The International Maritime Organization (IMO) enacts and amends IMO instruments (including relevant regulations) on the safety of the sea and the prevention of marine pollution from ships, and strives for a safe and clean sea around the world. The failure to implement international agreements on maritime safety, security and protection of the marine environment introduced by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) increases the risk of marine accidents and the resulting maritime accidents have a negative human and physical impact on the shipping industry. Thus, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) continues to discuss globally to ensure the practical implementation of the IMO Convention and related regulations with the level of implementation of the same agreements.
As it is required to improve the implementation level of the IMO instruments by evaluating the implementation level of the IMO Convention, an evaluation system such as Port State Control (PSC), the Self-Assessment of Flag State Performance, and the IMO Member States Audit Scheme have been introduced and implemented. First of all, the Port State Control (PSC), the Self-Assessment of Flag State Performance, and the IMO Member Audit System (IMSAS) are analyzed. The Port State Control (PSC) inspections evaluate the implementation of the IMO instruments of the flag ships, and the Self-Assessment of Flag State Performance requires the implementation of IMO instruments regarding the Flag States by using the self-inspection form. It was also confirmed that the IMO Member State Audit (IMSAS) is assessing the performance of the comprehensive competent administrations of the Flag State, Coastal Sate and Port State of entry into the instruments as a Contracting Government. Considering the need to more objectively evaluate the level of implementation of the IMO Instruments of Flag, Coastal, and Port States of the contracting parties to the IMO instruments, this study aims to present an evaluation model by developing Key Performance Indicators as a tool that can be used as an objective evaluation tool for the implementation performance of the IMO instruments based on the requirements of the IMO Member State Audit Scheme (IMSAS).
In order to develop the evaluation model of the implementation of the IMO instruments, the strategic goal was to achieve the vision of IMO implementation plan in the Republic of Korea, "Securing the Best State Status to Implement the IMO Convention," and by analyzing the III Code based on the IMO Member States Audit Scheme, Critical Success Factors (CSFs) were derived. Based on the results, the III Code Evaluation Areas and Candidate Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the each III Code Evaluation Area were developed for the four perspectives (financial, customer, internal processes, learning and growth) of the implementation of the IMO instruments. In addition, a study model and surveys were designed for the development of the evaluation model. The study model was structured by tier 1 consisting of the III-BSC perspective, tier 2 consisting of the III Code evaluation area variables, and tier 3 composed of the evaluation indicator variables, which are the core evaluation indexes (KPIs), by layer. To analyze the validity of the candidate Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), a ranking scale survey using the SMART evaluation technique and a pair comparison survey were designed to analyze the weights of each tier of the research model.
Based on the results of the surveys, the validity of the candidate's Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) according to the SMART evaluation technique was analyzed first and the final Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) were completed except for some of the candidate Key Assessment Indicators (KPIs) that were not feasible. The study model for the development of the evaluation model has been revised to reflect the revised Key Assessment Indicators (KPIs). The AHP (Analysis Hierarchy Process) was used to analyze the importance of each tier of the study model, and an IMO implementation evaluation model of the BSC perspective was presented based on the results.
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) developed in this study are presented, but no detailed formulas for the KPIs are specified for them. Also, there is a limitation of not sufficiently assessing the effectiveness of each entities' performance of the implementation.
However, the evaluation method using the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) from the BSC perspective on the implementation of the IMO instruments provides an opportunity for continuous improvement by identifying and measuring the performance of each indicator. Also, It is meaningful in that it provides organizations with a basic framework for communicating and achieving the vision and its strategies.
In future studies, the efficiency of implementation of the instruments can be analyzed by maximizing the output result of input by each authority. Also, it will be possible to improve the implementation evaluation model of the IMO instruments by comparing and analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of the evaluation models developed by applying other various performance evaluation methods.
I hopes that IMO Member States, including the Republic of Korea, will use the developed evaluation model of the Implementation of IMO instruments as a means to check or monitor the level of implementation of IMO instruments, thereby contributing to the improvement of the level of implementation of IMO instruments, and furthermore, the promotion of the implementation of the IMO instruments will contribute to maritime safety and protection of the marine environment.