在港口水域船舶交通安全管理中综合安全评估（FSA）的应用研究
|
摘要
海上安全一直是人们非常关注的问题,而船舶交通安全是海上安全中最为重要的组成部分之一。港口是海上交通的起讫点,是海陆运输的联接点。由于船舶交通量的增加、运输吨位的增大、危险货物的增多,使水上交通环境变得更加拥挤、更加危险,在这样复杂的交通环境条件下,应该以新的观点去研究港口水域船舶交通安全对策。长期以来,世界各海运国家为确保船舶交通安全已做了大量的工作。但是,全世界船舶搁浅、碰撞、翻船、油污、火灾等海事仍屡次发生,并造成了严重的后果。究其原因,除了全球海运业的不断发展和少数海上不可抗力的原因外,绝大部分都是由于船舶设计、营运管理、人员工作态度与技能等人为因素所产生的。
港口水域是海上交通运输系统的一个子系统,该系统究竟存在多大的危险性,可能对社会造成多大的损失,人们可接受的风险值究竟是多大,需要多大的安全投资才能将系统的危险程度降低到安全指标内,这些都依赖于安全研究。对系统的危险性进行定性和定量描述的需要,催生出了繁多的安全评价方法。例如:管理学方法、多元统计分析方法、运筹学方法、行业组织方法、模糊理论、灰色理论、神经网络方法、计算机辅助评价等众多评价法。该类方法在各自领域针对具体问题均发挥着相应作用,但始终存在着通用性和兼容性差的问题。海运领域因此长期缺乏科学适用的安全评价工具,但每年逾百亿美元的事故损失亟需科学的决策支持工具,提高海运界的安全管理水平,以避免遗漏事故隐患和高耗低效的规定,综合安全评价(Formal Safety Assessment,FSA)应运而生。
FSA是一种系统性和规范化的综合评估方法。在船舶设计、航运与安全管理等方面中应用这种方法的目的是通过采用规范化的5个步骤,全方位地对船舶设计、检验、营运、航行的相关项目进行综合评估,以有效地提高海上生命、船员健康、海洋环境和船舶与货物财产资源等方面的海上安全程度。本文把综合安全评估(FSA)法的流程应用于港口水域船舶交通安全管理中,在对每个步骤的研究中,试图研究出适合港口水域船舶交通安全的具体方法。
论文主要有以下四个方面的创新性工作:
(1)应用未确知测度理论建立港口水域船舶交通安全预评价模型。本文通过与模糊性的数学评价模型对比分析,得出未确知测度评价模型更适合港口水域船舶交通安全预评价。
(2)通过对航行船舶安全状况风险预先控制实施原则的研究,制定了航行船舶安全状况风险预先控制方法实施流程,目的是尽早发现潜在的危险因素,使航行船舶安全事故防患于未然。
(3)社会营销理论应用于船舶交通安全人为因素管理中的模式分析,主要从确定海上交通安全营销目标、明确实施活动的障碍、制定使目标受众行为改变的有效营销策略、评价实施效果这四个方面详细的阐述了如何实施海上交通安全的社会营销。
(4)由于安全风险控制方案的效益和费用往往是无形的,量化和货币化有很多困难或极具不确定性,无法使用传统的CBA方法进行费效比分析,因此本文利用层次分析法进行港口水域船舶交通安全风险控制方案的费效比分析。
Maritime safety is noticeable questions, and one of the most important components in maritime safety is the shipping traffic safety. The port is the beginning and the end of the maritime traffic. Because of the increasing volume of traffic of shipping, transportation tonnage and dangerous freight, the shipping traffic environment become more crowded and dangerous. Therefore, the countermeasures of shipping traffic safety should be studied with the new view under so complicated a traffic environment condition. For a long time, each shipping countries does a large number of work for guaranteeing shipping traffic's security. But maritime affairs, such as vessel stranded, colliding, wrecking, greasy dirt, fire, etc. still take place time and again in the whole world, which have caused the serious consequences. Except the constant development of the global marine and maritime force majeure, the majority reason is because of vessel design, operation management, personnel working attitude and skill, etc.
The system of port water areas is one subsystem of maritime traffic system. There are various safety evaluation methods, for example, Management method, the pluralism counting analytical method, operations research method, the trade organizing method, fuzzy theory, gray theory, neural network method, computer to assisting numerous evaluation assessments etc. This kind of method is playing a corresponding role in each field to the concrete problem, but each of them has the problem of general acceptability and compatibility. The field of sea transport lacks the science applicable safety evaluation tool for a long time, but the accident losses of over ten billion dollars every year need the scientific decision support tool. In order to improve the security management level of the field of sea transport and avoid the omitting accident, the Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) arises at the historic moment.
FSA is a systematic and standardized comprehensive assessment method. The purpose of applying this method in some aspects such as shipping design, shipping and safety management, etc. is to carry on omni-directional formal assessment in the relevant item of ship designing, examining, operating and shipping, through adopting 5 standardized steps. The purpose is to improve safety of maritime people life, crewman health, marine environment, vessel and goods property resource, etc. The paper applies the procedure of FSA to the marine traffic safety assessment of the port and its adjoining waters and attempt to work out concrete method suitable to the marine traffic safety of the port and its adjoining waters in the study of each step.
The innovative job of this paper followed as below:
(1) Employ unascertained measure to set up precautionary assessment model of the marine traffic safety of the port and its adjoining waters. Comparing with the fuzzy mathematics assessment model, it is more suitable to the marine traffic safety assessment of the port and its adjoining waters.
(2) Through the advance manipulative methodological research about the risk of ships safety condition, the principles and the flow sheet of the advance control about the risk of ships safety condition are formulated. The purpose is to find potential dangerous factor as soon as possible.
(3) The theory of social marketing is applied to marine safety management. For solve the problem, the theme is analyzed from four segments, which are confirming social marketing goal, confirming obstacle, constituting marketing strategy and evaluating effect.
(4) Because benefits and expenses of the safe risk control scheme are often invisible, it is very difficult to measure. Therefore it is unable to use traditional CBA method carry on the cost–benefit analysis. So AHP (the analytic hierarchy process) is applied to the cost–benefit analysis in the risk control scheme of the marine traffic safety of the port and its adjoining waters.
港口水域是海上交通运输系统的一个子系统,该系统究竟存在多大的危险性,可能对社会造成多大的损失,人们可接受的风险值究竟是多大,需要多大的安全投资才能将系统的危险程度降低到安全指标内,这些都依赖于安全研究。对系统的危险性进行定性和定量描述的需要,催生出了繁多的安全评价方法。例如:管理学方法、多元统计分析方法、运筹学方法、行业组织方法、模糊理论、灰色理论、神经网络方法、计算机辅助评价等众多评价法。该类方法在各自领域针对具体问题均发挥着相应作用,但始终存在着通用性和兼容性差的问题。海运领域因此长期缺乏科学适用的安全评价工具,但每年逾百亿美元的事故损失亟需科学的决策支持工具,提高海运界的安全管理水平,以避免遗漏事故隐患和高耗低效的规定,综合安全评价(Formal Safety Assessment,FSA)应运而生。
FSA是一种系统性和规范化的综合评估方法。在船舶设计、航运与安全管理等方面中应用这种方法的目的是通过采用规范化的5个步骤,全方位地对船舶设计、检验、营运、航行的相关项目进行综合评估,以有效地提高海上生命、船员健康、海洋环境和船舶与货物财产资源等方面的海上安全程度。本文把综合安全评估(FSA)法的流程应用于港口水域船舶交通安全管理中,在对每个步骤的研究中,试图研究出适合港口水域船舶交通安全的具体方法。
论文主要有以下四个方面的创新性工作:
(1)应用未确知测度理论建立港口水域船舶交通安全预评价模型。本文通过与模糊性的数学评价模型对比分析,得出未确知测度评价模型更适合港口水域船舶交通安全预评价。
(2)通过对航行船舶安全状况风险预先控制实施原则的研究,制定了航行船舶安全状况风险预先控制方法实施流程,目的是尽早发现潜在的危险因素,使航行船舶安全事故防患于未然。
(3)社会营销理论应用于船舶交通安全人为因素管理中的模式分析,主要从确定海上交通安全营销目标、明确实施活动的障碍、制定使目标受众行为改变的有效营销策略、评价实施效果这四个方面详细的阐述了如何实施海上交通安全的社会营销。
(4)由于安全风险控制方案的效益和费用往往是无形的,量化和货币化有很多困难或极具不确定性,无法使用传统的CBA方法进行费效比分析,因此本文利用层次分析法进行港口水域船舶交通安全风险控制方案的费效比分析。
Maritime safety is noticeable questions, and one of the most important components in maritime safety is the shipping traffic safety. The port is the beginning and the end of the maritime traffic. Because of the increasing volume of traffic of shipping, transportation tonnage and dangerous freight, the shipping traffic environment become more crowded and dangerous. Therefore, the countermeasures of shipping traffic safety should be studied with the new view under so complicated a traffic environment condition. For a long time, each shipping countries does a large number of work for guaranteeing shipping traffic's security. But maritime affairs, such as vessel stranded, colliding, wrecking, greasy dirt, fire, etc. still take place time and again in the whole world, which have caused the serious consequences. Except the constant development of the global marine and maritime force majeure, the majority reason is because of vessel design, operation management, personnel working attitude and skill, etc.
The system of port water areas is one subsystem of maritime traffic system. There are various safety evaluation methods, for example, Management method, the pluralism counting analytical method, operations research method, the trade organizing method, fuzzy theory, gray theory, neural network method, computer to assisting numerous evaluation assessments etc. This kind of method is playing a corresponding role in each field to the concrete problem, but each of them has the problem of general acceptability and compatibility. The field of sea transport lacks the science applicable safety evaluation tool for a long time, but the accident losses of over ten billion dollars every year need the scientific decision support tool. In order to improve the security management level of the field of sea transport and avoid the omitting accident, the Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) arises at the historic moment.
FSA is a systematic and standardized comprehensive assessment method. The purpose of applying this method in some aspects such as shipping design, shipping and safety management, etc. is to carry on omni-directional formal assessment in the relevant item of ship designing, examining, operating and shipping, through adopting 5 standardized steps. The purpose is to improve safety of maritime people life, crewman health, marine environment, vessel and goods property resource, etc. The paper applies the procedure of FSA to the marine traffic safety assessment of the port and its adjoining waters and attempt to work out concrete method suitable to the marine traffic safety of the port and its adjoining waters in the study of each step.
The innovative job of this paper followed as below:
(1) Employ unascertained measure to set up precautionary assessment model of the marine traffic safety of the port and its adjoining waters. Comparing with the fuzzy mathematics assessment model, it is more suitable to the marine traffic safety assessment of the port and its adjoining waters.
(2) Through the advance manipulative methodological research about the risk of ships safety condition, the principles and the flow sheet of the advance control about the risk of ships safety condition are formulated. The purpose is to find potential dangerous factor as soon as possible.
(3) The theory of social marketing is applied to marine safety management. For solve the problem, the theme is analyzed from four segments, which are confirming social marketing goal, confirming obstacle, constituting marketing strategy and evaluating effect.
(4) Because benefits and expenses of the safe risk control scheme are often invisible, it is very difficult to measure. Therefore it is unable to use traditional CBA method carry on the cost–benefit analysis. So AHP (the analytic hierarchy process) is applied to the cost–benefit analysis in the risk control scheme of the marine traffic safety of the port and its adjoining waters.
引文
[1] 秦庭荣,陈伟炯,郝育国等.综合安全评价(FSA) 方法.中国安全科学学报, 2005,15(4):88-92
[2] J.Wang, P.Foinikis. Formal safety assessment of containerships. Marine Policy, 2001,25: 143-157
[3] 方泉根,王津,A. Datubo.综合安全评估( FSA) 及其在船舶安全中的应用.中国航海,2004,58(1):2-5
[4] J.Wang. The current status and future aspects in formal ship safety assessment. Safety Science, 2001,38:19-30
[5] 赵佳妮.综合安全评估( FSA)方法综述.航海技术,2005,2:77-78
[6] J.Wang. A subjective modeling tool applied to formal ship safety assessment. Ocean Engineering, 2000,27:1019–1035
[7] J.Wang, H.S.Sii, J.B.Yang. Use of Advances in Technology for Maritime Risk Assessment. Risk Analysis, 2004,24(4): 1041-1063
[8] Karen P.Fabbri.A methodology for supporting decision making in integrated coastal zone management. Ocean and Coastal Management, 1998,39:51-62
[9] 张宝晨.海上安全现状与展望.航海技术,1995,2:12-14
[10] P.布鲁恩(美国).港口工程学. 第一版.交通部第一航务工程局设计院技术情报组译.北京 : 人民交通出版社, 1981.32-36
[11] 陈伟炯.船舶安全与管理.第一版.大连:大连海事出版社,1998.1-4
[12] P.T.Pedersen. Collision risk for fixed offshore structures close to high-density shipping lanes. Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 2002,216:29-44
[13] 曾华岚.影响海上交通安全的人为因素分析与评价: 硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学图书馆,2000.
[14] 张锦朋.海上交通事故中的人为因素分析.上海海运学院学报,1998,3:35-40
[15] L.H. VassieC.W. Fuller. Assessing the inputs and outputs of partnership arrangements for health and safety management. Health and safety management, 2003,25(5): 490-501
[16] 黄志.对船舶安全状况的评价及研究:硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学图书馆,2000.
[17] Ge Wang, John Spencer, Yongjun Chen. Assessment of a ship’s performance in accidents. Marine Structures, 2002,15:313-333
[18] P.Sena, John K.G.Tanb, David Spencerc.An integrated probabilistic risk analysis decision support methodology for systems with multiple state variables. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 1999,64:73-87
[19] 翁跃宗, 吴兆麟. 厦门港及附近水域船舶交通安全评价:硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学图书馆,2000.
[20] Nikolaos P.Ventikos, Harilaos N. Psaraftis. Spill accident modeling: a critical survey of the event-decision network in the context of IMO’s formal safety assessment. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2004, 107:59–66
[21] 闫乐林,王国旗,许满贵,陈晓坤.煤矿安全预评价的未确知测度模型及应用.灾害学,2004,6:18-22
[22] David Slater, Huw Jones. Environmental risk assessment and the environment agency. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 1999,65: 77–91
[23] Ling Zhu, PaulJames, Shengming Zhang. Statistics and damage assessment of ship grounding. Marine Structures,2002,15:515–530
[24] 冯肇瑞. 安全系统工程. 第一版. 北京: 冶金工业出版社, 1987. 89-167.
[25] Steve Frosdick. The techniques of risk analysis are insufficient in themselves. Disaster Prevention and Management, 1997,6(3): 165–177
[26] Di Jin, Hauke L. Kite-Powell, Eric Thunberg. A model of fishing vessel accident probability. Journal of Safety Research, 2002(33): 497– 510
[27] How Sing Sii, Tom Ruxton, Jin Wang. A fuzzy-logic-based approach to qualitative safety modeling for marine systems. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2001(73): 19-34
[28] 王超. 交通灾害中的载运工具致灾机理及其预警管理系统研究:博士学位论文. 武汉: 武汉理工大学图书馆,2002.
[29] P.T.Pedersen. Collision risk for fixed offshore structures close to high-density shipping lanes. Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 2002,216:29-44
[30] J. Wang. Offshore safety case approach and formal safety assessment of ships. Journalof Safety Research, 2002, 33:81– 115
[31] Derek J Mcglashan. Managed relocation: an assessment of its feasibility as a coastal management option. The Geographical Journal, 2003,169(1): 6-6
[32] 章彰.浅谈交通安全的社会营销. 综合运输,1995,7:28-29
[33] Maurice Moffett, Alok K. Bohara, and Kishore Gawande. Governance and Performance: Theory-Based Evidence from U.S. Coast Guard Inspections. The Policy Studies Journal, 2005,33(2): 283-306
[34] D.D.Hee, B.D.Pickrell, R.G.Bea. Safety Management Assessment System (SMAS): a process for identifying and evaluating human and organization factors in marine system operations with field test results. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 1999,65: 125–140
[35] 刘克中,季永青.船舶自动识别系统在 VTS 中的应用. 航海技术,2003,4:30-32
[36] Anne Christine Brusendorff. The HELCOM Copenhagen Declaration: A Regional Environmental Approach for Safer Shipping. Marine and Coastal Law, 2002,17(3): 351-395
[37] Nikolaos P. Ventikos., Harilaos N. Psaraftis. Spill accident modeling: a critical survey of the event-decision network in the context of IMO’s formal safety assessment. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2004,107: 59–66
[38] 杨国豪,徐轶群,林洪贵.船舶设备管控一体化系统结构及其实现方法.中国航海,2004,4:67-70
[39] J. Wang. A brief review of Marine and offshore safety assessment. Marine Technology and Sname News. 2002, 39(2): 77-86
[40] Le Blanc, Louis A, Rucks. A cluster analysis of vessel accidents. Logistics and Transportation Review, 1995,31(1): 47-63
[41] 徐周华.水上水下碍航物碍航评价工作智能化及碍航缓解措施专家系统的探索与研究:硕士学位论文. 武汉: 武汉理工大学图书馆,2004.
[42] Kiyoshi Hara. A comprehensive assessment system for the maritime traffic environment. Safety Science, 1995, 19:203-215
[43] Hance D Smith.the environmental management of shipping. Marine Policy, 1995,19(6): 503-508
[44] 田宏伟.船舶交通管理系统的费用效益分析:硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学图书馆,2000.
[45] Alexander M. Goulielmos, Kostas Giziakis. Treatment of uncompensated cost of marine accidents in a model of welfare economics. Disaster Prevention and Management, 1998,7(3): 183
[46] P.C.Cacciabue. Human error risk management for engineering systems: a methodology for design, safety assessment, accident investigation and training. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2004,83:229–240
[47] K. X. LI, J. WONHAM. Who is safe and who is at risk: a study of 20-yearrecord on accident total loss in different flags. MARIT. POL. MGMT., 1999, 26(2): 137 -144
[48] 兰小童.安全成本及其效益分析:硕士学位论文.北京:华北电力大学图书馆,2004.
[49] E.J.Smith. Risk management in the north sea offshore industry: history, status and challenges. Acta Astronautica, 1995,37:513-523
[50] Kjartan Sensminde.Cost–benefit analyses of walking and cycling track networks taking into account insecurity, health effects andexternal costs of motorized traffic .Transportation Research Part, 2004,5:25-36
[51] Paul Dolan, Richard Edlin.Is it really possible to build a bridge between cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. Journal of Health Economics 2002,21:45-65
[52] Bernd Hansjurgens.Economic valuation through cost-benefit analysis possibilities and limitations. Toxicology, 2004,25:12-23
[53] 丁静. 基于群组层次分析法的配送中心配送绩效评价的研究:硕士学位论文.合肥:合肥工业大学图书馆,2004.
[54] Michelle M. Cowing, M. Elisabeth Pate Cornell, Peter W. Glynn. Dynamic modeling of the tradeoff between productivity and safety in critical engineering systems. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2004,86:269–284
[55] H. Christopher Frey, Sumeet R. Patil. Identification and Review of Sensitivity Analysis Methods. Risk Analysis, 2002,22(3): 553-578
[56] Vladimir M.Trbojevic, Barry J.Carr. Risk based methodology for safety improvements in ports. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2000,71:467–480
[57] C.Guedes Soares, A.P.Teixeira.Risk assessment in maritime transportation. ReliabilityEngineering and System Safety, 2001, 74:299-309
[58] Tony Rosqvist, Risto Tuominen. Qualification of Formal Safety Assessment: an exploratory study. Safety Science,2004,42:99–120
[59] Jae-Ohk Lee, In-Cheol Yeo, Young-Soon Yang. A trial application of FSA methodology to the hatchway watertight integrity of bulk carriers. Marine Structures, 2001,14:651–667
[60] Clive Smallman. Offshore Safety Management Systems: Current Practice and a Prescription for Change. Disaster Prevention and Management, 1994,3(3): 33-48.
[2] J.Wang, P.Foinikis. Formal safety assessment of containerships. Marine Policy, 2001,25: 143-157
[3] 方泉根,王津,A. Datubo.综合安全评估( FSA) 及其在船舶安全中的应用.中国航海,2004,58(1):2-5
[4] J.Wang. The current status and future aspects in formal ship safety assessment. Safety Science, 2001,38:19-30
[5] 赵佳妮.综合安全评估( FSA)方法综述.航海技术,2005,2:77-78
[6] J.Wang. A subjective modeling tool applied to formal ship safety assessment. Ocean Engineering, 2000,27:1019–1035
[7] J.Wang, H.S.Sii, J.B.Yang. Use of Advances in Technology for Maritime Risk Assessment. Risk Analysis, 2004,24(4): 1041-1063
[8] Karen P.Fabbri.A methodology for supporting decision making in integrated coastal zone management. Ocean and Coastal Management, 1998,39:51-62
[9] 张宝晨.海上安全现状与展望.航海技术,1995,2:12-14
[10] P.布鲁恩(美国).港口工程学. 第一版.交通部第一航务工程局设计院技术情报组译.北京 : 人民交通出版社, 1981.32-36
[11] 陈伟炯.船舶安全与管理.第一版.大连:大连海事出版社,1998.1-4
[12] P.T.Pedersen. Collision risk for fixed offshore structures close to high-density shipping lanes. Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 2002,216:29-44
[13] 曾华岚.影响海上交通安全的人为因素分析与评价: 硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学图书馆,2000.
[14] 张锦朋.海上交通事故中的人为因素分析.上海海运学院学报,1998,3:35-40
[15] L.H. VassieC.W. Fuller. Assessing the inputs and outputs of partnership arrangements for health and safety management. Health and safety management, 2003,25(5): 490-501
[16] 黄志.对船舶安全状况的评价及研究:硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学图书馆,2000.
[17] Ge Wang, John Spencer, Yongjun Chen. Assessment of a ship’s performance in accidents. Marine Structures, 2002,15:313-333
[18] P.Sena, John K.G.Tanb, David Spencerc.An integrated probabilistic risk analysis decision support methodology for systems with multiple state variables. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 1999,64:73-87
[19] 翁跃宗, 吴兆麟. 厦门港及附近水域船舶交通安全评价:硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学图书馆,2000.
[20] Nikolaos P.Ventikos, Harilaos N. Psaraftis. Spill accident modeling: a critical survey of the event-decision network in the context of IMO’s formal safety assessment. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2004, 107:59–66
[21] 闫乐林,王国旗,许满贵,陈晓坤.煤矿安全预评价的未确知测度模型及应用.灾害学,2004,6:18-22
[22] David Slater, Huw Jones. Environmental risk assessment and the environment agency. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 1999,65: 77–91
[23] Ling Zhu, PaulJames, Shengming Zhang. Statistics and damage assessment of ship grounding. Marine Structures,2002,15:515–530
[24] 冯肇瑞. 安全系统工程. 第一版. 北京: 冶金工业出版社, 1987. 89-167.
[25] Steve Frosdick. The techniques of risk analysis are insufficient in themselves. Disaster Prevention and Management, 1997,6(3): 165–177
[26] Di Jin, Hauke L. Kite-Powell, Eric Thunberg. A model of fishing vessel accident probability. Journal of Safety Research, 2002(33): 497– 510
[27] How Sing Sii, Tom Ruxton, Jin Wang. A fuzzy-logic-based approach to qualitative safety modeling for marine systems. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2001(73): 19-34
[28] 王超. 交通灾害中的载运工具致灾机理及其预警管理系统研究:博士学位论文. 武汉: 武汉理工大学图书馆,2002.
[29] P.T.Pedersen. Collision risk for fixed offshore structures close to high-density shipping lanes. Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 2002,216:29-44
[30] J. Wang. Offshore safety case approach and formal safety assessment of ships. Journalof Safety Research, 2002, 33:81– 115
[31] Derek J Mcglashan. Managed relocation: an assessment of its feasibility as a coastal management option. The Geographical Journal, 2003,169(1): 6-6
[32] 章彰.浅谈交通安全的社会营销. 综合运输,1995,7:28-29
[33] Maurice Moffett, Alok K. Bohara, and Kishore Gawande. Governance and Performance: Theory-Based Evidence from U.S. Coast Guard Inspections. The Policy Studies Journal, 2005,33(2): 283-306
[34] D.D.Hee, B.D.Pickrell, R.G.Bea. Safety Management Assessment System (SMAS): a process for identifying and evaluating human and organization factors in marine system operations with field test results. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 1999,65: 125–140
[35] 刘克中,季永青.船舶自动识别系统在 VTS 中的应用. 航海技术,2003,4:30-32
[36] Anne Christine Brusendorff. The HELCOM Copenhagen Declaration: A Regional Environmental Approach for Safer Shipping. Marine and Coastal Law, 2002,17(3): 351-395
[37] Nikolaos P. Ventikos., Harilaos N. Psaraftis. Spill accident modeling: a critical survey of the event-decision network in the context of IMO’s formal safety assessment. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2004,107: 59–66
[38] 杨国豪,徐轶群,林洪贵.船舶设备管控一体化系统结构及其实现方法.中国航海,2004,4:67-70
[39] J. Wang. A brief review of Marine and offshore safety assessment. Marine Technology and Sname News. 2002, 39(2): 77-86
[40] Le Blanc, Louis A, Rucks. A cluster analysis of vessel accidents. Logistics and Transportation Review, 1995,31(1): 47-63
[41] 徐周华.水上水下碍航物碍航评价工作智能化及碍航缓解措施专家系统的探索与研究:硕士学位论文. 武汉: 武汉理工大学图书馆,2004.
[42] Kiyoshi Hara. A comprehensive assessment system for the maritime traffic environment. Safety Science, 1995, 19:203-215
[43] Hance D Smith.the environmental management of shipping. Marine Policy, 1995,19(6): 503-508
[44] 田宏伟.船舶交通管理系统的费用效益分析:硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学图书馆,2000.
[45] Alexander M. Goulielmos, Kostas Giziakis. Treatment of uncompensated cost of marine accidents in a model of welfare economics. Disaster Prevention and Management, 1998,7(3): 183
[46] P.C.Cacciabue. Human error risk management for engineering systems: a methodology for design, safety assessment, accident investigation and training. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2004,83:229–240
[47] K. X. LI, J. WONHAM. Who is safe and who is at risk: a study of 20-yearrecord on accident total loss in different flags. MARIT. POL. MGMT., 1999, 26(2): 137 -144
[48] 兰小童.安全成本及其效益分析:硕士学位论文.北京:华北电力大学图书馆,2004.
[49] E.J.Smith. Risk management in the north sea offshore industry: history, status and challenges. Acta Astronautica, 1995,37:513-523
[50] Kjartan Sensminde.Cost–benefit analyses of walking and cycling track networks taking into account insecurity, health effects andexternal costs of motorized traffic .Transportation Research Part, 2004,5:25-36
[51] Paul Dolan, Richard Edlin.Is it really possible to build a bridge between cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. Journal of Health Economics 2002,21:45-65
[52] Bernd Hansjurgens.Economic valuation through cost-benefit analysis possibilities and limitations. Toxicology, 2004,25:12-23
[53] 丁静. 基于群组层次分析法的配送中心配送绩效评价的研究:硕士学位论文.合肥:合肥工业大学图书馆,2004.
[54] Michelle M. Cowing, M. Elisabeth Pate Cornell, Peter W. Glynn. Dynamic modeling of the tradeoff between productivity and safety in critical engineering systems. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2004,86:269–284
[55] H. Christopher Frey, Sumeet R. Patil. Identification and Review of Sensitivity Analysis Methods. Risk Analysis, 2002,22(3): 553-578
[56] Vladimir M.Trbojevic, Barry J.Carr. Risk based methodology for safety improvements in ports. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2000,71:467–480
[57] C.Guedes Soares, A.P.Teixeira.Risk assessment in maritime transportation. ReliabilityEngineering and System Safety, 2001, 74:299-309
[58] Tony Rosqvist, Risto Tuominen. Qualification of Formal Safety Assessment: an exploratory study. Safety Science,2004,42:99–120
[59] Jae-Ohk Lee, In-Cheol Yeo, Young-Soon Yang. A trial application of FSA methodology to the hatchway watertight integrity of bulk carriers. Marine Structures, 2001,14:651–667
[60] Clive Smallman. Offshore Safety Management Systems: Current Practice and a Prescription for Change. Disaster Prevention and Management, 1994,3(3): 33-48.