817

1 INTRODUCTION

Compromises on safety [37], inadequate fatigue

mitigation standards [2], and mental health troubles

[15, 19], are some of the difficulties commonly

reported by seafarers. In the wake of the COVID-19

crisis, the maritime news also reported: “Hunger

strikes, crews unpaid and abandoned, rumours of

suicides but no obligation to report them. Shipping

must be better than this.” [5] In response to the crew

change crisis, in February 2021, the Neptune

Declaration on Seafarer Wellbeing and Crew Change

was signed to protect the welfare of seafarers. On 01

March 2021, Maritime UK launched a mental health

pledge including the need to also enhance wellbeing.

This recent activity underlines the urgent need to offer

decent working conditions to seafarers, promote their

wellbeing and respect their right to life [38]. The

maritime industry has in place regulatory instruments

such as the Maritime Labour Convention 2006, as

Seafarers’ Wellbeing or Business, a Complex Paradox

of the Industry

B. Tetemadze, M. Carrera Arce, R. Baumler & I. Bartusevičiene

World Maritime University, Malmoe, Sweden

ABSTRACT: The research is an insightful exploration into what contributes to the deterioration of seafarers’

wellbeing. It unveils the determinant factors and their impact on wellbeing, further exploring the perception

and awareness levels of the maritime society on the issue. Moreover, the effectiveness of main regulatory

instruments to address seafarers’ wellbeing is analysed and discussed.

Qualitative methodology based on semi-structured interviews and content analysis was applied. Twenty-six

active seafarers of different nationalities and working on different types of vessels, one pilot and 11 influential

maritime stakeholders of the industry were interviewed.

The literature review shows that wellbeing can only be fully understood when considering its physical, mental

and social dimensions, and emphasizing its significance the workplace. However, the study indicates that

despite high awareness of such dimensions and determinant factors of wellbeing, the psychosocial working

conditions provided by shipowners onboard ships are not in full compliance with a holistic view of wellbeing.

Moreover, shipping companies lack promotion and training on awareness of mental health and wellbeing issues

onboard ships and how to handle them, as the existing safety management system is based on incident and

accident reduction principles. Results expose excessive workload and lack of sleep (as a result of reduced

manning) as major contributors to fatigue further causing deterioration of seafarers’ wellbeing. Other revealed

factors include long contracts, lack of shore leave, unavailability of recreational facilities and internet

connection, lack of onboard socialising, fear of job loss and stress/anxiety. The regulatory instrument MLC 2006

sets out basic seafarers’ rights but does not fully capture their wellbeing to its fullest.

Seafarers’ wellbeing is unlikely to improve unless awareness of the concept of wellbeing is installed within the

SMS and all of its dimensions are well addressed in future amendments of the regulatory instruments.

http://www.transnav.eu

the International Journal

on Marine Navigation

and Safety of Sea Transportation

Volume 15

Number 4

December 2021

DOI: 10.12716/1001.15.04.14

818

amended (MLC, 2006) and fatigue management

guidelines from the International Maritime

Organisation (IMO). However, what constitutes the

psychosocial working and living environment for a

ship’s crew [28] or what defines seafarers’ wellbeing

in such an environment are aspects not properly

addressed by these international regulatory

instruments or national legislations.

Numerous studies reveal that seafaring is still

associated with a multitude of mental and physical

stressors [21]. A recent study by Yale University

reports dangerous levels of depression, anxiety and

risk of suicide among seafarers [18]. Another recent

study from Cardiff University also reveals that

seafarers are at a high risk of depression and anxiety

and indicates seafarers’ loneliness, lack of shore leave,

fear of job loss and separation from family as main

contributors to their deteriorating mental health [33].

Lack of sleep and fatigue have been reported as

increasing issues among seafarers as per project

MARTHA [17]. The Seafarers’ Happiness Index, as

measured by the charity organization Mission to

Seafarers, indicates constant fluctuation of the average

score over time, and the latest report (Q4, 2020) has

revealed that seafarers’ current experiences at sea are

the worst in decades.

The results of these studies indicate that the

regulations and policies that govern seafarers’

wellbeing either lack the intended effectiveness or

lack proper implementation or both. This raises a few

important questions that the current research aims to

investigate: What are the main determinant factors of

the seafarers’ wellbeing and how they are monitored?

How do seafarers perceive their own wellbeing and

how is it perceived by other relevant industry

stakeholders? What is the general awareness of

wellbeing in the industry and how consistent are its

supporting regulatory mechanisms?

Finding answers to these questions is not an easy

task in a heavily regulated international and multi-

national industry. Nevertheless, reinforcing the

knowledge of what exactly constitutes seafarers’

wellbeing could shed light on the ultimate research

question - ‘why does seafaring as an occupation suffer

from mental health deterioration?’ Stemming from

this question, this paper first explores through a

literature review what wellbeing is and how it can be

fully assessed and understood. Secondly, the paper

explores the main determinants of wellbeing and

investigates the level of its perception and awareness

among seafarers and maritime stakeholders. Further

revision of the regulatory instruments governing

seafarers’ wellbeing is also considered.

2 WHAT WELLBEING REALLY IS AND ITS

SIGNIFICANCE IN WORKPLACE

The World Health Organization’s (WHO) constitution

of 1948 defines health as: ‘A state of complete

physical, social and mental well-being, and not merely

the absence of disease or infirmity.’ [8] Such a holistic

definition connects health to wellbeing and considers

mental aspects as an integral part of health; that is,

“there is not health without mental health”. In

shipping, the certificate of seafarers’ medical fitness is

mainly issued through examination of physical

dimension only, which serves as the evidence

attesting to their optimal wellbeing throughout their

work contract period. However, the only viable way

to maintain seafarers’ wellbeing at an optimal level,

particularly within the unique psychosocial

workplace of the ship, is by not paying attention

solely to the physical but also the mental and social

dimensions of health [31]. Disregard of any of the

three dimensions will lead to failure to maintain the

quality of wellbeing [30]. As the International Labour

Organization (ILO) declares, the work environment

must be safe and healthy, and conditions of work

must be in full compliance with the workers’

wellbeing and dignity [27]. That is where workplace

wellbeing obtains its significance, addressing

protection and promotion of health and wellbeing of

workers [32]. Therefore, organizations have the

responsibility to create a healthy working

environment where all possible hazards and risks

threatening the wellbeing of the employee are

recognized and eliminated through the application of

preventive and protective measures [29].

3 MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study has an exploratory and interpretive nature

based on semi-structured interviews. The interview

questions -structured separately for seafarers and

other maritime stakeholders-were based on three

main themes: 1) Determinant factors of wellbeing, 2)

Awareness and perception of wellbeing, and 3)

Regulations addressing wellbeing.

Open questions were used to explore the topics,

except for the topic on determinant factors of

wellbeing for which 2 additional closed-ended

questions on a 5-point Likert scale were used: ‘how

often are you affected by the factor?’ focusing on the

frequency of occurrence and ‘how does the given

wellbeing determinant affect you?‘ focusing on the

intensity of the effect.

Ethical principles were ensured by respecting the

anonymity and confidentiality of interviewees by

signing informed consent form approved by the

World Maritime University. The validity and

reliability of the research were ensured by accuracy of

the collection, transcription and interpretation of the

data. Credibility was ensured by involving seafarers,

as well as experts from shipping companies, and on

maritime legislation and psychology.

The researcher used non-probability convenience

and snowball sampling methods to select the sample

of study. As the study is based on grounded theory of

qualitative methodology, recommended number of

interviews between 20 and 30 was selected (22) in

compliance with the theory of saturation. It is when

obtaining of no new information was noticed from

last several interviews (23) and collected data reached

the point of the diminishing returns (4).

LinkedIn was used for reaching out to the potential

participants. Video calls on Zoom and Skype were

held with the final participants. Both options allowed

audio and video recording, which was essential for

819

further data processing. For the data analysis process,

the software ATLAS.ti, version 8 was chosen.

In total 26 active seafarers of 15 nationalities,

different ranks, and serving on board different types

of vessels, 1 pilot and 11 representatives of various

maritime organizations were interviewed within 6

months (January-July 2020). The selection criteria for

maritime stakeholders was based on the influence of

their voice with regard to ongoing discussions in the

maritime industry affecting seafarers’ wellbeing. This

included shipping companies; NGOs, both

representing industry and seafarers’ interests;

charities; companies offering welfare and health care

services to seafarers, and psychologists and medical

consultants.

4 RESULTS

4.1 Sample description

The sociodemographic characteristics of the

participant seafarers are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Participants’ sociodemographic characteristics –

Seafarers

Table 2 shows the sociodemographic

characteristics of the participant maritime

stakeholders.

Table 2. Participants’ sociodemographic characteristics –

Maritime stakeholders

4.2 Determinants of seafarers’ wellbeing

Figure 1 shows the main determinant factors of

seafarers’ wellbeing and their occurrence frequency as

experienced regardless of rank or type of ship served

on. Most of the factors were found to be interrelated,

one leading to the others.

Figure 1. Determinants of wellbeing revealed by the

question ‘how often are you affected by the factor?’

Lack of sleep (n=16), lack of access to the

recreational activities (n=16), lack of access to internet

connection (n=15), lack of interaction among crew

(n=11) and lack of shore leave (n=9) were identified as

major contributors to deteriorated wellbeing as well

as causing stress and anxiety among crew.

When lack of sleep is explored more deeply, work

schedule, night-time work and stormy weather were

named as the main causes of sleep deprivation and

fatigue among seafarers. Able seaman-27 admitted:

“You can be on your off-work time, but then ship

arrives in port and your sleep is interrupted to carry

out the operations. It causes a lot of fatigue to me in a

820

way that I lose my concentration gradually and affects

my mood very negatively. Then it develops insomnia

because you cannot get back to sleep that easily.”

Master-1 stated: “Actions and decisions of crew are

vastly dependent on how much sleep they have had

being affected by so many various factors such as bad

weather or unexpected operations and that’s all

beyond normality.”

Regarding recreational facilities and equipment

onboard as requested by MLC, 2006, they were either

absent or installed in a limited way, mostly onboard

cargo ships. Master-13 explained: “There is a small

gym on board, but it is small. I mean, there are a few

pieces of equipment in a limited space” and 3rd

Officer-22 admitted: “There is basically no gym

onboard the ship and those interested only can do

exercises in their cabins with onboard manufactured

tools.”

With regard to internet connection, seafarers find

themselves heavily engaged with connecting to shore

through the internet, even during their limited rest

hours, as a way to cope with isolation and stress. As

the results indicate, various companies have various

policies on the provision of internet on board. Some

have expensive prepaid cards and others unlimited

access, but most of the respondents reported lack of

access to internet onboard. Two officers commented

on the availability of internet on their respective ships:

The 2nd Officer-3 noted: “In my last company we had

no internet onboard, and it was the main reason for

feeling isolated from the world affecting my

wellbeing negatively”, while the 3

Officer-4

explained, “There’s a WIFI connection onboard, but

you have to buy a card for connection, which is quite

expensive. Besides, there’s only a very limited

connection that it offers, only for brief chatting and

then data expires very quickly.”

Lack of shore leave as the next determinant factor

was found to have been experienced by all seafarers,

causing them to feel isolated at times. Workload was

further named as the main contributing reason to lack

of shore leave. Tugboat mate-7 admitted: “During my

5 months long contract I managed to go ashore only

four times, mainly because of the workload.” Master-

14 said: “I have always been limited with going

ashore, managed only two times during my last 3

months long contract.” And most notably as per

3rdEngineer-11: “Never…I never went ashore during

4 months stay onboard, never had a chance.”

Concerning social interaction, most of the

respondents (n=18) admitted they would rather sleep

than sacrifice some of their free time for extra

activities including onboard interaction with one

another. 3rdOfficer-4 said: “I try to get rest

minimizing onboard socializing as much as possible.

Sometimes I am craving for talking with the others,

but mostly fatigued and I’d rather go and sleep.”

“Crew get so tired from work that most of the time all

they need is to sleep, no space for socializing but it is

not good for wellbeing, because talking and sharing

with others are very essential, especially after a very

stressful work.” (3rd Officer-5).

The exploration of other determinant factors and

the extent to which they affected seafarers indicates

that long contract, bureaucracy, commercial pressure,

inspections, vibration, lack of mentorship and noise

and stormy weather also have extreme negative

effects (Figure 2).

Long contract duration (n=18) was found to be a

factor causing significant impact on seafarers’

wellbeing. Crew nationality and type of ship mostly

determined contract duration. Those seafarers from

Asia and employed onboard tanker ships experienced

longer stays onboard. As the 2

officer-2 from the

product tanker explained:

“Long contract is like a heavy weight on shoulders,

you think it’s not going to end. I do not feel happy

anymore, rarely smile and I have to do my job, which

I do not enjoy anymore. It evolves depression, losing

interest and appetite for food. I stop socializing with

the crew developing isolation, mostly spending time

in my cabin.”

Figure 2. Determinants of wellbeing revealed by the

question ‘how does the factor affect you?’

“I usually stay home two and half months, not

longer. It is never enough to be fully recovered from

the stress gained in the previous contract. It’s because

of my company, they don’t let me stay any longer at

home as they think I might lose my proficiency to the

procedures quickly if I stay longer.” (3rd Officer-5).

Further analysis also indicates that some of these

factors place an even heavier burden on seafarers’

stress from tanker ships, mainly because of

commercial aspects such as pressure from the ship

operator, ship inspections and fast turnaround in

ports with reduced manning levels. Two officers

explained these pressures: “I think the biggest

problem in the industry right now is the commercial

pressure and the paperwork from the company”

(Chief Officer-9). “When the ship is underway in

average, I sleep 7h but in port it’s never more than 4h,

mainly because of watch schedule 6 on/off and then

never ending all sorts of inspections.” (3rd Officer-22)

4.3 Perception and awareness of wellbeing. Seafarers vs

maritime stakeholders

The level of general understanding of the concept of

wellbeing was the same for both seafarers and

industry stakeholders. Their perception was strongly

associated with the determinant factors emerging

821

from physical, mental and social dimensions causing

severe fatigue and mental health issues.

A psychologist from the maritime sector

elaborated his understanding of wellbeing as:

“Through the holistic lens it includes physical, mental,

social, intellectual and religious dimensions. Physical

wellbeing is quite understandable by all, but mental

or emotional not really.” He further stated that mental

health was not as well embraced by seafarers as other

dimensions of wellbeing, mainly because of lack of

knowledge of their rights: “When I interview

seafarers, they put a smile on their face when we

touch mental issues or disorders not really realizing

its force and meaning. At the same time, it's crucially

important for seafarers to understand that one part of

their wellbeing is their intellectual capacity which will

include their knowledge about their contractual

rights, about organizations who would be able to

support them, also their knowledge about skills, social

interaction abilities, which is a trainable thing.”

One maritime charity organization’s representative

considered wellbeing as the provision of general

conditions at the living and working site, where all

factors affecting seafarers’ mental health can be

identified. He added that seafarers are more

vulnerable to poor mental health than those ashore

due to a large number of determinant factors at sea.

The representative of another maritime charity

organization stressed that seafarers’ wellbeing needed

more acknowledgement beyond their occupational

limits when he stated: “To me seafarers’ wellbeing is

associated with the acknowledgment of the fact that

they are not only occupational beings, but also social,

emotional, intellectual, physical and spiritual beings.”

Further analysis was made to expose industry’s

awareness of determinant factors and how they were

perceived. Even though several of the factors

mentioned by both parties were the same,

stakeholders tend to possess more knowledge about

elements contributing to deterioration of seafarers’

wellbeing with clear and deeper understanding about

the root causes than the seafarers themselves. Figure 3

shows the 24 factors identified by the stakeholders,

who mentioned excessive work, being away from

family and fear of job loss as the most determinant

among others.

Figure 3. Factors causing deterioration of seafarers’

wellbeing as per the maritime stakeholders

The industry tends to be more aware of the

concept of wellbeing and its importance than seafarers

are. This is primarily connected with the lack of

seafarer training on the subject as per respondents’

answers. The manager of a private company offering

mental health support to seafarers claimed that:

“Well, there are online training courses for seafarers

how to handle sleep and fatigue, but in many cases

companies have not implemented them as mandatory

tool within their SMS. It is simply not their focus.”

This is also stressed on the comment by the

international trade association admitting that the

current ISM code provides more safety focused

exercises rather than awareness raising training: “Yes

seafarers are trained in many aspects, but this training

is more like safety focused exercise. There is no

leadership from top chief executive who is not really

showing how to walk a walk and how to talk a talk.”

Moreover, similar training only captures more

physical accident avoidance related aspects, rather

than integrating mental and social issues linked to

wellbeing: “I think in terms of trainings integrating of

all the things, I would say physical thing does carry

weight, like safety and accidents avoidance, but when

it comes to mental health, I think it's not due

importance still not given to it.” (International trade

union).

4.4 Awareness of the regulatory instruments and their

effectiveness

The majority of seafarers and maritime stakeholders

demonstrated a good level of recognition of

regulatory mechanisms, mainly the MLC 2006 and

particularly regulations on hours of work and rest. It

is interesting to note that seafarers from oil and

chemical tankers demonstrated much higher

understanding and knowledge of such regulations

than those from all other types of ships. This

considerable comprehension was found to be related

to higher standards of safety and environmental

protection for such ships but at the expense of a much

increased workload and lack of sleep with decreased

manning levels as a root cause. However, exploration

on how effectively the regulations influence wellbeing

indicated that the majority of seafarers considered

these regulations to be ineffective. As Master-1

explained: “It’s a very difficult balance because the

regulations do not match with the reality and then this

is a problem and then the only viable way to survive

and carry on with the ships’ normal operations is just

violating the regulations.”.

None of the other maritime stakeholders

confirmed the ineffectiveness of the regulations but

rather mentioned improper implementation within

the companies. The welfare organization’s

representative elaborated that: “In most cases

companies don't have policies and some companies

have. And I would say in general there's a few

companies that have mental health policies. For

example, wellbeing is part of their policy, but it's very

limited. They have it in place but not in its complete

state.”

The same respondent highlighted misconceptions

of wellbeing, which is often incorrectly installed

within shipping company policies: “There's a problem

in terms of a conceptual framework from which

wellbeing is understood. I think it's clear that

822

wellbeing is much more than just the absence of

illness. But, there is no current framework that really

assists in explaining comprehensively what wellbeing

is in terms of international regulations.”

The representative from an international trade

association emphasized the company’s responsibility

to establish sufficient tools onboard their managed

ships to set acceptable norms of wellbeing: “The

company should have policies, but they don’t.

Because the regulations are just those a framework,

international framework. A good responsible

employer will have all those policies in place what is

and what is not acceptable on board which would

clearly set norms of facilitating seafarers’ wellbeing.”

The same respondent noted that companies tend to

develop their own policies on wellbeing, not as a

separate tool but rather integrated with the ship’s

safety management system. “I will say 90% of them

have a policy on wellbeing integrated into the safety

management system.” (International trade

association).

Other issues raised about the effect of the

governing mechanisms were related with the failure

of maritime society to seriously embrace seafarers’

wellbeing, and the failure of MLC 2006 to fully

capture all of its dimensions. As per the international

trade union: “I think we need more time to fully

implemented MLC 2006, not in terms of well-being

only but in general. I think the wellbeing is an issue,

which is sometime not taken seriously by everybody,

because we think it's part of life, but mental health is

an issue that needs to be fully addressed.”

5 DISCUSSION

The results of this study are consistent with the idea

that shipowners have obtained some ‘freedom’ to

create a working environment for seafarers with

minimum regulations under their own favourable

terms [1]. Fear of job loss among seafarers mostly

caused by the ‘hire and fire’ regime is a good indicator

of this, as well as long periods of work without proper

rest, long contracts, short leave, lack of recreational

tools as per MLC 2006, unavailability of shore leave

policy and lack of internet connectivity, all leading to

stress / anxiety and isolation [13]. Commercial

routines and the fast turnaround of ships in ports

cannot be modified but as the results (particularly

from tanker ships) reveal, reduced manning levels is

the core factor contributing to lack of sleep, hectic

work schedule, fatigue and reduced shore leave [16,

35].

The industry’s awareness of the deteriorated

wellbeing onboard ships and its unreadiness to deal

with it - especially during global pandemic times -

gives a reason to believe that seafarers are mainly

perceived as a necessary ‘workforce.’ High

expectations are put on their job performance, but

their role remains undervalued [6, 20]. Moreover,

despite the world’s increased mental distress, ships

continue to sail and business is progressing

uninterrupted [11, 34]. Seafarers’ lower perception of

wellbeing-related issues serves as evidence that

companies do not promote awareness by

incorporating appropriate training tools into their

SMS, which prevents seafarers from embracing their

wellbeing to its fullest [3]. The fact that existing SMS

training material is mainly focused on minimizing

incident and accident occurrence creates a complex

paradox that ultimately the maritime industry is

concerned with the seafarers’ wellbeing only up to a

level sufficient for running a safe and successful

business. This could be the main answer to the

question ‘why does seafaring as an occupation suffer

from deteriorated wellbeing conditions?’

Additionally, MLC 2006 provisions lack necessary

elements to capture the concept of wellbeing because

the results reveal that seafarers’ wellbeing is still

compromised in many aspects [7, 10]. Results also

indicate that compliance with regulatory mechanisms

seems to obtain significance only when it contributes

to the success of the business. This is supported by the

study’s results showing that those from tanker ships

demonstrate much better comprehension of MLC 2006

provisions than those from other types of ships. The

global pandemic exposed the weakness of this labour

regulatory instrument when the maritime industry

faced increased difficulties handling issues related to

seafarers’ wellbeing [9]. Maritime charities take the

role of offering various service tools to both raise

awareness and help seafarers to cope with their

mental distress [12, 25].

The research has exposed major issues related to

seafarers’ wellbeing, which should be the subject of

deeper examination for its further improvement. First,

modification of company culture is essential, which

should recognize the influence of the determinant

factors on seafarers’ wellbeing and should incorporate

it within the SMS of ships [26]. This can be achieved

through installing mandatory awareness enhancing

training tools, which would also contribute to

reduction of the mental health stigma. Second,

seafarers should be educated and trained so that the

fear of being blacklisted can be eliminated and a

common healthy vision towards mental health would

be promoted. Such a vision should be regulated, thus

incorporated within the MLC 2006 in its upcoming

amendments [14, 24, 36]. Third, facilitating channels

of transparent and direct communication between

companies’ top management and crews would give

opportunities for sharing wellbeing related issues and

promote effective worker representation and

consultation on occupational safety and health [10].

Finally, the development of programs by the

companies engaging seafarers into onboard

interaction must also be taken into the consideration,

enabling them to see themselves as human beings

rather than as just a ‘workforce’.

6 CONCLUSION

The study has exposed the complexity of the issues

related with the seafarers’ wellbeing, which have been

experienced throughout the long existence of this

occupation. However, it seems the maritime society

recognizes its importance only when seafarers fail to

perform their duties and tasks due to increased

burden on their mental or physical health, resulting in

a threat to the safety of the business. In the

823

multicultural, international and non- transparent

shipping industry, seafarers remain vulnerable and

submissive to an unfavourable working and living

environment. At the same time, regulatory

instruments fail to fully address the issues stemming

from their deteriorated wellbeing and, with absolutely

no choice, the seafarers’ voice remains unheard.

Global pandemic issues caused some jolt to the

governments and shipping companies to take actions

to facilitate the wellbeing of seafarers, but it seems to

have an intermittent nature from state to state. Finally,

it is important to give increased awareness and wider

recognition to seafarers’ wellbeing in order to

introduce seafaring to the world not only as a

necessary workforce, but also as human beings

deserving much better living and working conditions.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank the seafarers and the

maritime stakeholders who took part in the study.

REFERENCES

1. Bakar Hamad, H.: Flag of Convenience Practice: A

Threat to Maritime Safety and Security. jsshr. 1, 8, 208–

230 (2016).

2. Baumler, R., Bhatia, B.S., Kitada, M.: Ship first:

Seafarers’ adjustment of records on work and rest hours.

Marine Policy. 104186 (2020).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104186.

3. Bhattacharya, S.: The effectiveness of the ISM Code: A

qualitative enquiry. Marine Policy. 36, 2, 528–535 (2012).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2011.09.004.

4. Bowen, G.A.: Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation

concept: A research note. Qualitative research. 8:1, 137-

152 (2008).

5. Bush, D.: From the News Desk: Seafarers in crisis,

https://lloydslist.maritimeintelligence.informa.com/LL11

35936/From-the-News-Desk-Seafarers-in-crisis, last

accessed 2021/05/17.

6. Corbett, A.: Sea Coral rescue spat shows why seafarers

need a legal safety net | TradeWinds,

https://www.tradewindsnews.com/regulation/sea-coral-

rescue-spat-shows-why-seafarers-need-a-legal-safety-

net/2-1-959632, last accessed 2021/05/17.

7. Exarchopoulos, G., Zhang, P., Pryce-Roberts, N., Zhao,

M.: Seafarers’ welfare: A critical review of the related

legal issues under the Maritime Labour Convention

2006. Marine Policy. 93, 62–70 (2018).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.04.005.

8. G.A. Res. 217 (III) A: Universal Declaration of Human

Rights. (1948).

9. Graham, C.: Why the MLC is failing as a regulatory

response to the Covid-19 global pandemic,

https://splash247.com/why-the-mlc-is-failing-as-a-

regulatory-response-to-the-covid-19-global-pandemic/,

last accessed 2021/05/17.

10. Graham, C.A., Walters, D.: Representation of seafarers’

occupational safety and health: Limits of the Maritime

Labour Convention. The Economic and Labour Relations

Review. 1035304620981374 (2020).

https://doi.org/10.1177/1035304620981374.

11. Grey, M.: Seafarers demand respect for the life-critical

services they have tirelessly provided during the

pandemic, https://www.missiontoseafarers.org/the-

sea/the-invisible-workforce, last accessed 2021/05/17.

12. Hand, M.: Charities continue providing seafarer welfare

amid coronavirus restrictions, https://www.seatrade-

maritime.com/ship-operations/charities-continue-

providing-seafarer-welfare-amid-coronavirus-

restrictions, last accessed 2021/05/17.

13. International Transport Workers’ Federation: Flags of

convenience,

https://www.itfglobal.org/en/sector/seafarers/flags-of-

convenience, last accessed 2021/05/17.

14. Iversen, R.T.B.: The Mental Health of Seafarers.

International Maritime Health. 63, 2, 78–89 (2012).

15. Jensen, H.-J., Oldenburg, M.: Objective and subjective

measures to assess stress among seafarers. International

Maritime Health. 72, 1, 49–54 (2021).

https://doi.org/10.5603/IMH.2021.0007.

16. Jepsen, J., Zhao, Z., van Leeuwen, W.: Seafarer fatigue: a

review of risk factors, consequences for seafarers’ health

and safety and options for mitigation. International

Maritime Health. 66, 2, 106–117 (2015).

https://doi.org/10.5603/IMH.2015.0024.

17. Jepsen, J.R., Zhao, Z., Szymanski, K.: Project MARTHA.

TK Foundation (2016).

18. Lefkovitz, R.Y., Slade, M.D.: Seafarer mental health

study. The ITF Seafarers’ Trust, London (2019).

19. Lefkowitz, R.Y., Slade, M.D., Redlich, C.A.: Rates and

occupational characteristics of international seafarers

with mental illness. Occupational Medicine. 69, 4, 279–

282 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqz069.

20. Lloyd’s Register: Crew feel ‘forgotten and abandoned’

LR survey finds., https://www.lr.org/en-gb/latest-

news/crew-feel-forgotten-and-abandoned-lloyds-

21. McVeigh, J., MacLachlan, M., Stilz, R., Cox, H., Doyle,

N., Fraser, A., Dyer, M.: Positive Psychology and Well-

Being at Sea. In: MacLachlan, M. (ed.) Maritime

Psychology: Research in Organizational & Health

Behavior at Sea. pp. 19–47 Springer International

Publishing, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-

319-45430-6_2.

22. Marshal, B., Cardon, P., Poddar, A., Fontenot, R.: Does

sample size matter in qualitative research? A review of

qualitative interviews in IS research. J Com Inf Syst.

54(1):11-22 (2013).

23. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M.: Qualitative data analysis.

Sage. 4, 408 (2019).

24. Nautilus International: The right to be well – should

seafarer wellbeing be enshrined in maritime law?,

https://www.nautilusint.org/en/news-

insight/telegraph/the-right-to-be-well-should-seafarer-

wellbeing-be-enshrined-in-maritime-law/, last accessed

2021/05/17.

25. Nautilus International: UK maritime welfare charities

find a creative way to connect crews,

https://www.nautilusint.org/en/news-

insight/telegraph/uk-maritime-welfare-charities-find-a-

creative-way-to-connect-crews/, last accessed 2021/05/17.

26. Nielsen, M., Bergheim, K., Eid, J.: Relationships between

work environment factors and workers’ well-being in

the maritime industry. International Maritime Health.

64, 2, 80–88 (2013).

27. Occupational Safety and Health Convention:

Convention (No. 155),

https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPU

B:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C155, last accessed

2021/05/17.

28. Paraïso, J.: Ship shape - a working environment

onboard. Chalmers University of Technology (2016).

29. Price, R.H., Hooijberg, R.: Organizational exit pressures

and role stress: Impact on mental health. Journal of

Organizational Behavior. 13, 7, 641–651 (1992).

https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130702.

30. Rachele, J., Washington, T., Cockshaw, W.D., Brymer, E.:

Towards an operational understanding of wellness.

Journal of Spirituality, Leadership and Management. 7,

1, 3–12 (2013). https://doi.org/10.15183/slm2013.07.1112.

31. Renger, R.F., Midyett, S.J., Soto Mas, F.G., Erin, T.D.,

McDermott, H.M., Papenfuss, R.L., Eichling, P.S., Baker,

824

D.H., Johnson, K.A., Hewitt, M.J.: Optimal Living

Profile: An Inventory to Assess Health and Wellness.

American Journal of Health Behavior. 24, 6, 403–412

(2000). https://doi.org/10.5993/AJHB.24.6.1.

32. Safety and health at work, workplace health promotion

and wellbeing: Workplace well-being,

https://www.ilo.org/global/topics/safety-and-health-at-

work/areasofwork/workplace-health-promotion-and-

well-being/WCMS_118396/lang--en/index.htm, last

accessed 2021/05/17.

33. Sampson, H., Ellis, N.: Seafarer’s mental health and

wellbeing. The Institution of Occupational Safety and

Health, London (2019).

34. Slišković, A.: Seafarers’ well-being in the context of the

COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study. Work. 67, 4,

799–809 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-203333.

35. Smith, A.: Adequate crewing and seafarers’ fatigue: the

international perspective. Centre for Occupational and

Health Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff (The UK)

(2007).

36. Szymanski, K.: Be Mindful of Mental Health But Don’t

Unfairly Stigmatize Seafarers, https://www.maritime-

executive.com/editorials/be-mindful-of-mental-health-

but-don-t-unfairly-stigmatize-seafarers, last accessed

2021/05/17.

37. Walters, D., Bailey, N.: Lives in Peril: Profit or Safety in

the Global Maritime Industry? Palgrave Macmillan UK

(2013). https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137357298.

38. Zhang, P., Shan, D., Zhao, M., Pryce-Roberts, N.:

Navigating seafarer’s right to life across the shipping

industry. Marine Policy. 99, 80–86 (2019).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.10.002.