PMID- 37501951
OWN - NLM
STAT- PubMed-not-MEDLINE
LR  - 20230728
IS  - 2405-8440 (Print)
IS  - 2405-8440 (Electronic)
IS  - 2405-8440 (Linking)
VI  - 9
IP  - 7
DP  - 2023 Jul
TI  - Application of a fuzzy multi-criteria decision framework for safety-critical 
      maritime infrastructure evaluation.
PG  - e17782
LID - 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17782 [doi]
LID - e17782
AB  - This present paper is an investigation of a framework for Safety-Critical 
      Maritime Infrastructure (SCMI) evaluation. The framework contains three 
      Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) tools, namely: fuzzy Step-wise Weight 
      Assessment Ratio Analysis (SWARA), Technique for Order of Preference by 
      Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) and Weighted Aggregates Sum Product 
      Assessment (WASPAS). It also contains five safety practice criteria: people's 
      safety, property safety and monitoring capabilities, response to regular and 
      irregular threats in a robust yet flexible manner, and breaches in physical 
      security. The framework has four safety culture criteria: learning from 
      experience and inter-element collaboration, lack of facility maintenance, and 
      anticipating risk events and opportunities. Through the framework, an evaluation 
      of the safety practices and safety culture of six Nigerian seaports is done. 
      Then, data obtained from the ports in regard to their safety practices and 
      culture were analysed in line with the framework identified and adopted. The 
      results revealed that the safety of people's life is the most important safety 
      practice and contributed about 47.90% to evaluate the SCMI. Results equally 
      showed that the most significant safety culture is learning from experience, and 
      accounted for approximately 53.20% in assessing the SCMI. Similarly, the TOPSIS 
      method ranked Warri (A(5)) and Tin Can Island A(1) as the best and worst safety 
      practices performance, respectively. Results of analyses on the TOPSIS showed 
      that Apapa port (A(2)) and Onne port (A(6)) had the best and worst performances 
      correspondingly. WASPAS was also analysed. The results indicated that A(6) 
      performed the best safety practice performance, while A(2) had the worst safety 
      practice performance. Analysis of the WASPAS method was equally done. It showed 
      that A(1) had the worst safety culture performance, while A(5) had the best 
      safety culture performance. Therefore, the proposed framework could serve as a 
      veritable tool for analysing SCMI by using safety practice and safety culture 
      criteria.
CI  - (c) 2023 The Authors.
FAU - Ighravwe, Desmond Eseoghene
AU  - Ighravwe DE
AD  - University of Johannesburg, Auckland Park, South Africa.
FAU - Mashao, Daniel
AU  - Mashao D
AD  - University of Johannesburg, Auckland Park, South Africa.
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
DEP - 20230703
PL  - England
TA  - Heliyon
JT  - Heliyon
JID - 101672560
PMC - PMC10368772
OTO - NOTNLM
OT  - Decision support framework
OT  - Maritime industry
OT  - Multi-criteria
OT  - Safety practice and culture
OT  - Safety-critical infrastructure
COIS- The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or 
      personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in 
      this paper.
EDAT- 2023/07/28 06:43
MHDA- 2023/07/28 06:44
PMCR- 2023/07/03
CRDT- 2023/07/28 04:08
PHST- 2022/09/23 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2023/06/27 00:00 [revised]
PHST- 2023/06/28 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2023/07/28 06:44 [medline]
PHST- 2023/07/28 06:43 [pubmed]
PHST- 2023/07/28 04:08 [entrez]
PHST- 2023/07/03 00:00 [pmc-release]
AID - S2405-8440(23)04990-3 [pii]
AID - e17782 [pii]
AID - 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17782 [doi]
PST - epublish
SO  - Heliyon. 2023 Jul 3;9(7):e17782. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17782. eCollection 
      2023 Jul.