Determination of Indicators of Implementation of Sea Transportation Safety Management System for Traditional Shipping Based on Delphi Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please refer to the attachment.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for your corrections to this paper. My response is attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper needs revision as below;

1- The abstract needs revision with regards to have a quantitative data for the results.

2- The research question of this study should be remarked in the introduction section.

3- The results should be supported with the literature data. Also discussions have to be added.

4- In addition to the main findings, the Conclusions section should indicate research gaps and research directions identified as the results of research presented.

5- What is the contribution of this study to the maritime literature and also to the industry?

6- What is limitations of this study? It should be stated in manuscript in details.

Needs small gramatical errors.

Author Response

Thank you for your corrections to this paper. My response is attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors are doing good work trying to improve maritime safety in Indonesia, however, it needs significant improvement before it can be accepted.

First of all the literature review is very poor. There have been many studies published on the topic of safety key performance indicators such as

- BIMCO The shipping KPI standard 

- Banda et al. 2016 A method for extracting key performance indicators from maritime safety management norms.

-  Hjellik and Saetrevik 2020 Can survey measures predict KPI of safety? Forntiers in Pschycology.

 -Gavalas et al 2022 Assessing KPI in the shipbuilding industry Marine Policy and Management

-Arslan, V. K. R. C. E. T. O. W. L., 2016. Identification and Implementation of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Achieving Safer and Resilient Passengers Shipping Operations. Glasgow, European Safety and Reliability Conference 2016.

-Jalonen, R. S. K., 2009. SAFETY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR MARITIME - Literature Review, Espoo: Helsinki University of Technology.

-American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), 2012. Safety Culture and Leading Indicators of Ship Safety, Houston: s.n.

-TMSA, 2019. Tanker Management Self-Assessment Version 3, London: Oil Companies International Marine Forum.

-Grabowski, M. A. P. M. J. M. D., 2007. Accident precursors and safety nets: leading indicators of tanker operations safety. Maritime Policy & Management, 34(5), pp. 404-425.

- S. Williams, System approached to operational ship safety, PhD thesis

And many others

As such the study is already on shaky grounds. As a result, the suggested KPIs are poor. How do they comply with the classical SMART criteria (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound?)

The abstract needs improvement, it took me a while to realise what is Perla.

I can see the originality, but the quality of the article needs to be substantially improved before the paper can be accepted.

The language is poor and requires significant improvements.

Author Response

Thank you for your corrections to this paper. My response is attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Given the level of safety in the fleet described, the article is very important. In the absence of a commitment to implementing IMO principles and ideas (e.g. ISM-Code, STCW 95) in the traditional fleet, any study proposing methods for implementing safety principles and evaluating the results of these activities is important as it allows for a scientific analysis of the changes taking place in the fleet in the field of safety and allows for reasonable changes to be made to the proposed method as a result of the experience gained.

Author Response

Thank you for your corrections to this paper. My response is attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Please refer to the attachment

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear Reviewers.
Thank you for your corrections and input.
we have tried to fix according to your suggestions. hopefully it's as expected.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

All the questions were answered. It can be accepted.

Author Response

Dear Reviewers.
Thank you for your corrections and input.
we have tried to fix according to your suggestions. hopefully it's as expected.

Reviewer 3 Report

The article is good now. I would recommend that it goes through a moderate polishing for grammar and expression errors.

The manuscript language can be improved.

Author Response

Dear Reviewers.
Thank you for your corrections and input.
we have tried to fix according to your suggestions. hopefully it's as expected.

Regarding the language, we will fix it as soon as possible

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Accept in present form

Minor editing of English language required