilitation action customs automation. 2. reshape globalization sustainability resilience. Disruptions caused COVID-19 outbreak -ignited debate risks international manufacturing production extended supply chains. important carefully assess varied options supply-chain design outcomes aligned Sustainable Development Goals 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development. , shortening supply chains - shoring shoring reduce transport costs fuel consumption, necessarily future-proof supply chains disruptions place, location. Multi-sourcing approaches guarantee greater resilience approaches concentrate production single location, home . debate globalization focus identifying ways unsustainable globalization patterns mitigated generate wider range economies. 3. Promote greater technology uptake digitalization. Polices support digital transformation improves resilience supply chains supporting transportation networks. maritime transport play role linking global economies supply chains, leverage crisis investing technology adopting solutions meet supply chains future support resilience efforts. Digitalization efforts enable enhanced efficiencies, including energy efficiency, productivity transport ( , smart ports shipping). countries tap -commerce capabilities transport facilitation benefits boost trade. impact, cybersecurity strengthened levels. 4. Harness data monitoring policy responses. fast-evolving data capabilities support efforts forecast growth monitor recovery trends. sources data enhanced possibilities emanating digitalization provide ample opportunities analyse improve policies. pandemic highlighted potential real-time data ship movement port traffic, information shipping schedules generate early warning systems economic growth seaborne trade. 5. Enable agile resilient maritime transport systems. invest risk management emergency response preparedness pandemics. Future- proofing maritime supply chain risk management require greater visibility door- -door transport operations. , formulate plans setting key actions protocols implemented response crises ensuring business continuity. Special consideration needed address seafarers’ concerns, developing countries. Collaboration port States actors countries remains key improving crew changeover processes ensuring standardized procedure risk- management protocols. 6. Maintain momentum sustainability, climate-change adaptation resilience- building. Current efforts deal carbon emissions shipping ongoing energy transition fossil fuels remain priority. Governments direct stimulus packages support recovery promoting priorities climate- change mitigation adaptation action. , policies adopted context post-pandemic world support progress shipping industry’ transition greening sustainability. , sustainability resilience concerns, connectivity small island developing States climate-change adaptation, remain key priorities. States, critical coastal transport infrastructure lifeline external trade, tourism, food energy security. generation dissemination tailored data information plays important role risk assessment, improvement connectivity levels, development effective adaptation measures, preparation targeted studies effective multidisciplinary multi-stakeholder collaboration. addition, progress realization target 8.1 Sustainable Development Goals – sustainable economic growth developed countries – important strengthen resilience developed countries ability cope future disruptions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTIONxvi COVID-19 pandemic litmus test, globalization global solidarity collaboration . success -mentioned policy measures depend effective international collaboration ensure coordinated policy responses. Coordinated efforts standardization data, tracking port performance development protection mechanisms cybercrime. facing challenges , policymakers ensure financial support, technical cooperation capacity-building developing countries, vulnerable groups countries, including developed countries, landlocked developing countries small island developing States. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC 1 Growth international maritime trade stalled 2019, reaching lowest level global financial crisis 2008–2009. Lingering trade tensions high policy uncertainty undermined growth global economic output merchandise trade extension, maritime trade. Maritime trade volumes expanded 0.5 cent, 2.8 cent 2018 reached total 11.08 billion tons 2019. Growth world gross domestic product slowed 2.5 cent, 3.1 cent 2018 1.1 percentage point historical average 2001–2008 period. tandem, global merchandise trade contracted 0.5 cent, manufacturing activity pressure negative impact trade tensions largest world economies toll investment trade. backdrop weaker 2019, short-term prospects maritime transport trade darkened early 2020. initial expectations 2020 bring moderate improvements economy trade, unprecedented global health economic crisis triggered COVID-19 pandemic severely affected outlook. fallout maritime transport trade dramatic, economic indicators pointing downward. account prevailing persistent uncertainty, UNCTAD estimates volume international maritime trade fall 4.1 cent 2020. Predicting timing scale recovery challenging, factors significantly influence outlook. Bearing mind, UNCTAD projections maritime trade recover 2021 expand 4.8 cent. debate recovery continues evolve, clear disruptions caused COVID-19 pandemic lasting impact shipping trade. disruptions trigger deep shifts operating landscape, heightened sustainability resilience-building imperative. Potential shifts range globalization patterns alterations supply-chain design, --time production models, technology uptake consumer spending habits. Depending patterns unfold interact, implications maritime transport transformational. , risk assessment management, resilience-building future-proof supply chains maritime transport, feature prominently policy business agendas. maritime transport emerge catalyst supporting trends, brace change adapt ensure prepared enter post-COVID-19 pandemic world. Review Maritime Transport 2020 structured substantive chapters. Chapter 1 considers demand maritime transport services. Chapter 2 considers factors shape maritime transport infrastructure services supply, including ship-carrying capacity, ports related maritime businesses. Chapter 3 assesses sector’ performance set indicators port calls, port-waiting times, connectivity environmental sustainability ships. Chapter 4 overview selected contributions received stakeholders, including government industry, sharing experiences lessons learned connection pandemic. Chapter 5, final chapter, presents key legal regulatory developments, trends technology innovation affecting maritime transport trade. present chapter international maritime trade port traffic reviews major developments world economy, merchandise trade, industrial activity manufacturing supply chains underpin demand maritime transport infrastructure services. Section discusses volumes international maritime trade port traffic outlines key trends affecting maritime trade 2019. Section focuses unprecedented health economic global crisis triggered pandemic considers impacts fallout varied shipping segments ports, implications outlook maritime transport trade. Section concludes priority action areas view ensuring longer-term sustainability resilience maritime transport networks supply chains. 3REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 . VOLUME OF INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC 1. Maritime trade lost momentum 2019 pressure 2020 Owing slowdown world economy trade, growth international maritime trade stalled 2019 reached lowest level financial crisis 2008–2009. rising moderately (2.8 cent) 2018, volumes expanded marginal 0.5 cent 2019. number factors weighed performance maritime trade. included trade policy tensions; adverse economic conditions social unrest countries; sanctions; supply-side disruptions, Vale dam collapse Brazil Cyclone Veronica Australia; oil demand growth. UNCTAD estimates total volume maritime trade 2019 11.08 billion tons (tables 1.1 1.2). shown figure 1.1, growth maritime trade decelerated line slowdown world GDP growth. Data point negative outlook 2020, world GDP maritime trade projected contract 4.1 cent. onset pandemic early 2020 fallout world economies, travel, transport consumption patterns, manufacturing activity supply chains, causing global recession 2020. section detailed discussion pandemic implications maritime transport trade. 2. Negative trends world economy trade put dent international maritime trade Shipping derived demand largely determined developments world economy trade. , negative economic trade trends affected maritime trade growth 2019. Global economic growth decelerated 2019 backdrop lingering trade tensions high policy uncertainty. Growth world GDP slowed 2.5 cent, 3.1 cent 2018 1.1 percentage point historical average 2001–2008 (table 1.3). Developed developing economies alike affected, reflecting continued trade tensions China United States weakening Source: UNCTAD calculations, based Review Maritime Transport, issues, data UNCTADstat table 1.12 report. Figure 1.1 Development international maritime trade global output, 2006–2020 (Annual percentage change) 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC4 Year Tanker tradera Main bulkb dry cargoc Total ( cargo) 1970 1 440 448 717 2 605 1980 1 871 608 1 225 3 704 1990 1 755 988 1 265 4 008 2000 2 163 1 186 2 635 5 984 2005 2 422 1 579 3 108 7 109 2006 2 698 1 676 3 328 7 702 2007 2 747 1 811 3 478 8 036 2008 2 742 1 911 3 578 8 231 2009 2 641 1 998 3 218 7 857 2010 2 752 2 232 3 423 8 408 2011 2 785 2 364 3 626 8 775 2012 2 840 2 564 3 791 9 195 2013 2 828 2 734 3 951 9 513 2014 2 825 2 964 4 054 9 842 2015 2 932 2 930 4 161 10 023 2016 3 058 3 009 4 228 10 295 2017 3 146 3 151 4 419 10 716 2018 3 201 3 215 4 603 11 019 2019 3 169 3 225 4 682 11 076 Table 1.1 Development international maritime trade, selected years (Million tons loaded) Sources: UNCTAD calculations, based data supplied reporting countries published government port industry websites, specialist sources. Dry cargo data 2006 onwards revised updated reflect improved reporting, including figures breakdown cargo type. 2006, breakdown dry cargo main bulk dry cargo main bulk based issues Shipping Review Outlook Seaborne Trade Monitor, produced Clarksons Research. Estimates total maritime trade figures 2019 based preliminary data year data . Tanker trade includes crude oil, refined petroleum products, gas chemicals. Main bulk includes iron ore, grain, coal, bauxite/alumina phosphate. regard data 2006, main bulk includes iron ore, grain coal . Data relating bauxite/alumina phosphate included dry cargo main bulk. Includes minor bulk commodities, containerized trade general cargo. world economy. developed countries, GDP growth decelerated 1.8 cent, 2.3 cent 2018, developing regions expanded 3.5 cent, higher rate comparison, 4.3 cent growth recorded 2018. Growth transition economies stalled, expanding 2.2. cent 2019 2.8 cent 2018. United States, supportive effect fiscal stimulus measures ( York Times, 2018) strong domestic demand underpinned growth 2018 diminished slightly 2019. Growth European Union fell 1.5 cent, lowest rate 2013. Concerns Europe uncertainty surrounding potential “-deal” departure European Union United Kingdom Great Britain Northern Ireland (Brexit) negative impact economy. economy China continued gradually mature diversify, trade tensions contributed weaker GDP expansion 2019. Growth slowed 6.1 cent, country’ weakest performance early 1990s. Economic growth decelerated East Asia, South Asia South- East Asia varying degrees. , economy India slowed 4.2 cent GDP growth 2019, 6.8 cent 2018. developing Americas, economic growth hindered adverse domestic global conditions. 2019, GDP growth region contracted 0.3 cent. Subdued growth (0.9 cent) Western Asia reflected weaker oil prices geopolitical tensions region, including arising sanctions Islamic Republic Iran. Growth Africa remained steady, increasing 3.1 cent. Global merchandise trade contracted 2019 manufacturing activity slowed year. Rising tariffs heightened policy uncertainty, undermined investment weighed global trade. 2019, world merchandise trade volumes declined fell 0.5 cent, lowest level financial crisis decade earlier (table 1.4). negative trends driven contraction imports developing countries, including China, emerging Asian economies developing America (United Nations, 2020a). Global trade tensions increased 2019 extended China, United States Brexit. , complaints countries Indian tariffs, reciprocal allegations protectionism put European Union United States, trade dispute occurred Japan Republic Korea. , June 2020, United States announced imposing tariffs European goods view contention subsidies Airbus Boeing. list goods face duties 100 cent, potentially doubling price goods, caused European stocks fall, beverage companies, luxury goods manufacturers truck makers (Whitten Ben-Moussa, 2020). developments, rising nationalist sentiment (MDS Transmodal, 2020a) - policies, added uncertainty, caused business confidence deteriorate, affected investment growth countries undermined global trade. environment amplified challenges electronics automotive sectors, large international production chains. sectors hit hard. , countries gained export market shares 5REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Table 1.2 International maritime trade 2018–2019 (Type cargo, country group region) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data supplied reporting countries published government port industry websites, specialist sources. Dry cargo data 2006 onwards revised updated reflect improved reporting, including figures breakdown cargo type. Estimates total maritime trade figures 2019 based preliminary data year data . Note: longer time series data prior 2019, UNCTADstat Data Centre (http://unctadstat.unctad.org/wds/TableViewer/ tableView.aspxReportId=32363). Includes refined petroleum products, gas chemicals. Designation Goods loaded Goods unloaded Year Total Crude oil tanker tradea Dry cargo Total Crude oil tanker tradea Dry cargo Millions tons World 2018 11 019.0 1 881.0 1 319.7 7 818.3 11 016.8 2 048.8 1 338.6 7 629.4 2019 11 075.9 1 860.2 1 308.4 7 907.3 11 083.0 2 033.4 1329.3 7 720.3 Developed economies 2018 3 862.8 206.2 507.5 3 149.1 3 844 931.9 494.8 2 417.8 2019 3 935.2 242.9 506.9 3 185.4 3 780 913.6 472.6 2 394.0 Transition economies 2018 713.0 203.8 37.6 471.6 99.4 0.3 4.8 94.3 2019 715.8 193.9 41.1 480.8 102.0 0.8 5.4 95.8 Developing economies 2018 6 443.4 1 471.1 774.6 4 197.6 7 072.9 1 116.6 839.0 5 117.3 2019 6 424.8 1 423.3 760.3 4 241.2 7 200.7 1 118.9 851.3 5 230.5 Africa 2018 763.0 297.4 70.4 395.2 501.8 39.0 99.9 362.8 2019 762.1 293.5 69.9 398.7 504.5 39.2 99.3 365.9 America 2018 1 385.4 200.6 88.7 1 096.1 638.1 47.1 149.3 441.8 2019 1 386.3 204.2 82.3 1 099.8 621.7 47.8 138.8 435.1 Asia 2018 4 280.4 971.3 607.8 2 701.3 5 918.9 1 029.7 584.7 4 304.5 2019 4 261.8 923.9 600.5 2 737.5 6 059.1 1 031.1 607.7 4 420.3 Oceania 2018 14.5 1.7 7.8 5.1 14.1 0.8 5.0 8.2 2019 14.6 1.8 7.7 5.1 15.4 0.7 5.5 9.1 Designation Goods loaded Goods unloaded Year Total Crude oil tanker tradea Dry cargo Total Crude oil tanker tradea Dry cargo Percentage share World 2018 100.0 17.1 12.0 71.0 100.0 18.6 12.2 69.3 2019 100.0 16.8 11.8 71.4 100.0 18.3 12.0 69.7 Developed economies 2018 35.1 11.0 38.5 40.3 34.9 45.5 37.0 31.7 2019 35.5 13.1 38.7 40.3 34.1 44.9 35.5 31.0 Transition economies 2018 6.5 10.8 2.8 6.0 0.9 0.0 0.4 1.2 2019 6.5 10.4 3.1 6.1 0.9 0.0 0.4 1.2 Developing economies 2018 58.5 78.2 58.7 53.7 64.2 54.5 62.7 67.1 2019 58.0 76.5 58.1 53.6 65.0 55.0 64.0 67.8 Africa 2018 6.9 15.8 5.3 5.1 4.6 1.9 7.5 4.8 2019 6.9 15.8 5.3 5.0 4.6 1.9 7.5 4.7 America 2018 12.6 10.7 6.7 14.0 5.8 2.3 11.1 5.8 2019 12.5 11.0 6.3 13.9 5.6 2.4 10.4 5.6 Asia 2018 38.8 51.6 46.1 34.6 53.7 50.3 43.7 56.4 2019 38.5 49.7 45.9 34.6 54.7 50.7 45.7 57.3 Oceania 2018 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.1 2019 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.1 http://unctadstat.unctad.org/wds/TableViewer/tableView.aspxReportId=32363 http://unctadstat.unctad.org/wds/TableViewer/tableView.aspxReportId=32363 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC6 Region country Average 2001–2008 2018 2019 2020 2021a World 3.6 3.1 2.5 -4.3 4.1 Developed countries 2.3 2.3 1.8 -5.8 3.1 : European Union (27) 2.1 2.1 1.5 -7.3 3.5 Japan 1.2 0.3 0.6 -4.5 1.9 United States 2.6 2.9 2.3 -5.4 2.8 Developing countries 6.6 4.3 3.5 -2.1 5.7 : Africa 5.8 3.1 3.1 -3.0 3.5 East Asia 9.2 5.9 5.4 1.0 7.4 : China 10.9 6.6 6.1 1.3 8.1 South Asia 6.7 5.1 2.8 -4.8 3.9 : India 7.6 6.8 4.2 -5.9 3.9 South-East Asia 5.7 5.1 4.4 -2.2 4.3 Western Asia 5.5 2.0 0.9 -4.5 3.6 Latin American Caribbean 3.9 0.6 -0.3 -7.6 3.0 : Brazil 3.7 1.3 1.1 -5.7 3.1 Caribbean 5.0 3.5 1.9 -6.4 2.3 Transition economies 7.2 2.8 2.2 -4.3 3.5 : Russian Federation 6.8 2.3 1.3 -4.2 3.4 Table 1.3 World economic growth, 2018–2021 (Annual percentage change) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based UNCTAD, 2020a, Trade Development Report 2020: Global Pandemic Prosperity – Avoiding Lost Decade, chapter 1. Forecast. Table 1.4 Volumes exported imported goods, selected group countries, 2018–2020 (Annual percentage change) Group/country Volume exports (percentage change) Volume imports (percentage change) 2018 2019 2020a 2018 2019 2020a World 3.1 -0.5 -9.0 3.8 -0.4 -8.8 Developed countries : 2.6 0.0 -12.4 2.5 0.2 -10.9 Euro area 1.9 -0.2 -13.3 2.2 0.0 -12.1 Japan 2.6 -1.6 -11.3 3.1 0.9 -4.9 United States 4.2 -0.5 -13.3 5.2 -0.3 -9.8 developed countries 2.9 1.1 -10.8 0.5 0.6 -11.6 Developed countries : 3.7 -1.7 -4.7 5.7 -1.2 -5.7 China 5.4 0.5 -4.5 6.9 -0.4 -0.9 Africa Middle East 1.0 -3.9 -5.2 0.8 -0.2 -2.8 Asia ( including China) 3.7 -1.7 -3.9 6.9 -2.3 -7.1 Latin America 3.0 0.5 -7.0 4.8 -1.6 -12.8 Transition economies 3.9 -1.3 -4.1 2.2 3.1 -5.9 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based CPB World Trade Monitor, August 2020. Data source methodology aligned UNCTAD, 2020a, Trade Development Report 2020: Global Pandemic Prosperity – Avoiding Lost Decade. Note: Country coverage aggregated country groupings comprehensive. Percentage change average period January June 2020 January June 2019. building border facilities carrying required checks providing targeted support ports build infrastructure (Lloyd’ Loading List, 2020a). , European Union expected impose full customs controls checks goods United Kingdom starting 1 January 2021 (United Nations, 2020a). 3. Regional country grouping contribution maritime trade 2019, developing economies continued account lion’ share goods loaded (58 cent) unloaded (65 cent) seaports worldwide (figure 1.2). , developed economies economies transition generated 42 cent global merchandise exports sea (goods loaded) imported 35 cent (goods unloaded) global trade. role developing regions source destination maritime trade significant, developing economies homogenous group. grouping includes countries economies companies looked suppliers countries affected rising tariffs. December 2019, China United States agreed phase trade agreement de-escalate tensions economies. 15 January 2020, countries signed agreement understanding China increase merchandise imports United States $200 billion (United Nations, 2020a). return, United States cut 15 cent tariffs $120 billion imports China. Europe, reduced uncertainty Brexit development, European Union United Kingdom needed define trading relationship January 2021 (United Nations, 2020a). June 2020, United Kingdom outlined customs border arrangements 2021 commitment introducing -phase plan import , 7REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Figure 1.2 Participation developing economies international maritime trade, selected years (Percentage share total tonnage) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based Review Maritime Transport, issues table 1.2 report. varying stages development degrees integration world’ manufacturing trading networks. growth recorded decade largely driven fast growing emerging developing countries, notably China. countries driving structural shift trade patterns observed 2013, volumes unloaded developing countries exceeded volumes loaded. shift reversal historical pattern developing countries acted suppliers large-volume - raw materials imported developed countries. predominance Asian intra-Asian trade globalized production processes chain growth. closer trend globalization manufacturing processes global. scope developing regions Asia diversify economies, expand maritime transport capacity participate effectively regional international production processes. marginal contribution economies global chains reflected limited contribution container trade flows global container port throughput. Maritime transport, combined supportive trade industrial policies, catalyst growth greater integration world economy broader range developing countries. 2019, 41 cent total goods loaded (exported) sourced Asia 62 cent total goods unloaded (imported) received region (figure 1.3). contribution developing America Africa maritime trade flows remained marginal. comparison, previously noted, Asia benefited greater integration global manufacturing Figure 1.3 International maritime trade, region, 2019 (Percentage share total tonnage) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data supplied reporting countries published government port industry websites, specialist sources. Note: Estimated figures based preliminary data year data . trading networks, promoting intraregional trade. Capitalizing fragmentation globalized production processes, Asia maritime hub brings 50 cent global maritime trade volumes. 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC8 4. Maritime trade underperformed market segments Dry cargo continued account thirds total maritime trade volumes, liquid bulk commodities, including crude oil, refined petroleum products, gas chemicals, accounted remaining share. 2019, growth market segments decelerated. Trade dry cargo expanded 1.1 cent 2018, tanker trade volumes contracted 1 cent. market segments evolved 1990 shows growth maritime trade decades sustained bullish trends containerized trade volumes starting 2000s, coinciding wave hyperglobalization (figures 1.4 1.5). supported swift growth trade dry bulk commodities accompanied rapid industrial expansion China accelerated accession World Trade Organization (WTO) 2001. adjusted distances travelled, international maritime trade grew slightly faster rate 1 cent 2019, supported growing long-haul oil exports Brazil United States Asia. Clarksons Research estimates seaborne trade ton-miles reached 59,503 billion ton-miles 2019 (figure 1.6). Figure 1.7 shows trade ton-miles cargo expanded varying degrees. Trade container dry bulk commodities fuelled growth decades. number cargo ton-miles generated dry cargo rising steadily years. 2002, China imported 121.7 million tons iron ore coal, accounting 11.8 cent global iron ore coal trade sea (Clarksons Research, 2006). decades, volumes increased 1.3 billion tons, bringing country’ market share 50 cent world total (Clarksons Research, 2020b). Gas trade ton-miles expanded swiftly 9.9 cent 2019. segments recorded smaller growth; ton-miles generated trade chemicals expanded 3.2 cent, container trade (1.9 cent) dry cargo (1.6 cent). Growth ton-miles produced trade oil major bulk commodities contracted 2019, reflecting declines iron ore trade disruption mining activities Brazil caused Vale dam collapse. 5. Demand supply-side pressures weighed key market segments Trade oil weakened, trade gas remained robust onset shale revolution United States, developments country’ energy sector played significant role shaping global tanker trade. apparent 2019, Figure 1.4 Development international maritime trade cargo type, selected years (Billion tons loaded) Source: UNCTAD, Review Maritime Transport, issues. 2006–2019, breakdown cargo type based Clarksons Research, 2020a, Shipping Review Outlook, spring 2020 Seaborne Trade Monitor, issues. Note: 1980–2005 figures main bulk include iron ore, grain, coal, bauxite/alumina phosphate. regard data starting 2006, main bulk figures include iron ore, grain coal . Data relating bauxite/alumina phosphate included “ dry cargo”. Tanker trade includes crude oil, refined petroleum products, gas chemicals. 9REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Figure 1.5 Development international maritime trade cargo type, selected years (Index: 1990 = 100) Source: UNCTAD, Review Maritime Transport, issues. 2006–2019, breakdown cargo type based Clarksons Research, 2020a, Shipping Review Outlook, spring 2020 Seaborne Trade Monitor, issues. Note: 1980–2005 figures main bulk include iron ore, grain, coal, bauxite/alumina phosphate. 2006, main bulk figures include iron ore, grain coal . Data relating bauxite/alumina phosphate included “ dry cargo”. Tanker trade includes crude oil, refined petroleum products, gas chemicals. decline United States crude oil imports rise long-haul exports. tanker trade contracted 1 cent 2019, owing volumes crude oil refined petroleum products (table 1.5). overview global players oil gas sector presented table 1.6. Crude oil trade decreased 1.1. cent 2019. Downside factors include cuts supply members Organization Petroleum Exporting Countries aimed supporting oil prices, disruptions affecting exports Islamic Republic Iran Bolivarian Republic Venezuela. impact exports Western Asia resulting attacks Saudi oil infrastructure limited. Pressure demand side include global oil demand, sharp reduction United States imports decline global refinery activity. , expansion exports Brazil United States supported long-haul journeys Atlantic Asia. Crude oil imports China increased 10.6 cent 2019, compared previous year, imports United States declined (Clarksons Research, 2020c). Asia, extended refinery maintenance smaller refining margins contributed limiting import growth (Clarksons Research, 2020d). tanker trade experienced difficulty 2019, contracting 1 cent. Major setbacks included slower global economic growth extended refinery maintenance periods, refiners adjusting production preparation coming force 1 January 2020 IMO 2020 regulation sulphur cap marine fuels. addition, naphtha faced competition liquefied petroleum gas petrochemical feedstock, arbitrage opportunities limited (Clarksons Research, 2020e) fuel oil trade declined. accounts 20 cent trade seaborne refined petroleum products (Clarksons Research, 2020d). Mexican imports, key driver global trade growth years, dropped 2019 domestic supply increased. Growth imports Latin America rising exports China support product tanker demand. Trade gas remained strong, volumes expanding 11 cent 2019. Trade liquefied natural gas increased 11.9 cent, supported project start-ups Australia United States. comparison, trade liquefied petroleum gas grew 6 cent, driven largely growing supply Australia, Canada United States (Clarksons Research, 2020c). 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC10 Figure 1.6 International maritime trade cargo ton-miles, 2000–2020 (Billion ton-miles) Source: Clarksons Research, 2020a, Shipping Review Outlook, spring. Note: Seaborne trade data ton-miles estimated Clarksons Research. methodological differences, containerized trade data tons sourced Clarksons Research comparable data TEUs sourced MDS Transmodal. Estimated. Forecast. Includes iron ore, grain coal. Figure 1.7 International maritime trade cargo ton-miles, 1999–2020 (Billion ton-miles; index: 1999 = 100) Source: Clarksons Research, 2020a, Shipping Review Outlook, spring. Note: Seaborne trade data ton-miles estimated Clarksons Research. methodological differences, containerized trade data tons sourced Clarksons Research comparable data TEUs sourced MDS Transmodal. Includes iron ore, grain coal. Estimated. Forecast. 11REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Tanker tradea 2018 2019 Percentage change 2018–2019 Crude oil 1 881 1 860 -1.1 tanker tradea : 1 320 1 308 -0.9 Gas 416 461 10.8 Total tanker trade 3 201 3 169 -1.0 Sources: UNCTAD calculations, derived table 1.2 report. Note: Gas figures derived Clarksons Research, 2020c, Seaborne Trade Monitor, Volume 7, . 6, June. Includes refined petroleum products, gas chemicals. Table 1.5 Tanker trade, 2018–2019 (Million tons annual percentage change) World oil production Percentage World oil consumption Percentage Western Asia 32 Asia Pacific 36 North America 23 North America 23 Transition economies 16 Europe 15 Developing America 9 Western Asia 9 Africa 9 Developing America 9 Asia Pacific 8 Transition economies 4 Europe 3 Africa 4 Oil refinery capacities Oil refinery throughput Asia Pacific 35 Asia Pacific 37 North America 21 North America 22 Europe 15 Europe 15 Western Asia 11 Western Asia 11 Transition economies 8 Transition economies 8 Developing America 7 Developing America 5 Africa 3 Africa 2 World natural gas production World natural gas consumption North America 27 North America 25 Transition economies 21 Asia Pacific 22 Western Asia 17 Transition economies 15 Asia Pacific 17 Western Asia 15 Europe 6 Europe 13 Developing America 6 Developing America 6 Africa 6 Africa 4 Table 1.6 Major producers consumers oil natural gas, 2019 (World market share percentage) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data published British Petroleum 2020, BP [British Petroleum] Statistical Review World Energy 2020, June 2020. Note: Oil includes crude oil, shale oil, oil sands natural gas liquids. term excludes liquid fuels sources biomass coal derivatives. trade tensions, long-haul United States exports Asia continued expand steadily due substitution trends limited growth Western Asian exports stemming sanctions supply cuts. regard imports, China India remained key markets. Imports China picked speed 2019 compared 2018, supported petrochemical sector demand coming online propane dehydrogenation capacity. Reduced shipments United States offset increased imports Africa, Australia Western Asia. India, import demand liquefied petroleum gas supported continued rollout liquefied petroleum gas infrastructure rural areas government subsidy programme. trade chemicals rose rapidly 2018, growth segment 2019, reflecting pressure demand. China, demand palm oil soared 2019, higher domestic soybean oil prices consequence trade tensions African swine fever affecting pig farming China, causing reduction soymeal feed. Strong demand India palm oil, decline import taxes January 2020, supported growth segment. Trade palm oil remains highly sensitive policy shifts, rise Indian import duties Malaysian palm oil ( Indian Express, 2020), decision European Union phase palm oil-based biofuel 2030 higher taxes Indonesian biofuel liquefied petroleum gas. mainstay maritime trade, growth dry bulk commodity trade, faltered 2019 Major bulk Dry bulk commodities, minerals ores, closely linked industrial steel production, manufacturing construction.1 relevant indicators pointing downward 2019, global trade dry bulk lost momentum year grew marginally, (0.5 cent), bringing total 5.3 billion tons (table 1.7) (Clarksons Research, 2020f). overview global players dry bulk commodities steel trade sector presented table 1.8. time 20 years, iron ore trade fell 1.5 cent due severe supply-side disruptions caused Vale dam collapse Brazil Cyclone Veronica Australia. factors play include shift - steel production China, favours scrap steel imported iron ore. China represented 72 cent global seaborne iron ore imports 2019 (Clarksons Research, 2020f), affecting import demand strong impact trade global dry bulk commodities. Australia Brazil major suppliers iron ore China. , growing Chinese investments Guinea 1 Detailed figures dry bulk commodities derived Clarksons Research, 2020f. 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC12 country important alternative source supply capture part Chinese market (Drewry, 2020a). growth economy China continued decelerate, steel demand expanded 7.8 cent 2019, largely driven real estate investment (World Steel Association, 2019). contrast, steel demand rest world. Chinese manufacturing sector, similarly countries, pressure due slowing economy effect trade tensions, manufacturing automotive industries. 2019, growth coal (coking thermal) trade slowed 2.4 cent, reflecting thermal coal imports Europe coking coal demand China. regard exports thermal coking coal, Indonesia remained top position, share 35.3 cent, Australia 29.7 cent (Clarksons Research, 2020g). China, seaborne thermal coal imports increased 9.2 cent, supported coal prices government efforts stimulate industrial activity growth. country’ topping domestic coal supply imports key risk factor global seaborne coal trade. import demand varies domestic output, prices government policies, including decarbonization air pollution control efforts. India countries South-East Asia, imports continued rise, coal-fired power generation capacities. India, world’ largest seaborne coking coal importer, Viet Nam, major steel producer, increased coking coal imports 2019 support growth steel sectors. Agricultural bulk commodities, notably grains, important issue trade tensions China 2018 2019 Percentage change 2018–2019 Major bulksa : 3 215.0 3 225.0 0.3 Coal 1 263.0 1 293.0 2.4 Grain 475.0 477.0 0.4 Iron ore 1 477.0 1 455.0 -1.5 Minor bulk : 2 010.0 2 028.0 0.9 Forest products 380.0 382.0 0.5 Steel products 388.0 371.0 -4.4 Total dry bulk 5 225.0 5 253.0 0.5 Table 1.7 Dry bulk trade, 2018–2019 (Million tons annual percentage change) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based Clarksons Research, 2019d, Dry Bulk Trade Outlook, Volume 26, . 6, June. Includes iron ore, coal (steam coking) grains (wheat, coarse grain soybean). Steel producers Steel users China 53 China 51 India 6 India 6 Japan 5 United States 6 United States 5 Japan 4 Russian Federation 4 Republic Korea 3 Republic Korea 4 Russian Federation 2 Germany 2 Germany 2 Turkey 2 Turkey 1 Brazil 2 Italy 1 17 24 Iron ore exporters Iron ore importers Australia 57 China 72 Brazil 23 Japan 8 South Africa 5 Europe 7 Canada 4 Republic Korea 5 India 2 8 Sweden 2 7 Coal exporters Coal importers Indonesia 35 China 19 Australia 30 India 18 Russian Federation 12 Japan 15 United States 6 European Union 11 South Africa 6 Republic Korea 11 Colombia 6 Taiwan Province China 5 Canada 3 Malaysia 3 2 18 Grain exporters Grain importers Brazil 25 East South Asia 46 United States 22 Western Asia 14 Argentina 13 Africa 13 Ukraine 12 South Central America 12 European Union 8 European Union 10 Russian Federation 7 North America 1 Canada 6 4 Australia 3 4 Table 1.8 Major dry bulk commodities steel: Producers, users, exporters importers, 2019 (World market shares percentage) Sources: UNCTAD calculations, based data Clarksons Research, 2020f, Dry Bulk Trade Outlook, Volume 26, . 6, June; World Steel Association, 2019, World Steel short range outlook October 2019, 14 October; World Steel Association, 2020, 2020 World Steel Figures. United States. 2019, grain volumes expanded 0.4 cent. Soybean imports China, accounted 60 cent global soybean imports, continued affected tariffs spread swine fever country’ pig population. context substitution effect, Brazil overtook United States world’ largest seaborne grain exporter. United States long world’ largest grain exporter , fully implemented, phase trade agreement China United States potentially support increased 13REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 soybean grain exports United States. Shipping benefit development, exporters complementing , grain export season United States runs September February, Brazil, March September. Minor bulk contraction 4.4 cent trade steel products detracted growth seaborne shipments minor bulk commodities. 2019, minor bulk volumes expanded 0.9 cent, 3.8 cent 2018 (Clarksons Research, 2020g). Exports China, Japan, Republic Korea Russian Federation pressure demand Europe United States lessened. Imports China minor bulk commodities, nickel ore, bauxite cement, continued support type trade. important development potential impact segment ban Indonesia nickel ore exports force January 2020. , exports Philippines Caledonia partially bolster trade commodities. dry cargo: Containerized trade 2019, global containerized trade expanded slower rate 1.1 cent, 3.8 cent 2018 bringing total 152 TEUs (figure 1.8). Figure 1.8 Global containerized trade, 1996–2020 (Million 20-foot equivalent units annual percentage change) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MDS Transmodal, 2020b, 19 August. growth driven activity -mainlane East–West, South–South intraregional trade routes. Excluding intraregional flows, global containerized trade increased 0.4 cent 2019. challenges facing global car industry motor manufacturing 2019 impact, trade automotive- related goods important sector individual trade lanes. Global car sales decreased time 1.5 cent 2018, steady growth decade. Sales continued decline 2019. China, largest market, recorded double-digit drop. addition slowdown economy, factors play: emissions standards, shift electrification, greater durability cars extended life cycle growing popularity cars ridesharing (Drewry, 2019). Mainlane East–West containerized trade routes, Asia–Europe, trans-Pacific transatlantic, handled 39.1 cent worldwide containerized trade flows 2019. Trade routes, involves greater participation developing countries, gained importance time, countries accounted 60.9 cent containerized trade 2019 (figure 1.9 table 1.9). , intraregional trade, principally intra-Asian flows, South–South trade represented 39.9 cent total 2019. 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC14 Table 1.9 Containerized trade mainlane East–West routes routes, 2016–2020 (20-foot equivalent units annual percentage change) 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020a 20-foot equivalent units Mainlane East–West routes 54 610 793 57 695 035 60 512 411 59 451 778 55 529 706 routes : 81 973 339 87 152 831 89 796 992 92 439 115 87 733 977 -mainlane East–West 17 928 632 18 977 780 18 961 472 19 869 413 18 099 717 North–South 11 108 989 11 753 235 11 963 148 12 018 424 11 576 259 South–South 16 251 689 17 619 241 18 898 303 19 433 908 18 007 289 Intraregional 36 684 030 38 802 575 39 974 069 41 117 369 40 050 711 World total 136 584 133 144 847 866 150 309 403 151 890 894 143 263 682 Percentage change 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020a Mainlane East–West routes 4.06 5.6 4.9 -1.8 -6.6 routes (-mainlane) : 1.59 6.3 3.0 2.9 -5.1 -mainlane East–West 2.7 5.9 -0.1 4.8 -8.9 North–South -0.31 5.8 1.8 0.5 -3.7 South–South -0.98 8.4 7.3 2.8 -7.3 Intraregional 2.83 5.8 3.0 2.9 -2.6 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MDS Transmodal, 2020b, World Cargo Database, 19 August. Notes: -mainlane East–West: Trade involving East Asia, Europe, North America Western Asia Indian subcontinent. North–South: Trade involving Europe, Latin America, North America, Oceania -Saharan Africa. South–South: Trade involving East Asia, Latin America, Oceania, -Saharan Africa Western Asia. Forecast. Figure 1.9 Market share global containerized trade route, 2019 (Percentage) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MDS Transmodal, 2020b, World Cargo Database, 19 August. continued prominence Asia world’ factory continued boost expansion intra-Asian container trade, growing contribution South-East Asia. -mainlane, secondary East–West trade routes North–South routes accounted 13.1 cent 7.9 cent market, . Trade -mainlane East–West routes involves flows East Western Asia, East South Asia, South Asia Europe, Western Asia Europe, . Sanctions Islamic 15REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Republic Iran geopolitical tensions region create volatility types trade. Cargo bound Saudi Arabia United Arab Emirates 50 cent containers carried East Western Asia. 2019, trade westbound leg route increased, reflecting gradual economic recovery countries. Imports Iraq improved, reflect element diverted trade Islamic Republic Iran. number imports Eastern Asia–South Asia lane diminished 2019 line poor economic performance India. consumption demand, bans waste imports, declining vehicle sales car manufacturing contributed growth. appears time writing (September 2020) India, Viet Nam, capitalized trade tensions China United States attract production moving China (Drewry, 2019). 2019, main East–West trade lanes contracted 1.8 cent, compared positive growth routes (+2.9 cent growth). Trade tensions escalating tariffs China United States toll trans-Pacific containerized trade. Volumes key East–West lane contracted 4.7 cent 2019. reflected decrease 7.4 cent peak leg, East Asia–North America, hand, 3.8 cent drop return leg North America East Asia, (table 1.10). significant, slump trade flows moderated substitution Chinese volumes exports United States Asian economies. substitution impact clear: number shipments China Hong Kong, China declined, countries rose (Malaysia, Thailand Viet Nam – lesser extent – Indonesia, Japan, Republic Korea Taiwan Province China). Year Trans-Pacific Asia–Europe Transatlantic Eastbound Westbound Trans- Pacific Eastbound Westbound Total Asia–Europe Eastbound Westbound East Asia–North America North America– East Asia Northern Europe Mediterranean East Asia East Asia– Northern Europe Mediterranean North America– Northern Europe Mediterranean Northern Europe Mediterranean– North America Transatlantic 2014 16.2 7.0 23.2 6.3 15.5 21.8 2.8 3.9 6.7 2015 17.4 6.9 24.3 6.4 15.0 21.3 2.7 4.1 6.8 2016 18.2 7.3 25.5 6.8 15.3 22.1 2.7 4.3 7.0 2017 19.4 7.3 26.7 7.1 16.4 23.4 3.0 4.6 7.5 2018 20.8 7.4 28.2 7.0 17.3 24.3 3.1 4.9 8.0 2019 20.0 6.8 26.8 7.2 17.5 24.7 2.9 4.9 7.9 2020 18.1 7.0 25.1 6.9 16.1 23.0 2.8 4.7 7.4 Annual percentage change 2014–2015 7.9 -2.0 4.9 1.4 -2.6 -1.4 -2.4 5.6 2.2 2015–2016 4.4 6.6 5.1 6.3 2.5 3.6 0.4 2.9 1.9 2016–2017 6.7 -0.5 4.7 4.1 6.9 6.0 7.9 8.3 8.1 2017–2018 7.0 0.9 5.4 -1.3 5.7 3.6 5.8 6.8 6.4 2018–2019 -3.8 -7.4 -4.7 2.9 1.4 1.8 -5.0 -0.2 -2.1 2019–2020 -9.7 2.6 -6.6 -3.6 -8.3 -6.9 -5.3 -5.8 -5.6 Table 1.10 Containerized trade major East–West trade routes, 2014–2020 (Million 20-foot equivalent units annual percentage change) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based MDS Transmodal, 2020b, World Cargo Database, 19 August. Volumes Asia–Europe trade lane grew 1.8 cent. Volumes westbound leg expanded 1.4 cent, supported replenishment European importers stocks, inventory building United Kingdom Brexit increased export focus China Europe (Clarksons Research, 2020h). Eastbound volumes Europe Asia rose 2.9 cent, strengthened uplift refrigerated pork shipments response outbreak African swine fever China (Drewry, 2019). Shipments wastepaper plastic increased 2019, loads destined recycling China reflected greater compliance country’ regulations waste contamination levels , alternatively, redirected markets China, Indonesia Malaysia. Transatlantic trade volumes declined 2.1 cent 2019. Volumes eastbound journey North America Europe contracted 5.0 cent. westbound leg, number imports United States fell slightly (0.2 cent), reflecting reduced 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC16 ship parts components motor vehicle manufacturing United States. potentially negative impact escalating trade tensions European Union United States remained major reason concern. October 2019, WTO authorized United States apply tariffs 25 cent $7.5 billion worth imports European Union, 15-year dispute subsidies granted Airbus. European Union threatened apply tariffs United States, WTO expected decision United States subsidies Boeing (Drewry, 2019). possibility tariffs applied European exports cars motor vehicle parts United States remains concern. 6. Trade tensions curbed maritime shipments caused trade patterns shift 2019, United States increased merchandise exports rest world, helped offset extent reduced exports China. 2 cent world maritime trade metric tons 7 cent containerized cargo estimated subject tariffs introduced China United States 2018 2019 (Clarksons Research, 2020a). estimated additional tariffs curbed maritime trade 0.5 cent 2019, impact mitigated substitution trends, , exporting / importing alternative markets, extent demand tariffed goods sensitive increased tariff levels. quest alternative markets suppliers resulted changing trade patterns redirection flows China markets, South-East Asia, promoting deployment smaller vessels intra-Asian trade (Clarksons Research, 2020a). 2017 2019, major shipping segments experienced declines exports tariffed goods. United States exports goods redirected markets, failed fully compensate volumes lost China. case dry bulk commodities exports, . greater number exports rest world added volumes support maritime trade ton-miles, countries importing dry bulk commodities United States shorter distance, compared China. Viet Nam benefited changing trade patterns triggered trade tensions. migration sourcing countries South-East Asia 2018, market shares Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore Thailand increase pace Viet Nam. share China United States imports Asia dropped 63.8 cent 2019, 69.1 cent 2018 (JOC., 2020a). production goods, electronics footwear, delocalized Viet Nam country continued boost capacity receive business developing port inland transportation infrastructure upgrading manufacturing skills. parallel development, carriers added trans-Pacific services ports Viet Nam. South-East Asian nations expanding manufacturing base, slower pace. patterns containerized bulk trades. general, bulk commodities raw material cargoes sectors seek markets, containerized manufactured goods sectors seek alternative suppliers. 7. Slower growth port traffic 2019 shifts port-call patterns UNCTAD estimates growth global container port throughput decelerated 2 cent 2019, 5.1 cent 2018. 2019, 811.2 million TEUs handled container ports worldwide, reflecting additional 16.0 million TEUs 2018 (table 1.11). 2019, 65 cent global port-container cargo handling concentrated Asia – share China exceeded 50 cent (figure 1.10). Europe ranked terms container port-handling volumes, Table 1.11 World container port throughput region, 2018–2019 (Million 20-foot equivalent units annual percentage change) 20-foot equivalent units Annual percentage change 2018–20192018 2019 Asia 514.9 526.7 2.3 Europe 121.7 123.6 1.5 North America 61.6 62.5 1.6 Latin America Caribbean 52.3 52.6 0.7 Africa 31.3 32.5 3.9 Oceania 13.5 13.2 -2.2 Small island developing States Oceania 13.5 13.2 -2.2 World total 795.3 811.2 2.0 Sources: UNCTAD calculations, based data collected sources, including Lloyd’ List Intelligence, Dynamar . ., Drewry, information published websites port authorities container port terminals. Note: Data reported format . cases, estimates country volumes based secondary source information, reported growth rates estimates based correlations variables, liner shipping connectivity index UNCTAD. Country totals conceal fact minor ports included. , cases, data table differ actual figures. 17REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Asia, share times greater. regions descending order North America (7.7 cent), Latin America Caribbean (6.5 cent), Africa (4 cent) Oceania (1.6 cent). rankings world’ top 20 container ports 2019 changed compared 2018, slower growth world economy trade translated moderated growth global container port throughput. shown figure 1.11() (), reductions volumes handled ports Dalian, China; Dubai, United Arab Emirates; Hong Kong, China; Long Beach, United States. comparison, container port activity continued grow ports Antwerp, Belgium; Hamburg, Germany; Klang, Malaysia; Qingdao, China; Tianjin, China (Lloyd’ List, 2020). China, growth Shanghai lagged Ningbo 2019, benefited feeder rail traffic growth. year, rail connections operation helped attract traffic neighbouring provinces, reflecting government policy concentrate container trade selected ports prevent unhealthy port competition. Volumes Hong Kong, China dipped 6.3 cent, political crisis negative impact economy. port losing market share ports mainland China. Qingdao Tianjin, China domestic traffic move sea result government anti- pollution measures restrict trucking operations. South-East Asia, port Klang, Malaysia continued capture trans-shipment market share. , sufficient recover entire volumes moving Singapore time. Cargo handled port Tanjung Pelepas, Malaysia increased 1.55 cent, growth Singapore remained 1.63 cent. European ports recorded volume growth, reflecting persistent weakness plagued manufacturing sector importers drawing stocks inventories. Rotterdam, Netherlands expanded volumes 2.1 cent compared 2018, Antwerp, Belgium achieved 6.8 cent growth. move THE Alliance’ Atlantic services Germany Bremerhaven Hamburg, reflected 2019 throughput ports. Hamburg recorded increase 6.1 cent volumes handled, supported addition connections Baltic services, Bremerhaven recorded decline volumes (Drewry, 2020b). Container port throughput North American ports moderated 2019. West coast ports performed poorly, compared east coast coast Gulf Mexico. Ports United States west coast lost market share combined import-export market. trend accelerated trade tensions, tendency cargo move west coast North America. 2019, share ports Los Angeles Long Beach, United States dropped 22.9 cent, 26.5 cent 2015. Cargo migration impact west coast ports Canada Mexico, , ports Vancouver, ázaro árdenas Manzanillo, lost market share. United States, exporters looked export markets avoid increased reciprocal tariffs imposed China (JOC., 2020b). previously noted, trade tensions required shippers find alternative markets source imports locations China, South-East Asia. Thailand Viet Nam benefited change trade patterns routing, market share China shrank. Ports Atlantic Gulf coasts positioned handle shipments arriving parts Asia. performance ports Houston Savannah, United States, , market share increased, case point. Figure 1.10 Estimated world container port throughput region, 2019 (Percentage share total 20-foot equivalent units) Sources: UNCTAD calculations, derived table 1.11 report. 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC18 Figure 1.11 Leading 20 global container ports, 2018–2019 () million 20-foot equivalent units () annual percentage change ) ) Sources: UNCTAD calculations, based Lloyd’ List, 2020a, Ports. Challenging economic trends Argentina, recession Brazil social unrest Chile constrained cargo volumes ports Latin America Caribbean. , ports Freeport Bahamas; Itajaí, Sao Francisco Sul Paranaguá Brazil; Panama Pacific terminals recorded positive growth. Western Asia, container port volumes continued affected sanctions political tensions. 2019, gradual recovery economies Saudi Arabia United Arab Emirates support port-handling activity, Islamic Republic Iran, volumes Bandar Abbas decreased. United Arab Emirates, Khalifa port activity rose, China Ocean Shipping Company (COSCO) Mediterranean Shipping Company moved business respective terminals, Jebel Ali (Drewry, 2020b). Growth container activity South Asia stalled 2019, reflecting slower economic growth India austerity measures Pakistan. ports Jawaharlal Nehru Mundra reported growth, Chennai port continued lose traffic newer east coast ports Kattupalli. Indian ports Visakhapatnam Krishnapatnam benefiting increased trans- shipment coastal traffic generated relaxation country’ cabotage rules. Sri Lanka, subdued growth Colombo reflected declining trend gateway traffic erosion trans-shipment 19REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 cargo amended cabotage rules India. Africa, weakening economies Nigeria South Africa constrained container port volume growth. Oceania, container port activity declined 2.2 cent economy Australia slowed consumer confidence fell (Drewry, 2019). 8. Adapting port strategies seeking opportunities Today, ports showing interest strengthening connections hinterland closer shippers tap cargo volumes committed. Providing intermodal access, warehousing logistics services illustrates type actions ports capture local market volumes. , port Savannah, United States , decades, pioneer driving port centric logistics growing hub retail import distribution. Republic Korea, port Busan investing port-distribution centres (“distriparks”) strengthen position regional logistics centre. Egypt, port Damietta focusing gateway market opposed trans-shipment business. illustrated development dry port rail connection projects (Drewry, 2019). change strategy, gradual shift mergers acquisitions, opposed development projects, reflects uncertainty surrounding outlook port growth diversify business strategies respond evolving landscape (Drewry, 2020b). , China Merchants Port Holdings concluded agreement CMA CGM transfer 10 terminal assets Terminal Link. South Asian company Adani acquired 75 cent shares Krishnapatnam Port Company India. regard future developments, ports expand environmental facilities line accelerated environmental sustainability agenda. Similarly ports, shipping companies Maersk, , showing increasing interest integrating services ports inland logistics ( Loadstar, 2019). 9. Challenges sector onset pandemic , 2019 weak year shipping maritime trade. upside, hard Brexit avoided delayed, remains trade relations European Union United Kingdom evolve. apparent easing trade tensions China United States phase trade agreement countries signed January 2020. Initial expectations moderate improvement global economic conditions occur 2020. , unprecedented global health economic crisis triggered COVID-19 pandemic early 2020 undermined growth prospects maritime transport trade. black swan event extremely rare unpredictable, potentially severe consequences (Drewry, 2020c), pandemic global fallout transformed world. making precise assessment impacts longer-term implications challenging task, doubt, , outlook significantly deteriorated uncertain. . MARITIME TRADE IN THE ERA OF PANDEMIC Initially localized China, pandemic evolved rapidly global game changer quarter 2020. spread disease worldwide consequent disruptions societies economies -reaching implications, including transport trade. supply-chain disruptions, falling global demand global economic uncertainty caused pandemic, global economy suffered dislocation, supply , demand . disruptions natural disasters, conflicts, strikes security incidents common maritime transport, pandemic exceptional, scale, speed direct impact global supply chains, transport trade. Historically, disruption resulted global lockdown people business. Restrictions mobility, travel economic activities worldwide, varying degrees, unprecedented. mid-April 2020, 90 cent world economy affected form lockdown (United Nations, 2020b), month’ , 4.2 billion people 54 cent global population (International Energy Agency, 2020). 100 countries closed national borders, disrupting supply supressing global demand goods services. country prepared face combined health economic crisis. Risk assessment management common practice business policymaking processes, emergence risks – security threats, environmental risks, changing weather patterns rising social unrest. , likelihood disruption type scale COVID-19 outbreak foreseen underestimated. factors play, including competing policy priorities, longer- term concerns, budget pressures institutional capacity constraints. , research behavioural economics suggests limitations inherent human minds interfering relevant risk assessment decision-making processes ( box). June 2020, appeared brunt economic shock concentrated 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC20 2020 impacts vary region line gradual geographical spread pandemic. Breaking stages gradually moving region , pandemic impact supply chains. affected multiple times goods cross borders ways, depending pathway pandemic region. result, managing pandemic response based single location, responses account multiple locations. 80 cent world merchandise trade volume carried sea, impact pandemic maritime transport -reaching implications. impact magnified role played China maritime trade, prosperity shipping sector long strongly tied country. 2003, outbreak severe acute respiratory syndrome, China 5 cent global GDP. Today figure stands 16 cent. 2019, China accounted 20 cent world imports sea, 10 cent 2003. share total exports remained stable 5 cent world total 2003, share global container exports increased. context, maritime trade ripple effects shipping market segments, supply-chain disruptions involving China naturally send shockwaves shipping ports worldwide. pandemic weighed maritime trade China, quarter 2020, global maritime trade bound affected. addition sector’ high exposure sensitivity developments China, restrictions vessels crew ports, labour force shortages restrictions movement, operational challenges shipping unchartered waters. Impacts felt board, ranging maritime trade flows vessel movements, vessel crew , capacity deployed, port operations, warehousing capacity, hinterland connections inland logistics. June 2020, leading economic shipping indicators showing resumed activity China. , partly helped recovery, consumers business export markets lockdown. major economies eased lockdown, situation remained problematic continued evolve uncertainty pandemic spikes. background, section considers implications pandemic maritime transport trade. exhaustive, main issues highlight type challenges emphasize maritime transport act trade facilitator, supply-chain connector key partner promoting resilient, robust sustainable transport trade patterns: • pandemic shockwaves supply chains, shipping ports. • World output merchandise trade projected fall 2020. • Global merchandise trade receives supply demand shocks. • Disruptions caused pandemic raise existential questions globalization. regard issue, pandemic’ disruptions supply chains, shipping ports, Box 1.1 Blind spots risk assessment management frequency severity supply-chain disruptions rise. Supply chains vulnerable broad range threats, including pandemics, extreme weather events, cyberattacks political crises. Risk management widely years, events terror attacks 11 September 2001 United States, tsunamis 2008–2009 global financial crisis. COVID-19-induced disruptions revealed extent world ill-prepared face rapidly evolving global pandemic. calls question effectiveness relevant risk assessment management plans, current context highly interdependent interconnected world economies. Paradoxically, lack pandemic plans. , generally failed account full importance ramifications global supply chains. Research behavioural economics, pioneered Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman, suggests evaluating risks, biases inherent human mind interfere. Thinking critically important assessing risks. , humans prone making errors reasoning, fallacies cognitive illusions clutter thinking. Examples cognitive blind spots include relying intuition evaluate evidence, assess probabilities risks; autopilot – , primed social cultural conditions; making snap judgments; shortcuts quick decisions based trial error, rule thumb educated guess; ignoring facts, hard data statistics; influenced vivid mental images; motivated emotional factors gut feeling necessarily rational objective thinking. Understanding biases shape judgments decisions important assessing risks devising response measures plans. overcome limitations, policymakers business executives start aware cognitive biases undermine sound policies decisions, adopt potential mitigation measures, deemed . Sources: Economic Social Commission Asia Pacific, 2013; Kahneman, 2011; Piattelli-Palmarini, 1994; Rodrigue, 2020. 21REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 disruptions inevitably invite comparisons global financial crisis 2008–2009. crises similar respects diverge . , cases, governments intervened injecting funds economy stimulate recovery. , crises accompanied rising protectionist sentiment scepticism globalization. , differed type, scope, speed scale. crisis , surpassing 2008–2009 financial crisis, COVID-19 crisis dubbed “Great Lockdown” (International Monetary Fund, 2020a). touch points financial crisis limited, pandemic swept entire world record time. 2020 crisis double-hit disruption, morphed supply-side disruption China global cross-sectoral demand shock. , restrictions economic activity travel occur previous crisis. Fourth, pre-existing trade finance trends . , 2008–2009 crisis began mid-2008, worst effects evident months , impact 2020 crisis . regard shipping maritime trade, fundamental difference industry’ response suppressed demand. carriers focused safeguarding market shares months leading outbreak pandemic, focus shifted managing supply maintain rates. , case financial crisis, size orderbook higher ( chapter 2). precise impact shipping maritime trade difficult gauge, picture 2020 optimistic, key forecasting entities predicting contractions world GDP merchandise trade. regard issue, world output merchandise trade decline 2020, existing estimates economic fallouts pandemic vary, high degree uncertainty involved. converge point global recession making. Bearing mind uncertain times, differences forecasting techniques assumptions, potential revisions depending pandemic continues evolve policy interventions effective mitigating pandemic effects, UNCTAD expects world GDP fall 4.3. cent 2020. International Monetary Fund predicts decline 4.4 cent (International Monetary Fund, 2020b) (figure 1.12). comparison, UNCTAD analysis shows world GDP contracted 1.3 cent 2009. cases, GDP countries, developed developing countries alike, expected decrease, East Asia, including China, marginal growth 1.1 cent. UNCTAD analysis, pandemic- related recession translate $12 trillion loss global income relative 2019. based UNCTAD baseline scenario world GDP growth takes account average growth rate world economy – trend prior outbreak pandemic – 3.0 cent 2017– 2019 (UNCTAD, 2020a). estimate suggests cumulative output losses 2020 2021 approach $8.5 trillion (United Nations, 2020b). developing countries affected declining demand export revenues, remittances, foreign direct investment official development assistance. developed countries hit hard, limited resources exposure supply-chain disruptions exports textiles clothing products ( , Bangladesh). economies Africa, developing America Western Asia, transition economies, added concern sharp fall commodity prices. Commodity-dependent countries small island developing States, depend heavily external flows, vulnerable external shocks. , external flows account 35 cent GDP (United Nations, 2020b). Fiscal measures stimulus packages introduced worldwide stand $9 trillion, equivalent 10 cent global GDP 2019. , developing countries implementing limited fiscal stimulus, exceeding 2 cent GDP. lack fiscal resources Figure 1.12 Varied forecasts gross domestic product growth 2020 (Percentage change) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based reports issued entities listed. 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC22 address economic impact large relief stimulus measures (United Nations, 2020b). respect issue, global merchandise trade receives shocks supply demand, trade typically volatile output fall sharply times crisis (World Bank, 2020). mid-2020, full impact outbreak pandemic international trade remained uncertain, line projections GDP growth. , preliminary estimates leading indicators provide pointers. trade weakened 2019, clear disruptions brought pandemic significantly suppressed trade volumes collapsed record lows. Forecasts varied differences assumptions, scenarios models concur international merchandise trade expected decrease contraction levels 2009. UNCTAD estimates international merchandise trade declined 5 cent quarter 2020 diminish 27 cent quarter (UNCTAD, 2020b). quarter 2020, trade textiles apparel diminished 12 cent, office machinery automotive sectors, 8 cent. April 2020, trade energy automotive products fell 40 cent 50 cent , . Significant declines observed trade chemicals, machineries precision instruments, drops 10 cent. contrast, trade agrifood products electronics fared comparatively (WTO, 2020). full year, WTO projections point reductions world merchandise trade ranging 13 32 cent 2020, depending scenario, recovering rates ranging 21.3 24 cent 2021 (WTO, 2020). , numbers bode maritime trade. fourth issue disruptions caused pandemic raise existential questions globalization. maritime transport backbone linking global supply chains, supporting trade enabling participation global chains. pandemic magnitude COVID-19 crisis occurs, sector works transmission channel sends shockwaves supply chains regions. Restrictions introduced response pandemic raised obstacles undermine smooth movement trade flows supply-chain operations significantly erode transport services trade liberalization trade facilitation gains achieved years. context, pandemic fallout accelerated existing debate benefits globalization extended supply chains. debate sparked heightened trade tensions China United States 2018. disruption caused pandemic brought fore concerns outsourcing production distant locations diversify production manufacturing sites suppliers. 70 cent international trade linked global chains (OECD, 2020b), China predominating manufacturer exporter consumer products, supplier intermediate inputs manufacturing companies located countries. UNCTAD estimates intermediate products trade world goods 2018 – $8.3 trillion (UNCTAD, 2020c). 2020, estimated 20 cent global trade manufacturing intermediate products originated China, 4 cent 2002 (UNCTAD, 2020d). volume intra-Asian containerized trade rapid growth years reflect trend. context, disruption supply chains China bound affect production rest world, wide-ranging impacts machinery, automotive products, chemicals, communication equipment precision instruments. Japan, Republic Korea, Taiwan Province China, United States Viet Nam affected . Preliminary analyses suggest electronics electrical equipment highest risk sector global scale. automotive industry maintains inventory levels, , , depend China electronics industry (Aylor al., 2020). Electronics manufacturing global large degree, adds complexity, goods cross borders. OECD database 2018 trade added, share foreign added electronics exports 10 cent United States, 25 cent China, 34 cent Republic Korea, 44 cent Singapore, 50 cent Malaysia Mexico, 60 cent Viet Nam. Constraints transportation logistics lack workers prevented timely delivery components China countries factories South-East Asia pandemic. result, response measures sourcing Viet Nam, switching land air freight rerouting shipping lanes previously included stops Chinese factories (Aylor al., 2020). shipping, measures translate rerouting vessels, schedules port calls, variations volumes. , illustrate challenges involved transport time-sensitive trade disruptions supply chains occur level integration country’ supply chain level inventories change outcomes. sophisticated manufacturing countries Bangladesh, Pakistan Viet Nam, attracted factories move production China, highly exposed COVID-19-induced disruptions. case point Bangladesh, 85 cent exports composed textile fibres, textiles - articles, clothing accessories 23REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 (categories standard international trade classification) (UNCTAD, 2020e). shock supply chain demand driven reflects cuts spending -essential goods store closures. estimate expects global sales fashion luxury brands drop 25 35 cent 2020, compared 2019 (Seara al., 2020). Factory closures, including China East Asian countries, lockdowns implemented worldwide, resulting supply-chain disruptions, revealed shortcomings extended single-country- centric supply chains. rekindled debate risks internationalization production networks overreliance countries China manufacturing production, predominance -inventory - -time supply-chain models. observers argue revisit existing supply-chain patterns reflect strategies shift model promoted hyperglobalization (1999–2009). assert -nationalizing global chains , extent, insulate countries fallout pandemic (OECD, 2020b). United States, incentives encourage companies shift business China include tax breaks reshoring fund (Lloyd’ Loading List, 2020b). Japan announced allocate $2.2 billion attract Japanese manufacturers shift production China, $2 billion earmarked relocation Japan. developments accelerate move China one2 manufacturing hub model, evolved rising labour costs country intensified trade tensions. developments prompt regionalization supply chains growth intraregional containerized flows. single country easily absorb massive export manufacturing capacity China. Moving production home closer home complex process account factors labour costs. Analytical research suggests contraction GDP worse -nationalized global chains, government lockdowns affect supply domestic inputs (OECD, 2020b). , increasingly evident slowdown globalization place decade. Prior pandemic, structural shifts, digitalization, “servicification” manufacturing (Haven Van Der Marel, 2018), growing sustainability imperative rise protectionist sentiment, hold increasingly -shaping globalization trends. Companies adding operations supplement current production. 2 business strategy aims avoid investing concentrating business China. Viet Nam largest country region manufacturing growth offshoring, illustrated agreements Intel Samsung. , Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore Thailand, prime candidates. India contemplating larger role establish regional manufacturing hub attract companies seeking move supply chains China (Bloomberg, 2020a). Tax incentives easy access land infrastructure considered. efforts pre-date pandemic (Bloomberg, 2020b), trade tensions China United States supply-chain vulnerabilities exposed outbreak accelerate process. , China remain key player, strong supply-chain network infrastructure knowledge base, massive labour force, match. instance, Intel opened facility Viet Nam, company maintained assets China. Viet Nam simply added assembly testing operation (Procurement Bulletin, 2020). illustrated rise United States imports China 2020, reflecting fact retailers rushing China inventory replenishment showing difficult shift entire sourcing (JOC., 2020c). manufacturing activity migrated South-East Asia tied -wage -skill workers produce footwear apparel. higher- products electronics, workers require greater skills (JOC., 2020c). hand, Chinese companies shifting production neighbouring countries, reflecting part impact tariff escalation 2018. globalization process based labour- cost differentials extensive outsourcing production stimulated trade reached limits, factors developments world economy population shape maritime trade patterns future transport. include global decarbonization agenda, implications largest commodities transported sea: crude oil coal. driver growing demand smaller - packages physical goods increasingly bundled services require faster transit time. shifts demand patterns expected question cost advantage shipping compared means transport (Port Economics, 2020). summary, pandemic-induced disruption trigger shifts globalization patterns, supply-chain configuration production models, implications transport inventory decisions – strategic importance shipping. potential reshape operational landscape, 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC24 container shipping, including regard vessel size, capacity deployed operations. , greater regionalization lead increased fragmentation trade flows , turn, larger vessels challenging (JOC., 2020d). . OUTLOOK 1. Poor short-term outlook maritime trade Uncertainty remains overriding theme 2020. Predicting impact maritime trade timing scale recovery fraught uncertainty. factors play, significantly influencing outlook. include pathway pandemic, effectiveness efforts control outbreaks, continued shifts spending patterns, trends consumer business confidence, developments commodity prices ability stimulus packages give impetus growth put world economy track. Bearing mind extrapolating trends, UNCTAD expects volume maritime trade decline 2020. Based maritime trade--GDP ratio period 1990–2019 forecast GDP growth International Monetary Fund (October 2020), UNCTAD predicts international maritime trade fall 4.1 cent 2020 (table 1.12). Seaborne trade forecasts 2021 depend economic growth projections, vary. , UNCTAD expects world GDP rebound 4.1 cent 2021 ( table 1.3 ), Department Economic Social Affairs 2020 forecast projects global GDP expansion 4.2 cent International Monetary Fund June 2020 forecast predicts growth bounce 5.4 cent 2021. contrast, WTO forecast April 2020 points recovery world merchandise trade volume 2021 ranging 21.3 24 cent, depending scenario (WTO, 2020). 2021, UNCTAD estimates maritime trade flows recover 4.8 cent. 2. Falling containerized trade volumes rising service cancellations 2020 Container shipping strongly affected disruptions induced pandemic, containerized trade closely linked world economic developments, consumer activity supply chains. Reflecting negative impact combined demand supply shocks, volumes coming pressure 2020. large share ship capacity idled number services cancelled good indication slowdown. provide general picture, 10 cent global vessel-carrying capacity sitting idle April 2020 (Drewry, 2020d). shown figure 1.8 tables 1.9 1.10, global containerized trade projected contract trade routes, intra-regional trade faring . Data quarters 2020 highlight impact pandemic containerized trade originating China main East–West containerized trade routes (figure 1.13 () ()). Journeys involving East, export leg (westbound Asia–Europe, eastbound trans-Pacific), contracted quarter 2020, compared quarter 2019. numbers pronounced quarter slump demand Europe North America felt. transatlantic route, automotive goods staple container flows, outlook deteriorated. shown figure 1.13 (), double digit-drops transatlantic route recorded quarter 2020. Owing diminishing trade volumes factory output manufacturing regions slowed consumers reduced discretionary spending -essential items Europe North America, carriers cut capacity introducing blank sailing, idling capacity -routing Cape Good Hope pare costs advantage fuel prices ( chapters 2 4). avoid cost transiting Suez Canal ($600,000 - trip ultralarge container ships) absorbing excess capacity extending sailing times. -routing vessels Table 1.12 International maritime trade development forecasts, 2020–2021 (Porcentage change) Forecasting entity Annual growth (percentage) Years Source UNCTAD -4.1 2020 International Monetary Fund world GDP growth forecast UNCTAD 4.8 2021 International Monetary Fund world GDP growth forecast Clarksons Research Services -4.0 2020 Seaborne Trade Monitor, October 2020 Clarksons Research Services 4.7 2021 Seaborne Trade Monitor, October 2020 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based analysis forecasts published institutions data providers. 25REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 imply $10 million lost charges Suez Canal Authority. rebate scheme announced early 2020, failed curtail longer journeys Cape Good Hope (DHL, 2020). Blank sailing service cancellations announced carriers usual notice periods affect service reliability ability shippers plan supply chains. Deploying larger vessels means missed port calls caused blank sailing greater impact capacity (JOC., 2020e). June 2020, ports reported blank sailing resulted mega-sized vessels calling , large volumes created peaks operational challenges. operational hurdles affect ports (ship- -shore operations yard activity), landside distribution (Notteboom Pallis, 2020). container vessels move scheduled rotation, cancellation sailing port rotation cascades ports served carrier rotation. smaller ports hard hit multiple cancellations services. Ship capacity ports Manila Odessa, Russian Federation, , reduced 25 cent 2020, ports Beirut Visakhapatnam, India 20 cent, larger ports Hamburg, Germany Rotterdam, Netherlands, 10 cent. Trans-shipment ports Colombo Djibouti affected Figure 1.13 Containerized trade growth main East–West routes () million 20-foot equivalent units; () percentage change, quarter 2019– quarter 2020, quarter 2019– quarter 2020 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Trans-Pacific eastbound East Asia–Europe westbound Trans-Pacific westbound East Asia–Europe eastbound Europe– North America westbound Europe– North America eastbound Q2 2019Q1 2019 Q1 2020 Q2 2020 Percentage -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 Trans-Pacific eastbound East Asia–Europe westbound Trans-Pacific westbound East Asia–Europe eastbound Europe– North America westbound Europe– North America eastbound Q1 2019–Q1 2020 Q2 2019–Q2 2020 Percentage ) ) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based MDS Transmodal, 2020b, World Cargo Database, 19 August. Abbreviation: , quarter. 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC26 reductions, 13 cent 11 cent, (Clipper Data, 2020). context, argued blank sailing increase bargaining power carriers compared terminals canals, owing increased arrears terminal-handling charges, (International Transport Forum, 2020). Shippers contribute disruption cancelling bookings prior notice carriers, making planning optimize vessel capacity difficult. port level, traffic results cancellation work shifts advance notice inland carriers. operational challenges combined amplified growing detention demurrage charges exceeding free storage time late return equipment marine terminals ( chapter 2). experience shared Northern Corridor Transit Transport Coordinating Authority Eastern Africa highlights challenges case cross-border corridor underscores effective trade-facilitation measures ( chapter 4). Pressure warehousing capacity, shipments -essential merchandise idled, reported (JOC., 2020e). Rebalancing empty containers challenge, empties shortage Europe, stagnated ports China (JOC., 2020f). Information sharing, transparency communication key avoiding hurdles inefficiencies arise responding disruptions (Lloyd’ Loading List, 2020c). April 2020, reports carriers reinstated cancelled sailings announced rate increases Asia–Europe route met optimism early signs recovery. , argued sailings reinstated part carriers overestimated fall demand activity explained clearing backlog accumulated China lockdown (JOC., 2020g). likelihood, announced extension blank sailings August 2020 points expected pressure demand recovery maritime trade volumes. Blank sailings give indication trends demand. (Drewry, 2020e). decline number blank sailings earliest signs global trade picking (Clipper Data, 2020), conclusions drawn quickly. Blank sailings provide full picture assessed scheduled supply capacities relevant indicators. 3. Oil gas trade declines restrictions travel transport 2020 pandemic significant impact trade oil gas. Global oil demand fell freezing large parts global economy, restrictions travel transport, cuts industrial activity refinery output. , factors depressed demand, volumes crude oil refined petroleum products declined. Supply-side factors consideration. surplus oil production practically filled oil inventories, vessels floating storage ( chapter 2). implementation supply cuts extended group Organization Petroleum Exporting countries early 2020 expected reduce availability crude oil. Disruptions oil infrastructure Libya, declining outputs Islamic Republic Iran Bolivarian Republic Venezuela, curtailing growth (Clarksons Research, 2020j). outlook liquefied natural gas shipping affected pandemic. Disruptions early 2020 depressed import demand China quarter. global outbreak pandemic March 2020, global demand liquefied natural gas pressure. 4. Dry bulk trade affected decline industrial automotive sector activities Reductions mining industrial activity impact dry bulk trade lesser extent containerized trade. Global dry bulk trade pressure 2020, owing suppressed economic activity demand. , partial recovery Brazilian iron ore exports rebuilding stockpiles China support iron ore trade flows decline 2019, decades. Trade coal projected shrink, due weaker power demand regions, oil gas prices making coal power generation competitive. Minor bulk trade commodities, steel products, cement scrap metal, construction steel manufacturing, generally suffer weakening economy. steel aluminium sectors, automotive industry depends, collapsed, automotive sector hit hard (Baltic International Maritime Council (BIMCO), 2020). Trade minor bulk commodities expected deteriorate 2020, stimulus measures concentrate infrastructure housing investment boost demand commodities. , assuming commitments set phase 1 trade agreement China United States implemented, grain shipments pick . Generally, food-based agricultural commodities exposed decline economic output. 5. Shrinking port volumes 2020 storage space baseline scenario Drewry, global port container throughput expected contract 7.3 cent 2020. contraction amplify reach 12 cent negative scenario upheld. shown quarterly trends depicted figure 1.14, global container port volumes collapsed quarter 2020 height 27REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 pandemic. Port volumes 2021 vary, depending scenario. Projected figures range contraction 3 cent jump 10 cent (Drewry, 2020f). range scenarios shows unpredictable volatile short-term outlook . ports reported increase port terminal utilization due rise imported essential goods, grains (rice, wheat). ports reported traders began storing liquid bulk commodities anticipation future commodity price developments. situation faced ports relates automotive industry, cars collected, due collapse sales, resulted overcrowding relevant storage areas. Storage space cases transit container shipping programmes suspended. , Mediterranean Shipping Company applied suspension transit world’ leading trans-shipment hubs (Bremerhaven, Germany; Busan, Republic Korea; King Abdullah port, Saudi Arabia; Lomé; Rodman port, PSA Panama International Terminal, Panama; Asyaport, Tekirdağ, Turkey). reported experience shared Mediterranean Shipping Company, allowed shippers benefit advance yard storage start moving goods early anticipation resumption demand ( chapter 4). shipping lines, mitigate effect volume reductions , , blank sailings, service suspensions capacity cuts, ports mitigation tools disposal focus increasingly costs. Developments production supply-chain-design choices relevance ports. noted , disruptions brought pandemic hasten shift single country-centric sourcing. , previously noted, shift China supplier, supply chains angles proved resilient pandemic experience, compared locations. Container ports important role play servicing migrating trade. locations prepare potential growth volumes. , Cambodia Indonesia shortfalls port capacity, , handle traffic larger vessels. Viet Nam, major beneficiary container trade patterns, port capacity considered suitable, country invest deepwater berths capable handling larger vessels direct calls. Closing infrastructure gap region estimated require $12 billion investment (Drewry, 2020g). 6. Shifts consumption shipping patterns rise -commerce continue pandemic revealed -commerce important instrument sustain consumption crises. pandemic lockdown boosted -commerce uptake, continue consumption patterns evolve. potential growth significant. UNCTAD puts global -commerce sales 2018 $25.6 trillion, 8 cent 2017. 2018, estimated -commerce sales , includes business--business business--consumer sales, equivalent 30 cent global GDP. United States continued dominate -commerce Figure 1.14 World port-handling forecast, 2019–2021 (Million 20-foot equivalent units percentage change) -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 50 100 150 200 250 Q1 2019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019 Q1 2020 Q2 2020 Q3 2020 Q4 2020 Q1 2021 Q2 2021 Q3 2021 Q4 2021 Percentage change Throughput Pe rc en ta ge illi 2 0- fo ot qu iva le nt ni ts Source: Drewry baseline forecast; Drewry, 2020e, 2020 Container Forecaster Update, quarter 1, . Abbreviation: , quarter. 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC28 market remained top countries business--consumer -commerce sales, China United Kingdom (UNCTAD, 2018). Global cooperation area -commerce, facilitate cross-border movement goods services, narrow digital divide level playing field small businesses, enhanced (Lloyd’ Loading List, 2020d). Growing -commerce shipping put pressure warehousing distribution capacity, business ensure availability safety stocks buffers. turn, increase demand storage space. Demand logistics space continues outpace supply Asia, consumer demand -commerce growing faster logistics infrastructure supporting . $4 billion poured Asia-based logistics development funds beginning 2020 (JOC., 2020h). Demand distribution centres warehouses expected increase, brought COVID-19-induced disruptions. , supply chains -appraised, inventories increased geographical diversification decentralization supply chains pursued. . SUMMARY AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS recovery vary differences disruption caused pandemic, countries’ levels development capacity support economic growth, providing social safety nets. International support cooperation paramount importance developing countries, developed countries small island developing States. Trade key component recovery, maritime transport industry, carries , major role play. 1. Maritime transport remains pivotal interdependent world COVID-19 outbreak revealed high levels global interdependency setting motion trends reshape maritime transport trade. sector pivotal moment, face concerns raised pandemic. , longer-term considerations : potential shifts supply-chain design, globalization patterns, consumption spending habits , general, growing focus risk assessment vulnerability reduction. , sector continue mitigating impact - policies trade protectionism carry sustainability -carbon agenda. trends unfold affect maritime transport trade. post-COVID-19 pandemic world, element shortened supply chains ( shoring, reshoring) redundancy (maintaining excess inventory) (Flock Freight, 2020). pandemic fallout accelerate transformation supply chains started years ( Review Maritime Transport 2019). aspects supply chains, sourcing, inventory transport, reassessed view strengthening resilience optimizing robustness event future disruptions. Investing warehousing storage, space, important ensure sufficiency safety stocks inventories. established --time supply-chain model reassessed include considerations resilience robustness, , stocks buffers, strategic goods commodities. Diversification sourcing, routing distribution channels grow importance. Moving single country multiple-location sourcing focused cutting costs delays risk management resilience evolve (JOC., 2020i). pandemic brought focus notion -sufficiency, equated reshoring shoring, approach vulnerabilities case localized disruptions. Decisions uproot supply chains depend labour costs difficult readily achieve. 2. Aftermath pandemic: potential implications pandemic lasting impact maritime transport trade. key trends maritime transport trade part pandemic’ legacy: • accelerated shift globalization patterns supply-chain designs. outright de- globalization occur complexity costs involved uprooting reshuffling highly integrated supply chains, slower wave globalization started post-2008 financial crisis decelerate regionalization trade gain momentum. • swifter uptake technology digitalization, technology increasingly permeating supply chains distribution networks, including transport logistics. Adopting technological solutions keeping abreast advances field requisite, longer option. pandemic disruptions shown movers terms technological uptake weather storm, , -commerce online platforms, blockchain solutions information technology-enabled -party logistics. 29REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 • Continued shifts consumer spending behaviour evolving tastes change production transport requirements. Examples include rise online shopping post-COVID-19 era requirement customized goods. trends emphasize -mile transport leg promote shorter supply chains -dimensional printing robotics. trends trigger demand warehousing space stocks. • Heightened importance criteria metrics risk assessment management relevant policy agendas industry’ business plans strategies. Risk assessments integrate considerations global interlinkages interdependencies, including underpinned intertwined supply chains financial channels. • Adjustments maritime transport adaptation change line changing operating landscape. Industry stakeholders continue tap business opportunities. Authorities international maritime passages Panama Canal assessing options ensure preparedness case reconfiguration supply chains prompted pandemic (JOC., 2020j). tapping business opportunities trend started pandemic. instance, shipping lines Maersk port operators DP World, greater interest business opportunities lie supply chain inland logistics. aim closer shippers emerge reliable -- logistics service providers (Riviera Maritime Media, 2019). 3. Priority action areas preparation post-COVID-19 pandemic world priority action areas address ongoing challenges affecting maritime transport trade developing countries, challenges arising pandemic fallout. : • Fostering economic recovery. support economies path recovery, developing countries fiscally constrained, respond multiple shocks triggered crisis. Existing pledges support packages falling short expectations. UNCTAD called massive liquidity injection extraordinary special drawing rights tailored developing country -scheduling restructuring external debt. , UNCTAD proposes $500 billion Marshall Plan instituted health care developing countries support medical social response pandemic. • Allowing trade support growth development effectively. Trade tensions, protectionism export restrictions, essential goods times crisis, entail economic social costs. limited, extent . , -tariff measures trade barriers addressed, including stepping trade-facilitation measures customs automation. • Helping reshape globalization sustainability resilience. important carefully assess options supply- chain design ensure economic, social environmental outcomes, line Sustainable Development Goals 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development. , shortening supply chains -shoring shoring reduce transport costs fuel consumption, necessarily future-proof supply chains disruptions occur , location. Multiple-sourcing approaches prove effective resilience-building concentrating production location, home . Strategies aim find ways unsustainable globalization patterns mitigated generate wider range economies. • Strengthening international cooperation. pandemic litmus test globalization global solidarity (United Nations, 2020b). Addressing impacts pandemic global supply chains require strengthened coordinated global cooperation action. • Assisting shipping ports preparing adapting supply chains future. Maritime transport adapt ensure prepared support supply chains promote greater resilience robustness. Shipping ports reassess business strategies investment plans, including terms port capacity, shipping network configuration, vessels capacity deployment. , investment vessel capacity account shortening supply chains ( , critical essential goods pharmaceuticals) regionalization trade flows. Port logistics capacity countries receiving businesses moved China upgraded expanded needed. importantly, key lesson drawn 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC30 pandemic experience cooperation, information sharing technology support transport coordinated action crucial. • Promoting resilience-building, including investment risk assessment preparedness. expand visibility supply chains , , control towers tools supply-chain disruptions predicted analysed (Aylor al., 2020). Plans provide respond crises, ensure business continuity set actions protocols stages crisis (Knizek, 2020). shipping, establishing priority lanes handling critical cargo ( , food, medicine medical equipment) limiting restrictions affect labour crew leave. Lessons learned pandemic serve guidance informing preparedness future-proofing maritime transport resilient supply chains ( chapters 2, 4 5). Relevant actions include collecting sharing information potential concentration bottlenecks, developing stress tests essential supply chains fostering enabling regulatory framework ensures greater certainty (OECD, 2020b). , 2008–2009 financial crisis, Governments developed stress tests specific supply chains. tests carried context policies related creation strategic stockpiles correctly assess inventories buffer stocks needed prevent shortages future. • priorities avoiding short- sighted policies. pandemic overriding theme 2020 years decades , important potentially disruptive global issues overlooked. , climate change risk pushed burner, address concerns raised pandemic. Momentum current efforts address carbon emissions shipping ongoing energy transition fossil fuels maintained. Governments potentially direct stimulus packages support recovery promoting priorities time, including climate-change mitigation adaptation. , policies adopted view preparing world pandemic support progress shipping industry’ transition greening sustainability. , sustainability concerns connectivity small island developing States progress developed countries realization Sustainable Development Goal 8.1 important building resilience cope future disruptions. • Enabling greater uptake technology minding digital divide. means promoting efforts accelerate digital transformation improve build resilience supply chains supporting transportation networks. Digitalization efforts enable enhanced efficiencies productivity transport, smart ports shipping, countries tap -commerce capabilities transport facilitation benefits boost trade. Developing countries support minimize divide ensure exploit advantages digitalization build resilience. maritime transport play role linking global economies supply chains, leverage crisis investing technology adopting solutions meet supply chains future supporting resilience-building efforts (Egloff, 2020). 31REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 REFERENCES Aylor , Gilbert Knizek (2020). Responding coronavirus’ impact supply chains. Boston Consulting Group. 9 March. BIMCO (2020). Dry bulk shipping: quick recovery dry bulk market COVID-19 digs deeper. 26 . Bloomberg (2020a). Japan fund firms shift production China. 8 April. Bloomberg (2020b). India steps effort grab China’ title world’ factory. 4 June. British Petroleum (2020). BP Statistical Review World Energy 2020. London. June. Clarksons Research (2006). China Intelligence Monthly. Volume 1. . 1. June. Clarksons Research (2020a). Shipping Review Outlook. Spring. Clarksons Research (2020b). China Intelligence Monthly. Volume 15. . 6. June. Clarksons Research (2020c). Seaborne Trade Monitor. Volume 7. . 6. June. Clarksons Research (2020d). Seaborne Trade Monitor. Volume 7. . 4. April. Clarksons Research (2020e). Oil Tanker Trades Outlook. Volume 25. . 1. Clarksons Research (2020f). Dry Bulk Trade Outlook. Volume 26. . 6. June. Clarkson Research (2020g). Dry Bulk Trade Outlook. Volume 26. . 1. January. Clarksons Research (2020h). Seaborne Trade Monitor. Volume 7. .1. January. Clarksons Research (2020i). Seaborne Trade Monitor. Volume 7. . 3. March. Clarksons Research (2020j). Oil Tanker Trades Outlook, Volume 25. . 4. April. Clipper Data (2020). Shipping lines slash container capacity, extend cuts June. 7 . DHL (2020). Ocean freight market update. March. Drewry (2019). Container Trade Forecaster. Quarter 4. Drewry (2020a). Guinea set supply iron ore 2026. 21 . Drewry (2020b). Ports Terminals Insight. Quarter 1. Drewry (2020c). Container Trade Forecaster. Quarter 1. Drewry (2020d). Shipping Insight. . Drewry (2020e). 2020 Container Forecaster Update. Quarter 1. . Drewry (2020f). Container Trade Forecaster. Quarter 2. June. Drewry (2020g). Ports Terminals Insight. Quarter 2. Economic Social Commission Asia Pacific (2013). Building Resilience Natural Disasters Major Economic Crises. Bangkok. Egloff (2020). Hit hard COVID-19, transportation logistics companies adapt supplies moving. Boston Consulting Group. 4 April. Flock Freight (2020). build pandemic-proof global supply chain. White Paper. 5 December. Haven Van Der Marel (2018). Servicification manufacturing boosting productivity services sector reform Turkey. Policy Research Working Paper 8643. World Bank Group. International Energy Agency (2020). Global Energy Review 2020: Impacts COVID-19 Crisis Global Energy Demand CO2 [Carbon-dioxide] Emissions. April. France. International Monetary Fund (2020a). World Economic Outlook: Great Lockdown. Washington, .. www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/Issues/2020/04/14/weo-april-2020. International Monetary Fund (2020b). World Economic Outlook update: Long Difficult Ascent. Washington, .. October. http://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/Issues/2020/04/14/weo-april-2020 1. INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT TRAFFIC32 International Transport Forum (2020). COVID-19 transport : Global container shipping coronavirus crisis. 29 April. JOC. (2020a). US [United States] accelerates import sourcing shift China. 15 . JOC. (2020b). US [United States]–China trade war accelerates market share losses West Coast ports. 4 . JOC. (2020c). Importers rushing China inventory replenishment. 2 July. JOC. (2020d). “Great Dispersal” upend intermodal rail supply chains. 11 . JOC. (2020e). Carriers rise booking cancellations, -shows. 28 . JOC. (2020f). Container cargo imbalance COVID-19 deepens. 1 . JOC. (2020g). Vessel port call frequency improving Europe, falling North America. 8 June. JOC. (2020h). COVID-19 sparks fresh investment Asia warehouse capacity. 19 June. JOC. (2020i). Pandemic pushes US [United States] shippers rethink sourcing, tech spend. 23 June. JOC. (2020j). Panama Canal preps reduced container growth scenario. 7 . Kahneman (2011). Thinking Fast Slow. Penguin Books. London. Knizek (2020). Stabilizing supply chains response COVID-19. Boston Consulting Group. 26 March. Lloyd’ List (2020). Ports 2020. Maritime Intelligence.1 . Lloyd’ Loading List (2020a). UK outlines customs border arrangements 2021. 16 June. Lloyd’ Loading List (2020b). US [United States] mulls paying firms pull supply chains China. 19 . Lloyd’ Loading List (2020c). Current logistics challenges ‘perfect storm’ shippers. 20 April. Lloyd’ Loading List (2020d). Mixed picture globally -commerce logistics. 8 June. MDS Transmodal (2020a). coronavirus pandemic globalization 9 June. MDS Transmodal (2020b). World Cargo Database. 19 August. York Times (2018). Congress approves $1.3 trillion spending bill, averting shutdown. 22 March. Notteboom Pallis (2020). International Association Ports Harbours–World Ports Sustainability Programme Port Economic Impact Barometer. 6 July. OECD (2020a). OECD Economic Outlook: Volume 2020. Issue 1: Preliminary version. . 107. OECD Publishing. Paris. OECD (2020b). COVID-19 global chains: Policy options build resilient production networks. 3 June. Piattelli-Palmarini (1994). Inevitable Illusions: Mistakes Reason Rule Minds. John Wiley Sons. York. Port Economics (2020). Changing demand maritime trades. Port Report . 4. . www. porteconomics.eu. Procurement Bulletin (2020). Understanding “China, ” strategy. www.procurementbulletin. /understanding--china---strategy/. Riviera Maritime Media (2019). Maersk moves goal “global integrator container logistics”. 21 February. Rodrigue - (2020). Geography Transport Systems. edition. Routledge. York. Seara , Denia Krueger (2020). COVID-19 recovery scenarios fashion luxury brands. Boston Consulting Group. 25 March. Indian Express (2020). India’ imports palm oil: Dynamics trade Malaysia. 29 January. Loadstar (2019). Maersk’ inland terminal network integrated Logistics Service. 16 . United Nations (2020a). World Economic Situation Prospects. Department Economic Social Affairs. York. http://www.porteconomics.eu http://www.porteconomics.eu https://www.procurementbulletin./understanding--china---strategy/ https://www.procurementbulletin./understanding--china---strategy/ 33REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 United Nations (2020b). World Economic Situation Prospects Mid-2020. Department Economic Social Affairs. York. UNCTAD (2018). UNCTAD Estimates Global -commerce 2018. Technical Notes ICT Development. . 15. TN/UNCTAD/ICT4D/15. UNCTAD (2020a). Trade Development Report 2020: Global Pandemic Prosperity – Avoiding Lost Decade. (United Nations publication. Sales . .20.II..30. Geneva). UNCTAD (2020b). Global Trade Update. June. UNCTAD/DITC/INF/2020/2. UNCTAD (2020c). Key Statistics Trends International Trade 2019: International Trade Slump (United Nations publication. Sales . .20.II..8. Geneva). UNCTAD (2020d). Global Trade Impact Coronavirus (COVID-19) Epidemic. Trade Development Report Update. 4 March. UNCTAD/DITC/INF/2020/1. UNCTAD (2020e). Textile garment supply chains times COVID-19: Challenges developing countries. UNCTAD Transport Trade Facilitation Newsletter . 86. Whitten Ben-Moussa (2020). trade war fronts: .. [United States] considers tariffs European goods. Shepard Mullin. Global Trade Law Blog. www.globaltradelawblog./2020/07/02/ tariffs-european-goods-ustr/. World Bank (2020). World Economic Prospects: June 2020. Washington, .. World Steel Association (2019). Worldsteel Short Range Outlook October 2019. 14 October. World Steel Association (2020). 2020 World Steel Figures. Brussels. WTO (2020). Trade statistics outlook: Trade falls steeply 2020. Press release . 858. 23 June. https://www.globaltradelawblog./2020/07/02/tariffs-european-goods-ustr/ https://www.globaltradelawblog./2020/07/02/tariffs-european-goods-ustr/ 2 MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY present chapter focuses key developments related supply maritime transport year. assesses early impact COVID-19 pandemic supply maritime transport services industries discusses responses, lessons learned implications pandemic terms forces shaping supply industry’ long-term goal decarbonization. pandemic significant impact shipping industry. hand, lockdowns factory closures gradually affected demand maritime transport, due reduced cargo volumes ( chapter 1). hand, safety measures applied spread virus, lockdowns travel restrictions, affected movement maritime transport workers procedural introduced ports, induced operational disruptions supply maritime transport. prompted shipping operations requests government support sector. industry reflect ways enhance resilience sector future shocks. chapter reviews world fleet developments annual fleet growth, structure age fleet. considers selected segments maritime supply chain, shipbuilding, ship recycling, ship ownership, ship registration maritime workforce, emphasizing impacts pandemic maritime transport marine manufacturing industries supply shipping services. examines impact pandemic container, dry bulk tanker freight markets; government responses support shipping; industry prospects, regard accelerated digitalization prioritization environmental sustainability. Lastly, explores impact pandemic supply port-related infrastructure services, explaining technology- based solutions relating trade facilitation, automation digitalization support increased resilience future shocks. 37REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 . WORLD FLEET AND MARITIME WORKFORCE 1. Structure age fleet vessel sizes early 2020, total world fleet amounted 98,140 ships 100 gross tons , equivalent 2,061,944,484 dwt capacity. 12 months prior 1 January 2020, global commercial shipping fleet grew 4.1 cent (table 2.1), registering highest growth 2014, levels observed 2004–2012 period. market segment achieved highest growth gas carriers, oil tankers, bulk carriers container ships. Gas carriers remained dynamic segment, recording highest growth 2015–2020 period. 2019–2020, growth oil tankers segment highest observed 2015. comparison, time years, slowest-growing segment general cargo ships, offshore vessels, tonnage declined year year (figure 2.1). start 2020, average age global fleet 21.29 years terms number ships, 10.76 years terms carrying capacity dwt (table 2.2). terms dead-weight tonnage, bulk carriers youngest vessels, average age 9.28 years, container ships (9.91 years) oil tankers (10.38 years). average, general cargo ships oldest vessel type (19.46 years). Box 2.1 explains age fleet matters decarbonization illustrating case Pacific islands. highest average vessel sizes youngest fleet segments ( years). group, oil tankers highest average size, bulk carriers container ships (figure 2.2). terms country groupings, developed developing countries record higher average sizes fleets aged years, countries economies transition, highest average sizes vessels 10 19 years . 20 years, vessel sizes increasing optimize costs economies scale ( chapter 3). Average bulker container ship sizes grown significantly 1990s – average size container ships doubled 1996. distribution average sizes vessel types (figure 2.2) suggests average capacity vessels built years greater built 20 years . , compared vessels built 20 years , average capacity oil tankers times greater; container ships, times greater; general cargo ships, times greater; bulk carriers, times greater. 2. Ship ownership registration Ship ownership Greece, Japan, China remain top ship- owning countries terms cargo-carrying capacity (table 2.3), representing 40.3 cent world’ tonnage 30 cent global fleet (table 2.4). list top 35 ship-owning countries terms cargo-carrying capacity remained stable 2016. 12 months prior 1 January 2020, countries recording highest increases carrying capacity compared previous year included Nigeria ( 17.2 cent), United Arab Emirates ( 5 cent) United Kingdom ( 11.9 cent). contrast, Germany, Saudi Arabia Malaysia lost ground ( 6.2 cent, 3.6 cent 3.4 cent, ). Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Clarksons Research. Notes: Propelled seagoing merchant vessels 100 tons ; beginning--year figures. Principal types 2019 2020 Percentage change 2020 2019 Bulk carriers 846 418 879 330 3.9 43 cent 43 cent Oil tankers 568 244 601 163 5.8 29 cent 29 cent Container ships 266 087 274 856 3.3 13 cent 13 cent types 226 568 232 012 2.4 11 cent 11 cent vessels 80 262 79 862 -0.5 4 cent 4 cent Gas carriers 69 081 73 586 6.5 3 cent 4 cent Chemical tankers 46 157 47 474 2.9 2 cent 2 cent Ferries passenger ships 7 096 7 289 2.7 0 cent 0 cent / 23 972 23 802 -0.7 1 cent 1 cent General cargo ships 74 192 74 583 0.5 4 cent 4 cent World total 1 981 510 2 061 944 4.1 Table 2.1 World fleet principal vessel type, 2019–2020 (Thousand dead-weight tons percentage) 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY38 fleet linked expectations revenue performance shipping markets (Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide, 2020a; Marine Insight, 2019) return investment, important consideration perspective owners. fleet linked transport logistics chain level sophistication fleet, , embedded digital technology making improve efficiency, safety, equipment maintenance operational processes (Riviera Maritime Media, 2020). beginning 2020, main ship types representing highest proportion global fleet bulk carriers, oil tankers offshore vessels (table 2.4). top ship-owning economies (Greece, Japan China) represent higher share global carrying capacity global fleet (figure 2.3), fourth- -ranked countries (United States Norway, ). characteristics composition commercial fleets explain contrast percentage shares. countries, linked high- -cargo ships. instance, highest proportion fleet Norway, United Kingdom, Netherlands Brazil offshore vessels, case United States, Switzerland Italy, cruise ships. Ship registration Panama, Liberia Marshall Islands remain leading flags registration, terms carrying capacity (table 2.5) fleet registered (table 2.6). 1 January 2020, represented 42 cent carrying capacity 33.6 cent fleet. flags Islamic Republic Iran, Taiwan Province China Thailand registered highest increases terms dead-weight tonnage. Ships flag Islamic Republic Iran tripled growth compared 2019. registries level tonnage decrease 12 months preceding 1 January 2020 United Kingdom, Bermuda Isle Man. quadrupling number ships flying flag Islamic Republic Iran derives increased pressure exerted sanctions, led registries, including Liberia, Panama, Sierra Leone Togo (Reuters, 2019a), de-flag vessels trade country (Lloyd’ List, 2020a). guidance maritime industry, issued 2020 Office Foreign Assets Control United States Department Treasury, important milestone. guidance expanded compliance responsibility fleet control monitoring actors shipowners operators, including flag registries, port operators, freight forwarders, classification societies financial institutions (Lexology, 2020; Maritime Executive, 2020a). 1 January 2019 1 January 2020, registries United Kingdom international registries categorized crown dependencies overseas territories – Gibraltar Isle Man – witnessed reduction. Tonnage registered flag United Kingdom Source: UNCTAD, Review Maritime Transport, issues. Figure 2.1 Growth world fleet principal vessel type, 2014–2020 (Dead-weight tonnage percentage change) 39REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Country grouping Years Average age Average age 0–4 5–9 10–14 15–19 20 2020 2020 World Bulk carriers Percentage total ships 20.22 42.17 18.70 8.99 9.93 10.18 9.69 Percentage dead-weight tonnage 23.30 44.86 16.73 8.22 6.89 9.28 8.87 Average vessel size (dead-weight tonnage) 84 714 78 169 65 767 67 246 50 973 Container ships Percentage total ships 15.60 20.39 32.79 14.67 16.55 12.72 12.29 Percentage dead-weight tonnage 24.41 29.14 28.19 11.74 6.53 9.91 9.43 Average vessel size (dead-weight tonnage) 80 070 73 137 43 993 40 934 20 186 General cargo ships Percentage total ships 4.64 12.34 15.67 7.99 59.36 26.93 26.30 Percentage dead-weight tonnage 8.52 23.16 19.76 9.88 38.69 19.46 18.89 Average vessel size (dead-weight tonnage) 7 933 8 029 5 455 5 902 2 772 Oil tankers Percentage total ships 14.45 18.95 20.19 11.11 35.32 19.12 18.77 Percentage dead-weight tonnage 24.73 24.99 26.57 17.52 6.20 10.38 10.11 Average vessel size (dead-weight tonnage) 93 311 72 952 71 391 86 251 9 924 Percentage total ships 11.21 18.05 15.53 8.28 46.93 23.18 22.70 Percentage dead-weight tonnage 21.56 16.94 22.22 10.57 28.71 15.59 15.42 Average vessel size (dead-weight tonnage) 11 613 6 267 8 682 8 034 4 304 ships Percentage total ships 11.64 20.11 17.42 8.98 41.85 21.29 20.83 Percentage dead-weight tonnage 23.14 33.04 21.85 11.72 10.25 10.76 10.43 Average vessel size (dead-weight tonnage) 47 901 40 986 30 290 32 742 6 661 Developing economies ( ships) Percentage total ships 11.26 21.72 17.31 8.49 41.21 20.38 19.90 Percentage dead-weight tonnage 21.75 33.21 18.22 11.62 15.21 11.56 11.15 Average vessel size (dead-weight tonnage) 37 438 32 440 20 900 27 950 7 544 Developed economies ( ships) Percentage total ships 13.33 20.35 19.82 10.67 35.84 19.95 19.54 Percentage dead-weight tonnage 24.52 33.42 24.42 11.68 5.97 9.96 9.71 Average vessel size (dead-weight tonnage) 61 465 52 885 40 792 38 294 7 305 Countries economies transition ( ships) Percentage total ships 6.38 8.19 8.63 4.34 72.47 30.33 29.82 Percentage dead-weight tonnage 8.94 20.19 27.46 15.58 27.83 16.99 16.39 Average vessel size (dead-weight tonnage) 12 644 18 987 25 905 25 880 2 724 Table 2.2 Age distribution world merchant fleet vessel type, 2019–2020 (Percentage dead-weight tonnage) Source: Clarksons Research. Note: Propelled seagoing vessels 100 gross tons ; beginning--year figures. 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY40 declined 29.8 cent, Isle Man 13.5 cent Gibraltar, 7.4 cent. developments linked geopolitical tensions Islamic Republic Iran, led ship registration (United Kingdom Department Transport, 2020) uncertainty related Brexit process (Lloyd’ List, 2019a; Reuters, 2019b). Plans improving competitiveness attractiveness United Kingdom registry, -emission technology vessels , long-term, autonomous semi-autonomous ships, include digitalization initiatives. aimed reinforcing paperless maritime governance -registration enhancing quality service standards practices pertaining inspections, certifications business facilitation (United Kingdom Department Transport, 2019). 3. Shipbuilding, orders ship recycling Shipbuilding China, Republic Korea Japan maintained traditional leadership shipbuilding, representing 92.5 cent newbuilding deliveries 2019 Box 2.1 Reducing carbon dioxide emissions: case Pacific islands average age vessel indirect indication environmental performance. cases, younger vessels fuel-efficient polluting technological advances. Bringing carbon footprint shipping function age fleet ( introduction technical improvements) function operational measures, speed optimization, shifting alternative fuels. factors play maintenance schemes fleet-renewal trends linked scrapping patterns financial incentives ( scrap order newbuildings). studies conducted Pacific assess carbon dioxide reduction pathways, islands region launched regional national initiatives develop -carbon coastal maritime transport. age fleet important consideration inform decision-making related maritime transport strategies objectives. estimates Pacific Community, 41 cent vessels Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Samoa, Solomon Islands Vanuatu 20 years ; 20 cent, 20 30 years ; 38 cent, 30 years . large proportion older vessels donated bought -hand. vessels carrying capacity ( 5,000 tons) entail economic costs due increasing maintenance survey costs. newbuildings result 80–90 cent improvement operational efficiency, require significant investment enable fleet replacement meet emission-reduction targets set regional national decarbonization strategies, highlighting financing. abate emissions existing fleet, Pacific islands retrofitting vessels wind propulsion wind solar auxiliary power supply. retrofits suitable characteristics, financial capabilities, level technological uptake maritime heritage Pacific fleet options considered countries, shifting alternative fuels onshore electrification. studies potential scale retrofits acknowledged retrofits achieve degree savings emission reduction newbuilds. Sources: Government Fiji, 2018; Micronesian Centre Sustainable Transport, 2019a, 2019b, 2020. Figure 2.2 Average vessel size age distribution, selected vessel types, 2020 (Dead-weight tons) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Clarksons Research. Note: Propelled seagoing vessels 100 gross tons ; beginning--year figures. 41REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Table 2.3 Ownership world fleet, ranked carrying capacity dead-weight tons, 2020 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Clarksons Research. Notes: Propelled seagoing vessels 1,000 gross tons , 1 January 2020. purposes table, international registries recorded foreign international registries, , , ships belonging owners United Kingdom registered Gibraltar Isle Man recorded foreign international flag. addition, ships belonging owners Denmark registered Danish International Ship Register account 45 cent Denmark-owned fleet dead-weight tonnage, ships belonging owners Norway registered Norwegian International Ship Register account 27.4 cent Norway-owned fleet dead-weight tonnage. complete listing nationally owned fleets, http://stats.unctad.org/fleetownership. Country territory ownership Number vessels Dead-weight tonnage National flag Foreign flag Total National flag Foreign flag Total Foreign flag percentage total Total percentage total 1 Greece 671 3 977 4 648 60 827 479 303 026 753 363 854 232 83.28 17.77 2 Japan 909 3 001 3 910 36 805 225 196 329 652 233 134 877 84.21 11.38 3 China 4 569 2 300 6 869 99 484 023 128 892 849 228 376 872 56.44 11.15 4 Singapore 1 493 1 368 2 861 74 754 209 62 545 517 137 299 726 45.55 6.70 5 Hong Kong, China 883 807 1 690 72 505 185 28 452 208 100 957 393 28.18 4.93 6 Germany 205 2 299 2 504 8 340 596 81 062 481 89 403 077 90.67 4.37 7 Republic Korea 778 837 1 615 14 402 899 66 179 736 80 582 635 82.13 3.93 8 Norway 383 1 660 2 043 1 884 535 62 051 275 63 935 810 97.05 3.12 9 Bermuda 13 529 542 324 902 60 088 969 60 413 871 99.46 2.95 10 United States 799 1 131 1 930 10 237 585 46 979 245 57 216 830 82.11 2.79 11 United Kingdom 317 1 027 1 344 6 835 508 46 355 337 53 190 845 87.15 2.60 12 Taiwan Province China 140 850 990 6 636 271 44 255 009 50 891 280 86.96 2.48 13 Monaco 473 473 43 831 888 43 831 888 100.00 2.14 14 Denmark 25 921 946 31 435 42 683 049 42 714 484 99.93 2.09 15 Belgium 113 188 301 10 040 106 20 658 108 30 698 214 67.29 1.50 16 Turkey 449 1 079 1 528 6 656 989 21 433 413 28 090 402 76.30 1.37 17 Switzerland 26 401 427 1 113 387 25 365 225 26 478 612 95.80 1.29 18 India 859 183 1 042 16 800 490 9 035 433 25 835 923 34.97 1.26 19 Indonesia 2 132 76 2 208 22 301 493 1 604 369 23 905 862 6.71 1.17 20 Russian Federation 1 403 339 1 742 8 292 932 14 812 631 23 105 563 64.11 1.13 21 United Arab Emirates 118 852 970 480 283 20 271 823 20 752 106 97.69 1.01 22 Islamic Republic Iran 238 8 246 18 245 935 353 441 18 599 376 1.90 0.91 23 Netherlands 700 492 1 192 5 584 365 12 437 918 18 022 283 69.01 0.88 24 Saudi Arabia 137 132 269 13 303 057 4 126 462 17 429 519 23.68 0.85 25 Italy 499 179 678 11 005 343 6 400 010 17 405 353 36.77 0.85 26 Brazil 302 94 396 4 963 496 8 984 821 13 948 317 64.42 0.68 27 France 106 333 439 898 897 12 448 289 13 347 186 93.27 0.65 28 Cyprus 141 165 306 4 958 311 6 659 094 11 617 405 57.32 0.57 29 Viet Nam 910 150 1 060 8 390 791 2 357 014 10 747 805 21.93 0.52 30 Canada 222 159 381 2 723 583 7 247 389 9 970 972 72.68 0.49 31 Malaysia 464 156 620 6 378 887 2 164 848 8 543 735 25.34 0.42 32 Oman 5 51 56 5 704 8 069 314 8 075 018 99.93 0.39 33 Qatar 59 67 126 1 056 669 6 054 422 7 111 091 85.14 0.35 34 Sweden 88 213 301 929 401 5 580 520 6 509 921 85.72 0.32 35 Nigeria 182 74 256 3 227 668 3 031 686 6 259 354 48.43 0.31 Subtotal, top 35 shipowners 20 338 26 571 46 909 540 427 639 1 411 830 198 1 952 257 837 72.32 95.33 Rest world unknown 3 037 3 015 6 052 36 513 130 59 204 480 95 717 610 61.85 4.67 World total 23 375 29 586 52 961 576 940 769 1 471 034 678 2 047 975 447 71.8 100.0 http://stats.unctad.org/fleetownership 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY42 Table 2.4 Top 25 ship-owning economies, 1 January 2020 (Million dollars) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Clarksons Research, 1 January 2020 (estimated current ). Note: estimated commercial ships 1,000 gross tons . Country territory Bulk carriers Oil tankers Offshore vessels Ferries passenger ships Container ships Gas carriers General cargo ships Chemical tankers / Total 1 Greece 34 426 37 873 187 2 404 7 936 12 238 189 1 064 468 96 785 2 Japan 34 027 9 981 4 713 3 030 11 805 15 173 3 482 4 937 9 150 96 298 3 China 30 108 13 278 10 189 5 089 17 243 4 267 5 244 3 126 3 008 91 553 4 United States 3 352 6 308 20 392 52 130 1 190 1 458 1 122 1 971 732 88 655 5 Norway 4 213 6 217 23 156 3 088 1 852 7 847 950 2 423 3 002 52 748 6 Singapore 12 860 13 975 5 189 25 6 845 4 428 1 043 4 695 566 49 626 7 Germany 5 857 2 121 630 9 630 17 211 1 966 3 429 791 360 41 996 8 United Kingdom 3 760 4 106 13 226 4 575 4 592 5 318 920 1 457 2 581 40 535 9 Hong Kong, China 10 209 7 239 601 2 723 10 082 1 173 898 282 1 027 34 234 10 Bermuda 4 826 5 895 5 779 2 079 8 431 375 62 27 447 11 Republic Korea 7 319 5 999 264 366 2 400 4 914 710 1 595 2 816 26 383 12 Denmark 1 412 4 008 2 373 999 10 642 2 014 752 971 111 23 282 13 Switzerland 813 821 3 244 10 243 7 337 225 236 213 9 23 142 14 Netherlands 747 535 13 457 619 386 753 3 411 1 228 1 938 23 076 15 Italy 1 162 2 319 2 655 8 944 4 305 2 068 553 504 18 515 16 Brazil 145 1 029 15 345 69 298 131 35 84 1 17 138 17 Monaco 3 292 7 232 32 997 3 712 32 30 15 327 18 Taiwan Province China 7 057 1 668 37 79 4 088 396 632 156 105 14 219 19 France 374 130 5 393 1 813 4 174 521 179 141 224 12 949 20 Turkey 3 208 1 433 691 346 1 290 145 1 892 1 121 42 10 168 21 Russian Federation 246 3 966 1 456 74 72 1 489 1 227 633 849 10 014 22 Malaysia 166 239 6 409 14 73 1 897 138 142 166 9 245 23 Belgium 1 515 4 070 88 262 1 221 811 167 529 8 663 24 Indonesia 838 2 091 849 1 942 790 517 1 105 348 47 8 528 25 United Arab Emirates 1 530 2 300 3 051 59 216 473 75 584 72 8 359 13 157 19 676 23 857 12 120 3 135 15 552 8 345 4 169 3 317 103 328 World total 186 622 164 511 163 232 120 413 116 998 96 568 38 894 33 258 31 718 952 213 (table 2.7). country specializes shipping segments. China leading builder bulk carriers (56.2 cent), offshore vessels (58 cent) general cargo ships (34.6 cent); Republic Korea, gas carriers (62.8 cent), oil tankers (59.4 cent) container ships (41.7 cent); Japan, chemical tankers (54.1 cent). Compared 2019, market share Republic Korea increased 7.7 percentage points, China decreased 5.1 percentage points. Bulk carrier oil tanker newbuildings registered largest increases (7.8 5.2 percentage points, ) container ships gas carriers registered greatest decreases (-2 -3.2 percentage points, ). orders early 2020, world order book declined respect dry bulk carriers, oil carriers, container ships general cargo ships (figure 2.4). Orders shipping segments shrinking 2017 ( dry bulk carriers, increased 2019). Widening disparity newbuilding prices earnings, geopolitical instability, persistent financing challenges broad uncertainty fuel technology choices explain trend (Barry Rogliano Salles, 2020). 43REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Ship recycling Bangladesh remains country largest global share recycled tonnage, accounting ships recycled 2019. India Turkey, countries represented 90.3 cent ship recycling activity 2019. year, bulk carriers constituted recycled tonnage ( ), container ships oil tankers (table 2.8). 2016, global volumes recycled tonnage wane. Volumes fell 29,135 thousand gross tons 2016, 23,138 thousand gross tons 2017, 19,003 thousand gross tons 2018 12,218 thousand gross tons 2019. Steel price developments scrapping destinations expectations evolution freight rates factors underpinning trends (Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide, 2019). country top scrapping destinations increased ship-recycling volumes 2019 Turkey (figure 2.5), linked reportedly certification Turkish shipyards European Union, enabling list approved facilities recycling ships flying European Union flags (Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide, 2018). 2019, Turkey ratified Hong Kong [China] International Convention Safe Environmentally Sound Recycling Ships, 2009 IMO. countries, reduction share Pakistan significant, motivated adverse conditions related taxation exchange rates ( Maritime Executive, 2019). 2019, bulk carriers increased percentage share global recycling volumes 172 cent; container ships, 145 cent; offshore vessels, 88 cent. contrast, oil tankers gas carriers registered significant decreases 71 55 cent, . Impacts coronavirus disease pandemic, responses prospects: Labour shortages affect newbuilding ship recycling weak investor sentiment affects ordering pandemic led reductions delays newbuilding delivery standstill ship recycling. attributed lockdown-induced labour shortages shipbuilding ship recycling industries. addition, measures implemented reduce spread pandemic, travel restrictions, impossible owners arrange visits obtain crew final delivery. Port closures affected tonnage arrival scrapping destinations Indian subcontinent (Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide, 2020b). pandemic significant impact manufacturing segments maritime supply chain. February 2020, deliveries China fell lowest level 15 years, ships delivered. lockdowns gradually lifted, industrial activity resumed. China reported returned 50 cent 2019 output average March 2020 Figure 2.3 Top 20 ship-owning economies terms carrying capacity global fleet, 2020 (Percentage) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Clarksons Research. Note: estimated commercial ships 1,000 gross tons . 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY44 Table 2.5 Leading flags registration dead-weight tonnage, 2020 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Clarksons Research. Notes: Propelled seagoing merchant vessels 100 gross tons , 1 January 2020. complete listing countries, http://stats.unctad.org/fleet. Flag registration Number vessels Share world vessel total (percentage) Dead-weight tonnage (thousand dead-weight tons) Share total world dead-weight tonnage (percentage) Cumulated share dead-weight tonnage (percentage) Average vessel size (dead-weight tonnage) Growth dead-weight tonnage 2020 2019 (percentage) 1 Panama 7 886 8 328 950 16 16.0 41 713 -1.3 2 Liberia 3 716 4 274 786 13 29.3 73 947 13.0 3 Marshall Islands 3 683 4 261 806 13 42.0 71 085 6.5 4 Hong Kong, China 2 694 3 201 361 10 51.7 74 744 1.3 5 Singapore 3 420 3 140 333 7 58.5 41 033 8.3 6 Malta 2 207 2 115 879 6 64.2 52 505 4.7 7 China 6 192 6 100 086 5 69.0 16 164 3.0 8 Bahamas 1 381 1 77 869 4 72.8 56 386 0.1 9 Greece 1 294 1 68 632 3 76.1 53 039 -0.7 10 Japan 5 041 5 40 323 2 78.1 7 999 3.4 11 Cyprus 1 065 1 34 533 2 79.8 32 425 -0.1 12 Indonesia 10 137 10 25 574 1 81.0 2 523 6.9 13 Isle Man 356 0 24 129 1 82.2 67 779 -13.5 14 Danish International Register 575 1 23 044 1 83.3 40 077 3.0 15 Norwegian International Register 647 1 20 780 1 84.3 32 118 4.8 16 Madeira 526 1 20 698 1 85.3 39 351 6.0 17 Islamic Republic Iran 877 1 19 700 1 86.3 22 463 362.3 18 India 1 768 2 17 339 1 87.1 9 807 -0.2 19 Republic Korea 1 889 2 14 942 1 87.8 7 910 14.9 20 Saudi Arabia 376 0 13 554 1 88.5 36 047 3.2 21 United States 3 650 4 11 985 1 89.1 3 284 0.6 22 United Kingdom 945 1 11 962 1 89.6 12 658 -29.8 23 Italy 1 310 1 11 953 1 90.2 9 124 -10.8 24 Belgium 203 0 10 349 1 90.7 50 980 -1.1 25 Malaysia 1 772 2 10 260 0 91.2 5 790 -0.4 26 Russian Federation 2 808 3 9 797 0 91.7 3 489 6.9 27 Viet Nam 1 909 2 9 123 0 92.1 4 779 7.7 28 Germany 606 1 8 468 0 92.5 13 974 -0.9 29 Bermuda 138 0 7 662 0 92.9 55 525 -18.9 30 Turkey 1 216 1 6 993 0 93.3 5 751 -6.5 31 Netherlands 1 200 1 6 982 0 93.6 5 818 -1.4 32 Taiwan Province China 407 0 6 739 0 93.9 16 557 16.0 33 Antigua Barbuda 727 1 6 657 0 94.2 9 157 -11.1 34 Thailand 840 1 6 642 0 94.6 7 907 15.7 35 Cayman Islands 163 0 6 636 0 94.9 40 713 -1.1 Top 35 total 73 624 75 1 956 529 95 94.9 26 575 World total 98 140 100 2 061 944 100 100.00 21 010 4.1 http://stats.unctad.org/fleet 45REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Table 2.6 Leading flags registration, ranked principal vessel type, 2020 (Dollars) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Clarksons Research, 1 January 2019 (estimated current ). Note: estimated commercial ships 1,000 gross tons . Flag registration Bulk carriers Oil tankers Offshore vessels Ferries passenger ships Container ships Gas carriers General cargo ships Chemical tankers / applicable Total 1 Panama 40 369 13 462 17 612 12 037 17 035 10 632 3 899 5 306 7 412 127 765 2 Marshall Islands 27 870 29 606 17 257 1 284 6 150 15 110 515 4 511 2 207 104 511 3 Liberia 23 729 22 944 12 662 150 17 217 5 756 1 010 2 590 1 488 87 544 4 Bahamas 4 950 7 759 23 781 31 330 606 13 295 73 106 2 566 84 466 5 Hong Kong, China 23 280 11 360 289 42 21 030 5 987 1 607 1 878 120 65 592 6 Malta 9 418 11 192 4 758 15 420 12 173 4 929 1 681 1 793 873 62 236 7 Singapore 12 226 14 540 8 748 11 673 7 473 1 066 3 541 1 458 60 725 8 China 14 910 7 012 7 914 4 412 3 456 678 2 880 1 451 2 887 45 599 9 Greece 2 831 10 710 1 1 561 272 5 587 47 77 90 21 176 10 Italy 671 1 064 501 14 235 77 244 2 106 388 504 19 791 Subtotal top 10 160 253 129 650 93 521 80 469 89 689 69 692 14 883 21 642 19 606 679 405 26 370 34 861 69 711 39 944 27 309 26 876 24 011 11 615 12 112 272 808 World total 186 622 164 511 163 232 120 413 116 998 96 568 38 894 33 258 31 718 952 213 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Clarksons Research. Notes: Propelled seagoing merchant vessels 100 gross tons . data shipbuilding countries, http://stats. unctad.org/shipbuilding. Table 2.7 Deliveries newbuildings major vessel types countries construction, 2019 (Thousand gross tons) Vessel type China Republic Korea Japan Philippines Rest world Total Percentage Bulk carriers 12 773 1 010 7 942 652 338 22 716 34.5 Oil tankers 4 200 11 827 2 811 128 946 9 912 30.2 Container ships 3 712 4 545 2 521 19 94 10 891 16.5 Gas carriers 420 3 888 1 881 1 6 189 9.4 Ferries passenger ships 214 3 59 3 1 903 2 182 3.3 General cargo ships 452 202 267 387 1 307 2.0 Offshore vessels 651 135 4 332 1 121 1.7 Chemical tankers 368 49 574 71 1 063 1.6 285 12 182 0 50 530 0.8 Total 23 074 21 670 16 242 802 4 122 65 911 100.0 Percentage 35.0 32.9 24.6 1.2 6.3 100.0 60 cent . , 2020 global shipbuilding output dwt 14 cent year year (Clarksons Research, 2020a). March, pandemic erupted Europe United States, lockdowns Bangladesh, India Pakistan gradually halted ship recycling (Vessels , 2020). June 2020, Indian recycling yards reported operating 30 40 cent full capacity (Clarksons Research, 2020b). COVID-19 pandemic brought widespread uncertainty related economic performance 2020 2021 ( chapter 1). result, strategic investment decisions reconsidered, instance, newbuilding ordering repairs postponed. Ordering contracts 53 cent year year July 2020 (Clarksons Research, 2020c). addition, companies decided delay scrubber installation impact pandemic http://stats.unctad.org/shipbuilding http://stats.unctad.org/shipbuilding 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY46 Figure 2.4 World tonnage order, 2000–2020 (Thousand dead-weight tons) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Clarksons Research. Notes: Propelled seagoing merchant vessels 100 gross tons ; beginning--year figures. financial cash flow (Clarksons Research, 2020d; Manifold Times, 2020). linked fuel price dynamics January 2020, narrowing price differential high sulphur fuel, increased time recover investment cost installing scrubbers (IHS Markit, 2020; Seatrade Maritime News, 2020a). pandemic, shipbuilding sector facing challenging environment fierce competition declining orders. Increased consolidation government finance helped cope situation (UNCTAD, 2019a). Seeking minimize costs losses restructuring businesses improve balance sheets, world’ Source: Clarksons Research. Notes: Propelled seagoing vessels 100 gross tons . Estimates countries http://stats.unctad.org/shipscrapping. Table 2.8 Reported tonnage sold ship recycling major vessel type country ship recycling, 2019 (Thousand gross tons) Vessel type Bangladesh China India Pakistan Turkey Rest world World total Percentage Bulk carriers 3 426 238 582 132 161 32 4 570 37.4 Chemical tankers 64 4 125 7 3 9 211 1.7 Container ships 1 015 24 964 12 10 86 2 111 17.3 Ferries passenger ships 71 2 46 27 76 5 226 1.8 General cargo ships 140 62 150 12 174 36 575 4.7 Liquefied gas carriers 169 70 30 9 279 2.3 Offshore vessels 326 4 543 9 435 197 1 514 12.4 Oil tankers 1 271 14 387 56 119 153 1 999 16.4 200 35 384 13 87 12 732 6.0 Total 6 682 383 6 682 267 1 095 540 12 218 100.0 Percentage 54.7 3.1 26.6 2.2 9.0 4.4 100.0 http://stats.unctad.org/shipscrapping 47REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 largest shipbuilder (Hyundai Heavy Industries Company Republic Korea) signed March 2020 formal agreement State-run Korea [Republic ] Development Bank buy Daewoo Shipbuilding Marine Engineering. merger completed approval antitrust authorities China, European Union, Japan, Kazakhstan, Republic Korea Singapore ( Korea Times, 2020). European Union Japan voiced concerns potential merger lead uneven trading playing field (WTO, 2020) reduced competition shipbuilding markets large container ships, oil tankers, liquefied natural gas carriers liquefied petroleum gas carriers (European Commission, 2019). background, pandemic accentuated challenges, reducing demand affecting orders, production delivery. Box 2.2 describes challenges, perspective European Union. slowdown shipbuilding contributes fleet growth. newbuilding deliveries April–September 2020 period result fleet growth, bringing 1.6 cent 2020 (Clarksons Research, 2020e). extent improve supply–demand balance 2021 depend demand economic activity recover developments ship recycling. comparison, ship recycling offers positive prospects. June 2020, container ship recycling volumes high levels reported January 2020 (Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide, 2020c). month, ship-recycling activity partially recovered bulk carriers segment. segment, scrapped volumes 2020 exceeded levels full year 2019 (Clarksons Research, 2020e). Ship recycling expected increase, shipping industry copes idling fleets plans scrap older vessels ( 15 years ) fuel efficient (Lloyd’ List, 2020b). Figure 2.5 Reported tonnage sold ship recycling major vessel type country ship recycling, 2017–2019 (Thousand gross tons percentage change) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Clarksons Research. Notes: Propelled seagoing vessels 100 gross tons . Estimates countries http://stats.unctad.org/shipscrapping. http://stats.unctad.org/shipscrapping 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY48 Box 2.2 Shipbuilding crossroads European Union face production halts, temporary layoffs liquidity issues stemming COVID-19 pandemic, European shipbuilding maritime equipment manufacturing industries sought additional support – horizontal industrial policies financial support – calling sector-specific support measures. , aim preserve economic contribution sector , importantly, prevent potential dependence Asian foreign suppliers maritime technology, strategic element generate maritime supply chain. European Shipbuilding Maritime Equipment Association estimated scenario losing €120 billion added created maritime technology sector; 1 million jobs maritime technology companies Europe’ innovation technological global leadership complex ship types. Concerns relate role played shipbuilding equipment industries achieving longer-term goals promoting technological development innovation ensure carbon neutral shipping 2050, foreseen European Green Deal. sense, losing European shipyards dependent Asian nations achieve goals. Sources: Safety4sea, 2020; SWZ|Maritime, 2020; World Maritime News, 2020. 4. Seafarers maritime workforce Emerging challenges maritime workforce result changing nature work due technological change Historically, innovation technology played crucial role increasing economic efficiency shipping industry. , drivers enablers improved environmental performance sector. social perspective, technological advances automation represent opportunities challenges shipping industry. emerging technologies maritime industry aim improve safety efficiency board. Technological change entails challenges. Disruptions labour market expected sets skills demand work routines change. report International Transport Workers’ Federation (2019),3 forecast 3 report analyses modes transport explores readiness based 17 country case studies (Australia, Brazil, China, Denmark, France, Ghana, Japan, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Republic Korea, South Africa, Sweden, Turkey United States). scenarios suggest , technology potential reduce labour requirements, expanding international trade counterbalance reduction. , demand seafarers expected continue mounting 2040, albeit rate.4 cases, decrease jobs transport offset increase parts transport system. , transport workers needed future. impact technology automation global maritime workforce, 2020 2040, vary, depending skills tasks performed workers’ demographic groups. middle- skilled jobs ( , support activities deep- sea transport workers cargo handlers ports, dockers, crane operators, maintenance repair workers) ageing higher-wage workforces face greater risk redundancy. contrast, high-skilled occupations, ship captains officers, prone automation, automation technological applications introduced assist work. Younger -wage workforces witness delay introduction automation technologies. impact labour markets depend level readiness countries adopt technologies automation. readiness defined capability capitalize future, mitigate risks challenges, resilient agile responding unknown future shocks. country’ level readiness automation measured factors: innovation technology, infrastructure quality, regulation governance, human capital skills, business investment. -mentioned report, readiness gap maritime sector developed developing countries. higher level readiness observed Australia, East Asia, Europe United States, countries Africa South America positioned , due insufficient technological advancement investment, regulation infrastructure gaps weaknesses terms business models. means developing countries witness slower adoption rate technology automation, middle-skilled jobs industrialized countries face substantial risk disappearing due automation probability. accompanied capital investments research development expenditures, leading smaller productivity increases risk falling terms maritime sector capabilities competitiveness. likelihood, future work maritime sector today, jobs onboard ships 4 complete statistics supply seafarers, http://stats.unctad.org/seafarersupply. http://stats.unctad.org/seafarersupply 49REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 onshore jobs, requiring adaptable workforce. -skilling retraining crucial preparing workers transformations arise result advanced technologies automation. , countries elaborated long-term plans automation maritime sector (International Transport Workers’ Federation, 2019). support successful transition workers, report Federation recommends actions: • Raising awareness implications introduction automation technology transport systems. • Facilitating dialogues stakeholders global transport understanding positions parties concerned. • Establishing national strategies policies address ramifications automation technology transport. • Supporting developing countries dealing effects introducing automation technology transport. • Identifying essential skills needed work effectively world advanced automation technology transport, implementing education training. Impacts, responses prospects relation COVID-19 pandemic: Sailors stranded sea month 150,000 seafarers changed ships operate ensure compliance international maritime regulations ensuring safety, crew health welfare, prevention fatigue. pandemic led restrictions cross-border movement persons, closures consulates affecting visa processing, port closures, disembarkation restrictions lack air services, impaired ability repatriate resupply crews. mobilize action addressing problem, international organizations, maritime industry labour organizations approached relevant authorities issued guidance documents facilitate crew repatriation seafarers , time, steps minimize risk contagion coronavirus disease ( chapter 5 detailed description guidance documents). 2020, Governments started allowing crew port strict protocols. efforts, crew advanced slowly. June, seafarers working contractual terms, disembark replaced. mid-June 2020, IMO estimated 300,000 seafarers month required international flights enable crew changeovers. needed repatriated home aircraft, needed join ships. Additionally, 70,000 cruise ship staff waiting repatriation (IMO, 2020). Countries faced challenges local level enact crew . include difficulty engage systematic approach wide range domestic agencies involved process. Countries faced difficulties related lack infrastructure protective equipment unclear procedures mitigate risks, enabling logistics crew change restrictions lockdown protocols shortages staff involved process (Lloyd’ List, 2020c). pandemic brought visibility seafarers recognition provide essential service ensure trade essential goods, medical supplies food, supply chains running. , slow pace concrete actions highlights challenges balancing safety - workers operational continuity, raises question practices procedures crew changeover, disease management, health care welfare evolve enhance support seafarers. , pandemic opportunity raise awareness importance gender maritime sector, including seafarers. Today, women represent 2 cent world’ 1.2 million seafarers; 94 cent women seafarers working cruise industry (www.imo.org/en/OurWork/TechnicalCooperation/Pages/ WomenInMaritime.aspx#.) important move promote safe attractive sector supports greater engagement women ( box 2.3). . SHIPPING COMPANIES, EARNINGS AND REVENUES AND OPERATIONS DURING AND BEYOND THE PANDEMIC CRISIS 1. Impact pandemic freight rates earnings section describes impact COVID-19 pandemic relevant developments maritime freight markets, containerized trade, dry bulk tankers, 2020. coronavirus toll global economy seaborne trade early 2020, freight rates shipping strongly affected continued determined supply capacity handled. case container ships segment, practised blank sailing applied capacity-management measures adapt supply capacity reduced demand seaborne trade freight rates remain strong. Tanker freight rates affected https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/TechnicalCooperation/Pages/WomenInMaritime.aspx# https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/TechnicalCooperation/Pages/WomenInMaritime.aspx# 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY50 repercussions lockdowns relating pandemic, geopolitical events, oil price fluctuations increased vessels storage floating, led rise freight rates, March–April 2020. Dry bulk freight rates, pulled oversupplied market, affected shock negative demand, China, owing outbreak coronavirus disease. Container freight rates earnings: Strong freight rates abrupt drop seaborne trade container segment shipping industry struggling oversupplied market slow demand growth pandemic, level container freight rates generally years. pandemic brought economies halt toll trade, industry segment experienced major setback. start 2020 witnessed recovery demand freight rates pandemic outbreak pandemic, prospects demand decreased, fleet development affected . lockdowns force March 2020, reducing demand containerized goods, shipping companies engaged strategies manage supply capacity reduce costs cope freight rates falling. shown table 2.9, 2020 began freight rates compared average rates 2019 routes, driven surcharge applied carriers compensate higher bunker costs reduced supply capacity due scrubber retrofits compliance IMO 2020 sulphur cap regulations. spread coronavirus pandemic early 2020, led sudden drop demand seaborne transport, carriers applied strategies increased blank sailing idling vessels, -routing (MDS Transmodal, 2020) adjusting supply demand ( chapter 1). allowed freight rates remain stable time demand ocean shipping. blank sailings, accompanied oil bunker prices, helped shipping lines manage supply capacity reduce costs, blank sailings cost carriers 40 cent operating cost vessel (Drewry, 2020a) impact revenue due capacity withdrawals. perspective shippers, strategies meant severe space limitations transport goods delays delivery dates, impact supply chains proper functioning ports. regard idling, 11 cent container fleet estimated idle 2020. vessel types showing higher proportion idle fleet – 7 9 cent – included containers, tankers car carriers (Clarksons Research, 2020c). showing highest increases idle fleet compared January 2020 car carriers – tripled – liquefied natural gas carriers liquefied petroleum gas carriers. regard charter market, declining demand increase idling blank sailings applied carriers reduce supply capacity negative impact segments container charter rates, larger vessels segment. ConTex charter rate decreased average 368 points months 2020, compared annual average 407 points 2019 (figure 2.6). , rates reach level witnessed 2016, earnings segments fell beneath operating costs due oversupplied market. improvements witnessed July 2020, volume activity picked slightly, regard large medium-sized vessels. remains unclear improvements persist. quarter 2020 container ships continued extending capacity-reduction programmes, Box 2.3 Promoting diversity inclusion maritime sector 27 January 2020, Women’ International Shipping Trading Association IMO signed memorandum understanding agreed enhance technical cooperation activities maritime field build opportunities diversity inclusion, professional development skill competency. , parties agreed : • opportunities partner maritime issues, include organizing workshops speaking panels annual conferences events held parties, focus panel diversity. • promote greater engagement women maritime occupations, members, broader ocean business community, ocean stakeholders public. • develop participate relevant training, workshops, business related areas mutual interest. • support implementation IMO Assembly resolution 1147(31) 4 December 2019 preserving legacy world maritime theme 2019 achieving barrier-free working environment women maritime sector. UNCTAD collaborating Association discussing collaboration terms data collection dedicated capacity-building activities. Sources: : www.imo.org/en/OurWork/ TechnicalCooperation/Pages/WomenInMaritime. aspx#; Women’ International Shipping Trading Association, 2020. https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/TechnicalCooperation/Pages/WomenInMaritime.aspx# https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/TechnicalCooperation/Pages/WomenInMaritime.aspx# https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/TechnicalCooperation/Pages/WomenInMaritime.aspx# 51REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Ta bl 2. 9 ta er fr ei gh ar ke es , 2 01 0– 20 20 Fr ei gh ar ke 20 10 20 11 20 12 20 13 20 14 20 15 20 16 20 17 20 18 20 19 20 20 ( ve ra ge Ja nu ar – Ap ril ) Ja nu ar 20 20 Fe br ua ry 20 20 ar ch 20 20 Ap ril 20 20 20 19 ( pr il Ja nu ar – Ap ril ) er ce nt ag ch ge Tr - Pa ci fic ( ol la rs er 4 0- fo ot qu iv al en ni ) Sh gh ai – ni te St es es oa st 2 30 8 1 66 7 2 28 7 2 03 3 1 97 0 1 50 6 1 27 2 1 48 5 1 73 6 1 52 5 1 52 1 1 57 2 1 39 5 1 50 9 1 60 8 1 71 1 -1 1. 10 Pe rc en ta ge ha ng 68 .2 2 -2 7. 77 37 .1 9 -1 1. 11 -3 .1 -2 3. 6 -1 5. 5 16 .7 16 .9 -1 2. 2 Sh gh ai – ite St es oa st 3 49 9 3 00 8 3 41 6 3 29 0 3 72 0 3 18 2 2 09 4 2 45 7 2 80 6 2 63 4 2 77 5. 5 2 89 8 2 71 4 2 78 4 2 70 6 2 80 7. 25 -1 .1 3 Pe rc en ta ge ha ng 47 .8 2 -1 4. 03 13 .5 6 -3 .6 9 13 .0 7 -1 4. 5 -3 4. 2 17 .3 14 .2 -6 .1 Fa – Eu ro pe ( ol la rs er 2 0- fo ot qu iv al en ni ) Sh gh ai – er Eu ro pe 1 78 9 88 1 1 35 3 1 08 4 1 16 1 62 9 69 0 87 6 82 2 76 0 85 .5 1 04 0 82 9 80 5 74 0 81 4. 5 4. 79 Pe rc en ta ge ha ng 28 .2 4 -5 0. 75 53 .5 8 -1 9. 88 7. 10 -4 5. 8 9. 7 27 .0 -6 .2 -7 .5 Sh gh ai – ed ite rr ea 1 73 9 97 3 1 33 6 1 15 1 1 25 3 73 9 68 4 81 7 79 7 81 1 97 6. 75 1 18 1 97 9 89 8 84 9 84 1. 5 16 .0 7 Pe rc en ta ge ha ng 24 .4 8 -4 4. 05 37 .3 1 -1 3. 85 8. 9 -4 1, 0 -7 .4 19 .4 -2 .4 1. 8 rt – ut ( ol la rs er 2 0- fo ot qu iv al en ni ) Sh gh ai – ou er ic ( ) 2 23 6 1 48 3 1 77 1 1 38 0 1 10 3 45 5 1 64 7 2 67 9 1 70 3 1 67 3 1 55 1 2 06 9 1 71 4 1 42 6 99 5 1 38 7 11 .8 2 er ce nt ag ch ge -7 .9 5 -3 3. 68 19 .4 -2 2. 08 -2 0. 1 -5 8. 7 26 2. 0 62 .7 -3 6. 4 -1 .8 Sh gh ai – tra lia / ew ea la ( el bo ur ne ) 1 18 9 77 2 92 5 81 8 67 8 49 2 52 6 67 7 82 7 59 6 88 4. 75 94 4 86 8 81 5 91 2 44 1 10 0. 62 Pe rc en ta ge ha ng -2 0. 73 -3 5. 07 19 .8 2 -1 1. 6 -1 7. 1 -2 7. 4 6. 9 28 .7 22 .2 -2 7. 9 Sh gh ai – es fri ca ( ag os ) 2 30 5 1 90 8 2 09 2 1 92 7 1 83 8 1 44 9 1 18 1 1 77 0 1 92 0 2 47 4 2 85 7. 75 2 85 6 2 93 0 2 89 1 2 75 4 2 60 3. 5 9. 77 er ce nt ag ch ge 2. 58 -1 7. 22 9. 64 -7 .8 9 -4 .6 -2 1. 2 -1 8. 5 49 .9 8. 5 28 .9 Sh gh ai – ou fri ca ( ur ba ) 1 48 1 99 1 10 47 80 5 76 0 69 3 58 4 1 15 5 88 8 80 2 98 6. 5 1 12 0 1 03 2 96 9 82 5 75 3. 75 30 .8 8 er ce nt ag ch ge -0 .9 4 -3 3. 09 5. 65 -2 3. 11 -5 .6 -8 .8 -1 5. 7 97 .8 -2 3. 1 -9 .7 tr - ia ( ol la rs er 2 0- fo ot qu iv al en ni ) Sh gh ai – ou - si ( ga po ) 31 8 21 0 25 6 23 1 23 3 18 7 70 14 8 14 6 13 8 19 3. 25 18 9 18 7 20 1 19 6 14 9. 75 29 .0 5 er ce nt ag ch ge -3 3. 96 21 .9 0 -9 .7 7 0. 9 -1 9. 7 -6 2. 6 11 1. 4 -1 .4 -5 .5 Sh gh ai – ap 31 6 33 7 34 5 34 6 27 3 14 6 18 5 21 5 22 3 23 3 23 9. 75 24 1 23 6 24 0 24 2 22 8. 5 4. 92 Pe rc en ta ge ha ng 6. 65 2. 37 0. 29 -2 1. 1 -4 6. 5 26 .7 16 .2 3. 7 4. 5 Sh gh ai – es ap 21 5 22 3 22 9 22 7 22 6 22 1 22 7 23 4 22 7. 5 -0 .2 2 Pe rc en ta ge ha ng .. 3. 7 2. 7 Sh gh ai – ep ub lic ea 19 3 19 8 18 3 19 7 18 7 16 0 10 4 14 1 16 3 12 8 11 9 12 0 11 8 11 8 12 0 14 4. 25 -1 7. 50 Pe rc en ta ge ha ng 2. 59 -7 .6 7. 65 -5 .1 -1 4. 4 -3 5. 0 35 .6 15 .6 -2 15 Sh gh ai – ed ite rr ea Gu lf/ Se 92 2 83 8 98 1 77 1 82 0 52 5 39 9 61 8 46 3 73 5 98 3. 25 1 16 1 1 03 4 99 7 74 1 70 4. 25 39 .6 2 Pe rc en ta ge ha ng -9 .1 1 17 .0 6 -2 1. 41 6. 4 -3 6. 0 -2 4. 0 54 .9 -2 5. 1 58 .7 ou rc : ha ng ha ta er iz ed fr ei gh ; ha ng ha pp xc ha ng ; fro la rk ns es ea rc , ta er te llig en ce ly , ar io su es . 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY52 demand picking , keeping freight rates rise. signal shipping lines expecting slow recovery effects crisis caused pandemic. , persisting application reduced capacity measures appears causing severe problems. , carriers offering sailings delays weeks, containers (empty filled) building ports sailings place scheduled. Filled containers arriving ports booked sailing wait longer period time arrival vessel, resulting port delays (Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide, 2020d). situation exacerbated vessels limited window ports due labour shortages ( case India, pandemic spreading July 2020). empty containers piling ports. Ports United Kingdom, , reported overwhelmed empty containers stacking causing congestion limited port storage yards (Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide, 2020d) ( Box 2.6). Tankers freight rates earnings: Sharp freight rate fluctuations surge demand tankers floating storage Lockdowns induced pandemic, geopolitical events oil price fluctuations impact developments oil tanker freight market, maintaining freight rates high quarter 2020. period, freight rates market experienced highly volatile trends, weak market balance due oversupplied fleet market demand. March April 2020, tanker rates rose sharply, demand vessels increased, global demand crude oil petroleum products falling dramatically due pandemic ( chapter 1). explained hiring vessels floating storage, lack agreement Organization Petroleum Exporting Countries wider group production cuts led temporary increase output Saudi Arabia time consumption side ( chapter 1). oil market state super contango front-month prices future months, making storage oil future sales profitable. Traders rushed charter large tankers floating storage sell oil higher prices , reducing availability vessels market triggering sharp rise tanker rates. shown table 2.10, time-charter equivalent earnings picked tanker segments March April 2020, huge peaks large crude carrier segment. case point Arabian Gulf–Japan single voyage route. route surge average 48 Worldscale points February average 137 Worldscale points March 174 Worldscale points April 2020. worked average daily time-charter equivalent $124,000 March $170,900 April, spiking 10 times compared average earnings February 2020. Figure 2.6 ConTex index, 2015–2020 (Index base: October 2007 – 1,000 points) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data ConTex index produced Hamburg Shipbrokers Association (www.vhss.de). Notes: ConTex index based assessments current day charter rates selected container ship types, representative size categories: Types 1,100 TEUs 1,700 TEUs (charter period year); Types 2,500, 2,700, 3,500 4,250 TEUs (charter period years). http://www.vhss.de 53REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 2020 2020 2019 January February March April June December Crude oil tankers large crude carriers Arabian Gulf–Japan Worldscale 100 48 137 174 66 57 105 Dollars day 63 500 16 500 124 000 170 900 51 700 38 800 87 800 Change earnings (percentage) -28 -74 652 38 -70 -25 Arabian Gulf–China Worldscale 94 44 125 159 60 52 109 Dollars day 70 000 18 300 128 200 176 000 53 800 40 600 83 400 Change earnings (percentage) -16 -74 601 37 -69 -25 Arabian Gulf–north-western Europe Worldscale 127 33 127 104 38 106 61 Dollars day 63 200 20 900 205 600 169 200 169 400 167 000 66 100 Change earnings (percentage) -4 -67 884 -18 0 -1 Suezmax crude tankers West Africa–north-western Europe Worldscale 136 82 126 146 82 49 Dollars day 54 800 26 400 59 700 77 400 37 600 14 400 57 800 Change earnings (percentage) -5,19 -51,82 126,14 29,65 -51,42 -61,70 West Africa–Caribbean/east coast North America Worldscale 103 79 121 141 78 54 Dollars day 35 900 24 800 59 600 76 800 36 200 18 200 41 500 Change earnings (percentage) -13 -31 140 29 -53 -50 Black Sea–Mediterranean Worldscale 147 90 134 151 86 54 Dollars day 62 900 24 700 65 700 82 700 33 400 6 200 61 200 Change earnings (percentage) -60,73 165,99 25,88 -59,61 -81,44 Aframax crude tankers Mediterranean– Mediterranean Worldscale 149 81 143 157 107 63 193 Dollars day 34 200 5 700 42 000 50 800 26 500 3 400 55 400 Change earnings (percentage) -38 -83 637 21 -48 -87 North-western Europe– North-western Europe Worldscale 147 118 136 170 109 74 209 Dollars day 41 500 25 200 42 900 69 100 28 300 2 200 83 200 Change earnings (percentage) -50 -39 70 61 -59 -92 Caribbean–east coast North America Worldscale 324 169 161 155 122 68 225 Dollars day 91 600 36 900 39 700 41 300 28 000 5 300 53 800 Change earnings (percentage) 70 -60 8 4 -32 -81 South-East Asia–east coast Australia Worldscale 151 99 121 156 132 73 178 Dollars day 30 100 15 000 31 000 50 500 39 400 12 900 44 300 Change earnings (percentage) -32 -50 107 63 -22 -67 Product tankers Medium-range tankers 1 Baltic–United Kingdom continental Europe Worldscale 190 195 187 247 160 103 205 Dollars day 18 400 21 400 22 800 36 400 19 300 6 900 22 300 Change earnings (percentage) -17 16 7 60 -47 -64 Medium-range tankers 2 United States Gulf-north- western Europe Worldscale 161 97 120 150 108 76 122 Dollars day 16 100 5 200 13 600 22 100 13 000 5 200 10 700 Change earnings (percentage) 50 -68 162 63 -41 -60 Long-range tankers 1 Arabian Gulf-Japan Worldscale 127 100 153 304 254 82 157 Dollars day 12 300 9 900 28 600 70 400 56 700 10 800 23 000 Change earnings (percentage) -47 -20 189 146 -19 -81 Long-range tankers 2 Arabian Gulf-Japan Worldscale 121 93 155 319 263 87 156 Dollars day 15 800 11 600 40 400 102 200 81 400 17 000 31 600 Change earnings (percentage) -50 -27 248 153 -20 -79 Table 2.10 Crude oil product tanker spot rates time-charter equivalent earnings (Worldscale dollars day) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based Drewry Shipping Insight, issues. 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY54 noted table 2.10, product tanker market witnessed surge earnings supported increased floating storage demand, large vessels. , peaking March–April, freight rates vessel earnings segments declined sharply , total vessels locked floating storage returned active trade, inflating supply. tonnage locked floating storage dropped 45 million dwt April 30 million dwt (Drewry, 2020b). number large crude carriers storing crude oil dropped sharply 83 vessels 56 vessels period. , , remains historically high number. Tanker rates crude oil product tankers market continued decrease June 2020, countries easing lockdowns measures. Demand oil remained significantly quarter 2020 compared 2019. time, continued cuts output Organization Petroleum Exporting Countries wider group led return vessels locked floating storage, increasing supply capacity. regard outlook, freight rates remain , tanker market fundamentals highly uncertain. Recession projections global economy reduce demand oil oil products. Oil price development geopolitics impact. , tanker supply remain high time. management vessel order books recycling crucial improve market imbalances reduce freight volatility. Dry bulk freight rates earnings: Weakened fundamentals due COVID-19 pandemic increased freight rate volatility months 2020, market dry bulk freight rates continued shaped imbalances supply demand, aggravated impact pandemic resulted high fluctuations, larger vessels period. discussed earlier, overcapacity affecting dry bulk market, supply growth outstripping demand years. exacerbated negative demand shock caused pandemic, added downward pressure shipping freight rates. beginning 2020, dry bulk shipping industry freight rates earnings severely affected, Capesize market. due combination drop seasonal dry bulk demand outbreak coronavirus disease China, imports majority globally shipped dry bulk cargo volumes, including iron ore, coal, major grains oilseeds. outbreak pandemic early 2020 disrupted industrial activities China, resulted reduced demand dry bulk vessels, Capesize vessels carry industrial raw materials China. time, exports iron ores Brazil ( chapter 1) added pressure dry bulk volumes, exacerbating freight rate volatility leading unprecedented negative levels Capsize market freight rates. Baltic Exchange Capesize index negative February March, dropping -243 -221 points sudden massive drop globally shipped dry bulk cargo volumes due shutdown China (figure 2.7). June 2020, index increased high levels 2,267 points boosted higher demand iron ore China easing COVID-19-related restrictions. freight rates smaller vessel sizes experience decline, remained highly volatile . Demand Panamax Supramax vessels, global shipping grain oil seeds, higher, trade volumes remained stronger ( chapter 1). Time-charter rates segments affected pandemic weakened market fundamentals, plagued oversupply vessels. June 2020, average -year time-charter rates Capesize bulk carriers $11,050 day, $9,785 day Panamax bulk carriers, $8,513 day Handysize bulk carriers $8,150 day Supramax bulk carriers (figure 2.8). Sector recovery depend global economic growth. , prospect global recession uncertainties impact pandemic developed developing economies, development freight rates remains uncertain. key feature development China, biggest driver recovery dry bulk industry. time, overcapacity remains threat industry market fundamentals increase market arising additional supply offset growth demand. 2. Government-backed financial support shipping industry times pandemic: case container segment abrupt significant drop seaborne trade uncertainties future caused pandemic, financial viability container segment shipping industry risk, confronted freight rates volatility profits decade. Financial support Governments ensure proper functioning maritime transport services global necessity. airline industry, financial assistance common practice shipping industry, Asia ( East-Asian South-Asian countries China, Republic Korea, Singapore Taiwan Province China) sector rely bailout funds financial relief Governments (Drewry, 2020b). 55REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 , government intervention support perceived industry, disrupts equilibrium impedes market reform. , pandemic crisis growing uncertainties demand recover, carriers applied State-backed financial support regions, including Europe. , 2020, CMA CGM secured $1.14 billion (€1.05 billion) State-guaranteed syndicated loans Government France (JOC., 2020a) strengthen company’ cash position confront uncertainties global economy resulting pandemic. addition, Republic Korea launched $33 billion rescue fund protect mainstay sectors (Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide, 2020e), including Figure 2.7 Baltic Exchange dry index, 2017–2020 Source: Baltic Exchange; data derived Clarksons Research, Shipping Intelligence Network Time Series. Notes: Panamax index: basis – 82,500-dwt vessel start 2020, 74,000-dwt vessel prior. Handysize index: basis – 38,200-dwt vessel start 2020, 28,000-dwt vessel prior. Figure 2.8 -year time-charter rates bulk carriers, 2015–2020 (Dollars day) Source: Baltic Exchange; data derived Clarksons Research, Shipping Intelligence Network Time Series Note: Long-run historical series. http://JOC. 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY56 shipping shipbuilding sectors, allocated $1 billion5, HMM, Hyundai Merchant Marine, received $400 million (Pulse, 2020).6 Evergreen Yang Ming Marine Transport Corporation receive State-backed loans totalling $568 million part plan Taiwan Province China alleviate financial pressure facing local shipping sector (Lloyd’ List, 2020d). plan, Government pledged provide guarantees 80 cent approved loans subsidies interest, local shipping companies ports access additional financing. -mentioned carriers world’ top 10 deep-sea container shipping lines (figure 2.9). , addition industry involvement recovery, reliable governmental policies support sustainable business models fundamental building resilience sector. 3. Industry prospects times pandemic : Supply discipline collaboration, accelerated digitalization prioritization environmental sustainability Disciplinary collaborative approach container ship segment face pandemic regard measures applied pandemic crisis container ship segment industry handled crisis compared financial crisis 2009, industry disciplined collaborative approach protect industry ensure long-term recovery viability. lessons learned downturn global trade financial crisis, competition carriers dominate market scale. Vessels sailing freight rates barely cover operational costs, resulting losses container segment shipping industry $20 billion 2009 (JOC., 2020b) number operators business. current context pandemic, container ship segment gaining market share. , concentrated maintaining positive level freight rates managing 5 industries include airlines, automotive manufacturing, machinery manufacturing, power generation telecommunications. 6 addition, State agency Korea [Republic ] Ocean Business Corporation planned buy 100 billion won worth subordinated bonds shippers accepting shippers’ loan-- ratio maximum 95 cent current average 60 80 cent. agency buy 100 billion won worth debts small- mid-sized shippers (https://pulsenews..kr/view. phpyear=2020andno=423920 www.seatrade-maritime. /finance-insurance/south-korea-pledges-1bn-support- ailing-shipping-sector). capacity supply line demand reducing costs ensuring sector viability. effect pandemic crisis container shipping obvious, reflected decreasing demand seaborne trade reduction fleet deployment. effort address future uncertainty prospects demand growth ( box 2.5), carriers continue exercising flexibility managing maritime networks matching supply capacity demand support freight cost rates. true freight rates level ensures economic viability sector. , supply-reduction measures applied shipping lines sustained long period recovery volumes, lead dysfunctionalities sector, including ports, undermining performance shippers global supply chains. Figure 2.9 Top 10 deep-sea container shipping lines, ranked deployed capacity market share, 2020 (20-foot equivalent units percentage) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MDS Transmodal Container Ship Databank, 2020. Note: Data refer fully cellular container ship tonnage include intraregional services. http://JOC. https://pulsenews..kr/view.phpyear=2020andno=423920 https://pulsenews..kr/view.phpyear=2020andno=423920 http://www.seatrade-maritime./finance-insurance/south-korea-pledges-1bn-support-ailing-shipping-sector http://www.seatrade-maritime./finance-insurance/south-korea-pledges-1bn-support-ailing-shipping-sector http://www.seatrade-maritime./finance-insurance/south-korea-pledges-1bn-support-ailing-shipping-sector 57REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Box 2.4 Policies support shipping sustainable recovery pandemic crisis global shipping industry forefront recovery vital enabler smooth functioning international supply chains. countries turned economic stimulus packages promote recovery, asked leverage support build economies drive sustainable economic prosperity. reflection requires short-term priorities (job creation boosting economic activity) thinking long-term objectives. Long-term objectives refer support growth potential, resilience future shocks sustainable growth trajectory, including decarbonization. important consideration respect climate-proofing infrastructure investments avoid future disruption transport operations. line thinking, countries considered strategic diverse reasons include elements policies related maritime transport strategies part recovery plans pandemic crisis, : • avoid stranded assets ( , assets lose economic anticipated life) investing declining technology supporting investment emerging technologies bring simultaneous economic environmental benefits . , British Ports Association proposed plan utilize ports maritime industries stimulate future growth, involved maritime green fund invest green equipment vessels, study identify barriers increase uptake onshore electricity, bring financial savings ports contribute reduce air pollution. • build resilience future shocks, instance promoting digitalization. case initiative launched Maritime Port Authority Singapore, Singapore Shipping Association Infocomm Media Development Authority support maritime companies digital transformation, includes support formulate digitalization road maps, guide execution benefit maritime digital platforms covering port clearances services, trade documentation, trade operations financing. • develop export markets, create domestic chains, generate jobs prepared future fossil fuels. national hydrogen strategy Germany, aimed promoting alternative fuel industries, including shipping. offers market incentives green hydrogen competitive investments €9 billion onshore electricity, bring financial savings ports contribute reduce air pollution. Sources: Chambers, 2020; Elgie McNally, 2020; Greenport, 2020; Hammer Hallegatte, 2020; Seatrade Maritime News, 2020b. Accelerated digitalization prioritization environmental sustainability current context accentuated industry trend digitalization. Companies leveraged digitalization adapt circumstances, Box 2.5 changing landscape international production, COVID-19 pandemic, resilience-building maritime transport fleet deployment International production patterns changing financial crisis 2008–2009. slowdown trade global chain trade linked shift trade investment policy environment, trending greater interventionism, rising protectionism shift regional bilateral frameworks. drivers landscape international production include technological advancements sustainability trends. UNCTAD analysis suggests place degree fragmentation length chains geographical spread added, pointing shorter chains concentrated added. COVID-19 crisis brought spotlight exposure international production systemic risks, perspective securing continuity supply. , building resilience supply chain translate diversifying sources inputs. , crisis accentuated pre-existing trends related length fragmentation chains. Depending starting configuration industries, trajectories system international production follow include reshoring, diversification, regionalization replication. early fully grasp supply-chain redesign patterns post- pandemic recovery scenario, inevitable shipping industry fundamentally affected, specific trajectories industries follow. instance, reshoring trajectory, leading shorter fragmented chains, impact deep-sea cargo volumes capacity generate economies scale mega- sized vessels, provide flexibility smaller ships adapt sharp fluctuations supply demand. hand, regionalization trajectory, leading short physical supply chains fragmented, increase attractiveness short sea networks countries, opening opportunities regional cooperation cabotage services: Sources: ánchez, forthcoming; Loadstar, 2020a; UNCTAD, 2020a. 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY58 increasingly favouring online tools simplify processes cut costs. , June 2020, Mediterranean Shipping Company introduced instant-quote tool provide easy access rates ocean shipping, customers’ supply chain easier manage improve -- efficiency (Port Technology, 2020). Companies sought improve data accessibility transparency, adapt evolving consumer expectations environment characterized supply-chain disruption, remote working increased engagement business--consumer -commerce. instance, mid-April 2020, Maersk’ online application, features cargo release, calculation fees online payment release functionalities, registered 85 cent increase transactions customers started ordering remotely sought track cargo efficiently (Maersk, 2020a). current context accelerated interest data-driven services support decision-making emergence services business opportunities. , Cubex Global digital marketplace built collaborative blockchain principles, enables buying selling cubic metres container space, enabling capacity management digital platform. platform promises gains operational efficiency ranging 25 40 cent container load state 100 cent full container load state empties (Khalid Tariq, 2020). conclusion, collaborative innovation, accelerated digital solutions cope impacts pandemic respond changing consumer , remain long term, confirming embark digital transformation customer-centric service development. long-term goal shipping decarbonization linked Initial IMO Strategy reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships, aimed cutting annual emissions 50 cent 2050 carbon intensity emissions 40 cent 2030 70 cent 2050, compared 2008 levels. Maintaining commitment reach goal require significant resources investment. impacts pandemic, long-term goal remains priority industry (Shell International, 2020). due increased awareness technical progress improve sustainability operations unlock savings generate commercial opportunities adapt changing regulatory environment result Initial IMO Strategy. semester 2020, companies announced maintaining, initiating, investment plans related developing carbon- neutral fuels technologies, setting ambitious company targets reduce carbon-dioxide emission (Maersk, 2020b; Global, 2020). . PORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY Ports play essential role facilitating movements goods supply chains. key node transport system gateways connecting countries maritime transport networks, maritime transport domestic regional markets multimodal transport connections hinterland. editions Review Maritime Transport discussed heightened pressure ports experienced years, view larger powerful alliances seeking raise network efficiency. led ports enhance productivity adapt space, infrastructure equipment increased vessel size competitive pressure ports seeking attract investment diversify sources income activities. maritime transport activities, sector subject pressure incorporate sustainable criteria port development wave horizontal vertical consolidation, affecting container terminals. 1. Vertical integration shipping companies, terminal operators inland logistics intensifies 2010–2020, container shipping companies sought expand services offer include shipping, terminal operations inland logistics reduce exposure volatile freight rates generate alternative revenue streams providing -- logistic solutions. Table 2.11 identifies 21 main global players control 80 cent global terminal operations. companies part closely linked shipping lines (APM Terminals/Maersk; Terminal Investment Limited/Mediterranean Shipping Company; Mitsui Osaka Shosen Kaisha Lines; Yang Ming Marine Transport Corporation; HMM COSCO). Similarly, terminal operators engaging vertical integration greater control inland logistics aiming provide integrated service offerings generate . Examples developments 2020 include Maersk’ acquisition customs brokerage firm warehousing distribution services provider (JOC., 2020c), CMA CGM’ partnership online platform links couriers online retailers (Lloyd’ List, 2019b) DP World’ acquisitions global feeder network, http://JOC. 59REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Table 2.11 Top 21 global terminal operators, throughput capacity, 2019 (Million 20-foot equivalent units) Source: Drewry, 2019, Global Container Terminal Operators Annual Review Forecast: Annual Report 2020/21. Note: World throughput refers data estimated Drewry, container port throughput data reported table 1.11 chapter 1 report. Ranking Operator Throughput Capacity Total port handling (million TEUs) Share world throughput (percentage) Growth decline (million TEUs) Growth decline (percentage) Total capacity (million TEUs) Growth decline (percentage) 1 COSCO 109.8 13.7 4.0 3.8 141.6 8.9 2 PSA International 84.8 10.6 4.8 5.9 117.0 3.9 3 APM Terminals 84.2 10.5 5.5 7.0 107.6 7.9 4 Hutchison Ports 82.6 10.3 0.1 0.1 113.0 0.9 5 DP World 69.4 8.7 -0.6 -0.9 91.0 1.5 6 Terminal Investment Limited 50.8 6.3 3.1 6.4 72.8 16.8 7 China Merchants Ports 35.6 4.4 1.1 3.1 44.2 3.1 8 CMA CGM 26.1 3.3 0.5 2.0 43.1 12.3 9 SSA Marine 13.0 1.6 0.4 3.3 20.5 1.4 10 ICTSI 11.8 1.5 2.0 20.9 20.0 11.7 11 Eurogate 11.7 1.5 -1.9 -14.2 20.6 -9.1 12 Evergreen 10.1 1.3 -0.3 -3.0 17.0 -0.9 13 Hyundai 9.5 1.2 2.0 25.8 12.1 -2.1 14 NYK Lines (Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha) 8.2 1.0 -2.4 -22.4 22.5 -5.3 15 MOL (Mitsui Osaka Shosen Kaisha Lines) 7.8 1.0 0.5 6.7 10.7 6.6 16 HHLA ((Hamburger Hafen und Logistik) 7.7 1.0 0.2 3.2 10.5 1.5 17 Yildirim/Yilport 6.1 0.8 -0.3 -4.4 11.9 16.8 18 Bollore 6.0 0.7 0.7 12.7 9.8 4.5 19 Yang Ming Marine Transport Corporation 4.3 0.5 0.0 -1.1 8.4 0.0 20 SAAM Puertos (Sudamericana Agencia éreas Marítimas) 3.1 0.4 0.0 -0.3 5.6 8.2 21 “” Line (Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha) 3.1 0.4 -0.2 -4.6 5.7 0.0 Global operators total 645.8 19.1 3.1 905.6 5.2 freight forwarding services providers ( Loadstar, 2020b). study representative group ports Latin American Caribbean countries (Argentina, Bahamas, Brazil, Colombia, Jamaica, Mexico, Panama Peru) suggests significant proportion container volumes region ( table 2.12) handled port terminals controlled shipping companies part major alliances (2M, Ocean Alliance THE Alliance) (ánchez, forthcoming). perspective port development, terminal investments shipping lines positive impact. , investments secure capital investment upgrade port facilities serve -larger vessels, increase efficiency service reliability, reduce costs operating times (Zhu al., 2019). , increased vertical integration shipping port services discourage lines calling ports, limit choices shippers influence approaches terminal concessions (UNCTAD, 2018). 2. Impact pandemic responses thereto Worker shortages ports port closures resulting pandemic affected ability ports terminal operators complete vessel-related operations timely fashion provide key services port–hinterland interface. situation led interrupted cargo movement ports, inducing port congestion, additional costs shippers container shortages. Reduced port calls ( chapter 3) caused decline port stock prices revenues. mitigate impact congestion economic impacts carriers 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY60 shippers, ports cut deferred fees charges, accentuated diminishing revenues, increasing debt insolvency risks. Box 2.6 expands discussion case ports India. Ports central keeping supply chains open allowing maritime trade continue. line defence stopping spread pandemic protecting essential staff daily tasks, letting goods flow. respond challenge, ports introduce significant procedures operations. endeavour, large set documentation collected port members UNCTAD TrainForTrade Port Management Programme relevant entities build generic guidelines share practices (box 2.7). , crisis protocol port entities drawn outlining response measures, based colour-coded levels intervention ranging green, yellow orange red, indicating worst case scenarios confirmed COVID-19 cases port area. 3. Prospects lessons learned: Building supply-chain resilience perspective supply port services infrastructure Trade facilitation: Remote documentary processes ensure continuity cross-border trade COVID-19 crisis, role information communications technologies (ICTs) promoting trade facilitation increasingly prominent. Digital trade facilitation commonly refers making full ICTs paperless stages cross-border trade process. Digital trade facilitation means higher efficiency, convenience cost savings cross-border trade operations, means entire process completed significantly – – -person physical contact interaction. proved crucial COVID-19 crisis ensuring continuity cross-border trade, reducing direct physical contact people remote operations. International agreements enabled mainstreaming digital trade facilitation. , IMO Convention Facilitation International Maritime Traffic, 1965 requires national Governments facilitate electronic information exchange ship ports, recommending maritime single windows. initiatives seeking transpose physical documentation maritime cargo digital working methods ( chapter 5). international legal instrument, WTO Agreement Trade Facilitation, references ICT tools means cross-border trade regulations transparent predictable expedite movement, release clearance goods. COVID-19 crisis, developing countries launched expanded initiatives traders present documents remotely enable border officials undertake remote verification clearance processes transparent manner. , Morocco, National Single Window Foreign Trade (Portnet) shifted 100 cent online tools allowing completion import-export formalities access related Source: ánchez, forthcoming, Latin America: Concerns evolution shipping markets post-pandemic era. Table 2.12 Share integrated port terminals container volumes handled, selected countries Latin America Caribbean (Percentage) Country Ports Share integrated terminals ports (percentage) Share integrated terminals country total throughput (percentage) Argentina Buenos Aires 67.7 56.8 Bahamas Freeport 100.0 89.8 Brazil Itapoa, Itajaí, Paranaguá, Pecé, Rio de Janeiro, Santos 67.2 48.6 Colombia Buenaventura, Cartagena 11.1 10.3 Jamaica Kingston 81.9 81.9 Mexico ázaro Cardenas, Progreso 72.9 15.1 Panama Balboa, Cristobal, Rodman 10.8 10.7 Peru Callao 41.2 34.6 Total 37.3 32.36 61REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Box 2.6 Challenges faced ports India result COVID-19 pandemic Attempting minimize spread pandemic, India implemented lockdown measures 24 March 2020, led acute workforce shortages ports. due widespread migrant labour country’ industrial port hubs: workers returned home towns announcement lockdown, offers additional remuneration facilities. Labour shortages impact emptying import containers, reducing daily outward moves. Shortages drivers severely restricted movement cargo ports June 2020, affecting inland logistics. Worker shortages impact ability ports undertake cargo-clearance activities. Customs clearance procedures affected operational issues decision 22 June 2020 conduct 100 cent physical verification import consignments China ports. Limited cargo movements ports led port congestion. April 2020, 100,000 TEUs reported remained uncollected container freight stations Jawaharlal Nehru port, 50,000 TEUs remained uncleared Chennai port. instances, case Hazira port, situation forced ports close gates imports exports. Uncleared cargo blocked carriers’ equipment. mid- 2020, Indian ports reported 50–60 cent shortage cargo containers export. result, carriers began imposing equipment imbalance surcharge, citing additional inventory repositioning costs. instance, Mediterranean Shipping Company reported $300 container cargo shipped ports Jawaharlal Nehru, Mundra Hazira ports eastern southern Africa. media sources suggest increase freight containers India 25 32 cent. Authorities India introduced measures aimed coping challenges. include allotment additional land storage accommodate port users faced issues related cargo movement waiver penalty charges port users delays due late loading, unloading evacuation cargo. measures include deferment payment vessel-related charges shipping lines, waivers lease rentals licence fees. view labour scarcity factors control affected ability ports meet shippers’ expectations, ports India declared force majeure March 2020. Sources: Grainmart News, 2020; Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide, 2020f; Hindustan Times, 2020; JOC., 2020d; Reuters, 2020; Seatrade Maritime News, 2020c; Standard Club, 2020; Economic Times, 2020; Loadstar, 2020c. Box 2.7 Measures protect staff working port communities ensure continuity port operations: Generic guidelines Based information Port Management Programme UNCTAD entities, guidelines protecting staff working port communities ensure continuity port operations drawn : • Constantly promote enforce preventive hygiene measures (handwashing). • Limit physical interaction onboard onshore staff. Ship crew communicate quayside staff radio telephone. • Respect physical distancing rules: stay metres . • Expand digital documentation limit human contact minimum • Provide adequate sufficient protective equipment staff (face masks, gloves, hand sanitizers, protective eyewear). • Increase sanitation surfaces contact hands. • Establish point control perimeter port area monitor temperature related symptoms (automated temperature screening) equip antibacterial solutions sanitizers. • Establish waste disposal policy suspicious cases. • Fumigate disinfect passenger terminals areas. • Disinfect monitor cargo. • Set passenger information system easy contact tracing isolated holding testing area port users displaying symptoms coronavirus disease. • Institute protocol disembarking passengers crew requiring medical care coordination national health authorities • Identify decontamination areas port buildings. Source: UNCTAD, 2020b. governmental services 24 hours day, 7 days week (Morocco World News, 2020). Oman capitalized electronic procedures put place pandemic, virtual clearance officers trade processes online submission cargo manifests 48 hours vessel arrival expanded -services exchange documents, payments data (Global Alliance Trade Facilitation, 2020). http://JOC. 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY62 Leveraging automation digitalization develop port resilience pandemic brought fore concept building resilience supply chains. perspective trade logistics, specifically supply port services infrastructure, means improving risk management developing capabilities avoid severe threats operators. Technology appears hold key achieving objectives. Workforce shortages pandemic resulting lockdowns severely disrupted maritime cargo operations multimodal transport connections, highlighting extent movement goods supply chains running depends human labour. perspective, increased automation strategy protect workforce, ensure business continuity port terminal operation processes vessel visits, reduce processing times. Potential applications include remote piloting, alternative communications ship navigation systems assist increasingly autonomous ship navigation, automated cranes, automated rubber-tyre port vehicles automated intermodal connections ( Maritime Executive, 2020b). Digitalization enhance port resilience enabling collaboration decision-making. Port-call optimization enhanced digital data exchange actors involved port- call process contribute proper planning predictable timings achieve efficient operations offering opportunities environmentally sustainable transport, reducing emissions -- time sailing (UNCTAD, 2019b). addition, digitalization play key role diversifying business opportunities ports, charging fees space, providing services add lead unnecessary costs. , digital solutions enabling shared warehouses shared logistics assets transport- capacity sharing service providers raise asset capacity utilization rates cut logistics costs (Economist Intelligence Unit, 2020; World Ports Sustainability Programme, 2020). Leveraging digitalization enhance port resilience require increased investment technological innovations strengthened cybersecurity protect digital infrastructure ( analysis cyberrisks, chapter 5). ports lagging terms electronic commerce data exchange, boost Internet capabilities accessibility port areas port workers users alike engage innovative training approaches scale maximize benefits technological innovations. Advancing data standardization interoperability enable improved data sharing actors supply chain . . CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS editions Review Maritime Transport identified profitability – underpinned oversupply – stringent environmental standards main drivers shaping supply maritime transport, leading heightened pressure increase cost-cutting efficiencies improve sustainability operations. growing size vessels, diversification business activities combining supply maritime land-side logistic services, company partnerships share assets, combine operations improve fleet utilization. context, digitalization enabler change, providing solutions optimize costs improve efficiency sustainability operations. Managing capacity cope oversupply 2019, fleets experienced highest growth rate 2014, vessel sizes continuing increase. beginning 2020, contraction cargo volumes caused pandemic brought additional challenge structural market imbalance. avoid profitability declining freight rates, carriers exercised discipline manage capacity cut costs, blank sailings. effort address future uncertainty prospects demand growth ( box 2.5), carriers continue exercising flexibility managing maritime networks matching supply capacity demand support freight cost rates. true freight rates level ensuring economic viability sector. , supply-reduction measures applied shipping lines sustained long period recovery volumes, lead dysfunctionalities sector, including ports, undermining performance shippers global supply chains. Leveraging technology cope disruption Workforce shortages pandemic resulting lockdowns disrupted manufacturing segments maritime supply chain port services, highlighting extent maritime transport supply , movement goods involved keeping supply chain running depends human labour. context, pandemic gave impetus digitalization emerged vehicle overcome important challenge pandemic, , maintaining continuity transport operations trade processes reducing risk contagion. Quick deployment technological solutions ensure continuity business activities government processes linked cross-border trade respond consumer expectations environment characterized supply-chain disruption, remote working increased engagement 63REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 business--consumer -commerce business operations. , technological solutions featuring digital trade facilitation digitalized processes ports important element toolbox designed build resilience potential disruption impact performance maritime transport supply chains. automation maritime cargo operations multimodal transport connections ports increasingly introduce improvements ensure business continuity workforce safety case disruptions, optimize efficiency. Expanding supply port services digital technology developing services enable collaboration port actors improved visibility supply chain contribute enhancing resilience diversifying business opportunities ports. Supply-chain redesign patterns impact future ship-deployment patterns pandemic put spotlight exposure international production systemic risks, perspective securing continuity supply. , crisis accentuated pre-existing trends related length fragmentation chains. early fully grasp supply-chain redesign patterns post-pandemic recovery scenario, shipping industry affected, specific trajectories industries follow, potentially influencing patterns ship deployment. Priority action areas preparation post-COVID-19 world COVID-19 crisis revealed importance maritime transport essential service ensuring continuity trade supply critical supplies global flow goods pandemic. Ensuring proper functioning maritime transport services precondition economic recovery. Policies long-term objectives sector crucial “build ” future pandemic crisis. means climate change global challenge poses threat increased disruption transport operations. means prioritizing investments bring simultaneous economic environmental benefits, expediting adaptation alternative fuels, wind solar energy ships. Reducing carbon footprint fleet, fleet renewal retrofits, represents significant challenge (UNCTAD, 2020c). characteristics shipping markets age fleet small island developing States developed countries, additional investment capacity-building required. meet challenges post-pandemic recovery, including acknowledge asymmetric capabilities countries, priorities considered: • Promote technological tools, including digital trade facilitation reforms, enhance sectoral resilience future disruptions transport supply-chain operations. • Increase accessibility ICT tools. • Develop data infrastructure capabilities. • Build local capacities ICT tools solutions. • Develop skills work effectively world advanced automation technology. • Mitigate cybersecurity risks. • international technical support digital trade facilitation reforms. conclusion, important enhance collaboration port States actors countries improve crew-changeover processes ensure standards procedure risk-management protocols national level achieve balance safety - workers imperatives operational continuity. 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY64 REFERENCES Barry Rogliano Salles Group (2020). Annual Review: Shipping Shipbuilding Markets 2020. Chambers (2020). Germany paves green hydrogen future. Splash 24/7. 11 June. Clarksons Research, Container Intelligence Monthly, issues. Clarksons Research (2020a). COVID-19: Monitoring supply-side metrics. 1 . Clarksons Research (2020b). Shipping Intelligence Weekly. 26 June. Clarksons Research (2020c). Shipping Intelligence Weekly. 31 July. Clarksons Research (2020d). COVID-19: Ship repair impact.19 June. Clarksons Research (2020e). COVID-19: Shipping market impact assessment. Update . 6. 2 July. Drewry (2020). Global Container Terminal Operators Annual Review Forecast 2020: Annual Report 2020/21. London. Drewry (2020a). Maritime Financial Insight. April. Drewry (2020b). Shipping Insight. June. Economist Intelligence Unit (2020). great unwinding: COVID-19 regionalization global supply chains. London. Elgie McNally (2020). 3 ingredients smart stimulus. Blog. 30 April. European Commission (2019). Mergers: Commission opens -depth investigation proposed acquisition DSME [Daewoo Shipbuilding Marine Engineering Company] HHIH [Hyundai Heavy Industries Holdings]. Press release. 17 December. Global Alliance Trade Facilitation (2020). COVID-19 accelerating digital transformation trade Oman’ ports. 19 June. Government Fiji (2018). Fiji Emission Development Strategy 2018–2050. Ministry Economy. Grainmart News (2020). Shortage labour containers ports leading fall India’ exports. 29 . Greenport (2020). Green maritime fund proposed UK [United Kingdom] recovery. 21 . Hammer Hallegatte (2020). Planning economic recovery COVID-19: sustainability checklist policymakers. World Bank Blog. 14 April. Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide (2018). Turkish yards’ EU [European Union] shipbreaking approval increases scrap possibilities. 10 December. Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide (2019). Demolition market fired . 19 December. Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide (2020a). Hellas: Shipping fleet reaches $100.5 billion. 11 . Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide (2020b). Ships’ demolition market facing doldrums. 7 April. Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide (2020c) June container ship demolitions increase year--date volumes 100. 2 July. Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide (2020d). Shipping lines adopt desperate measures pandemic disrupts operations. 28 July. Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide (2020e). coronavirus weighs trade, South Korea [Republic Korea] launches world’ largest container ship. 27 April. Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide (2020f). COVID-19 India impact: Issues, green shoots . 1 June. Hindustan Times (2020). Shortage workers, choked ports disrupt supply chains. 14 April. IHS Markit (2020). Scrubber installation delays maintenance incidents. Safety Sea. 18 June. International Transport Workers’ Federation (2019). Transport 2040: Automation, Technology, Employment – Future Work. World Maritime University. London. 65REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 IMO (2019). Resolution 1147 IMO Assembly, - session. 4 December. IMO (2020). FAQ crew repatriation seafarers. IMO Media Centre. 16 June. JOC. (2020a). CMA CGM lands $1.14 billion state-backed loan. 13 . JOC. (2020b). High debt levels leave container lines exposed. 6 April. JOC. (2020c). Maersk acquisition deepens North American warehouse reach. 19 February. JOC. (2020d). Labour scarcity warehouses compounds Indian port flow woes. 20 . Reuters (2020). Singapore’ PSA, container freight operators warn congestion Indian ports. 27 April. Khalid Tariq (2020). decarbonize shipping spending billions. World Economic Forum Blog. 13 March. Lexology (2020). .. [United States] sanctions compliance guidance released global maritime, energy metals sectors. 3 June. Lloyd’ List (2019a). UK [United Kingdom] flag abandons growth targets Brexit wipes 30 tonnage, 19 June. Lloyd’ List (2019b). CMA CGM takes stake delivery firm. 29 October. Lloyd’ List (2020a). Flag registries drop [Islamic Republic ] Iran-linked ships sanctions scrutiny. 14 January. Lloyd’ List (2020b). Shipping’ short-term pain won’ stifle decarbonization. 25 June. Lloyd’ List (2020c). Shipping struggles overcome political inertia crew change crisis starts bite. 10 June. Lloyd’ List (2020d). Evergreen Yang Ming set receive State-backed loans. 9 June. Maersk (2020a). Maersk app sees record COVID-19. Press release. 6 . Maersk (2020b). research centre lead decarbonizing shipping. Press releases. 25 June. Manifold Times (2020). Shipowners delay postpone scrubber retrofits minimize COVID-19 financial impact. Marine Insight (2019). Greece #1 2019’ Global Fleet Rankings – VesselsValue. 6 February. MDS Transmodal (2020). container service cancellations . 9 April. Micronesian Centre Sustainable Transport (2019a). Country profiles fleet data. Technical Working Paper . 1. Micronesian Centre Sustainable Transport (2019b). Potential shipping emissions abatement measures. Technical Working Paper . 2. Micronesian Centre Sustainable Transport (2020). Pacific domestic shipping emissions abatement measures technology transition pathways selected ship types. Technical Working Paper . 3. Morocco World News. (2020). COVID-19: Portnet launches online services import/export. 16 March. Port Technology (2020). MSC [Mediterranean Shipping Company] launches online quotation tool digitization drive. 1 July. Pulse (2020). Korean govt offer $1 bn aid sea carriers, $400 mn HMM. 23 April. Safety4Sea (2020). European shipbuilding sector calls urgent support due COVID-19 crisis. 2 April. ánchez (forthcoming). Latin America: Concerns evolution shipping markets post-pandemic era. Reuters (2019a). Flags inconvenience: Noose tightens Iranian shipping. 26 July. Reuters (2019b). Shipping firms drop British flag Brexit risks loom. 2 July. Riviera Maritime Media (2020). Creating future-proof bulkers tankers. 11 June. Shell International (2020). Decarbonizing shipping: hands deck – Industry perspectives. www.shell. /energy--innovation/-energy-future/decarbonising-shipping/. Global (2020). IMO 2020, decarbonization spotlight shipping sector: Fuel thought. 29 July. Seatrade Maritime News (2020a). Bunker prices slip, high- sulphur spread narrows $56. 24 April. Seatrade Maritime News (2020b). Singapore launches ‘Playbook’ accelerate maritime’ digital transformation. 22 June. http://JOC. http://JOC. http://JOC. http://JOC. http://www.shell./energy--innovation/-energy-future/decarbonising-shipping/ http://www.shell./energy--innovation/-energy-future/decarbonising-shipping/ 2. MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY66 Seatrade Maritime News (2020c). Container freight rates Indian subcontinent ports rise sharply. 18 March. Standard Club (2020). Indian ports declare force majeure due COVID-19 outbreak. 27 March. SWZ [Schip en Werf de Zee] |Maritime (2020). Pandemic break European taboo state aid maritime industry. 11 June. Economic Times. (2020). Chinese cargo checked nationwide risk alert. 25 June. Korea Times (2020). EU [European Union], KFTC delaying HHI–DSME merger process. 9 March. Loadstar (2020a). Diversify post-COVID, ‘shorter supply chains aren’ shortcut efficiency’.12 June. Loadstar (2020b). DP World 60 stake South Korean [Republic Korea] forwarder Unico. 27 July. Loadstar (2020c). Uncleared import boxes clogging India’ ports ‘free warehousing’. 24 April. Maritime Executive (2019). Developments ship recycling 2019. 15 December. Maritime Executive (2020a). .. [United States] sanctions Iranian shipping interests enforced. 6 June. Maritime Executive. (2020b). Automation aid port operations pandemic. 9 April. UNCTAD (2018). Market consolidation container shipping: Policy . 69. UNCTAD (2019a). Review Maritime Transport 2019. (United Nations publication. Sales . .19.II..20. Geneva). UNCTAD (2019b). Digitalizing Port Call Process. Transport Trade Facilitation Series. . 13. (United Nations publication. Geneva). UNCTAD (2020a). World Investment Report 2020: International Production Pandemic (United Nations publication. Sales . .20.II..23. Geneva). UNCTAD (2020b). Port responsiveness fight ‘invisible’ threat: COVID-19. Technical Note. https://tft.unctad.org/ports-covid-19/. UNCTAD (2020c). Decarbonizing maritime transport: Estimating fleet renewal trends based ship scrapping patterns. UNCTAD Transport Trade Facilitation Newsletter . 85. United Kingdom Department Transport (2019). Maritime 2050: Navigating future. United Kingdom Department Transport (2020). Shipping Flag Statistics 2019. Statistical Release. 15 April. Vessels (2020). Monthly market report. March. Women’ International Shipping Trading Association (2020). WISTA [Women’ International Shipping Trading Association] International signs MOU [memorandum understanding] International Maritime Organization, IMO. https://wistainternational./news/wista-international-signs-mou--- international-maritime-organisation-imo/. World Maritime News (2020). European shipyards, equipment manufacturers call EU [European Union] protection COVID-19 crisis. Offshore Energy. 2 April. World Ports Sustainability Programme (2020). World Ports COVID-19 survey: ports significant storage utilization ports overcrowded car terminals. https:// sustainableworldports.org/-world-ports-covid-19-survey--ports--significant--- storage-utilization--ports---overcrowded-car-terminals/. WTO (2020). Japan initiates WTO dispute complaint Korean support shipbuilders. Dispute settlement. 10 February. https://tft.unctad.org/ports-covid-19/ https://wistainternational./news/wista-international-signs-mou---international-maritime-organisation-imo/ https://wistainternational./news/wista-international-signs-mou---international-maritime-organisation-imo/ https://sustainableworldports.org/-world-ports-covid-19-survey--ports--significant---storage-utilization--ports---overcrowded-car-terminals/ https://sustainableworldports.org/-world-ports-covid-19-survey--ports--significant---storage-utilization--ports---overcrowded-car-terminals/ https://sustainableworldports.org/-world-ports-covid-19-survey--ports--significant---storage-utilization--ports---overcrowded-car-terminals/ 3 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS chapter series performance indicators relating maritime transport sector. update port activity, focus liner shipping connectivity index, time ships spend ports data operation container terminals. offers insights port performance scorecard TrainForTrade Port Management Programme UNCTAD. Finally, chapter presents metrics greenhouse gas emissions shipping terms flag, vessel type parameters. port data offer information determinants port performance, including infrastructure investments, private sector participation trade facilitation. data show relevance – limits – economies scale apply container shipping port operations. data sources helpful analysis complementary information: • Section automatic identification system data complete world fleet port calls country level, high level detail vessels time spent port 2018, 2019 early 2020.7 • Section devoted data relating container ships. employs data shipping schedules presents statistics network services companies 2006 early 2020.8 automatic identification system data discussed section , data section cover vessel types. • Section utilizes data obtained 10 world’ largest shipping companies container ports call companies 2019. section detailed analysis performance container terminals ports.9 • Section data selected ports members TrainForTrade Port Management Programme, based detailed questionnaire elaborated UNCTAD.10 • Section automatic identification system data, coupled information vessel types ship characteristics, discuss key performance indicator shipping side maritime transport, notably carbon-dioxide emissions. , provide statistics annual carbon-dioxide emissions world fleet.11 reassuring statistics generated means sources consistent main metrics, , relationships vessel sizes, position shipping network economic development hand, performance indicators . 7 Underlying data MarineTraffic. 8 Underlying data MDS Transmodal. 9 Underlying data Journal Commerce–IHS Markit. 10 Underlying data ports annual surveys. 11 Underlying data Marine Benchmark. 69REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 . PORT CALLS AND TURNAROUND TIMES 1. Port calls increase turnaround times improve global number recorded commercial shipping port calls ships 1,000 gross tons rose 6.07 cent 2018 2019 (figure 3.1). Ports improved efficiency, median time ship spent port decreased slightly 0.41 cent (table 3.1), 0.970 days 0.966 days. performance seaports important determinant trade costs connectivity (ánchez al., 2003; UNCTAD, 2017a). longer ships spend port, time sea carry cargo international trade. Longer times port lead higher speeds sea greater fuel consumption carbon-dioxide emissions additional vessels maintain frequency services. results longer transit times higher inventory-holding costs. outcomes desirable carriers shippers. ports, , faster turnaround times interest, effectively increase throughput capacity fixed assets. Port efficiency prompt turnarounds mutually rewarding. shorter time port positive indicator port’ efficiency trade competitiveness, good reasons ship spend time port, bunker, purchase goods services, simply load unload high volumes goods import export. Benefiting data set MarineTraffic, draws automatic identification system data emitted world’ commercial fleet, section update time ships spent port calls 2018 2019, including initial trends observed period.12 2019, (55 cent) recorded port calls worldwide passenger ships, tankers wet bulk carriers (12 cent), container ships (11 cent) general cargo break bulk ships (10 cent) (table 3.2). Container ships fastest turnaround time, median 0.69 days, improvement cent 2018. Dry bulk carriers longest load unload – days’ median time. vessel types, 2019 recorded increase port calls 12 UNCTAD calculations based data MarineTraffic (www.marinetraffic.). Aggregated figures derived fusion automatic identification system data port-mapping intelligence MarineTraffic, covering ships 1,000 gross tons . Passenger ships roll- roll- carriers included computation turnaround times. arrivals account measure number port calls. Cases 10 arrivals 5 vessels country level commercial market segmented included. data updated months maritime statistics portal UNCTAD (http://stats.unctad.org/maritime). slight decrease median turnaround time, compared 2018. 2. Turnaround times vary vessel type Container ships maximum vessel size container ships gross tons 6.87 cent 2018 2019, increase TEUs greater, 10.94 cent. largest container ships de facto big largest wet bulk carriers bigger largest dry bulk carriers cruise ships (table 3.2; chapter 2 details world fleet). countries container ship port calls 2019 (table 3.3, figure 3.2), China (72,583), Japan (39,066) Republic Korea (23,933). top 25 countries container port calls, 4 recorded median turnaround times day, notably Australia, Indonesia, Viet Nam United States, Japan Taiwan Province China, container ship spent median time day port (table 3.3). Section discusses detail determinants container ships spend time port countries . importantly, time port number containers loaded unloaded port call. Tankers liquid bulk carriers 44,633 port calls , Japan continued record largest number arrivals tankers liquid bulk carriers 2019, albeit slightly (-0.55 cent) 2018. Netherlands (41,042 arrivals), China (40,702) Singapore (36,187). , countries account 30.9 cent world total vessel type, top 20 countries account 74.6 cent. Japan (7.4 hours) Germany (8.5 hours) represent shortest median turnaround times, compared India United States, tankers spent longest time port. close relationship vessel sizes time spent port, smaller ships time load unload. countries top 20 receive ships 300 000 dwt . exceptions Belgium, Hong Kong, China Russian Federation, port depth infrastructure accommodate vessels size. Dry bulk carriers largest dry bulk carriers 404,389 dwt deployed transportation iron ore Brazil China distribution hub Malaysia. regard port calls, China received largest number dry bulk carriers 2019 (60,420 arrivals), Japan (30,528 arrivals) Australia (15,399 arrivals). http://www.marinetraffic. http://stats.unctad.org/maritime 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS70 Roll- roll- carriers Japan leads world roll- roll- ship arrivals, 34,995 port calls 2019. United Kingdom (16,465), Netherlands (12,494), Spain (11,529) Italy (9,465). vessel type includes ferries coastal inter-island transport, car carriers. island economy major automobile exporter, Japan dependent roll- roll- shipping. Passenger ships 2019, Norway accounted largest share port calls (535,649) passenger ships 1,000 gross tons, United States (213,902) Italy (194,992). home ports cruise ships included category. Baltic Mediterranean seas, countries large archipelagos, Indonesia, Japan, Norway, Philippines Turkey, maritime passenger transport replaces buses trains economical environmentally friendly mode public transport. Liquefied natural gas carriers number arrivals liquefied natural gas carriers rose significantly 2018 2019 ( 15 cent), line growing demand source energy fleet growth (table 2.1). countries port calls segment Japan (1,901), Australia (1,179) Qatar (1,043). top 20 countries, ships spent Figure 3.1 Port calls, vessel types, 2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MarineTraffic. Notes: Ships 1,000 gross tons . data include countries, http://stats.unctad.org/maritime. Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MarineTraffic (www.marinetraffic.). Table 3.1 Recorded port calls time port, 2018 2019 Port calls 2018 2019 Change 2019 2018 Number recorded arrivals 4 112 944 4 362 737 6.07 Median time port (days) 0.970 0.966 - 0.41 Average age vessels (years) 18 18 0.00 Average size vessels (gross tons) 15 066 14 980 - 0.57 Maximum size vessels (gross tons) 234 006 234 006 0.00 Maximum container-carrying capacity vessels (20-foot equivalent units) 21 413 23 756 10.94 Total 7.66 1.58 0.53 http://stats.unctad.org/maritime http://www.marinetraffic. 71REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Table 3.2 Port calls time port vessel type, 2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MarineTraffic (www.marinetraffic.). Note: Ships 1,000 gross tons . Vessel type Number arrivals Number arrivals, change 2018 (percentage) Median time port (days) Median time port (days), change 2018 (percentage) Average size vessels (gross tons) Average size vessels, change 2018 (percentage) Average age vessels Maximum size vessels (gross tons) Container ships 474 553 4.52 0.69 -1.09 38 172 -0.90 13 232 618 Dry break bulk carriers 446 817 3.83 1.10 -0.71 5 476 0.70 20 91 784 Dry bulk carriers 277 872 7.06 2.01 -2.14 32 011 0.22 15 204 014 Liquefied natural gas carriers 12 222 15.12 1.11 -0.15 95 469 1.79 10 168 189 Liquefied petroleum gas carriers 55 227 11.89 1.01 -0.60 10 300 -3.40 14 59 226 Passenger ships 2 378 937 6.80 - 8 859 -0.77 21 228 081 Roll- roll carriers 190 907 1.80 - 25 277 -0.36 19 100 430 Wet bulk carriers 526 202 6.49 0.93 -0.56 15 702 1.02 14 234 006 4 362 737 6.07 0.97 -0.41 14 980 -0.57 18 234 006 Table 3.3 Port calls median time spent port container ships: Top 25 countries, 2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MarineTraffic. Notes: Ships 1,000 gross tons . data include countries, http://stats.unctad.org/maritime. Country Number arrivals Median time port (days) Average age vessels (years) Average size vessels (gross tons) Maximum size vessels (gross tons) Maximum cargo-carrying capacity vessels (TEU) China 72 583 0.60 12 50 062 232 618 23 756 Japan 39 066 0.35 12 17 205 219 688 20 388 Republic Korea 23 933 0.58 14 30 951 232 618 23 756 United States 19 574 1.03 13 59 336 194 250 19 462 Taiwan Province China 16 733 0.44 14 29 571 219 775 20 388 Malaysia 16 459 0.75 14 41 499 232 618 23 756 Singapore 16 299 0.77 13 54 612 228 741 21 413 Spain 15 137 0.65 14 35 592 232 618 23 756 Indonesia 14 715 1.05 14 15 475 131 332 11 356 Hong Kong, China 12 355 0.53 14 39 826 228 741 21 413 Netherlands 12 155 0.80 13 32 385 232 618 23 756 Turkey 11 011 0.63 16 34 599 176 490 15 908 Viet Nam 10 041 1.03 16 18 459 175 688 16 000 Germany 9 543 0.74 13 42 018 232 618 23 756 United Kingdom 8 395 0.73 14 36 766 232 618 23 756 India 8 211 0.91 15 46 994 153 666 13 386 Italy 8 171 0.91 15 44 772 194 849 19 462 Thailand 8 130 0.68 17 22 653 154 000 14 220 Brazil 8 050 0.73 9 62 947 119 441 11 923 United Arab Emirates 7 082 0.94 15 47 830 219 277 21 200 Philippines 5 492 0.84 15 19 124 71 786 6 800 Belgium 5 190 1.00 14 52 967 232 618 23 756 France 4 468 0.75 13 56 344 219 277 20 776 Australia 4 400 1.18 12 48 715 109 712 9 971 Panama 4 347 0.63 11 45 162 150 000 14 000 World total 474 553 0.69 13 38 172 232 618 23 756 http://www.marinetraffic. 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS72 Figure 3.2 Port calls container ships, 2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MarineTraffic. Notes: Ships 1,000 gross tons . data include countries, http://stats.unctad.org/maritime. time port call Norway ( hours average), longest Singapore ( days). Break bulk vessels Norway (33,564 calls), China (30,007) Russian Federation (28,837) countries port calls break bulk general cargo vessels. top 20 countries category, Germany Norway shortest median turnaround times 0.35 0.33 days , France (1.58 days), Italy (1.98 days) Russian Federation (1.61 days), general cargo ships spent longest time ports.13 3. Small island economies depend heavily general cargo ships Break bulk general cargo ships declining share world fleet ( chapter 2). remain, , important small island economies destinations port traffic, deployment specialized ships justified. small island economies countries archipelagos, Indonesia Philippines, break bulk general cargo vessels account substantial share countries’ total port calls. small island economies longest port turnaround times general cargo vessels, lack infrastructure specialized 13 http://stats.unctad.org/maritime complete tables vessel types. port equipment. short turnaround times, owing lack congestion frequencies cargo volumes loading unloading (UNCTAD, 2019a). 2018 2019, Comoros, Maldives Caledonia significant improvements terms increased port calls shorter port turnaround times. Fiji Caledonia served youngest modern fleet general cargo ships, French Polynesia, Maldives Saint Kitts Nevis receive vessels average 30 years (table 3.4). 4. downturn port calls COVID 19 pandemic COVID 19 crisis led port calls vessel types 2020 (figure 3.3). Liquefied natural gas liquefied petroleum gas carriers tankers (wet bulk carriers) continued record increases port calls quarter 2020. quarter, , vessel types experienced decline number port calls. hardest hit roll- roll- vessels, include ferries vessels carry passengers. regard container ship port calls, number arrivals started fall 2019 levels week 12 (mid-March 2020) began recover gradually week 25 ( week June) (figure 3.4). mid-June, average number container vessels arriving weekly ports worldwide sunk 8,722, 8.5 cent year--year drop. , average weekly calls started recover, rising 9,265 early http://stats.unctad.org/maritime http://stats.unctad.org/maritime 73REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Table 3.4 Port calls median time spent port, general cargo ships, 2019 (Selected small island economies) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MarineTraffic. Note: Ships 1,000 gross tons . data include countries, http://stats.unctad.org/maritime. Country territory, break bulk cargo Number arrivals 2019 Number arrivals, change 2019 2018 (percentage) Median time port, 2019 (days) Median time port, change 2019 2018, (percentage) Average age vessels (years) Average size vessels (gross tons) Maximum size vessels (gross tons) American Samoa 57 -6.6 0.63 10.3 16 9 494 18 100 Antigua Barbuda 193 12.9 0.39 3.4 22 5 797 17 644 Aruba 59 - 51.2 0.73 82.3 19 9 729 28 805 Bahamas 464 -15.3 0.41 28.9 26 4 831 91 784 Barbados 309 -5.8 0.56 4.3 22 6 813 22 698 Cabo Verde 360 36.9 0.63 -10.6 21 5 095 46 295 Cayman Islands 153 -14.0 0.56 3.8 24 7 513 27 818 Christmas Island 50 -35.1 0.43 -10.7 14 5 913 10 021 Comoros 197 32.2 1.03 -25.3 15 6 352 24 960 Curaçao 320 -31.9 0.53 1.9 18 3 285 16 137 Dominican Republic 107 -0.9 0.40 -1.2 16 6 586 14 413 Fiji 457 40.6 0.95 39.7 7 4 914 40 393 French Polynesia 555 -12.9 0.19 20.4 39 3 165 54 529 Grenada 124 -23.5 0.58 43.8 24 7 016 16 639 Guam 67 -25.6 2.11 -2.5 20 8 979 61 185 Guernsey 339 63.0 0.14 13.4 25 1 687 2 601 Haiti 384 -4.5 0.96 1.9 21 4.760 24 140 Jamaica 576 1.4 0.90 -10.6 13 9.099 29 688 Maldives 101 44.3 0.49 -89.1 31 4.041 20 965 Martinique 193 -9.0 0.40 2.5 17 8.628 27 828 Mauritius 133 -10.1 3.48 47.6 21 5 317 21 483 Mayotte 25 -66.2 2.23 -8.1 11 7 219 24 960 Micronesia 73 -24.0 0.35 -53.6 22 4 352 9 924 Caledonia 549 52.5 1.24 -24.0 8 7 507 29 829 Reunion 53 -11.7 1.30 -13.6 12 8 323 21 483 Samoa 68 -2.9 0.54 41.9 15 9 045 18 100 Seychelles 137 -18.5 5.22 -8.7 24 5 384 16 803 Sint Maarten 179 -39.9 0.38 -25.0 18 6 374 22 698 Solomon Islands 50 -38.3 1.75 2.9 17 10 509 18 468 Saint Kitts Nevis 207 6.2 0.27 14.3 35 3 274 14 413 Saint Lucia 287 8.7 0.41 -10.6 28 5 892 16 137 Saint Vincent Grenadines 116 -38.6 0.38 23.6 16 9 761 16 137 Timor-Leste 164 6.5 0.98 -2.5 16 4 339 9 719 Tonga 82 3.8 0.39 -12.3 15 8 363 18 100 Trinidad Tobago 584 -14.4 0.91 13.6 16 7 326 30 488 Turks Caicos Islands 197 -27.0 0.43 -3.6 19 1 749 2 191 Tuvalu 69 -4.2 11.21 -19.9 28 4 047 6 965 Vanuatu 17 -55.3 0.83 21.4 15 15 551 18 100 Word total 446 817 3.8 1.10 -0.7 20 5 476 91 784 http://stats.unctad.org/maritime 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS74 Figure 3.3 Global change number port calls, quarters 2020 compared quarters 2019, selected vessel types Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MarineTraffic. Abbreviation: , quarter. Figure 3.4 Number weekly container ship port calls worldwide, moving -week average, 2019 2020 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MarineTraffic. 75REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 August 2020, 3 cent levels recorded 12 months earlier. detailed analysis region, UNCTAD, 2020a (https://unctad.org/en/pages/ newsdetails.aspxOriginalVersionID=2465). 5. Future automatic identification system data assess port shipping performance automatic identification system initially developed introduced tool support navigational safety. Today, signals transmitted system track movement vessels, owners vessels prefer . publicly data, data analysis presented . transmission signals automatic identification systems mandatory increasingly scrutinized, data coverage continuously improving. Combining automatic identification system-derived statistics sources data information respond growing demands optimization supply chain, monitoring emission data trade forecasts. Optimizing supply chain today, initiatives port-call optimization benefit automatic identification system data (UNCTAD, 2020b). seaside operation, supply chain benefit exchanging data, including automatic identification system data ship movements, data modes transport, ports goods traded. context, digitalization, artificial intelligence, blockchain, Internet automation growing relevance. optimize existing processes, create business opportunities transform supply chains geography trade (UNCTAD, 2019b). potential opportunities benefits offered automatic identification system, including -cost global access, requires capacity-building investments digitalization, developing countries. policy design national international levels ensure developing countries benefit automatic identification system digitalization maritime transport (UNCTAD, 2019b). Trade statistics forecasts Automatic identification system data include information cargo ships carry. , combining data vessel moves drafts information vessel type, trade flows countries departure destination, automatic identification system data obtain increasingly exact --date picture trade flows (Arslanalp al., 2019; Cerdeiro al., 2020; United Nations, 2020; World Bank, 2020). Combined information speed vessels, port departures idle ships, serve produce nowcasts forecasts trade economic growth. verify trade statistics checking published trade data vessel moves transport goods. efforts benefit standardization data. Reducing emissions Shipping move carbon. Initiatives Coalition, supported UNCTAD, aim reduce carbon-dioxide emissions shipping net (Global Maritime Forum, 2020). ship’ emissions depend numerous factors, including vessel size, engine type, fuel speed. Automatic identification system data – combined information ship’ engine fuel – assign carbon- dioxide emissions country vessel’ flag country’ waters carbon dioxide emitted. Section automatic identification system data. . CONTAINER SHIPPING: LINER SHIPPING CONNECTIVITY 1. Countries’ evolving liner shipping connectivity 2020, 6 10 connected economies Asia (China; Singapore; Republic Korea; Malaysia; Hong Kong, China; Japan, 3 Europe (Spain, Netherlands, United Kingdom), 1 North America ( United States) (figure 3.5). connected country – China – improved liner shipping connectivity index 56 cent baseline year 2006, global average liner shipping connectivity index 50 cent period. 2020, UNCTAD, collaboration MDS Transmodal, reports quarterly values liner shipping connectivity index, port country levels.14 work based empirical 14 UNCTAD developed liner shipping connectivity index 2004. basic concepts major trends presented discussed detail UNCTAD, 2017a MDS Transmodal, 2020. collaboration MDS Transmodal, liner shipping connectivity index updated improved 2019 offer additional country coverage, including small island developing States, add component covering number countries reached trans-shipment. remaining components, notably number companies provide services, number services, number ships call month, total annualized deployed container-carrying capacity ship sizes, remained unchanged. Applying methodology country-level liner shipping https://unctad.org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspxOriginalVersionID=2465 https://unctad.org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspxOriginalVersionID=2465 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS76 evidence country’ competitiveness access overseas markets benefit liner shipping connectivity, reflects access global container shipping network (UNCTAD, 2017a). section analyses trends country port levels, discuss developments components index generated. connectivity index, UNCTAD generated liner shipping connectivity index ports. components port liner shipping connectivity index captures key aspect connectivity: • large number scheduled ship calls high frequency servicing imports exports. • large deployed capacity shippers trade sizable volumes imports exports. • large number regular services port shipping options reach overseas markets. • large number liner shipping companies provide services indicator level competition market. • Large ship sizes economies scale sea leg possibly transport costs. • large number destination ports reached trans-shipment indicator fast, reliable direct connections foreign markets. 2020, methodology applied country port levels quarterly basis. 2. Liner shipping connectivity small island developing States stagnates small island developing States small island economies poor shipping connectivity. , enhance liner shipping connectivity, remains limited, geographic position, lack wider hinterland trade volumes. Figure 3.6 depicts liner shipping connectivity index selected small island developing States small island economies shipping schedules reported separately. small island developing States, notably Bahamas, Jamaica Mauritius, position ports trans-shipment hubs increase attraction ports call. Mauritius, , doubled liner shipping connectivity index 2006. additional fleet deployment stemming trans-shipment shipments national importers exporters. , small island developing States continue experience levels connectivity, lack improvement years. leading ports subregion, Suva, Pacific, lowest port liner shipping connectivity index (figure 3.8). 50 connected economies, 37 small island developing States. Figure 3.5 Liner shipping connectivity index top 10 economies, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MDS Transmodal. data set includes countries, http://stats. unctad.org/LSCI. Abbreviation: , quarter. http://stats.unctad.org/LSCI http://stats.unctad.org/LSCI 77REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 20 connected economies, Democratic People' Republic Korea, Moldova Paraguay small island developing States, landlocked countries, liner shipping connectivity index generated containerized river transport services. Achieving economies scale, ensuring level competition choice shippers difficult conundrum small island developing States small economies remote ports. port infrastructure, dredging specialized port cranes, , larger efficient ships call, ships require port calls carry monthly volume foreign trade. result choice shippers frequency services. Put differently, , small island developing States, improve components liner shipping connectivity index, illustrated figure 3.9 ( chapter 4, discusses challenge faced small island developing States Pacific). 3. Developments port level 2020, top 10 ports located China (Shanghai, Ningbo, Hong Kong, Qingdao Xiamen), Asian countries (Malaysia, Republic Korea Singapore), Europe (Belgium Netherlands). liner shipping connectivity index top 10 ports risen significantly 2006, Hong Kong, China, overtaken ports (figure 3.7). port-level liner shipping connectivity index generated container ports world receive regular container shipping services.15 quarter 2020, database maintained MDS Transmodal (www.mdst..uk) recorded regular container shipping services 939 ports worldwide, 12.6 cent increase 2006. latest port count decline 3.6 cent compared peak quarter 2019, global liner shipping services included 974 ports schedules. decline place quarters 2020 largely attributed capacity management response COVID-19 pandemic. Figure 3.8 depicts liner shipping connectivity index leading ports major maritime regions. regional leaders spike index quarter 2020, managed attract additional services larger vessels. 15 complete data set providing quarterly values liner shipping connectivity index 1,200 ports, quarter 2006 onwards, http://stats.unctad.org/ maritime. Figure 3.6 Liner shipping connectivity index selected small island developing States, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MDS Transmodal. data set includes countries, http://stats. unctad.org/LSCI. Abbreviation: , quarter. http://www.mdst..uk http://stats.unctad.org/maritime http://stats.unctad.org/maritime http://stats.unctad.org/LSCI http://stats.unctad.org/LSCI 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS78 Figure 3.7 Liner shipping connectivity index top 10 ports, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MDS Transmodal. liner shipping connectivity index ports, http://stats.unctad.org/maritime. Abbreviation: , quarter. Figure 3.8 Liner shipping connectivity index leading regional ports, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Jebel Ali, United Arab Emirates Colombo, Sri Lanka Valencia, Spain Tanger Med, Morocco Los Angeles, United States York/ Jersey, United States Cartagena, Colombia Callao, Peru Durban, South Africa Tema, Ghana Santos, Brazil Djibouti, Djibouti Kingston, Jamaica Melbourne, Australia Mombasa, Kenya Suva, Fiji de 20 06 , 1 20 06 , 3 20 07 , 1 20 07 , 3 20 08 , 1 20 08 , 3 20 09 , 1 20 09 , 3 20 10 , 1 20 10 , 3 20 11 , 1 20 11 , 3 20 12 , 1 20 12 , 3 20 13 , 1 20 13 , 3 20 14 , 1 20 14 , 3 20 15 , 1 20 15 , 3 20 16 , 1 20 16 , 3 20 17 , 1 20 17 , 3 20 18 , 1 20 18 , 3 20 19 , 1 20 19 , 3 20 20 , 1 20 20 , 2 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MDS Transmodal. liner shipping connectivity index ports, http://stats.unctad.org/maritime. Abbreviation: , quarter. http://stats.unctad.org/maritime http://stats.unctad.org/maritime 79REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 4. Liner shipping connectivity index components: Bigger ships companies liner shipping connectivity index helps analyse trends countries ports. components generating index insights industry developments (figure 3.9). average fleet deployment country reflection long-term trend consolidation, vessel sizes total capacity deployed increase sharply, average number companies provide services country continues decrease. number direct connections, number services number weekly calls follow similar, slightly downward trend. 5. Fleet deployment COVID-19 pandemic quarters 2020, carriers managed deployed capacity reducing frequency calls number services. average size largest container ships deployed continued grow, line long-term trends analysed chapter 2. quarter 2020, scheduled deployed capacity stood quarter 2019, albeit larger number blank sailings; quarter 2020, schedules adjusted , total deployed capacity reduced 2019 levels (figures 3.9, 3.10 3.11). Figure 3.9 Liner shipping connectivity index components, quarter 2006– quarter 2020, index averages country ( quarter 2006 = 100) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MDS Transmodal. Abbreviation: , quarter. Figure 3.10 Quarterly trends fleet deployment, quarter 2019– quarter 2020 ( quarter 2019 = 100) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MDS Transmodal. Abbreviation: , quarter. 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS80 Container shipping schedules show total fleet deployment quarter 2020 quarter 2019 economies. quarter, carriers started reduce capacity considerably. Steps shipping lines manage capacity helped sustain positive earnings semester 2020, spite traffic ( chapter 2). China started 2020 increase 2.1 cent quarter 2019, recording negative year--year growth 4.7 quarter. Growth rebounded 1 cent quarter. European countries underwent steeper decline. , Netherlands 7.0 cent quarter 10.5 cent quarter 9.3 cent quarter. Morocco experienced positive growth quarters, lost ground quarter. Togo stands gaining deployed capacity, port Lomé regional hub West African trade, Nigeria, ports draft restricted. 6. connectivity stimulates port traffic liner shipping connectivity index indicator deployment world’ container ship fleet. highly correlated country’ port traffic. demand shipping containerized cargo, liner companies deploy larger ships, achieve higher level total fleet deployment. provide services connect country countries. demand , additional companies enter market. components fleet deployment components liner shipping connectivity index generated. interesting analyse correlation components, liner shipping connectivity index, country’ port container traffic patterns. UNCTAD systematically gathering port traffic statistics 2010 (http://stats.unctad.org/TEU) ( chapter 1). Figure 3.12 depicts correlation liner shipping connectivity index port traffic countries 2017, year complete statistics . Interestingly, correlation linear. additional 1 cent increase liner shipping connectivity index 1.896 cent increase port traffic. words, ships services , port traffic grows exponentially. statistical finding line data, port performance economies scale recorded shipping companies ( section ). Similar correlations observed individual components index port traffic (table 3.5). component, high -linear correlation country’ port traffic. highest correlation lowest exponential growth recorded total deployed container-carrying Figure 3.11 Quarterly trends fleet deployment, selected countries, 2019–2020 (Percentage change) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MDS Transmodal. Note: Timeline: quarters 2020 compared quarters 2019. Abbreviation: , quarter. http://stats.unctad.org/TEU 81REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Figure 3.12 Liner shipping connectivity index port traffic, 2017 (20-foot equivalent units) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based UNCTAD port traffic statistics liner shipping connectivity index generated data MDS Transmodal. Values quarter 2017 liner shipping connectivity index 2017 annual port traffic volumes TEUs. Note: R2 = 0.7851; = 3209.1x1.896. Source: UNCTAD calculations, based UNCTAD port traffic statistics liner shipping connectivity index generated data MDS Transmodal. Correlation elasticity based power equation ( figure 3.12). Underlying values relate quarter 2017 liner shipping connectivity index 2017 annual port traffic volumes TEUs. Table 3.5 Correlation components liner shipping connectivity index port traffic Liner shipping connectivity index component Coefficient determination (R2) Elasticity Liner shipping connectivity index 0.79 1.90 Total deployed container-carrying capacity (20-foot equivalent units) 0.90 1.13 Services (number ) 0.87 1.50 Frequency port calls (number week) 0.86 1.43 Companies (number ) 0.82 1.90 Size largest ships (20-foot equivalent units) 0.61 1.53 Direct connections (number , countries) 0,56 1.96 capacity, variables largely grow parallel. additional companies direct connections additional markets, exponential growth stronger; increasing number direct connections 1 cent increase port traffic 2 cent. words, port authority aims boost port traffic, good sense focus attracting additional carriers provide direct services large number trading partners. 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS82 7. Connecting trading partners container shipping network quarter 2020, 939 seaports connected global liner shipping network regular container shipping services (figure 3.13). ports direct connections , 440,391 port--port liner shipping services. reality, 12,748 port pairs direct services, , 2.9 cent theoretical total. trade 97.1 cent port pairs, containers trans-shipped ports. number trans-shipments port pairs. connected port pairs require trans-shipments. , 7 shipping services 14 port moves export container Pacific island ports Atlantic island ports trade transaction. structure liner shipping network illustrated figure 3.14. algorithm, illustration visualizes ports connected locating close proximity . Ports direct connections total represented larger points. distant ports , trans-shipments required transport container . connectivity depicted figure 3.14 connectivity Coatzacoalcos, Mexico Basra, Iraq Malacca, Malaysia Rarotonga, Cook Islands. Colour schemes reflect geographical location port, expected, ports geographically closer tend connected container shipping network. port pair connected direct services Ningbo–Shanghai, China, 52 liner shipping companies providing 154 direct services total deployed annualized capacity 50.1 million TEUs ports. Port Klang, Malaysia–Singapore, 41 companies; Busan, Republic Korea–Shanghai, China, 38 companies; Shanghai–Qingdao, China, 37 companies. top 50 connected port pairs intraregional routes, exclusively Asia, connections Europe: Antwerp, Belgium-Rotterdam, Netherlands, 24 companies Hamburg, Germany–Rotterdam, Netherlands, 23 companies. regions, , neighbouring ports generally connected . intraregional connections necessarily carry trade neighbouring ports, high connectivity result connected overseas routes, combination feedering trans-shipment services. Africa, , Durban Cape Town, South Africa connected services 12 companies. Angola, Luanda connected Cape Town, South Africa companies, Mombasa, Kenya connected Dar-es-Salam, United Republic Tanzania direct services 10 companies. comparison, companies connect Mombasa, Kenya Ningbo, China. connectivity Figure 3.13 Number seaports regular container vessel calls, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MDS Transmodal. Abbreviation: , quarter. 83REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Figure 3.14 Global liner shipping network, quarter 2020 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data MDS Transmodal; visualization Julian Hoffmann. Notes: Layout = stress; links = number companies providing direction connection. level Tanger Med, Morocco highest Algeciras Valencia, Spain, services liner companies. South America, Buenos Aires, Argentina connected Montevideo, Uruguay (13 companies) Brazil, 14 companies provide direct services Paranaguá, Rio de Janeiro Santos. 10 companies connect San Antonio, Chile Callao, Peru; 15 companies connect Callao, Peru Guayaquil, Ecuador 12 companies provide direct services Cartagena, Colombia Manzanillo, Panama. Pacific, ports Fiji (Lautoka Suva) connected services liner companies, Betio, Kiribati connected Lautoka Suva, Fiji services carriers. , Kosrae Pohnpei, Micronesia direct services Majuro, Marshall Islands companies, company connects ports Yokohama, Japan ports Asia. Honiara, Solomon Islands Port Vila, Vanuatu connected ports Fiji ( companies) Yokohama, Japan ports Asia (3 companies).16 . CONTAINER SHIPPING: PORT PERFORMANCE 1. Container terminal performance average, 75–85 cent port call time container ships container operations, , time container lifts, remaining time due pilotage, mooring, 16 Data relate quarter 2020. UNCTAD calculations based data MDS Transmodal. liner shipping bilateral connectivity index port country pairs http://stats.unctad.org/maritime. http://stats.unctad.org/maritime 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS84 customs formalities operational procedural requirements. efficiency container operation segment influenced combination crane speed multiplied quantity cranes deployed (crane intensity). constrained occasionally stowage plans, ship’ length cranes, crane intensity largely influenced call size. large variations average port times, opportunity improvement. gaps large closed single giant step, succession smaller progressive steps required countries located bottom table 3.6. lead metric 2019 port turnaround times average total port hours port call. , port hours counted time ship reaches port limits (pilot station anchorage) departs berth operations completed. incorporates waiting/idle time, steaming- time berth time. time steam port limits included , homogeneous, , influenced port effectiveness. delays departure due channel congestion; absence pilots, tugs resources; ship readiness incurred ship departs berth line released. Ships sit idle departure bunkering repair simply safe waters port accommodate berthing arrival. data section IHS Markit extensive, proprietary Port Productivity Programme. comprises close 200,000 container ship port calls year, approximately 42 cent total. combines data vessel calls time port detailed information containers loaded unloaded call, totalling 300 million TEUs, 430 ports 138 countries. underlying data 10 world’ largest shipping lines enhanced matched port arrival times IHS Markit automatic identification system database. time ships spent port 2019 reported section (table 3.3). measured absolute numbers, number containers loaded unloaded period. selected ports carriers analysed section, Journal Commerce–IHS Markit database adjust port turnaround time loading unloading operations period. objective overview container ship -port time, factors considered, including call size quantity container moves ship call. objective benchmarking, actual port call hours weighted quantity containers exchanged call. formula achieve country : Actual port hours/actual call size actual call size full benchmark group , country takes 12 hours handle ship 1,200 containers loaded unloaded, average benchmark group 1,500 moves call, assumed subject port 15 hours handle quantity (12/1,200 1,500). sum, resulting weighted port hours represent time ship spends port container loaded unloaded, multiplied global average number containers benchmark group. 2. countries port performance Asia shorter time port positive indicator port’ efficiency trade competitiveness. Based criteria explained , container ships spent average time 23.2 hours (0.97 days) port call 2019. Table 3.6 lists world’ leading 25 economies terms total container ship port calls ( table 3.3) average -port time, weighted call size. average port-call time 25 economies 2019 21.7 hours (0.91 days), slightly global average. leading 25 countries terms container ship port calls, United Arab Emirates hold record shortest -port time (14.1 hours weighted port time), China (15.5 hours), Singapore (17.4 hours) Republic Korea (17.8 hours). countries performing average entire group, (Belgium Netherlands) Asia. lowest levels performance represented France (41.8 hours), Italy (36.5 hours), Australia (34.6 hours) Brazil (33.6 hours). Table 3.7 lists top bottom 10 countries terms weighted average port hours, average vessel size terms container-carrying capacity (TEUs). Middle Eastern countries top 10 2019. Republic Korea, Singapore Sri Lanka, ports countries handle predominantly trans-shipment containers. generally high crane densities quay walls, enabling high crane intensities. ratio yard quay equipment similar contemporary container terminals trans-shipment container yard move quay move, number doubled gateway ports. Trans-shipment ports fundamental advantages, limited gateway cargo, trucks causing congestion yards, potentially planned days , cargo arriving departing large batches. , , ports operated global terminal operators, set cost centres joint ventures ship operators. Hub ports face challenges, tight connections, fragmented discharge roll-overs impact yard integrity; addition, port 85REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Table 3.6 Weighted average port call hours top 25 economies, 2019 Source: Journal Commerce–IHS Markit Port Productivity Programme. Note: top 25 countries derived total number container ship port calls shown table 3.3. Country Number weighted average port hours United Arab Emirates 14.1 China 15.5 Singapore 17.4 Republic Korea 17.8 India 18.2 Thailand 20.0 Netherlands 20.3 Malaysia 20.5 Belgium 20.7 Hong Kong, China 22.5 Germany 23.0 Viet Nam 23.0 United States 24.7 Taiwan Province China 25.8 United Kingdom 26.5 Spain 26.8 Indonesia 27.2 Japan 28.2 Philippines 31.7 Panama 32.3 Turkey 32.5 Brazil 33.6 Australia 34.6 Italy 36.5 France 41.8 Top 25 economies 21.7 head-haul contend scattered load stowage high-profile stacks. lowest-ranking countries table 3.7 Africa, catching terms building sufficient infrastructure implementing port trade facilitation reforms handle -growing demand effectively. additional investment required, performance indicators presented suggest private sector operators. 3. Economies scale port performance larger container ships benefit economies scale. general rule thumb, higher move counts (call size) larger ships terminals deploy higher quantity cranes (crane intensity), handle containers ship hour countries smaller average vessel calls. Larger vessels tend assigned higher priority scarce resources terminal port shared multiple ships. larger vessels tend deployed modern efficient ports handling efficiency significantly refined ports terminals secondary tertiary ports call. shown figure 3.15, containers loaded unloaded port call (call size), longer ship stay port (average port hours). , economies scale, relationship linear; call size 1 cent, time spent port increases 0.5 cent. regressions illustrated figures 3.15 3.16 statistically explain 47 cent variance time ship spends port (R2 = 0.47), remainder differences countries explained factors trans-shipment incidence, port infrastructure, management trade facilitation, parameters economic institutional development. shown figure 3.15, longest average port call durations Sudan Yemen. port calls 2019, port calls involved Table 3.7 Weighted average port call hours, top bottom 10 countries territories Source: Journal Commerce–IHS Markit Port Productivity Programme. Economy Weighted average port hours Average vessel size Oman 12.5 9 002 United Arab Emirates 13.8 7 619 China 15.1 8 483 Poland 16.6 6 357 Saudi Arabia 16.8 8 351 Singapore 17.0 6 183 Republic Korea 17.4 7 425 Qatar 17.7 7 081 India 17.8 7 463 Sri Lanka 18.5 5 749 Top 10 15.9 7 769 Canary Islands 61.7 984 Mozambique 62.6 2 533 Norway 62.9 1 259 Cameroon 63.7 2 541 Bulgaria 64.1 1 162 El Salvador 64.2 2 203 Nigeria 65.0 4 379 Gabon 65.9 1 559 Namibia 71.8 3 561 Trinidad Tobago 72.1 1 490 Bottom 10 65.1 2 530 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS86 Figure 3.15 Country averages port time ship call size, 2019 (Hours port moves port call) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Journal Commerce–IHS Markit Port Productivity Programme. Note: R2 = 0.47; = 0.90 x0.50. Figure 3.16 Minutes port container move average call size, 2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Journal Commerce–IHS Markit Port Productivity Programme. Note: R2 = 0.47; = 53.83 -0.50. 87REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Figure 3.17 Minutes port container move number port calls country, 2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Journal Commerce–IHS Markit Port Productivity Programme. Note: R2 = 0.65; = 4.63 -0.18. Figure 3.18 Minutes port container move average vessel size, 2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Journal Commerce–IHS Markit Port Productivity Programme. Note: R2 = 0.64; = 123.04 -0.52. Abbreviation: TEU, 20-foot equivalent unit. 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS88 large number loaded unloaded import export containers, ships spent average 100 hours port. countries highest average call size trend line ( , efficient) Oman, Poland United Arab Emirates, large share trans-shipment cargo main terminals operated international private terminal operators. shed light port performance economies scale, worth time spent port container loaded unloaded. Economies scale efficiencies mutually beneficial. faster ship load unload containers ( minutes container port), ships ports accommodate number piers infrastructure (figure 3.17). Increasing number calls 1 cent decrease time port container 0.18 cent. similar picture emerges time port correlated average ship sizes (figure 3.18). Larger ships bring containers assigned resources (cranes, piers arrival, yard equipment), spend time port container loaded unloaded. time, carriers assign largest expensive ships, preferably ports handle shortest time. average, increasing average vessel size cent improvement time spent container 0.52 cent. countries largest average vessel sizes, trend line, meaning efficient. China, Netherlands, Oman Saudi Arabia. trend line: Croatia. economies scale illustrated line analysis data sets discussed chapter, relating port traffic fleet deployment (figure 3.12) time spent port (table 3.3). importance economies scale bode small island economies (figure 3.6), possibilities attract cargo, services larger ships. section explore issue port performance perspective ports. . PORT PERFORMANCE: LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE TRAINFORTRADE PORT MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME OF UNCTAD 1. TrainForTrade port performance scorecard framework port network TrainForTrade Port Management Programme, 3,600 port managers trained decades 60 countries Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America Caribbean.17 section reports latest developments port performance component TrainForTrade Port Management Programme. initiative started 2012 series international conferences held cities belonging TrainForTrade network (Belfast, Northern Ireland; Ciawi, Indonesia; Geneva, Switzerland; Manila, Philippines; Valencia, Spain). , port performance scorecard enhancements upgrades respond main technical requests port members. pps. unctad.org website features user-friendly interface, incorporated data-consistency checks, automated -entry function advanced analysis tools regions categories automated graphics filters. process captures data annual surveys (starting year 2010) focal points port entity April, report previous calendar year. 2020, 24 port entities ( 50 ports reported data inception port performance scorecard) completed 2019 survey, reporting total 2,509 data points average 72 data points -year rolling average global results. data collected series questions (82) port performance scorecard derives 26 agreed indicators categories: finance, human resources, gender, vessel operations, cargo operations, environment (table 3.8). approach inception port performance scorecard ensure consistency comparability measures time. newest development port performance scorecard platform digital strengthening backbone information technology architecture, UNCTAD expects increase participation port entities scope TrainForTrade network provide accurate relevant data analysis time. Simultaneously, UNCTAD pursues efforts include port entities countries TrainForTrade network reporting 17 TrainForTrade Port Management Series (volumes 1 7) featuring case studies actionable recommendations line Sustainable Development Goals (https://tft. unctad.org/tft_documents/publications/port-management- series). impact programme measured regularly indicators TrainForTrade methodology: performance rate (75 cent global average) satisfaction rate (88 cent global average) collected time activity conducted TrainForTrade network. long-standing success Port Management Programme, capitalizes training capacity-building port managers strengthening port institutions equally implementation good governance mechanisms practices, time deeper analysis long-term impact. Based assumption support member ports TrainForTrade network, Irish Aid port partners (France, Ireland, Portugal, Spain United Kingdom), steps operational level 2012 identify metrics analysis. https://tft.unctad.org/tft_documents/publications/port-management-series https://tft.unctad.org/tft_documents/publications/port-management-series https://tft.unctad.org/tft_documents/publications/port-management-series 89REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 port performance scorecard component. Major advances port performance scorecard tools, enhanced terms data validated, comparisons external data, essentially gross tonnage total time port, add considerable . number participating ports regions varied 10 years reporting held data set.18 23–26 ports report comprehensively year. basis comparative financial operational benchmarks. reports applied member ports range planning 18 partnership MarineTraffic established share data port entities participating port performance scorecard ensure consistency data ports. performance-based analyses. Table 3.9 summary -year period 2015 2019 average port region size category traditional throughput performance measure. key elements data set : • 2019, port sizes ranged 1.5 million tons 80.7 million tons. • average port handled 19.2 million tons annum 2015. • median period 8 million tons. • Twenty- cent ports averaged 3.3 million tons 2015–2019 period. Category Indicator number Description Number values Finance 1 EBITDA/revenue (operating margin) 38.8% 85 2 Labour/revenue 22.3% 89 3 Vessel dues/revenue 15.7% 90 4 Cargo dues/revenue 34.9% 90 5 Concession fees/revenue 14.7% 83 6 Rents/revenue 6.4% 84 Human resources 7 Tons employee 62 649 94 8 Revenue employee $202 476 88 9 EBITDA employee $104 812 80 10 Labour cost employee $35 760 82 11 Training cost/wages 1.6% 82 Gender 12 Female participation rate (global) 17.6% 96 12.1 Female participation rate (management) 38.0% 95 12.2 Female participation rate (operations) 13.2% 84 12.3 Female participation rate (cargo handling) 5.5% 60 12.4 Female participation rate ( employees) 29.4% 27 Vessel operations 13 Average waiting time (hours) 13 83 14 Average gross tonnage vessel 18 185 94 15.1 Average oil tanker arrivals 10.4% 80 15.2 Average bulk carrier arrivals 10.9% 81 15.3 Average container ship arrivals 31.8% 79 15.4 Average cruise ship arrivals 1.4% 78 15.5 Average general cargo ship arrivals 23.6% 82 15.6 Average ship arrivals 24.2% 80 Cargo operations 16 Average tonnage arrival () 7 865 103 17 Tons working hour, dry solid bulk 416 60 18 Tons hour, liquid bulk 428 40 19 Boxes ship hour berth 27 44 20 20-foot equivalent unit dwell time (days) 7 54 21 Tons hectare () 140 408 91 22 Tons berth metre () 10 091 102 23 Total passengers ferries 1 458 596 57 24 Total passengers cruise ships 126 976 61 Environment 25 Investment environmental projects/total CAPEX 7.2% 35 26 Environmental expenditures/revenue 2.3% 50 Table 3.8 Port performance scorecard indicators, 2015–2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data selected member ports TrainForTrade network. Abbreviations: CAPEX, capital expenditure; EBITDA, earnings interest, taxes, depreciation amortization. 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS90 2. Financial sustainability financial analysis presented port performance scorecard platform shows range values ports 2015 2019. period, average annual total revenues participating ports $1.97 billion 417 million tons. average revenue ton varies widely, depending port’ financial profile, including port dues, port estate, concessions services investment income. Figure 3.19 shows income categories interest data (indicators 3–6). analysis port revenue region shows expected dominance cargo-related income port entities, compared vessel-related income. , ports generate higher return working quays cargo marine assets dredged berths channels. ports show higher values concessions category tend larger ports container terminals. Europe largest proportion revenue income category. Figure 3.20 represents values earnings interest, taxes, depreciation amortization proportion revenue (indicator 1), figure 3.21 shows labour costs proportion revenue (indicator 2). Profit levels, represented indicator 1, reported year consistent range 36–40 cent global average; appears reasonable suggest average baseline required sustainable modern port. 2015 2019, average revenue port $88.9 million; 50 cent ports brought $49 million revenue. ports quartile 1 (25 cent sample) averaged $13.3 million, large ports quartile 3 (25 cent sample) averaged $80 million annum. share results individual port, UNCTAD analysis finds evidence average rates closely aligned similar ports regional group compared. , publicly data Irish ports shows gross revenue ton compared Ireland. financial indicators benchmarks region size forecasting revenue development projects. Figure 3.19 Revenue mix ports region, 2015–2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data selected member ports TrainForTrade network. Figure 3.20 Earnings interest, taxes, depreciation amortization proportion revenue, 2015–2019 (Percentage) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data selected member ports TrainForTrade network Abbreviation: Earnings interest, taxes, depreciation amortization. Region Category Small <5m Medium <10m Large <20m large <20m Average Africa 4.4 8.7 14.2 22.7 11.9 Asia 3.3 7.2 61.5 11.1 Europe 1.5 47.1 41.4 Latin America Caribbean 2.2 8.7 14.4 31.9 14.3 Average 3.0 8.5 14.3 43.4 19.2 Table 3.9 Average annual throughput volume, 2015–2019 (Million tons) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data selected member ports TrainForTrade network. 91REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Figure 3.21 Labour costs proportion revenue, 2015–2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data selected member ports TrainForTrade network. Figure 3.22 Average wages employee, 2015–2019 (Dollars) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data selected member ports TrainForTrade network.Labour costs recorded stable average 10 years covered port performance scorecard. Values settled 20 22 cent proportion gross revenue (indicator 2). analysed region (figure 3.21) proportion number employees, significant range values. Africa, high Latin America Caribbean, . clear level data abstraction attributable rates pay employee numbers, turn reflect levels private supply port entities contractors. case Latin America Caribbean, average rate global , suggesting ports high staffing levels (figure 3.22, indicator 10). , analysis clear regard Africa, labour rates higher spectrum. Europe shows highest rate employee – $67,705 annum. average proportion total capital expenditure investment environmental projects (indicator 25) 7.2 cent, 2.3 cent operating expenditures reported devoted environmental requirements (indicator 26). difficult number isolate, reported benchmarks note caution. , data-collection period, recorded numbers consistent. suggests proportion total spending, note upward trend, regulatory requirements implemented effects climate change increase. 3. Gender participation gender profile remains terms female participation port workforce (figure 3.23, indicators 12–12.4). category gender-balanced distribution management administration. , remains participating ports achieve greater female participation. 4. Vessel cargo operations Figures 3.24 3.25 illustrate profile participating ports terms vessel type (indicators 15.1–15.6) cargo volumes handled (indicator 16). graphics show ports vessel cargo mix. Africa Europe Figure 3.23 Female participation rate port workforce, 2015–2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data selected member ports TrainForTrade network. 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS92 largest average cargo tons arrival departure arguably reasons, vessel mix. Relating average time port varied cargo size vessel comparison. tight range 1.5–2 days port, average. , larger cargo lots handled higher labour equipment output. container vessels , average, time port (1.2 days), higher averages dry wet bulk carriers. Dry bulk carriers stay port 3.5 days average. , data TrainForTrade network show values similar global statistics recorded automatic identification system data ( section chapter). online port performance scorecard shows change waiting times. Figures 3.26 3.27 provide insights efficiency container-handling operations. wide range values standard performance metrics dwell time crane lifting rates, results line data presented section 3. . Europe Figure 3.24 Share vessel arrivals, 2015–2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data selected member ports TrainForTrade network. Figure 3.25 Average cargo arrival departure, 2015–2019 (Tons) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data selected member ports TrainForTrade network. Figure 3.26 Maximum 20-foot equivalent unit dwell time, 2015–2019 (Days) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data selected member ports TrainForTrade network. Figure 3.27 Average box-handling rate, 2015–2019 (Boxes ship-hour) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data selected member ports TrainForTrade network. 93REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 higher lifting rates reflect equipment capacity labour efficiency (figure 3.27; indicator 19). Figure 3.26 shows highest dwell time days region (indicator 20). topic requires sophisticated analysis identify reasons slow processing, , customs procedures, storage agreements, port-container stripping, multiple-user facilities congestion road network port. . SHIPPING: EMISSIONS OF THE WORLD FLEET 1. Initiatives reduce carbon emissions shipping Member States IMO agreed 2018 “ reduce total annual greenhouse gas emissions 50 cent 2050 compared 2008” part Initial IMO Strategy reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships (IMO, 2018; UNCTAD, 2020c; UNCTAD, 2020d) ( chapter 5.. additional background information). achieve objective, International Chamber Shipping maritime industry associations propose establishment research development fund cut emissions (BIMCO al., 2019). heavy fuel oil, correspond carbon price $0.63 ton carbon dioxide. project raise $5 billion 10 years. fund financed contribution $2 ton marine fuel oil purchased consumption. private sector-led Coalition suggests “[]hipping’ decarbonization engine drives green development world” (Global Maritime Forum, 2020). falling costs net -carbon energy technologies production sustainable alternative fuels increasingly competitive. Determined collective action shipping increase confidence suppliers future fuels sector moving direction. UNCTAD supports Coalition promotes efforts achieve sustainability, helping developing countries adapt build resilience light climate emergency. Parry al., 2018, “[] environmental case maritime carbon tax increasingly recognized”. Environmental Defence Fund (2020), “meeting IMO’ 2050 target represents $50 billion $70 billion year 20 years’ spending, revenue opportunity”. Englert Losos, 2020 ( World Bank), supporter Coalition, state large share investment opportunity lie developing countries. sizable part investments ashore, including energy infrastructure seaports. Shipowners invest renewal fleet technologies (UNCTAD, 2020e). Engine power limit short-term measure proposed Japan enable shipowners meet requirements relating energy efficiency index existing ships reach IMO target 2030. Engine power limit decreases vessel speed minimal ship performance, reducing fuel emissions based cube law (relationship engine load vessel speed). study, systematic assessment vehicle emissions model International Council Clean Transportation evaluate scenarios engine power limit focusing container ships, bulk carriers oil tankers, 2018 automatic identification system data utilized baseline. study argues carbon-dioxide “reductions proportional engine power limit ship engines operating maximum power” (Rutherford al., 2020). model shows negligible effect engine power limit 20 cent ship’ carbon-dioxide emissions. engine power limit ranging 30 40 cent, emissions reduction 2 6 cent. , study shows significant reduction carbon-dioxide emissions ( 8–19 cent) larger engine power limit 50 cent . 2. Emissions vessel type determinants wide range parameters influences amount carbon dioxide ship emits ton-mile. include vessel type, speed, size, hull design, ballast, technologies types fuel . larger ship naturally emit carbon dioxide mile, economies scale, emit carbon dioxide ton-mile; smallest container ships 999 TEUs emit carbon dioxide container carried largest container ships. Container ships tend transit higher speeds dry bulk carriers, – equal – emitting carbon dioxide ton-mile . Liquefied natural gas cruise ships average larger offshore service vessels, tugs, emit carbon dioxide ship smaller vessels ( figure 3.28). shift larger tankers, bulk carriers container vessels decade, combined multiple efficiency gains scrapping efficient vessels, meant carbon-dioxide emissions growth trailed increase fleet dead weight. noticeable container ships, modest speed reductions materially lowered fuel consumption emissions. container fleet capacity rose 45 cent 2011 2019, carbon-dioxide emissions 2 cent higher. period, carbon-dioxide emissions tankers bulk carriers increased 19 cent 17 cent, , 38 cent 51 cent growth respective fleet capacity ( figures 3.29 3.30). 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS94 Figure 3.28 Annual carbon-dioxide emissions vessel vessel type, 2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Marine Benchmark. Figure 3.29 Comparison dead-weight tonnage respective fleet carbon-dioxide emissions bulk carriers, container ships tankers, 2011–2019 (2011 = 100) Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Marine Benchmark. 95REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 larger average vessel sizes, carbon-dioxide emissions vessel declined slightly decade. gains expected decade, modern eco-designs continue replace older, efficient designs, increases average vessel size , meaningfully reduce carbon-dioxide emissions line 2050 targets IMO. Achieving targets require radical engine fuel technology . Shell International (2020), 90 cent interviewees survey industrial perspectives shipping decarbonization stated policy main priority organization. considered economic disruption induced COVID-19 pandemic opportunity accelerate decarbonization progress. cent persons interviewed stated lack technology alignment ( alternative fuels) major barrier decarbonization. Hydrogen ammonia considered promising long-term fuel alternative, present unviability, due significantly energy density compared heavy fuel oil, challenges relating storage immaturity fuel cell technology. shipowners turning liquefied natural gas alternative meet IMO targets 2030, liquefied natural gas 20–25 cent carbon-intensive heavy fuel oil. , interviewees reserved long-term perspectives liquefied natural gas. Owing methane slip challenges arising extraction transport, life-cycle greenhouse gas emission benefit derived liquefied natural gas engine technology (Pavlenko al., 2020). 3. Emissions flag registration Flag States important role play enforcing IMO rules. exercise regulatory control world fleet, applying law imposing penalties case -compliance, diverse issues. range ensuring safety life sea protection marine environment provision decent working living conditions seafarers. regard implementation initial strategy reduction greenhouse gas emissions IMO, flag States ensure ships compliant applicable IMO rules. addition, provide incentives ships registered flag reduce carbon-dioxide emissions ensure collection future fees contributions emissions. , International Chamber Shipping proposal mentioned suggests contributions proposed fund commensurate ship’ annual fuel oil purchased consumption, verified flag State. Flag States involvement business opportunity, transparent reliable flag States provide services . addition, major flag States affected impacts climate change. , Panama Canal confronted shortage fresh water; Liberia developed national adaptation plan mainstream climate change adaptation planning budgets; Marshall Islands Figure 3.30 Annual carbon-dioxide emissions vessel vessel type, 2011–2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Marine Benchmark. 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS96 -lying small island developing States risk sea-level rise (UNCTAD, 2020f). , countries’ interest support reduction global greenhouse gas emissions, including shipping (UNCTAD, 2017b). Data generated automatic identification system tracking system ships, including - mentioned information vessel characteristics, speed, type fuel ballast situation, calculate estimates carbon-dioxide emissions ship aggregate estimates. basis, ships registered Marshall Islands, Liberia Panama accounted (32.96 cent) carbon-dioxide emissions shipping 2019 (figure 3.31). metrics, 2019, ships (commercial vessels 1,000 dwt ) registered top 10 economies accounted 67.15 cent total maritime carbon-dioxide emissions. 1 January 2020, 10 flags represented 48.52 cent Figure 3.31 Annual carbon-dioxide emissions vessel flag registration, 2019 Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Marine Benchmark. 97REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 world fleet 65.73 cent world gross tonnage. World maritime carbon-dioxideemissions rose 8 cent 2014 2019, based latest analysis Marine Benchmark.19 . SUMMARY AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS growing availability port shipping data helps maritime industry monitor improve performance. analysts compare report differences ports, countries fleets, turn helps Governments port maritime authorities adjustments activities policies, . Based performance indicators discussed , points set merit consideration analysts policymakers: • , economies scale important, benefit stakeholders. data sets covering port shipping performance show larger ports, ship calls bigger vessels, report performance connectivity indicators. , economies scale relevant maritime transport port performance. time, ports aim attract larger ships call sizes, note caution warranted. economies scale presented reflect averages: cover total costs door--door logistics. shipowner satisfied ships spends time port (sections ) fuel efficient (section ), shippers, ports intermodal transport providers confronted diseconomies scale. average call size increase total cargo throughput, higher call size lead peak demand trucks, yard space intermodal connections, additional investment needed dredging bigger cranes. costs borne shippers, ports inland transport providers, shipowners reduce number ship calls deliver volume trade. concentration traffic major ports imply shippers suffer choice ports costs trucking extra distances. equal, concentration cargo bigger ships ports cargo volume implies business companies market. resulting 19 Data electronically 2 August 2020 Marine Benchmark (www.marinebenchmark./). reduction competition levels lead situation cost savings seaside passed clients terms freight rates, markets service providers start , case small island developing States. • , small island developing States continue face challenges maritime trade. small island economies longest port ship turnaround times lowest service frequencies, lack infrastructure specialized port equipment, attract ship calls cargo carry. States confronted diseconomies scale – time – levels competition limited options choosing importers exporters. small island developing States improve liner shipping connectivity, owing geographic position, lack wider hinterland trade volumes. times, attract trans-shipment services, resulting additional fleet deployment shipments national importers exporters. small number island economies hub ports countries’ trade, resulting higher connectivity benefits countries’ importers exporters. • , emissions reductions require radical technological . Larger vessel sizes, combined multiple efficiency gains scrapping efficient vessels, led growth carbon-dioxide emissions compared global fleet tonnage. Container ship fleet capacity, , increased 45 cent 2011 2019, carbon-dioxide emissions container ships 2 cent period. trend larger container ships, annual emissions ship effectively declined. gains expected decade, modern ecological designs continue replace older, efficient designs. , marginal improvements suffice meaningfully reduce carbon-dioxide emissions line IMO targets 2050. Achieving targets require radical engine fuel technology . shown Review, technologies track vessels identify fuels, combined reporting requirements vessel operators, today assign carbon-dioxide emissions vessels flags registration. resulting statistics insights http://www.marinebenchmark./ 3. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS98 contribute discussions market-based measures reduce carbon-dioxide emissions. • Fourth, nowcasts, forecasts monitoring pandemics growing role play maritime industry. Ship movements, schedules port traffic data short notice, official statistics economic growth trade published. opportunity maritime data obtain early picture physical trade goods. trends reported show quarter 2020, total fleet deployment economies quarter 2019. quarter, carriers started significantly reduce capacity. China, , started positive growth quarter 2020, compared quarter 2019, recorded negative year--year growth quarter. European North American countries steep decline quarter. data analysed international organizations professional forecasters aiming predict economic trade growth upcoming weeks. Ports shipping companies extent plan fleet deployment upcoming period, based predictions. important fall circular reasoning, pessimistic forecasts lead withdrawal shipping capacity, turn lead worsening predictions growth. • , standardize maritime data. ports shipping companies benefit benchmarking, data comparable. Ship types, key performance indicators, definitions parameters standardized. long run, UNCTAD port performance scorecard potential industry standard , globally accepted benchmark, helping port sector continuously improve efficiency. , port entity member TrainForTrade Port Management network stated prepares updates strategic submission Government, port performance scorecard values drawing baseline metrics proof-- concept appraisal, forecasting profit levels, wage profiles, employment numbers revenue profiles. UNCTAD pursuing efforts include port entities countries TrainForTrade network reporting port performance scorecard component collaborate international partners, International Association Port Authorities, contribute standardization data tracking port performance. REFERENCES Arslanalp , Marini Tumbarello (2019). Big data vessel traffic: Nowcasting trade flows real time. Working Paper. . 19/275. International Monetary Fund. Washington, .. BIMCO, Cruise Lines International Association, International Association Dry Cargo Shipowners, International Chamber Shipping, Interferry, International Parcel Tankers Association, Intertanko, World Shipping Council (2019). Reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships: Proposal establish international maritime research development board (IMRB). MEPC 75/7/4. 18 December. Cerdeiro DA, Komaromi , Liu Saeed (2020). World seaborne trade real time: proof concept building AIS [automatic identification system] -based nowcasts scratch. Working Paper. WP/20/57. International Monetary Fund. Washington, .. Englert Losos (2020). -emission shipping: ’ developing countries World Bank Blogs. 24 February. Environmental Defence Fund (2020). Shipping’ green $1trn profitable investment, cost. 30 January. Global Maritime Forum (2020). Coalition. www.globalmaritimeforum.org/--- coalition. IMO (2018). Initial IMO Strategy reduction GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions ships. MEPC 72/17/Add.1. Annex 11. April. MDS Transmodal (2020). Port liner shipping connectivity index. www.portlsci./index.php. http://www.globalmaritimeforum.org/---coalition http://www.globalmaritimeforum.org/---coalition http://www.portlsci./index.php 99REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Parry , Heine , Kizzier Smith (2018). Carbon taxation international maritime fuels: Assessing options. Working Paper. WP/18/203. International Monetary Fund. Washington, .. Pavlenko , Comer , Zhou , Clark Rutherford (2020). climate implications LNG [liquefied natural gas] marine fuel. Working Paper 2020-02. International Council Clean Transportation. Rutherford , Mao , Osipova Comer (2020). Limiting engine power reduce [carbon dioxide] CO2 emissions existing ships. Working Paper 2020-10. International Council Clean Transportation. ánchez RJ, Hoffmann , Micco , Pizzolitto GV, Sgut Wilmsmeier (2003). Port efficiency international trade: Port efficiency determinant maritime transport costs. Maritime Economics Logistics. 5(2):199–218. Shell International (2020). Decarbonizing Shipping: Hands Deck – Industry Perspectives. United Nations (2020). International Trade Statistics Database (Comtrade). AIS [automatic identification system]: Trade volume. Trade, transport travel dashboards. https://public.tableau./views/ CerdeiroKomaromiLiuandSaeed2020AISdatacollectedbyMarineTraffic/AISTradeDashboard; https://comtrade. .org/. UNCTAD (2017a). Review Maritime Transport 2017. (United Nations publication. Sales . .17.II..10. York Geneva). UNCTAD (2017b). UNCTAD Framework Sustainable Freight Transport (United Nations publication. York Geneva). UNCTAD (2019a). Container ports: fastest, busiest, connected. 7 August. UNCTAD (2019b). Digitalization maritime transport: Ensuring opportunities development. Policy . 75. UNCTAD (2020a). Navigating coronavirus crisis uncertainty: maritime transport data . Transport Trade Facilitation Newsletter . 87. UNCTAD (2020b). Digitalizing Port Call Process. Transport Trade Facilitation Series. . 13 (United Nations publication, Geneva). UNCTAD (2020c). Decarbonizing shipping: role flag States Transport Trade Facilitation Newsletter . 86. UNCTAD (2020d). decarbonization international maritime transport: Findings methodology developed ECLAC [Economic Commission Latin America Caribbean] shipping [carbon-dioxide] CO2 emissions Latin America. UNCTAD Transport Trade Facilitation Newsletter . 86. UNCTAD (2020e). Decarbonizing maritime transport: Estimating fleet renewal trends based ship-scrapping patterns. Transport Trade Facilitation Newsletter . 85. UNCTAD (2020f). Climate Change Impacts Adaptation Coastal Transport Infrastructure: Compilation Policies Practices. Transport Trade Facilitation Series . 12 (United Nations publication. Sales . .20.II..10. Geneva). World Bank (2020). COVID-19 trade watch #3 – Signs recovery 29 June. https://public.tableau./views/CerdeiroKomaromiLiuandSaeed2020AISdatacollectedbyMarineTraffic/AISTradeDashboard; https://comtrade..org/ https://public.tableau./views/CerdeiroKomaromiLiuandSaeed2020AISdatacollectedbyMarineTraffic/AISTradeDashboard; https://comtrade..org/ https://public.tableau./views/CerdeiroKomaromiLiuandSaeed2020AISdatacollectedbyMarineTraffic/AISTradeDashboard; https://comtrade..org/ THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 PANDEMIC: LESSONS LEARNED FROM FIRST-HAND EXPERIENCES 4 chapter highlights selected maritime stakeholder experiences regard COVID-19 pandemic, including challenges faced, related response measures potential lessons learned. stakeholders, regions representing mix public authorities maritime transport industry actors, involved operating managing maritime transport logistics, invited share respective experiences. exhaustive intended illustrative examples, reflections received generate additional insights implications pandemic maritime transport trade. Key findings consistent data analysis detailed preceding chapters impact pandemic maritime trade; supply maritime transport infrastructure services; performance sector.20 20 experiences presented chapter based inputs received UNCTAD entities. illustrative nature reflect experiences broader set stakeholders. 102 4. THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 PANDEMIC: LESSONS LEARNED FROM FIRST-HAND EXPERIENCES 102 . INVITED REFLECTIONS ON THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 PANDEMIC IN MARITIME TRANSPORT AND HINTERLAND CONNECTIONS COVID-19 pandemic unprecedented global challenge significant consequences economies, sectors industries, including maritime transport logistics. Data analysis presented preceding chapters underscored magnitude disruption caused pandemic. tracking maritime trade, port traffic, port calls, liner shipping connectivity levels deployed vessel capacities, data sets, including automatic identification system data, shown magnitude impact pandemic maritime transport trade. disruption triggered sudden slowdown seaborne trade increases blank sailings, delays ports closures ports, reductions working hours, shortages equipment, shortages labour capacity constraints truck inland transport systems. important takeaway research analysis detailed preceding chapters related strategic role maritime transport logistics ensuring continuity reliability global supply chains cross-border trade. ensuring smooth delivery essential goods services required manage crises, sector crucial keeping trade flows moving. conclusion analysis concerns ensure integrity, connectivity smooth functioning maritime transport economies, developed developing, small island developing States developed countries. disproportionately high transport costs levels shipping connectivity, trade uncompetitive, volatile, unpredictable costly. Finally, risk assessment management emergency disaster response planning emerged key business continuity robustness. complement findings, UNCTAD sought contributions field experiences main actors involved maritime supply chains. Building synergies arising ongoing collaboration UNCTAD, selected stakeholders representing mix public authorities maritime transport industry actors invited share experiences regard impact pandemic, measures applied date potential lessons learned good practices. Stakeholders invited share perspectives impact maritime supply chain challenges faced elaborate ways acted mitigate risks address challenges generated pandemic.21 contributions received provide clarity impact disruptions caused pandemic stakeholders, account differences functions roles stakeholder maritime supply chain. additional efforts required build resilience maritime transport system supply chain future. exhaustive meant representative public authorities industry actors, views experiences shared stakeholders provide insights specific occurrences, related responses lessons learned, view future disruption. stakeholders shared perspectives small island developing States; landlocked, transit coastal countries, lens transit transport corridor; international maritime passage authorities; port authorities; global shipping companies. views cover regions, , Africa, Europe, Latin America Pacific. shared experiences presented detail subsequent sections chapter. overview experiences highlights key aspects crucial stakeholders navigating crisis. trend, identified analysis preceding chapters reiterated experiences shared, importance keeping trade moving crisis conditions -functioning resilient maritime supply chains. difficulties challenges faced pandemic, shipping companies, ports relevant stakeholders remained operational put place measures facilitate trade movement goods, vital commodities products. highlighted experiences shared. Stakeholders reported 21 chapter informed contributions stakeholders: Mediterranean Shipping Company; Micronesian Centre Sustainable Transport; Northern Corridor Transit Transport Coordination Authority; Panama Canal Authority; Port Authority Valencia; Sailing Sustainability, Fiji. 103REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 103REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 experiences varied depending pre-existing conditions levels preparedness, , maritime transport logistics helped essential goods trade moving. digitalization interactions information-sharing emphasized critical continuity maritime transport operations pandemic, stakeholders noted digitalization key component resilience-building efforts. Finally, stakeholders stated awareness required potential trade patterns resulting disruptions caused pandemic, prepare adapt infrastructure operations promote sustainability resilience sector. Key findings experiences shared include : • pandemic impacted maritime supply chain hinterland connections. Returning normal time normality differ expected pandemic. • Responses adjustments pandemic-related disruptions spanned areas, including operations; financial economic areas; sanitary safety protocols processes; working practices organizational aspects. • responses entailed substantial reorganization operations, including prioritization essential services; reorganization operations working conditions due sanitary safety protocols; advancement digitalization communications strategies. • Sanitary safety protocols related measures urgently implemented short time. capacity coordinate local / national authorities communicate actors maritime supply chain critical responses coping strategies. • Work-related operational adjustment measures helped sector adapt transformational maritime supply chain stakeholders. digitalization processes technology workforce triggered revisit operations upgrade knowledge skills. • Challenges related crew highlighted orchestrate integrated approach relevant stakeholders. major issues faced maritime supply chain. Stakeholders included ministries health parties, regard public policies implemented restrictions travel. • Ports managed avoid significant disruptions cargo operations. facilitated reduced number port calls vessels maritime trade flows. • revision capacity management plans adaption services key. significant features adjustment measures introduced shipping lines. • Maintaining landside operations difficult transit transport corridors. Long queues borders highlighted importance reliable chains crisis pandemic. difficulties affected coastal countries landlocked transit countries, needed maintain access seaports. pandemic exposed potential limitations trade facilitation measures applied context cross-border transport land. • Business continuity plans emerged key acting swiftly. plans important developed revised, integrate lessons learned prepare future disruption events pandemics due climate change-related factors. • Responding pandemic-related challenges required collaboration coordination, exchanges information stakeholders. established, collective actions effective combating risks improving decision-making resilience. Adjustments governance communications strategies parties involved, exchanges information sharing experiences, important. • Furthering systemic, coordinated responses building capacities staff important. future, , transboundary disaster management 104 4. THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 PANDEMIC: LESSONS LEARNED FROM FIRST-HAND EXPERIENCES 104 strategies coordinated including, transit transport corridors, harmonized disaster response mechanism. Coordination collaboration focus sharing intelligence early-warning systems, conducting capacity-building personnel involved transport logistics chain embedding disaster responses national regional policies affect trade, transport related infrastructure. • pandemic obvious impact small island developing States Pacific. , impact longer lasting critical, multiple crises shocks occur time. decision divert single ship countries, absence vessels calling ports availability single operator, due reductions cargo destination key export market, tested ability maritime transport deliver essential goods. increase shipping costs small island developing States. States develop risk mitigation capabilities resilience-building, including green shipping solutions, national, regional international levels. • Small island developing States remain vulnerable country grouping. experience combination disruptive factors shocks. , April 2020, small island developing States Pacific region experienced impact tropical cyclone. Losses damages significant pandemic delivery emergency support relief challenging. context, climate change mitigation adaptation remain important priorities efforts address challenge, including auspices IMO, enhanced. . EXPERIENCE OF SMALL ISLAND DEVELOPING STATES: SMALL ISLAND DEVELOPING STATES IN THE PACIFIC coronavirus disease Cyclone Harold: Lockdown Pacific 2019, Samoa experienced measles epidemic news COVID-19 emerged, small island developing States Pacific cautious restricted travel January 2020, period lockdown instituted. June 2020, 15 small island developing States Pacific, Fiji Papua Guinea recorded cases COVID-19 ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7348597/). remoteness small island developing States Pacific beneficial instance, increased case numbers put strain limited health-care systems possibly increased poor sanitation levels overcrowded urban areas. April 2020, severe tropical Cyclone Harold struck Fiji, Solomon Islands, Tonga Vanuatu, causing significant loss life damage crops buildings. instance, 27 lives lost overcrowded interisland vessel leaving Honiara due pandemic ( https:// apnews./article/f15a56f7b85f79c9f22fc28d055c78ec). Cyclone Harold caused damage worth millions dollars port infrastructure jetties, pandemic-related restrictions put additional pressure responses, relief goods teams comply quarantine requirements; multiple states emergency impacting international responses; pandemic-related restrictions interisland shipping limiting reshipment emergency relief remoter islands communities. coronavirus disease: Impact shipping, food, fishing tourism period January–April 2020, impact shipping mixed. small island developing States Pacific processes policies place deal global pandemic. countries instituted total ban arrival ships types ships, cruise liners. countries imposed varying periods quarantine allowed access ships specific countries ports sea varying periods, 5 28 days. resulted blank sailings, reductions cargo throughput, ships diverted countries trans-shipment Fiji. World Food Programme activated COVID-19 pandemic response team collect data impact shipping https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7348597/ https://apnews./article/f15a56f7b85f79c9f22fc28d055c78ec https://apnews./article/f15a56f7b85f79c9f22fc28d055c78ec 105REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 105REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 share information stakeholders small island developing States Pacific, line recommendations International Chamber Shipping, ILO, IMO . Global Logistics Cluster, World Food Programme lead agency, weekly update international shipping situation Pacific, identifying national quarantine requirements, ship schedules sources information advice.22 Government plans systems dealing pandemic put place teams government officials trained briefed. Shipping issues longer predominantly due quarantine restrictions, due significant reductions demand international tourism industry slowed lack goods key resupply hubs Hawaii. case COVID-19 recorded Lautoka, Fiji, international port closed, March 2020, ships diverted Suva . significant drop throughput international ports small island developing States Pacific instances food shortages. , June, islands Kiribati began experience shortages foodstuffs, ships called March 2020 ( https:// logcluster.org/document/pacific-shipping-operations-update-20--2020). demand cargo declined, shipping industry applied measures , , blank sailings, reduced frequencies services alterations scheduled routes. , sailings Pacific Direct Line Zealand feeder service Fiji reduced month, Mariana Express Lines removed Bairiki Tarawa Majuro South Pacific Service schedule - 2020 blank sailings region ( https://logcluster.org/document/pacific- shipping-operations-update-25-june-2020). Domestic interisland shipping initially confined ports, interisland travel allowed; , commercial interisland vessels began allowed operate, stages, beginning cargo , limited numbers passengers. Government Cook Islands subsidized interisland shipping northern islands ensure essential cargo delivered. States, Marshall Islands, experience impact interisland shipping. September 2020, ships Samoa Tokelau – airport reached ship – permit passengers. economic impact pandemic included high levels unemployment tourism-dependent economies Fiji, Vanuatu Cook Islands. Governments initiated plans dealing pandemic citizens left urban centres returned villages farm. Import export volumes dropped, community resilience -sufficiency regard food increased barter systems helped reduce demand imported goods. countries experienced shortages fresh food, surpluses due drop demand tourism industry increased local gardens.23 opportunities regional trade States free COVID-19, fully explored, part due lack shipping services. major impact seafarers, crew small island developing States Pacific serving international ships, cruise liners, stranded . fishing fleet affected, foreign flagged vessels continuing fish region calling ports trans-shipment resupply, restrictions beginning affect sector. , Samoa restricts docking fishing vessels day crew allowed disembark, date port crew change 28 days previously, compliance requirements related quarantine notification place. surcharges increases shipping costs put place carriers, increased costs international shipping customer, significantly fuel prices ( table 4.1). September 2020, quarantine restrictions beginning relaxed. , Marshall Islands, crew record disembarkation vessels regularly serviced small island developing States Pacific exempt 14-day quarantine period. , crew permitted. Schedules altered reduce quarantine periods ports, shorter voyages, Papua Guinea Solomon Islands. 22 https://logcluster.org/searchf%5B0%5D=field_raw_op_id%3A33587&%5B1%5D=field_document_type% 3A156&%5B2%5D=field_logistical_category%3A16. 23 https://www.fijitimes./lautoka-market-sales-plummet/ https://pacificfarmers./resource/pacific- farmers----survey-report/. https://logcluster.org/document/pacific-shipping-operations-update-20--2020 https://logcluster.org/document/pacific-shipping-operations-update-20--2020 https://logcluster.org/document/pacific-shipping-operations-update-25-june-2020 https://logcluster.org/document/pacific-shipping-operations-update-25-june-2020 https://logcluster.org/searchf%5B0%5D=field_raw_op_id%3A33587&%5B1%5D=field_document_type%3A156&%5B2%5D=field_logistical_category%3A16 https://logcluster.org/searchf%5B0%5D=field_raw_op_id%3A33587&%5B1%5D=field_document_type%3A156&%5B2%5D=field_logistical_category%3A16 https://www.fijitimes./lautoka-market-sales-plummet/ https://pacificfarmers./resource/pacific-farmers----survey-report/ https://pacificfarmers./resource/pacific-farmers----survey-report/ 106 4. THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 PANDEMIC: LESSONS LEARNED FROM FIRST-HAND EXPERIENCES 106 Conclusion pandemic obvious impact small island developing States Pacific. , impact longer lasting critical. pandemic setback small island developing States Pacific experiencing climate change-related extreme weather events, severe tropical Cyclone Harold. Building resilience small island developing States, including regard maritime transport chains, preparing , responding recovering significant multi-hazard threats pandemics climate change-related events critical. small island developing States Pacific vulnerable regard impact climate change, achieving reductions emissions international shipping, line efforts limit global temperature increase 1.5° pre-industrial levels, essential survival States decades afford delay. 2018, IMO adopted initial strategy reduction total annual greenhouse gas emissions 50 cent 2050 compared 2008 , time, pursuing efforts phasing ( http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/PressBriefings/Pages/06GHGinitialstrategy.aspx). current delay adoption short-term reduction measures strategy turn defer debates medium-term measures, market-based measures , , carbon tax, key international shipping deliver vision decarbonization . delay review initial targets, agreed prior release special report United Nations Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change 2018. data demonstrates significantly greater emissions reduction levels required sectors limiting global temperature increase 1.5° remain viable option ( Bullock al., 2020). fourth IMO greenhouse gas study submitted Marine Environment Protection Committee July 2020 shows emissions shipping increased 9.6 cent 2012–2018, methane emissions increasing 151 cent (IMO, 2020). Shipping pathway needed achieve limiting global temperature increase 1.5°; fact, trend direction, projected 50 cent increase emissions 2050 ( https://www.cedelft.eu/en/ publications/2488/fourth-imo-greenhouse-gas-study). economic recovery stimulus packages put place worldwide, inclusion measures related decarbonization shipping essential shipping meet emissions reductions targets initial strategy. global investment opportunity initiatives greener shipping, nationally internationally, , small island developing States Pacific afford left . pandemic demonstrated resilience, dependence shipping. regard, , Pacific Blue Shipping Partnership country-driven initiative large-scale blended finance investments, catalyse multi-country transition sustainable, resilient -carbon shipping, including -carbon domestic interregional shipping driven small island developing States Pacific (: www.mcst-rmiusp.org/index. php/projects/current-projects/pacific-blue-shipping-partnership). Source: Global Logistics Cluster data. Table 4.1 Examples surcharges shipping costs Shipping line Additional charges Application Neptune Pacific Line $349/TEU, $25/revenue (break bulk) Temporary quarantine surcharge Pacific ports $100/TEU Freight cost increase shipments Australia Zealand Fiji, 3 5 July 2020, Pacific Direct Line $100/TEU Rate restoration charge shipments Asia Pacific island ports, 15 July 2020 China Navigation Company $150 (20-foot full container load), $300 (40-foot full container load) $8.50/ revenue ton (break bulk) Rate restoration charge shipments Fiji $163–285 (20-foot full container load), $326–570 (40-foot full container load) $10–16.75/m3 (break bulk) Quarantine surcharge applied vessels calling Honiara http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/PressBriefings/Pages/06GHGinitialstrategy.aspx https://www.cedelft.eu/en/publications/2488/fourth-imo-greenhouse-gas-study https://www.cedelft.eu/en/publications/2488/fourth-imo-greenhouse-gas-study 107REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 107REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 . EXPERIENCE OF AN AUTHORITY COORDINATING TRANSIT AND TRANSPORT CORRIDOR: NORTHERN CORRIDOR TRANSIT AND TRANSPORT COORDINATION AUTHORITY, EAST AFRICA Importance maritime transport regional international trade importance maritime transport role international shipping underestimated current global economic market conditions, transport sea prominent. Maritime shipping connects suppliers producers, buyers sellers. important transport activities northern corridor continent Africa . Current issues related status regional maritime shipping discussed relation rest world, factors crucial sustaining industry analysed. Port Mombasa: Gateway regional trade Ports serve important transportation hubs facilitate movement goods regional markets, businesses , , landlocked countries. port Mombasa, , connects goods consumers northern corridor, includes road networks, railways, inland waterways pipelines. port gateway East Africa Central Africa busiest largest ports East Africa. direct connectivity 80 ports worldwide linked Burundi, Democratic Republic Congo, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Somalia, South Sudan, Uganda United Republic Tanzania. port comprises Kilindini Harbour, Port Reitz, Port, Port Tudor tidal waters encircling Mombasa Island capacity 2.65 million TEUs (Kenya Port Authority Strategic Plan 2018-2022). Kilindini Harbour natural deep-water inlet depth 45–55 meters deepest; controlling depth outer channel, dredged depth 17.5 meters. coronavirus disease: Impact port northern corridor performance COVID-19 pandemic profound effects transport entire logistics sector. pandemic, situation sudden unanticipated, exposed vulnerability trade facilitation northern corridor region. Key challenges facilitating cross-border trade included lack preparation lack transboundary disaster management strategies. abrupt nature pandemic coupled absence tailored strategies affected, extent continue affect, performance port Mombasa northern corridor. Declines noted pandemic regard performance indicators northern corridor, border crossing time affected . 2020, queues trucks awaiting clearance common border crossing points reported stretched 50 kilometres ( http://www.ttcanc.org/documents.php). Congestion experienced crossing points due measures put place testing drivers virus. , transit time crossing points distance 948 kilometres increased average 3 days 8 days. disruptions led delays, return empty containers port Mombasa, delays led retention charges set shipping lines, posing burden cost business. number measures put place port Mombasa curb spread virus, including, , fumigation key equipment, operational areas, offices workshops; temperature checks individuals accessing port; sanitization hand washing gates entrances buildings. port health authority ensures protocols observed ships scheduled call Port. measures implemented affecting normal port operations. interventions, coupled blank sailings vessel cancellations, explain part regard performance indicators port northern corridor. directives executed Governments people remain home telecommute affected performances port northern corridor http://www.ttcanc.org/documents.php 108 4. THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 PANDEMIC: LESSONS LEARNED FROM FIRST-HAND EXPERIENCES 108 disrupting working systems. adjustments , coping mechanisms instituted mitigate negative impacts, improvements began delivering services port northern corridor. impact pandemic transport trade patterns northern corridor apparent, cargo trucks operation. addition, shortages staff operate equipment Port, caused delays transfer cargo. explain variations ship turnaround time performance indicators, noted Northern Corridor Transport Observatory ( http://www.kandalakaskazini..ke). positive trends pandemic noted regard indicators vessel waiting time berth, ship turnaround time port dwell time. attributed decreased volumes reduced number vessels calling Port, compared 2019. Time pick cargo release customs increased 2020, compared 2019, due length time trucks return destinations due pandemic-related measures. increase transit time January– 2020 regard destinations attributed measures, implemented member States Northern Corridor Transit Transport Coordination Authority ( figure 4.1). Source: UNCTAD calculations, based data Northern Corridor Transport Observatory, http:// top.ttcanc.org/downloads.php. January February March April 47.9 38.9 32.6 40.3 35.9 34.8 33.3 32.9 31.1 34.3 36 36 36 36 36 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 January February March April 65.4 34.8 26.1 37.7 26.7 43.5 65.7 63 43.3 63.2 24 24 24 24 24 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 January February March April 99.4 84.4 69.2 111 87.3 113.5 90 95.2 89.1 119 2020 2019 Target 72 72 72 72 72 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 January February March April 76 59 61 48 78 65 76 66 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 2020 2019 Target 2020 2019 2020 2019 Target () Ship turnaround time () Dwell time () Delay release customs () Clearance time -stop centre Figure 4.1 Port Mombasa: Performance indicators, 2020 (Hours) http://www.kandalakaskazini..ke http://top.ttcanc.org/downloads.php http://top.ttcanc.org/downloads.php 109REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 109REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Northern Corridor Transit Transport Coordination Authority East African Community: Current interventions attempt address numerous challenges affecting transport trade logistics due pandemic, secretariat Northern Corridor Transit Transport Coordination Authority initiated online platform key stakeholders meet discuss issues related corridor trade facilitation. Meetings bring stakeholders member States Authority, aim sharing experiences, challenges opportunities. platform real-time updates events member State, transit transport nodes corridor, including ports, weighbridges, border crossing points, inland container depots truck transit parking yards. East African Community putting place surveillance tracker, contribute dealing pandemic ( http://www.ttcanc.org/news.phpnewsid=117). initiative, pilot testing, provide platform exchange information real time tests drivers crew transit movements drivers trucks. support tracking tracing drivers contacts. Advocacy mutual recognition COVID-19 testing certificates member States East African Community efforts establish testing centres points origin cargo locations northern corridor. Conclusion Member States Northern Corridor Transit Transport Coordination Authority ratified protocols strategic responses, national international levels, aimed enhancing safe trade region. , detailed assessment regional vulnerability, national transboundary disaster mitigation measures put place. Member States adopt harmonized disaster response mechanism safeguard transport corridor; share intelligence early-warning systems; conduct capacity-building personnel involved transport logistics chain; embed disaster responses national regional policies affect trade, transport related infrastructure. . EXPERIENCE OF AN AUTHORITY MANAGING AN INTERNATIONAL MARITIME PASSAGE: PANAMA CANAL AUTHORITY stage pandemic 25 March 2020, Government Panama declared full quarantine lockdown country. time, Panama Canal Authority identified 3,700 employees critical minimum maintain safe continuous operations waterway efficient services clients. Physical distancing enforced protect - employees, technology played key role enabling critical administrative personnel telecommute. Systems adapted remote access, secure stable manner. positive aspect Panama Canal , operations relied heavily culture safety , protocols place handle infectious diseases, Regulation Sanitation Prevention Communicable Diseases, updated 2016, noted diseases required period quarantine procedures handle crews, passengers vessels conditions. regulation basis initial approach Panama Canal Authority dealing pandemic, established procedures follow prior arrival vessel general requirements arrival, protocols inspections health measures included procedures designed infectious diseases. challenge transit operations regard COVID-19 pandemic, Regulation Sanitation Prevention Communicable Diseases applied notice cruise ship Zaandam, owned Holland America Line, Panama, carrying number passengers crew fallen ill. vessel denied entry ports needed transit Panama Canal order proceed Port Everglades, United States. transit operation led Ministry Health Panama, issues recommendations http://www.ttcanc.org/news.phpnewsid=117 110 4. THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 PANDEMIC: LESSONS LEARNED FROM FIRST-HAND EXPERIENCES 110 vessels transit based health conditions. key aspect operation constant communications parties concerned, , Ministry Health, captain vessel, local agent head office Holland America Line offices Panama Canal Authority, including port captain, marine traffic control, market analysis customer relations. Holland America Line vessel, Rotterdam, , coordination Ministry Health, COVID-19 tests administered crew passengers Zaandam; tested negative transferred Rotterdam, oxygen tanks medical supplies moved Zaandam. transfer executed protocols agreed Ministry Health, Panama Canal Authority Holland America Line. transit vessels approved humanitarian reasons. Panama Canal Authority personnel boarded vessels sanitation disinfection areas access. wore full personal protective equipment, supervision Ministry Health. transit vessels successfully completed 29 March 2020. experience raised standards handling similar situations future. Internal protection increasing number cases Panama, main concern administration - workforce Panama Canal Authority. lockdown period, procedures put place reduce exposure essential personnel. Working periods changed 12-hour shifts, consecutive days, reduce contagion secure physical distancing, Authority reserved hotel rooms personnel lived distance working stations, ensure safety availability. Private transportation , order maintain group Panama Canal Authority personnel close contacts. time, vessel arrivals high putting place measures key ensuring safety availability workforce, maintaining efficient seamless operations clients. normal operations resumed 2020, offices cleaned disinfected, recommendations World Health Organization Ministry Health Panama. administration established centre crisis management official point contact consultations regard pandemic; section health, - occupational safety handles questions related health safety equipment installations. administration issued protocol industrial hygiene occupational health, protocol cleaning ensuring safety equipment installations protocol administering COVID-19 tests. part plan safe return work, employees tested return working stations. Employees telecommute allowed , September 2020, remained number Panama Canal Authority teams telecommuting. Impact traffic impact COVID-19 pandemic Panama Canal experienced March 2020, cruise ship season cut short. impact regard commercial cargo experienced . period April–June 2020, 2,707 transits Panama Canal registered, compared 3,013 transits 2019, difference 10.2 cent. Passenger vessels, vehicle carriers, refrigerated containers, tankers liquefied natural gas carriers affected ( table 4.2). Panama Canal Authority, annual traffic projections container ships, takes account blank sailings season generally takes place February. January–June 2020, canal registered 51 blank sailings linked pandemic included canal forecasts. regard container traffic, represented decline 3 cent April–June 2020, compared period 2019. Vehicle carriers significantly impacted pandemic car manufactures Asia shut demand United States soared. Similar patterns observed refrigerated products demand oil oil products significantly reduced lockdown measures consequent declines electricity generation. traffic liquefied natural gas carriers affected oversupplied market, pandemic exacerbated situation. note, period April–June 2020, traffic locks Neo-Panamax ships continued 111REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 111REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 increase slightly, traffic locks Panamax ships decreased compared traffic period April–June 2019. reduction 10 cent transits significant impact operations canal crew continued work usual, adjustments schedules provisions private transportation shelter due extended lengths shifts. reduction transits helped canal recover water levels operations. drought start 2020, rain levels historical averages, led Panama Canal Authority institute water conservation measures. traffic slowed , water usage declined, transits favourable water availability purposes short term, Authority worked implementing solutions long term. Panama Canal fiscal year runs 1 October 30 September. expected quarter, July–September, behave similarly quarter 2019. , traffic fiscal year strong, time writing, performance full fiscal year 2020 expected positive. Lessons learned Panama Canal Authority maintained regular communications customers date situation Panama diverse channels send information employees regard operational administrative matters, share methods tips preventing community transmission provide psychological support. Innovation contributed maintenance operations upkeep morale. involved, , sharing physical exercise routines virtual concerts social media, development number applications, including travel application helped Authority track employees internal transport system. pandemic predictable. procedures measures constantly reviewed improvement strong humane leadership order difficult timely decisions limited information. Collaboration solidarity Authority proven helpful decision-making processes, bringing support experiences benchmarks. Shared information experiences key port authorities shipping companies communications technology played key role. Panama Canal Authority resilient personnel, adapted normal quickly, including safety protocols, challenges related telecommuting , , uncertainty. important lesson learned date subject constant ongoing improvement. fluid situation requires frequent adjustments. Source: Panama Canal Authority. Table 4.2 Number oceangoing vessel transits Panama Canal Vessel type April–June 2019 April–June 2020 Percentage change Container 629 611 -2.9 Dry bulk 643 630 -2.0 Roll-, roll- vehicle carrier 217 111 -48.8 Tanker / chemical tanker 699 549 -21.5 Liquefied petroleum gas carrier 281 341 21.4 Liquefied natural gas carrier 95 89 -6.3 Refrigerated containers 163 126 -22.7 Passenger 35 6 -82.9 General cargo 163 160 -1.8 88 84 -4.5 Total 3 013 2 707 -10.2 112 4. THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 PANDEMIC: LESSONS LEARNED FROM FIRST-HAND EXPERIENCES 112 . EXPERIENCE OF PORT AUTHORITY: PORT AUTHORITY OF VALENCIA operation ports vital importance dealing COVID-19 crisis, helps ensure essential goods food, medical supplies fuel, raw materials manufactured goods, continue reach intended destinations. section details experience port authority handling crisis early measures applied. Port Authority Valencia public body responsible management State-owned ports eastern Spain, , Valencia, Sagunto Gandí. minimize impact COVID-19 pandemic, Port Authority Valencia applied set measures regard internal activity ports connection activity entire logistics chain. measures comprised fundamental aspects, , operational, sanitary, economic social. Operations Port Authority Valencia distinguished internal external operations. ensure continuous internal operations ports managed Authority, contingency plan developed involving progressive levels emergency. Essential -essential jobs clarified roles continuity port operations. -essential workers progressively transferred telecommuting, 200 employees telecommuting national state alarm declared Spain. information technology department prepared protocol ensure broader, secure access digital resources Authority. Electronic data interchanges port community system enhanced ensure information management operating procedures ( https://www.valenciaportpcs./en/). Essential workers expected comply strict measures personal protective equipment protocols interacting employees parties conducting duties ports. frequency disinfection working areas maintained. regard terminal operations, similar recommendations regard port services, including personal protective equipment; maintaining physical distancing working environment, including board vessels; disinfecting working spaces; ensuring vulnerable employees remain home. Pilots protocols regard access vessels requirements board ensure protection infection. Stevedores encouraged form stable groups members limit community transmission. Port services considered essential services; companies permitted continue operations national regulations accordance national state alarm. Port personnel considered essential workers permitted participate daily operations. period state alarm, ports managed Port Authority Valencia remained fully operational. adapted measures caused reduction productivity weeks, procedures protocols adjusted . Port services recovered ground, productivity reaching maximum levels recorded pandemic. measures coordinated Ports State, State-owned company responsible management State-owned ports Spain. Sanitation Port Authority Valencia applied rules recommendations established Ministry Health defining protocols internal external operations. key recommendation related personal protective equipment, maintenance physical distancing disinfection installations, establishment protocols interactions personnel. Economy regard economic impact pandemic, Port Authority Valencia support ports facilitating €10 million ($11.24 million) urgent compensatory measure mitigate impact. support implemented, March 2020, Authority streamlined payment €7.33 million ( $8.24 million) provide liquidity 250 suppliers service providers working ports managed Authority. Authority anticipates total advance payments suppliers 2020 amount €51 million ( https://www.valenciaportpcs./en/ 113REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 113REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 $57.3 million). objective provide weekly payments national state alarm period, minimize treasury-related difficulties suppliers facing. measure required Authority establish internal mechanisms process invoices quickly . Authority port clients advance €2.64 million ( $2.97 million) rebates ( , discounts port taxes) pending 2019, order reduce impact port taxes customers port operators. Social Port Authority Valencia set solidarity campaign titled Al pie del cañ, initiative launched declaration national state alarm, sought shed light important work carried port personnel guarantee supply goods smooth functioning supply chains pandemic. campaign resulted sharing 100 videos people transport logistics chain, Spain worldwide, wished explain work send messages encouragement solidarity.24 Conclusion early determine full impact pandemic trade economy; returning normal time normality differ expected pandemic. Port Authority Valencia witnessed declines traffic lockdown measures instituted worldwide; January– 2020, total accumulated traffic volume ports managed Authority dropped 7.92 cent, compared period 2019. regard operational matters, pandemic impact port operations carried , regard passenger ships cruise liners. Sanitary measures continue applied, border control procedures. processes shape port infrastructure operations coming years. Resilience relevant concept regard supply chain management development business continuity plans critical, prepare future disruption events pandemics due climate change-related factors. Digitalization driving force sustainability business pandemic. integration port community systems supply chains development pursue future, foster resilience innovation based technologies, key element competitiveness environment traffic scarcity. Ports aware trade patterns emerge prepare infrastructure operations . regard, Authority launched strategy considers order prepared normal centred digital, innovative, responsible, resilient carbon neutral port world. regard contributions achieving Sustainable Development Goals, crisis provide opportunity achieve sustainable inclusive development. . EXPERIENCE OF GLOBAL SHIPPING COMPANY: MEDITERRANEAN SHIPPING COMPANY spread COVID-19 unprecedented global health issue, triggered unexpected shocks societies economies. Mediterranean Shipping Company continued implement health protection measures mitigate risk crew employees worldwide curb spread virus. Company enacted established business continuity plans switched telecommuting office-based employees countries, helped limit disruptions global supply chains. Speed reaction biggest lessons 2020 importance acting quickly conviction. reports outbreak received January 2020, Mediterranean 24 Chair Authority stated : “ weeks experiencing major crisis brought mind elements reflection… change scale values professions update values. Solidarity play fundamental role days. crisis brought job losses dramatic situations families. Solidarity vital.” President Authority highlighted “ logistics sector lived expected , responded contributing , bringing goods, arranging citizens” conveyed message optimism stating “ worth thinking lived experiences plan future”. 114 4. THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 PANDEMIC: LESSONS LEARNED FROM FIRST-HAND EXPERIENCES 114 Shipping Company immediately implemented robust health protection measures ships, infrastructure offices, line guidance World Health Organization compliance recommendations national authorities. Company swift implement global ban business travel cancel visits headquarters colleagues, customers suppliers -January 2020. Telecommuting instruction headquarters, international meetings held videoconferencing instruction remained place . start pandemic, Mediterranean Shipping Company record number staff working agile technology , instances, telecommuting. began January offices China, extended headquarters Geneva locations worldwide. Shifting telecommuting part established business continuity plans, experience demonstrated, extent, processes worked. , form staff deployment resulted experiences implementing company plans. understanding videoconferencing. , crisis triggered advancement skills knowledge regard videoconferencing efficient online workspaces. Guidance care ’ health, keeping productivity levels, regularly shared company agencies. addition, global intranet disseminate information news pandemic. Mediterranean Shipping Company aims emerge pandemic heightened internal awareness benefits digital tools , result, greater resilience business continuity shocks future. Operational flexibility Implementing existing business continuity plans ensured operations customer service continue, company staff avoided travel practiced confinement physical distancing. China, , Mediterranean Shipping Company maintained operations shifting functions offices relying support shared services centres regions, part plan determined pandemic. Preserving close contacts relationships customers essential. challenge maintaining contact customers face--face meetings easily overcome, customers situation terms telecommuting. addition, Company worked continuously adapt contingency plans regularly advise customers online booking platform myMSC manage , relying internal information sharing system collect data 155 countries. Digitalization slow adopted container shipping. significant begun place documentation booking processes, incorporation electronic business tools online connectivity equipment. case investing digital platforms processes clearer compelling, availability funds investments affected short term impact pandemic trade. Essential workers addition maintaining services support cargo flows, supporting employees easily telecommute challenge. Seafarers groups workers significantly affected pandemic, due border closures restrictions movement, led long shifts sea. measures introduced height crisis countries, ships Mediterranean Shipping Company fleet 550 vessels equipped personal protective equipment. addition, company policies restricted crew ashore ports. significant impact seafarers restrictions Governments limited crew ships ports worldwide. regard, Company extended contracts container shipping crew social financial support relevant cases mitigate challenges crew sea facilitate crew support seafarers families. Governments steps designate seafarers key workers, line request IMO, positive difference situation ( http:// www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Coronavirus.aspx). company founded ship captain, Company places high contribution seafarers business aims ensure key role seafarers economy contribution - functioning societies understood. similar label importance expression gratitude directed, policymakers general public, employees port terminal http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Coronavirus.aspx http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Coronavirus.aspx 115REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 115REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 depots warehouses, drivers trucks, trains barges carrying containers, continued work pandemic permitted national rules. Adapting services ensure minimum level disruption customers, Mediterranean Shipping Company adapted shipping services networks companies ship goods easily. sudden slowdown trade resulted reductions capacities container shipping networks order match level demand cargo shipments. , subsequent rebounds trade flows easing lockdown measures underscored importance flexible network management. 2020, Company helped shippers short-sea shipping networks, Europe , reliable alternative road transport. helped mitigate delays border crossing points land due restrictions movement. Company introduced suspension transit programme container shipping dedicated trans-shipment hubs, : Bremerhaven, Germany; PSA Panama International Terminal; Port Busan, Republic Korea; King Abdullah Port, Saudi Arabia; Port Lomé, Togo; Asyaport, Tekirdağ, Turkey. programme flexibility substantial cost savings enabled shippers control storage costs point booking, allowing adapt delivery date . helped minimize congestion ports discharge improve efficiency, products closer distribution networks. lessons learned crisis innovate provision services storage solutions, employing solutions incidents, reintroducing discontinued service enable partial recovery cargo volumes route. Keeping world moving difficult operating conditions pandemic, Mediterranean Shipping Company, major shipping logistics services provider, contributed ensuring high priority transport essential goods food, agricultural products, raw materials medical equipment. Container shipping lines customers crucial role global economy enabling -functioning societies. future, Company aims strengthen business continuity planning technology processes related telecommuting digitalization, raise awareness essential role personnel container supply chains, sea, blood flowing arteries global economy. REFERENCES Bullock , Mason , Broderick Larkin (2020). Shipping Paris climate agreement: focus committed emissions. BMC Energy. 2:5. IMO (2020). Reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships: Fourth IMO greenhouse gas study 2020 – Final report. MEPC 75/7/15. London. 29 July. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 5This chapter summary important international legal regulatory issues, related technological developments period review, presents policy considerations. issues worth highlighting implement IMO resolution MSC.428(98) 16 June 2017 maritime cyberrisk management safety management systems, encourages Administrations ensure cyberrisks shipping appropriately addressed safety management systems, effective 1 January 2021. , preparation implementation – inspection international safety management auditors 1 January 2021 2020 – shipping companies assess risk exposure develop information technology policies include safety management systems, order mitigate increasing cyberthreats. Owners fail risk ships detained port State control authorities. Strengthening cybersecurity increase importance, cyberrisks grown, greater reliance virtual interaction result ongoing COVID-19 crisis. addition, work progressing respect development, testing operation maritime autonomous surface ships, market growing. Industry collaboration autonomous drones continuing, including regard inspections commercial drone delivery vessels anchored port. electronic trade documentation increased importance, context COVID-19 pandemic, international organizations industry bodies issued calls Governments remove restrictions processing electronic trade documents, , ease requirements documentation presented hard copy. important regulatory developments relate reduction greenhouse gas emissions international shipping ship-source pollution control environmental protection measures. Issues covered include shipping climate change mitigation adaptation; air pollution, sulphur emissions; ballast water management; biofouling; pollution plastics microplastics; safety considerations fuel blends alternative marine fuels; conservation sustainable marine biodiversity areas national jurisdiction. addition, important development covered chapter includes decision European Commission extend liner shipping Consortia Block Exemption Regulation25 25 April 2024. 25 Commission Regulation (EC) 906/2009 28 September 2009 application article 81(3) Treaty categories agreements, decisions concerted practices liner shipping companies (consortia). PAGE INFOGRAPHIE CHAPITRE 5 119REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 . TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND EMERGING ISSUES IN THE MARITIME INDUSTRY 1. Ensuring maritime cybersecurity Ship cybersecurity Ships integrated information technology networks. , communication operational processes digitalized, smart navigation advanced analytics optimize ship operations reduce fuel consumption greenhouse gas emissions. line trends, implementing strengthening cybersecurity measures priority shipowners managers. 2019, cyberincidents rated top risks maritime shipping sector, major industry survey (Allianz, 2019). cyberrisks major concern, COVID-19 crisis compounded existing problems impetus action. importance cybersecurity expected grow , increasing reliance virtual interactions result pandemic, related rise cyberthreats vulnerabilities. Digital Container Shipping Association – consortium container lines26 – published cybersecurity implementation guide ensure vessel preparedness relevant IMO regulations, outlining practices provide shipping companies common language manageable, task- based approach meeting IMO implementation deadline January 2021 (Digital Container Shipping Association, 2020a). guide line BIMCO National Institute Standards Technology cyberrisk management framework guidelines, enabling shipowners effectively incorporate cyberrisk management existing safety management systems. guide aims provide management framework reduce risk cyberincidents affect safety security vessels, crews cargo. breaks BIMCO framework themes maps controls underpin functional elements Institute: identify, protect, detect, respond, recover (Digital Container Shipping Association, 2020b). January 2020, cybersecurity management system – Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha Group – certified industry classification society Nippon Kaiji Kyokai, commonly ClassNK, compliant latest IMO guidelines (Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha Line, 2019). 26 Maersk Line, CMA CGM, Hapag-Lloyd, Mediterranean Shipping Company, Ocean Network Express, Evergreen Line, HMM, Marine Transport Corporation Zim Integrated Shipping Services, covering 70 cent world trade. consortium launched November 2018. relevant IMO instruments, - mentioned IMO resolution maritime cyberrisk management safety management systems affirms approved safety management system account cyberrisk management accordance objectives functional requirements International Safety Management Code27 encourages Administrations ensure cyberrisks appropriately addressed safety management systems annual verification company’ document compliance 1 January 2021 (IMO, 2017a). International Safety Management Code, force 1 July 1998, important ensure vessels cyberresilient report identified cyberrisk, underreporting cybersecurity incidents considered problem maritime industry (Safety4Sea, 2019a). issues identified board ships vulnerable cyberattacks, including unsecure networks software, lack seafarer training insufficient protection data. Shipping companies issues include cyberrisk safety management systems, deal approach cyberincident. require time, work completed inspection International Safety Management auditors 1 January 2021. Owners fail comply risk ships detained port- State control authorities aim enforce requirement uniform equitable manner. time, implementing cybersecurity important protect shipping assets technology mounting cyberthreats, cyberrisks expected grow, greater reliance virtual interaction result ongoing COVID-19 crisis. Cybersecurity covered International Ship Port Facility Security Code, force 1 July 2004 ( BIMCO al., 2018 related guidance). , set part , section 8.4 Code, ship security assessment include, inter alia, “2. identification evaluation key ship board operations important protect; 3. identification threats key ship board operations likelihood occurrence, order establish prioritize security measures; 4. identification weakness, including human factors infrastructure, policies procedures”. 27 main purpose International Safety Management Code provide international standard safe management operation ships pollution prevention. establishes safety management objectives requires safety management system established " Company", defined shipowner person, manager bareboat charterer, assumed responsibility operating ship. company required establish implement policy achieving objectives (www.imo.org/en/OurWork/HumanElement/ SafetyManagement/Pages/ISMCode.aspx). http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/HumanElement/SafetyManagement/Pages/ISMCode.aspx http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/HumanElement/SafetyManagement/Pages/ISMCode.aspx 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 120 Part , section 8.3 Code states ship security assessment address, , elements board ship: “5. radio telecommunications systems, including computer systems networks, 6. areas , damaged illicit observation, pose risk persons, property operations board ship port facility”. regard cyberrisks, IMO Assembly early 2017 adopted strategic plan recognized integrate advancing technologies regulatory framework shipping (IMO, 2017b). addition, support effective cyberrisk management, IMO committees, Maritime Safety Committee Facilitation Committee, adopted guidelines provide high-level recommendations safeguard shipping current emerging cyberthreats vulnerabilities. recommendations incorporated existing risk management processes complementary safety security management practices established IMO ( , International Safety Management Code International Ship Port Facility Security Code) (IMO, 2017c). guidelines present functional elements: identify, protect, detect, respond recover.28 guidance, standards regulations, adopted international, regional national levels, . European Union Network Information Security Directive (EU) 2016/1148 requires Member States protect critical national infrastructure implementing cybersecurity legislation 2018 (European Union, 2016). Inter alia, Directive chapter 2 lays obligations Member States adopt national strategy security network information systems; creates cooperation group support facilitate strategic cooperation exchange information Member States; establishes computer security incident response teams network; sets security notification requirements operators essential services digital service providers; spells obligations Member States designate national competent authorities, single points contact computer security incident response teams. Directive covers organizations vital sectors rely heavily information networks referred “operators essential services”, including energy, transport, utilities, banking finance, digital services health care. noted preambular paragraph 10, water transport sector, security requirements companies, ships, port facilities, ports vessel traffic services European Union legal acts cover operations, including radio 28 information platform aimed helping shipowners operators understand vulnerabilities improve cybersecurity processes systems IMO deadline, Safety4Sea, 2020a. telecommunication systems, computer systems networks. International standard 27001:2013 International Organization Standardization International Electrotechnical Commission, commonly ISO/IEC 27001:2013, specifies requirements setting , implementing, maintaining continually improving information security management system context organization (International Organization Standardization, 2013). includes requirements assessment treatment information security risks tailored organization. requirements generic intended applicable organizations, type, size nature. Framework Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity United States National Institute Standards Technology prepared assist companies risk assessments helping understand, manage express potential cyberrisks internally externally (National Institute Standards Technology, 2018). Code Practice Cybersecurity Ships United Kingdom drawn companies develop cybersecurity assessments plans, mitigation measures, manage security breaches; ship security standards relevant IMO regulations (Institution Engineering Technology, 2017). Guidelines Cybersecurity Board Ships offer guidance shipowners operators procedures actions maintain security cybersystems company board ships (BIMCO al., 2018).29 IMO guidelines United States National Institute Standards Technology framework account. guidance specifies, , company plans procedures cyberrisk management incorporated existing security safety risk management requirements contained International Safety Management Code International Ship Port Facility Security Code. Asia-Pacific region, instance, countries developed cybersecurity legislation policy, elements applicable industry areas; set relevant implementing bodies entities national regional levels. , sector-specific guidance initiatives tailored business , provision methods address unique risks specific operations sectors, including maritime sector, limited region (BSA/ Software Alliance, 2015; North Atlantic Treaty Organization Cooperative Cyberdefence Centre Excellence, 2019). national level, instance, China Classification Society July 2017 issued guidelines requirements security assessments ship cybersystems, offering 29 additional industry guidelines, Safety4Sea, 2018. 121REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 solutions increasingly threat ship cybersecurity (China Classification Society, 2017). February 2020, Republic Korea released guidelines based international standards type approval maritime cybersecurity inspect cybersecurity level functioning cybersystems, including remote access equipment, integrated control monitoring systems board ships (Safety4Sea 2020a). Port cybersecurity Ports important supply chains moving economies world functioning. “smart”, relying technologies digitalization competitive optimize operations, ports facing increased cybersecurity challenges threats. report port cybersecurity identifies good practices terminal operators officials responsible cybersecurity implementation port authorities (European Union Agency Cybersecurity, 2019): • Define clear governance cybersecurity port level, involving stakeholders involved port operations. • Raise awareness cybersecurity matters port level foster cybersecurity culture. • Enforce technical cybersecurity basics network segregation, updates management, password hardening segregation rights. • security design applications, ports systems, opened parties data exchange. vulnerability systems gateway compromising port systems. • Enforce detection response capabilities port level react quickly cyberattack affects port operation, safety security ( www.sauronproject.eu/). Prompted Ryuk ransomware attack enterprise environments December 201930 (National Cybersecurity Centre, 2019; United States Coast Guard, 2019a) concerns maritime network vulnerable cybercrime (Riviera, 2019; United States Coast Guard, 2019b), United States Coast Guard issued guidelines dealing cyberrisks Maritime Transportation Security Act regulated facilities (United States Coast Guard, 2020). guidelines, regulated facilities assess document risks computer systems networks facility security assessment address facility security plan alternative security programme. , owners operators demonstrate compliance. time owners operators facilities tackle cybersecurity vulnerabilities, initial 30 Encryption block access systems, devices files ransom paid. implementation period 1.5 years update facility security assessment alternative security programme 30 September 2021. Similarly, Department Transport United Kingdom updated 2016 cybersecurity guidance ports wider maritime industry cyberthreats. guidance aims ports develop cybersecurity assessments identify gaps security, providing advice handling security breaches incidents defining clear roles responsibilities deal cyberattacks (Institution Engineering Technology, 2020). COVID maritime cybersecurity Maritime digitalization ongoing trend time board ships ashore. COVID-19 outbreak heightened digitalization brought maritime industry stakeholders closer collaborative digital technologies. include video conferencing online platforms, sharing remote monitoring data ensure supply chains continue function (Riviera, 2020a; Riviera, 2020b). time, reports increase shipping cyberattacks 400 cent February June 2020 (Splash, 2020a). cybersecurity systems provider Naval Dome, ability companies sufficiently protect reduced travel restrictions, social distancing measures economic recession. , primary reason spike increase malware, ransomware phishing emails exploiting COVID-19 crisis (Marine Link, 2020). regard ports, instance, COVID-19 crisis demonstrated port communities digitalized business processes developed smart ports, lagging , relying heavily personal interaction paper-based transactions norm, shipboard-, ship–port interface- port–hinterland-based exchanges. highlighted port industry policy statement, 49 174 IMO Member States functioning port community systems (International Association Ports Harbours al., 2020a). circumstances, main shipping port industry organizations launched call action accelerate digitalization maritime trade logistics.31 set priorities: • Assess state implementation find ways enforce mandatory requirements defined 31 BIMCO, Federation National Associations Ship Brokers Agents, International Association Ports Harbours, International Cargo Handling Coordination Association, International Chamber Shipping, International Harbour Masters Association, International Marine Purchasing Association, International Port Community Systems Association, International Ship Suppliers Services Association, Protect Group. http://www.sauronproject.eu/ 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 122 IMO Convention Facilitation International Maritime Traffic, 1965 support transmission, receipt response information required arrival, stay departure ships, persons cargo, including notifications declarations customs, immigration, port security authorities, electronic data exchange. • Ensure harmonization data standards aforementioned Convention facilitate sharing port berth-related master data --time operation ships optimum resource deployment vessel services suppliers, logistics providers, cargo handling clearance, saving energy, improving safety cutting costs emissions. achieved supply-chain standards International Organization Standardization, standards International Hydrographic Organization IMO Compendium Facilitation Electronic Business. • Strive introduction port community systems (www.ipcsa.international/) secure data exchange platforms main ports Member States represented IMO. • Review existing IMO guidance maritime cyberrisk management regard ability address cyberrisks ports, developing additional guidance needed. • Raise awareness, avoid misconceptions promote practices standardization port communities apply emerging Internet technologies automation; facilitate implementation emerging technologies innovative tools increase health security port environments; develop framework road map facilitate implementation operationalization digital port platforms connect hinterland supply chains , data securely shared. • Establish coalition stakeholders improve transparency supply chain collaboration standardization, starting overdue introduction electronic bill lading. • Set capacity-building framework support smaller, developed understaffed port communities, providing technical facilities training personnel (International Association Ports Harbours al., 2020a).32 32 information list maritime technology initiatives industry deal disruption caused pandemic, https://thetius. /maritime-technology-initiatives-supporting--industry- covid-19-response. International Association Ports Harbours al., 2020b. digitalization cyberrisks vulnerabilities growing ongoing COVID-19 crisis aftermath, related capacity-building required developing countries. general note, developing world large, lack reliable affordable Internet services widespread digital divide continue major concern, effectively addressed ( Economic Commission Asia Pacific, 2019). 2. Technological developments shipping Autonomous ships, navigation systems drones Work advancing development maritime autonomous surface ships, drones navigation systems ( UNCTAD, 2018; UNCTAD, 2019a). 2019, announced Mayflower autonomous ship33 attempting world’ unmanned transatlantic crossing Plymouth, United Kingdom, Plymouth, Massachusetts, United States 2020. symbolic voyage, Mayflower set sail 400 years historic voyage, time artificial intelligence advanced technologies, providing safer navigation hazard avoidance (Safety4Sea, 2019b). full-size, fully autonomous research ship launched 16 September 2020 journey spend months gathering data state ocean (BBC News, 2020). report technology innovation consultancy Thetius, market maritime autonomous surface ships worth $1.1 billion annually grow 7 cent year $1.5 billion 2025. addition, 96 cent 3,000 patents relating autonomous shipping technology worldwide registered China. report, lead nations develop implement autonomous shipping years (Thetius, 2020). report include COVID-19-related considerations, . Global navigation satellite systems, safe navigation ships, automatic identification system signals satellites, tracking ships world, considered critical improve safety ship navigation reliability data vessel tracking analytics, including insurance purposes ( chapter 3A). , safety systems compromised jamming, spoofing hacking, evidenced incidents, dangerous lead grounding collisions. 33 Partners project International Business Machines, Promare University Plymouth, United Kingdom. http://www.ipcsa.international/ 123REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Automatic identification system tracking ships occasionally disrupted, vessels switch devices enter zones legally prohibited performing fishing illegal activities. , important strengthen global navigation satellite systems automatic identification system communications, satellites. instance, European Space Agency started developing solution mitigate risks services area (Digital Ship, 2020). Industry collaboration continuing respect drones , including instance, launching Singapore ship--shore pilot project Wilhelmsen Airbus, worked deploy drone technology real-time port conditions, delivering variety small, time-critical items vessels anchored port (Splash, 2019), commercial drone delivery vessels. Drone deliveries save costs, time carbon-dioxide emissions compared traditional shipping reduced unnecessary human contact pandemic. drones project deliver maximum 5 kg loads 5 km, company planning complete development drone carry 100 kg loads 100 km, 2021 (Splash, 2020b). addition, June 2020, industry- inspection autonomous drone, oil tank floating production, storage offloading vessel, completed. drone light detection ranging navigate tank, reception satellite signals accurate positioning unavailable enclosed space, -dimensional map tank created. technology matures, drones expected navigate autonomously (Riviera, 2020c). regard regulatory issues intergovernmental meetings related technology shipping, IMO Subcommittee Navigation, Communications Search Rescue met January 2020. discussed advances modernizing Global Maritime Distress Safety System – regulations chapter IV International Convention Safety Life Sea, 1974, , performance standards navigational communication equipment. Interested parties invited give progress report updates document entitled “-navigation strategy implementation plan: Update 1” (MSC.1/Circ.1595). Subcommittee reviewed issues related long-range identification tracking system testing operating maritime autonomous surface ships. Subcommittee’ recommendations reviewed Maritime Safety Committee meeting. Committee scheduled meet 2020, meeting postponed COVID-19 crisis (IMO, 2020a). Regulatory issues related maritime autonomous surface ships agendas IMO Legal Committee (scheduled March 2020) IMO Facilitation Committee (scheduled April 2020); meetings postponed.34 Paperless bills lading Negotiable bills lading carriage goods sea, containerized transport, carries world’ manufactured cargo. commodities trade cost, insurance freight terms (commonly CIF). Bills lading physically presented carrier obtain delivery, due documentary security function key role document title international trade ( Gaskell al., 2000; UNCTAD, 2003). reasons, numerous attempts decades, commercially viable electronic equivalents begun emerge (UNCTAD 2003). International Group Protection Indemnity Clubs indemnity insurance 90 cent world’ ocean- tonnage (International Group Protection Indemnity Clubs, 2020). Group recognized electronic bill--lading systems providers date (United Kingdom Protection Indemnity Club, 2017; United Kingdom Protection Indemnity Club, 2020a; United Kingdom Protection Indemnity Club, 2020b). background, light increased virtual interactions resulting ongoing COVID-19 crisis, developments efforts enable promote paperless bill lading solutions, including , worth noting. Digital Container Shipping Association announced plans promote initiative enable open collaboration achieving full electronic bill lading adoption, based belief electronic bill lading beneficial parties container shipping (JOC, 2019). part initiative, Association aims develop open-source standards legal terms conditions, definitions terminology facilitate communication customers, container carriers, regulators, financial institutions industry stakeholders. view, carriers reduce costs inefficiencies manual creation paper documents. successful, ports regulatory agencies benefit access digital data electronic bills lading, irregular shipping patterns easier identify. research Association, paper bill processing costs times electronic 34 IMO set remote meeting plan September–December 2020 (https://imo-newsroom.prgloo./news/imo-sets-remote- meeting-plan--september-december-2020). https://imo-newsroom.prgloo./news/imo-sets-remote-meeting-plan--september-december-2020 https://imo-newsroom.prgloo./news/imo-sets-remote-meeting-plan--september-december-2020 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 124 bill lading processing, determined extra $4 billion annually collective processing costs, 50 cent adoption rate container shipping industry. regard success electronic air waybills airfreight introduced International Air Transport Association 2010, Association suggests 50 cent adoption rate feasible 2030 steps standardizing electronic bills lading (Digital Container Shipping Association, 2020c). ambitious worthwhile goal; , air waybills, negotiable bills lading, serve documents title providing holder independent documentary security (UNCTAD, 2003). , legal regulatory problems electronic air waybills. Progress acceptance technology government authorities, banks insurers, accelerated result COVID-19 crisis. instance, number Digital Container Shipping Association members reported sharp increase electronic bill lading adoption, effort trade moving. noted previously, International Group Protection Indemnity Clubs approved electronic bill--lading systems providers. noted Association, case negotiable bills lading, standard electronic bill lading conjunction technologies, distributed ledger technology, peer--peer technology blockchain technology, offer potential solutions eliminating risk single catastrophic failure attack compromise integrity uniqueness electronic bill lading (Digital Container Shipping Association, 2020c; JOC, 2020). , Ocean Network Express, world’ sixth largest container line ( chapter 2) latest shipping line offer fully electronic bills lading customers. liner company announced handled electronic negotiable bill lading, essDOCS’ paperless document solution, CargoDocs, systems approved International Group Protection Indemnity Clubs (https://essdocs./). Ocean Network Express electronic bill lading shipment containerized synthetic rubber Russian Federation China planning customers electronic bills lading regional subsequently global basis commencing quarter 2020 part initiatives aimed delivering improved, digital customer experience (Ocean Network Express, 2020). , India integrate electronic bills lading digital documentation country’ electronic port community system, incorporating CargoX platform blockchain document transfer infrastructure, manage secure exchange data (Smart Maritime Network, 2020). number earlier attempts create commercially viable electronic alternatives traditional paper-based bills lading shipping industry, including, Bolero35 systems, essDOCS, success ongoing initiatives remain . , COVID-19 crisis added impetus resolving long-standing legal regulatory problems. main challenge efforts develop electronic alternatives traditional paper bill lading effective replication document’ functions secure electronic environment, ensuring electronic records data messages enjoys legal recognition paper documents. negotiable bills lading, exclusive delivery goods traditionally linked physical possession original document, includes , replication, electronic environment, unique document title function (UNCTAD, 2003). concerns legal enforceability, Governments legislative provisions effect place. Establishing widespread fully electronic equivalent traditional bill lading require international cooperation coordination ensure commercial parties world readily accepting relevant electronic records, legal systems adequately prepared. addition, capacity-building required, small medium-sized enterprises developing countries lack access technology means implementation. context, , increasing cybersecurity related capacity-building matter critical strategic importance development international trade electronic environment. electronic trade documentation, including electronic bills lading equivalents, increased significantly importance COVID-19 pandemic, related physical distancing, teleworking disrupted suspended postal services affected large parts world population. matters, trade finance transactions typically require significant levels -person review processing hard-copy paper documentation. circumstances, international organizations industry bodies issued calls Governments remove restrictions processing electronic trade documents documentation presented hard copy. instance, International Chamber Commerce called Governments key actions delay: temporary measure, void legal requirements trade documentation hard copy adopt United Nations Commission International Trade Law Model Law Electronic Transferable Records (International Chamber Commerce, 2020a; United 35 www.bolero.net UNCTAD, 2003. https://essdocs./ http://www.bolero.net 125REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Nations Commission International Trade Law, 2018; UNCTAD, 2017a).36 . REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS RELATING TO INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING, CLIMATE CHANGE AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES 1. Developments auspices International Maritime Organization related reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships Maritime decarbonization reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships priority area policymakers industry achieved, , adoption energy-efficient technologies, optimization ship operations - -carbon fuels, regulation. number measures adopted areas Governments, collaboration industry, nationally internationally. IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee time addressing greenhouse gas emissions ships engaged international voyages. measures improve energy efficiency international shipping adopted chapter International Convention Prevention Pollution Ships, 1973, modified Protocol 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL), annex VI. force 1 January 2013, measures apply ships 400 gross tons engaged international voyage. key requirements mandatory: energy efficiency design index ships ship energy efficiency management plan existing ships. energy efficiency design index ships increasingly strict time. 2019, Marine Environment Protection Committee approved, adoption session (initially scheduled April 2020, postponed due COVID-19 pandemic), draft amendments MARPOL annex VI. aimed significantly strengthen phase 3 requirements index, bringing entry force date 2022, 2025, ship types, including container ships, gas carriers, general cargo ships liquefied natural gas carriers. ship energy efficiency management plan existing ships establishes mechanism improving energy efficiency ships, including 36 solutions involve electronic documents, scanned, faxed emailed images potential scenarios delivery documents COVID-19 crisis, International Chamber Commerce, 2020b. monitoring energy efficiency performance, practices technologies. instance, mandatory ships collect report ship fuel oil consumption data. 1 January 2019, flag States collect consumption data type fuel oil ships 5,000 gross tons , transferred IMO ship fuel oil consumption database. Reports analysing summarizing data collected periodically inform Marine Environment Protection Committee. Information reports benefits analysis emissions flag vessel type presented chapter 3. Review. April 2018, Marine Environment Protection Committee adopted Initial Strategy reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships (IMO, 2018a, annex 1; UNCTAD, 2019a), envisages reduction total annual greenhouse gas emissions international shipping 50 cent 2050 compared 2008, , time, pursuing efforts phasing . Candidate short-term measures, developed agreed member States 2018 2023, include technical operational energy efficiency measures existing ships, speed optimization reduction, development robust life cycle greenhouse gas carbon intensity guidelines types fuels prepare alternative -carbon -carbon fuels, port activities incentives movers. Innovative emissions-reduction mechanisms, possibly including market-based measures, incentivize greenhouse gas emission reduction – controversial issue number years – included candidate midterm measures. agreed decided 2023 2030, long-term measures undertaken 2030 ultimately lead -carbon fossil-free fuels enable potential decarbonization shipping sector century ( information, UNCTAD, 2018). October 2018, Marine Environment Protection Committee approved programme follow- actions Initial Strategy reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships 2023. planned revised strategy reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships adopted 2023. Marine Environment Protection Committee Working Group Reduction Greenhouse Gas Emissions Ships met sixth intersessional meeting November 2019 progress issues, leading achieving levels ambition set Initial Strategy ( IMO, 2019a). include : • Development draft resolution national action plans address greenhouse gas emissions 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 126 international shipping. development update relevant national action plans envisaged candidate short-term measure Initial Strategy. resolution suggests national action plans include, limited , actions: improving domestic institutional legislative arrangements effective implementation existing IMO instruments; developing activities enhance energy efficiency ships; initiating research advancing uptake alternative -carbon carbon fuels; accelerating port-emission reduction activities, consistent resolution MEPC.323(74); fostering capacity-building, awareness-raising regional cooperation; facilitating development infrastructure green shipping. Potential legal, policy institutional arrangements put place Member States elaborated accordance national circumstances priorities relevant experiences shared IMO. • Consideration concrete proposals mandatory short-term measures reduce greenhouse gas emissions existing ships. Proposals technical nature included, , energy efficiency existing ship index, require ships technical modifications, , mandatory engine power limitation, improve energy efficiency. Proposals operational approach included focusing carbon-intensity-reduction targets carbon-intensity indicators, including means strengthening ship energy efficiency management plan based regular energy audits ship. approach include measures limit optimize speeds voyages. general agreement mandatory goal-based approach technical operational approaches provide needed flexibility incentive innovation. • Assessment impacts proposals States, attention paid developing countries, developed countries small island developing States. • Consideration alternative fuels, regard measures medium long term. important encourage uptake - -carbon fuels shipping sector. establishment dedicated workstream development life cycle greenhouse gas carbon-intensity guidelines ( , wake tank propeller) relevant types alternative fuels suggested. include, , biofuels, (renewable) electro- synthetic fuels hydrogen ammonia. issue methane slip, including enhanced understanding problem, methane slip measured, monitored controlled measures considered IMO address matter, discussed relation uptake methane-based fuels liquefied natural gas (IMO, 2019a). IMO collaborative work address greenhouse gas emissions ships engaged international voyage include : • Fourth IMO greenhouse gas study. study, published August 2020, includes inventory current global emissions greenhouse gases relevant substances emitted 2012 2018, ships 100 gross tons engaged international voyages, carbon intensity, projects scenarios future international shipping emissions 2018–2050. builds IMO greenhouse gas study, issued 2014. fourth study, mentioned , share shipping emissions global anthropogenic emissions increased 2.76 cent 2012 2.89 cent 2018. voyage-based allocation international shipping, study carbon-dioxide emissions increased 701 million tons 2012 740 million tons 2018 – 5.6 cent increase – growth rate total shipping emissions. vessel-based allocation international shipping IMO greenhouse gas study, carbon-dioxide emissions grew 848 million tons 2012 919 million tonnes 2018 – 8.4 cent increase. study notes ship emissions projected rise 90 cent 2008 emissions 2018 90–130 cent 2008 emissions 2050. , work lies meet IMO strategy goal cutting greenhouse gas emissions international shipping 50 cent 2008 levels 2050. , phase greenhouse gas emissions sector , regulations encourage innovation widespread adoption cleanest, advanced technologies needed (International Council Clean Transportation, 2020). Consideration approval fourth IMO greenhouse gas study 2020 Marine Environment Protection Committee pending (IMO, 2020b). • Multi-donor trust fund reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships. fund established provide dedicated source financial support sustain IMO technical 127REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 cooperation capacity-building activities support implementation Initial Strategy. • Collaboration UNCTAD expert review impact assessments submitted Intersessional Working Group Reduction Greenhouse Gas Emissions Ships. collaborative efforts aim produce review comprehensiveness impact assessments concrete proposals improve energy efficiency existing ships submitted Working Group, account procedure assessing impacts States candidate measures set MEPC.1/Circ.885 data. United Nations Climate Action Summit, held York September 2019, business leaders local government representatives announced concrete actions address climate change (United Nations, 2019). , industry-led initiative “ Coalition”, supported UNCTAD, committed deployment viable -emissions vessels 2030 achievement goals IMO Initial Strategy (United Nations, 2019). regard European Union European Economic Area, important legal requirement worth noting. 1 January 2018, large ships 5,000 gross tons load unload cargo passengers ports European Economic Area required monitor report related carbon-dioxide emissions relevant information, conformity Regulation 2015/757, amended Delegated Regulation 2016/2071 ( https://ec.europa. eu/clima/policies/transport/shipping_en). result, 2019, ships calling ports European Economic Area report European Union regulation IMO data collection system. year, European Commission publishes report public abreast trends carbon-dioxide emissions energy efficiency information monitored fleet (European Commission, 2020a; European Commission, 2020b). 2. Developments United Nations Framework Convention Climate Change related issues Conference Parties United Nations Framework Convention Climate Change twenty- session, held Madrid, December 2019, highlighted work lies domestic international fronts regard climate action consistent goal Paris Agreement37 holding increase global average temperature 2° pre-industrial levels pursue efforts limit temperature increase 37 Ratified 188 States. https://unfccc.int/process/- paris-agreement/status--ratification. 1.5° pre-industrial levels (article 2). respect greenhouse gas emissions international shipping, Subsidiary Body Scientific Technological Advice permanent subsidiary bodies United Nations Framework Convention Climate Change. body, supports work Conference Parties providing information advice, including emissions fuel international aviation maritime transport, reach agreement postponed discussions session, held twenty-sixth session Conference Parties November 2021 (United Nations, 2020). Documents publications launched twenty- session Conference Parties assist countries efforts implement Paris Agreement include : • yearbook (United Nations Climate Change Secretariat, 2019). • online database diverse range stakeholders registered climate change mitigation / adaptation commitments, number climate action pathways, developed Marrakech Partnership Global Climate Action (United Nations Framework Convention Climate Change, 2020). • Global Climate Action portal, -State Actor Zone Climate Action, outlines transformational actions milestones key sectoral cross-cutting areas, transport resilience. launched twenty- session Conference Parties declaration climate change World Association Waterborne Transport Infrastructure, PIANC (World Association Waterborne Transport Infrastructure, 2019). declaration highlights number priority actions strengthen adaptation resilience- building. include inspection maintenance; monitoring systems effective data management; risk assessments, contingency plans warning systems. focus flexible adaptive infrastructure, systems operations, engineered redundancy improve resilience. regard climate change adaptation resilience-building seaports, transport pathway action table Marrakech Partnership Global Climate Action includes distinct action areas focus adaptation transport systems transport infrastructure, , related milestones 2020, 2030 2050 (Marrakech Partnership Global Climate Action, 2019a). Inter alia, milestones, integrated cross-sectoral resilience adaptation pathway action table, envisage , 2030, “ critical transport infrastructure assets, systems/networks components [] climate resilient ( ) 2050”; , https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/shipping_en https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/shipping_en https://unfccc.int/process/-paris-agreement/status--ratification https://unfccc.int/process/-paris-agreement/status--ratification 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 128 2050, “[]ll critical transport infrastructure assets, systems/networks components [] climate resilient ( ) 2100” (Marrakech Partnership Global Climate Action, 2019b).38 represents important timely ambition, major acceleration efforts required put relevant measures place. Climate change adaptation resilience-building increasingly important issue, perspective vulnerable developing countries forefront climate change impacts, small island developing States.39 Critical coastal transport infrastructure countries, notably ports airports, lifelines external trade, food energy security, tourism, including context disaster-risk reduction (UNCTAD, 2019b; UNCTAD United Nations Environment Programme, 2019). assets projected growing risk coastal flooding, early 2030s, effective adaptation action (Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change, 2018; Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change, 2019; Monioudi al., 2018). absence timely planning implementation requisite adaptation measures, projected impacts critical transport infrastructure broad economic trade-related repercussions severely compromise sustainable development prospects vulnerable nations (Economic Commission Europe, 2020; Pacific Community, 2019; UNCTAD, 2020a; UNCTAD 2020b;). , important knowledge gaps vulnerabilities specific nature extent exposure individual coastal transport facilities facing.40 number important issues emerged part related work UNCTAD decade. , purposes risk-assessment view developing effective adaptation measures, generation dissemination tailored data information important, targeted case studies effective multi-disciplinary multi-stakeholder collaboration. Successful adaptation strategies underpinned strong legal regulatory frameworks reduce exposure / 38 Key recommendations technical experts, key industry stakeholders international organizations participating ad hoc expert meeting entitled “Climate Change Adaptation International Transport: Preparing Future”, held UNCTAD 2019, reflected Marrakech Partnership Global Climate Action pathways transport resilience (Marrakech Partnership Global Climate Action, 2019a 2019b). https://unctad.org/ en/pages/MeetingDetails.aspxmeetingid=2092. 39 information related work UNCTAD, https://SIDSport-ClimateAdapt.unctad.org; https://unctad. org/ttl/legal; https://unctad.org/en/pages/MeetingDetails. aspxmeetingid=2354. 40 evidenced port industry surveys studies climate change impacts adaptation (Asariotis al., 2018; Panahi al., 2020). vulnerability climate-related risks coastal transport infrastructure (UNCTAD, 2020a). policies standards important role play, context infrastructure planning coastal zone management. , guidance, practices, checklists, methodologies ( , UNCTAD, 2017b) tools support adaptation urgently required, targeted capacity-building critical, vulnerable countries.41 3. Protection marine environment conservation sustainable marine biodiversity Relevant areas regulatory action protection marine environment conservation sustainable marine biodiversity, . Implementing 2020 sulphur limit International Maritime Organization Sulphur oxides harmful human health, causing respiratory symptoms lung disease. lead acid rain, harm crops, forests aquatic species, contribute ocean acidification. , limiting sulphur-oxide emissions ships helps improve air quality protect human health environment (IMO, 2020c). IMO regulation limiting sulphur content ship fuel oil 0.50 cent, 3.50 cent, entered force 1 January 2020 (UNCTAD, 2019a). designated emission control areas, limit remained , 0.10 cent.42 support consistent implementation compliance provide means effective enforcement States, port State control, IMO October 2018 adopted additional MARPOL amendment, entered force 1 March 2020. amendment prohibits , carriage -compliant fuel oil combustion purposes propulsion operation board ship, ship fitted approved equivalent method, scrubber exhaust gas cleaning system. , comprehensive set guidelines support consistent implementation 0.50 cent limit sulphur ship fuel oil related amendments Convention approved 2019 (IMO, 2019b, annex 14). 41 information relevant practices regulatory policy approaches, UNCTAD, 2020a. https://SIDSport-ClimateAdapt.unctad.org. 42 emission control areas : Baltic Sea area, North Sea area, North American area (covering designated coastal areas Canada United States) United States Caribbean Sea area ( Puerto Rico United States Virgin Islands). https://unctad.org/en/pages/MeetingDetails.aspxmeetingid=2092 https://unctad.org/en/pages/MeetingDetails.aspxmeetingid=2092 https://SIDSport-ClimateAdapt.unctad.org; https://unctad.org/ttl/legal https://SIDSport-ClimateAdapt.unctad.org; https://unctad.org/ttl/legal https://unctad.org/en/pages/MeetingDetails.aspxmeetingid=2354 https://unctad.org/en/pages/MeetingDetails.aspxmeetingid=2354 https://SIDSport-ClimateAdapt.unctad.org 129REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 support enforcement carriage ban safe consistent sampling fuel oil carried , February 2020, IMO Subcommittee Pollution Prevention Response progress preparatory work draft amendments guidelines submitted session Marine Environment Protection Committee view consideration adoption. Subcommittee finalized draft guidelines provide recommended method sampling liquid fuel oil intended carried board ship. finished revision 2015 guidelines exhaust gas cleaning systems ( scrubbers), view enhancing uniform application guidelines criteria testing, survey, certification verification systems MARPOL annex VI, ensure provide effective equivalence sulphur-oxide emission requirements regulations. addition, Subcommittee agreed recommend Marine Environment Protection Committee future work evaluation harmonization rules guidance discharge water exhaust gas cleaning systems aquatic environment, including conditions areas. background, IMO members expressed concern factors account assessing impact wash water discharge scrubbers operating ports coastal areas. suggested open- loop systems compliant 2015 guidelines produce harmful impacts coastal areas. number coastal States (China, Malaysia, Norway Singapore) announced ban open-loop exhaust gas cleaning systems coastal areas (Safety4Sea, 2019c), Egypt banned systems transiting Suez Canal (IMO, 2020d; Seatrade Maritime News, 2020). implementation sulphur regulation 1 January 2020 initially considered smooth, compliant fuel oil reported widely . , difficulties arisen result disruptions caused pandemic. March 2020, ban carriage -compliant fuel oil entered force support implementation sulphur limit. , appears enforcement port State control authorities suspended, due measures put place reduce inspections risk spreading virus (Heavy Lift, 2020). Ballast water management February 2020, IMO Subcommittee Pollution Prevention Response completed work revision guidance document testing ballast water management systems, intended validate installation demonstrating mechanical, physical, chemical biological processes working properly. guidance expected adopted Marine Environment Protection Committee session, amendment regulation -1 International Convention Control Management Ship' Ballast Water Sediments, 2004, Ballast Water Management Convention, 2004. Ballast Water Management Convention, 2004, force September 2017. 31 July 2020, ratified 84 States, representing 91.10 cent gross tonnage world’ merchant fleet. Convention aims prevent risk introduction proliferation -native species discharge untreated ballast water ships. considered greatest threats world’ oceans major threat biodiversity, , addressed, severe public health-related environmental economic impacts (UNCTAD, 2011; UNCTAD, 2015). date Convention’ entry force, ships required manage ballast water meet standards -1 -2; requires ships exchange release 95 cent ballast water volume coast; raises restriction maximum amount viable organisms allowed discharged, limiting discharge microbes harmful human health. , regulatory focus continues effective uniform implementation Convention. Biofouling Ballast Water Management Convention, 2004 aims prevent spread potentially harmful aquatic species ballast water, invasive species, marine animals, plants algae, attach ships ( , ship hulls) marine structures. biofouling. ships structures move areas, species detach , adapt habitat, overcome local fauna invasive, negative effects host ecosystem. , biofouling addressed . Biofouling negative effects – increases surface roughness ship hulls propellers, resulting speed loss constant power power increase constant speed higher fuel consumption 20 cent (Riviera, 2020d; Riviera, 2020e). Anti-fouling paints coat bottoms ships prevent sea life algae molluscs attaching hull, slowing ship increasing fuel consumption. Convention Control Harmful Anti-fouling Systems Ships, 2001 defines anti-fouling systems “ coating, paint, surface treatment, surface device ship control prevent 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 130 attachment unwanted organisms”. aims prohibit harmful organotin compounds anti-fouling paints ships establish mechanism prevent potential future harmful substances anti-fouling systems. Convention entered force 17 September 2008. 31 July 2020, 89 States parties, representing 96.09 cent gross tonnage world’ merchant fleet, ratified Convention. Annex 1 Convention states 1 January 2003, ships apply -apply organotin compounds, act biocides anti-fouling systems, 1 January 2008, ships () bear compounds hulls external parts surfaces () bear coating forms barrier compounds leaching underlying -compliant anti-fouling systems. July 2017, Marine Environment Protection Committee started work amending annex 1 Convention include controls biocide chemical compound cybutryne, scientific data cybutryne significant adverse effects environment, aquatic ecosystems. Work matter ongoing Subcommittee Pollution Prevention Response, February 2020 finalized proposed amendment Convention include controls cybutryne. draft amendment presented Marine Environment Protection Committee session approval. Subcommittee began review IMO Guidelines Control Management Ships' Biofouling Minimize Transfer Invasive Aquatic Species, Biofouling Guidelines (IMO, 2011), provide globally consistent approach management biofouling (IMO, 2020d). Marine pollution plastics microplastics Marine debris general, plastics microplastics , give rise greatest environmental concerns today, climate change, ocean acidification loss biodiversity. affect sustainable development aspirations developing States small island developing States , , custodians vast areas oceans seas, face existential threat disproportionately affected effects pollution plastics. issue marine debris, plastics microplastics oceans receiving increasing public attention topic seventeenth meeting United Nations Open-ended Informal Consultative Process Oceans Law Sea 2016 (United Nations, 2016). Sustainable Development Goal 14.1, committing prevent significantly reduce marine pollution kinds, land-based activities, including marine debris nutrient pollution 2025, relevant context. cross-cutting nature problem, plastics pollution relevant Sustainable Development Goals, including Goals 4 (education), 6 (clean water sanitation), 12 (sustainable consumption production patterns), 15 (sustainable terrestrial ecosystems). IMO implementing action plan address marine plastic litter ships, measures completed 2025, relating ships, including fishing vessels, supports IMO commitment meeting targets set Goal 14 (IMO, 2018b). seventh meeting February 2020, Subcommittee Pollution Prevention Response prepared draft Marine Environment Protection Committee circulars provision adequate facilities ports terminals reception plastic waste ships sharing results research marine litter encouraging studies understand microplastics ships. established correspondence group amend MARPOL annex 2017 guidelines implementation MARPOL annex (resolution MEPC.295(71)) facilitate enhance reporting accidental loss discharge fishing gear information reported Administrations IMO, reporting mechanisms modalities (IMO, 2020d). focus section Review developments related plastic waste ships, considerations plastics pollution arise context COVID-19 crisis. protective measures implemented priority months view controlling spread virus. include wearing surgical face masks gloves frequent disinfection hands, involve plastic. addition, threat contamination, people tend disposable single- plastic items food containers utensils, reusable . risk items litter environment, including sea beaches, countries mainstay local tourism industry. Short-term solutions address increase plastics pollution arising ongoing pandemic include imposing fines, placing labels disposable items making information littering recycling public. Public attention plastics pollution increase, COVID-19 health crisis control. , researchers suggest recycling single- plastic items, limiting food deliveries ordering grocery suppliers offer sustainable delivery packaging. addition, wearing reusable face masks, disposing single- face masks correctly buying hand sanitizer contained ecologically sustainable packaging considered ( https://earth. org/covid-19-surge--plastic-pollution/). https://earth.org/covid-19-surge--plastic-pollution/ https://earth.org/covid-19-surge--plastic-pollution/ 131REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Safety considerations fuel blends alternative marine fuels ensure compliance mandatory 0.50 cent sulphur limit fuel oil meet emission targets set IMO Initial Strategy reduction greenhouse gas emissions, fuels fuel blends developed. IMO, matters related fuels considered Maritime Safety Committee context discussions International Code Safety Ships Gases -flashpoint Fuels. Code, entered force 2017, aims minimize risk ships, crews environment, nature fuels involved. initially focused liquefied natural gas, work fuel types. preparation meeting Committee (scheduled 2020 postponed due COVID-19 crisis), Subcommittee Carriage Cargoes Containers, sixth session September 2019 action: • Finalized draft interim guidelines safety ships methyl ethyl alcohol fuel, submission Maritime Safety Committee approval. • progress developing draft interim guidelines safety ships fuel cell power installations. • Agreed develop amendments International Code Safety Ships Gases -flashpoint Fuels include safety provisions ships -flashpoint oil fuels established correspondence group continue work. • Approved principle draft amendments Code, relating specific requirements ships natural gas fuel. • Agreed develop interim guidelines safety provisions ships liquefied petroleum gas fuels. • Completed draft guidelines acceptance alternative metallic materials cryogenic service ships carrying liquefied gases bulk ships gases -flashpoint fuels, submission Maritime Safety Committee approval (IMO, 2019c). Conservation sustainable marine biodiversity areas national jurisdiction: Legally binding instrument United Nations Convention Law Sea, 1982 Areas national jurisdiction hold unique oceanographic biological features play role climate regulation.43 provide seafood, raw materials genetic medicinal resources, increasing commercial interest hold promise development drugs treat infectious diseases major threat human health – antibiotic-resistant infections potentially, coronavirus disease. perspective developing countries, access benefit sharing, conservation marine genetic resources, importance context (Premti, 2018). United Nations Convention Law Sea, 1982 sets rights obligations States oceans, resources protection marine coastal environment. , expressly refer marine biodiversity exploration exploitation resources water column areas national jurisdiction. , ongoing negotiations international legal instrument United Nations Convention Law Sea conservation sustainable marine biological diversity areas national jurisdiction worth noting. sessions intergovernmental conference issue place, , August 2019 ( UNCTAD, 2019a information discussions held). Discussions broad range issues expected continue fourth session conference, scheduled held 23 March 3 April 2020, United Nations Headquarters York, postponed due COVID-19 crisis. gap international legally binding instrument aims address establishment marine protected areas. scientific evidence, areas effective tools conserving restoring oceans resources. , current system ocean management, establish comprehensive marine protected areas parts high seas. study conducted determine areas high seas protected ecologically biologically significant (Visalli al., 2020). considered variety factors conservation features conservation prioritization tool select areas ocean include 30 percent conservation features, minimizing overlap areas heavily fished. similar studies 43 Maritime zones United Nations Convention Law Sea, 1982 include : territorial sea, extending 12 nautical miles baseline (article 3); exclusive economic zones, extending edge territorial sea 200 nautical miles baseline (article 57); continental shelf, natural prolongation land territory outer edge continental margin, 200 nautical miles baseline, greater (article 76); areas national jurisdiction, composed “ Area” (article 1) high seas (article 86). 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 132 highlighting specific areas national jurisdiction high priorities protection expected inform negotiations decision-making issues United Nations. . OTHER LEGAL AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS AFFECTING TRANSPORTATION Extension European Union Consortia Block Exemption Regulation 2024 Article 101(1) Treaty Functioning European Union prohibits agreements undertakings restrict competition. , article 101(3) treaty declaring agreements compatible internal market, contribute improving production distribution goods promoting technical economic progress, allowing consumers fair share resulting benefits. Liner shipping highly concentrated industry, 91 cent deep-sea maritime transport services controlled 10 global operators ( chapter 2, table 10 report). European Union, liner conferences allowing members fix freight rates collectively discuss market conditions banned 2008 (Council (EC) Regulation 1419/2006). , liner shipping consortia, form operational cooperation, continue enjoy block exemption European Union competition rules, set expire 25 April 2020. international nature liner shipping services experience gained earlier initiatives European Union field (Premti, 2016), impact European Union decisions Europe bearing container shipping markets developing countries European Union trading partners. September 2018, European Commission conducted evaluation Consortia Block Exemption Regulation (European Commission, 2009), included consultation stakeholders maritime liner shipping supply chain ( results, European Commission, 2019a). aim assess impact relevance regulation view general policy harmonizing competition rules important developments liner shipping industry determine left expire prolonged, , conditions. Allowing Regulation expire consortia agreements unlawful – examined general rules competition cooperation agreements sectors (European Commission, 2019b). consortia block exemption regulation adopted 1995 revised 2009; , prolonged years modification. main stakeholders participating consultation carriers apply Regulation clients (shippers freight forwarders), port operators respective associations, including developing countries affected freight rates quality frequency services resulting change European Union regulation. Industry associations representing users liner shipping services service providers expressed objection extension Regulation.44 argued evaluation criteria European Commission biased interest carriers, 30 cent market share threshold difficult monitor practice due missing data quality choice, service levels schedule reliability, decreased years, rate volatility increased (Lloyd’ Loading List, 2020) ( chapter 2). consultation, port operators expressed concerns, , limited competition individual lines offered equal service levels, pointed decrease freight rates small element total shipping costs (https://ec.europa. eu/competition/consultations/2018_consortia/index_ en.html). addition, representatives transport workers reluctant prolong Regulation, arguing shipping companies negative impact economic profitability terminals service providers. increased size ships, constant significant investments terminals required, adversely affecting working conditions job security ports. 24 March 2020, European Commission announced extension Consortia Block Exemption Regulation 25 April 2024. Commission, Regulation results efficiencies carriers vessel capacity offer connections. , efficiencies result prices quality service consumers decrease costs carriers – years, prices customers dropped approximately 30 cent (European Commission, 2020c). . STATUS OF CONVENTIONS number international conventions field maritime transport prepared adopted auspices UNCTAD. table information status ratification conventions 31 July 2020. 44 European Association Forwarding, Transport, Logistic Customs Services; European Shippers Council; Global Shippers Forum International Union Road–Rail Combined Transport. https://ec.europa.eu/competition/consultations/2018_consortia/index_en.html https://ec.europa.eu/competition/consultations/2018_consortia/index_en.html https://ec.europa.eu/competition/consultations/2018_consortia/index_en.html 133REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 . COVID-19 LEGAL AND REGULATORY CHALLENGES FOR INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING AND COLLABORATIVE ACTION IN RESPONSE TO THE CRISIS 1. Maritime health preparedness response COVID-19 pandemic Key shipping stakeholders, including international bodies Governments, issued number recommendations guidance aimed ensure, , seafarers protected coronavirus disease, medically fit access medical care ships met international sanitary requirements.45 industry partners international organizations, IMO developed issued practical advice guidance variety technical operational matters related pandemic. IMO enforcement authority , issue general exemptions delay implementation mandatory provisions relevant conventions mandatory regulations flag port States. , IMO issued number circular letters 45 list COVID-19-related communications measures IMO Member States Associate Members (updated weekly), www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/ COVID-19-Member-States-Communications.aspx. detailed list recommendations Governments international bodies, Safety4Sea, 2020b. Title convention Date entry force conditions entry force Contracting States Convention Code Conduct Liner Conferences, 1974 6 October 1983 Algeria, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Congo, Costa Rica, ôte ’Ivoire, Cuba, Czechia, Democratic Republic Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Liberia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Republic Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Sweden, Togo, Trinidad Tobago, Tunisia, United Republic Tanzania, Uruguay, Bolivarian Republic Venezuela, Zambia (76) United Nations Convention Carriage Goods Sea, 1978 1 November 1992 Albania, Austria, Barbados, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Chile, Czechia, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Gambia, Georgia, Guinea, Hungary, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Morocco, Nigeria, Paraguay, Romania, Saint Vincent Grenadines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, Uganda, United Republic Tanzania, Zambia (34) International Convention Maritime Liens Mortgages, 1993 5 September 2004 Albania, Benin, Congo, Ecuador, Estonia, Honduras, Lithuania, Monaco, Nigeria, Peru, Russian Federation, Spain, Saint Kitts Nevis, Saint Vincent Grenadines, Serbia, Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, Ukraine, Vanuatu (19) United Nations Convention International Multimodal Transport Goods, 1980 force – requires 30 contracting parties Burundi, Chile, Georgia, Lebanon, Liberia, Malawi, Mexico, Morocco, Rwanda, Senegal, Zambia (11) United Nations Convention Conditions Registration Ships, 1986 force – requires 40 contracting parties, represent- ing 25 cent world’ tonnage annex III Convention Albania, Bulgaria, ôte ’Ivoire, Egypt, Georgia, Ghana, Haiti, Hungary, Iraq, Liberia, Libya, Mexico, Morocco, Oman, Syrian Arab Republic (15) International Convention Arrest Ships, 1999 14 September 2011 Albania, Algeria, Benin, Bulgaria, Congo, Ecuador, Estonia, Latvia, Liberia, Spain, Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey (12) Table 5.1 Contracting States Parties selected international conventions maritime transport, 31 July 2020 Note: additional information, UNCTAD Trade Logistics Branch, Policy Legislation Section unctad.org/ttl/legal. official status information, United Nations Treaty Collection, https://treaties..org. http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/COVID-19-Member-States-Communications.aspx http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/COVID-19-Member-States-Communications.aspx http://unctad.org/ttl/legal https://treaties..org 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 134 addressed Member States, seafarers shipping industry stakeholders posted compilation guidance online resources international organizations maritime industry website.46 Circular letters included items: • Information impacts pandemic shipping industry, including implementation enforcement mandatory IMO requirements, call increased cooperation flag port States, pragmatic approach uncertain COVID-19 situation (Circular Letter . 4204/Add.1). • Guidance relevant stakeholders, addressing global issues relevant health seafarers, seagoing vessels offshore infrastructure establishing implementing COVID-19 protocols mitigating preventing outbreaks sea, guidance European Commission, International Chamber Shipping, IMO World Health Organization health shipping context COVID-19 (Circular Letters . 4204/Add.1–Add.4). • Recommendations Governments relevant national authorities facilitation maritime trade pandemic (Circular Letter . 4204/Add.6) ensuring integrity global supply chain pandemic (Circular Letter . 4204/Add.9). • Guidance relevant shipbuilders, equipment suppliers, shipowners, surveyors service engineers advising newbuilding bulk carriers oil tankers scheduled delivery 1 July 2020 (Circular Letter . 4204/Add.7). • European Commission guidelines protection health, repatriation travel arrangements seafarers, passengers persons board ships (Circular Letter . 4204/Add.11). • World Health Organization information guidance safe effective personal protective equipment (Circular Letters . 4204/Add.15 Add.16). 20 February 2020, European Union issued advice ship operators preparedness response outbreak COVID-19, included dedicated chapter maritime transport focus cargo ship travel (European Union, 2020a). Guidelines exercise free movement workers COVID-19 outbreak (European Commission, 2020d). Representing global shipping industry, International Chamber Shipping published guidance industry combat spread coronavirus disease. guidance offered advice 46 COVID-19-related IMO circulars www.imo. org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Coronavirus.aspx. managing port entry restrictions, practical protective measures disease seafarers, including outbreak management plan (International Chamber Shipping, 2020a). International Bunker Industry Association adopted protective measures disease. international shipping, contact ship shore personnel bunkering process involved risk spreading disease, advice mitigate risk infection process (Safety4Sea, 2020b). International Association Ports Harbours adopted guidance ports’ responses pandemic, structured - layered approach present methodology range good practices measures addressing port operations, governance communication; measures protect business financial returns; measures support customers supply chain stakeholders (International Association Ports Harbours, 2020b). part response COVID-19 outbreak, UNCTAD issued call action ships moving, ports open cross-border trade flowing (UNCTAD, 2020c). published policy , highlighting 10-point action plan strengthen international trade transport facilitation times pandemic (UNCTAD, 2020d). Related technical cooperation collaboration United Nations regional commissions begun.47 , Secretaries-General UNCTAD IMO issued joint statement support keeping ships moving, ports open cross-border trade flowing pandemic (IMO UNCTAD, 2020). assist stakeholders obtaining overview multitude COVID-19-related measures responses, plan potential implications thereof, UNCTAD drafted technical note ports -exhaustive list links online resources international organizations industry groups provide - date information ongoing developments countries.48 2. Maritime certification Port State control regimes world, expressing solidarity shipping industry, developed temporary guidance member authorities COVID-19 crisis.49 line IMO efforts circular letters related pandemic, port State control 47 Transport trade connectivity age pandemics (project 2023X) (www..org/development/desa/da/da- response--covid-19/). 48 https://tft.unctad.org/ports-covid-19/ https:// etradeforall.org/unctad-repositories--measures--cross- border-movement--goods--persons/. 49 Port State control inspection foreign flag ships national ports verify compliance international rules safety, security, marine environment protection seafarers living working conditions. http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Coronavirus.aspx http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Coronavirus.aspx http://www..org/development/desa/da/da-response--covid-19/ http://www..org/development/desa/da/da-response--covid-19/ https://tft.unctad.org/ports-covid-19/ https://etradeforall.org/unctad-repositories--measures--cross-border-movement--goods--persons/ https://etradeforall.org/unctad-repositories--measures--cross-border-movement--goods--persons/ https://etradeforall.org/unctad-repositories--measures--cross-border-movement--goods--persons/ 135REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 regimes developed temporary guidance intended deal impact pandemic. included acceptance extended periods service board seafarers; extended periods surveys, inspections audits; seafarers’ certification, pragmatic harmonized approach ( Indian Ocean Memorandum Understanding Port State Control Secretariat, 2020; Paris Memorandum Understanding Port State Control Secretariat, 2020; Secretariat Memorandum Understanding Port State Control Asia–Pacific Region, 2020). , general principle, guidance adopted port State control regimes suggests pragmatic risk-based approach -mentioned issues . cases, active involvement flag State, , recognized organization conduct inspections issue certification expected. include examination information ship history, performance ship’ company. inspection place remained decision port State. temporary guidance reviewed, , aligned rapidly successive developments coronavirus disease future initiatives relevant stakeholders, including International Labour Organization IMO. addition, recognized organizations,50 including American Bureau Shipping,51 Bureau Veritas,52 DNV GL,53 Indian Register Shipping54 Lloyd’ Register,55 issued guidance shipowners apply extension statutory certificates, including Safety Management Certificate International Safety Management Code (International Convention Safety Life Sea, chapter IX); International Ship Security Certificate International Code Security Ships Port Facilities (International Convention Safety Life Sea, chapter XI-2); Maritime Labour Certificate (Maritime Labour Convention, 2006), , remote surveys. number flag States initial instructions ways cases certificates needed extended months suggested.56 50 organizations responsible carrying surveys inspections behalf Administrations. 51 https://ww2.eagle.org/en/news/abs-covid-19-update. html. 52 https://marine-offshore.bureauveritas./newsroom/ covid-19-update-bureau-veritas-marine-offshore. 53 www.dnvgl./news/dnv-gl-maritime-response--- coronavirus-covid-19-outbreak-166449. 54 www.irclass.org/covid-19/. 55 https://info.lr.org//12702/2020-02-27/8ntgzw. 56 , Belgium, Denmark, Marshall Islands, Netherlands Norway. updated information, Lloyds Register, 2020. Enabling extension validity licences certificates leads greater flexibility legal certainty. maintain supply chains ensure continued mobility sea, safeguarding safety security. context, worth noting addition Safety Management Certificate International Ship Security Certificate, flag States allowed extend months period validity certificates required mandatory IMO legal instruments (IMO, 2019d): • Cargo Ship Safety Equipment Certificate. • Cargo Ship Safety Construction Certificate. • Cargo Ship Safety Radio Certificate. • International Load Line Certificate. • International Oil Pollution Prevention Certificate. • International Pollution Prevention Certificate Carriage Noxious Liquid Substances Bulk. • International Sewage Pollution Prevention Certificate. • International Air Pollution Prevention Certificate. • International Certificate Fitness Carriage Dangerous Chemicals Bulk Certificate Fitness Carriage Dangerous Chemicals Bulk. • International Certificate Fitness Carriage Liquefied Gases Bulk. • Passenger Ship Safety Certificate. • Polar Ship Certificate. • International Ballast Water Management Certificate. general rule, IMO mandatory instruments, certificate extended period longer months (IMO, 2019c), Maritime Labour Convention International Labour Organization (standard A5.1.3, paragraph 4), flag State extend validity Maritime Labour Certificate period exceeding months. , appears due prevailing exceptional circumstances COVID-19 crisis, flag States extend validity statutory certificates period months. normal operation ports travel surveyors continue restricted pandemic eventual problems delays created pandemic, alternative ways address case--case basis, issuing short-term certificates based remote surveys alternative survey locations (Lloyds Register, 2020). 8 April 2020, representatives https://ww2.eagle.org/en/news/abs-covid-19-update.html https://ww2.eagle.org/en/news/abs-covid-19-update.html https://marine-offshore.bureauveritas./newsroom/covid-19-update-bureau-veritas-marine-offshore https://marine-offshore.bureauveritas./newsroom/covid-19-update-bureau-veritas-marine-offshore http://www.dnvgl./news/dnv-gl-maritime-response---coronavirus-covid-19-outbreak-166449 http://www.dnvgl./news/dnv-gl-maritime-response---coronavirus-covid-19-outbreak-166449 http://www.irclass.org/covid-19/ https://info.lr.org//12702/2020-02-27/8ntgzw https://mobilit.belgium./sites/default/files/2020-02_operational_measures_covid-19_-_versie_1.0.pdf https://www.lr.org/en/--/coronavirus/flag--port-state-instructions/ https://www.register-iri./covid-19/ https://www.ilent.nl/documenten/publicaties/2020/03/17/coronavirus-covid-19-contingency-plan--guidelines-shipping-merchant--fishing https://www.ilent.nl/documenten/publicaties/2020/03/17/coronavirus-covid-19-contingency-plan--guidelines-shipping-merchant--fishing https://www.sdir./sjofart/regelverk/rundskriv/covid-19---extension--certificates--vessel-instructions/ 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 136 10 port State control regimes57 cover world’ oceans IMO Secretariat met online meeting. reported , number physical -board ship inspections reduced considerably protect port State control officers seafarers, regimes continued work target high-risk ships substandard. reported pragmatic, practical flexible approach, recognizing exemptions, waivers extensions certificates granted flag States, expressed general desire practices standardized harmonized (IMO, 2020e) (Circular Letter . 4204/Add.8). addition, IMO addressed certification seafarers fishing vessel personnel (Circular Letter . 4204/Add.5/Rev.1), including medical certification, ship sanitation certification (Circular Letters . 4202/Add.10 Add.11), certification ships (Circular Letter . 4204/Add.19/Rev.2), Special Tripartite Committee Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, amended, statement COVID-19 suggested extending validity seafarers’ certificates months adopting flexible approach ship certification (International Labour Organization, 2020). addition, temporary measures adopted 2020 European Union level, enabling extension validity certificates licences road, rail waterborne transport sectors (European Union, 2020b). amendment adopted Port Services Regulation (EU) 2017/352, relaxed rules charging ships port infrastructures, providing flexibility reduction, deferral, waiver suspension port infrastructure charges response COVID-19 crisis, contributing financial sustainability ship operators context pandemic (European Union, 2020c). , measures decided case--case basis port-managing bodies. temporary amendment 57 regional port State control agreement (Paris Memorandum Understanding Port State Control) signed 1982, IMO supported establishment regional port State control regimes, achieving global maritime network. areas responsibility cover waters European coastal States North Atlantic basin North America parts Europe north Atlantic (Paris Memorandum Understanding Port State Control); Asia part Pacific Ocean (Memorandum Understanding Port State Control Asia–Pacific Region); Latin America (Latin American Agreement Port State Control Vessels); Caribbean (Memorandum Understanding Port State Control Caribbean Region); West Central Africa (West Central Africa Memorandum Understanding Port State Control); Black Sea (Memorandum Understanding Port State Control Black Sea Region); southern part Mediterranean Sea (Mediterranean Memorandum Understanding Port State Control); Indian Ocean (Indian Ocean Memorandum Understanding Port State Control); Persian Gulf (Riyadh Memorandum Understanding Port State Control). United States Coast Guard maintains tenth port State control regime. applied measures 1 March 2020 31 October 2020 (European Union, 2020d). Members International Association Classification Societies, acting behalf flag States, developed guiding principles provision technical implementation advice States permit statutory certificate extension months (Circular Letter . 4204/Add.19). clarified extension validity certificates statutory maximum considered extraordinary circumstances alternative exists. issuance short-term certificates measures limited specific situations caused pandemic, relevant decisions case--case basis. guiding principles provide technical implementation advice flag States extend certificates months allowed IMO treaty regime. represent -step approach informed decision-making process respects existing regulatory regime result evidence-based assessment justification extension. port State control measures temporarily suspended degree port State control regimes, responsibility flag State issue clear statutory instructions decisions owners recognized organizations extensions. 3. Crew key worker status Shipping seafarers vital global supply chains world economy. month, large number seafarers changed ships operate ensure compliance international maritime regulations safety, crew health welfare, prevent fatigue. COVID-19-related restrictions, , large numbers seafarers service extended board ships months sea, unable replaced repatriated long tours duty. International Transport Workers' Federation estimated July approximately 300,000 seafarers trapped working aboard ships due crew change crisis caused government border travel restrictions relating pandemic; number unemployed seafarers, ashore, waiting join . 600,000 seafarers affected crisis (International Transport Workers' Federation, 2020a). considered unsustainable, safety - seafarers safe operation maritime trade (Marine Insights, 2020) ( chapter 2 report). implementation border closures, lockdowns preventative measures aiming reduce exposure COVID-19 risk ports terminals, including temporary suspension crew prohibition crew disembarking port 137REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 terminals,58 major issue recognition Governments relevant national authorities key-worker status operating essential services maritime transport, including professional seafarers marine personnel, nationality, jurisdiction. give transit international borders obtain medical attention ashore.59 key issue Governments national authorities facilitate crew repatriation completion periods service, permitting professional seafarers marine personnel disembark ships port transit territory. cooperation global industry associations representing sectors maritime transport industry,60 IMO adopted number general measures protocols designed address issues ensure ship crew place safely pandemic (Circular Letter . 4204/Add.14). protocols covered travel movement seafarers ships purpose effecting ship crew , included locations ( potential locations) process crew change travel periods time risks needed managed controlled process. circular letter contained recommendations maritime Administrations relevant national authorities, health, customs, immigration, border control, seaport civil aviation authorities outlined roles shipping companies, agents representatives, including crew agencies seafarers. information extended seaports, airports airlines involved travel operations ship crew . gradual trend easing restrictions crew authorities, easing subject conditions, travel history / nationalities crew board. cases, full prohibition closure borders remained.61 58 COVID-19-related port restrictions vessels crew interactive map ports world, Wilhelmsen, 2020. 59 draft template letters authorization International Chamber Shipping International Transport Workers’ Federation seafarers authorities recognize key worker status, International Chamber Shipping International Transport Workers' Federation, 2020. 60 BIMCO, Cruise Lines International Association, Federation National Associations Ship Brokers Agents, Intercargo, Interferry, InterManager, International Air Transport Association, International Association Ports Harbours, International Chamber Shipping, International Federation Shipmasters Associations, International Marine Contractors Association, International Parcel Tankers Association, International Transport Workers’ Federation, Intertanko, Protection Indemnity Clubs World Shipping Council. International Transport Workers’ Federation (2020b, 2020c 2020d). 61 list countries disembarkation purpose crew change related information relevant restrictions, BIMCO, 2020; S5 Agency World, 2020; Waterfront Maritime Services, 2020. 102 countries surveyed July 2020, 45 countries allowed crew , 57 . joint statement issued 2020, International Civil Aviation Organization, IMO International Labour Organization recognized humanitarian reasons comply international safety employment regulations, crew postponed indefinitely (Circular Letter . 4204/Add.18). advised mid-June 2020, 150,000 seafarers month require international flights ensure crew changeovers place. facilitate crew change, urged Governments local authorities designate personnel key workers: seafarers, marine personnel, fishing vessel personnel, offshore energy sector personnel, aviation personnel, air cargo supply chain personnel service provider personnel airports ports, nationality. urged exempt travel restrictions ensure smooth changeover crews, access emergency medical treatment , emergency repatriation. implementation included permitting seafarers, marine personnel, fishers offshore energy sector personnel disembark embark ships port transit territory Governments local authorities ( , airport) purpose crew repatriation implementation approval screening protocols. Gradually, reports successful crew received (Splash, 2020c). 4. Commercial law implications COVID-19 crisis highlighted UNCTAD policy (UNCTAD, 2020d), unprecedented disruptions pandemic massive socioeconomic consequences giving rise plethora legal issues affecting traders globe ( , delays performance failure, liability breach contract, frustration force majeure). effects issues lead large-scale economic losses bankruptcies, small medium-sized enterprises, including developing countries, turn overwhelm courts legal systems. Collaborative approaches Governments industry, policy coherence synergy required minimize adverse effects. Industry traders encouraged waive legal rights agree moratoriums payments, performance , Governments intervention financial assistance . cases performance disrupted, delayed impossible, legal consequences arise, leading dispute resolution potential litigation involving complex jurisdictional issues globalized context. common approaches reducing incidence disputes facilitate 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 138 resolution, agreement contractual extensions, restraint terms pursuing rights legal claims, efforts mediation informal dispute resolution, scale overwhelming legal administration justice systems, implications global governance rule law.62 Coordinated government collective industry action required, commercial risk-allocation standard contractual clauses drafted address contractual rights obligations light circumstances pandemic. part response COVID-19 crisis, UNCTAD begun lending technical assistance provide related technical advice guidance small medium-sized traders policymakers, developing countries;63 related briefing notes preparation. 5. systemic coordinated policy responses global level urgent systemic coordinated policy responses global level prompted United Nations Global Compact issue call action identifies recommendations urgent political action global ocean-related supply chains moving (United Nations Global Compact, 2020a). recommendations consolidation work COVID-19 Task Force Geopolitical Risks Responses initiated Action Platform Sustainable Ocean Business Global Compact (United Nations Global Compact, 2020b). Task Force consists representatives leading international companies, industry associations, financial institutions, United Nations specialized agencies academic institutions. call action recognizes : scale, complexity urgency problem call comprehensive, systemic coordinated approach global level. issues effectively dealt case--case basis, bilaterally limited number countries. absence decisive policy responses global level trigger ripple effects reverberate national economies impede cross-border supplies critical goods. call action includes recommendations: • Recognize fundamental role robust international ocean-related supply chains play COVID-19 pandemic response. • Pursue holistic harmonized global cooperation coordination ensure safety integrity ocean-related global supply chains. 62 Note context Sustainable Development Goal 16 peace, justice strong institutions Goal 17 Global Partnership Sustainable Development. 63 Transport trade connectivity age pandemics (project 2023X), www..org/development/desa/da/da- response--covid-19/. • Ensure continued cross-border flow goods sea avoid disruptions integrity ocean-related global supply chains. • Adopt internationally recognized key worker status system enabling unhindered movement, nationality, international borders personnel key safety integrity ocean-related supply chains. • Implement measures facilitate safe efficient cross-border movement key personnel flow goods sea. • Adopt uniform, evidenced-based globally consistent approach certification classification procedures ensure safety integrity ocean-related global supply chains. • Establish system metrics gauge disruptions global ocean-related supply chains. (United Nations Global Compact, 2020a). Detailed elaborations recommendations, suggestions concrete actions , annex aforementioned call action. . SUMMARY AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS Technological advances, COVID-19 pandemic regulatory legal environment provide challenging environment policymakers, respond developments. Key issues presented discussed include . 1. Ensuring cybersecurity maritime industry increasingly embracing automation, ships ports connected integrated information technology networks. trends affecting industry growing shift digitalization development smart navigation advanced analytics. result, implementation strengthening cybersecurity measures essential priority shipowners, managers port operators. ships, important implement IMO Resolution MSC.428(98), Maritime Cyberrisk Management Safety Management Systems, encourages Administrations ensure cyberrisks appropriately addressed safety management systems, starting 1 January 2021. , preparation implementation IMO resolution 2020 – inspection International Safety Management auditors 1 January 2021 – shipping companies assess risk exposure develop information technology policies inclusion safety management systems. Owners fail exposed http://www..org/development/desa/da/da-response--covid-19/ http://www..org/development/desa/da/da-response--covid-19/ 139REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 cyberrisks ships detained port State control authorities enforce requirement. COVID-19 outbreak brought maritime industry stakeholders closer efforts ensure supply chains continue function. Virtual platforms played important role facilitating communication operations time. , increase shipping cyberattacks 400 cent reported February June 2020, exacerbated reduced ability companies sufficiently protect , result travel restrictions, social distancing measures economic recession. Cyberrisks continue grow significantly, result greater reliance electronic trading increasing shift virtual interactions levels; heightens vulnerabilities globe, potential crippling effects critical supply-chains services. Coordinated efforts developing protection mechanisms cybercrime attacks pursued matter urgency; require significant scaling investment capacity-building developing countries, including respect skilled human resources. 2. electronic trade documents context pandemic, international organizations industry issued calls Governments remove restrictions processing electronic trade documents documentation presented hard copy. Governments significant efforts ports operational speed technologies, including digitalization. addition, industry associations working promote electronic equivalents negotiable bill lading acceptance government authorities, banks insurers. 3. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions international shipping adapting transport infrastructure impacts climate change regard reduction greenhouse gas emissions international shipping, progress IMO achieving levels ambition set Initial Strategy reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships, including ship energy efficiency, alternative fuels development national action plans address greenhouse gas emissions international shipping. includes publication 2020 fourth IMO greenhouse gas study. UNCTAD collaborates IMO review impact assessments submitted Intersessional Working Group Reduction Greenhouse Gas Emissions Ships. perspective developing countries, vulnerable growing risks climate-change impacts, important legitimate interests account quest reduce emissions international shipping. twenty- session United Nations Framework Convention Climate Change, held Madrid December 2019, highlighted remains domestic international fronts climate action achieved consistent long-term goal Paris Agreement Convention.64 context climate-change adaptation resilience-building seaports – issue relevance developing world – transport action table prepared Marrakech Partnership Global Climate Action includes distinct areas focus adaptation, transport systems transport infrastructure, , related milestones 2020, 2030 2050 (Marrakech Partnership Global Climate Action, 2019a). envisage, , 2030, critical transport infrastructure climate-resilient 2050. Relevant key actions milestones transport integrated cross-sectoral resilience adaptation action table, highlights key actions milestones climate resilience-building (Marrakech Partnership Global Climate Action, 2019b). UNCTAD actively contributed preparation documents. light scientific projections, climate-change impacts adaptation critical transport infrastructure remain key challenges, including post-pandemic recovery. 4. Reducing pollution shipping important areas regulatory action protection marine environment conservation sustainable marine biodiversity. : implementation IMO 2020 sulphur limit; ballast water management; action address biofouling; reduction pollution plastics microplastics; safety considerations fuel blends alternative marine fuels; conservation sustainable marine biodiversity areas national jurisdiction. implementation 1 January 2020 mandatory IMO limit 0.5 cent sulphur content ship fuel oil considered smooth outset; , difficulties arisen result disruptions caused COVID-19 64 Paris Agreement, article 2.1(): “Holding increase global average temperature 2° pre- industrial levels pursuing efforts limit temperature increase 1.5° pre-industrial levels…”. 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 140 crisis. March 2020, ban carriage -compliant fuel oil entered force support implementation sulphur cap. , appears enforcement port State control authorities suspended, owing measures put place reduce inspections risk spreading coronavirus disease. important ensure delay adversely affect implementation sulphur cap regulation long term. 5. Responding COVID-19 pandemic spread coronavirus entire world – international maritime industry – unprecedented situation. slow spread disease mitigate impacts, key shipping stakeholders, including international bodies Governments, issued number recommendations guidance aimed ensure, , port workers seafarers protected coronavirus disease, medically fit access medical care, ships met international sanitary requirements. Seafarers face major challenges stemming pandemic. Owing COVID-19 restrictions, seafarers service extended board ships months sea, unable replaced repatriated long tours duty. problematic state affairs, terms safety - safe operation maritime trade. , calls issued designate seafarers marine personnel key workers, nationality, exempt travel restrictions, enable crew . addition, temporary guidance developed flag States, enabling extension validity seafarers ship licences certificates mandatory instruments International Labour Organization IMO. clear due scale, complexity urgency COVID-19 crisis, addressing issues effectively calls comprehensive coordinated approach global level. respect important wide-ranging commercial law implications COVID-19 crisis aftermath, coordinated government collective industry action required. , commercial risk-allocation standard contractual clauses drafted address legal rights obligations light circumstances pandemic ensure legal administrative systems overwhelmed. regard, capacity- building legal technical advice guidance needed support small medium-sized enterprises, policymakers developing countries. REFERENCES Allianz (2019). Allianz: Shipping losses lowest century, incident numbers remain high. Press release. 4 June. Asariotis , Benamara Mohos-Naray (2018). Port industry survey climate change impacts adaptation. Research Paper . 18. UNCTAD. BBC News (2020). Ship crew sail Atlantic. 14 September. BIMCO (2020). Coronavirus (COVID-19): Crew change challenges. 13 March. BIMCO, Cruise Lines International Association, International Chamber Shipping, Intercargo, InterManager, Intertanker, International Union Marine Insurance, Oil Companies International Marine Forum World Shipping Council (2018). guidelines cybersecurity onboard [sic] ships. Version 3. BSA/ Software Alliance (2015). Asia–Pacific Cybersecurity Dashboard: Path Secure Global Cyberspace. China Classification Society (2017). CCS [China Classification Society] issued Guidelines Requirement Security Assessment Ship Cyber System. 21 July. Digital Container Shipping Association (2020a). DCSA [Digital Container Shipping Association] Implementation Guide Cybersecurity Vessels v1.0. Digital Container Shipping Association (2020b). DCSA [Digital Container Shipping Association] publishes implementation guide IMO cybersecurity mandate. 3 October. Digital Container Shipping Association (2020c). DCSA [Digital Container Shipping Association] takes eBill lading standardization, calls collaboration. Digital Ship (2020). CYSEC helps ESA [European Space Agency] protect ship tracking communications cyberattack. 23 April. 141REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 Economic Commission Asia Pacific (2019). Measuring digital divide Asia–Pacific Region United Nations Economic Social Commission Asia Pacific. Asia–Pacific Information Superhighway (AP-IS) Working Paper Series. Economic Commission Europe (2020). Climate Change Impacts Adaptation International Transport Networks (United Nations publication. Sales . .20.II..23. Geneva). European Commission (2009). Commission Regulation (EC) . 906/2009 28 September 2009 application article 81(3) Treaty categories agreements, decisions concerted practices liner shipping companies (consortia). European Commission (2019a). Evaluation Commission Regulation (EC) . 906/2009 28 September 2009 application article 81(3) Treaty categories agreements, decisions concerted practices liner shipping companies (consortia). Commission Staff Working Document. 20 November. European Commission (2019b). Consultation strategy evaluation Consortia Block Exemption Regulation. European Commission (2020a). Full-length report. Accompanying document Report Commission: 2019 Annual Report CO2 [Carbon-dioxide] Emissions Maritime Transport. SWD(2020) 82 final. 19 . European Commission (2020b). Report Commission: 2019 Annual Report CO2 [Carbon-dioxide] Emissions Maritime Transport. (2020) 3184 final. 19 . European Commission (2020c). Antitrust: Commission prolongs validity block exemption liner shipping consortia. Press release. 24 March. European Commission (2020d). Communication Commission: Guidelines exercise free movement workers COVID-19 outbreak. 2020/ 102 /03. 30 March. European Union (2016). Directive (EU) 2016/1148 European Parliament Council 6 July 2016 measures high common level security network information systems Union. European Union Agency Cybersecurity (2019). Port Cybersecurity: Good Practices Cybersecurity Maritime Sector. Athens. European Union (2020a). Advice ship operators preparedness response outbreak COVID-19. Version 3. 20 February. European Union (2020b). Regulation European Parliament Council laying specific temporary measures view COVID-19 outbreak renewal extension certificates, licences authorizations postponement periodic checks periodic training areas transport legislation. PE-CONS 16/1/20 REV 1. 25 . European Union (2020c). Regulation European Parliament Council amending Regulation (EU) 2017/352, managing body port competent authority provide flexibility respect levying port infrastructure charges context COVID-19 outbreak. 25 . European Union (2020d). COVID-19 transport measures: Council adopts temporary flexibility licences port services. Press release. 20 . Gaskell , Asariotis Baatz (2000). Bills Lading: Law Contracts. Informa Law Routledge. LLP Professional Publishing. London. Global Maritime Forum (2019). Coalition. www.globalmaritimeforum.org/--- coalition/members. Heavy Lift (2020). Covid-19 shakes Sulphur 2020. 3 April. International Association Ports Harbours (2020a). IAPH [International Association Ports Harbours]– WPSP [World Ports Sustainability Programme] port economic impact barometer. International Association Ports Harbours (2020b). Guidance ports’ response coronavirus pandemic. Version 2.0. International Association Ports Harbours, BIMCO, International Cargo Handling Coordination Association, International Chamber Shipping, International Harbour Masters Association, International Maritime Pilots Association, International Port Community Systems Association, International Ship Suppliers Services Association, Federation National Associations Ship Brokers Agents, Protect Group (2020a). Accelerating digitalization maritime trade logistics: call action. 2 June. http://www.globalmaritimeforum.org/---coalition/members http://www.globalmaritimeforum.org/---coalition/members 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 142 International Association Ports Harbours, International Cargo Handling Coordination Association, TT Club Mutual Insurance World Ports Sustainability Programme (2020b). Port community cybersecurity. International Group Protection Indemnity Clubs (2020). Annual Review 2018/19. 14 January. IMO (2011). Guidelines control management ships’ biofouling minimize transfer invasive aquatic species. MEPC 62/24/Add.1. London. IMO (2017a). IMO Resolution MSC.428(98) maritime cyberrisk management safety management systems. 16 June. MSC 98/23/Add.1. Annex 10. IMO (2017b). IMO Resolution .1110 (30), Strategic Plan Organization -year period 2018 2023. IMO (2017c). Guidelines maritime cyberrisk management. MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3. 5 July. IMO (2018a). Report Working Group Reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships. MEPC 72/WP.7. 12 April. IMO (2018b). Action plan address marine plastic litter ships. MEPC 73/19/Add.1. 26 October. IMO (2019a). Note International Maritime Organization fifty- session Subsidiary Body Scientific Technological Advice (SBSTA 51) Madrid, Spain, 2 9 December 2019: Agenda item 10()“Methodological issues Convention: emissions fuel international aviation maritime transport” – Update IMO’ Work Address GHG [Greenhouse Gas] Emissions Fuel International Shipping. IMO (2019b). Report Marine Environmental Protection Committee seventy-fourth session. MEPC 74/18. 9 June. IMO (2019c). Subcommittee Carriage Cargoes Containers. Sixth session. Report Maritime Safety Committee Marine Environment Protection Committee. CCC 6/14. 21 September. IMO (2019d). Survey guidelines Harmonized System Survey Certification (HSSC). A31/Res.1140. 6 January. IMO (2020a). Subcommittee Navigation, Communications Search Rescue. Seventh session. Report Maritime Safety Committee. NCSR 7/23. 17 February. IMO (2020b). Reduction greenhouse gas emissions ships: Fourth IMO greenhouse gas study 2020: Final report. MEPC 75/7/15. 29 July. IMO (2020c). Sulphur 2020 – cutting sulphur oxide emissions. www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/ Pages/Sulphur-2020.aspx. IMO (2020d). Subcommittee Pollution Prevention Response. Seventh Session. Report Marine Environment Protection Committee. PPR 7/22. 24. London. April. IMO (2020e). IMO port State inspection authorities set pragmatic approach support global supply chain. 10 April. IMO UNCTAD (2020). Joint statement support keeping ships moving, ports open cross-border trade flowing COVID/19 pandemic. 8 June. Indian Ocean Memorandum Understanding Port State Control Secretariat (2020). Indian Ocean MoU [memorandum understanding] issuing guidance dealing impact outbreak COVID-19. Press release. 20 March. Institution Engineering Technology (2017). Code Practice: Cybersecurity Ships. Queen' Printer Controller Majesty' Stationery Office. London. Institution Engineering Technology (2020). Good Practice Guide: Cybersecurity Ports Port Systems. Elanders. Newcastle Tyne. Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change (2018). Impacts 1.5º global warming natural human systems (chapter 3). : Global Warming 1.5°: IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change] Special Report Impacts Global Warming 1.5° Pre-industrial Levels Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Path Ways, Context Strengthening Global Response Threat Climate Change, Sustainable Development Efforts Eradicate Poverty. Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change (2019). IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change] Special Report Ocean Cryosphere Changing Climate. http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Sulphur-2020.aspx http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/Sulphur-2020.aspx 143REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 International Chamber Commerce (2020a). ICC [International Chamber Commerce] memo governments central banks essential steps safeguard trade finance operations. 6 April. International Chamber Commerce (2020b). Guidance paper impact COVID-19 trade finance transactions issued subject ICC [International Chamber Commerce] rules. International Chamber Shipping (2020a). Coronavirus (COVID-19) Guidance Ship Operators Protection Health Seafarers. Version 1.0 – 3 March. Marisec Publications. London. International Chamber Shipping International Transport Workers’ Federation (2020). Facilitation certificates international transport worker: Seafarer. 17 April. www.ics-shipping.org/docs/default-source/ resources/annex-1-finalcover-letter-seafarers.pdfsfvrsn=4. International Council Clean Transportation (2020). IMO study highlights sharp rise short-lived climate pollution. Press release. 4 August. International Labour Organization (2020). Statement Officers Special Tripartite Committee [ Marine Labour Convention, 2006, amended] coronavirus disease (COVID-19). International Organization Standardization (2013). IOS/IEC 27001:2013 [International Organization Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commission standard 27001:2013]. Information technology – security techniques – information security management systems – requirements. International Transport Workers’ Federation (2020a). 300,000 Seafarers trapped sea: Mounting crew change crisis demands faster action governments. 16 July. International Transport Workers’ Federation (2020b). Message G20 [Group 20] leaders ministers facilitating essential movement seafarers marine personnel. International Chamber Shipping International Transport Workers’ Federation joint statement. 7 April. International Transport Workers’ Federation (2020c). Crew contractual rights obligations. Joint statement International Transport Workers’ Federation Joint Negotiating Group Employers. 16 April. International Transport Workers’ Federation (2020d). COVID-19 access sanitation facilities transport workers: Guidance trade union negotiators. 17 April. JOC. (2019). Carriers driving container data standardization. 4 September. JOC. (2020). DCSA [Digital Container Shipping Association] targets elusive electronic bill lading standard. 19 . Lloyd’ Loading List (2020). Container shipping customer groups jointly urge EU [European Union] -evaluate BER [Block Exemption Regulation]. 21 January. Lloyds Register (2020). Latest flag port State instructions COVID-19 (coronavirus). Marine Insights (2020). IMO endorses protocols designed lift barriers crew . 7 . Marine Link (2020). Surge maritime cyberattacks reported. 15 June. Marrakech Partnership Global Climate Action (2019a). Climate action pathway: Transport. Action table. Marrakech Partnership Global Climate Action (2019b). Climate action pathway: Resilience adaptation. Action table. Monioudi , Asariotis , Becker , Bhat , Dowding-Gooden , Esteban , Feyen , Mentaschi , Nikolaou , Nurse , Phillips , Smith , Satoh , ’Donnell Trotz , Velegrakis AF, Voukouvalas , Vousdoukas MI Witkop (2018). Climate change impacts critical international transportation assets Caribbean small island developing States (SIDS): case Jamaica Saint Lucia. Regional Environmental Change. 18:2211–2225(2018). 31 . National Cybersecurity Centre (2019). Advisory: Ryuk Ransomware Targeting Organizations Globally. NCSC-Ops/17-19. 22 June. National Institute Standards Technology (2018). Framework Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity. Version 1.1. 16 April. www.nist.gov/cyberframework/framework. Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha Line (2019). NYK [Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha] Group accredited ClassNK cybersecurity management. 16 December. http://www.ics-shipping.org/docs/default-source/resources/annex-1-finalcover-letter-seafarers.pdfsfvrsn=4 http://www.ics-shipping.org/docs/default-source/resources/annex-1-finalcover-letter-seafarers.pdfsfvrsn=4 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 144 North Atlantic Treaty Organization Cooperative Cyberdefence Centre Excellence (2019). ASEAN cyber developments: Centre excellence Singapore, cybercrime convention Philippines open-ended working group . Ocean Network Express (2020). Ocean network express issues electronic bill lading selects essDOCS power global bill lading digitization initiative. 2 April. Pacific Community (2019). Fourth pacific regional energy transport ministers’ meeting. 17 September. www.spc. int/updates/news/speeches/2019/09/fourth-pacific-regional-energy--transport-ministers-meeting. Panahi , Ng Pang (2020). Climate change adaptation port industry: complex lingering research gaps uncertainties. Transport Policy. 95:10–29. Paris Memorandum Understanding Port State Control Secretariat (2020). Paris MOU [Memorandum Understanding] guidance impact COVID-19. Press release. 26 March. Premti (2016). Liner shipping: competition Discussion Paper . 224. UNCTAD. Premti (2018). Conservation sustainable marine biodiversity areas national jurisdiction: legal developments. 29 October. UNCTAD Transport Trade Facilitation Newsletter . 80. Fourth quarter. https://unctad.org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspxOriginalVersionID=1905. Riviera (2019). US [United States] ‘ adequately addressing problem’ maritime cyberthreats. 2 April. Riviera (2020a). Covid-19 forces shipping adopt digitalization. 28 April. Riviera (2020b). Shipping adapts coronavirus restrictions. 29 April. Riviera (2020c). Altera drone test success paves remote tank inspection. 10 June. Riviera (2020d). Explained: Propeller fouling ‘ power penalty’. 11 February. Riviera (2020e). Hull fouling add 20% fuel costs. 30 . S5 Agency World (2020). Service availability port. https://app.powerbi./ viewr=eyJrIjoiN2I3MmJiYmYtYmYyNy00MGVkLWI0ZTktZDZmNTY4ZTBlMzM3IiwidCI6IjM5MGZkN2Q4LWU zMjktNDdiYy04MmY4LWM5NTY4NTg5MzYyYyIsImMOjEwfQ%3D%3D. Safety4Sea (2018). Cybersecurity library shipping: . 26 April. Safety4Sea (2019a). underreporting major cyberthreat shipping industry. 2 July. Safety4Sea (2019b). IBM joins Mayflower autonomous ship project. 16 October. Safety4Sea (2019c). Scrubber discharges bans ports: . 22 November. Safety4Sea (2020a). KR [Korean Register] issues guidelines type approval maritime cybersecurity. 4 February. Safety4Sea (2020b). coronavirus affects shipping: . 4 February. Seatrade Maritime News (2020). Suez Canal clarifies open-loop scrubber confusion. 14 January. Secretariat Memorandum Understanding Port State Control Asia–Pacific Region (2020). Tokyo MoU [memorandum understanding] issuing guidance dealing impact outbreak COVID-19. Press release. 12 March. Smart Maritime Network (2020). India moves digital bills lading. 11 June. Splash (2019). Wilhelmsen Airbus trial world’ commercial drone deliveries vessels anchorage. 15 March. Splash (2020a). Number shipping cyberattacks leaps 400 cent February. 5 June. Splash (2020b). -drones completes commercial BVLOS [ visual line sight] drone delivery Singapore. 29 April. Splash (2020c). Ship managers accelerate crew repatriation. 5 June. Thetius (2020). Maritime autonomous surface ship market map. United Kingdom Protection Indemnity Club (2017). Legal briefing: Electronic bills lading. . United Kingdom Protection Indemnity Club (2020a). Electronic bills lading: update, part . 26 March. United Kingdom Protection Indemnity Club (2020b). Electronic bills lading: update, part II. 1 April. http://www.spc.int/updates/news/speeches/2019/09/fourth-pacific-regional-energy--transport-ministers-meeting http://www.spc.int/updates/news/speeches/2019/09/fourth-pacific-regional-energy--transport-ministers-meeting https://unctad.org/en/pages/newsdetails.aspxOriginalVersionID=1905 https://app.powerbi./viewr=eyJrIjoiN2I3MmJiYmYtYmYyNy00MGVkLWI0ZTktZDZmNTY4ZTBlMzM3IiwidCI6IjM5MGZkN2Q4LWUzMjktNDdiYy04MmY4LWM5NTY4NTg5MzYyYyIsImMiOjEwfQ%3D%3D https://app.powerbi./viewr=eyJrIjoiN2I3MmJiYmYtYmYyNy00MGVkLWI0ZTktZDZmNTY4ZTBlMzM3IiwidCI6IjM5MGZkN2Q4LWUzMjktNDdiYy04MmY4LWM5NTY4NTg5MzYyYyIsImMiOjEwfQ%3D%3D 145REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2020 United Nations (2016). Report work United Nations Open-ended Informal Consultative Process Oceans Law Sea seventeenth meeting. /71/204. York. 25 July. United Nations (2019). Report Secretary-General 2019 Climate Action Summit 2020. 11 December. http://sdghelpdesk.unescap.org/sites/default/files/2020-06/cas_report_11_ dec.pdf. United Nations (2020). Report Subsidiary Body Scientific Technological Advice fifty- session, held Madrid 2 9 December 2019. FCCC/SBSTA/2019/5. 16 March. United Nations Climate Change Secretariat (2019). Yearbook Global Climate Action 2019: Marrakech Partnership Global Climate Action. Bonn. UNCTAD (2003). transport documents international trade. UNCTAD/SDTE/TLB/2003/3. 26 November. UNCTAD (2011). 2004 Ballast Water Management Convention – international acceptance growing – Convention enter force. Transport Newsletter . 50. UNCTAD (2015). International Ballast Water Management Convention 2004 set enter force 2016. Transport Trade Facilitation Newsletter . 68. UNCTAD (2017a). Review Maritime Transport 2017 (United Nations publication. Sales . .17.II..10. York Geneva). UNCTAD (2017b). Climate Risk Vulnerability Assessment Framework Caribbean Coastal Transport Infrastructure: Climate Change Impacts Coastal Transportation Infrastructure Caribbean – Enhancing Adaptive Capacity Small Island Developing States. UNCTAD/DTL/TLB/2018/1. UNCTAD (2018). Review Maritime Transport 2018 (United Nations publication. Sales . .18.II..5. York Geneva). UNCTAD (2019a). Review Maritime Transport 2019 (United Nations publication. Sales . .19.II..20. York Geneva). UNCTAD (2019b). Outcome document: High-level panel discussion “Climate resilient transport infrastructure sustainable trade, tourism development SIDS [small island developing States]”. 10 December. UNCTAD (2020a). Climate Change Impacts Adaptation Coastal Transport Infrastructure: Compilation Policies Practices (United Nations publication. Sales . .20.II..10. Geneva). UNCTAD (2020b). Climate change adaptation seaports support 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development. TD//./MEM.7/23. 10 February. Geneva. UNCTAD (2020c). Coronavirus: ’ ships moving, ports open cross-border trade flowing. 25 March. UNCTAD (2020d). COVID-19: 10-point action plan strengthen international trade transport facilitation times pandemic. Policy . 79. April. UNCTAD United Nations Environment Programme (2019). High-level panel discussion COP 25 [ twenty- Conference Parties United Nations Framework Convention Climate Change], Madrid. Climate- resilient transport infrastructure sustainable trade, tourism development SIDS [small island developing States]. 10 December. https://unctad.org/en/Pages/MeetingDetails.aspxmeetingid=2354. United Nations Commission International Trade Law (2018). UNCITRAL [United Nations Commission International Trade Law] Model Law Electronic Transferable Records (United Nations publications. Sales . .17..5. York). United Nations Framework Convention Climate Change (2020). Climate Action Pathways. https:// unfccc.int/climate-action/marrakech-partnership/reporting--tracking/climate_action_pathways. United Nations Global Compact (2020a). COVID-19 Task Force Geopolitical Risks Responses: Call--action – Imminent threats integrity global supply chains. Sustainable Ocean Business Action Platform. United Nations Global Compact (2020b). Sustainable Ocean Business Action Platform. www. unglobalcompact.org/-action/action-platforms/ocean. United States Coast Guard (2019a). Marine Safety Information Bulletin: Cyberattack impacts MTSA [Maritime Transportation Security Act] Facility Operations. 16 December. United States Coast Guard (2019b). Marine Safety Information Bulletin: Cyber adversaries targeting commercial vessels. 24 . http://sdghelpdesk.unescap.org/sites/default/files/2020-06/cas_report_11_dec.pdf http://sdghelpdesk.unescap.org/sites/default/files/2020-06/cas_report_11_dec.pdf https://unctad.org/en/Pages/MeetingDetails.aspxmeetingid=2354 https://unfccc.int/climate-action/marrakech-partnership/reporting--tracking/climate_action_pathways https://unfccc.int/climate-action/marrakech-partnership/reporting--tracking/climate_action_pathways http://www.unglobalcompact.org/-action/action-platforms/ocean http://www.unglobalcompact.org/-action/action-platforms/ocean 5. LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS 146 United States Coast Guard (2020). ACN 040/20 – March 2020 promulgation navigation vessel inspection circular . 01-20: Guidelines addressing cyberrisks Maritime Transportation Security Act regulated facilities. Visalli , , Cabral , Cheung , Clark , Garilao , Kaschner , Kesner-Reyes , Lam , Maxwell , Mayorga , Moeller , Morgan , Ortuñ Crespo , Pinsky , White McCauley (2020). Data-driven approach highlighting priority areas protection marine areas national jurisdiction. Marine Policy. 28 March. Waterfront Maritime Services (2020). COVID-19 overview: Crew change impact. 23 October. Wilhelmsen (2020). COVID-19 global port restrictions map. https://wilhelmsen./ships-agency/ campaigns/coronavirus/coronavirus-map/. World Association Waterborne Transport Infrastructure (2019). PIANC [World Association Waterborne Transport Infrastructure] Declaration climate change. https://wilhelmsen./ships-agency/campaigns/coronavirus/coronavirus-map/ https://wilhelmsen./ships-agency/campaigns/coronavirus/coronavirus-map/ Table 1.1 Development international maritime trade, selected years (Million tons loaded) Table 1.2 International maritime trade 2018–2019 (Type cargo, country group region) Table 1.3 World economic growth, 2018–2021 (Annual percentage change) Table 1.4 Volumes exported imported goods, selected group countries, 2018–2020 (Annual percentage change) Table 1.5 Tanker trade, 2018–2019 (Million tons annual percentage change) Table 1.6 Major producers consumers oil natural gas, 2019 (World market share percentage) Table 1.7 Dry bulk trade, 2018–2019 (Million tons annual percentage change) Table 1.8 Major dry bulk commodities steel: Producers, users, exporters importers, 2019 (World market shares percentage) Table 1.9 Containerized trade mainlane East–West routes routes, 2016–2020 (20-foot equivalent units annual percentage change) Table 1.10 Containerized trade major East–West trade routes, 2014–2020 (Million 20-foot equivalent units annual percentage change) Table 1.11 World container port throughput region, 2018–2019 (Millon 20-foot equivalent units annual percentage change) Table 1.12 International maritime trade development forecasts, 2020–2021 (Percentaje change) Table 2.1 World fleet principal vessel type, 2019–2020 (Thousand dead-weight tons percentage) Table 2.2 Age distribution world merchant fleet vessel type, 2019–2020 (Percentage dead-weight tonnage) Table 2.3 Ownership world fleet, ranked carrying capacity dead-weight tons, 2020 Table 2.4 Top 25 ship-owning economies, 1 January 2020 (Million dollars) Table 2.5 Leading flags registration dead-weight tonnage, 2020 Table 2.6 Leading flags registration, ranked principal vessel type, 2020 (Ddollars) Table 2.7 Deliveries newbuildings major vessel types countries construction, 2019 (Thousand gross tons) Table 2.8 Reported tonnage sold ship recycling major vessel type country ship recycling, 2019 (Thousand gross tons) Table 2.9 Container freight market rates, 2010–2020 Table 2.11 Top 21 global terminal operators, throughput capacity, 2019 (Million 20-foot equivalent units) Table 2.12 Share integrated port terminals container volumes handled, selected countries Latin America Caribbean (Percentage) Table 3.1 Recorded port calls time port, 2018 2019 Table 3.2 Port calls time port vessel type, 2019 Table 3.3 Port calls median time spent port container ships: Top 25 countries, 2019 Table 3.4 Port calls median time spent port, general cargo ships, 2019 (Selected small island economies) Table 3.5 Correlation components liner shipping connectivity index port traffic Table 3.6 Weighted average port call hours top 25 economies, 2019 Table 3.7 Weighted average port call hours, top bottom 10 countries territories Table 3.8 Port performance scorecard indicators, 2015–2019 Table 3.9 Average annual throughput volume, 2015–2019 (Million tons) Table 4.1 Examples surcharges shipping costs Table 4.2 Number oceangoing vessel transits Panama Canal Table 4.1 Contracting States Parties selected international conventions maritime transport, 31 July 2020 Figure 1.1 Development international maritime trade global output, 2006–2020 (Annual percentage change) Figure 1.2 Participation developing economies international maritime trade, selected years (Percentage share total tonnage) Figure 1.3 International maritime trade, region, 2019 (Percentage share total tonnage) Figure 1.4 Development international maritime trade cargo type, selected years (Billion tons loaded) Figure 1.5 Development international maritime trade cargo type, selected years (Index: 1990 = 100) Figure 1.6 International maritime trade cargo ton-miles, 2000–2020 (Billion ton-miles) Figure 1.7 International maritime trade cargo ton-miles, 1999–2020 (Billion ton-miles; index: 1999 = 100) Figure 1.8 Global containerized trade, 1996–2020 (Million 20-foot equivalent units annual percentage change) Figure 1.9 Market share global containerized trade route, 2019 (Percentage) Figure 1.10 Estimated world container port throughput region, 2019 (Percentage share total 20-foot equivalent units) Figure 1.11 Leading 20 global container ports, 2018–2019 () million 20-foot equivalent units () annual percentage change Figure 1.12. Varied forecasts gross domestic product growth 2020 Figure 1.13 Containerized trade growth main East–West routes () million 20-foot equivalent units; () percentage change, quarter 2019– quarter 2020, quarter 2019– quarter 2020 Figure 1.14 World port-handling forecast, 2019–2021 (Million 20-foot equivalent units percentage change) Figure 2.1 Growth world fleet principal vessel type, 2014–2020 Figure 2.2 Average vessel size age distribution, selected vessel types, 2020 (Dead-weight tons) Figure 2.3 TTop 20 ship-owning economies terms carrying capacity global fleet, 2020 Figure 2.4 World tonnage order, 2000–2020 Figure 2.5 Reported tonnage sold ship recycling major vessel type country ship recycling, 2017–2019 Figure 2.6 ConTex index, 2015–2020 Figure 2.7 Baltic Exchange dry index, 2017–2020 Figure 2.8 -year time-charter rates bulk carriers, 2015–2020 Figure 2.9 Top 10 deep-sea container shipping lines, ranked deployed capacity market share, 2020 Figure 3.1 Port calls, vessel types, 2019 Figure 3.2 Port calls container ships, 2019 Figure 3.3 Global change number port calls, quarters 2020 compared quarters 2019, selected vessel types Figure 3.4 Number weekly container ship port calls worldwide, moving -week average, 2019 2020 Figure 3.5 Liner shipping connectivity index top 10 economies, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 Figure 3.6 Liner shipping connectivity index selected small island developing States, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 Figure 3.7 Liner shipping connectivity index top 10 ports, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 Figure 3.8 Liner shipping connectivity index leading regional ports, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 Figure 3.9 Liner shipping connectivity index components, quarter 2006– quarter 2020, index averages country Figure 3.10 Quarterly trends fleet deployment, quarter 2019– quarter 2020 Figure 3.11 Quarterly trends fleet deployment, selected countries, 2019–2020 Figure 3.12 Liner shipping connectivity index port traffic, 2017 Figure 3.13 Number seaports regular container vessel calls, quarter 2006– quarter 2020 Figure 3.14 Global liner shipping network, quarter 2020 Figure 3.15 Country averages port time ship call size, 2019 (Hours port moves port call) Figure 3.16 Minutes port container move average call size, 2019 Figure 3.17 Minutes port container move number port calls country, 2019 Figure 3.18 Minutes port container move average vessel size, 2019 Figure 3.19 Revenue mix ports region, 2015–2019 Figure 3.20 Earnings interest, taxes, depreciation amortization proportion revenue, 2015–2019 (Percentage) Figure 3.21 Labour costs proportion revenue, 2015–2019 Figure 3.22 Average wages employee, 2015–2019 (Dollars) Figure 3.23 Female participation rate port workforce, 2015–2019 Figure 3.24 Share vessel arrivals , 2015–2019 Figure 3.25 Average cargo arrival departure, 2015–2019 (Tons) Figure 3.26 Maximum 20-foot equivalent unit dwell time, 2015–2019 (Days) Figure 3.27 Average box-handling rate, 2015–2019 (Boxes ship-hour) Figure 3.28 Annual carbon-dioxide emissions vessel vessel type, 2019 Figure 3.29 Comparison dead-weight tonnage respective fleet carbon-dioxide emissions bulk carriers, container ships tankers, 2011–2019 (2011 = 100) Figure 3.30 Annual carbon-dioxide emissions vessel vessel type, 2011–2019 Figure 3.31 Annual carbon-dioxide emissions vessel flag registration, 2019 Figure 4.1 Port Mombasa: Performance indicators, 2020 Box 1.1 Blind spots risk assessment management Box 2.1 Reducing carbon dioxide emissions: case Pacific islands Box 2.2 Shipbuilding crossroads European Union Box 2.3 Promoting diversity inclusion maritime sector Box 2.4 Policies support shipping sustainable recovery pandemic crisis Box 2.5 changing landscape international production, COVID-19 pandemic, resilience-building maritime transport fleet deployment Box 2.6 Challenges faced ports India result COVID-19 pandemic Box 2.7 Measures protect staff working port communities ensure continuity port operations: Generic guidelines ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Abbreviations note Executive summary INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRADE AND PORT traffic . Volume international maritime trade port traffic . Maritime trade era pandemic . Outlook . Summary policy considerations MARITIME TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPLY . World fleet maritime workforce . Shipping companies, earnings revenues operations pandemic crisis . Port services infrastructure supply . Conclusions policy considerations PERFORMANCE INDICATORS . Port calls turnaround times . Container shipping: Liner shipping connectivity . Container shipping: Port performance . Port performance: Lessons learned TrainForTrade Port Management Programme UNCTAD . Shipping: Emissions world fleet . Summary policy considerations THE CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 PANDEMIC: LESSONS LEARNED FROM FIRST-HAND EXPERIENCES . Invited reflections coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic maritime transport hinterland connections . Experience small island developing States: Small island developing States Pacific . Experience authority coordinating transit transport corridor: Northern Corridor Transit Transport Coordination Authority, East Africa . Experience authority managing international maritime passage: Panama Canal Authority . Experience port authority: Port Authority Valencia . Experience global shipping company: Mediterranean Shipping Company LEGAL ISSUES AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS . Technological developments emerging issues maritime industry . Regulatory developments relating international shipping, climate change environmental issues . OTHER LEGAL AND REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS AFFECTING TRANSPORTATION . Status conventions . COVID-19 legal regulatory challenges international shipping collaborative action response crisis . Summary policy considerations
Bibliographic type
Book
Referenced