Fragmented shipping value chain collaboration: Green corridors require aligned action from shipowners, charterers, ports, fuel producers, banks, insurers, and regulators, yet stakeholders remain siloed with mismatched timelines, risk appetites, and incentives. Of 80+ announced corridors, only 4 have been realised. 

Insufficient demand and investment for green fuels and infrastructure: High upfront costs for zero-emission fuels, vessel retrofits, and port upgrades create a “chicken-and-egg” problem, while uncertain offtake deters supply-side investment. 

Lack of scalable, commercially viable pathways that include marine protection and a just transition: Many corridor efforts focus on emissions alone and struggle to protect marine ecosystems, support seafarers in developing regions, and remain profitable over time. 

Shipping, trade, and energy are interconnected but disconnected in the transition: Shipping underpins global trade and energy security, while the energy transition shapes maritime fuels and economics. Treating shipping in isolation narrows solutions and misaligns value-chain incentives.