SECTORAL ACTIVITIES PROGRAMME
Discussion Paper
IS THERE A DECENT WAY |
To purchase this video, click here |
2 SHIP BUILDING
2.1 Where are ships built?
2.2 Who orders ships?
3. THE NEXT STEP
TABLES
Table 1: Ship scrapping by country 1996-1998
Table 2:Ship completions in 1998
Table 3:New ships ordered, by type and country where
they are being built
Table 4:Main countries ordering new ships by type
By any standards, the demolition of ships is a dirty and dangerous occupation. However, the feasibility of ship-breaking is largely determined by the price of scrap metal. The recent introduction of environmental and safety laws in China - once the major breaking nation - has made this industry unprofitable in that country. The race is to the bottom to find countries where occupational health and safety standards are not enforced.
Despite earlier attempts in Resolutions (1)of
the ILO Metal Trades Committee to draw attention to the phenomena of ship-breaking,
ship scrapping, demolition, de-commissioning, or recycling as it is also
known, little has been done up until recently to improve the working conditions
of those involved. However, the recently concluded 279th Session of the
ILO's Governing Body (November 2000) endorsed a conclusion of the Tripartite
Meeting on the Social and Labour impact of Globalization in the Manufacture
of Transport Equipment (8-12 May 2000)(2)
stating that:
There can be no doubt that scrapping a ship that has been run up onto
a beachhead qualifies as unsafe and dangerous work. There is a broad spectrum
of problems facing workers involved with ship-breaking (most of whom are
migrants) ranging from poor conditions of employment and work,(4)
to a total absence of any collective bargaining or industrial relations
procedures. As mentioned above, ILO's previous concerns (consistent with
earlier resolutions of the Metal Trades Committee) have focused more on
the OSH issues surrounding the demolition of ships and the prevention of
accidents and injuries. And even when environmental disasters occur affecting
a wider population, the workers scrapping the ships are first in the line
of exposure. The work is carried out in 40°C heat, on beaches without
any personal protective devices or equipment. Box 1 presents a list prepared
by the ILO of clearly identifiable hazards and hazardous substances associated
with ship-breaking and a number of existing ILO Conventions, Recommendations
and Codes of Practice which can provide guidance. CIS (International Occupational
Safety and Health Information Centre) also maintains a database of relevant
literature on the subject.
Box 1. Identifiable hazards associated with ship-breaking and existing ILO standards
1. Hazardous or Harmful Factors in Ship Scrapping • Asbestos • Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) • Lead • Chromates • Mercury • Fumes of welding & cuffing • Radiation • Noise • Vibration • Air pollution • Low-level radium sources • Organic liquids ( Benzene etc.) • Battery, Compressed gas cylinders,firefighting liquids, etc. • Chemical materials • Work using plasma and gas torches • Explosive(s) • Work using cranes and lifting equipment • Saws, Grinders and Abrasive cutting wheels • Accident factors: falling, upsetting, electric shock, etc. 2. Existing OSH Conventions, Recommendation and Codes of Practice relevant to Ship Scrapping Conventions • C 13 (White Lead Convention)
Recommendations • R 114 ( Radiation Prevention Recommendation )
Codes of Practice • Occupational Safety and Health in the Iron and Steel Industry, 1983
Source: ILO, InFocus Programme on SafeWork |
Given that some ships must be scrapped after 20-25 years for safety reasons, the supply side for these vessels is easy to calculate since the age of the existing fleet is known. In 1998 - a bumper year - a total of 673 ships or 27,254,525 dwt were scrapped, with signs that 1999 will be about the same.The average age of the current 88,000-strong fleet will be 19 years at the end of 2000. To maintain this average would require the annual scrapping of almost 1,900 vessels a year with an average age of 25 years, which would be three times the current rate. (5)
1.4. Where are ships scrapped?
Most of the work is carried out in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan where
the high tides are especially conducive to heaving the ships up onto the
beach. Over 300 ships a year are now being processed at Alang which has
demolished over 2,000 ships since its inception in the early 1980s. On
the other hand, given the fact that this work is carried out in these low
income countries, one would not want to deprive these workers (many of
whom are migrants), of what little income they can earn (even if it appears
meagre by Western standards). To the 25,000 or so who work at Chittagong
in Bangladesh and the 40,000 reportedly in Alang in India must be added
all those indirectly affected or benefiting from the industry. Quite possibly
this would involve multiplying these figures by a factor of five or ten.
Nevertheless, minimum levels of protection must be afforded these workers
to protect them from hazards.
Table 1. Ship scrapping by country 1996 -1998
(All figures in million dwt tonnes)
| Country | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 |
| India | 8.9 | 7.6 | 8.5 |
| Bangladesh | 4.4 | 2.9 | 5.2 |
| Pakistan | 2.0 | 0.8 | 2.7 |
| China | 0.2 | 0.2 | 1.4 |
| Others | 2.3 | 3.8 | 2.6 |
| Total | 17.9 | 14.5 | 20.4 |
Source: Iron & Steelscrap and Shipbreakers Association of India), citing Lloyd's List
Obviously, the only safe way to demolish a ship would be in a shipyard. However, the last ship to be scrapped in the UK was over a quarter of a century ago. Usable facilities still exist in Spain and Turkey and Australia has undertaken a feasibility study to establish a facility. The EU is also doing a study. China which until 1993 undertook half of the scrapping in the world, dropped out of the market when stricter environmental laws were introduced. Although a ship can be scrapped in two weeks in a yard as opposed to over six months on a beach, it is unlikely that industrialized countries will move back into the business as the breaking up of ships also presupposes a market for scrap steel near the ship yard.
In many of the proposed guidelines, such as the US draft(6) guidelines for working conditions on ships being exported for scrapping, the Norwegian proposal (7), submitted to the IMO, and those being considered by the UN General Assembly(8), much of the emphasis is placed on environmental concerns and the prevention of pollution. (References to ship dismantling in the Basel Convention (9) on "The control of the transboundary movement of hazardous waste and their disposal" also go in the same direction, but omit a lot of countries who are not signatories. This Convention, however, was not drafted with ship-breaking in mind). Many of the proposals also focus on the IMO or the Secretariat of the Basel Convention, as the competent agencies, although it is unclear what jurisdiction they would have over working conditions in and around vessels once they have been beached.
A status report (10) by the Directorate General Factory Advice Service and Labour Institutes (DGFASLI), India, provides useful insights on how factory inspection can be strengthened to improve basic safety training for accident prevention.
Greenpeace, the ITF and the IMF have also mounted information campaigns.
In preparation for the Tripartite Meeting (8 - 12 May 2000) on the Social and Labour impact of Globalization in the Manufacture of Transport Equipment, the Director of the ILO Area Office in Dhaka commissioned a special study on ship-breaking in Chittagong.
Box 2. Eyewitness account from Bangladesh
In Bangladesh, the provisions of the Factories Act and occupational safety
measures are not taken into consideration in ship breaking. The testing
of cranes, lifting gear and motorized pulleys is rarely carried out. The
yards re-use ropes and chains recovered from scrapped ships without any
inspection for soundness or strength. There is no system for marking the
loading capacity of crane chains and other lifting equipment. Gas cutters
and their helpers cut steel plates without eye protection, protective clothing,
gloves or boots. Unskilled workers carry pieces of iron sheet on their
shoulders; employers seem unaware of the legal load limit for workers prescribed
in the Factories Act and Factories Rules.
Ships are not properly cleaned before beaching. Workers are unaware of the hazards to which they are likely to be exposed and consequently develop lung problems that prevent them from working. The hatches and pockets of a vessel may contain explosive or inflammable gases; experienced cutters drill small holes in order to release these gases or fumes frequently causing severe explosions. The beaches where ship breaking is undertaken become polluted with chemicals and toxic substances and are littered with small, sharp, iron splinters that can cause injury to workers who are usually barefoot. Accidents are not reported or recorded and workers who are affected by occupational disease or accident lose their jobs. Employers usually conceal information when a worker dies as a result of an occupational accident. In most cases, victims' families are not informed as contractors do not use proper names and addresses of their workers. A number of fatal incidents have occurred in the past as a result of fires, explosions and heavy metal plates falling from the upper part of the ships. Minor fires occur frequently and are controlled by spraying water and sand. Two major accidents were reported in 1998: in one a supervisory staff member was killed by a heavy steel sheet falling from the upper deck of a vessel, and in another, a gas cutter died as a result of an explosion. Recently, in another major accident, a 16,000-tonnes ship exploded in the ship-breaking yard of Brothers Associates, near Sitakunda, discharging poisonous gases. The press reported one dead, 50 missing, and 22 hospitalized. The Ministry of Labour and Employment is responsible for the enforcement of labour laws and ensuring the welfare of the workers; the Department of Inspection is responsible for the implementation of rules of the Factories Act 1965; the Department of Labour for ensuring compliance with the provisions of labour law relating to labour welfare, trade unionism and industrial relations. Other aspects such as OSH and working conditions are within the purview of the Inspection Department. The level of enforcement of the Factories Act and labour laws in the above enterprises is not at all satisfactory e.g. during the last three years, the Inspection Department conducted only 16 inspection visits. Source: Report on Ship-breaking (mimeo) prepared by Ataur Rahman and AZM Tabarak Ullah, consultants, ILO Dhaka, Oct. 1999 |
The debate culminated in 1999 with the first international conference (11)on ship-breaking which failed to reach agreement on the points for discussion(12). Among proposals aimed at producing a solution were the following:
Table 2 below shows that Asia altogether (Japan, South Korea, China)
accounted for between two thirds and three quarters of all ships built
in 1998 depending on the size, followed by Europe with between twenty and
thirty percent. Brazil and the United States accounted for a few percentage
point each.
Table 2. Ship completions in 1998
| Number built | 1,000 GT | 1,000 CGT | |
| Japan | 559 | 40.7% | 38.0% |
| Europe
- Germany |
570
- 74 |
20.0%
4.1 |
28.8%
5.4 |
| South Korea | 159 | 29.3% | 20.3% |
| Rest of World
- China - USA |
365
- 122 - 76 |
10%
5.6 0.8 |
12.9%
6.1 2.0 |
| TOTAL | 1,653 | 100% | 100% |
Source. Association of European Shipbuilders and Shiprepairers: AWES Annual Report 1998-1999, p. 91
Sub-contracting and international outsourcing, as in the rest of the TEM industries, is also prevalent in the shipbuilding industry with countries such as Poland and Romania building components such as bridges and decks and then floating them to Hamburg for final assembly. Table 3 shows where "new" ships are currently being built.
Table 3. New ships ordered, by type and country where they are being
built
| Country | Dry cargo | Container | Tanker | Bulker | RoRo | Total | Total
dwt (000) |
| Japan | 77 | 58 | 169 | 230 | 49 | 583 | 38,430 |
| South Korea | 2 | 58 | 204 | 57 | 20 | 341 | 34,251 |
| China | 65 | 52 | 67 | 25 | 4 | 213 | 5,040 |
| Taiwan | 4 | 20 | - | 11 | - | 35 | 1,706 |
| Germany | 23 | 35 | 16 | - | 22 | 96 | 1,673 |
| Poland | 6 | 17 | 18 | 13 | 2 | 56 | 1,571 |
| Denmark | 1 | 13 | 5 | - | - | 19 | 1,124 |
| Croatia | 19 | - | 18 | 1 | 5 | 43 | 1,112 |
| Spain | 1 | - | 20 | - | 6 | 27 | 984 |
| Ukraine | 7 | - | 12 | 5 | - | 24 | 929 |
| Netherlands | 145 | 7 | 16 | 2 | 3 | 173 | 806 |
| United States | - | - | 4 | 1 | 13 | 18 | 805 |
| Italy | 4 | - | 23 | 2 | 14 | 43 | 779 |
| Romania | 44 | 4 | 9 | 5 | - | 62 | 550 |
| Turkey | 15 | 11 | 9 | 3 | 6 | 43 | 448 |
| Indonesia | 2 | 7 | 8 | 5 | - | 22 | 325 |
| Iran | 15 | - | 1 | - | - | 16 | 318 |
| Philippines | - | - | - | 8 | 1 | 9 | 283 |
| Russia | 10 | - | 18 | 1 | - | 29 | 279 |
| Bulgaria | 12 | - | - | 7 | - | 19 | 265 |
| India | 3 | 1 | 3 | 4 | - | 11 | 229 |
| Norway | - | - | 5 | - | - | 5 | 144 |
| Slovakia | 28 | - | - | - | - | 28 | 112 |
| France | - | - | 3 | 1 | - | 4 | 110 |
| Yugoslavia | 10 | - | 2 | 3 | - | 15 | 66 |
| Others | |||||||
| TOTAL | 507 | 289 | 640 | 386 | 156 | 1978 | 92,681 |
Note: Excludes passenger ships (183) and other miscellaneous vessels (417) which will not affect the overall analysis above. Source: Fairplay "Newbuildings", 4 March 1999, p. 4
From the above it is clear that more than half of all new ships ordered
in 1998 were being built in Asia, the vast majority (nearly 50%) of which
will be built in Japan and South Korea which account for almost 80% of
the deadweight tonnage (dwt), which once again confirms the trend away
from Europe. Newer data reveal that the three Far Eastern countries of
- Japan, South Korea and China - now account for 86% of the world order
book (13).
Table 4 further shows those countries which have ordered new ships.
The top countries ordering are from Japan, Western Europe and the United
States which means that these countries are also in a position to specify
the characteristics according to which the ships are built such as using
material which can be recycled and is safe to dismantle.
Table 4: Main countries ordering new ships
by type
| Country | No. | Dwt | GenC | Cont | Tank | Bulk | Pass | Misc | RoRo | Reef | Comb | Offs |
| Japan | 315 | 18,421 | 23 | 13 | 75 | 116 | 12 | 23 | 36 | 13 | - | 4 |
| Germany | 252 | 3,676 | 100 | 83 | 24 | 11 | 6 | 6 | 21 | 1 | - | - |
| Netherlands | 218 | 1,375 | 110 | 12 | 16 | 1 | 4 | 58 | 10 | 5 | - | 2 |
| Unknown
countries |
190 | 3,626 | 82 | 11 | 33 | 27 | 4 | 24 | 4 | 4 | - | 1 |
| Norway | 180 | 4,559 | 10 | - | 44 | 14 | 10 | 38 | 13 | - | - | 51 |
| United States | 179 | 4,738 | - | 2 | 43 | 2 | 30 | 29 | 13 | - | - | 60 |
| Greece | 136 | 8,042 | 10 | 14 | 66 | 18 | 21 | - | - | 7 | - | - |
| United Kingdom | 87 | 8,269 | 7 | 1 | 36 | 5 | 10 | 13 | 1 | - | 2 | 12 |
| China | 85 | 2,910 | 17 | 20 | 11 | 30 | - | 7 | - | - | - | - |
| Denmark | 84 | 4,563 | 5 | 28 | 25 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 2 | - | - | 13 |
| Italy | 77 | 1,414 | - | - | 25 | 6 | 22 | 12 | 6 | 4 | - | 2 |
| Taiwan | 66 | 3,541 | 7 | 36 | 7 | 14 | - | 2 | - | - | - | - |
| Singapore | 64 | 3,234 | - | 1 | 24 | 13 | 2 | 13 | 2 | - | - | 9 |
| Indonesia | 48 | 295 | 1 | 7 | 21 | 2 | 5 | 12 | - | - | - | - |
| Russia | 47 | 927 | 14 | - | 24 | - | - | 6 | - | 1 | - | 2 |
| TOTAL | 2, 732 |
Source: AWES Annual report 1998-99, op. cit., p. 2
At present, sufficient research has been undertaken by enough agencies (including the ILO) to identify the problems and hazards associated with ship-breaking. There are only a handful of countries which order ships, there are fewer which build them and even less that decommission them. Each group of countries could be specifically targeted, for example, to require those ordering ships to write recyclable material into their specifications and to document any hazardous material used. Already existing ILO standards (listed above) could be scanned to extract OSH passages which are also applicable and relevant to ship-breaking activities. In this way, a compendium could be prepared as requested, and could later lead to the publication of a practical guide While the ultimate goal would be a Code of Practice on Safety and Health in Ship Scrapping, a number of interim steps such as training videos 14 , hand-outs (translated into the local languages), seminars and workshops could be organized, with the goal of improving worker safety.
The ILO's Sectoral Activities Department will work with the InFocus Programme on Safework, as well as with the ILO Regional Office in Bangkok, Multidisciplinary Teams and the area offices in Islamabad, New Delhi and Dhaka. It will liaise with other international agencies, such as the IMO and the Secretariat of the Basel Convention, with relevant NGO's and International Trade Secretariats (IMF and ITF). The ILO's main focus would be in the field of occupational safety and health (OSH) and worker protection. Potential donors would be those countries which either order, build or sail ships, and which are known to have an interest in the matter. The direct beneficiaries would be the workers and employers in Asia, especially in Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and China.
The first national workshop on worker safety in the shipbreaking industries is scheduled to be held in Chittagong from 21 to 22 March 2001. Others are planned, first, for Pakistan and India (Alang)and will be followed by a sub-regional seminar which will assess the lessons learned and formulate a project document as a basis for a technical cooperation project.
____________________________________
1 Resolutions 100 and 111, respectively of the 12th (1988) and 13th (1994) sessions of the Metal Trades Committee.
2 ILO: The Social and Labour impact of Globalization in the Manufacture of Transport Equipment (Geneva, 2000), pp. 136-141
3 Note on the Proceedings of the Tripartite Meeting on the Social and Labour impact of Globalization in the Manufacture of Transport Equipment, para. 15 of the Conclusions (also available in pdf format). In this connection, an "Inventory of Potentially Hazardous Materials on Board" has been jointly developed by nine agencies: BIMCO, ECSA, IACS, INTERCARGO, INTERTANKO, ICS, ITOPF, ITF and OCIMF.
4 In the words of ILO's Senior Specialist on OSH (SAAT, New Delhi) who visited Mumbai port (in India): "It is impossible to make an assessment ... In fact, there are no 'working conditions' at all ... without any safety measures ..."
5 "Concentration of power", Lloyd's List, June 2000, p. 3
6 EPA-OSHA: Self-audit and inspection guide for facilities conducting ship scrapping (December 1998)
7 IMO, Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC), 42rd session, Future Work Programme: Scrapping of Ships, Submitted by Norway. (February 1999). A first draft will be discussed at the 46th session of the MEPC in April 2001.
8 General Assembly, Oceans and law of the sea (Decommissioning/ recycling/ scrapping of ships), doc. A/55/61, 20 March 2000.
9 Report of the Technical Working Group (TWG) on the environmentally sound, full and partial dismantling of ships (co-ordinated by Norway), UNEP/CHW/TWG/17/.
10 Ministry of Labour, Government of India, Mumbai: Status report on occupational safety, health and welfare of workers in the ship-breaking industry at Alang, 1998.
11 1st Global Ship Scrapping Summit, Amsterdam, 23 June 1999. Background Paper: Raising Awareness, Considering Action (a second global ship-scrapping summit is tentatively scheduled for April 2001).
12 Alan Dickey: "Scrapping accord dumped at summit", Lloyd's List, 24 June 1999
13 "Concentration of power" Lloyd's List, June 2000, p. 3.
14 Sanja Göhre: "Globalization's downside - From shipyard to graveyard: Is there a decent way to break ships" in World of Work, No. 37, December 2000 (Geneva, ILO) p.8
