DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on Incidence of Risk Factor for Assessing Maritime Traffic Risk

  • Kim, Inchul (International Maritime Team, Maritime Safety Bureau, Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries)
  • Received : 2017.04.24
  • Accepted : 2017.05.29
  • Published : 2017.05.31

Abstract

In order to assess risk as a basic step for securing safety, it requires to select risk factors and determine the frequency and the severity of the consequence of each risk factor. This research adopted common risk factors among well-known maritime risk assessment models, and proposed objective criteria to gauge the risk level of each risk factor. The starting points of risk evolution were chosen for criteria according to related studies and seafarers' experience. The rate of risk appearance over the criteria is named as the incidence of risk factor. Therefore, the total risk level is expressed as the combination of incidence of each risk factor and severity. This quantitative method would be applied to measuring and comparing the risk level of target maritime zones, and it would also be useful to survey which risk factor be focused for reducing the total risk of a certain maritime zone.

Keywords

References

  1. IALA(2009a), History of IWRAP, Retrieved 21 April, 2017 from the World Wide Web: http://www.iala-aism.org/wiki/iwrap /index.php/History_of_IWRAP.
  2. IALA(2009b), IALA Recommendation O-134 on the IALA Risk Management Tool for Ports and Restricted Waterways Edition 2, p. 8.
  3. IMO(2015), MSC.1/Circ.1394/Rev.1, Generic Guidelines for Developing IMO Goal-Based Standards, pp. 1-9.
  4. IMO(2002), MSC/Circ.1023 & MEPC/Circ.392, Guidelines for Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) for Use in the IMO Rule-Making Process, p. 43.
  5. Inoue, K.(2000), Evaluation Method of Ship handling Difficulty for Navigation in Restricted and Congested Waterways, Journal of Navigation, The Royal Institute of Navigation, 53(1), pp. 167-180. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0373463399008541
  6. Kim, C. S. and H. H. Lee(2012), A Study on Assessment Criterion of the Risk Factor for the Marine Traffic Environment, Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment and Safety, Vol. 18, No. 5, pp. 431-438. https://doi.org/10.7837/kosomes.2012.18.5.431
  7. Kim D. W., J. S. Park and Y. S. Park(2011), Comparison Analysis between the IWRAP and the ES Model in Ulsan Waterway, Journal of Navigation and Port Research International Edition, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 281-287. https://doi.org/10.5394/KINPR.2011.35.4.281
  8. Kim, I. C. and K. An(2016), Comparison and Analysis on Risk Assessment Models of Coastal Waters considering Human Factors, Journal of Navigation and Port Research, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 27-34. https://doi.org/10.5394/KINPR.2015.40.1.27
  9. Kim, I. C.(2016), A Study on Developing a Model for Maritime Traffic Risk Assessment of Coastal Waters, Mokpo National Maritime University, Graduate school of Maritime Transport System, Ph. D Dissertation, p. 103.
  10. Lee, H. H.(2013), A Study on the Development of the Integrated Risk Assessment Model for the Marine Traffic Environment, Mokpo National Maritime University, Graduate school of Maritime Transport System, Ph. D Dissertation, p. 54, p. 118, pp. 202-205.
  11. MET(2016), Meteorological Office, Beaufort Scale, Retrieved 14 June, 2016 from the World Wide Web: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/guide/ weather/marine/beaufort-scale.
  12. MMU(2015), Maritime Traffic Audit Team of Mokpo National Maritime University, Audit Report of Construction of Boryung No. 3 Pier, Mokpo, pp. 4-8.
  13. MOF(2017), Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries, The 2nd National Maritime Safety Master Plan, Sejong, p. 68.
  14. MSA(2015), Maritime Safety, ${\S}$ 2, Ministry of Government Regislation.
  15. Nguyen, X. T.(2013), A Study on Comparison Assessment Applying ES Model with PARK Model in the Busan adjacent waterways, Busan, pp. 10-11.
  16. Park, J. S., Y. S. Park and S. J. Na(2013), Maritime Traffic Engineering and Policy, Busan, pp. 188-189.
  17. Park, Y. S.(2007), Maritime Transport Safety Policy, Chapter 8 Maritime Traffic Simulation, Busan, pp. 253-258.