A review on the Analysis Methods Used in Maritime Casualty And Maritime Incident Studies

Abstract

Marine casualties and marine incidents are undesirable events that can cause loss of life, ship or cargo and environmental damage after the accident. After marine casualties occur, accident investigations are carried out to find the true cause of the accident and to prevent similar accidents from happening again. Since serious negative consequences may occur after marine accidents, accident investigations are emphasized and necessary comprehensive measures are taken after investigations in order to prevent accidents. In this paper, a literature review was made on the marine casualty analysis methods used to find the causes of the accidents and analyze the accidents, marine casualty analysis methods are introduced and general information is given on using of these methods. There are many methods used to investigate marine accidents and to find the root causes of the accident as a result of the investigations. In order to ensure maritime safety, to protect the marine environment and to draw attention to maritime accidents by all maritime stakeholders, it is necessary to make effective and efficient marine accident analysis. When marine casualties are analyzed realistically with appropriate methods, it is seen that the root causes of the accidents are found and important lessons are learned in order to prevent similar accidents.

Keywords

• Marine Casualty
• Marine Incident
• Analysis
• Investigation

Deniz Kazaları ve Deniz Olaylarını İnceleme Çalışmalarında Kullanılan Analiz Yöntemleri Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme

Abstract

Deniz kazaları ve deniz olayları can, gemi ya da yük kayıpları ve kaza sonrasında çevre zararı da oluşturabilen yaşanması arzu edilmeyen olaylardır. Deniz kazaları gerçekleştikten sonra kazanın gerçek nedeninin bulunarak benzer kazaların tekrar yaşanmaması için kaza incelemeleri yapılmaktadır. Deniz kazaları sonrasında ciddi olumsuz sonuçlar meydana gelebileceği için kaza incelemeleri üzerinde önemle durulmakta ve kazaların önüne geçebilmek için incelemeler sonrasında gerekli kapsamlı tedbirler alınmaktadır. Bu çalışmada gerçekleşen deniz kazaları sonrasında kaza nedenlerinin bulunup kazaların analiz edilmesinde kullanılan deniz kaza analiz yöntemleriyle ilgili literatür taraması yapılmış ve deniz kaza analiz yöntemleri tanıtılarak bu yöntemlerin kullanımlarına ilişkin genel bilgiler verilmiştir. Deniz kazalarını incelemek ve incelemelerin sonucunda kazaya sebep olan kök nedenlerin bulmak amacıyla kullanılan birçok yöntem mevcuttur. Deniz emniyetinin sağlanması, deniz çevresinin korunması ve tüm denizcilik paydaşları tarafından deniz kazalarına dikkat çekilebilmesi için gerçekleşen deniz kazalarının analizlerinin etkin ve etkili şekilde yapılması gerekmektedir. Deniz kazaları gerçekçi şekilde uygun yöntemler ile analiz edildiğinde kazaların kök nedenlerinin bulunduğu ve benzer kazaların yaşanmaması için önemli dersler çıkarıldığı görülmektedir.

Keywords

• Deniz Kazası
• Deniz Olayı
• Analiz
• İnceleme

References

1. Acharya, T. D., Yoo, K. W. ve Lee, D. H. (2017). GIS-Based Spatio-Temporal Analysis of marine accidents database in the coastal zone of Korea. Journal of Coastal Research, (79), 114-118. doi: 10.2112/SI79-024.1
2. Arici, S. S., Akyuz, E. ve Arslan, O. (2020). Application of Fuzzy Bow-Tie Risk Analysis to maritime transportation: The case of ship collision during the STS operation. Ocean Engineering, 217. doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107960
3. Arslan, Ö., Zorba, Y. ve Svetak, J. (2018). Fault Tree Analysis of tanker accidents during loading and unloading operations at the tanker terminals. Journal of Eta Maritime Science, 6(1), 3-16. doi:10.5505/jems.2018.29981
4. Asuelimen, G., Blanco-Davis, E., Wang, J., Yang, Z. ve Matellini, D. B. (2020). Formal safety assessment of a marine seismic survey vessel operation, incorporating Risk Matrix and Fault Tree Analysis. Journal of Marine Science and Application, 19(2), 155-172. doi:10.1007/s11804-020-00136-4
5. Awal, Z.I. ve Hasegawa, K. (2017). A study on accident theories and application to maritime accidents. Procedia Engineering, 194, 298-306. doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.08.149
6. Aydemir, İ. (2017). Sağlık kurumlarında sistem kaynaklı tıbbi hataların analizi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 19(4), 665-681. doi:10.16953/deusosbil.281328
7. Babacan, E.K. ve Karaduman, M.Ö. (2018). Bayes Ağları-K2 Algoritması üzerine bir çalışma. Karadeniz Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 8(2), 24-38. doi:10.31466/kfbd.418862
8. Beşi̇kçi̇, E.B. ve Şıhmantepe, A. (2020). Deniz kazalarının çözümlenmesine güncel bir bakış: Fram yöntemi ile analiz örneği. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi, Özel Sayı, 69-90. doi:10.18613/de-udfd.740159

9. Banda, O. V., Hänninen, M., Goerlandt, F. ve Kujala, P. (2014a). Bayesian networks as a decision making tool to plan and assess maritime safety management indicators. Paulos, T (Ed). 12th International Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management Conference (PSAM). Honolulu
10. Banda, O. V., Goerlandt, F., Montewka, J. ve Kujala, P. (2014b). Winter navigation at the Baltic Sea: an analysis of accidents occurred during winters 2002–2003 and 2009–2013. Nowakowski,T., Mlynczak, M., Jodejko-Pietruczuk, A. ve Werbinska-Wojciechowska, S. (Ed). Safety and Reliability Methodology and Applications 83-92. London: CRC Press.
11. Bayazit, O., Toz, A. C. ve Buber, M. (2020). Spatial distribution analysis of ship accidents in the Çanakkale Strait. Scientific Journals of the Maritime University of Szczecin, 62, 9-17. doi:10.17402/414
12. Budiyanto, M. A. ve Fernanda, H. (2020). Risk assessment of work accident in container terminals using the fault tree analysis method. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 8(6), 466. doi:10.3390/jmse8060466
13. Büber, M. ve Töz, A. C. (2019). Liman sahasında meydana gelen gemi kazalarının konumsal analizi: Ege Bölgesi için bir uygulama. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi, 11, 1-16. doi:10.18613/ deudfd.565124
14. Büyükkarakurt, A. ve Mutluoğlu, Ö. (2020). Altyapı bilgi sistemi ve Konya örneği. Türkiye Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri Dergisi, 2(1), 10-16.
15. Bye, R. J. ve Almklov, P. G. (2019). Normalization of maritime accident data using AIS. Marine Policy, 109, 103675. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103675
16. Chai, T., Weng, J. ve De-qi, X. (2017). Development of a quantitative risk assessment model for ship collisions in fairways. Safety science, 91, 71-83. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2016.07.018
17. Chen, S. T. (2020). An approach of identifying the common human and organisational factors (HOFs) among a group of marine accidents using GRA and HFACS-MA. Journal of Transportation Safety and Security, 12(10), 1252-1294. doi:10.1080/19439962.2019.1583297
18. Craig, B. (2013). Using safety performance metrics to support CSR goals and objectives. Vappu Kunnaala and Jenna Viertola. Proceedings of The International Scientıfıc Meeting for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) In Shipping, (s.77-91). Kotka. Publications of the Centre for Maritime Studies University of Turku.
19. Çakır, E. ve Kamal, B. (2021). İstanbul Boğazı’ndaki ticari gemi kazalarının karar ağacı yöntemiyle analizi. Aquatic Research, 4(1), 10-20. doi:10.3153/AR21002
20. De la Campa Portela, R. (2005). Maritime casualties analysis as a tool to improve research about human factors on maritime environment. Journal of Maritime Research, 2(2), 3-18.
21. Demir, İ. (2016). Deniz kazalarını ve olaylarını araştırma ve inceleme yönetmeliği üzerine değerlendirmeler. Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi, 22(3), 879-904.
22. Dönmez, K. ve Uslu, S. (2018). İnsan Faktörleri Analiz ve Sınıflandırma Sistemi’nin (HFACS) literatürde yaygın kullanımının değerlendirilmesi. Journal of Aviation, 2(2), 156-176. doi:10.30518/jav.463607
23. Erol, S. ve Başar, E. (2015). The analysis of ship accident occurred in Turkish search and rescue area by using decision tree. Maritime Policy and Management, 42(4), 377-388. doi:10.1080/03088839.2013.870357
24. Eun Jin Kim, Jae Man Kim, Sang Min Shin ve Hee Kyung Park. (2017). A study on analytical methodology in maritime HNS spill accidents cases focused on error of actors. Journal of the Korean Society of Hazard Mitigation, 17(3), 381-389. doi:10.9798/KOSHAM.2017.17.3.381
25. Fu, S., Yan, X., Zhang, D., Li, C. ve Zio, E. (2016). Framework for the quantitative assessment of the risk of leakage from LNG-fueled vessels by an event tree-CFD. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 43, 42-52. doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2016.04.008
26. Forbes, T. D. (2010). Marine casualty investigations. Tul. L. Rev., 85, 1363-1382.
27. Gençsoy, E. K. (2016). Deniz Yapıları İçin Güvenlik Tabanlı Karar Destek Sistemleri (Doktora Tezi). İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
28. Ghirxi, K. T. (2003). Implementation of the code for the investigation of marine casualties and incidents: A critical analysis (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). World Maritime University.
29. Gilberg, A., Kleiven, E. ve Bye, R. J. (2016). Marine navigation accidents and influencing conditions: An exploratory statistical analysis using AIS data and accident databases. Lesley Walls, Matthew Revie, and Tim Bedford (Ed). In Proceedings of the ESREL 2016 Conference. (s. 97-104). Glasgow: Taylor & Francis.
30. Graziano, A., Teixeira, A. P. ve Soares, C. G. (2016). Classification of human errors in grounding and collision accidents using the TRACEr taxonomy. Safety Science, 86, 245-257. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2016.02.026
31. Güneysu, G. (2016). Bir kereste işletmesi üretim sürecinde iş sağlığı ve güvenliği risk değerlendirme çalışması (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Bartın Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
32. Holen, S. M., Utne, I. B. ve Holmen, I. M. (2014). A preliminary accident investigation on a Norwegian fish farm applying two different accident models. Proceedings of the Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management PSAM, 22-27. Honolulu.
33. Jia, Y., Zhuang, Y., Wang, F. ve Lyu, P. (2018). Causes analysis of ship collision accidents using Bayesian Network. International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers. The 28th International Ocean and Polar Engineering Conference, 18-99. Sapporo.
34. Jiang, M. ve Lu, J. (2020). Maritime accident risk estimation for sea lanes based on a dynamic Bayesian network. Maritime Policy and Management, 47(5), 649-664. doi:10.1080/03088839.2020.1730995
35. Jiang, M., Lu, J., Yang, Z. ve Li, J. (2020). Risk analysis of maritime accidents along the main route of the Maritime Silk Road: a Bayesian network approach. Maritime Policy and Management, 47(6), 815-832. doi: 10.1080/03088839.2020.1730010
36. Keçeci, T. (2015). Gemi kazası probleminin incelenmesi için kök sebep analizi yaklaşımı önerisi (Doktora Tezi). İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
37. Keefe, P. (2016). Disasters at sea and their impact on shipping regulation. Marine Link. Erişim adresi: https://www.marinelink.com/news/regulation-disasters371542
38. Kim, H., Na, S., Kim, H. ve Ha, W. (2010, Eylül). Marine accident investigation and analysis with focus on human factors. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 1440-1444. Los Angeles: CA: SAGE Publications. doi:10.1177/154193121005401918
39. Koçak, D. (2019). Bir kömür madeninde iş sağlığı ve güvenliği risk değerlendirmesi için uygun yöntem seçimi (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
40. Kum, S. (2005). Petrol tankerlerinde risk değerlendirmesi (Doktora Tezi). İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
41. Lee, H. K. ve Chang, S. R. (2005). Cause analysis and prevention of fishing vessels accident. Journal of the Korean Society of Safety, 20 (1), 153-157.
42. Lee, J. ve Chung, H. (2018). A new methodology for accident analysis with human and system interaction based on FRAM: Case studies in maritime domain. Safety science, 109, 57-66. doi:10.1016/j.ssci. 2018.05.011
43. Li, K. X., Yin, J., Bang, H. S., Yang, Z. ve Wang, J. (2014). Bayesian network with quantitative input for maritime risk analysis. Transportmetrica A: Transport Science, 10(2), 89-118. doi:10.1080/18128602. 2012.675527
44. Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. ve Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(10), e1-e34. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006
45. Mokhtari, K., Ren, J., Roberts, C. ve Wang, J. (2011). Application of a generic bow-tie based risk analysis framework on risk management of sea ports and offshore terminals. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 192(2), 465-475. doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.05.035
46. Montewka, J., Goerlandt, F. ve Kujala, P. (2014). On a systematic perspective on risk for formal safety assessment (FSA). Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 127, 77-85. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2014.03.009
47. Patriarca, R. ve Bergström, J. (2017). Modelling complexity in everyday operations: functional resonance in maritime mooring at quay. Cognition, Technology and Work, 19(4), 711-729. doi:10.1007/s10111-017-0426-2
48. Psarros, G., Skjong, R. ve Eide, M. S. (2010). Under-reporting of maritime accidents. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42(2), 619-625. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2009.10.008
49. Purba, P. H., Dinariyana, A.A.B., Handani, D. W. ve Rachman, A. F. (2020). Application of formal safety assessment for ship collision risk analysis in Surabaya West Access Channel. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (1-10). Surabaya: IOP Publishing. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/557/1/012034
50. Raiyan, A., Das, S. ve Islam, M. R. (2017). Event tree analysis of marine accidents in Bangladesh. Procedia Engineering, 194, 276-283. doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.08.146
51. Said, M. H. ve Noor, M. F. A. M. (2018). Technique for the retrospective and predictive analysis of cognitive errors in maritime pilotage operations. 12th International UMT Annual Symposium Advancements in Marine and Freshwater Sciences, 11-320.
52. Salihoğlu, E. ve Beşikçi, E. B. (2021). The use of Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM) in a maritime accident: A case study of Prestige. Ocean Engineering, 219 (2021), 108223. doi:10.1016/ j.oceaneng.2020.108223
53. Saragih, J. W. ve Hasibuan, A. (2020). Analysis of damage to ship MT. Delta Victory due to Human Error and Electricity with the Shel Method. 4rd International Conference on Electrical, Telecommunication and Computer Engineering (ELTICOM), 48-51, Medan: IEEE. doi:10.1109/ELTICOM50775.2020.9230475
54. Schröder-Hinrichs, J. U., Baldauf, M. ve Ghirxi, K. T. (2011). Accident investigation reporting deficiencies related to organizational factors in machinery space fires and explosions. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 43(3), 1187-1196. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2010.12.033
55. Schröder-Hinrichs, J.-U., Graziano, A., Praetorius, G. ve Kataria, A. (2017). TRACEr-MAR: Technique for The Retrospective and Predictive Analysis of cognitive errors adapted to the maritime domain. WMU Papers in Maritime and Ocean Affairs No.1, Malmö: World Maritime University. doi:10.21677/pmoa.20170630
56. Serrat, O. (2017). The five whys technique. In Knowledge solutions. Singapore: Springer.
57. Shorrock, S. T. ve Kirwan, B. (2002). Development and application of a human error identification tool for air traffic control. Applied Ergonomics, 33, 319-336. doi:10.1016/S0003-6870(02)00010-8
58. Smolarek, L. (2016). Examples of bow-tie risk analysis at maritime transport. Journal of KONES, 23(3), 489-494. doi:10.5604/12314005.1216455
59. Sotiralis, P., Louzis, K. ve Ventikos, N. P. (2019). The role of ship inspections in maritime accidents: An analysis of risk using the bow-tie approach. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part O: Journal of risk and reliability, 233(1), 58-70. doi:10.1177/1748006X18776078
60. Sothivanan, S. ve Siddiqui, N. A. (2015). Laconic study on Incident/Accident Investigation technique-Sequentially Timed Event Plotting (STEP). International Journal for Scientific Research and Development, 3(08), 680-683.
61. Tian, W. ve Caponecchia, C. (2020). Using the Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM) in Aviation Safety: A Systematic Review. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 8898903. doi:10.1155/2020/8898903
62. Töz, A. C. ve Olgaç, T. (2020). Türk Arama ve Kurtarma Organizasyonu: Uluslararası iş birliği faaliyetleri ve yaşanan anlaşmazlıklar. Gemi ve Deniz Teknolojisi, (217), 45-57.
63. Tunçel, A. L. (2020). Dökme yük ve genel kargo gemi kazalarının analizi (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). İskenderun Teknik Üniversitesi Mühendislik ve Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
64. Tüminçin, F., Aytekin, A. ve Ayaz, A. (2019). Veri Madenciliğinde Karar Ağacı Algoritması. Ph. D. Fatma Tüminçin, F. ve Baran, K. (Ed). SHADAB 5th International Conference on Social Researches and Behavioral Sciences 350-356. Tbilisi.
65. Tzannatos, E. ve Kokotos, D. (2009). Analysis of accidents in Greek shipping during the pre-and post-ISM period. Marine Policy, 33(4), 679-684. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2009.01.006
66. Uğurlu, F., Yıldız, S., Boran, M., Uğurlu, Ö. ve Wang, J. (2020). Analysis of fishing vessel accidents with Bayesian network and Chi-square methods. Ocean Engineering, 198,106956, 1-13. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng. 2020.106956
67. Yıldırım, U. ve Başar, E. (2019). Balıkçı gemilerinde çatışma kazalarının İnsan Faktörleri Analiz ve Sınıflandırma Sistemi (HFACS) ile İncelenmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2), 203-220. doi:10.18613/deudfd.659807
68. Youn, I. H., Park, D. J. ve Yim, J. B. (2019). Analysis of lookout activity in a simulated environment to investigate maritime accidents caused by human error. Applied Sciences, 9(1), 1-10. doi:10.3390/app9010004
69. Zhan, Y., Xu, F. ve Zhang, Y. (2009, Aralık). The application of HAZOP analysis on risk assessment of the 10000TEU container ships. International Asia Symposium on Intelligent Interaction and Affective Computing, 59-62. Wuhan:IEEE. doi:10.1109/ASIA.2009.9
70. Zhang, G. ve Thai, V. V. (2016). Expert elicitation and Bayesian Network modeling for shipping accidents: A literature review. Safety Science, 87, 53-62. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2016.03.019
71. Ziedelis, S. ve Noel, M. (2011). Comparative analysis of nuclear event investigation methods, tools and techniques. European Commission. European Union Joint Research Center (EC/JRC). doi:10.2790/3097
72. Qiao, W., Liu, Y., Ma, X. ve Liu, Y. (2020). Human factors analysis for maritime accidents based on a dynamic fuzzy bayesian network. Risk Analysis, 40 (5), 957-980. doi:10.1111/risa.13444
73. Wang, H., Boulougouris, E., Theotokatos, G., Priftis, A., Shi, G., Dahle, M. and Tolo, E. (2020). Risk assessment of a battery-powered high-speed ferry using formal safety assessment. Safety, 6(3),39. doi:10.3390/ safety6030039
74. Whitaker-Sheppard, D., Kallen, E. and Wendel, T. (1996). Analysis of the causes of chemical spills from marine transportation or related facilities. USA Coast Guard Research and Development Center.
75. Xie, H. (2001). Risk-Based Approach to maritime safety (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). World Maritime University.