IMO Publishes New MASS Code for Autonomous Ships
On 1 July, the International Maritime Organization published a new code for Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships, usually shortened to MASS. According to the UK government, it is the first international framework written specifically for remotely operated and autonomous cargo ships covered by the safety rules in SOLAS Chapter I. That may sound like a specialist story, but it reaches further than the shipping sector. If more vessels are going to rely on software, sensors and remote control, countries need a shared rulebook on safety before the technology becomes common at sea.
If you are wondering what an autonomous ship actually is, the short answer is that it is not always a crewless robot vessel crossing the ocean alone. Some ships may carry people on board while using advanced automation for parts of the voyage. Others may be controlled from shore for some tasks, with human operators stepping in when needed. **What this means:** MASS is really an umbrella term. It covers different levels of automation, from ships with heavy computer support to vessels that can be remotely operated, and that is exactly why regulators have been trying to define the ground rules clearly.
The new code matters because shipping law has had to catch up with engineering. According to the IMO, the MASS Code is non-mandatory for now, but it gives governments, shipowners, inspectors and manufacturers a common starting point. Instead of each country guessing its own approach, the code sets out shared principles for how these vessels should be designed, checked and run. In practical terms, it touches the issues that tend to worry people most: certification, software, cyber security, manning, training and watchkeeping. Those are not small details. They decide who is responsible, what counts as safe, and how a vessel is assessed before it is allowed to operate.
The structure of the code is easier to follow than the name suggests. Part 1 sets the purpose, principles and objectives. Part 2 turns those principles into rules that apply across the board, including surveys, certification, software, security, manning, training and watchkeeping. Part 3 then looks at what a ship is actually doing, covering navigation, remote operations, fire management, cargo handling and search and rescue. There is also an appendix for the paperwork side of things, including certificates and records for autonomous and remote operations. That may sound dry, but it is a reminder that regulation is not only about big ideas. It is also about the forms, checks and records that make a safety system work in real life.
The UK had a strong hand in shaping this stage of the work. The government says the Maritime and Coastguard Agency took a leading role during drafting at the IMO, with Leanne Page, the MCA’s Assistant Director for Future Technical Standards, describing the publication as a major move towards clearer and safer rules. For the UK, the code does not instantly change domestic law. The plan is to use these high-level principles to prepare national legislation later, after consultation with the maritime sector, and the government says firms with technical questions can go through the UK Maritime Innovation Hub. In other words, this is a framework first and a full legal rewrite later.
The next step is a two-year Experience-Building Phase, when researchers, regulators and industry will gather evidence from use, trials and feedback. That is an important detail. The IMO is not pretending the first version is perfect; it is testing how well the code works before turning it into a mandatory regime. **Why that matters:** shipping is an international business where mistakes can be deadly and expensive. A phased approach gives countries room to learn what works, what needs tightening and what new problems appear once autonomous systems move from pilot projects into ordinary operations. The mandatory version is scheduled to come into force by 2032.
For students, teachers and curious readers, this is a useful example of how technology and regulation often grow side by side. New inventions do not simply arrive and then sort themselves out. Public bodies, international agencies and industry have to decide how safety, responsibility and public trust will work when machines take on more decision-making. For ports, shipowners and software firms, the code is a sign that autonomous shipping is being treated as a serious long-term issue rather than a futuristic side project. For everyone else, the big question is simple: if ships are going to think and act differently, who checks that they still behave safely at sea? The MASS Code is an early answer, not the final one.