Quantification of influence and interest at IMO in Maritime Safety and Human Element matters
Raphael Baumler,Maria Carrera Arce,Anne Pazaver
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104746
IF: 4.315
2021-11-01
Marine Policy
Abstract:Recently, the Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), Transparency International, and InfluenceMap questioned the International Maritime Organization (IMO) governance. The critics suggested that the industry and a handful of countries captured IMO's regulatory development To verify NGOs' claims, the paper introduces a quantitative methodology to assess the most influential stakeholders in IMO's debates. The study quantified twenty-two years of written evidence of participation in the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) and seven years of the Sub-committee on Human Element, Training, and Watchkeeping. The study completes its analysis by integrating the audio records available from 2013 to 2019. The findings confirm the previous studies and a century-long historical trend. By quantifying the influence, the study demonstrates that few players dominate maritime debates. Only 20% of the delegations (n = 67) attending MSC meetings submit 90% of the documents. Consequently, these delegations can control the agenda of debates. Additionally, the data shows the overwhelming influence of developed countries, large flag States, major shipbuilding nations, and trade organizations on MSC and HTW debates. Alarmingly, the study shows that 74 out of 174 Member States have not participated in any submissions or discussions in the studied Committees. It signifies that 42.5% of Member States attending the meetings do not actively participate. Additionally, it seems that the ownership of maritime assets determines the influence. Finally, by quantifying the preeminent role of some countries and industry players, it is expected that enhanced mechanisms for developing nations to engage effectively in maritime forum can be established.
environmental studies,international relations