Application of Fuzzy Extended AHP methodology for selection of ideal ship for oceangoing watchkeeping officers

International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics

Volumn 47, Issue , 2015, Pages 132-140

  Uğurlu, Özkan ^a  

^a KARADENIZ TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

FEAHP; Maritime transportation; Seafarer; Watchkeeping officer

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS; DECISION MAKING; FLEET OPERATIONS; WATERWAY TRANSPORTATION;

CONTAINER SHIPS; FEAHP; FUZZY EXTENDED AHP; MARITIME TRANSPORTATION; MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION MAKING METHODS; QUALIFICATION STANDARDS; SEAFARER; WATCHKEEPING OFFICER;

SHIPS;

EID: 84939977877     PISSN: 01698141     EISSN: 18728219     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ergon.2015.01.013     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Andresen M., Domsch M., Cascorbi A. Working unusual hours and its relationship to job satisfaction: a study of European maritime pilots. J.Labor Res. 2007, 28(4):714-734. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12122-007-9010-5.
2. Arslan O., Er I.D. SWOT analysis for safer carriage of bulk liquid chemicals in tankers. J.Hazard. Mater. 2008, 154(1-3):901-913. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.10.113.
3. Baulk S., Reyner L. Fatigue in Ferry Crews: A Pilot Study 2002, Cardiff University Seafarers International Research Centre (SIRC), Cardiff.
4. BIMCO/ISF Man Power 2010 Update: the Worldwide Demand for and Supply of Seafarers 2010, University of Warwick, Coventry.
5. Bloor M., Pentsov D., Levi M., Horlick-Jones T. Problems of Global Governance of Seafarers' Health and Safety 2004, Cardiff University Seafarers International Research Centre (SIRC), Cardiff.
6. Bozbura F.T., Beskese A., Kahraman C. Prioritization of human capital measurement indicators using fuzzy AHP. Expert Syst. Appl. 2007, 32(4):1100-1112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2006.02.006.
7. Buckley J.J. Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 1985, 17(3):233-247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(85)90090-9.
8. Celik M., Deha Er I., Ozok A.F. Application of fuzzy extended AHP methodology on shipping registry selection: the case of Turkish maritime industry. Expert Syst. Appl. 2009, 36(1):190-198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.09.004.
9. Chan F.T.S., Kumar N. Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach. Omega 2007, 35(4):417-431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2005.08.004.
10. Chang D.Y. Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1996, 95(3):649-655. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(95)00300-2.
11. Chang D.Y. Extent analysis and synthetic decision. Optim. Tech. Appl. 1992, 95:352-355.
12. Deng J.L. Basic Approach of Grey System 1988, Huajong Science and Engineering University, Wuhan.
13. Ding J.F., Liang G.S. Using fuzzy MCDM to select partners of strategic alliances for liner shipping. Inf. Sci. 2005, 173(1-3):197-225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2004.07.013.
14. Equasis The World Merchant Fleet in 2007 2008, (accessed January 2013). [Online]. Available:. http://www.equasis.org.
15. Equasis The World Merchant Fleet in 2011 2012, (accessed January 2013). [Online]. Available:. http://www.equasis.org.
16. Erensal Y.C., Öncan T., Demircan M.L. Determining key capabilities in technology management using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: a case study of Turkey. Inf. Sci. 2006, 176(18):2755-2770. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2005.11.004.
17. Glen D. What do we know about the labour market for seafarers?: a view from the UK. Mar. Policy 2008, 32(6):845-855. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2007.12.006.
18. Göksu A., Güngör I˙. Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and its application of university preference ranking. J.Fac. Econ. Adm. Sci. 2008, 13(3):1-26.
19. Hansen H.L. Surveillance of deaths on board Danish merchant ships 1986-93. Occup. Environ. Med. 1996, 53(4):269-275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/oem.53.4.269.
20. Hepu D. Multicriteria analysis with fuzzy pairwise comparison. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 1999, 21(3):215-231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0888-613X(99)00025-0.
21. ILO Accident Prevention on Board Ship at Sea and in Port 1996, International Labour Organization, Geneva.
22. IMO STCW Conventions and STCW Code (Manila 2010) 2011, IMO Publishing, London.
23. ISL Shipping Statistics and Market Review 2012, Institute of Shipping Economics and Logistics, Bremen.
24. Jones B.C., Dorrian J., Rjaratnam M.W.S., Dawson D. Working hours regulations and fatigue in transportation. Saf. Sci. 2005, 43(4):225-252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2005.06.001.
25. Kahraman C., Cebeci U., Ruan D. Multi-attribute comparison of catering service companies using fuzzy AHP: the case of Turkey. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2004, 87(2):171-184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(03)00099-9.
26. Kahraman C., Cebeci U., Ulukan Z. Multi-criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP. Logist. Inf. Manag. 2003, 16(6):382-394. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09576050310503367.
27. Karsak E.E., Tolga E. Fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making procedure for evaluating advanced manufacturing system investments. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2001, 69(1):49-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(00)00081-5.
28. Kilincci O., Onal S.A. Fuzzy AHP approach for supplier selection in a washing machine company. Expert Syst. Appl. 2011, 38(8):9656-9664. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.01.159.
29. Klir G.L., Yuan B. Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic 1995, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
30. Kulak O., Kahraman C. Multi-attribute comparison of advanced manufacturing systems using fuzzy vs. crisp axiomatic design approach. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2005, 95(3):415-424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.02.009.
31. Kulak O., Kahraman C. Fuzzy multi-attribute selection among transportation companies using axiomatic design and analytic hierarchy process. Inf. Sci. 2005, 170(2-4):191-210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2004.02.021.
32. Leggate H. The future shortage of seafarers: will it become a reality?. Marit. Policy Manag. 2004, 31(1):3-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03088830310001642049.
33. Leung A.W.S., Chan C.C.H., Ng J.J.M., Wong P.C.C. Factors contributing to officers' fatigue in high-speed maritime craft operations. Appl. Ergon. 2006, 37(5):565-576. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2005.11.003.
34. Lin C.T., Wang S.M., Chiang C.T. Manpower supply and demand of ocean deck officers in Taiwan. Marit. Policy Manag. 2001, 28(1):91-102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03088830121479.
35. Louie V.W., Doolen T.L. Astudy of factors that contribute to maritime fatigue. Mar. Technol. Sname News 2007, 44(2):82-92.
36. Mcnamara R., Collins A., Matthews V. Areview of research into fatigue in offshore shipping. Marit. Rev. 2000, 118-122.
37. Miller N.L., Shattuck L.G., Matsangas P. Sleep and fatigue issues in continuous operations: a survey of US army officers. Behav. Sleep. Med. 2011, 9(1):53-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15402002.2011.533994.
38. Mitroussi K. Employment of seafarers in the EU context: challenges and opportunities. Mar. Policy 2008, 32(6):1043-1049. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2008.03.006.
39. Obando-Rojas B. Asystem dynamic analysis of officer manpower in the merchant marine. Marit. Policy Manag. 1999, 26(1):39-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/030888399287050.
40. Orosa J.A., Santos R., Pérez J.A. Apractical case study of the relationship between work risk prevention and fatigue at work in Spanish merchant ships. Hum. Factors Ergon. Manuf. Serv. Ind. 2011, 21(5):484-492. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20249.
41. Peters M., Zelewski S. Pitfalls in the application of analytic hierarchy process to performance measurement. Manag. Decis. 2008, 46(7):1039-1051. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00251740810890203.
42. Phillips R. Sleep, watchkeeping, and accidents: a content analysis of incident at sea reports. Transp. Res. Part F: Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2000, 3(4):229-240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8478(01)00007-9.
43. Pietrzykowski Z., Uriasz J. The ship domain - a criterion of navigational safety assessment in an open sea area. J.Navig. 2009, 62(1):93-108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0373463308005018.
44. Pik K.R. The alternative watch system: a critical analysis. Crew Endur. Manag. Newsl. 2007, IV:5-6.
45. Robert S. Fighting fatigue: the alternative watch system. Crew Endur. Manag. Newsl. 2007, IV:4-5.
46. Saaty T.L. Ascaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J.Math. Psychol. 1977, 15(3):234-281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5.
47. Saaty T.L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process 1980, McGraw-Hill, New York.
48. Saaty T.L. How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1990, 48(1):9-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I.
49. Uğurlu Ö., Köse E., Başar E., Yüksekyildiz E., Yildirim U. Investigation of Working Hours of Watchkeeping Officers on Short Sea Shipping: A Case Study in an Oil Tanker 2012, IAME 2012, Taipei.
50. Van Laarhoven P.J.M., Pedrycz W. Afuzzy extension of Saaty's priority theory. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 1983, 11(1-3):199-227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(83)80082-7.
51. Wang Y.M., Luo Y., Hua Z. On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2008, 186(2):735-747. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2007.01.050.