Formal Safety Assessment: an updated review

The method of Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) was devised several years ago with the intent to help the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and other policy makers formulate policies and regulations by the proper use of the scientific method in matters pertaining to maritime safety and the protection of the marine environment. A host of FSA studies have been submitted over the last several years and have been reviewed by the IMO. Also, progress has been recently accomplished as regards incorporating environmental risk evaluation criteria within FSA. On the basis of these developments, revisions of the FSA guidelines have been proposed and adopted. This paper presents a review of the FSA method in light of these developments. This review updates an earlier review of FSA by Kontovas and Psaraftis [Marine Technol 46(1):45–59, (2009)]. It also takes this opportunity to identify some deficiencies of FSA, either due to an incorrect application of the method or to the method itself, and makes some suggestions for further action in this area.

[1]  Christos A. Kontovas,et al.  Improving FSA as a Prerequisite for Risk-Based GBS , 2007 .

[2]  山田 安平,et al.  On the Derivation of CATSthr within the Framework of IMO environmental-FSA studies(Summaries of Papers published by Staff of National Maritime Research Institute at Outside Organizations) : , 2011 .

[3]  Jiangping Wang.  The current status and future aspects in formal ship safety assessment , 2001 .

[4]  Christos A. Kontovas,et al.  Estimating the consequence costs of oil spills from tankers , 2012 .

[5]  Yashuhira Yamada,et al.  The cost of oil spills from tankers in relation to weight of spilled oil , 2009 .

[6]  Christos A. Kontovas,et al.  Risk based rulemaking and design - Proceed with caution , 2006 .

[7]  A. Boardman,et al.  Cost-Benefit Analysis: Concepts and Practice , 1996 .

[8]  Christos A. Kontovas,et al.  The Two C”s of the Risk-Based Approach to Goal based Standards: Challenges and Caveats , 2007 .

[9]  Christos A. Kontovas,et al.  An empirical analysis of IOPCF oil spill cost data. , 2010, Marine pollution bulletin.

[10]  Carlos Guedes Soares,et al.  Risk assessment in maritime transportation , 2001, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[11]  Rolf Skjong,et al.  Risk acceptance criterion for tanker oil spill risk reduction measures. , 2011, Marine pollution bulletin.

[12]  E. Quah,et al.  Cost-Benefit Analysis , 1972 .

[13]  Χρήστος Κοντόβας.  Quantitative risk management framework for maritime safety and environmental protection , 2011 .

[14]  Yasuhira Yamada,et al.  A New Criteria to Apply Weight-dependent CATSthr to Cost-Benefit Analysis within the Framework of IMO Environmental-FSA studies(Summaries of Papers published by Staff of National Maritime Research Institute at Outside Organization) , 2012 .

[15]  Christos A. Kontovas,et al.  Formal safety assessment: A critical review , 2009 .

[16]  Christos A. Kontovas,et al.  Marine environment risk assessment: A survey on the disutility cost of oil spills , 2008 .

[17]  Dagmar Schmidt Etkin.  Presented at: Arctic and Marine Oilspill Program Technical Seminar (June 2000) Worldwide Analysis of Marine Oil Spill Cleanup Cost Factors , 2000 .

[18]  Harilaos N. Psaraftis,et al.  Environmental risk evaluation criteria , 2008 .

[19]  Arnold Barnett.  Global passenger-mortality risk decreased substantially in accidents from 2000 to 2005 , 2006 .

[20]  Risto Tuominen,et al.  Qualification of Formal Safety Assessment: an exploratory study , 2004 .