New study maps the web of climate transition risks facing shipping and warns that siloed approaches to address them would not limit exposure in International Shipping News 13/05/2026 A new white paper published today argues that the sector’s current fragmented approach to climate risk management leaves it dangerously exposed. The white paper titled, Navigating climate transition risks in global shipping, draws on a peer-reviewed academic study by researchers from Erasmus Rotterdam University, University of Copenhagen and UCL, and provides comprehensive analysis of the climate-related transition risks facing the global shipping industry. The study identified five interconnected categories of transition risk — litigation, policy, contractual, technology, and social, and maps the pathways through which risks in one domain can trigger or amplify consequences in another. For instance, the IMO’s Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) regulation requires investment in emissions-reducing technologies and operations, which in turn generates unresolved contractual questions around cost allocation and performance guarantees — questions that may ultimately land in litigation. Separately, social pressure for stronger environmental standards can accelerate regulatory ambition, while simultaneously triggering greenwashing claims and shareholder suits over inadequate climate disclosure. Hannah Mosmans, external PhD Researcher at the Department of Law & Markets at Erasmus School of Law, and Researcher Port Economics and Maritime Law at Erasmus Centre for Urban, Port and Transport Economics (Erasmus UPT), Erasmus University Rotterdam, said “Addressing climate transition risks in shipping requires more than isolated legal or technical solutions: it demands genuine interdisciplinary collaboration. The challenges we face sit at the intersection of public and private law, economic incentives, policy design, and technological and safety considerations. Only by connecting these perspectives can we begin to understand how risks propagate through the maritime supply chain and develop responses that are both effective and workable in practice. This research shows that bridging disciplines is not simply valuable, but essential, if we are to navigate the complexity of maritime decarbonisation and meaningfully address these ‘wicked problems.’” With the IMO working towards the adoption of the Net Zero Framework later this year, EU ETS and FuelEU obligations already in force and other regional regulations forthcoming, the research argues that the shipping industry can no longer afford to treat legal, regulatory, contractual, technological, and social risks as separate business problems. The decisions companies make today — on fuels, contracts, financing, and fleet investment — will determine their exposure for decades. The central finding is action or inaction in a single risk category rarely stays contained. The research draws on a mixed-methods approach combining a systematic literature review spanning the period 2014 to 2025 with legal doctrinal analysis of key maritime conventions, case law, and regulatory instruments. This dual approach allows the authors to connect insights from across disciplines and illustrate these through cascade chain examples. For example, the inclusion of shipping in the EU Emissions Trading System, for instance, introduces carbon pricing obligations that necessitate operational adjustments such as slow steaming or route optimisation, which in