Many charterers claim to prioritise ESG, but economic realities often tell another story. This article explores how tight margins, fragmented markets, and weak incentives mean that cost and timing still outweigh ethical and environmental performance in vessel selection.
Charterers claim to prioritise safety and environmental performance over cost, but commercial pressures override ESG considerations when selecting vessels.
This research shows that charterers frequently position themselves as ESG-driven decision makers. 73% claim safety records and investments in risk reduction solutions significantly or critically influence chartering decisions. Nearly half (47%) rank vessel safety as their top priority above other ESG factors. 40% say crew welfare standards significantly or critically influence their chartering choices, and 47% say carbon reduction targets play a critical role in their selection decisions.
Yet when commercial realities intrude, ESG considerations slip. Only 27% of charterers report offering better terms to owners that exceed ESG baselines. 60% say tight profit margins limit their ability to select vessels with higher ESG standards, and 53% cite short deadlines or urgent delivery demands.
According to Gina Panayiotou, CEO and Founder of Oceans Arena, the demand from charterers and mainstream segments for greener vessels remains relatively low. Although coalitions of large charterers such as the Zero Emission Maritime Buyers Alliance (ZEMBA) and the Sea Cargo Charter signatories have pledged to prioritise low-emission vessels, this is still the exception rather than the norm.
Prashanth Athipar, Head of Maritime Safety & Technical at BHP, explained:
“Nothing goes out unless the ship is safe. Safety is the first and foremost thing. Do what is right is one of BHP’s core values. It means, a sustainable future starts with safety and integrity, building trust with those around us.”
He added: “Owners say pay me a premium for a greener vessel. Fine. But unfortunately, there is currently no global regulatory or commercial system in place for end customers to pay for the total life cycle emissions, including shipping emissions. So, it becomes our problem.”
The evidence points to a paradox. While safety is universally acknowledged as non-negotiable, in practice it acts more like a threshold than a differentiator. Once a vessel is deemed “safe enough,” cost and availability again dominate decision-making.
To explore how the maritime industry can anchor safety, sustainability, and crew welfare at the heart of vessel selection, read the full thought leadership report, From Pledges to Practice: Anchoring Safety, Sustainability, and Crew Welfare in Vessel Selection, commissioned by RightShip.
