381

1 INTRODUCTION

The sea is, has been and will continue to be a

dangerous place to work; it is not a coincidence that

throughout the course of human history, a quite

extended number of maritime accidents are recorded

[2]. It is also necessary to note that shipping activities

have always been vital for the support of international

trade; quite often they have been termed as the

“obedient servants of globalization”. In any case, it is

a rather self-explanatory fact that with the

globalization phenomenon gaining momentum

during the last couple of decades, the size of the

maritime transport industry has also simultaneously

increased significantly and today more than fifty

thousand (50.000) merchant ships are trading

internationally [10]. By considering this very high

number and different type of vessels that are crossing

the seas and oceans of our planet on a daily basis,

coordinated efforts such as a very expanded portfolio

of international regulations (that are all based

on/utilize the approach of “standardization”) are

needed to ensure the necessary level of safety.

From the very beginning of its establishment, the

International Maritime Organization (IMO) has been

Understanding the Interrelation between the Safety

of Life at Sea Convention and Certain IMO’s Codes

D. Guevara & D. Dalaklis

World Maritime University, Malmö, Sweden

ABSTRACT: Over the last few decades, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) has very heavily utilized

the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974 Convention as the main legal instrument (and implementation tool)

concerning safety at sea for merchant vessels engaged in international trade. During this more than a century of

existence and continuous improvement of the Convention, wide-ranging safety risks have been addressed via

SOLAS and certain relevant “supporting” Codes, covering for example the issues of design, construction and

equipment of ships, as well as paving the way for the introduction of a structured framework of operational

procedures that ensures a high level of professional performance for the crew onboard those seagoing vessels

(the International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention-ISM Code)

and even including human factors topics. Until this point in time, the IMO has developed the SOLAS

Convention with fourteen (14) chapters that are covering all the main risks associated with shipping operations

and are working in parallel with other related Conventions and Codes to enhance the level of safety at sea,

under a holistic approach that is working under the principle of interrelation. This paper aims to briefly discuss

SOLAS’ history of development and highlight just a few of those important risks that this Convention is

addressing, with certain emphasis on the topic of “safety of navigation”. Apart from helping to understand the

way this Convention and other IMO’s legal instruments are interrelated, it will also provide a few educated

guesses about the “upcoming” challenges that in the near future should also be included into the scope of the

SOLAS, with the topic of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MAAS) clearly standing out.

http://www.transnav.eu

the International Journal

on Marine Navigation

and Safety of Sea Transportation

Volume 15

Number 2

June 2021

DOI: 10.12716/1001.15.02.15

382

consistently working to enhance the safety of vessels

at sea by implementing measures through very

specific legal instruments. The IMO’s principal

instrument with such focus is the International

Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS); with

the expected introduction of new technology

applications that can completely reshape the way the

shipping industry operates, such as Maritime

Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS), further

adaptations and changes in the scope of SOLAS

should also be expected.

Initially, the SOLAS Convention was created as a

reaction towards the well-known Titanic disaster and

as a response to address passenger ships' risks, but

today it has increased/expanded its scope widely to

become the most important instrument created by the

IMO with 165 member States party to the Convention

and a coverage of 99.04% of the gross tonnage of the

world’s merchant fleet. Nowadays, SOLAS applies to

all passenger ships that carry of more than twelve (12)

passengers, as well as to all cargo ships with over five

hundred (500) gross tonnage that are engaged on

international voyages [5].

Historically, the SOLAS Convention has five

versions: the first one (was attempted to be) adopted

in 1914, the second in 1929, the third one in 1948, the

fourth in 1960, and finally the last major revision took

place in 1974. Over these years, the IMO has most

often deployed a reactive approach by introducing the

necessary new regulations after the occurrence of an

important accident that had attracted worldwide

attention. On a positive note, lately there is a shift

towards a preemptive approach within the IMO, by

looking forward and identify relevant needs before a

major disaster occurs. This latest version of SOLAS

also includes an extended number of Codes that

provide the international standards required for the

elements mentioned in that particular chapter of the

convention.

Following a path of continuous improvement, the

wider regulatory framework under the auspices of the

IMO has resulted in a safer, cleaner and more

sustainable shipping industry that is capable to

effectively support the global economy needs. The

main purpose of this paper is to discuss the aforesaid

evolution in the IMO’s framework to enhance safety at

sea, facilitate its better understanding and especially

highlight the interrelating approach deployed via the

numerous Conventions and Codes supporting this

framework. Following this brief introductory section,

the evolution of SOLAS is briefly discussed next. The

methodology to be used is a qualitative comparison of

the SOLAS different Chapters and the related Codes

that are influencing safety at sea. In order to provide a

structured summary, all SOLAS interrelations are

summarized in a table format.

2 DISCUSSING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE

SOLAS CONVENTION

The sinking of the Titanic in 1912 was the starting

point of the shipping industry’s international

regulatory framework, as it is known today. The first

international conference on safety at sea met two

years later in 1914, and the first version of the SOLAS

Convention was discussed. After that point, more

conferences and new versions of the SOLAS

Convention were necessary to keep the safety

regulations of the maritime transport industry

updated. The SOLAS Convention with its successive

versions has clearly become the most important of all

international treaties concerning the safety of

merchant vessels, but an expedite mechanism to put

in force the regulations was necessary to make them

mandatory to the increasing international merchant

fleet.

In the year 1948, an international conference in

Geneva adopted a Convention formally establishing

IMCO (Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative

Organization, which changed the name to IMO in

1982). The IMCO Convention entered into force in

1958, and the new Organization met for the first time

the following year. Since its beginning, in 1959, the

Organization has applied every effort to protect

human life at sea. The Organization is also

empowered to deal with administrative and legal

matters related to these purposes. IMO’s first task was

to adopt a new/updated version of SOLAS, the most

important of all treaties dealing with maritime safety;

this was achieved in 1960 [7].

IMO has used the concept of continuous

development and improvement, by keeping abreast to

the advancements in technology to ensure that

relevant measures that have been incorporated in this

Convention mitigate pre-existing or newly identified

risks. Accordingly, significant revisions took place in

1929, 1948, 1960 and 1974 that resulted into the

current International Convention for the Safety of Life

at Sea, 1974, as amended. The Convention proper

consist of thirteen (13) Articles. Its Annex consist of

fourteen (14) chapters which contain the applicable

regulation to all facets of maritime safety. SOLAS 1974

Convention, has also been amended twice in 1978,

and 1988 via protocols. After that, the IMO with the

Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) and the work of

the concerned Subcommittees continuously keep up

to date the Convention with periodic amendments.

Since 1981, SOLAS has received the impressive

number of a hundred and seventy six (176)

amendments; in addition, the 1978 SOLAS Protocol is

associated with four (4) amendments and the 1988

SOLAS Protocol with thirteen (13) amendments [8].

Amendments in the Convention can be made via

two (2) different procedures. The first one is after a

formal consideration within IMO, proposed by

member states and adopted by a two-thirds majority

of those contracting Governments present and voting

in the MSC committee; the second one is via a

dedicated conference. The SOLAS 1974 version

includes a tacit acceptance procedure which allows

that an amendment shall enter into force on a

specified date unless, before that date, objections to

the amendment are received from an agreed number

of Parties [9].

Recently (in year 2014) the MSC implemented a

four-year cycle for the entry into force of amendments

to the 1974, SOLAS Convention on the notion to take a

more proactive approach in making regulations after a

period of time and revision of the existed ones, but

always keeping in mind that exceptional

circumstances such a serious casualty can always

383

trigger the need of amendments or changes into an

instrument. It is also necessary to highlight the

influence of the International Safety Management

Code (ISM) and the International Ship and Port

Facility Security (ISPS) Code. These two specific

instruments were introduced by the IMO under the

SOLAS Convention and have played an important

role in relation to improving the current global

maritime safety and security regimes and both include

a significant portfolio of risk mitigation measures.

Nowadays, an extended number of technical

committees and subcommittees of the IMO continue

their work in creating mandatory international

standard regulations to manage safety risks within the

shipping industry and while the world is in constant

change. As an example, a set of important

amendments to the SOLAS Convention were adopted

by the 96th to 99th sessions of the MSC and entered

into force on 1 January 2020, addressing among

others: lifeboat maintenance (SOLAS regulations III/3

and III/20), subdivision and damage stability (Chapter

II/1), planning for evacuation on cruise ships,

expanding maritime satellite communications

equipment providers, etc.

Before moving to a different direction, it is

necessary to note that during the 81st session of the

MSC, the process to be followed for developing the

regulatory framework for e-navigation was agreed, by

taking well into account the expected future

technological advances in shipping. Very briefly, the

Correspondence Group on e-navigation of the

Navigation, Communications and Search and Rescue

(NCSR) sub-committee created a roadmap of the e-

navigation strategy implementation plan (SIP) in 2014.

The FSA-derived SIP aims at reaching five specific e-

navigation solutions [6]. Once formulated and

incorporated into SOLAS amendments, these

solutions will improve safety of navigation further.

The topic of e-navigation also needs additional

consideration towards integration of systems by

factoring the so called “net-centric” functionality of

modern digital equipment and systems towards

optimization of effective processing of high-quality

data and information, an issue that can further

enhance situational awareness/safety of navigation [4].

3 CODES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SOLAS

CONVENTION

The safety of maritime transportation and especially

passenger ships has been for many years one of the

main concerns of member States. The work of the IMO

in this regard with the SOLAS convention have been

significantly and very important. The visible result of

this work is the high number of Codes associated and

clearly interrelated with the SOLAS Convention. A

Code should be viewed as an integral part of the

Convention that provides the international standards

and additional details required for the topic/issue

discussed are “introduced” via the particular chapter

of the Convention. For effectively summarizing all

these, table 1 below provides the association of the

fourteen (14) Chapters within the SOLAS Convention,

the safety issues and risks addressed by each one of

them, as well as the additional Codes that are used to

elaborate on an issue covered by a SOLAS Chapter.

The adoption of a new Chapter –along with its

associated Code- for the SOLAS Convention until

recently came via the previously mentioned “reactive”

approach, following an important incident or

accident, for example disasters like the Herald of the

Free Enterprise, the Estonia and the Doña Paz.

Although with a slow pace, this approach allowed the

creation of regulations under SOLAS pertaining to

damage and intact stability, as well as paved the way

for the introduction of a safety management regime

through the International Safety Management Code

(ISM) Code in Chapter IX of SOLAS.

Table 1 is non-exhaustive; there are also other

Codes and Conventions that are equally important

with regard to particular aspects of ship safety that are

not under a direct association with SOLAS

Convention, such as:

− The International Regulations for Preventing

Collisions at Sea Convention COLREG, 1972,

which deals with navigation procedures to avoid

collisions at sea.

− The International Load Lines (LL)

Convention,1966, which is interrelated to the topic

of “seaworthiness” of ships.

− The International Convention on Tonnage

Measurement of Ships, 1969, which deals with ship

measurements for design, construction and

operations.

− The International Convention on Maritime Search

and Rescue (SAR), 1979, which puts forward a

framework of preparatory measures to rescue

persons in distress at sea, no matter where an

accident occurs.

The majority of these Convention and Codes were

created/introduced during the 60´s and 70´s, at a time

when the new tacit amendment procedure for the

SOLAS Convention had not been established yet. For

example, the Tonnage Measurement Convention has

never been amended until now; probably, the main

causes of this unfortunate situation are the absence of

the tacit amendment procedure and the reluctance of

certain stakeholders to open discussion on an issue

that they consider as a “Pandora box” [2].

On the other hand, it is true that the inclusion of

associated Codes under the SOLAS Convention has

become a “legal facilitator tool” to quickly introduce

biding standard regulations globally which are

necessary because of fast pace of changes in

technology (or, other external factors like climate

change and the opening up of polar regions for

shipping operations). For example, with a very strong

preemptive approach, the International Code for

Ships Operating in Polar Waters (Polar Code) become

mandatory under the SOLAS and MARPOL

Conventions by entering into force on 1 January 2017

and covering the full range of risks and environmental

protection measures in the waters surrounding the

two Poles.

The Polar Code is affiliated with both the SOLAS

and MARPOL Conventions, imposing rather strict

requirements for ships intended to sail in Polar

waters, with the issue of a Polar Ship Certificate that

ensures that the ship and crew are taking into account

the training requirements and the anticipated range of

operating parameters and hazards the ship may

encounter in Polar Waters clearly standing out [3].

384

Table 1. Safety Issues & Risks Addressed by the SOLAS Convention. (Created by the authors)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

SOLAS Chapter Safety Issues & Risks Addressed Additional Codes

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

I Surveys in relation to different types of ships

General Provisions Control of ships in ports

II-1

Construction-subdivision Subdivision of ships in watertight compartments

and stability, machinery Watertight integrity and bilge pumping arrangements

and electrical installations Stability requirements

Machinery and electrical installations requirements

Steering gear requirements

II-2

Fire protection, fire Fire safety provisions for all ships and specific provisions for International Fire Safety Systems

detection, and fire passenger ships, cargo ships, and tankers. Code (FSS)

extinction

III

Life-saving appliances and Requirements for lifeboats, rescue boats, life jackets according Life-Saving Appliance (LSA)

Arrangements to the type of ship Code

Radio-communications GMDSS equipment

Radiocommunication services ashore

Radiocommunication equipment's onboard

Safety of navigation Navigation safety services

Maintenance of meteorological services for ships, ice patrol

service, routing of ships, search and rescue services.

Mandatory use of VDRs and AIS

Carriage of cargoes Requirements for stowage and securing of cargo or cargo International Grain Code

units (except liquids and gases in bulk)

VII

Carriage of dangerous Regulations for the carriage of dangerous goods in packaged International Maritime

goods form. Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code

Construction and equipment of ships carrying dangerous International Bulk Chemical

liquid chemicals in bulk Code (IBC Code)

Construction and equipment of ships carrying liquefied gases International Gas Carrier Code)

in bulk and gas carriers IGC Code)

VIII

Nuclear ships Requirements for nuclear-powered ships and radiation Code of Safety for Nuclear

hazards Merchant Ships

Management for the safe Safety Management Systems on board. International Safety

operation of ships Management (ISM) Code

Safety measures for Requirements for safety of the high-speed craft International Code of Safety for

high-speed craft High-Speed Craft (HSC Code)

XI-1

Special measures to Authorization of recognized organizations. Maritime Casualty Investigation

enhance maritime safety Obligations to investigate maritime casualties. Code

Port State control operational requirements

XI-2

Special measures to International ship and port facilities and requirements for International Ship and Port

enhance maritime security security. Facilities Security Code (ISPS

Code)

XII

Additional safety measures Structural requirements for bulk carriers

for bulk carriers

XIII

Verification of compliance IMO's Member State Audit Scheme

XIV

Safety measures for ships Measures for ships engaged in polar navigation International Code for Ships

operating in polar waters Operating in Polar Waters (the

Polar Code)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

4 THE NEED OF NEW INTERNATIONAL

REGULATIONS

As sea-going vessels were increasing in size and

complexity, it also become obvious that coordinated

efforts to ensure the safety at sea were needed [9]. The

on-going development of technology applications has

indeed helped to make available better equipment

and systems both on ships and in ports. Technology

in support of the conduct of navigation has been a

mainstream issue within IMO; at the same time,

regulations and guidelines to increase the safety

standards each time a new technology application

appeared was also the main path of action.

The shipping industry is moving fast towards a

digital world; initiatives like “e-navigation” and

“smart navigation” are now considered as the right

tool towards the support/provision of vast quantities

385

of data and digital infrastructure for the benefit of

maritime safety, while at the same time increasing the

efficiency of maritime transport [6]. The E-navigation

initiative started in 2005, aiming to increase the safety

of navigation by modern technology in the fields of

on-board navigation systems, shore side vessel traffic

information management and communications

infrastructure applied for SOLAS ships [1]. Smart

navigation, on the other hand, is a Korean project that

includes both non-SOLAS and SOLAS ships.

As a rather self-explanatory example of the

necessity to increase regulations with the appearance

and ongoing introduction of “more” and “new”

technologies that are supporting better the Safety of

Navigation, table 2 below is summarizing all those

factors that have been addressed under Chapter V

(Safety of Navigation) of the SOLAS Convention:

Furthermore, it is a well-known fact that safe and

effective conduct of navigation is at the core of the

seafaring profession; the safety of navigation (under

all conditions) is also at the epicenter (and ultimate

purpose) of the SOLAS Convention. There are

numerous technology applications that have been

introduced by IMO by using SOLAS as the main

facilitator: from the introduction of Radars and the

various Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSSs)

after the 80's, to the mandatory use of voice data

recorder (VDR) nowadays, as well as the very

positive impact on the issue of situational awareness

via the electronic chart display and information

system (ECDIS) and the automatic identification

system (AIS).

The use of all these advanced systems onboard

ships and in base-landed monitoring centers are

regulated by the IMO and have helped to improve

reliability, resilience, and integrity of bridge

equipment. Finally, it is clear that search and rescue

services are very critical when referring to the issue of

safety of navigation; the IMO’s intensive work in this

specific domain has helped to develop a worldwide

organization for communication and co-ordination

for the rescue of persons in distress at sea. All types

of ships -but mostly passenger ships, because of the

large number of people onboard in case of an

emergency- have benefited significantly from these

services over the course the time.

5 FUTURE CHALLENGES FOR IMO REGARDING

THE SOLAS CONVENTION

Cooperation is crucial for addressing new challenges;

in the last few years, the IMO has been leading a

Harmonization Group in Data Modelling (HGDM)

with other international organizations such as the

World Meteorological Organization (WMO), the

International Hydrographic Organization (IHO), the

International Maritime Pilots Association (IMPA),

and the International Association of Marine Aids to

Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) in

order to integrate and facilitate the development of

sixteen (16) Maritime Services defined as Maritime

Services Portfolio (MSP). By integrating all these

services into one single portfolio, the data for safety

of navigation will be available 24/7 for seafarers and

external sources. Besides, these services will be

delivered, responding directly to the specific needs of

each ship, increasing the safety of navigation

significantly all around the world with more

standardized, available, and accurate services.

Furthermore, the ongoing trend of digitalization

and the issue of autonomy within the shipping

industry are strongly affecting the current portfolio of

regulations. The extensive use of artificial intelligence

in ships should be expected in the future; certain

“optimization” tasks probably provide the best

indicative example. This issue should be

appropriately regulated to determine who exactly is

responsible for what, in case of a future accident.

Table 2. Factors addressed under Chapter V (Safety of Navigation) of the SOLAS Convention. (Source: [9])

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

SOLAS Regulation Short Title Factor addressed

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Chapter V Reg 4 & 5 Navigational, Meteorological Early warning of risks of weather and navigation

services and Warnings

Chapter V Reg 7 Search and Rescue Safety of life in case of rescue of persons in distress at sea

or coast

Chapter V Reg 9 Hydrographic services Charts and publications updated to avoid navigation

incidents

Chapter V Reg 10 & 11 Ship´s routing and reporting Safety of life at sea, safety and efficiency of navigation,

systems protection of marine environment

Chapter V Reg 12 & 13 Vessel Traffic Services Ship traffic management and collision avoidance

Aids to Navigation

Chapter V Reg 14 Ship Manning Safe Manning (Human Factor)

Chapter V Reg 15 Principles related to ship design, Ergonomics of bridge design

equipment and procedures

Chapter V Reg 15 Maintenance of navigational Planned Maintenance System (PMS), also addressed in the

equipment ISM Code

Chapter V Reg 19 Carriage requirements of Mandatory Navigational equipment list

navigational equipment

Chapter V Reg 19-1 Long-range identification and Locating remotely the position of ships

tracking of ships

Chapter V Reg 19 Voyage Data Recorders “Black box” to access data recorded from various bridge

equipment for incident investigation

Chapter V Reg 33 Distress situations: obligations Master obligation to provide assistance in distress situation

and procedures

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

386

Automation is nothing new, but it can be viewed

as a continuous process that is creating far reaching

implications for the maritime sector [10]. Automation

can help to increase safety by taking advantage of the

so called “smart positioning” technology applications

or real-time dynamic positioning predictors or even

combine the previous with Artificial Intelligence

applications support in order to predict “behavior” of

nearby vessels to avoid collisions. However, a

question is still standing out: Will an “autonomous

system” be as safe as one system that is currently

operated by a human? Without a rigid regulatory

framework in place, the answer is no. Therefore, new

regulations will be needed to ensure the safety of

navigation in a common collaborative environment

where “regular” manned and unmanned/autonomous

ships will be operating together. There is a follow up

question that should be answered with future

research: Changing and/or updating the various

chapters of the SOLAS Convention and certain

existing instruments will be enough, or creating (from

scratch) a new specific Instrument and associated

Codes that will cover the issue of autonomous ships

should be considered?

6 CONCLUSIONS

The SOLAS Convention, which has its origin a couple

of decades before the IMO’s establishment itself is a

constantly evolving legislation. This adaptive

approach of this specific legal instrument has

contributed towards ensuring the safety of life at sea

and at the same time facilitate the Organization to

“uphold its leadership role as the global regulator of

shipping, promote greater recognition of the sector's

importance and enable the advancement of shipping,

whilst addressing the challenges of continued

developments in technology and world trade; and the

need to meet the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable

Development”.

During this more than a century of existence and

continuous improvement of the SOLAS Convention,

wide-ranging safety risks have been addressed via

this specific Instrument, working in unison with

certain relevant Codes, with the International

Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships

and for Pollution Prevention (ISM Code) clearly

standing out. It is obvious that the regulatory

framework that IMO has created over the course of

time and implemented via a rigorous approach plays

today a very crucial role in the effective functioning of

the maritime industry by determining the numerous

safety requirements and providing the necessary

operational guidelines and standardization

framework.

It is clear that the SOLAS Convention holds a

pivotal role for maritime safety by helping to decrease

accidents and/or loss of lives at sea. It is also true that

risks associated with the conduct of shipping

operations will never disappear, but bringing those

risks under control via appropriate mitigation

measures can have a really positive impact. After all,

IMO is a forum of collaboration and ensuring the

safety of hips is a complex process that depends on all

stakeholders involved in the maritime industry sector;

it is not only a responsibility of the Captain and crew,

but it is under the influence of IMO’s member States

flag states, coastal states, port states and the respective

port state control activities, ship-owners, etc. to name

just a few.

On a positive notion, the work of the IMO in

relation to addressing the main risks involved in

shipping operations seem to be on-going and restless

over the course of time. And to make things even

better, nowadays, the support of member States and

other relevant organizations is taking full effect.

However, new regulations and amendments should

be expected both in the near and mid-term future.

Last, but not least, it is the issue of MASS that will

most probably have a quite disruptive effect in the

current regulatory framework and intensive research

efforts will be needed to evaluate and clearly describe

all the necessary “adjustments” and “changes” that

will ensure a safe operating environment for vessels at

sea.

REFERENCES

1. Burmeister, H., Bruhn, W., Rødseth, Ø J., & Porathe, T.

(2014). Autonomous Unmanned Merchant Vessel and its

Contribution towards the e-Navigation Implementation:

The MUNIN Perspective. International Journal of E-

Navigation and Maritime Economy, 1, 1-

13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enavi.2014.12.002

2. Dalaklis, D.: Safety and Security in Shipping Operations.

In: Visvikis, I.D. and Panayides, P.M. (eds.) Shipping

Operations Management. pp. 197–213 Springer

International Publishing, Cham (2017).

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62365-8_9.

3. Dalaklis, D., Baxevani, E.: Maritime transport in the

Arctic after the introduction of the Polar Code: a

discussion of the new training needs. In: Sustainable

Shipping in a Changing Arctic. pp. 383–398 Springer

(2015).

4. Dalaklis, D., Katsoulis, G., Kitada, M., Schröder-

Hinrichs, J.-U., Ölcer, A.I.: A “Net-Centric” conduct of

navigation and ship management. Maritime Technology

and Research. 2, 2, 90–107 (2020).

https://doi.org/10.33175/mtr.2020.227028.

5. International Maritime Organization: Consolidated Text

of the International Convention for the Safety of Life at

Sea, 1974, and its Protocol of 1988: Articles. Annexes and

Certificates. , London (2012).

6. International Maritime Organization: E-Navigation

Strategy Implementation Plan - Update 1. , London

(2018).

7. International Maritime Organization: History of SOLAS

(The International Convention for the Safety of Life at

Sea). , London (2020).

8. International Maritime Organization: Status of IMO

Treaties. , London (2021).

9. Joseph, A., Dalaklis, D.: The international convention for

the safety of life at sea: highlighting interrelations of

measures towards effective risk mitigation. null. 5, 1, 1–

11 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/25725084.2021.1880766.

10. Ma, S.: Economics of Maritime Business. Routledge

(2020).

11. World Maritime University: Transport 2040:

Automation, Technology, Employment - The Future of

Work. Reports. (2019).

http://dx.doi.org/10.21677/itf.20190104.