Beware of regulatory protectionism in shipping
Posted on | March 11, 2010 | 1 Comment
Who remembers the picture of a six foot high tanker captain standing on the deck of his ship with a terrifying pile of rules, regulations, recommendations, byelaws, and other improving texts towering over him? I cannot recall the caption but the stark warning was that if he failed to read any of this immense wordage, he could end up in the slammer.
But just imagine the pile of paper which would have to be carried by a world wide trader, if every darned country, every region and most local authorities had their own take on what regulations they expected every ship to follow. It would be chaos on stilts, geographical anarchy, a patchwork of bureaucratic nonsense, that would drive shipmasters stark, staring mad. Unless it was a very big ship, or several hundred tons of cargo shut out, it would probably end up overloaded.
But the seeds of this garden of tares are already being sown, as local and regional politicians determined to put their own stamp on affairs, while being goaded by restive natives and (mostly) environmental zealots, formulate their own regulations.
Of course local interests wish to be heard if they see ships polluting their coasts, or perhaps even threatening to do the same by their presence. It’s easy to blacken the name of an industry, especially when it appears to be run mainly by foreigners. From the European Union to the coast of California, regulatory protectionism appears to have been unleashed, and nobody seems able to put this particular genie back in its bottle.
“Keep regulation global” says BIMCO in the lead article in which the shipping organisation reflects on the major issues which confront the industry. You might think that there are all manner of problems that keep shipping folk awake at night, but the fact that BIMCO has chosen to lead with this topic is significant. It is far from a new song – fifty years ago the organisation was inveighing against regulatory localism, but it is arguably more serious a threat than it has ever been.
Shipping is privileged to enjoy, in the IMO, one of the few UN agencies that really works, yet member states still find it more politic to produce local regulations than to ratify and bring into force sensible, pragmatic IMO conventions agreed by consensus. Goodness, it is a global industry, which operates under a thoroughly workable international regime. There is just no excuse for impatient Californians, or Brussels-based Europeans going off on their local or regional own and making nonsense of these international agreements. Whether it is environmental or trade rules, a trading world needs to operate against international criteria.
We have had the Oscars this week. Perhaps we should be offering a sort of international booby-prize, with nominations from shipping around the world, for protectionist bodies and politicians which bog down international trade and transport in their protectionist sludge. What should we call it?
Comments
One Response to “Beware of regulatory protectionism in shipping”
Leave a Reply
March 13th, 2010 @ 6:04 pm
With all due respect, I couldn’t disagree more. I mean, I empathize with officers and companies who struggle to stay atop a mountain of regulations. But, who wants to work in a shipping industry that is unable to work within the legal constraints established by the exporting and the importing country – constraints set by these countries’ oftentimes democratically elected leaders? I note your article is strikingly short in terms of examples. Why not make specific who should sacrifice? Should Californians suddenly find it OK to allow invasive species to wipe out local fauna? Should people in Japan lessen their air pollution laws to accord with that of China, even if the people in Japan don’t want that. It’s ridiculous. Crazy. That the shipping companies who were making USD 1 billion in profits two years ago and are now making USD 1 billion in losses this year want someone to cut them a break, is one thing. To tell governments to go soft on them for it, is another. We should work for a shipping industry that serves the interests of the people, that allows hard-working businesses to succeed by reaching a global market and that uses technology to constantly improve. An industry that wants to flaunt the laws of some nations, in favour of others, doesn’t sound like a healthy one. By all means, BIMCO and others can let the world, and individual countries, know the cost of slapping new rules on the industry. But considering the toll the shipping industry has taken on society when rules weren’t strict enough, it is asinine for the industry to seek a free-card now. Shipping will follow the letter of the law; shipping’s defenders should support the spirit of it, even when that may mean a hit on profits.