An interview with Martin Benderson by Nicolas Hocq.

Maritime corruption poses significant challenges to global trade, inflating costs, delaying operations and undermining integrity in supply chains. The Maritime Anti-Corruption Network (MACN), a leading international Collective Action initiative, has been at the forefront of addressing these issues through collaboration with governments, businesses and civil society.

In this exclusive interview, Martin Benderson, Chief Partnership Officer at MACN, sheds light on the findings of MACN’s recent report. This quantifies the costs of maritime corruption, underscores the importance of transparency and collaboration and revisits how MACN is tackling the USD 260-million corruption problem in the sector. Martin then shares his insights on the organisation’s mission, the evolving nature of maritime corruption and the impactful strategies it has implemented to drive change.

The costs of maritime corruption

MACN’s recent report focuses on the direct and indirect costs of corruption for maritime companies. Could you elaborate on the key findings and how companies are using these insights to improve their operations?

The report outlines the wide-reaching impact of maritime corruption on the maritime industry and on society as a whole. Using Nigeria as a case study, we used an approach with two hypothetical scenarios:

• Business-as-usual scenario: Assumes that bribes are paid without resistance by private or public actors in the port and maritime sector. Under this scenario, maritime corruption increases transport and logistics costs by 15 percent, resulting in an annual cost of corruption of over USD 162 million for the industry, substantially reducing GDP and job opportunities.

• Zero-tolerance scenario: Assumes no bribes are paid or requested by either the public or private sector. This scenario suggests that eliminating corruption could reduce costs by 62 percent (over USD 100 million annually) for the private sector. It also estimates an increase in GDP by USD 130 million annually and the creation of more than 147,000 full-time jobs.

Comparing these scenarios illustrates the potential economic gains from eliminating corruption in the port and maritime sector. Further, the study sheds light on the impact of MACN’s current anti-corruption initiatives on socioeconomic development, trade and societies.

At the company level, the study provides clear evidence of the value of upholding robust anti-corruption standards and participating in Collective Action. It demonstrates how such efforts not only contribute to a healthier bottom line, but also address the broader, often hidden costs of corruption. These industry-wide and societal costs – though not always directly encountered in a company’s daily operations or supply chain – have a profound influence on the sector as a whole.

The Maritime Anti-Corruption Network

Please tell us about the Maritime Anti-Corruption Network’s (MACN) origins. How has its role evolved since then?

MACN was established by a small number of maritime companies in 2011, in response to tightening anti-bribery laws, such as the UK Bribery Act, and the recognition that individual companies cannot combat corruption alone in the global, highly complex supply chains surrounding shipping.

Twelve years ago, we launched our first Collective Action initiative in Nigeria, working with the industry, government, local businesses and civil society to drive reform and establish accountability mechanisms in the country’s port and maritime sector. This model has since been replicated in Argentina, Bangladesh, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Ukraine, Pakistan and Ghana. This expansion would not have been possible without the backing of our members, bilateral and multilateral donors as well as local governments that collaborated on these initiatives.

MACN now has over 200 private-sector members representing the global value chain in the maritime industry and has become one of the largest industry-led Collective Action networks.

Corruption challenges in the maritime industry

What are some of the practical corruption challenges maritime companies face, and how do these challenges affect global supply chains?

Maritime trade is a highly complex environment involving numerous public- and private-sector stakeholders. On average, seven industry stakeholders and seven government agencies are involved in inspecting and clearing a single ship when it crosses an international border.

This complexity creates opportunities for coercive corruption, where bribes are requested during routine vessel and cargo clearance. Shipping companies are often pressured to make corrupt payments – either in cash or in kind – to avoid delays, excessive fines or even the detention of their vessels. These demands exploit the industry's reliance on strict time schedules and daily charter rates, leaving individual companies with limited options to resist without facing severe operational or financial consequences.

The shipping industry’s supply chain is global, involving multinational companies and local SMEs to ensure a ship reaches its destination. Ensuring transparency and addressing corruption risks across this intricate network is a significant challenge, even for companies with robust compliance standards. Maintaining a strict zero-tolerance policy across supply chains requires strong partnerships empowering and supporting both employees and suppliers to reject and report corruption.

Measures for meaningful industry change

What specific actions has MACN implemented to address these challenges, and what has been the impact of these efforts?

MACN empowers the maritime industry to strengthen internal anti-corruption programmes and enhance collaboration through supply chains to prevent and combat corruption. This is achieved through MACN’s tailored compliance solutions, tools and training designed specifically for the sector.

Our approach combines aligning compliance expectations with practical, frontline support for stakeholders. Key measures include developing anti-bribery contractual clauses, training modules and reporting mechanisms, as well as offering actionable guidance on rejecting corruption. Through our country-based Collective Action initiatives, we equip local companies with industry-specific tools to combat corruption.

Additionally, MACN advocates higher integrity standards and clearly defined anti-corruption regulation in maritime trade. Our collaboration with the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the leading body on maritime governance, has been pivotal. Together, we have successfully placed maritime corruption on the IMO agenda and issued actionable anti-corruption guidance for both private and public sectors. This achievement highlights the critical importance of addressing maritime corruption and reinforces MACN’s role as a catalyst for meaningful change in the industry.

Targeted and adaptive interventions

Corruption in the maritime sector varies significantly by region. How does MACN tailor its anti-corruption strategies to address specific regional challenges? And what steps are taken to ensure these strategies remain adaptable in a changing global environment?

MACN is a data-driven initiative that leverages frontline industry data to identify and address the most prevalent and severe corruption risks. We have collected nearly 65,000 anonymous incident reports, detailing firsthand accounts of corrupt demands across more than 1,300 ports. The data helps us build anti-corruption initiatives that are targeting the reported challenges. This in turn helps us get buy-in from companies and governments as we are trying to resolve practical difficulties in daily operations.

MACN applies adaptive learning in all its interventions, recognising that combating corruption often produces unexpected outcomes. When successful anti-corruption efforts eliminate issues in one area, they may resurface in another form elsewhere in the supply chain. Ongoing monitoring and stakeholder dialogue are crucial to stay ahead of these emerging challenges.

All stakeholders play a role

What role do different stakeholder groups (private sector, international organisations, governments and civil society) play in supporting MACN, and how does MACN engage with them to maximise efficiency in preventing corruption?

The role of various stakeholders in addressing corruption depends on the specific challenges faced in each country. However, at a broader level, MACN’s Collective Action approach is built on several key assumptions.

First, the maritime industry must comply with national and international anti-corruption regulations, gather evidence and use MACN’s anonymous reporting platforms to highlight systemic corruption challenges in the port and maritime sectors.

Second, governments must be open to learning from the private sector's experiences, using evidence to improve their compliance standards, regulatory frameworks and enforcement systems.

Third, MACN and our local civil society partners play a crucial role in holding both public- and private-sector stakeholders accountable, serving as trust builders between the two. Multilateral organisations, such as the IMO, OECD and others, can apply regulatory and normative pressure to drive behavioural and policy changes in both the public and private sector.

We and our implementing partners carefully assess the position and influence of each stakeholder group to identify who can play which role in our collective efforts to champion the overall anti-corruption agenda.