The Impact and Response of Modern Intelligent Shipping Development on Traditional Maritime Law System

Authors

  • Zixuan Yang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62051/ijgem.v9n3.08

Keywords:

Intelligent shipping, Maritime law, MASS rules, Responsibility determination, Regulatory innovation

Abstract

With the deep penetration of 5G, artificial intelligence, and blockchain technology in the shipping industry, intelligent shipping has moved from technical testing to large-scale implementation. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has classified Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS) into four levels, and countries such as Norway and Japan have completed regular trials of L3 level coastal ships. China's Yangtze River Maritime Intelligent Platform has identified 93000 safety hazards and avoided 17 collision accidents. However, the traditional maritime law system, which is based on "manual operation," has significant gaps in terms of subject identification, responsibility division, and regulatory rules. In 2022, the South Korean Golden Ray roll on/roll off ship capsized due to a defect in its intelligent navigation software, and in 2024, the CMA CGM Libra ship ran aground due to an error in its intelligent route planning. Both accidents resulted in disputes over liability identification due to the lack of clear legal regulations; Since the revision of China's Maritime Law in 2020, it has only mentioned "smart ships" in the "General Provisions" and has not covered the core provisions, lagging behind the non mandatory MASS rules process of IMO 2026. This article combines real cases and legislative dynamics to analyze the essence of institutional impact, and proposes a response path of "international rule connection+domestic institutional supplementation", providing practical reference for the adaptation of maritime law to intelligent shipping.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Soyer, B., & Tettenborn, A. (Eds.). (2019). New technologies, artificial intelligence and ship law in the 21st century. Taylor & Francis.

[2] Wróbel, K., Krata, P., & Montewka, J. (2019). Preliminary results of a system-theoretic assessment of maritime autonomous surface ships’ safety. TransNav, International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety od Sea Transportation, 13(4), 717-723.

[3] Xu, H., & Guedes Soares, C. (2023). Review of path-following control systems for maritime autonomous surface ships. Journal of Marine Science and Application, 22(2), 153-171.

[4] Vojković, G., & Milenković, M. (2020). Autonomous ships and legal authorities of the ship master. Case studies on transport policy, 8(2), 333-340.

[5] Zhu, L., & Xing, R. W. (2019). A pioneering study of third-party liability insurance for unmanned/autonomous commercial ships. Journal of business law, 2019(6), 442-458.

[6] Thompson, M., & Davies, M. (2023). Autonomous Ships: Liability and Insurance. In The global insurance market and change (pp. 182-211). Informa Law from Routledge.

[7] Li, S., & Fung, K. S. (2019). Maritime autonomous surface ships (MASS): implementation and legal issues. Maritime Business Review, 4(4), 330-339.

[8] Fenton, A. J., & Chapsos, I. (2023). Ships without crews: IMO and UK responses to cybersecurity, technology, law and regulation of maritime autonomous surface ships (MASS). Frontiers in Computer Science, 5, 1151188.

[9] Islam, M. S. (2025). Navigating modern era at sea: legal challenges and opportunities of unmanned and autonomous shipping. AI and Ethics, 5(3), 2293-2306.

[10] Pu, S., & Lam, J. S. L. (2021). Blockchain adoptions in the maritime industry: a conceptual framework. Maritime Policy & Management, 48(6), 777-794.

Downloads

Published

30-12-2025

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Yang, Z. (2025). The Impact and Response of Modern Intelligent Shipping Development on Traditional Maritime Law System. International Journal of Global Economics and Management, 9(3), 52-57. https://doi.org/10.62051/ijgem.v9n3.08