Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

A Comparison of Maritime Risk Perception and Accident Statistics in the Istanbul Straight

  • Yusuf Volkan Aydogdu (a1)

Abstract

The Istanbul Strait is a challenging waterway for maritime traffic due to its rough topology, moderate to severe environmental conditions, and heavy local traffic. In particular, a total of 232 maritime accidents took place there between 2000 and 2011. In this study, generic fuzzy analytic hierarchy processes were used to assess the risk perception of stakeholders in the Istanbul Strait, including ship captains, maritime pilots and Vessel Traffic Services operators. These risk perceptions were then compared to the statistical maritime accident data, revealing a fundamental discrepancy between the risk perception and statistical data. Specifically, the area of the Straight with the highest number of accidents is perceived as relatively low-risk, whereas areas perceived as high-risk experience a lower number of accidents. Our results have implications for stakeholders as well as government agencies responsible for the safety of the Straight.

Copyright

Corresponding author

References

Hide All
Aguarón, J. and Moreno-Jiménez, J. M. (2003). The geometric consistency index: Approximated thresholds. European Journal of Operational Research, 147, 137145.
Akten, N. (2003). The Strait of Istanbul (Bosphorus): The seaway separating the continents with its dense shipping traffic. Turkish Journal of Marine Science, 9(3), 241265.
Akten, N. (2004). Analysis of shipping casualties in the Bosporus. The Journal of Navigation, 57, 345356.
Aydogdu, Y. V., Yurtoren, C., Kum, S., Park, J. S. and Park, Y. S. (2010). Questionaire Survey on the Risk Perception in the Istanbul Strait. Journal of Navigation and Port Research, 7, 34, 09/2010.
Aydogdu, Y. V., Yurtoren, C., Kum, S., Park, J. S. and Park, Y. S. (2012). A Study on Local Traffic Management to Improve Marine Traffic Safety in the Istanbul Strait. The Journal of Navigation, 65, 99112.
Birpınar, M. E., Talu, G. F. and Gonencgil, B. (2009). Environmental effects of maritime traffic on the Istanbul Strait. Environmental Monitoring And Assessment, 152, Nos 1–4, 1323.
Buckley, J. J. (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 17, 233247.
Bulut, E., Duru, O. and Aydogdu, Y. V. (2010). Comparative Analysis for the Selection of Hazardous Area in the Strait of Istanbul. The First Global Conference on Innovation in Marine Technology and the Future of Maritime Transportation, Istanbul, Turkiye.
Bulut, E., Duru, O., Keçeci, T. and Yoshida, S. (2012). Use of consistency index, expert prioritization and direct numerical inputs for generic fuzzy-AHP modeling: A process model for shipping asset management. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 19111923.
Chang, D. Y. (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 95, 649655.
Cheng, C. H. (1997). Evaluating naval tactical missile systems by fuzzy AHP based on the grade value of membership function. European Journal of Operational Research, 96(2), 343350.
Crawford, G. and Williams, C. (1985). A note on the analysis of subjective judgment matrices. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 29, 387405.
Dağdeviren, M. and Yüksel, İ. (2008). Developing a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) model for behavior-based safety management. Information Sciences, 178, 17171733.
Dikmen, I., Birgonul, M. T. and Han, S. (2007). Using fuzzy risk assessment to rate cost overrun risk in international construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 25(5), 494505.
Duru, O., Bulut, E. and Yoshida, S. (2012). Regime switching fuzzy AHP model for choice-varying priorities problem and expert consistency prioritization: A cubic fuzzy-priority matrix design. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 49544964.
Ece, J.N. (2006). The accident Analysis of the Istanbul Strait from the Points of Safe Navigation and Environment and Evaluation of Innocent Passage. Ph.D. Thesis, Institute of Science and Technology, Gazi University, 2006.
Forman, E. and Peniwati, K. (1998). Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 108, 165169.
Gumus, A. T. (2009). Evaluation of hazardous waste transportation firms by using a two step fuzzy-AHP and TOPSIS methodology. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 40674074.
Hayakawa, H., Fischbeck, P. S. and Fischhoff, B. (2000). Traffic accident statistics and risk perceptions in Japan and the United States. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 32(6), 827835.
International Maritime Organization (1994). MSC 63/23: Maritime Traffic Regulations for the Turkish Straits Region.
International Maritime Organization (2010). Web Site – Conventions – COLREG http://www.imo.org/about/conventions/listofconventions/pages/colreg.aspx, information regarding COLREG 10 (accessed 19 May 2012).
Kaufmann, A. and Gupta, M. M. (1991). Introduction to Fuzzy Arithmetic. Theory and Applications. Nueva York, EUA: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Kum, S., Fuchi, M. and Furusho, M. (2006). Analysing of Maritime Accidents by Approaching Method for Minimizing Human Error. Proceedings of IAMU AGA-7, “Globalization and MET”, Part 2, 392409.
Kum, S. (2008). Mental Workload of Vessel Traffic Services Operator. Ph.D. Thesis, Kobe University, Graduate school of Science and Technology, Maritime Science and Technology.
Lund, I. O. and Rundmo, T. (2009). Cross-cultural comparisons of traffic safety, risk perception, attitudes and behaviour. Safety Science, 47(4), 547553.
Mikhailov, L. (2003). Deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison judgements. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 134, 365385.
Nieto-Morote, A. and Ruz-Vila, F. (2011). A fuzzy approach to construction project risk assessment. International Journal of Project Management, 29(2), 220231.
Or, I. and Kahraman, I. (2002). A Simulation Study of the Accident Risk in the Istanbul Channel. International Journal of Emergency Management, 1(2), 110124.
Ozbas, B., Or, I., Uluscu, O. S. and Altiok, T. (2009). Simulation-Based Risk Analysis of Maritime Transit Traffic in the Strait of Istanbul. TransNav, the International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, 3, 295300.
Ozgecan, S., Uluscu, I., Ozbas, B., Altıok, T. and Or, I. (2009). “Risk Analysis of the Vessel Traffic in the Strait of Istanbul”, Journal of Risk Analysis, 29, No. 10.
Powell, C. (2007). The perception of risk and risk taking behavior: Implications for incident prevention strategies. Wilderness & Environmental Medicine, 18(1), 1015.
Ramanathan, R. and Ganesh, L. S. (1994). Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members’ weightages. European Journal of Operational Research, 79, 249265.
Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15, 234281.
Saaty, T. L. (2000). Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the analytic hierarchy process: RWS Publications.
Sarioz, K. and Narli, E. (2003). Assessment of manoevring performance of large tankers in restricted waterways: a real-time simulation approach. Ocean Engineering, 30(12), 15351551.
Van Laarhoven, P. J. M. and Pedrycz, W. (1983). A fuzzy extension of Saaty's priority theory. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 11, 199227.
Wang, X., Chan, H. K., Yee, R. W. and Diaz-Rainey, I. (2012). A two-stage fuzzy-AHP model for risk assessment of implementing green initiatives in the fashion supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 135(2), 595606.
Yurtoren, C. (2004). Study on Maritime Traffic Management in the Istanbul Strait, PhD Thesis, Kobe University, Maritime & Transportation System Science.
Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8, 338353.

Keywords

A Comparison of Maritime Risk Perception and Accident Statistics in the Istanbul Straight

  • Yusuf Volkan Aydogdu (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed