THE shipping industry can crudely be divided into three categories: the good, the bad and the compliant.

The good have arguably already spotted there is a commercial advantage to be taken in optimising operations and having an emissions strategy that moves beyond basic compliance.

The bad will invest remarkable effort in avoiding it altogether.

In advance of this year’s Nor-Shipping events, Lloyd’s List is examining what this means for the majority of shipping that sit in the squeezed middle, unable, unwilling, or unsure of how to progress amid overwhelming complexity.

How does your average shipping operation move beyond compliance to seize the carbon opportunity, improve efficiency and take a commercial advantage over their peers?

Who are the winners and losers of the immediate future where regulatory reporting is already upon us, but so many companies are yet to deploy a convincing strategy?

Is it a question of scale and technical resource that determines success, or is there still a path left for smaller, more agile operators to leapfrog bigger, but laggard rivals?

In the wake of the MEPC83 meeting at the International Maritime Organization, do we finally have sufficient clarity as an industry to move ahead with investment and a green strategy? Or, are we still collectively using the wait-and-see excuse?

Does data transparency really deliver the commercial carbon advantage, or is this more about the management momentum and corporate psychology required to get a traditional business thinking differently about what it means to be a “good” shipowner?

Over a series of podcast, live discussions and analysis articles, Lloyd’s List will be discussing what happens next as we try to identify the likely winners and losers of shipping’s decarbonised regulatory future.

To help guide us, we would like your view. Answer a few quick questions below and for more substantive input contact our editor-in-chief directly at: [email protected]