The Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization Mapping of Research on Maritime Accidents

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to assess the output of research on maritime accidents and citations from 2000 to 2022 through a bibliometric analysis. Utilizing the visualization and mapping program VOSviewer 1.6.18, the relevant data was extracted from the Web of Science (WoS) database and analyzed. The findings indicated important study fields, country contributions, productive journals, as well as the most cited authors’ articles. The primary findings were as follows: The most influential journal was Safety Science. One of the most common topics of study for maritime accidents was the human factor. The most productive country was the People’s Republic of China. The findings of the study can assist researchers in conducting their studies more effectively by providing information about the journals they may use, the authors who contributed to it, current research trends, countries, and keywords.

Keywords

• Bibliometric Analysis
• Maritime Safety
• Maritime Accident

References

1. Akyuz, E. (2017). A marine accident analysing model to evaluate potential operational causes in cargo ships. Safety Science, 92, 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.09.010
2. Awal, Z. I., & Hasegawa, K. (2017). A study on accident theories and application to maritime accidents. Procedia Engineering, 194, 298–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.08.149
3. Batalden, B. M., & Sydnes, A. K. (2014). Maritime safety and the ISM code: A study of investigated casualties and incidents. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 13(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-013-0051-8
4. Bolbot, V., Kulkarni, K., Brunou, P., Banda, O. V., & Musharraf, M. (2022). Developments and research directions in maritime cybersecurity: A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 39, 100571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2022.100571
5. Büber, M., & Köseoğlu, B. (2022). A bibliometric review and science mapping research of oil spill response. Marine Science and Technology Bulletin, 11(1), 123-134. https://doi.org/10.33714/masteb.1081670
6. Bye, R. J., & Aalberg, A. L. (2018). Maritime navigation accidents and risk indicators: An exploratory statistical analysis using AIS data and accident reports. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 176, 174–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2018.03.033
7. Chauvin, C., Lardjane, S., Morel, G., Clostermann, J. P., & Langard, B. (2013). Human and organisational factors in maritime accidents: Analysis of collisions at sea using the HFACS. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 59, 26–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.05.006
8. Chen, D., Liu, Z., Luo, Z., Webber, M., & Chen, J. (2016). Bibliometric and visualized analysis of emergy research. Ecological Engineering, 90, 285–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2016.01.026

9. Chen, S. T., Wall, A., Davies, P., Yang, Z., Wang, J., & Chou, Y. H. (2013). A human and organisational factors (HOFs) analysis method for marine casualties using HFACS-Maritime Accidents (HFACS-MA). Safety Science, 60, 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.06.009
10. Dominguez-Péry, C., Vuddaraju, L. N. R., Corbett-Etchevers, I., & Tassabehji, R. (2021). Reducing maritime accidents in ships by tackling human error: a bibliometric review and research agenda. Journal of Shipping and Trade, 6(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41072-021-00098-y
11. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
12. Eleftheria, E., Apostolos, P., & Markos, V. (2016). Statistical analysis of ship accidents and review of safety level. Safety Science, 85, 282–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.02.001
13. Ellegaard, O., & Wallin, J. A. (2015). The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact? Scientometrics, 105(3), 1809–1831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1645-z
14. EMSA. (2022). Annual overview of marine casualties and incidents. European Maritime Safety Agency. Retrieved on December 25, 2022, from https://www.emsa.europa.eu/newsroom/latest-news/download/7362/4867/23.html
15. Fan, S., Blanco-Davis, E., Yang, Z., Zhang, J., & Yan, X. (2020a). Incorporation of human factors into maritime accident analysis using a data-driven Bayesian network. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 203, 107070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2020.107070
16. Fan, S., Zhang, J., Blanco-Davis, E., Yang, Z., & Yan, X. (2020b). Maritime accident prevention strategy formulation from a human factor perspective using Bayesian Networks and TOPSIS. Ocean Engineering, 210, 107544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107544
17. Fowler, T. G., & Sørgård, E. (2000). Modeling ship transportation risk. Risk Analysis, 20(2), 225–244. https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.202022
18. Fu, S., Goerlandt, F., & Xi, Y. (2021). Arctic shipping risk management: A bibliometric analysis and a systematic review of risk influencing factors of navigational accidents. Safety Science, 139, 105254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105254
19. Gil, M., Wróbel, K., Montewka, J., & Goerlandt, F. (2020). A bibliometric analysis and systematic review of shipboard Decision Support Systems for accident prevention. Safety Science, 128, 104717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104717
20. Graziano, A., Teixeira, A. P., & Guedes Soares, C. (2016). Classification of human errors in grounding and collision accidents using the TRACEr taxonomy. Safety Science, 86, 245–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.02.026
21. Hänninen, M., & Kujala, P. (2012a). Influences of variables on ship collision probability in a Bayesian belief network model. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 102, 27–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2012.02.008
22. Harati-Mokhtari, A., Wall, A., Brooks, P., & Wang, J. (2007). Automatic identification system (AIS): Data reliability and human error implications. Journal of Navigation, 60(3), 373–389. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0373463307004298
23. Hetherington, C., Flin, R., & Mearns, K. (2006). Safety in shipping: The human element. Journal of Safety Research, 37(4), 401–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2006.04.007
24. Kececi, T., & Arslan, O. (2017). SHARE technique: A novel approach to root cause analysis of ship accidents. Safety Science, 96, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.03.002
25. Kołakowski, P., Gil, M., Wróbel, K., & Ho, Y. S. (2022). State of play in technology and legal framework of alternative marine fuels and renewable energy systems: A bibliometric analysis. Maritime Policy and Management, 49(2), 236–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2021.1969460
26. Kulkarni, K., Goerlandt, F., Li, J., Banda, O. V., & Kujala, P. (2020). Preventing shipping accidents: Past, present, and future of waterway risk management with Baltic Sea focus. Safety Science, 129, 104798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104798
27. Kum, S., & Sahin, B. (2015). A root cause analysis for Arctic Marine accidents from 1993 to 2011. Safety Science, 74, 206–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.12.010
28. Lau, Y.-Y., Ducruet, C., Ng, A. K. Y., & Fu, X. (2017). Across the waves: a bibliometric analysis of container shipping research since the 1960s. Maritime Policy and Management, 44(6), 667–684. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2017.1311425
29. Li, J., Jovanovic, A., Klimek, P., & Guo, X. (2015). Bibliometric analysis of fracking scientific literature. Scientometrics, 105(2), 1273–1284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1739-7
30. Li, K., Rollins, J., & Yan, E. (2018). Web of Science use in published research and review papers 1997–2017: a selective, dynamic, cross-domain, content-based analysis. Scientometrics, 115(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2622-5
31. Luo, M., & Shin, S-H. (2019). Half-century research developments in maritime accidents: Future directions. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 123, 448–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.04.010
32. Mao, N., Wang, M. H., & Ho, Y. S. (2010). A bibliometric study of the trend in articles related to risk assessment published in science citation index. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 16(4), 801–824. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2010.501248
33. Md Khudzari, J., Kurian, J., Tartakovsky, B., & Raghavan, G. S. V. (2018). Bibliometric analysis of global research trends on microbial fuel cells using Scopus database. Biochemical Engineering Journal, 136, 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2018.05.002
34. Meyers, S. D., Azevedo, L., & Luther, M. E. (2021). A Scopus-based bibliometric study of maritime research involving the Automatic Identification System. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 10, 100387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2021.100387
35. Montewka, J., Ehlers, S., Goerlandt, F., Hinz, T., Tabri, K., & Kujala, P. (2014). A framework for risk assessment for maritime transportation systems - A case study for open sea collisions involving RoPax vessels. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 124, 142–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2013.11.014
36. Munim, Z. H., Dushenko, M., Jimenez, V. J., Shakil, M. H., & Imset, M. (2020). Big data and artificial intelligence in the maritime industry: A bibliometric review and future research directions. Maritime Policy and Management, 47(5), 577–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2020.1788731
37. Qiao, W., Liu, Y., Ma, X., & Liu, Y. (2020). A methodology to evaluate human factors contributed to maritime accident by mapping fuzzy FT into ANN based on HFACS. Ocean Engineering, 197, 106892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.106892
38. Schröder-Hinrichs, J. U. (2010). Human and organizational factors in the maritime world — Are we keeping up to speed?. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 9, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03195162
39. Shi, X., Zhuang, H., & Xu, D. (2021). Structured survey of human factor-related maritime accident research. Ocean Engineering, 237, 109561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.109561
40. Soner, O., Asan, U., & Celik, M. (2015). Use of HFACS-FCM in fire prevention modelling on board ships. Safety Science, 77, 25–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.03.007
41. Uğurlu, Ö., Yıldız, S., Loughney, S., & Wang, J. (2018). Modified human factor analysis and classification system for passenger vessel accidents (HFACS-PV). Ocean Engineering, 161, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.04.086
42. Wong, S. L., Nyakuma, B. B., Wong, K. Y., Lee, C. T., Lee, T. H., & Lee, C. H. (2020). Microplastics and nanoplastics in global food webs: A bibliometric analysis (2009–2019). Marine Pollution Bulletin, 158, 111432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111432
43. Wróbel, K., Montewka, J., & Kujala, P. (2017). Towards the assessment of potential impact of unmanned vessels on maritime transportation safety. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 165, 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2017.03.029
44. Wróbel, K. (2021). Searching for the origins of the myth: 80% human error impact on maritime safety. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 216, 107942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.107942
45. Yıldırım, U., Başar, E., & Uğurlu, Ö. (2019). Assessment of collisions and grounding accidents with human factors analysis and classification system (HFACS) and statistical methods. Safety Science, 119, 412–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.09.022
46. Zhang, W., Goerlandt, F., Kujala, P., & Wang, Y. (2016). An advanced method for detecting possible near miss ship collisions from AIS data. Ocean Engineering, 124, 141–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2016.07.059
47. Zou, X., Yue, W. L., & Vu, H. le. (2018). Visualization and analysis of mapping knowledge domain of road safety studies. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 118, 131–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.06.010