ANNOUNCEMENTS
The maritime industry is facing pressure from regulators to embed ESG issues into strategic decision-making. Indeed, the international maritime industry accounts for 90% of global trade by cargo mass and 2.89% of global GHG emissions, and this challenge is responding to an essential maritime ESG gap: accounting for GHG emissions and looking for materiality assessments are compliance-based not strategic tools.
A comprehensive GHG emissions accounting methodology for marine dual-materiality assessment has been developed and validated. The mixed-methods study uses emissions inventory analysis - quantitative for GHG emissions, and qualitative for ESG materiality assessment - and examined 18 marine business operational locations, spanning three emissions scopes and ten ESG consideration variables.
Scope 3 emissions encompass 94% of maritime emissions (31,085.43 tCO₂e total), with 42.49% derived from acquired goods and services. Of the 18 marine locations in the study, GHG emissions and climate effects were the highest rated ESG consideration (1.92), followed by energy efficiency at (0.96) and crew health and safety at (0.90). Regression analysis found that composite materiality assessments were positively correlated with final mapping (R² = 0.630, p < 0.01).
The research uses systematic emissions attributions to ESG issues and a stakeholder-weighted materiality assessment to help turn compliance based reporting emissions data into strategic ESG management tools. Prioritizing resource allocation from combined environmental effects and financial materiality is a way for marine businesses to achieve both the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and International Maritime Organization (IMO) decarbonization targets.
Keywords: Maritime industry, GHG emissions accounting, Double materiality, ESG frameworks, Sustainability reporting, Carbon accounting, Maritime decarbonization.
