Shipping inspections, detentions, and incidents: an empirical analysis of risk dimensions

ABSTRACT Inspections play a key role in keeping vessels safe. Inspection authorities employ different policies to decide which vessels to inspect, including type of vessel, age, and flag. Attention for vessel history is usually restricted only to past detentions. This paper demonstrates that the correlation between the probabilities of detention and (very serious and serious) incidents is very low and that proactive prevention of future incidents is improved by accounting for both risk dimensions, that is, by combining past incident and detention information for targeting high-risk vessels for inspection. Five combined methods are presented to classify vessels based on these two risk dimensions, each of which involves extensive sets of factors. These combined classification methods have predictive power for future incidents. Depending on the applied inspection rate, incorporation of incident risk improves inspection hit rates for vessels with future incidents by 30–50% compared to using only detention information. It is recommended to focus on vessels where both risks are relatively high. A practical example shows how the methods can be applied for inspection selection and for prioritizing inspection areas defined in terms of eight risk domains that include collisions, groundings, engine and hull failures, loss of life, fire, and pollution.

[1]  F. E. Satterthwaite An approximate distribution of estimates of variance components. , 1946, Biometrics.

[2]  Philip Hans Franses,et al.  Quantitative Models in Marketing Research , 2001 .

[3]  Pierre Cariou,et al.  On the Effectiveness of Port State Control Inspections , 2008 .

[4]  Sabine Knapp,et al.  Predictive power of inspection outcomes for future shipping accidents – an empirical appraisal with special attention for human factor aspects , 2018 .

[5]  Zhisen Yang,et al.  Realising advanced risk-based port state control inspection using data-driven Bayesian networks , 2018 .

[6]  Satterthwaite Fe An approximate distribution of estimates of variance components. , 1946 .

[7]  Sabine Knapp,et al.  A method to measure enforcement effort in shipping with incomplete information , 2014 .

[8]  Sabine Knapp,et al.  Ship Inspection Strategies: Effects on Maritime Safety and Environmental Protection , 2010 .

[9]  E. Gul Emecen Kara,et al.  A Comparative Analysis of Regional Agreements on Port State Control , 2016 .

[10]  Z. Yang,et al.  Maritime safety analysis in retrospect , 2013 .

[11]  Philip Hans Franses,et al.  A global view on port state control: econometric analysis of the differences across port state control regimes , 2007 .

[12]  Sabine Knapp,et al.  The Econometrics of Maritime Safety: "Recommendations to Enhance Safety at Sea" , 2007 .

[13]  Sung-Ho Shin,et al.  Half-century research developments in maritime accidents: Future directions. , 2016, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[14]  Sabine Knapp,et al.  An improved methodology to measure flag performance for the shipping industry , 2010 .

[15]  Kevin X. Li,et al.  Ship safety index , 2014 .

[16]  Pierre Cariou,et al.  An econometric analysis of deficiencies noted in port state control inspections , 2007 .

[17]  F. Wilcoxon Individual Comparisons by Ranking Methods , 1945 .

[18]  Martin Hassel,et al.  Underreporting of maritime accidents to vessel accident databases. , 2011, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[19]  Pascal Barla,et al.  Statistical Analysis of , 2016 .