Across the maritime industry, sustainability has evolved from a regulatory obligation into a strategic business priority. Yet many organisations remain focused on meeting compliance requirements, but treating ESG as a reporting exercise rather than a driver of long-term value.
Compliance is important. It demonstrates that an organisation understands and meets applicable regulations, disclosure requirements and stakeholder expectations. However, compliance is increasingly becoming the minimum standard rather than a measure of leadership.
“The organisations that stand out are not necessarily those doing the most reporting,” says Manasi Bhopale, Senior Consultant – Sustainability, LR Advisory. “They are the ones embedding ESG into how they make decisions, manage risks, invest in the future, engage with stakeholders, and create value.”
Compliance is only the beginning
The first stage of any maritime ESG journey is often centred around compliance. Organisations develop policies, collect vessel emissions data, complete customer questionnaires and prepare sustainability reports. These activities are essential foundations, helping businesses understand their impacts and establish governance mechanisms.
However, compliance alone rarely transforms business performance. A company can produce an annual sustainability report and still struggle to integrate ESG considerations into fleet or capital investment decisions. Compliance can mean measuring emissions without having a credible decarbonisation strategy. It can mean meeting regulatory requirements but failing to identify ESG-related opportunities that could strengthen competitiveness, improve vessel efficiency or build operational resilience.
LR Advisory’s recent Maritime ESG Maturity Index illustrates this gap. Most organisations can be placed along a maturity spectrum ranging from Beginner to Leader in four bands.
The Maritime ESG Maturity Index applies the same four bands, assessing companies against 59 questions across governance and strategy, environmental management, social impact and human capital, risk and disclosure, and the value chain.
Its assessment of 48 global shipping companies produced an average score of 56 out of 100, placing the whole sample in the lower Advanced band. Most of the companies assessed had established the visible architecture of ESG governance, including reports, board oversight and defined environmental programmes. What was often missing was greater depth in areas such as external assurance, Scope 3 reporting, value-chain accountability and maritime-specific environmental performance.
The Index found that 27 of the 48 companies scored higher on governance than on operational environmental performance. This suggests that, across much of the industry, policies, oversight and disclosure are developing more quickly than measurable changes in operations.
“The question is no longer simply whether a shipping company is compliant,” says Bhopale. “It is whether ESG has become part of the way the organisation operates, from the boardroom and shoreside functions to decisions affecting vessels, crews and the wider supply chain.”
Understanding ESG maturity
ESG maturity reflects how deeply sustainability is integrated throughout a business. It considers whether ESG is treated as a standalone function or as a strategic capability influencing decision-making across the organisation.
-
Beginner
At the Beginner stage, ESG efforts are largely reactive. Activities are typically driven by immediate customer requests, investor questionnaires or regulatory requirements. Data collection may be inconsistent, responsibilities unclear and sustainability initiatives fragmented between fleet, technical, crewing and corporate teams. The focus is on answering stakeholder questions rather than using ESG insights to drive business performance.
In a maritime context, this may mean gathering emissions or safety data for an individual request without having consistent definitions, ownership or systems across the fleet.
-
Progressing
Organisations at the Progressing stage have recognised the need for a more structured approach. Sustainability reporting becomes more consistent, with clearer roles and responsibilities and key performance indicators set.
Governance processes start to emerge, and organisations begin setting targets around emissions reduction, seafarer welfare, workforce development or responsible business practices. While compliance remains an important driver, ESG becomes gradually embedded into fleet and organisational planning.
-
Advanced
Advanced organisations move beyond reporting and begin integrating ESG into their business strategy. Leadership teams consider sustainability-related risks and opportunities when making decisions, while ESG performance becomes linked to operational improvement, supply-chain engagement, fleet investment and broader business objectives.
This is where the distinction between governance and execution becomes critical. The Index found that governance and strategy was the strongest-performing pillar, with a normalised mean score of 60.6. Environmental performance scored 52.4, while the value chain was the weakest pillar at 47.5.
Most companies had a supplier code of conduct, but relatively few demonstrated deeper supply-chain visibility, formal ship-recycling policies or the integration of ESG criteria into procurement.
At this stage, sustainability is no longer viewed solely as a compliance requirement. It becomes a tool for managing risk, improving vessel and operational efficiency, strengthening stakeholder relationships and supporting growth.
-
Leader
Leader organisations treat ESG as a core element of corporate strategy. Sustainability considerations influence everything from capital allocation and fleet renewal to innovation, customer engagement and long-term planning.
These organisations set ambitious targets, demonstrate clear accountability and engage proactively with stakeholders across their value chain. Their environmental data is more likely to be independently assured, while decarbonisation targets, financing arrangements and investment decisions are connected by clear and verifiable performance indicators.
Only 12 of the 48 companies assessed by the Index achieved Leader status. The report found that full independent assurance of ESG data was one of the clearest differentiators between companies in the Advanced and Leader bands.
Importantly, leaders in this band do not simply respond to change. They help shape it. Rather than asking what maritime regulations require today, they focus on what their business, assets and people will need to remain competitive tomorrow.
Why ESG maturity matters
A mature ESG programme delivers benefits that extend far beyond compliance.
More charterers and cargo owners want partners that can show credible sustainability performance. Investors and financiers place greater emphasis on transparency, governance and long-term resilience. Regulators continue to introduce new requirements, making robust ESG management systems and reliable operational data more important.
Organisations with higher levels of ESG maturity are better prepared to respond because the necessary governance structures, data systems and decision-making processes are already in place. They are also more likely to connect corporate commitments with practical considerations such as fuel and emissions performance, crew welfare, ship recycling, procurement and asset investment.
The Index also reveals significant differences within shipping. Container companies achieved an average score of 74.7, while tanker operators averaged 55.8 and dry bulk companies 49.5. These results should not be treated as a simple ranking of sectors, as each operates within a different commercial and stakeholder environment. They do, however, demonstrate that ESG maturity is developing unevenly across maritime markets.
Maritime-specific environmental performance remains an area for improvement. Across the assessed companies, criteria covering whale-strike prevention, underwater noise, Inventory of Hazardous Materials compliance and biodiversity-sensitive navigation scored comparatively poorly, including among companies in the Leader band. This indicates that broad corporate ESG frameworks do not always capture the environmental issues arising directly from vessel operations.
“Maturity is not simply about having more policies or producing a longer report,” says Bhopale. “It is about whether an organisation can turn its commitments into credible operational performance and use ESG information to make better decisions.”
“More importantly, mature organisations can identify opportunities that less mature organisations overlook. Whether through improved operational efficiency, stronger stakeholder trust, better workforce engagement or increased access to sustainable finance, ESG maturity can become a source of competitive advantage,” she adds.
Looking beyond compliance
Compliance will always remain a critical part of doing business. But in a rapidly changing maritime landscape, it should be viewed as the starting line, not the finish line.
The industry has made meaningful progress in establishing ESG governance and disclosure. The next stage is to ensure those structures translate into verifiable outcomes across vessels, shoreside operations and supply chains.
The real differentiator lies in how effectively organisations integrate ESG into their culture, strategy and decision-making processes. As expectations from customers, charterers, regulators, investors and society continue to evolve, shipping companies that invest in building ESG maturity will be better positioned to navigate future challenges and seize emerging opportunities.
Ultimately, the question is not “Are we compliant?”, it is “How mature is our ESG programme, and where do we want to be next?”
Where would your organisation place itself today: Beginner, Progressing, Advanced or Leader?
Compare your fleet by checking against LR’s Maritime ESG Maturity Index Benchmark Report
