The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has postponed the long-awaited adoption of its Net-Zero Framework, an ambitious plan meant to steer global shipping toward carbon neutrality, after the United States threatened economic retaliation against countries supporting the measure. The decision, made in London after tense negotiations among 176 member states, halts what was shaping up to be one of the most transformative policy shifts in maritime regulation. For Africa, whose trade arteries pulse through maritime routes, this delay reverberates far beyond the docks, touching the continent’s economic, environmental, and developmental ambitions.
The framework, initially endorsed by a majority of nations in April 2025, was designed to cap and progressively reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships, which currently account for about 3% of global emissions, roughly equal to Germany’s annual output. Left unchecked, maritime emissions are projected to double by 2050, eroding global climate gains and placing vulnerable coastal regions, many in Africa, at heightened risk from rising sea levels and erratic weather patterns. The IMO plan proposed a global fuel standard, a carbon pricing system, and a Net-Zero Fund to reward low-emission vessels and finance green maritime infrastructure in developing countries.
What seemed like a clear path to decarbonization was derailed by geopolitics. The United States government’s return to Washington’s helm has brought a sharp reversal of U.S. climate diplomacy. Citing the framework as “anti-competitive” and “burdensome to American consumers,” the U.S. threatened punitive actions against supporting states, including sanctions, higher port fees for their flagged vessels, and even visa restrictions for their maritime officials.
Facing that pressure, 57 nations, led by Singapore and backed by Saudi Arabia, voted to delay the agreement for another year, while 49 opposed and 21 abstained. The hesitation underscores a familiar pattern: global climate ambition often collapses at the intersection of politics and profit.
Read also: Major global corporations join forces to establish unified carbon accounting standards
In Africa, where 90% of trade by volume moves by sea, the implications are profound. The continent’s economies are acutely tied to maritime logistics; whether it’s Nigerian crude, Kenyan tea, or South African minerals. Yet Africa’s ports and shipping fleets remain among the least modernized and most carbon-intensive globally. According to the African Development Bank, fewer than 10% of African ports currently have the capacity to handle alternative fuels like green ammonia or methanol.
The IMO framework, with its promised financial support for clean technology transfer, could have positioned African nations to modernize fleets, upgrade port infrastructure, and create new green jobs across logistics chains. Its postponement therefore stalls not only a climate milestone but also an opportunity for Africa to participate in the trillion-dollar decarbonization economy.
Consider Durban, one of Africa’s busiest ports. Its annual throughput of over 2.8 million containers makes it a critical node in regional trade, yet its emissions profile is largely shaped by heavy fuel oil and outdated cargo handling systems. The city’s ongoing adaptation efforts, such as electrifying dock cranes and investing in LNG bunkering, represent early attempts at sustainability, but without global regulatory clarity, financing such initiatives becomes precarious.
A similar challenge faces Mombasa, which handles 1,700 ships annually and serves as East Africa’s maritime gateway. Kenya’s nascent plans to introduce low-sulphur fuel facilities could have received critical funding through the IMO’s Net-Zero Fund; now, those investments hang in limbo.
The suspension also threatens Africa’s voice in shaping the rules of future shipping. Many African countries, including Ghana, Egypt, and Seychelles, had aligned with the pro-framework bloc, viewing it as a vehicle for equity in global trade. The framework’s design included explicit provisions for a “just transition”, financial support for developing states to adapt without compromising competitiveness. The delay effectively sidelines these nations, reinforcing structural inequities that leave African ports reliant on outdated fleets even as global shipping giants, such as Maersk and MSC, accelerate their own private decarbonization projects.
The Danish shipping conglomerate Maersk, among the loudest critics of the delay, described the move as “a loss of momentum for the industry’s efforts to decarbonize.” Its first methanol-powered container ship began operations this year, signaling a shift among major players toward cleaner fuels. Yet without universal rules, the risk of a fragmented regulatory landscape grows. Wealthier states may adopt regional carbon schemes, like the European Union’s Emissions Trading System extension to shipping, while developing nations lag behind, facing potential trade penalties for non-compliance. This could mean higher freight costs for Africa, restricted access to certain ports, and growing inequality in maritime competitiveness.
The broader environmental consequences are no less severe. Africa’s 30,000-kilometer coastline already bears the brunt of rising seas and coastal erosion. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that a one-meter sea level rise could displace over 40 million Africans by mid-century. Shipping emissions, though global in origin, intensify these local threats by accelerating climate instability. By deferring collective action, the IMO has effectively extended the continent’s exposure to both environmental and economic volatility.
Amidst the disappointment, there are still signs of resilience. Several African states are pressing ahead with regional initiatives: Morocco is developing a green hydrogen corridor with the EU; Namibia is constructing an ammonia export hub; and Egypt has begun pilot programs to retrofit ships with solar-hybrid propulsion systems on the Suez Canal. These efforts, though modest in scale, illustrate a recognition that Africa cannot afford to wait for global consensus to secure its maritime future.
Ultimately, the postponement of the IMO Net-Zero Framework underscores a larger truth about sustainability in the developing world: progress is rarely linear, and global politics often dictate the pace of change. The challenge posed for Africa now is to harness this delay not as defeat, but as a catalyst, to prepare its ports, fleets, and policies for the inevitable transition ahead. Because when the framework eventually returns to the table, the continent’s readiness, or lack thereof, will determine whether it rides the next wave of green trade, or is once again left at its mercy.
