Marine Policy 36 (2012) 703–712

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Marine Policy

0308-59

doi:10.1

n Corr

fax: þ4

E-m1 Fl

Internat2 Th

at the e

2001 [1

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpol

Shipping casualties and loss of life in UK merchant shipping, UK secondregister and foreign flags used by UK shipping companies

Stephen E Roberts a,n, Peter B Marlow b, Bogdan Jaremin c

a College of Medicine, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea SA2 8PP, UKb Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University, Colum Road, Cardiff CF10 3EU, UKc Institute of Maritime and Tropical Medicine, Medical University of Gdansk, Powstania Styczniowego 9B, 81-519 Gdynia, Poland

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:

Received 27 September 2011

Received in revised form

3 November 2011

Accepted 5 November 2011Available online 30 November 2011

Keywords:

UK shipping

UK second register

Flag of convenience

Shipping casualty

Crew fatality

7X/$ - see front matter & 2011 Published by

016/j.marpol.2011.11.004

esponding author. Tel.: þ44 1792 513433/51

4 1792 513423.

ail address: stephen.e.roberts@swansea.ac.uk

ags of convenience shipping registries are ba

ional Transport Federation [2,3].

e tonnage on the UK shipping register totalle

nd of April 2011; an increase of over 11 mill

,4].

a b s t r a c t

UK shipping companies increasingly flagged out their ships from the 1970s to the late 1990s. This study

used Lloyd’s casualty records from 1970 to 2005 to investigate and compare shipping casualties and

crew fatalities in UK shipping, UK second registers (Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Gibraltar, Hong Kong and

the Isle of Man) and six foreign flags (Bahamas, Belize, Cyprus, Malta, St. Vincent and Vanuatu) used

frequently by UK shipping companies. The study also assessed how 12 shipping factors may affect ships

foundering and crew fatalities. Shipping casualty and crew fatality rates fell over time in UK shipping, in

UK second registers and in older flags of conveniences, rather than in newer flags of convenience such

as Belize and St. Vincent. Cargo, trade and weather most strongly affected ships foundering and crew

fatalities. The findings indicate that shipping casualties and crew fatalities should be monitored in new

and rapidly expanding flags of convenience.

& 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction

From the 1970s to the 1990s, there was a large reduction inthe size of the UK merchant fleet, as well as in those of manyEuropean and advanced economic countries—including Germany,France, Italy, Sweden and Japan [1]. This was largely because UKshipping companies reregistered their (cargo-carrying) ships –mainly for economic reasons – with flags outside the UK.

The ships were usually registered with, firstly, UK ‘secondregister’ fleets – such as Bermuda, Gibraltar and the Isle of Man –or, secondly, with foreign flags that have been labelled as ‘flags ofconvenience’ or ‘open registries’ such as Cyprus, Malta andSt. Vincent.1 Correspondingly, the sizes of these fleets havetypically increased sharply since the 1970s. However, followingthe ‘tonnage tax incentive’ introduced by the UK government inAugust 2000, some UK shipping companies have now reregisteredtheir ships back in the UK, which has since resulted in asubstantial increase in the size of the UK merchant fleet.2

Previous studies have shown that many flags of convenienceoften have increased rates of shipping casualties [5,6], while British

Elsevier Ltd.

3426;

(S. Roberts).

sed on lists compiled by the

d 18.8 million gross tonnage

ion gross tonnage from April

seafarers employed in non-UK shipping have had higher fatalaccident rates than British seafarers employed in the UK fleet [7].It is not fully clear whether these increased risks of shippingcasualties and crew fatalities apply to flags that are used frequentlyby UK shipping companies, or to other flags of convenience. It isalso unclear whether the increased risks are linked more stronglyto confounding risk factors than to the flag itself. For example,hazards could depend instead on the type of ship, the cargo carriedor the trading routes, which can vary strongly across flags.

There are three main objectives of this study. Firstly, tocompare shipping casualty rates and associated crew fatalityrates in UK shipping with those in UK second registers and inforeign flags that have been used frequently by UK shippingcompanies. Secondly, to investigate long term trends over time inthe shipping casualty and crew fatality rates and, thirdly, toinvestigate how shipping risk factors (including type of ship,age, flag, gross tonnage, trade, cargo, location and weather) mayincrease the risks of a ship foundering or increase the risks ofcrew fatalities following a shipping casualty.

2. Material and methods

2.1. Shipping casualties and crew fatalities

Lloyd’s casualty records were used to compare shippingcasualties and crew fatalities in UK merchant shipping with thosein UK second register fleets (Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Gibraltar,

0

1000

2000

3000

1970

Num

ber o

f shi

ps

Year

UKHong KongIsle of ManBermudaCayman IslandsGibraltar

0

1000

2000

3000

Num

ber o

f shi

ps

UKBahamasBelizeCyprusMaltaSt VincentVanuatu

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

1970Year

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Fig. 1. Trends over time in the numbers of ships from 1970 to 2005. (a) for UK and

UK second register flags, (b) for UK and foreign flags used frequently by UK

shipping companies.

S.E Roberts et al. / Marine Policy 36 (2012) 703–712704

Hong Kong and the Isle of Man), and in foreign flags (or flags ofconvenience) that have been used frequently by UK shippingcompanies.3 The criteria for selecting these foreign flags were,firstly, that they had been used frequently by UK shippingcompanies and, secondly, that they had been comprised ofsubstantial proportions of UK-owned merchant ships (at least�20% of all ships on the register during at least part of the studyperiod).4 The six foreign flags that met these criteria and wereincluded in the study were the Bahamas, Belize, Cyprus, Malta,St. Vincent and Vanuatu.

Fig. 1a shows changes over time in the numbers of shipsannually registered in the UK fleet and in the five UK secondregister fleets from 1970 to 2005, while Fig. 1b shows the changesover time for the UK and for the six foreign flags [1]. There was asharp reduction in the UK fleet from 1970 to the 1990s, but largeincreases for Hong Kong (since 2000), the Isle of Man (since the1990s), Cyprus (during the 1980s), Bahamas (in the late 1980s),Malta (1980s and early/mid-1990s) and St. Vincent and Belizeshipping (1990s).

3 Three of these five UK second registers (Bermuda, the Cayman Islands and

Gibraltar) have been classified as flags of convenience [2,3]. As Hong Kong was

classified as a UK second register throughout most of the study period (from 1970

to 1997) it has been included in this study.4 The numbers of UK-owned ships that were registered annually with various

flags (including the UK, UK second registers and the various foreign flags) was

provided by UK Department for Transport publications for the years from 2000

onwards [8], and through requests to the Department for Transport for similar

information during earlier years. The second criteria was applied so that foreign

flags with very large fleets (such as Panama and Liberia) – although used quite

frequently by UK shipping companies – comprised of very small proportions of UK

owned ships and would not therefore be included in this study.

The Lloyd’s casualty data included in this study covered allcasualties among merchant ships of at least 100 gross tonnage,that were either actual total losses or constructive total lossesbetween January 1st 1970 and December 31st 2005. The studyexcluded more minor casualties, casualties of fishing vessels andcasualties through ships being destroyed, damaged or detained asa result of military conflict. Additional details of the shippingcasualties were obtained from narrative details published byLloyd’s Maritime Information Services [9], and from internetsearches.

As Lloyd’s casualty records do not distinguish fatalities tocrew, passengers, etc. when investigating crew fatalities, addi-tional searches were performed to investigate whether the fatal-ities referred to crew. Unless they could be established as crewfatalities, fatalities from passenger ships and ferries wereexcluded as they mostly refer to passengers, but fatalities fromall other (mainly cargo) ships were included, as they usually referto crew. The analysis of crew fatalities was restricted to the 26year period from 1980 to 2005, when mortality information wasavailable from the Lloyd’s casualty data.

2.2. Factors that affect ships foundering and crew fatalities

The study investigated the effects of 12 shipping ‘risk factors’on, firstly, the risks of a ship foundering (or capsizing) and,secondly, crew fatalities following a shipping casualty. These 12factors were as follows: the type of ship, age, gross tonnage, flag,the year and country in which the ship was built, the year and themonth of the casualty, the main cargo carried, the (inter or intracontinental) trading voyage, the location of the casualty (sea orocean, based on Marsden grid reference) and the reportedweather conditions. Information on these 12 risk factors wasobtained, firstly, from Lloyd’s casualty records and, secondly, fromnarrative data published by Lloyd’s Maritime InformationServices [9].

The analysis of shipping risk factors that affect ships founder-ing and crew fatalities was confined to the 26 year period from1980 to 2005 when comprehensive risk factor data was providedby Lloyd’s. Since the aim of this part of the study was toinvestigate the effects of the risk factors on ships founderingand on crew fatalities following the casualty – for ships that wereon voyage – also excluded were casualties to ships, which were atdock, under repair in shipyards or under tow to be scrapped, andwhich were no longer in active service. Casualties involving shipsthat were at anchorage were assumed to be on voyage, unlessotherwise specified in the Lloyd’s records and were included.5

In order to establish accurately the role of factors – such astype of cargo, flag state of registration and age of ship – on the riskof a ship foundering, ideally it would be necessary to haverecorded details of every voyage (world-wide between 1980 and2005) to compare all ships that foundered with all of those thatdid not. As it was not feasible to obtain complete voyage data over26 years, comparison was made between all ships that founderedand all that were casualties from other causes—collisions,grounding, fires, explosions and other casualties.6 When investi-gating the influence of the shipping risk factors on crew fatalitiesfollowing a casualty, comparison was made between all casualties

5 These additional criteria resulted in the exclusion of a further 18.1% (161 of

890) of shipping casualties from 1980 to 2005.6 Although this is an imperfect control comparison, it is still very useful for

investigating factors that affect ships foundering. For example, if a typhoon in the

North Pacific, a cargo of iron ore or a ship aged more than over 20 years are major

risk factors for a ship foundering and for crew fatalities, these factors should not

have a strong influence on whether the ship is involved in a collision, has an

explosion in the engine room or becomes stranded.

Table 1Number of shipping casualties, casualty rate per 1000 ship-years, numbers of seafarers lost and crew fatality rates per 1000 ship years, in UK, UK second register and

foreign flags, 1970–2005.

No. of shippingcasualties

Casualty rate per1000 ship-years

(95% CI)b No. ofseafarers losta

Crew fatality rate per1000 ship years

(95% CI)b

UK 151 2.2 (1.9, 2.6) 167 4.3 (3.7, 5.0)

Bermuda 8 2.4 (1.0, 4.7) 26 9.8 (6.4, 14.4)

Cayman Islands 46 10.7 (7.8, 14.3 23 5.4 (3.4, 8.1)

Gibraltar 15 8.4 (4.7, 13.8) 18 10.6 (6.3, 16.7)

Hong Kong 16 1.2 (0.7, 2.0) 90 7.5 (6.0, 9.2)

Isle of Man 7 1.9 (0.8, 4.0) 14 3.9 (2.1, 6.5)

Total—second registers 92 3.5 (2.8, 4.3) 171 7.0 (6.0, 8.2)

Bahamas 95 4.2 (3.4, 5.1) 101 4.6 (3.8, 5.6)

Belize 94 9.7 (7.9, 11.9) 163 16.9 (14.4, 19.6)

Cyprus 442 11.9 (10.8, 13.0) 452 14.5 (13.2, 15.9)

Malta 151 7.2 (6.1, 8.5) 374 18.2 (16.4, 20.1)

St Vincent 162 9.4 (8.0, 11.0) 171 9.9 (8.5, 11.5)

Vanuatu 11 2.3 (1.2, 4.1) 43 9.6 (6.9, 12.8)

Total—foreign flags 955 8.5 (7.9, 9.0) 1304 12.4 (11.8, 13.1)

Total 1198 5.8 (5.4, 6.1) 1642 9.3 (9.1, 10.3)

a Fatalities are based on the period from 1980–2005.b 95% CI¼95% confidence interval.

Table 2Details of major shipping casualties with 20 or more crew fatalities seafarers, 1970–2005.

Flag Year Name of ship Type of ship (grosstonnage, age)

No. ofseafarerslost

Details of the shipping casualty

Bahamas 1989 MV Kronos Bulk carrier (11170, 16) 20 Disappeared without trace during amid F11 storms in the Bay of

Biscay, from Poland to Greece with a cargo of steel.

Belize 1995 MV Al Kashem General cargo ship (3025, 25) 24 Disappeared with all crew when on voyage from Hong Kong to Japan

Cyprus 1979 MV Master Michael Tanker (3664, 20) 31 Sank after an explosion in the engine room in the Caribbean Sea, in

ballast from Djibouti to Saudi Arabia. Four survivors.

Cyprus 1977 MV Eurobulker General cargo ship (7311, 14) 29 Disappeared during a hurricane in Mediterranean Sea when sailing

from Spain to Iran with a cargo of bagged cement

Cyprus 1988 MV Anthenian Venture Tanker (18251, 13) 29 Violent explosion and fire south east of Nova Scotia, sailing from

Amsterdam to New York with unleaded petrol

Cyprus 1991 MV Blue River Tanker (9707, 18) 28 Capsized and sank with all crew in typhoon ‘Amy’ in the South China

Sea, from Thailand to Taiwan with molasses.

Cyprus 1990 MV Charlie Bulk carrier (10673, 15) 27 Disappeared without trace in severe F11 storms in the North Atlantic,

Canada to Mozambique with a cargo of grain.

Cyprus 2000 MV Christopher Bulk carrier (83784, 17) 27 Foundered with all crew in heavy weather off the Azores on voyage

from Ecuador to Redcar with a cargo of coal.

Cyprus 1996 MV Anna Spiratou Bulk carrier (16352, 18) 26 Sank with all crew after colliding with a Greek bulk carrier in dense

fog in the Korea Strait, from Russia to Taiwan.

Cyprus 1997 MV Albion Two Bulk carrier (16278, 21) 25 Disappeared during severe North Atlantic storms, on voyage from

Poland to Jamaica with steel products.

Cyprus 1994 MV Shipbroker Bulk carrier (14826, 14) 25 Fire after collision with a Cyprus flagged tanker in the Bosphorous, in

ballast from Greece to Russia. Five saved.

Cyprus 1979 MV Milli Tanker (1113, 16) 24 Foundered after leaking during storms in the Bay of Biscay, from

Holland to Spain with butane.

Cyprus 1994 MV Iron Antonis Ore carrier (48,756, 26) 24 All crew lost after abandoning flooding ship during gales in the South

Atlantic, from Brazil to China with iron ore.

Cyprus 1998 MV Flare Bulk carrier (16947, 26) 21 Sank after breaking in two in North Atlantic storms off

Newfoundland, from Rotterdam to Canada. Four rescued.

Cyprus 1997 MV Leros Strength Bulk carrier (12998, 21) 20 Foundered with all crew during gales off Norway, when sailing from

northern Russia to Poland with iron ore.

Hong Kong 1971 SS Fatshan Passenger ferry (2637, 38) 83 Capsized and sank near Lantau Island after being struck by a drifting

ship during typhoon ‘Rose’. Four survivors.

Hong Kong 1991 MV Mineral Diamond Bulk carrier (75330, 9) 27 Disappeared during a cyclone in the Indian Ocean after leaving

Dampier, west Australia for Ymuiden with iron ore.

Hong Kong 1995 MV You Xiu Bulk carrier (15 865, 3) 27 Foundered with all crew after striking a breakwater when anchored

in ballast off Constantza, during severe storms.

Malta 1995 MV Paris Bulk carrier (14806, 23) 27 Sank with all crew after striking a breakwater during the same storm,

when anchored in ballast off Constantza.

Malta 1994 MV Christinaki Bulk carrier (16401, 21) 27 Foundered with all crew after hatch cover failure in North Atlantic

storms, from Liverpool to Mexico with scrap metal.

Malta 1993 MV Anderson Bulk carrier (6623, 18) 24 Foundered in the South China Sea during typhoon ‘Becky’, from

Russia to China with a cargo of iron. One survivor.

Malta 1995 MV Link Star General cargo ship (6241, 22) 23 Sank with all crew during gales in the Bay of Bengal, from India to

Taiwan with a cargo of steel products.

S.E Roberts et al. / Marine Policy 36 (2012) 703–712 705

Table 2 (continued )

Flag Year Name of ship Type of ship (grosstonnage, age)

No. ofseafarerslost

Details of the shipping casualty

Malta 1994 MV Stolidi Oil tanker (138764, 18) 20 Explosion and fire in the accommodation area, Arabian Sea, from

Oman to South Korea with oil. 17 survivors.

Malta 1989 MV Rahim 3 General cargo ship (2958, 20) 20 Foundered in heavy weather off Dubai when sailing from Qatar to

India with a cargo of scrap metal.

St Vincent 1993 MV Xian Ren General cargo ship (2889, 28) 29 Foundered with all crew off Japan in heavy weather, from Japan to

China with a scrap iron cargo.

St Vincent 1998 MV Golden Harvest Bulk carrier (12535, 23) 24 Sank with all crew during a cyclone in Arabian Sea, from Jordan to

India with diammonium phosphate.

UK 1972 SS Royston Grange Refrigerated cargo steamship

(9035, 13)

64 Explosion and fire after a collision with a Liberian tanker amid dense

fog in the River Plate. All crew lost with 10 others. From Montevideo

to London with dairy products.

UK 1980 MV Derbyshire Bulk carrier (91 655, 4) 42 Disappeared following hatch cover failure off Japan during typhoon

‘Orchid’, with iron ore from Canada to Japan.

UK 1987 MV Herald of Free Enterprise Passenger ferry (7951, 7) 38 Capsized after departing the Belgian port of Zeebrugge for Dover with

the bow doors left open. 155 passengers lost.

Vanuatu 1989 MV Capitaine Torres General cargo ship (6444, 21) 23 Foundered with all crew during storms in the Gulf of St. Lawrence,

sailing from Indiana to Taiwan with containers.

0

50

100

150

200

250

1970

Cas

ualty

rate

(per

100

0 sh

ip-y

ears

)

Vanuatu (1984-St Vincent (1974-MaltaCyprusBelize (1992-BahamasIsle of Man (1987-Hong KongGibraltarCayman IslandsBermudaUK

0

10

20

30

40

UK

Gibralt

ar

Isle o

f

ManBah

amas

Vanua

tu

Cas

ualty

rate

(per

100

0 sh

ip-y

ears

) 1970-19791980-19891990-2005

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Bermud

a

Cayman

Islan

ds Hong

Kong Beli

ze

Cyprus

Malta

St

Vincen

t

Fig. 2. Trends in shipping casualty rates in the twelve study flags, 1970–2005. (a) annually, (b) by time period. [Notes: Vertical bars represent 95% confidence intervals

Annual shipping casualty rates are smoothed in a)].

S.E Roberts et al. / Marine Policy 36 (2012) 703–712706

for which there was at least one crew fatality and all othercasualties with no fatalities.7

7 Fatalities from non-passenger ships were assumed to refer to crew and –

unless it was possible to identify that there was at least one crew fatality from the

passenger ships – fatalities from passenger ships were assumed to refer to

passengers and were excluded from the analysis.

Statistical methods used include shipping casualty and crewfatality rates, calculated using the numbers of casualties asnumerators and the numbers of ships registered with each flagas denominators [1], and expressed per 1000 ship-years at risk.Other methods include chi-square tests and multiple logisticregression to assess associations between shipping risk factorsand the risks of, firstly, ships foundering and, secondly, crew

S.E Roberts et al. / Marine Policy 36 (2012) 703–712 707

fatalities. The multiple regression models were constructed usinga parsimonious stepwise approach so that they ultimately com-prised only of risk factors that had significant independent effectsor effect sizes of three or more.

3. Results

3.1. Shipping casualties and crew fatalities

There were a total of 1198 shipping casualties in the twelvestudy flags from 1970 to 2005, and a total of 1642 lives lostthrough 733 separate shipping casualties with fatalities between1980 and 2005.

Over the 36 year period, shipping casualty rates were highestfor ships registered in Cyprus (11.9 per 1000 ship-years), theCayman Islands (10.7 per 1000), Belize (9.7) and Gibraltar (8.4)and lowest for Hong Kong (1.2), the Isle of Man (1.9) and the UK(2.2). Overall crew fatality rates were by far the highest for shipsregistered in Malta, Belize and Cyprus and lowest for the Isle ofMan and UK registries (Table 1).

Table 2 provides details of all major shipping casualties in thetwelve flags from 1970 to 2005 that led-to the loss of 20 seafarersor more. Of these 30 major casualties, which led to the loss of 878seafarers, most (16) refer to bulk or ore carriers, followed bygeneral cargo ships (6) and tankers (5). Most were flagged byCyprus (13) or Malta (5) with three UK-registered ships, the SS

Royston Grange, the MV Derbyshire and the MV Herald of Free

Enterprise. Twenty-one of the 30 ships foundered or disappeared –usually in typhoons, hurricanes or cyclones (six), storms (seven)

0

50

100

150

200

1980

Cre

w fa

talit

y ra

te (p

er 1

000

ship

-yea

rs)

0

20

40

60

80

Cre

w fa

talit

y ra

te (p

er 1

000

ship

-yea

rs)

1980-891990-992000-05

1985 1990

UK

Gibralt

ar

Isle

Bermud

a

Cayman

Islan

ds Hong

Kong

Fig. 3. Trends in crew fatality rates in the twelve study

or other heavy weather (six) – five were caused by collisions orcontacts and four by fires and explosions.

3.2. Trends over time in shipping casualty and crew fatality rates

Fig. 2 shows trends over time in shipping casualty rates acrossthe 12 flags, annually (Fig. 2a) and in broad time periods with 95%confidence intervals (Fig. 2b). The overall shipping casualty rate forthe 12 flags increased sharply from the late 1970s to a peak in the1980s and – apart from a much smaller peak during the early 1990s –has fallen continually since. The casualty rate has been very low forUK shipping throughout the 36 year period. Of the other flags, thecasualty rate was most elevated for Cyprus-registered ships duringthe 1970s, St. Vincent, Gibraltar, Malta and Cyprus during the 1980s,and Belize and St. Vincent since 1990.

The overall crew fatality rate for the 12 flags increased fromthe early 1980s to the mid-1990s but has fallen sharply since(Fig. 3a). The fatality rate was most increased for Vanuatu,Gibraltar and Malta during the 1980s, Malta, Cyprus, Hong Kong,Belize and St. Vincent during the 1990s and Belize since 2000. Itwas relatively much lower for the UK fleet throughout the 26years (Fig. 3b).

3.3. Factors that affect ships foundering

When the 12 shipping risk factors were considered individu-ally, the following were associated with highest significance(po0.001) with the risk of a ship foundering—the main cargo(with highest risks for iron ore), the type of ship (highest fordredgers and general cargo ships), the flag (St. Vincent and

Vanuatu (1984-St Vincent (1974-MaltaCyprusBelize (1992-BahamasIsle of Man (1987-Hong KongGibraltarCayman IslandsBermudaUK

1995 2000 2005

of

ManBah

amas

Vanua

tuBeli

ze

Cyprus

Malta

St

Vincen

t

flags (1980–2005). (a) annually, (b) by time period.

Table 3Associations between shipping risk factors and whether or not the shipping casualty was due to the ship foundering in the twelve study flags.

Shipping factor (p-value)a Per cent of shipping casualties due to shipfoundering (no. of cases)

Shipping factor (p-value)a Per cent of shipping casualties due tofoundering (no. of cases)

Main cargo (po0.001) Flag (po0.001)

Ballast/empty 15.6 (90) UK 35.2 (54)

Cement 48.4 (31) Bermuda 33.3 (6)

Coal 22.2 (9) Cayman Islands 26.1 (23)

Containers 31.6 (19) Gibraltar 27.3 (11)

Fertilisers and chemicals 36.7 (49) Hong Kong 30.0 (10)

General cargo 28.6 (21) Isle of Man 28.6 (7)

Grain and other foods 32.3 (93) Bahamas 36.1 (61)

Iron and steel 49.2 (61) Belize 51.3 (80)

Iron ore 69.2 (13) Cyprus 28.3 (226)

Other metals and ores 45.5 (33) Malta 29.8 (114)

Logs, timber and wood 22.7 (44) St. Vincent 54.3 (129)

Oils and gasses 54.8 (31) Vanuatu 37.5 (8)

Other cargoes 37.9 (58)

Age of ship (years) (p¼0.022)

Location—of casualty (p¼0.005) 0–9 50.0 (28)

Mediterranean Sea & Black Sea 33.8 (136) 10–14 45.5 (44)

Atlantic—South 16.7 (24) 15–19 34.9 (172)

Atlantic—North 37.8 (74) 20–24 30.4 (247)

Irish Sea & English Channel 50.0 (28) 25–29 37.9 (132)

North Sea 35.2 (54) 30þ 47.2 (106)

Baltic Sea 27.3 (11)

Bay of Biscay 55.3 (38) Gross tonnage (po0.001)

Red Sea/Gulf of Aden/Persian Gulf 17.6 (51) o500 46.5 (155)

Arabian Sea 44.7 (38) 500–999 47.5 (61)

Bay of Bengal 46.2 (13) 1000–1999 45.0 (111)

Indian Ocean 44.8 (29) 2000–4999 41.3 (126)

South China Sea & East China Sea 41.3 (63) 5000–9999 29.1 (103)

Pacific—North 29.7 (37) 10000–19999 19.4 (108)

Pacific—South 25.0 (12) 20000þ 23.1 (65)

Caribbean Sea 50.0 (88)

Year ship was built (p¼0.34)

Trade (p¼0.35) Pre 1960 40.5 (111)

All other 31.7 (164) 1960–1964 35.1 (74)

America–Europe 66.7 (12) 1965–1969 41.8 (146)

Europe–N America 50.0 (10) 1970–1974 32.6 (178)

Europe–NE Asia 55.6 (9) 1975–1979 32.4 (136)

Europe–S Asia 22.7 (22) 1980þ 41.7 (84)

N America–S America 38.5 (13)

N Europe–N Europe 41.2 (68) Country where ship was built (p¼0.006)

N Europe–S Europe 43.5 (23) UK 30.4 (79)

N Europe–W Africa 25.0 (8) Japan 40.0 (180)

NE Asia–NE Asia 35.7 (42) Germany 35.7 (98)

S America–Europe 33.3 (12) Norway 24.2 (33)

S America–S America 46.3 (41) Netherlands 54.8 (84)

S Asia–Europe 33.3 (12) Spain 29.3 (41)

S Asia–NE Asia 40.0 (15) Sweden 20.0 (20)

S Asia–S Asia 40.9 (44) Denmark 52.9 (17)

S Europe–N Europe 64.3 (14) Other 34.7 (144)

S Europe–S Europe 32.6 (46)

W Africa–N Europe 44.4 (9) Month of year—of casualty (p¼0.76)

January 39.7 (68)

Type of ship (po0.001) February 42.5 (73)

Passenger/RoRo cargo 23.8 (21) March 32.3 (62)

Bulk carrier 30.1 (113) April 36.4 (55)

Tanker 22.7 (66) May 24.2 (33)

Container 18.2 (11) June 40.4 (57)

General cargo 42.1 (461) July 32.3 (65)

Tug/offshore 34.1 (41) August 31.9 (47)

Dredger 42.9 (7) September 38.3 (47)

Other 22.2 (9) October 31.7 (60)

November 40.9 (66)

Time period—of casualty (p¼0.50) December 41.5 (94)

1980–1984 32.0 (122)

1985–1989 42.0 (157) Sea state (po0.001)

1990–1994 36.0 (161) No hazards reported 27.7 (498)

1995–1999 37.8 (180) Heavy weather/swell 57.0 (207)

2000–2005 34.9 (109) Typhoon/freak weather 54.2 (24)

a p-value obtained through the chi-square test.

S.E Roberts et al. / Marine Policy 36 (2012) 703–712708

Belize), gross tonnage (smaller ships o2000 gross tonnage) andsea state (highest for heavy weather and typhoons; Table 3).These were followed by smaller associations (0.001opo0.05)

with the location of the casualty (highest risks for the Bay ofBiscay), the age of the ship (oldest and newest ships) and thecountry where the ship was built (Netherlands and Denmark).

Table 4Associations between shipping risk factors and whether or not crew fatalities resulted from the shipping casualty in the twelve study flags.

Shipping factor (p-value)a Per cent of shipping casualties with crewfatalities (no. of cases)

Shipping factor (p-value)a Per cent of shipping casualties with crewfatalities (no. of cases)

Main cargo (p¼0.026) Flag (p¼0.15)

Ballast/empty 14.6 (90) UK 14.8 (54)

Cement 19.4 (31) Bermuda 33.3 (6)

Coal 44.4 (9) Cayman Islands 13.0 (23)

Containers 36.8 (19) Gibraltar 27.3 (11)

Fertilisers and chemicals 18.4 (49) Hong Kong 40.0 (10)

General cargo 19.0 (21) Isle of Man 28.6 (7)

- Grain and other foods 17.2 (93) Bahamas 22.0 (61)

Iron and steel 31.1 (61) Belize 30.4 (80)

Iron ore 53.8 (13) Cyprus 15.5 (226)

Other metals and ores 18.2 (33) Malta 22.8 (114)

Logs, timber and wood 25.0 (44) St. Vincent 18.8 (129)

Oils and gasses 22.6 (31) Vanuatu 37.5 (8)

Other cargoes 14.3 (58)

Age of ship (years) (p¼0.082)

Location—of casualty (p¼0.045) 0–9 35.7 (28)

Mediterranean Sea & Black Sea 16.2 (136) 10–14 25.6 (44)

Atlantic—South 8.3 (24) 15–19 24.4 (172)

Atlantic—North 27.0 (74) 20–24 16.7 (247)

Irish Sea & English Channel 25.0 (28) 25–29 19.8 (132)

North Sea 18.5 (54) 30þ 16.2 (106)

Baltic Sea 27.3 (11)

Bay of Biscay 23.7 (38) Gross tonnage (p¼0.66)

Red Sea/Gulf of Aden/Persian Gulf 9.8 (51) o500 15.7 (155)

Arabian Sea 21.1 (38) 500–999 21.3 (61)

Bay of Bengal 23.1 (13) 1000–1999 23.6 (111)

Indian Ocean 27.6 (29) 2000–4999 22.2 (126)

South China Sea & East China Sea 34.4 (63) 5000–9999 18.4 (103)

Pacific—North 35.1 (37) 10000–19999 19.6 (108)

Pacific—South 8.3 (12) 20000þ 24.6 (65)

Caribbean Sea 17.4 (88)

Year ship was built (p¼0.025)

Trade (p¼0.036) Pre 1960 13.6 (111)

All other 17.8 (164) 1960–1964 13.5 (74)

America–Europe 33.3 (12) 1965–1969 17.9 (146)

Europe–N America 50.0 (10) 1970–1974 23.2 (178)

Europe–NE Asia 22.2 (9) 1975–1979 21.3 (136)

Europe–S Asia 4.5 (22) 1980þ 31.3 (84)

N America–S America 7.7 (13)

N Europe–N Europe 19.1 (68) Country where ship was built (p¼0.22)

N Europe–S Europe 30.4 (23) UK 13.9 (79)

N Europe–W Africa 25.0 (8) Japan 23.5 (180)

NE Asia–NE Asia 38.1 (42) Germany 11.3 (98)

S America–Europe 8.3 (12) Norway 21.2 (33)

S America–S America 19.5 (41) Netherlands 22.9 (84)

S Asia–Europe 8.3 (12) Spain 26.8 (41)

S Asia–NE Asia 40.0 (15) Sweden 20.0 (20)

S Asia–S Asia 18.2 (44) Denmark 23.5 (17)

S Europe–N Europe 35.7 (14) Other 24.5 (144)

S Europe–S Europe 28.3 (46)

W Africa–N Europe 22.2 (9) Month of year—of casualty (p¼0.91)

January 17.6 (68)

Type of ship (p¼0.011) February 20.8 (73)

Passenger/RoRo cargo 11.8 (21) March 22.6 (62)

Bulk carrier 25.7 (113) April 21.8 (55)

Tanker 30.3 (66) May 12.1 (33)

Container 36.4 (11) June 22.8 (57)

General cargo 16.7 (461) July 20.0 (65)

Tug/offshore 22.0 (41) August 15.6 (47)

Dredger 57.1 (7) September 17.0 (47)

Other 22.2 (9) October 25.0 (60)

November 16.9 (66)

Time period—of casualty (p¼0.21) December 24.5 (94)

1980–1984 14.8 (122)

1985–1989 18.5 (157) Sea state (po0.001)

1990–1994 22.0 (161) No hazards reported 13.3 (498)

1995–1999 25.3 (180) Heavy weather/swell 32.9 (207)

2000–2005 18.3 (109) Typhoon/freak weather 56.2 (24)

a p-value obtained through the chi-square test.

S.E Roberts et al. / Marine Policy 36 (2012) 703–712 709

There were no significant associations between the risks offoundering and the time period or the month of the year (of thecasualty), the trade or the year that the ship was built.

As some of the risk factors are often inter-related (e.g. type ofship, gross tonnage, flag, trade and location of the casualty),multivariate analysis was used to identify those factors with

S.E Roberts et al. / Marine Policy 36 (2012) 703–712710

significant independent influence – or with an independent effectsize of 43 – on the risk of a ship foundering (Table 5). Thefollowing were independently significant: cargo, trade, location,gross tonnage, month of year and sea state. Firstly regardingcargo, compared with ships in ballast or empty, those with thehighest risks of foundering were carrying iron ore (18-foldincreased risk) or iron and steel (16). The other highest indepen-dent risks of foundering were for typhoons (17-fold) and heavyweather (8.4), for trades from south Europe to north Europe (13)and from Europe to north east Asia (8.7), for large ships of 45000gross tonnage compared with o500 (8.3) and for casualties in theBay of Bengal (6.9; Table 5).

Table 5Shipping factors that had significant independent influence (or independent effect siz

shipping casualty.

Casualties due to foundering

Shipping factor Increased risk

Main cargo

Ballast/empty Refb

Cement 6.85

Coal 8.71

Fertilisers and chemicals 4.93

Grain and other foods 3.50

Iron and steel 15.9

Iron ore 18.0

Other metals and ores 4.98

Oils and gasses 15.2

Other cargoes 4.58

Trade

All other Ref

America–Europe 4.66

Europe–N America 3.11

Europe–NE Asia 8.69

NE Asia–NE Asia

S Asia–NE Asia

S Europe–N Europe 13.0

S Europe–S Europe 3.30

Location—of casualty

Mediterranean Sea & Black Sea Ref

Atlantic—North

North Sea

Baltic Sea

Bay of Bengal 6.87

Indian Ocean 3.01

Caribbean Sea 4.29

Gross tonnage

o500 Ref

5000–9999 0.13

10000–19999 0.11

20000þ 0.12

Month of year—of casualty

January Ref

October 0.27

Sea state

No hazards reported Ref

Heavy weather/swell 8.40

Typhoon/freak weather 17.1

Country where ship was built

UK

Norway

Netherlands

Spain

Sweden

Denmark

Other

a 95% CI¼95% confidence interval.b Reference category.c Denotes significance at the 5% level.

3.4. Factors that affect crew fatalities

When considered individually, the following shipping factorswere associated with crew fatalities arising from a shippingcasualty: cargo (highest risks for iron ore and coal), location ofthe casualty (North Pacific and the South China Sea or East ChinaSea), trade (Europe to north America and south Asia to north eastAsia), type of ship (dredgers and container ships), the year theship was built (ships built since 1980) and sea state (typhoons;Table 4). There were no significant associations between crewfatalities and the time period, the age of the ship, gross tonnage,the country where the ship was built or the month of the year.

es of 43) on the risks of (i) ships foundering and (ii) crew fatalities following a

Casualties with crew fatalities

(95% CI)a Increased risk (95% CI)a

Ref

(1.89, 24.8)c

(0.84, 89.9) 11.2 (1.57, 79.0)c

(1.50, 16.2)c

(1.23, 9.95)c

(4.99, 50.8)c

(2.24, 145)c 4.05 (0.71, 23.1)

(1.30, 19.1)c

(4.03, 57.4)c

(1.42, 14.8)c

Ref

(0.68, 31.9)

(0.40, 24.2) 3.18 (0.52, 19.2)

(1.11, 68.1)c 4.56 (0.67, 30.9)

4.95 (1.05, 23.4)c

4.69 (0.81, 27.3)

(2.27, 75.0)c 5.80 (1.08, 31.3)c

(1.12, 9.72)c 3.16 (1.05, 9.55)c

Ref

3.50 (1.17, 10.4)c

5.15 (1.03, 25.6)c

5.82 (0.72, 46.8)

(0.76, 62.1)

(0.73, 12.5)

(1.03, 17.9)c 3.03 (0.70, 13.2)

Ref

(0.66, 2.28)

(0.84, 2.73)

(1.06, 3.99)c

Ref

(0.08, 0.92)c

Ref

(4.58, 4.24)c 4.40 (2.43, 7.94)c

(3.56, 81.9)c 12.1 (3.13, 46.5)c

Ref

4.58 (0.83, 5.07)

3.39 (0.85, 3.77)

3.70 (0.81, 16.8)

3.73 (0.62, 22.6)

3.66 (0.64, 21.0)

3.62 (1.05, 12.4)c

S.E Roberts et al. / Marine Policy 36 (2012) 703–712 711

Using multivariate analysis (Table 5), those factors associatedindependently with crew fatalities were cargo (highest risks forcoal and iron ore), trade (highest for south Europe to north Europeand for several trades to north east Asia), location of the casualty(the Baltic Sea and the North Sea), sea state (typhoons and heavyweather) and the country where the ship was built (low risks forUK built ships).

4. Discussion

This study found that shipping casualty and crew fatality rateshave fallen over time in UK shipping, in UK second registers andin older flags of conveniences that are used frequently by UKshipping companies. There has been less evidence of improve-ment for newer, less established flags of convenience, such asBelize and St. Vincent, which have had high shipping casualty andcrew fatality rates in recent years. Of 12 shipping factors inves-tigated, weather conditions, cargo and trade were identified asthe most important for ships foundering and crew fatalities.

A major strength of this study is that it provides new evidence onshipping casualty and crew fatality rates across registries that areused by UK shipping companies, and on risk factors for shipsfoundering and for crew fatalities following shipping casualties.The study used Lloyd’s casualty records, which are the single mostcomprehensive source of information on shipping casualties world-wide, with particularly good coverage for UK shipping, UK secondregisters and also for other flags used frequently by UK shippingcompanies. Although it is thought that the coverage of Lloyd’scasualty records improved slightly from about 1980 onwards, thevast majority of casualties in these flags would have been identified.The analysis also included casualties that were actual total losses orconstructive total losses and excluded more minor casualties, whichwould be covered less comprehensively in Lloyd’s records.

Study limitations include the fact that Lloyd’s casualty recordsdo not distinguish between fatalities among crew and passengers.Therefore, unless identified otherwise, assumptions were madethat fatalities from passenger ships referred to passengers andfatalities from all other (mainly cargo) ships referred to crew.Although this would incorporate some discrepancies into thestudy findings for crew fatalities, these assumptions would beaccurate in most cases so that the discrepancies would be small.Our control comparison when assessing the risks of ships foun-dering – casualties from all other causes – was imperfect: forexample, an older ship may have an increased risk of foundering,but it would also often have an increased risk of becoming aconstructive total loss following damages arising through adifferent type of casualty – such as a fire or a collision – as anolder ship may be considered not worth repairing and returningto service. However, such biases are probably small across therange of 12 shipping factors and, in the absence of completevoyage data for every ship in every fleet over the study period, itis almost certainly the best control comparison available.A further limitation is that whereas actual total losses of shipsare clearly defined, the threshold for a shipping casualty becom-ing a constructive total loss may vary, for example, according tofactors such as the ship’s age, the ship’s owners and the flag state.Finally it was not possible to include information on human andcultural factors comprehensively over the long study period.These factors would include the nationalities and ages of theships’ captains and officers, their experience, training and risk-taking, along with fatigue, stress levels, communication andsafety cultures on board, which can often effect or contribute toshipping casualties and subsequent loss of life [9,15–18].

Regarding trends in shipping casualties, the aggregated rate forthe 12 study flags (UK, UK 2nd register and foreign) has fallen

quite sharply throughout much of the period since the early1980s. While the UK, Bermuda and Hong Kong fleets had lowcasualty rates throughout the 36 year study period, this overallreduction over time has been due largely to improvements for theolder, more established flags of convenience – such as Cyprus, theBahamas, The Cayman Islands and Malta – that previously hadhigh casualty rates when they were new or expanding sharplyduring the 1970s or 1980s. In the most recent years, casualtyrates have been highest in the two newer, less established flags ofconvenience, namely Belize and St. Vincent.

The trend over time in the overall crew fatality rate for the 12flags increased up to the early and mid-1990s but has fallen since.This peak coincided with several factors at this time. Firstly, theemergence of the Belize flag. Secondly, an increase in crew fatal-ities for the St. Vincent and Hong Kong flags. Thirdly, it coincidedwith the foundering of a large number of bulk carriers (which wereoften lost with entire crews) that were flagged mainly by Cyprus,Malta and Hong Kong. Since the mid-1990s, however, there hasbeen a substantial reduction in the crew fatality rate.

When investigating associations between the 12 shippingfactors and the risks of ships foundering, the highest risks werefor the Belize and St. Vincent flags. However, when using multi-variate analysis, the most important independent risk factors forships foundering were the main cargo (with highest risks for ironore, iron and steel cargoes), trades from Europe to north East Asia(mainly Japan, Korea, Taiwan and East China), small ships of lowgross tonnage and weather conditions (most importantly fortyphoon/freak weather conditions followed by other heavyweather). The fact that the flag was no longer independentlyassociated with the risk of a ship foundering indicates that theshipping casualties for the highest risk flags (e.g. Belize andSt. Vincent) often had other important risk factors (such as a highrisk cargo, trade, ship size and/or weather conditions) that weremore important causal factors than the flag itself.

When investigating risk factors that affect crew fatalitiesfollowing a casualty, via multivariate analysis, there was littleassociation with the flag state. The most important independentrisk factors were type of cargo (with highest risks for coal and ironore), trade (from south Europe to north Europe and several tradesto north east Asia), casualties in the Baltic Sea and the North Seaand weather conditions (most importantly for typhoons/freakweather conditions).

Apart from weather conditions, the two most importantshipping factors overall that affected ships foundering and crewfatalities were the type of cargo and the trade. High risk cargoesincluded iron ore, iron and steel and coal. Iron ore is the mostdense cargo that can place severe stresses on cargo holds and hasfor long been identified from many studies as a major risk factorfor catastrophic structural failure in bulk carriers [2,10–14]. Coalcargoes have sometimes been prone to shifting in heavy weatherwith major consequences for the stability of small general cargoships – for example the MV Lovat and the MV Amberley [19,20] –although cargo shifting is less of a hazard for larger bulk carriers.Regarding trade, ships trading to north east Asia during the latesummer and autumn months often have to contend withtyphoons – in the north west Pacific, the South China Sea, theEast China Sea and the Sea of Japan – which is the region of theworld with the most frequent and the most severe typhoons [21].These trades have also been associated with increased risks offoundering for bulk carriers [5], including the largest British shipever lost at sea, the MV Derbyshire, which disappeared off Japan onvoyage from Canada in 1980 [22,23].

Of the 12 flags investigated in this study, Vanuatu andGibraltar had the highest crew fatality rates during the 1980s,while Gibraltar subsequently had its shipping registry restrictedby the UK Marine Safety Agency. More recently, Belize has had the

S.E Roberts et al. / Marine Policy 36 (2012) 703–712712

highest crew fatality rate, while Belize and St. Vincent have hadthe highest shipping casualty rates. Concerns about the safetyrecord of the Belize registry increased in Britain during the late1990s after the 32 year old general cargo ship MV Rema sank withfour British crew in the North Sea in 1998 [24,25]. The ship hadbeen detained for five days earlier in the year for 18 defects, aswell as during the previous year for problems including hulldamage and deck cracking [26]. The following year, anotherBelize-registered general cargo ship, MV The Royal One, listedand almost foundered in the Irish Sea and was detained for 10deficiencies by the UK Maritime and Coastguard Agency. The shiphad been detained six times in the preceding two years [26].

As of June 2009, a total of 35 flags world-wide were targetedfor special enforcement by either the Paris or Tokyo Memoran-dums of Understanding (MOUs) blacklists or by the US CoastGuard target list [27]. These 35 flags included Belize (Paris andTokyo blacklists and the US Coast Guard target list), St. Vincent(Paris blacklist and US Coast Guard target list) and Bahamas,Gibraltar and Malta (all on the US Coast Guard target list). Of the12 study flags, St. Vincent and Belize were among two of 16 flagsworld-wide that had ship detention rates of more than 10% in2006 [28]. The number of ships on the Belize register has shrunkby more than 40% since 2007 [1], which may lead to futureimprovements in safety and ship detentions. The UK, Bahamas,Cyprus, Hong Kong and the Isle of Man study flags all met low riskcriteria on the Paris MOU in 2009 [29].

The study illustrates that some of the older more establishedflags of convenience (such as Cyprus and Malta) previously hadhigh shipping casualty and crew fatality rates that have improvedover time. However, some of the high risks of casualties andfatalities appear to have been transferred in some way to neweror emerging flags of convenience, such as Belize (established in1992) and St. Vincent (in 1984), although there has also beenevidence of more recent improvement for the older of these twoflags, St. Vincent. This study indicates that it is important thatshipping casualties and crew fatalities should be monitored innewly emerging and rapidly expanding flags of convenience.

5. Conclusions

Several conclusions follow from this investigation and policymakers, governments and international organisations should bearthe following points in mind when formulating policy:

1.

In recent years, there has been a reduction in shippingcasualties and crew fatalities for the UK merchant fleet, forUK second registries and for older, more established flags ofconvenience used frequently by UK shipping companies. Therehas, however, been less evidence of improvement for newerflags of convenience.

2.

The multi-factorial risk analyses revealed that the mostimportant risk factors for ships foundering and for crewfatalities were the main cargo carried, trade and the weatheror sea state conditions.

3.

The study indicates that it is important that shipping casual-ties and crew fatalities should be monitored in newly emer-ging and rapidly expanding flags of convenience.

4.

Information on human and cultural factors were not availablecomprehensively for inclusion in this study, and require futureinvestigation.

Conflict of interest

None

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to John Crilley for advice and helpwith Lloyd’s Register casualty data, and Jeremy Grove andMargaret Talbot (Department for Transport) for advice and helpwith shipping figures for flags used by UK shipping companies.The study was funded in part by the Maritime and CoastguardAgency, UK Department for Transport (Grant number: RP 578).The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarilythose of the funding body.

References

[1] Lloyd’s Register of Shipping. World fleet statistics (annually, 1970–2010).London: Lloyd’s Register of Shipping; 1971–2011.

[2] International Transport Federation. List of flags of convenience (17th June1997). London: International Transport Federation; 1997.

[3] International Transport Federation. Campaign against flags of convenienceand substandard shipping: annual report 2004. London: International Trans-port Federation; 2004.

[4] Nautilus. Warnings over UK flag growth. Nautilus Telegraph 2011;44(6):3.[5] Roberts SE, Marlow PB. Casualties in dry bulk shipping (1963–1996). Mar

Policy 2002;26:437–50.[6] Li KX. The safety and quality of open registers and a new approach for classifying

risky ships. Transp Res Part E: Logistics Transp Rev 1999;35:135–43.[7] Roberts SE. Work-related mortality among British seafarers employed in flags

of convenience shipping, 1976–1995. Int Marit Health 2003;54:7–25.[8] Department for Transport. Maritime statistics, 2000–2005 [annual reports].

London: Department for Transport; 2001–2006.[9] Hooke N. Maritime casualties, 1963–1996. 2nd ed. London: Lloyd’s of London

Press; 1997.[10] Lloyd’s Register of Shipping. Bulk carriers—the safety issues. London: Lloyd’s

Register of Shipping; 1991.[11] HORSCOTCI (House of Representatives Standing Committee on Transport

Communications and Infrastructure). Ships of shame, inquiry into ship safety.Canberra, Australia: Australian Government Publishing Service; 1992.

[12] Bureau of Transport and Communications Economics. Structural failure oflarge bulk ships. Report 85. Canberra, Australia: Australian GovernmentPublishing Service; 1994.

[13] International Association of Classification Societies. Bulk carriers: guidanceand information on bulk cargo loading and discharging to reduce thelikelihood of over-stressing the hull structure. London: International Asso-ciation of Classification Societies; 1997.

[14] Intercargo. Intercargo calls for urgent review of bulk carriers. London: Lloyd’sList; 2010. [December 9th].

[15] Marine Accident Investigation Branch. Bridge watchkeeping safety study.Southampton: Marine Accident Investigation Branch; 2004.

[16] Hetherington C, Flin R, Mearns K. Safety in shipping: the human element. JSaf Res 2006;37:401–11.

[17] Tzannatos E, Kokotos D. Analysis of accidents in Greek shipping during thepre- and post-ISM period. Mar Policy 2009;33:679–84.

[18] Xhelilaj E, Lapa K. The role of human fatigue factor towards maritimecasualties. Marit Transp Navig J 2010;2:23–32.

[19] Department of Trade. MV Amberley (1973). The Merchant Shipping Act 1894,Report of MV Amberley [inquiry report]. London: HMSO; 1974.

[20] Department of Trade. The Merchant Shipping Act 1894, Report of Court no.8066, M.V. ’Lovat’ [inquiry report]. London: HMSO; 1975.

[21] Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory. Frequently askedquestions. Miami: Hurricane Research Division, Atlantic Oceanographic andMeteorological Laboratory; 2010. /www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/tcfaqHED.htmlS [last accessed September 2nd 2011].

[22] Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions. Inquiry into theloss of the MV Derbyshire. London: HMSO; 2001.

[23] Paik JK, Faulkner D. Reassessment of the M.V. Derbyshire sinking with thefocus on hull-girder collapse. Mar Technol 2003;40:258–69.

[24] Marine Accident Investigation Branch. Report of the Inspector’s Inquiry intothe loss of MV Rema with the loss of four lives on 25 April 1998 about22 miles north-east of Whitby, North Yorkshire (Marine Accident Report1/00). Southampton: Marine Accident Investigation Branch; 2000.

[25] House of Lords. ‘‘Rema’’ investigation, 599. London: House of Lords Debates;1999. 839-41.

[26] NUMAST (National Union of Marine, Aviation and Shipping TransportOfficers). How many more? A NUMAST report on international shippingsafety. London: NUMAST; 2001.

[27] MARISEC (Maritime International Secretariat Services Limited). Flag stateperformance table, 2009. London: MARISEC; 2010.

[28] Gianni M. Real and present danger: flag state failure and maritime securityand safety. London: International Transport Federation; 2008.

[29] Paris MOU (Memorandum of Understanding). Flags meeting low risk criteria,/http://www.parismou.org/Inspection_efforts/Inspections/Ship_risk_profile/Flags_meeting_low_risk_criteria/S [last accessed September 14th 2011].