Wrong Use of SMCP in Marine Communication: A Review Study

Year 2024, Volume: 4 Issue: 2, 1 - 12

Fahimeh Farjami

Abstract

The Standard Marine Communication Phrases (SMCP) are largely used on commerce ships to ensure safe navigation and to standardize communication between ships and between ships and shorelines. Therefore, it is crucial to raise training standards among important players in the sector: institutions for maritime education and training. This review study uses a theoretical and comprehensive systematic methodology and gathers data through analyzing SMCP previous papers in the context of onboard and external communication. The main objective of this research is to examine the improper usage of the SMCP, and marine safety to determine the needs and prospects for further future study. According to this analysis of the literature, intercultural collaboration, communication and a seafarer's language proficiency are the most significant factors that affect maritime safety on an individual level. Additionally, SMCP use for external communication is 9% optional, 26% recommended, and 65% required. There are many different ways that English is used in crew radio communication, particularly for onboard communication. 41% of respondents selected recommended, 48% selected mandatory, and 11% selected optional. This paper serves as a thorough literature source pinpointing major issues in the use of SMCP to be touched in future studies.

Keywords

Standard Marine Communication Phrase, Maritime English, Misuse of SMCP, English for Maritime

References

• Acar, U. and Varsami, C. (2021). Practical Communication Approach in Maritime English. TransNav. International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, 15(3), 601–604.
• Ahmed, H. J. (2013). The impact of maritime English communication training for non-native English language speakers concerning the competency of seafarers: Iraqi maritime sector case study [Dissertation]. World Maritime University.
• Anurag, C., A. Gaurav, and J. Meghna (2014). A review on applications of smart class and e-learning. International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Research, 2, 7980.
• Ahmmed, R. (2018). The Difficulties of Maritime Communication and the Roles of English Teachers. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327890958_The_Difficulties_of_Maritime_Communication_ nd_the_Roles_of_English_Teachers.
• Apostol-Mates, R., & Barbu, A. (2015). Is maritime english the key in solving communication problems within multinational crews?. In International Conference Knowledge-based Organization (Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 541544).
• Barsan, E., Surugiu, F. and Dragomir, C. (2012). Factors of human resources competitiveness in maritime transport. International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, 6(1), pp.89-92.
• Berg, H. P. (2013). Human factors and safety culture in maritime safety. International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety Culture in Maritime Safety, 107, 107115.
• Bin Mohd Rosedi, S. R., Sap, M. A. B. M., & Oommen, C. P. G. (2015). Aligning occupational, national and global standards in maritime english competency: a preliminary study on standard marine communication phrases (smcp). International Maritime English Conference 2015 (IMEC 27)At: Johor Bharu, Johor Darul Takzim, Malaysia.
• Bloor, M. and Sampson, H. (2009). Regulatory enforcement of labour standards in an outsourcing globalized industry: the case of the shipping industry. Work, Employment and Society, 23(4), 711726.
• Bocanegra-Valle, A. (2010). Global markets, global challenges: The position of maritime English in today’s shipping industry. English in the European context: The EHEA challenge, 151174.
• Boris, P. (2004). A databank of maritime english resources, 16th International Maritime English Conference, 2627.
• Boström, M. (2020). Mind the Gap! A quantitative comparison between ship-to-ship communication and intended communication protocol. Safety Science, 123, Article 104567.
• Chauvin, C., Lardjane, S., Morel, G., Clostermann, J. P. and Langard, B. (2013). Human and organizational factors in maritime accidents: Analysis of collisions at sea using the HFACS. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 59, 2637.
• Cole, C., & Trenkner, P. (2008). The yardstick for maritime English STCW assessment purposes. In Proceedings of IMLA 16th Conference (pp. 163173).
• Demydenko, N. (2012). Teaching maritime English: A linguistic approach. Journal of Shipping and Ocean Engineering, 2(4), Article 249.
• Ding, J., & Liang, G. (2005). The choices of employing seafarers for the national shipowners in Taiwan: an empirical study. Maritime Policy & Management 32(2), 123–137.
• Dirgeyasa, I. W. (2018). The need analysis of maritime english learning materials for nautical students of maritime academy in indonesia based on STCW’2010 curriculum. English Language Teaching, 11(9), Article 41.
• Davy, J. G., & Noh, C.-K. (2010). A basic study on maritime english education and the need for raising the instructor profile. Journal of Navigation and Port Research, 34(7), 533–538.
• Frolova, O. O. (2020). Integrating standard marine communication phrases into maritime english Course. Pedagogy of the Formation of a Creative Person in Higher and Secondary Schools, 2(68), 212215.
• Haralambides, H. E. (2019). Gigantism in container shipping, ports and global logistics: a time-lapse into the future. Maritime Economics & Logistics, 21(1), 160.
• Haryani, H., Mujiyanto, J., Hartono, R., & Yuliasri, I. (2022). English communication skill used by indonesian seafarer on radio communication. In English Language and Literature International Conference (ELLiC) Proceedings (Vol. 5, pp. 627634).
• Hoel, T., & Mason, J. (2018). Standards for smart education–towards a development framework. Smart Learning Environments, 5, 125.
• Hetherington, C., Flin, R., & Mearns, K. (2006). Safety in shipping: The human element. Journal of Safety Research, 37(4), 401411.
• International Maritime Organization. (2010). IMO Model Course 3.17. Maritime English. International Maritime Organization (IMO), Article 138.
• International Maritime Organization. (2010). ISM Code. International Maritime Organization.
• Jacks, D. S., & Pendakur, K. (2010). Global trade and the maritime transport revolution. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92(4), 745755.
• John, P., Brooks, B., & Schriever, U. (2017). Profiling maritime communication by non-native speakers: A quantitative comparison between the baseline and standard marine communication phraseology. English for Specific Purposes, 47, 114.
• Losey-León, M. A. (2000). Facing new changes in the maritime English curriculum: tasks' design towards the acquisition of the standard marine communication phrases. 2nd. International Congress on Maritime Technological Innovations and Research, Cádiz, Spain.
• MCA. (2016). Navigation: Watchkeeping Safety–Use of VHF Radio and AIS. Maritime and Coastguard Agency. https://www. gov.uk/government/publications/mgn-324-mf-navigation-watchkeeping-safety-use-of-vhf-radio
• Michail, N. A. (2020). World economic growth and seaborne trade volume: quantifying the relationship. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 4, Article 100108.
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage Publication.
• Mujiyanto, J., Hartono, R., & Yuliasri, I. (2023). The essential of using standard marine communication phrases in avoiding accidents at sea for indonesian seafarers. International Journal of Education, Vocational and Social Science, 2(02), 5167.
• James, A. J., Schriever, U. G., Jahangiri, S., & Girgin, S. C. (2018). Improving maritime English competence as the cornerstone of safety at sea: a focus on teaching practices to improve maritime communication. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 17(2), 293–310.
• Kovacevic, S. (2014). Maritime English Language Restrictedness. European Journal of Social Sciences Education and Research, 2(1), Article 89.
• Papastergiou, S., Kalogeraki, E. M., Polemi, N., & Douligeris, C. (2021). Challenges and issues in risk assessment in modern maritime systems. Advances in Core Computer Science-Based Technologies. Papers in Honor of Professor Nikolaos Alexandris, 129156.
• Park, J. S., & Choe, S. H. (2015). Workshop: IMEC and computer dialogue teaching approach in VHF communication. In Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference (pp. 233-236). Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research.
• Pyne, R., & Koester, T. (2005). Methods and means for analysis of crew communication in the maritime domain. Archives of Transport, 17(3-4), 193208.
• Rodrigue, J. P. (2010). Maritime transportation: drivers for the shipping and port industries (No. Forum Paper 2). ITF.
• Rosedi, S. R. B. H. M., bin Dahari, C. M., & bin Mohd Said, K. (2015). The need to incorporate inaesthetic learning as one of primary methods in maritime English/communication classes. Asian TEFL International Conference, 4, 181202.
• Rothblum, A. (2000). Human Error and Marine Safety, US Coast Guard research& Development Center. In Maritime Human Factors Conference.
• Sampson, H., & Zhao, M. (2003). Multilingual crews: communication and the operation of ships. World Englishes, 22(1), 3143.
• Seor, J. K., & Park, Y. S. (2020). A study on the educational efficacy of a maritime English learning and testing platform. Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety, 26(4), 374381.
• Sotiralis, P., Ventikos, N.P., Hamann, R., Golyshev, P. and Teixeira, A. P. (2016). Incorporation of human factors into ship collision risk models focusing on human centred design aspects. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 156, 210227.
• Sari, D. P., & Aprizawati, A. (2019). The effect of standard marine communication phrases application through english for maritime ability. Inovish Journal, 4(2), 119130.
• Şihmantepe, A., Beşikçi, E. B., & Özsever, E. (2019). Efficiency of IMO SMCP for safe navigation at sea: needs and challenges. Young Scientist, 71(2), Article 25.
• Sarkodie, P. A., Zhang, Z. K., Benuwa, B. B., Ghansah, B., & Ansah, E. (2018). A survey of advanced marine communication and navigation technologies: Developments and strategies. International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa, 34, 102–115.
• Sukomardojo, T. (2022). The using of media games to improve smcp (standard marine communication phrases) vocabulary in maritime English. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Development, 5(6), 1056–1064.
• Takagi, N., & Björkroth, P. (2015). Using Computer Dialogue Systems for Providing a Student-Centred Teaching Approach in SMCP-Based Maritime Communication (workshop). Hochschule Flensburg University of Applied Sciences.
• Trenkner, P. (2005). The IMO Standard Marine Communication Phrases–refreshing memories to refresh motivation. In Proceedings of the IMLA 17th International Maritime English Conference (pp. 117).
• Ung, S. T. (2019). Evaluation of human error contribution to oil tanker collision using fault tree analysis and modified fuzzy Bayesian Network based CREAM. Ocean Engineering, 179, 159172.
• Vangehuchten, L. (2010). Communication for maritime purposes: a research project focusing on linguistic and intercultural features. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Maritime English Conference (pp. 122140).
• Velikova, G. V. (2009). Maritime English testing current state of affairs. Vaptsarov Naval Academy Proceedings.
• Vidhiasi, D. M., & Syihabuddin, S. (2022.) Maritime English: Teaching English for Maritime Sciences or Teaching Maritime Sciences in English?. Saintara: Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu-Ilmu Maritim, 6(1), 7177.
• Valle, A. B. (2011). The language of seafaring: Standardized conventions and discursive features in speech communications. International Journal of English Studies, 11(1), 3553.
• Weng, J., Yang, D., Chai, T., & Fu S. (2019). Investigation of occurrence likelihood of human errors in shipping operations. Ocean Engineering, 182, 2837.
• Wójcik, A., Hatłas, P., & Pietrzykowski, Z. (2016). Modeling communication processes in maritime transport using computing with words. Archives of Transport System Telematics, 9(4), 4751.
• 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.
• Yurzhenko, A. Y. (2019). An e-course based on the LMS moodle to teach “Maritime English for professional purpose”, Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 71(3), Article 92.
• Ziarati, M., Ziarati, R., Bigland, O. & Acar, U. (2012). Communication and practical training applied in nautical studies. Coventry: Coventry University Technology Park.