New analysis published this week finds broad public support across the shipping and fuels sectors for a climate agreement at the International Maritime organisation, but it also identifies clear differences over key design choices. Sources indicated the findings on 13 November 2026, summarising an InfluenceMap study that sets out detailed evidence of that backing.
InfluenceMap, described in the report as a global think tank, compiled the analysis underpinning the account. The study concludes there is widespread public advocacy in favour of an IMO climate deal from groups linked to both the shipping industry and fuel suppliers.
At the same time, the analysis highlights differing advocacy positions on three principal components of any framework: the carbon price, the fuel standard and the rules for counting fuel emissions. The report presents these as distinct areas where stakeholders’ public positions do not align.
Differences over price, standard and accounting
On the carbon price, InfluenceMap’s material identifies a range of publicly stated positions among actors in the shipping and fuels sectors. The study similarly shows divergence in how a fuel standard should be defined and applied.
Rules for counting emissions from fuels are flagged separately in the analysis as a contested technical area, with the report presenting detailed evidence of variation in public advocacy on accounting approaches.
What the analysis adds to the debate
The report's summary notes that the InfluenceMap work brings together evidence rather than offering prescriptive solutions, setting out where public statements converge and where they do not. The report therefore supplies a mapped picture of consensus and disagreement as seen in stakeholders’ public advocacy.
The timing of the analysis, as reported, frames these findings against ongoing discussions at the International Maritime organisation. The reports item records the InfluenceMap study as the source of the evidence set out in the report.
The InfluenceMap analysis and the reports summary together provide a focused snapshot of public positions in the sectors most directly affected by any IMO climate framework. Readers and policymakers can use that mapped evidence to better understand where public advocacy aligns and where further engagement may be required.