7. The Nordic maritime industry

The Nordic vision for the maritime industry is to become the “most sustainable and integrated shipping region in the world” (Slotvik et al., 2024). Owing to strong maritime clusters, the Nordic countries are uniquely positioned to address this challenge, while maintaining their competitive edge in shipping. Clusters form when companies that together constitute an entire value chain exist in proximity to each other, thereby laying the groundwork for good collaboration and knowledge exchange. Several good examples exist in the maritime industry on the western coast of Norway.

According to a bi-yearly study by Menon Economics and DNV (2024), Oslo and Copenhagen are the 5^th and 9^th most important cities for the maritime industry globally in terms of shipping, finance and law, maritime technology, ports and logistics, and attractiveness and competitiveness. While seemingly robust, Nordic maritime clusters are facing risks related to high costs in the manufacturing sector (e.g. shipbuilding and equipment), which could threaten the completeness – and hence competitiveness - of the clusters in the long run.

7.1 The Nordic shipping sector

In global shipping, Norway ranks 10^th and Denmark 17^th by size of fleet, measured in deadweight tonnes. By commercial value, the Norwegian fleet ranks 6^th due to its large number of complex offshore vessels, Denmark 15^th, and Sweden 33^rd (UNCTAD, 2024). The Nordic region’s fleet totals around 5,000 vessels. Figure 7-1 shows the development of Nordic vessel ownership from 2005 and onwards in terms of vessel number per country, and the deadweight tonnage of the whole Nordic fleet. While the number of ships has grown 25% over this period (DNV, 2025a), its deadweight tonnage has grown nearly 80%, on a par with growth in transportation work globally (see Figure 7-2).

This implies that the Nordics have retained a strong position in international shipping, relative to what would be expected given the region’s relatively modest demand for cargo. It also means that the Nordic region holds a lot of human capital and knowledge about managing and operating ships and maritime logistics systems. This phenomenon is particularly evident in the role of regional maritime clusters across the Nordics.

Figure 7-1 Size of the Nordic fleet per country measured in number of vessels, and whole fleet by deadweight tonnes

Source Clarksons Research, 2025b

International (deep-sea) shipping: Shipping accounts for around 80% of the global trade volume measured by weight. The world’s maritime trade, measured in tonne-miles transportation work, is projected to grow only 10% to 2030, before plateauing and declining back to current levels (DNV, 2025a). Figure 7-2 shows that a modest growth will continue in container shipping and other cargo vessels. However, this is insufficient to offset declining fossil-fuel trades (oil, gas, and coal) and a potential regionalization of supply chains, though regional instabilities and supply chain disruptions can temporarily cause increased shipping distances.

Among major deep-sea shipping companies that are owned and operated from the Nordic countries are Denmark’s A.P. Møller-Maersk, running the world’s second biggest container fleet (UNCTAD, 2024), and Norwegian-Swedish Wallenius Wilhelmsen, operating one of the biggest fleets of roll-on/roll-off (RoRo) vessels, serving the automotive industry. In Figure 7-2, there is still mainly a positive outlook on growth in segments transporting manufactured goods. However, these segments will be heavily impacted in the short term by trade barriers such as new tariffs imposed on exports to the US (Coyne, 2025).

Short-sea shipping: Most maritime transport to and from Nordic ports is done by smaller vessels designed to operate on shorter routes. The short-sea shipping segments in the Nordic countries carry cargo between Nordic ports or from larger, globally connected ports in Europe – such as Rotterdam, Antwerp, Bremerhaven, and Hamburg – to Nordic ports. Passenger ferries are a key feature of Nordic short-sea shipping, as these routes often serve as extensions of the road network (e.g. between Finland and Sweden), serving cargo and passenger transport. These routes see high regularity and predictability, making them key candidates for ‘green corridors’ where ports and shipowners can more easily partner on investment in and scaling up the availability of alternative, low-carbon fuels like ammonia and methanol (Slotvik et al., 2024).

Offshore ships and other specialized segments: These are driven by trends other than transportation demand. Offshore support vessels are one segment where North Sea operations (e.g. Norway and Denmark) have long set the standard for ships operating in harsh environments. This part of the Nordic shipping ecosystem is in the midst of transitioning to renewables, serving offshore wind. Additionally, we see operational concepts using service operation vessels (SOVs) from offshore wind being introduced back into increasingly unmanned North Sea oil and gas operations (Aker BP, 2025). Other important special ship segments in the Nordics include fishing and aquaculture vessels, ferries, cruise (see Chapter 8), and in the case of Finland, icebreakers. Aquaculture support vessels have also increased in complexity with growing fish farm size and stricter biosecurity considerations (see Chapter 5).

Figure 7-2 Forecast of transportation work in the global maritime sector to 2050

Source DNV, 2025a

7.2 The future of Nordic ports

Ports are vital components of the transportation system, with high strategic and commercial significance, supporting the flow of goods and maritime logistics. With the increasing societal emphasis on security, the awareness of ports as critical infrastructure is likely to rise. Over the period 2015–2023, Nordic ports handle goods (imports and exports) equivalent to roughly 17% of all goods in the ports of the EU-27, measured by weight (EUROSTAT, 2025a). In contrast, Nordic ports handle around 5% of the containers (EUROSTAT, 2025b). During this time, there have been relatively small changes in volumes. The difference between the Nordics’ shares of shipping traffic in volume versus containers reflects that the Nordics play an important role in supply of commodities relative to the region’s importance in manufactured goods.

Figure 7-3 shows port handling by weight of goods in 2015 and 2023. For most Nordic countries, except for Norway, volumes have declined slightly. Norway handles around 200 million tonnes per year, leading by this metric mainly due to sizeable petroleum exports from terminals in the Bergen area (66 million tonnes in 2023) (EUROSTAT, 2025c). With declining oil and gas activity, this will reduce, though new trades such as shipping of CO₂ for CCS facilities in the North Sea will add some volumes. By weight, the second biggest port of the Nordic region is Gothenburg, by far the leading container port in the region. A port featuring surprisingly high on the list of ports (4^th) when ranked by weight of goods handled is Narvik (EUROSTAT, 2025c), the primary export port of Swedish iron ore miner LKAB (Luossavaara-Kiirunavaara Aktiebolag), which transports most of its ore by rail from Kiruna to Narvik, thereby avoiding the icy conditions of the Baltic Sea during winter (LKAB, 2022). LKAB produces most of Europe’s iron ore, illustrating that small towns in Northern Norway and Sweden play essential roles for the resilience of European steel-supply chains.

Figure 7-4 shows the number of containers handled by Nordic ports in 2015 and 2023. In the container segment, volumes handled have grown for all Nordic countries, except Finland. Sweden handled around 1.6 million TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent units) in 2023, followed by Finland at 1.2 million, both far exceeding Denmark and Norway. Finland handles the most containers on a per capita basis, probably due to its geography, despite requiring icebreaking capacity to keep sea lanes open during the winter months (Arctia, 2024). Before the Russo-Ukrainian War, Finland used to be a transit country for Russian imports, including cars (Port of Helsinki, 2023). However, the slight reduction in activity at Finnish ports suggests the decline in Russian transit has had a minor impact on them.

Figure 7-3 Goods handled in Nordic ports, measured in tonnes

Source EUROSTAT, 2025a

Figure 7-4 Containers handled in Nordic ports, except Iceland, measured in 1,000 TEUs

Source EUROSTAT, 2025b

Figure 7-3 Goods handled in Nordic ports, measured in tonnes

Source EUROSTAT, 2025a

Figure 7-4 Containers handled in Nordic ports, except Iceland, measured in 1,000 TEUs

Source EUROSTAT, 2025b

7.2.1 Emerging roles for the port sector

If the Nordics follow the same trends as the rest of the world, as shown in the forecast of maritime transportation in Figure 7-2, the Nordic ports sector is likely to grow more dependent on handling containerized goods, and less on handling commodities. Additionally, new demands from the growing cruise and offshore wind sectors will impact the types of infrastructure investment needed in the port sector and could drive renewed demand for port capacity. In many cases, Nordic cities have redeveloped their old and disused port areas for residential spaces, making high-value waterfront acreage available to the public (Donovan et al., 2021). However, this could come at the expense of society’s ability to meet the future needs of the port sector, for instance in offshore wind (see text box).

In many cases, the ports remain tightly connected with the city, with the result that docked ships often add to air pollution. In the case of the Port of Bergen, where the cruise vessels dock downtown, three vessels can now be supplied simultaneously by onshore electricity. Cruise vessels that connect to shore power are eligible for a 20% discount, and vessels that emit more than the emission threshold are subject to penalty. Emissions are being reported through the Environmental Port Index, developed by Bergen Harbour in collaboration with the Green Shipping Programme, and the system is now widely used in Nordic cruise harbours (Green Shipping Programme, 2020). The ports also play an essential role in the scaling of alternative fuels, reflected in their participation in green corridor initiatives (see Section 7.5).

Is there enough port capacity in the Nordics to support offshore wind?

Offshore wind is a big driver for future port activity in the Nordics. At the same time, access to port infrastructure for construction and assembly, as well as operations and maintenance of wind turbines, constitutes a major bottleneck for further build-out of offshore wind (see also Section 6.5.2). Ports will need to support approximately 12 GW of yearly capacity additions across the North Sea basin in the late 2030s and early 2040s, up from less than 4 GW/year currently (DNV, 2025d). This will also be a major challenge for the offshore wind segment in a front-runner market such as Denmark. The Port of Esbjerg, the largest offshore wind port in the North Sea, aims to expand the installation capacity it can support to 4.5 GW/year by 2030 (Menon Economics, 2023). It has also partnered with several other North Sea ports across the UK, Germany, the Netherlands, France, and Belgium, to overcome capacity issues.

The New Offshore Wind Ports in the Nordics project mapped out the Nordic port landscape, focusing on Nordic collaboration opportunities. 50 port industry actors across the Nordics contributed, and the initiative was coordinated by industry cluster organizations (Energy Cluster Denmark, OffshoreVäst Sweden, and Norwegian Offshore Wind, 2024).

7.3 Shifts in the shipbuilding industry

The Nordic countries’ shipbuilding industry has undergone massive change in the last 20 years. In the Nordics, mainly Finland and Norway still deliver newbuilds. Most Danish shipyards have transitioned to ship repairs and retrofits, and delivery of maritime equipment, but some have specialized in smaller craft and fishing vessels (OECD, 2024). The decline in shipbuilding is part of a wider European trend, where activity has moved to Asia or other low-cost countries.

Segments where the Nordics retain some competitiveness within newbuilding include, in Norway, offshore, fishing vessels, aquaculture, and ferries, and in Finland, cruise, ferries, and icebreakers. As an example, more than 50% of the global icebreaker fleet was built at Helsinki Shipyard (Davie, 2024). These vessel types are typically more complex than those intended for transportation. Figure 7-5 shows how newbuilding deliveries from Nordic yards have evolved over the last few years, with a declining number of ships delivered. The Finnish sector generally produces vessels with a higher CGT (compensated gross tonnage) than Norway, which delivers many more vessels. CGT is a measure of the work needed to build a ship, often considered a measure of ship complexity. Note that the source data excludes vessels less than 100 gross tonnes (GT), and does not cover fishing, aquaculture and naval vessels.

Figure 7-5 shows how the roles have shifted in ship production, with this trend expected to continue. When the main function of a vessel depends more on the onboard equipment than the amount of steel used, the role of the shipyard moves from primarily a manufacturing industry to more of a system integrator. The role of the Nordic yards is very often limited to outfitting, whereas the hull manufacturing is done in low-cost countries (Semini et al., 2023). A system integrator role implies working with a much wider field of equipment suppliers and service providers to meet customer requirements, setting higher standards for Nordic yards (see Figure 7-6). In many cases, these suppliers are local companies that do not necessarily feature in ocean accounts (see Chapter 2) but play an essential role in local maritime clusters.

Nordic shipyards have moved into more knowledge-intensive roles, including a greater focus on ship design and engineering than before (i.e. provisioning of services) (Lagemann et al., 2024). A consequence is that some design choices can be delayed well into the shipbuilding process to create flexibility for new solutions (Semini et al., 2023). This capability becomes even more important for Nordic yards in the face of the uncertainty posed by the increasing adoption of automation and new fuels. Despite this potential benefit of building in Nordic yards, the ship design sector seems more robust. A recent case is SOVs for offshore wind operations, where Norwegian firms (HAV Design, Kongsberg, Salt Ship Design, Ulstein, and Vard) have designed more than 80% of the SOVs delivered since 2018 (Clarksons Research, 2025a).

Figure 7-5 Number of ships (>100 GT) delivered from Nordic yards, and the average compensated gross tonnage (CGT) of deliveries from Norway and Finland

Source Clarksons Research, 2025b

‘Traditional’ ship production

Low complexity tonnage
Focus on price
Roles: Ship manufacturing

‘Nordic’ ship production

High complexity tonnage
Focus on capability and quality
Roles: System integration and service delivery

Figure 7-6 Conceptual model for the relative importance of yard versus equipment manufacturers in ship production in Nordic yards. Ship complexity increases with the width of the triangle

7.4 The Nordics as a testbed for maritime technology

For the Nordic maritime industry to remain competitive amidst increasing competition from low-cost countries, it needs to tackle the twin transitions of reducing environmental footprint and increasingly automating operations. New regulations from the EU (Fuel EU Maritime and the EU Emissions Trading System) provide strong incentives to reduce the emissions of the fleet (DNV, 2025c), trailed by the IMO’s delayed Net-Zero Framework (IMO, 2025), and there is an increasing awareness about biodiversity impacts from noise and invasive species. In a rapidly digitizing world with an aging population, increasing automation is becoming a key growth area, driven by a shortage of sailors and rising crew costs.

Decarbonization: New technologies such as low-carbon shipping fuels are most easily adopted at a local scale, such as local ferries, urban mobility solutions, and workboats, before scaling to regional and global routes becomes possible. Sweden’s Candela operates electric hydrofoils as part of the Stockholm public transport system (EU Urban Mobility Observatory, 2025), and Norway’s Pascal Technologies is advancing air cushion technologies for electric boats, with applications extending from fast ferries to workboats in aquaculture (Butler, 2025). Among early car ferry routes to be served by electric ferries were Lavik-Oppedal on the Norwegian West Coast, and Horten-Moss in the Oslofjord (Slotvik et al., 2024). MF Hydra in 2023 became the first hydrogen-powered car ferry (Norwegian Public Roads Administration, 2023).

The recent Nordic Roadmap for Future Fuels for Shipping supported several pilots testing new fuels, including green corridor initiatives on short-sea shipping routes in the North Sea, such as Oslo-Rotterdam (hydrogen), Esbjerg-Immingham (ammonia), and Gothenburg-Frederikshavn (methanol) (Slotvik et al., 2024). The platform supply vessel Viking Energy, expected in 2026, is likely to be the first ammonia-powered offshore vessel (Skipsrevyen, 2024). For offshore ships, batteries are particularly well-suited due to their operational profiles, and the Maersk-owned Stillstrom is a likely first mover in installing offshore charging systems for SOVs (Stillstrom, 2022).

Digitalization and maritime autonomy: Like low-carbon fuels, initiatives for maritime autonomy are first tested on very short routes. Urban waterborne transport is one early use case, as seen in the first trials in 2022 of the autonomous ferry milliAmpere 2 across a short canal in Trondheim, though IMO Collision Regulations still required an onboard safety operator in case of emergency (Alsos et al., 2024). This technology is currently being tested in Stockholm, and there are plans to extend its use to Åland for so-called virtual cable ferries (Zeabuz, 2025). Similar initiatives have been piloted in Denmark (DTU, 2022). Maritime autonomy is being piloted in the short-sea segments, with several initiatives in the Oslofjord (Kongsberg, 2024), and in offshore operations (MarineLink, 2025).

7.5 Opportunities and barriers

7.5.1 Growth opportunities for the maritime industry

Taking advantage of collaboration within clusters: The strong maritime clusters in Denmark, Finland, and especially Norway, can enable continued Nordic leadership in digital and environmentally friendly technologies in the maritime industry.

Shipping companies can support continued efforts in technology development with decarbonization, digitalization, and in the specialized shipping segments (e.g. offshore, cruise, aquaculture). This model of partnership between shipping and technology providers positions the Nordic clusters to expand into new areas in the global blue economy, with new export opportunities within the sectors that do not yet take full advantage of technology. Example initiatives include Wilhelmsen and Kongsberg’s autonomy joint venture ‘Massterly’, and Maersk’s initiatives in R&D funding for decarbonization (Mærsk Mc-Kinney Møller Center for Zero Carbon Shipping).

Ports in green corridors: Through several green corridor initiatives, ports already play an important role in development of the infrastructure for green shipping. Green corridors are collaborations between ports to facilitate bunkering of alternative fuels, enabling low-carbon shipping on specific routes. Early movers are routes with high frequency and regularity, such as ferry routes between Finland and Sweden, like the collaboration between Wasaline and the ports of Vaasa and Umeå (Slotvik et al., 2024).

Incentives from cargo owners: Cargo owners can play an important role in scaling new solutions in the digital and the decarbonization spaces by setting requirements during tendering, and by partnering with specific technology providers to ensure uptake of new technologies in the market. In autonomy and battery-powered ships, examples of Nordic cargo owners that have taken a proactive position in this area include Equinor (offshore), Yara (fertilizer producer), and Asko (grocery provider).

Government policy: Maritime policies and public procurement processes can play an important role in advancing new technologies in shipping. The high regulatory pace in decarbonization, for instance with the EU ETS and FuelEU Maritime, can help drive innovation in low-carbon shipping, helped by local initiatives in the Nordic regions, such as zero-emission requirements for Norway’s World Heritage Fjords (Norwegian Maritime Authority, 2025). Similarly, new technologies for hull cleaning are being introduced to comply with new requirements that are set in place to avoid the introduction of invasive species from hull fouling (see Section 3.2.6.). In the car ferry segment, requirements for electric propulsion systems are an example of public procurement playing an active role in advancing new low-carbon ships.

7.5.2 Barriers to growth in the maritime sector

High costs constitute a risk to the competitiveness of the Nordic maritime industry, as seen in the shipbuilding example, in which the Nordics risk losing an important part of the value chain, with potential detrimental consequences for the region’s maritime clusters. Similarly, costs related to shipping operations are generally expected to rise with uptake of alternative fuels and diversification of the fuel mix. Productivity gains through increased uptake of digital technologies are one lever for continued Nordic competitiveness in the sector.

Sourcing of alternative fuels: The key rationale behind green corridors is to reduce the uncertainty related to availability of alternative fuels such as ammonia or methanol. Despite successful partnerships between Nordic shipowners and ports, sourcing could remain an issue. Ammonia production will need to expand significantly to meet demand as a shipping fuel without cannibalizing supplies intended for fertilizer products.

New environmental regulations: With increasing awareness of environmental stressors such as biofouling and marine noise, the maritime industry in the Nordics could soon need to adapt to new regulations. In addition, new risks arise, such as the potential leakage of ammonia to the environment.

7.6 Scenarios for the Nordic maritime industry

Nature First	The demand for trade in bulk and tanker segments declines faster due to a big reduction of coal and oil in the energy mix globally. Decarbonization in shipping is largely successful, following international collaboration on advancing GHG emission regulations at the IMO. Green fuels and increasingly autonomous solutions go hand in hand, but a more diversified fuel mix with alternative fuels cause shipping costs to rise significantly, likely reducing overall shipping demand. Productivity gains from automation partly offset the operational cost increases from new fuels.
Constant Compromise	Globally, maritime transport follows the pathway indicated in Figure 7-2. Maritime transport scales new fuels beyond green corridors, and hydrogen-based fuels (ammonia and e-fuels) gain a large share of the fuel mix (DNV, 2025a). Fuel costs increase, but not sufficiently to dampen shipping demand. First mover advantages in digital and decarbonization strengthens the region’s role as a technology provider, whereas the clusters are at risk due to the lack of retention of shipbuilding capacity.
Regional Rivalry	New trade barriers dampen the demand for trade in goods significantly, driving homeshoring and refocusing trade within ‘economic blocs’. Additionally, disruptions due to geopolitical tension become more likely. Disruptions on key routes, e.g. through the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea, reduce the efficiency of trade networks, meaning rising transportation work and higher chartering rates also for Nordic-owned ships, at least in the short run. Lower priority on decarbonization, and cybersecurity concerns, further reduce the potential for autonomous shipping. The Baltic Sea will see stricter maritime security measures, which could disrupt shipping activity. There will be limited activity on the OEM side and among maritime technology providers due to demand uncertainty, coupled with rising prices and delays due to supply chain issues. At the same time, local shipbuilding and maritime technology will see increasing preferential treatment through framework conditions (e.g. taxes) and public procurement processes.
Growth First	No decline in petroleum transport segments. Rising demand for fossil fuels from new regions drives maritime transport. Offshore shipping segments in Norway will mainly support oil and gas operations. Focus on new trade routes that shorten average transport distances (e.g., Arctic ‘Northern Sea Routes’) leading to higher demand for icegoing vessels and potential reduction in tonne-miles. Increased activity in the Arctic will drive investment in ports and infrastructure in the far north (Northern Norway, Greenland), and benefits the Finnish maritime cluster, which has a strong position in ice technology. Little attention on decarbonization of the maritime industry, as short-term cost consciousness takes precedence over making investments in new, and more expensive, fuels. Reversal and lack of enforcement of environmental regulations in shipping. Loss of current competitive advantages in the Nordics with respect to shipping decarbonization.