Question

The International Safety Management (ISM) Code provides guidance to shipping companies and mariners to encourage a safety culture in commercial shipping companies and aboard merchant ships.Define how the ISM code came into being and the year of international introduction, explaining how the ISM Code has changed safety management culture aboard ships and in shipping corporate offices. Discuss how ships’ crews and shore-based management staff, especially in reducing form filling and paperwork, might develop the ISM in the future. Give appropriate examples in your answer and consider the impact of your proposals on individuals, your organization, and the wider shipping community. (50 marks)

Important! NOTE THESE TWO RULES:

1. you must talk about the above points/ideas in your introduction

2. you must revisit each of the above points/ideas in your conclusion.

I’ll reject a paper that does not adhere to the above two rules.

Use Harvard Referencing:

Here’s the format for a harvard-referenced journal article:

Zoli, C (1999) ‘Intersecting generalized Lorenz curves and the Gini index’, Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 183-196.

Here’s the format for a harvard-referenced book:

Gaye, M (2015) What is the ‘Beyond GDP’ initiative, Free Press, London.

Answer

International Safety Management

Contents

Introduction. 2

History of the International Safety Management (ISM) Code. 2

Operation of the ISM Code. 4

Conclusion. 9

Reference List. 11

Introduction

The International Safety Management (ISM) Code is an international standard and regulatory framework set up to promote and ensure safety in the ship and marine operations (Bhattacharya, 2012). This code is concerned with aspects of commercial shipping management and environmental conservation. In addition, its functionality extends to issues of international waters policies and negotiations to prevent conflict and conserve natural resources such as the Arctic waters. This analysis will focus on how the ISM was designed and enforced and then proceed to investigate the ways in which its provisions have affected ship safety management and shipping corporations (Hubbard and Rodrigues, 1999).

ORDER A SIMILAR PAPER NOW

Since the sea shipping industry is complex, cumbersome and bureaucratic, the ISM code has had to implement sequential and well calculated strategies in order to accomplish their goals and exert a positive impact (Bhattacharya, 2012). This paper is therefore a combined approach that looks into the technical and managerial components of the ISM code, including legislation, organization and financial reforms in shipping and sea freight corporations. At the same time, it will outline the role that ship and offshore staff play and contribute to the effectiveness of the code. Of particular importance is the role they can play in reducing paper and formwork thereby streamlining the industry and sustaining transparency in operations.

History of the International Safety Management (ISM) Code

            The code can be traced back to the 1980s when global concerns on the poor management and safety standards in the shipping sector led to the adoption of resolution A.741(18) by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) (Bhattacharya, 2012). In 1989, the IMO adopted management guidelines that would regulate the development and pollution in accordance with the pre-determined recommendations. These guidelines were amended and the code was taken up as a recommendation in 1993. The rise in management and safety challenges in the shipping industry necessitated the introduction of more dynamic and encompassing regulations which led to the code being made compulsory. This was famously done through amendments adopted on 24 May 1994, which involved adding a new chapter (IX) to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) (Bhattacharya, 2012). Even though the code was not essentially integrated into the convention, it was made compulsory solely through this convention.

            Meanwhile, a landmark incident that paved the way for the introduction of the ISM code occurred on 6 March, 1987 whenHerald of Free Enterprise,a cross-channel ferry, sank shortly after leaving the Zebrugge port in Belgian for Dover Port in England. The ferry was carrying close to 500 passengers (80 of whom were part of the crew), 80 cars and more than 50 freight vehicles (Brookes, 2000). Water rushed into the vessel after a boor door was left open,and this caused it to sink in less than thirty minutes. In total, 193 lives were lost and property damaged. The sinking of this vessel was evitable and was the biggest source of realization of the shortcomings and negligence in shipping management as well as by the ship staff. In this case, the assistant boatswain was directly responsible for the sinking of the vessel by forgetting to close the door. It was revealed that he lay asleep in his cabin as the vessel flooded and sank.

This incident led to the commencement of new investigations into shipping safety. It was found that while the boatswain was immediately responsible for the single fault that caused the sink,there had been a hierarchical fail at almost all levels of function and responsibility. The investigation and inquiry was led by Justice Sheen who investigated the shortcomings of the ship’s crew as well as the shore management company involved, Townsend Car Ferries Limited. Notably, the ship master had written several letters to Townsend’s main office outlining certain safety precautions that he felt they should make to the vessel all of which were ignored. It was revealed that from the very top positions, there was rampant negligence and ignorance on sea safety (Goulielmos, 2000). This was demonstrated by the company and even the crew members themselves who were most in danger.

            The boatswain role in this accident was thus very minimaland offset by previous factors. Itisnoted that he was indeed severely fatigued during his sleepwhen the door was left open. This shows that the ship master did not a have a good crew support systemthat allowed all the crew members to work and rest in equalmeasure. Certain crew staffhad more responsibilities which left them unable to balance their responsibilities while promoting efficiency in their tasks. Moreover, the Herald of Free Enterprise had been built using the most advanced technology at the time, meaning that the accident could not possibly be blamed on technical-failure factors. This investigation contributed immensely to the ISM code and the much-needed shift in the shipping industry (Chen, 2000). Its findings are openly reflected in the code as a fair representation of the nature of shipping safety and operations.

ORDER A SIMILAR PAPER NOW

Operation of the ISM Code

            The code requires that sea shipping companies develop and outline their safetyobjectives in reference to the code’s requirementsas stipulated in section 1.2. This must be followed by a Safety Management System as described in section 1.4. In December 1997, the United States Coast Guard integrated the code into its guidelines (Chen, 2000). Consequently, this regulation is applicable to all domestic and international shipping companies operating within US waters and ports. The code applies to all ships regardless of their year and place of construction, and this includes passenger ships and high speed vessels constructed after 1July 1998. Secondly, oil tankers, gas tankers, chemical and biological tankers, bulk vessels and cargo vessels of over 500 tonnes created after the same period were included in the code. In addition, mobile offshore drilling units grossing more than 500tones and constructed after 1 July 2002 were also covered in this regulatory framework (Bhattacharya, 2002).

            According to Chapter IX, the code provides safety management objectives and goals that form the major mode of operation and regulation. The main objectives are to provide safe practices in shipping operation as well as safe working environments for staff, to identify all risks and set procedures to prevent or mitigate them should they occur and to set in motion a continuous and self-supporting system that improves safety management during normal operation and in case of emergencies.

As part of the Safety Management System (SMS), the code also calls for the inclusion ofcertain technical and functional responsibilities (Chen, 2000). The primary requirement is a safety and environmental policy with clear and detailed procedures including safety precautions in ships being operated by offshore shipping corporations. These shipping companies are now required to be accountable for their vessels and consistently check on their conditions. This requires that they make periodic checks to ensure that all shipping components are in good quality.

Another functional responsibility by the SMS is to define all levels of authority and communication in the vessel and between the vessel and the offshore regulators (Chen, 2000). As in the case of the Herald of Free Enterprise, the lack of organization in authority was an evident theme during the investigation. This was coupled by a separated pattern of communication in vertical and horizontal levels. This regulation has used the role of training to enforce this requirement. Training the crew and crew authority now includes a combined effort to separate their authority while still creating a system of teamwork operations. Communication has been integrated into the main training curriculum as well as regular teamwork seminars. Through this requirement, there has been tremendous improvementin the communication between on-board personnel and shore staff.

The SMS also requires a proper procedure for reporting emergencies. Reporting systems have always been the biggest factors when it comes to mitigating effects and saving more lives during accidents. An efficient reporting system should be fast, clear and safe from most disaster conditions. This system should be able to remain independent and functional as the emergency occurs and progresses. It should be linked to their emergency contacts and continue transmitting information. This means that the crew and management have to invest time and resources in obtaining a reliable system and good human resource to operate the system. As part of protocol, the personnel in charge of emergency communication has to remain in close communication with authority and other staff members who may be able to alert them in case o any danger. Through this regulation, many lives and goods may be saved in case an accident becomes inevitable. This reporting system is often linked to the response system in certain levels. The responding levels should also have sufficient equipment and human capital which is self-sufficient especially in times of emergencies.

Finally, the SMSrequires and places great emphasis on internal audits of finance,operation and management. Even though the companies are allowed to conduct these audits internally, there areregulators who will gothrough these audits and ensure that they remain in compliancewith the code. It is importantthat these audits are acted upon in case ofany observed deficiencies to ensure that thereis continuous improvement especially in regards to management techniques. As a direct requirement of the code, every company must select a person or a team ashore that has direct access to the highest level management. This link should be exercised in case of a potential danger or any other important decisions that affect the safety of the ship. In consequence, the code outlines the primary role of the master and grants authority to this unit to make decisions. All decisions must be based on the safety or preservation of life as the priority and the preservation of goods and items in the vessel (Lamson, 1987).

Since the code allows the companies to have their own power in the actual designing of their operational guidelines, a copy of the final draft is needed to facilitate the checking and ascertaining compliance with the code. These copies are approved by sea regulators and the government function that deals with the ministry of transport and communication. Following approval, a document of compliance is issued both as a form of validation and reference in case of future non-compliance. This code is held to power by government and is protected by the constitution.Every ship that complies with the ISM is audited by the Flag State as part of the first survey. After two to three years, it is then audited by the Marine administration to verify their SMS. This system allows for a period of identification and gives the opportunity and time for ships to make necessary changes while sustaining their strengths.

The code has worked in close connection with the Maritime Safety Committee and the Marine Environment Protection Committee to include conservation and environmental friendly techniques. Previously, interpretation of the committee has led to concentrated efforts towards maritime safety with little focus on environmental conservation (Corbett, Wang and Winebrake, 2009). However, more direct efforts are being made to make all systems of operation and response environmental friendly to aquatic resources and coastal regions. Global environmental organizations have turned their attention to protecting the Arctic waters which are most in danger of pollution from both regional and global ocean activities (Sandas and Linstad, 2016). This has involved many international bodies as well as national governments. It has also contributed to the legislation and involvement in international water negotiations.

Even though the ISM regulates ship crew and managementdirectly,these parties also have the potential to influence the advancement of the ISM itself especially in the future. Evidently, the code has promoted a form of commitment from the top to the bottom in regards with safety. The code is extremely flexible and allows different stakeholders to apply it to their own requirements and settings. This means that companies are wellable to investigate their regionaland environmental factors and devise strategies that surround and remain true to these particular factors (Sandas and Linstad,2016). This form of flexibility allows for creativity and innovation in the shipping and sea transport industry. Moreover, staff and managers now have the capacity to contribute towards amendments that they feel are necessary. If the code is sufficiently successful in promoting participation, ownership and pride by all the stake holders, then in the future, these people will want to contribute towards streamlining the system.

Personnel requirements have also improved the quality of the skills possessed by the people who work in this industry. For instance, the master is required to be fully qualified and aware of the company’s SMSs. The company also has to ensure that all its staff members are vetted to determine their medical fitness in accordance with the code’s requirements. The management has developed creative ways that now support staff members even as they are transferred to different roles and departments (Corbett, Wang and Winebrake, 2009). As part of recent improvements being promoted by crew and staff bodies, companies are now rotating their employees to create a system where every individual is in a position to do all other tasks apart from those that they are allocated. While their primary focus and specialization lies in their job description, this flexibility is especially important in emergency situations.

To promote improvement in safety and management even further, crew and shore staff should be involved in identifying the required areas of training as a continuous process to be undertaken during the progress of shipping operations. Already, this move seems promising in the future based on current evaluations. Finally,the crew can be expected to contribute to the ISM code in future by promoting transparency and honesty in sea operations. As previously acknowledged, the shipping industry is riddled with bureaucratic hindrances that promote corruption as well as slow operation, consequently breeding inefficiency and slowing the growth of the industry at varying levels in different countries. It is for this reason that sea shipping has recorded extremely slow growth in some countries that have the potential to become regional shipping and port gateways. Crew members trained in ethical and professional responsibility will be expected to play a defining role in eliminating these restrictions and fully globalizing sea transport. With a unified global need for sea transport, it will be easier to improve and establish clear, safe sea routes. Besides, introducing an automated and online system will go a long way in eliminating the errors in the complex nature of observation, recording and reporting that is characteristic of sea transport. A simplified and personalized system will promote both the cargo and passenger shipping avenues and by extension foster growth in other reliant sectors such as tourism and trade.

Conclusion

The introduction of the ISM Code following the Herald of Free Enterprise incident is a compelling indication that stakeholders in the sea and shipping industry have identified gaps and set up strategies to improve the safety and management of sea operations. Having necessitated the ISM code, this development also shows that there is a gap in sea transport research. Through an investigation and the public concern that put this on the global spotlight, many shortcomings which would have otherwise been ignored were identified and brought to bear on subsequent policymaking processes. The immediate publicity resulting from this accident made other operators of other shipping companies alert in regards to safety accountability for crew members. By outlining the various components of the code and the SMS conditions it promotes, this analysis has explained the role of the code, the companies and the crew members in strengthening management and safety. In this way, the crew members and leaders have an opportunity to contribute to the ISM code as part of their day-to-day activities defined in their job descriptions. Meanwhile, the adoption of an automation strategy in the industry will eliminate paper and form procedures that are cumbersome and subject to errors. Designed as a self-perpetuating and innovative system, the code is bound to provide even more opportunities for sea safety in future than it already has.

Reference List

Bhattacharya, S. (2012). ‘The Effectiveness of the ISM Code: A Qualitative Enquiry’,Marine Policy, vol. 36, no.2, pp. 528-535.

Brooks, M. (2000). Sea Change in Liner Shipping: Regulation and Managerial Decision-Making in a Global Industry. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.

Chen, L. (2000). ‘Legal and Practical consequences of not complying with ISM Code’, Maritime Policy and Management, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 219-230.

 Corbett, J., Wang,H. and Winebrake, J. (2009). ‘The effectiveness and costs of speed reductions on emissions from International shipping’, Science Direct, vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 593-598.

Goulielmos, A. (2002). ‘Marine Accident Prevention: An Evaluation of the Ism code by the Fundamentals of the Complexity Theory’, Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, vol. 11,no. 1, pp. 18-32.

Hubbard, M. and Rorigue, A. (1999). ‘The International Safety Management (ISM) Code:A New Level of Uniformity’, Law Journal Library, pp. 1585-1599.

Lamson, C. (1987). ‘Arctic shipping, Marine safety and Environmental Protection’, Marine Policy, vol. 11,no.1, pp. 3-15.

Sandas, I. and Linstad,H. (2016). ‘Emission and Fuel Reduction forOffshore Support Vessels through Hybrid Technology’, Journal of Ship Production and Design, vol. 32, no.4, pp. 195-205.