DNV: High-risk waters test shipping’s resilience and responsibility

November 11 ------ As shipping continues to navigate disruptions caused by the conflict involving Iran, concerns are growing over the risks facing seafarers operating in high-risk waters and the industry’s responsibility to protect them.

During DNV’s Market Views videocast, titled Resilience versus transparency: Operating in high-risk waters, Carl-Johan Hagman, President and CEO of NYK Group Europe, and Jakub Walenkiewicz, DNV’s Director of Maritime Markets & Trade, discussed how shipping has adapted to geopolitical disruption while maintaining global trade.

Although the sector has demonstrated considerable resilience through successive crises, Hagman stressed that its ability to maintain operations should not come at the expense of seafarer safety. He emphasized that the industry’s adaptability must not overshadow the human consequences of operating in conflict-affected waters.

Seafarers bear the consequences of maritime disruption

Reflecting on the conflict in the Middle East, Hagman argued that the burden of maintaining global trade during periods of instability falls disproportionately on seafarers. He questioned whether the level of danger faced by crews in conflict-affected waters would be considered acceptable in other working environments, particularly where vessels may be exposed to missiles, armed attacks and other military threats.

Hagman said that protecting crews must remain a fundamental responsibility for shipowners, even when commercial pressures encourage the continuation of trade. He explained that NYK had stopped sending vessels into the affected areas around the Strait of Hormuz following the escalation of hostilities. However, the speed of the escalation had made it difficult to anticipate the risks and safely withdraw vessels already operating in the region.

Furthermore, according to Hagman, the company has been improving its ability to monitor security conditions and assess developments on an hourly basis to avoid exposing crews to unnecessary danger.

He also drew on previous experience involving seafarers held hostage to illustrate the wider consequences of serious security incidents, explaining that such situations can disrupt an entire shipping company’s operations. Beyond the moral obligation to protect personnel, he argued that exposing crews to extreme security risks makes little commercial sense.

Shipping resilience comes with reduced transparency

The discussion also addressed the shipping sector’s ability to maintain operations despite disruptions to major trade routes and maritime chokepoints. Hagman noted that shipping has demonstrated considerable adaptability during crises affecting the Suez Canal, Panama Canal and Strait of Hormuz. However, he cautioned against assuming that the industry’s resilience means all disruptions can be managed without serious consequences.

Walenkiewicz raised concerns that shipping’s continued ability to operate during the Middle East conflict has been accompanied by reduced transparency about actual vessel movements and trading conditions. He observed that available shipping data does not always reflect the full picture of operations in high-risk waters, making it more difficult to understand the risks vessels face.

This creates additional challenges for shipowners seeking to make informed decisions about routing, crew safety and the continuation of commercial operations. Furthermore, the discussion highlighted the importance of reliable situational awareness and access to timely security information, particularly when conditions can change rapidly.

Greater cooperation needed on maritime security

The protection of commercial shipping in conflict-affected waters requires greater cooperation between governments, flag states and the shipping sector, with freedom of navigation remaining a shared responsibility.

Naval protection plays an important role in this effort, not only by strengthening security but also by reassuring seafarers operating in dangerous regions. The presence of naval vessels can help crews feel safer during periods of heightened threats, while governments benefiting from international trade have a responsibility to support the safe passage of commercial vessels.

Beyond naval protection, the discussion highlighted opportunities for greater cooperation on maritime security information. Classification societies and other maritime organizations could help facilitate common platforms through which shipping companies share information about emerging threats and operational risks.

Although shipping companies compete commercially, Hagman stressed that safety should not become an area of competitive advantage. More systematic information sharing could improve situational awareness, support risk assessments and help operators make informed decisions when navigating conflict-affected waters.

Maritime chokepoints raise wider concerns

These security challenges also reflect broader geopolitical pressures on strategically important maritime chokepoints, where freedom of navigation increasingly intersects with national interests and attempts to exercise greater control over shipping routes.

The discussion highlighted the importance of open maritime trade to global economic development, while raising concerns about the potential consequences of restrictions or additional transit charges imposed on vessels passing through critical waterways.

Such measures could increase transportation costs and affect international trade beyond the shipping sector. Nevertheless, shipping’s ability to adjust routes and operations in response to changing conditions remains an important source of resilience, even as geopolitical uncertainty creates new challenges.

Resilience must not come at the expense of safety

Looking beyond immediate security concerns, the videocast also examined how shipping is adapting to broader changes, including high newbuilding activity, evolving business models, technological developments and new sources of investment.

The sector’s ability to respond to successive crises demonstrates its adaptability, but maintaining this resilience will require continued adjustments to commercial and operational practices.

At the same time, the responsibility to sustain global trade must be balanced against the risks faced by those working at sea. Greater cooperation between shipowners, governments and maritime organizations, supported by reliable security information and effective risk assessments, remains essential. The discussion reinforced a central distinction: the ability to keep trade moving through periods of conflict does not mean that the risks to seafarers have been adequately addressed.

Operational resilience must therefore be accompanied by stronger protection for crews navigating high-risk waters.

Source: safety4sea.com