533
1 INTRODUCTION
Shipping industry grew because of trade and
expansion. Voyages got even longer as ships sailed
across continents. Ships continue to meet accidents
andrungroundthatcontributelargelytothelossof
life and property at sea because of human element
that always surfaces as a significant factor
(Mockel,
Brenker, & Strohschneider, 2013). Navigational
equipmentandtoolsareusedtogivesignalsthatwill
affect the navigating‐officer’s decision in traversing
his ship. The development of the country’s Aid‐to‐
Navigation (ATON) system is underdeveloped as
compared to Japan, Singapore, and South Korea. In
linewiththis,the
Philippinegovernmentthroughthe
Maritime Industry Administration (MARINA)
envisions to have safe, secure, efficient, viable,
competitive,dependable,integrated,environmentally
sustainable, and people oriented Philippine sea ‐
transportation(Badayos,1999inPhilippineMaritime
Industry, 2016). MARINA functions cover domestic
shipping, and implementation of STCW. It also
monitors the regular upgrading standards on safety
of the ship, level of service, and environmental
sustainabilityinkeepingwithinternationalstandards
andpractice.
In this study of Berg, Stongard & Lappalainen
(2013),theresearchersstressedthat80%ofaccidents
arecausedbyhumanerrors,communicationfatigue,
Navigational Trip: Safety, Security, and Protection as
Compliance to Interntional Standard
R.A.Alimen,R.M.Galve,S.F.Francisco&C.I.Mongan
J
ohnB.LacsonFoundationMaritime
U
niversity,IloiloCity,Philippines
ABSTRACT: This study was determined the evaluation of the safety, security, and protection of the
navigationaltripintermsofsafetyamongmarineengineeringstudentsasanentiregroupandwhentheywere
classifiedaccordingtosectionsuchasPolaris3‐A,Polaris3‐B,andPolaris
3‐C.Respondentsofthestudywere
theonehundredtwenty(120)PolarismarineengineeringstudentswhoarecurrentlyenrolledintheCollegeof
MaritimeEducationofJBLFMU‐MoloforSchoolYear2017‐2018whowereonboardorhaveundertakenthe
navigational trip and have observed some of the
safety and security services on board. The researchers
employedquantitative‐qualitativeresearchdesignbyCreswell(2013) to determine the navigational trip and
observationsofthesafetyandsecurityservicesonboard.Resultsrevealedthattherespondentshad“excellent
evaluation”aboutthesafety,protection,andsecurityofthenavigationaltripvessel.There
werenosignificant
differences in theevaluation of the respondents as to the different sections; no relationships were observed
when the respondents’ evaluation results were compared according to sections. The observations and
commentscitedinthisstudysignifythatthenavigationaltripvesselexhibitedsafetyandsecurity,maintain
cleanand
safeenvironment,andfollowedthestrictimplementationofsafetyasprescribedbytheinternational
standards.Therespondents’commentsattestedthatthenavigationalshiphasimplemented theinternational
standardofsafetyandprocedureonboard.
http://www.transnav.eu
the International Journal
on Marine Navigation
and Safety of Sea Transportation
Volume 12
Number 3
September 2018
DOI:10.12716/1001.12.03.12
534
andlanguageskillsofseafarers.Themaritimesector
canachieve a competitive advantage byfocusing on
safety aspects of crews especially on operational
safety. Furthermore, this study mentioned that the
modern shipping is highly international and
technological industry with strong demands on
economic efficiency and profitability. The maritime
accidents, indeed,
defined as catastrophic incidents
whenconsidered the number of peopleintheships,
environmentaldamages,andvaluesoftheshipsand
carried cargoes (Basar, et al., 2013). This study
underscoredthatthereisaneedfortherequirement
offocusingonhumanactivitiesforthesafeoperation
ofthevessels
andtheneedtoprovidehighstandard
of safety, security, and environmental protection
aiming to obtain an eminent reduction of marine
accidentsandhighpriorityofhumanfactorissuesin
theworkingareaoftheships.Humanerrorincludes
unsafe/dangerous actions of the operators, the
preparatory conditions of unsafe or dangerous
actions,incompetentaudit,andorganizationaleffects.
The reasons of human errors are physical and
technological surrounding factors, physical and
situationofoperators,humanresourcesmanagement,
personal underlying or preparation factors such as
alcohol usage and organizational factors such as
insufficient allocation and maintenance of resources,
and incompetent audits. The watchkeeping
officer
maynotonlybetheperformerofanyerrorduringthe
voyageofthevessel,otherfactorscanbeconsidered
suchaslifestress,physicalandpsychologicalfatigue,
motivation, work load, and working hours as
individuals.
Sooksripaisarnkit (2013) stated that the company
shall establish procedures to ensure that the ship’s
personnel receive relevant information on the safety
management system in the working language or
languagesunderstoodbythepersonnel.Thecompany
shall identify equipment and technical systems, the
sudden operational failure of which may result in
hazardoussituations.Thesafetymanagementsystem
shall provide for specific measures that include
regular
testing of stand‐by arrangements and
equipmentSooksripaisarnkit(2013).Mockel,Brenker,
&Strohschneider (2013)mentionedthat safety isthe
mostprominenttopicsinthemaritimedomain.Often,
itisinstantlyassociatedwithtechnologicalinnovation
and replacement of traditional nautical instruments.
While improving technology and regulatory
respectivestandardizationeffortsaretreatedas
pillars
on which maritime safety rests. The seafaring
personnelisoftenconsideredastheerror‐proneand
safety‐critical element within the world of shipping.
Thehumanerror is consideredasthe main cause of
manymaritimecasualties.Still,onecouldarguethat
insteadofeducatingthehumanelementin
proactive
behaviors, training in the use of checklists,
handbooks,andstandardoperatingprocedures(SOP)
is used to illuminate human’s supposedly negative
impact. Safety improvements shall be among other
sources, and based on the analysis of accidents.
Critical view of the human factor is limiting the
approachestakentowardsincreasingsafety.
Thus,
thisstudywasconceivedbytheresearchers
to determine the safety and security of the
navigational ship among students of maritime
university.
2 STATEMENTOFTHEPROBLEM
In order to understand this present study, the
followingspecificquestionswereadvanced:
1 What is the level of evaluation on the safety,
security,andprotectionofthenavigationaltripin
termsofsafetyamongtherespondentsasanentire
group and when the respondents were classified
accordingtosectionsuchasPolaris3‐A,Polaris3‐
B,andPolaris3‐C?
2 Are there significant differences in the level of
evaluationonthe
safetyofthenavigationaltripin
terms of safety when classified according to
section?
3 Are there significant relationships in the level of
evaluation on the safety, security, and protection
ofthenavigationaltripwhenclassifiedaccording
todifferentcategories?
4 Hastheshippassedtheinternationalstandardsin
terms
of safety and security as perceived by the
respondents?
5 What are the observations of the marine
engineering students about the safety of the
navigationaltrip?
6 What are the observations of the respondents
abouttheship’scleanlinessandsafetyaccordingto
respondentsduringthenavigationaltrip?
3 CONCEPTUALFRAMEWORKOF
THESTUDY
Figure1.Conceptualframeworkofthepresentstudy
4 METHODOLOGY
4.1 ResearchDesign
Theresearchersofthisstudyutilizedthequantitative‐
qualitative research design by Creswell (2013). This
researchdesignis appropriate withdifferent sample
sizes,ageneralruleofthumbforqualitativeresearch
the samples for a single study involving individual
interviewusuallylieatunder50.
4.2 RespondentsoftheStudy
Therespondents of the study weretheonehundred
twenty(120)Polarismarineengineeringstudentswho
were currently enrolled in the College of Maritime
Education of JBLFMU‐Molo for School Year 2017‐
2018. The respondents had undertaken the
navigationaltripandobservedsomeofthesafety
and
securityservicesonboard.
535
Table1.DistributionoftheRespondents
_______________________________________________
Categoryf %
_______________________________________________
A.EntireGroup120 100
B.Section
Polaris3‐A40 33.33
Polaris3‐B40 33.33
Polaris3‐C40 33.33
_______________________________________________
4.3 ResearchInstrument
The research instrument determined the level of
safety of the navigational ship of the marine
engineeringstudentsandhadthescalesfrom10to1.
The scale of 10 is the highest and scale of 1 is the
lowest. The research instrument was subjected to
“face and
content validity” by the experts, marine
officers, and Members of Research Committee of
JBLFMU‐Molo, Iloilo City. The suggestions,
comments, remarks, and opinions of the jurors and
experts were considered in the final draft of the
instrument.Thevalidatedinstrumentwasalsopilot‐
tested to determine the extent of reliability
and
consistencytothecertainmunicipalitywhichhadthe
same characteristics with the respondents of the
presentstudy,whichtheresultwashigh.
Thequalitativedataweregatheredbyusingopen‐
endedquestionsinthedata‐gatheringinstrumentand
interviewtocapturetheviewsandobservationsofthe
respondents as to
the safety and security when
onboardtotheirnavigationalship.
4.4 Quantitative‐DataAnalysis
The researchers used frequency count, percentage,
andmeanasstatisticaltoolsforthedescriptivedata‐
analysistodetermine the level of each category.For
the inferential tools, the ANOVA (Analysis of
Variance)andPearson’sCoefficient Relationship
(r)
were used in this study to determine the significant
differences and relationships among the different
variables.
4.5 QualitativeInterpretation
The open‐ended items in the data‐gathering
instrumentwereusedas qualitativedata to describe
andgivesupplementalinformationtotheresearchers
aboutthenavigationalshipsafetyandsecurity
during
the students’ navigational tripasrequirementto the
courseinmarineengineeringatJBLFMU‐Molo,Iloilo
City,Philippines.
5 RESULTSANDDISCUSSION
Results in Table 2 reveal that the Polaris students’
evaluationofthenavigationaltripintermsofsafety,
protection, and security as an entire group was
“excellent”
as indicated by the mean of 8.24. The
respondents of the study also stated that the safety
andsecurityonboardwas“excellentlyimplemented”
by the crew of the ship as required. Students of
Polaris3‐B had“excellent” evaluation resultalso on
the navigational trip with the mean of 8.28,
and the
sameresultwiththestudentsfromPolaris3‐C,which
had“excellent”evaluationasindicatedwiththemean
of8.15.
Table2. Level of Evaluation of Safety, Protection, and
SecurityofNavigationalTripamongPolarisStudents
_______________________________________________
CategoryMean Description
_______________________________________________
A.EntireGroup8.24Excellent
B.Section
Polaris3‐A8.30Excellent
Polaris3‐B8.28Excellent
Polaris3‐C8.15High
_______________________________________________
Legend:
8.21‐10.00 Excellent
6.41‐8.20 High
4.61‐6.40 Moderate
2.81‐4.60 Poor
1.00‐2.80 VeryPoor
6 DIFFERENCEINTHELEVELOFSAFETYAND
SECURITYOFNAVIGATIONALSHIPAMONG
POLARISSTUDENTS
The data analysis using ANOVA showed that there
was no significant difference in the evaluation of
safetyandsecurityofnavigationalshipasthePolaris
studentsclassifiedaccordingtodifferentsections,F(
2, 117) =
1.312. Safety is an imperative requirement.
Polarisstudentssaw the need ofsafety and security
duringnavigationaltrips.
DataareshowninTable3.
Table3. One‐Way ANOVA in Navigational Ship’s Safety and Security among Polaris Students Grouped According to
Section
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
DegreesoffreedomSumofSquaresMeanSquares
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Variables BetweenWithin Total BetweenWithin Total BetweenWithin F Sig
groups groupsgroups groupsgroups groups
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Section 2117 119 9.42970.571 80.0 .857.653 1.312 .228
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Table4.RelationshipoftheEvaluationofSafety,Protection,andSecurityastotheDifferentSections
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Polaris3‐APolaris3‐BPolaris3‐C
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Variables PearsonSigPearsonSigPearsonSig
Correlation(r) (2‐tailed) Correlation(r) (2‐tailed) Correlation(r) (2‐tailed)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Polaris3‐A 1.149.359‐.080.623
Polaris3‐B .149.3591.002.989
Polaris3‐C‐.080.623.002.9891
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
536
7 RELATIONSHIPOFTHEEVALUATIONOF
SAFETY,PROTECTION,ANDSECURITYASTO
THEDIFFERENTSECTIONS
The Pearson’s r results in Table 4 showed that the
students’ evaluation on safety, protection, and
security was positively and not significantly related
accordingtodifferentsections.
Most of the respondents agreed that the
navigational
ship has followed the international
standards in terms of maritime safety, security, and
protection.
_______________________________________________
QuestionYes No Frequency
_______________________________________________
Isthenavigationalshipthatyou
havebeenexperiencedfollowed
theInternationalstandardsin
maritimesafety,security,and
protection?
Polaris3‐A40 0 33.33
Polaris3‐B40 0 33.33
Polaris3‐C40 0 33.33
Total120 0 100.00
_______________________________________________
8 QUALITATIVEOBSERVATIONSOFTHE
POLARISSTUDENTSABOUTTHESAFETYAND
SECURITYOFTHENAVIGATIONALSHIP
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Polaris3‐ATheme
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
FollowingInternationalStandard Clean&Well‐MaintainedSpaceConcernwiththeSafety&Protectionof
thePassengers
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
*TheywerefollowingtheMARPOL *Itisproperlymaintained*Itistheirdutyandresponsibilityto
andotherprotocols*Youcan’tseeanylitter.secureallpassengers
*Itfollowsthesafetythatisalso *Theroomsarecleanandthewastesare *Thecrewdemontrateonhowtousethe
observed
internationallyproperlysegregatedlifejacket
*Itisrequired.*Garbageisproperlyhandled*Informationaboutthetimeofarrival
*Lifesavingequipmentareavailable *Garbageareproperlydisposedanddeparturearedeliveredwell
*Equipmentmeetstheinternational *Sometimeswastesegregationisnot *Ibelievethatitissafetonavigateif
standards.followedpassengersarewell‐managed.
*Theship’ssafetyandprotection *Everythingwaswellmaintainedand *TheyarestrictinwearingofPPE(Kay
equipmentarefunctioningcleanliness iswellimplementedna‐estriktuhankamisuksokPPE)
*Itisrequiredtofollowthe *Cleanlinessisproperlyobserved*Theyarestrictinterms
ofsafety
internationalstandardsinmaritime *Itisproperlycleanedandmaintained. *Everycrewdoestheirdutyproperly
safetyandprotection*Everythingisfine.*Theyareproperlytrainedandknow
*Yes,butthereisaneed toimprovethe*Cleanandtidy.whattheyaredoing.
implementationofsafety(Huo
pero*Theyalwayslookforoursafetyfirst.
kinanglanpaguidimprovementpara
safe).
*Theyhavetherequiredfacilitiesand
equipmentonboard
*Wehadfamiliarizationwhichisthe
mainreasonofthetripsafely.
*Westrictlyfollowtherulesonboard
*Theshiphasalltherequiredfacilities
regardingwithsafety
andoperational
works
*Theyfollowtherulesregardingwaste
managementandpropersegregation
ofgarbage
*Everythingisinawell‐managed
‐activities
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Polaris3‐BTheme
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
FollowingInternationalStandard Clean&Well‐MaintainedSpaceConcernwiththeSafety&Protectionof
thePassengers
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
*Asweenteredtheengineroomall *AswhatIobservedtheshipwasclean *Theyguidetheirpassengersastheygo
arewearingtheirPPEwhenonduty.andwellmaintainedupthegangway.
*Allmaterialsarewellpreparedto *Sofarsogood*Theyconductmusteringanddrillin
ensuresafety.*Shipsareproperlycleaned.orderforthepassengerstoprepare
*Ourshipiscompleteinsafety *Cleanlinessisobservedduringthe themselvesintermsofaccidentson
equipment.navigationalshipboard.
*Theyneedtoensurethesafetyof *Theshipobservesproperwaste*Theyregularlycheckeveryroom.
theirpassengersandcrew.segregation*Theyreallyensurethesafetyof
537
*Theygivesafetyequipmenttothe *Theywillnotlettheshipgoifthe everybody.
trainessonboardtheship(Gahatag internationalstandards arenotfollowed*Theygiveannouncementsand
gidsilasangmgasafetyequipment (Dimanasilamakalargakungwalana informationabouttheimportantofsafety
para
samgatraineessabarko).followanginternationalstandards). (Gahataggidsilaannouncements
*Theshipimposessafetyproperly. *Cleanlinessoftheshipiswell maintained.kagginainformnilaangpasaheroabout
*Theygivelifejacketsandeveryroom*Thereisalwayssomeonecleaningfrom sakunanokaimportanteandsafety
has
signsonwhattodoandprohibitedtimetotime.equipment).
thingstodointheship(Okmanmay*Theshipobservedpropermanagement*Theycheckusfromtimetotime.
lifejacketkadakwartomadamomga ofgarbage.*Theyarealwayscheckingconditionof
signsangbawalkagmga
dapatthepassengers.
ubrahonnamakitasapalibotsangbarko).*Theypreparedeverythingaboutsafety
*Theyfollowthestandardonmaritimeofthepassengers.
safety(Ginsunodnlaangstandard*Theyshowustheproperwearingoflife
maritimesafety).jacketandtheyshowusthedifferent
*Theyhavereachedthe
standardofescaperoutes.
theISMwhenitcomestosafety*Theyremindthepassengersaboutthe
*ItisimportantbecausemaritimeDosandDon’tsintheship(Ginaremind
safetyandprotectionisnecessary.kamipirmesaDo’sandDon’ts sa
barko).
*Wecanseesafetysignseverywhere
wego
*They
haveinstalledvariouslife‐saving
‐equipment,alarms,escaperoutes
whichareveryessentialduringemergencies
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Polaris3‐CTheme
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
FollowingInternationalStandard Clean&Well‐MaintainedSpaceConcernwiththeSafety&Protectionof
thePassengers
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
*Theyhavemanysavingappliances *Theshipisclean(Limpyumanang *Yes,theyarewellaccommodated(Oo,
andteachhowtousetheminordertobarko).mayokaysilamagatipan).
avoidaccidents(Daghansilalife *Itiswellmaintained.*Yes,becausetheywellaccommodatethe
savingappliances,gitudlo
pudsaamo*Goodpassengerssafety.
angpagamitandparamakalikaysa *Thecleanlinessiswellmaintained. *Wellmaintained.
disgrasya).*Theshipiscleanandwell‐maintained *Theyalwaysgiveinstructionsand
*Becausetheyhavefollowedtherules(Malimpyukagginamaintaingidnandaannouncementeveryhour.
andregulationsin
theMaritimeSafetyangbarko).*Lifeisimportantthananycargointhe
Standard.*Cleanlinessiswellobserved.ship.
*Itfollowsalltheregulationandsafety *Thecleanlinessisgoodandwell *Thecrewcareforthepassenger(Kay
procedures.maintainedobligasyonnandaandsafety
*Forthesafetyofthecrew
orpassenger*Tohaveapropersolidwastekapasahero).
intheship.managementonboard*Theofficersarewell‐preparedincaseof
*Internationalstandardinmaritime *Solidwastemanagementisproperly accident.
safetyandprotectionarefollowed. implemented*Passenger’slifeisimportantsosafety
*OfficerssuchasSTO
andothercrews*Therearedesignatedpersonsassignedtoandprotectionwereimplemented.
esp.thesignsandsymbolspasted dothecleaning(Maypropermannga *Yesbecauseweshouldhaveasafety
alongthehallwaysoftheshiphelpa tawoangnagalimpyo).operationforthepassengers.
lotto
usandtotheotherpassengers. *Thecleanliness ofthenavigationalshipis*Theygiveinstructions.
*Inordertoavoidanyproblemthat alreadyorganizedbecauseoftheproper*Theycatertotheneedsandsafetyofthe
mayoccuronboard.garbagedisposal.passengers(Kayginahatagmannilaang
*Beforewegotoengineroomwewore *Goodkinahanglannamonkagsafetyman
eh).
ahelmet,coverall,safetybootsand *Wellmaintained.*Theyareveryaccommodating.
safetygoggles.*Itisveryimportant.*Theyaccommodatethepassengerwell.
*Signsandsymbolsareclearlyposted *Itiswellsegregatedthedifferentwastes.
*It’stheirjob!
*Theyhavepropersafetyprocedures *Cleanisobserved(Limpyogidkatama). *ItisunderSOLASprotocol.
(Kaysaktomanangsafety*Itisimportanttotakecareortofollow
ngaginahimo).thesafetyandprotectionofthe
*Thestandardofouruniversityisverypassengers.
nice
theyfollowedtheinternational*Theyhavesafetysignagesontheship.
standards*Thecrewarefriendlyandteachus
*Theyfollowthepropersafetyproperthingstodo.
procedure(Tungodkayproperila*Thecrewandofficerslookforthe
way).cleanlinessofthenavigationalship(Kay
*ItfollowstheMARINA
Rules.alwayssilanakatutoksacleanliness
*Itisundertheprotocolwhichtheysangnavigationalship).
shouldnotdisobey.
*Toavoidanyaccidentswemust
followtherules.
*Theyhavedosometrainings
*Theyfollowthepossiblerequirements
oftheIMO
*Alltheinformationandnoticesare
labelled(Kay
angtanannakalabelguid
sanginsaktokagnagasunodguidsaspot
kungdinsilanakadapatibutang).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
538
9 QUALITATIVECOMMENTSOFTHEPOLARIS
STUDENTSREGARDINGTHENAVIGATIONAL
SHIP
ThePolarisstudentsofsectionsPolaris3‐A,Polaris3‐
B, & Polaris 3‐C shared their comments about the
navigational ship. The qualitative comments were
categorized according to three themes such as the
following: (1) following the international
standards,
(2)cleanandwell‐maintainedspace,and(3)concern
with the safety and protection of its passengers as
showninthenexttables.
10 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the findings of this study, therefore, the
respondents had “excellent evaluation” about the
safety, protection, and security of the navigational
trip. There
were no significant differences in the
evaluation of the respondents as to the different
sections; no relationships were observed when the
respondents’ evaluation results were compared
according to sections. The observations and
comments cited in this study signify that the
navigationaltripvesselexhibitedsafetyandsecurity,
maintainedcleanandsafe
environment,andfollowed
the strict implementation of safety as prescribed by
the international standards. The respondents’
comments attested that the navigational trip vessel
hasimplementedtheinternationalstandardofsafety
andprocedureonboard.
11 RECOMMENDATIONS
Basedonthefindingsandconclusionsofthepresent
study, the following recommendations were
advanced:
1 Quantitativeresultsofthestudyshallbediscussed
with the next batches of students who will be
going to navigational trip because of favorable
results concerning navigational protection and
advocacy.
2 Open discussion with the different tie‐ups in
navigational trips shall be a regular exercise to
maintain the
standards of the international
communities.
3 Qualitativeremarks andcommentsofthestudents
of this study shall be given the Ship‐Board
TrainingOfficer(SBTO)andOfficeoftheDeanof
Marine Engineering to be discussed for further
improvementandfeed‐backing.
4 The researchers would like to suggest parallel
or
morestudiesonshipsecurityandsafetyinorder
tounfoldsomeotherrelatedproblemspertaining
tothefactorsaffectingtheshipsecurityandsafety
prescribed by the international standards of the
InternationalMaritimeOrganizations(IMO).
REFERENCES
Basar, et al., (2013).Investigating of Officers’ Navigation
andPortWatches ExposedtoExcessiveWorkingHours.
In: A. Weintrit (Ed.) Marine Navigation and Safety of
Sea Transportation. Advances in Marine Navigation.
Taylor&FrancisGroup,London,UK.
Berg,N.,Stongard,J.&Lappalainen,J.(2013). TheImpact
ofShipCrewson
MaritimeSafety. UniversityofTurkey.
ISSN1456‐1816
Creswell, J.W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry and Research
Design:ChoosingamongFiveApproaches,3rdEdition,
London:Sage.
MacNeill, J.R. (2000). Something New Under the Sun: An
EnvironmentalHistoryoftheTwentiethCenturyWorld.
W.W.NortonandCompany,NewYork(NY).
Mockel,S.,Brenker,
M.,&Strohschneider,S.(2013).Generic
CompetenciesforResilientSystems.In:A.Weintrit(Ed.)
Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation.
Advances in Marine Navigation. Taylor & Francis
Group,London,UK.
Nash, R. (1982). Wilderness and the American Mind. Yale
UniversityPress,NewHaven,CT.
Piller,C.(1991).TheFail‐Safe
Society:CommunityDefiance
and the end of American Technological Optimism.
UniversityofCaliforniaPress,Berkeley,CA.
Sooksripaisarnkit, P. (2013). Enhancing of Carriers’
LiabilitiesinRotterdamRules‐TooExpensiveCostsfor
Navigational Safety? In: A. Weintrit (Ed.) Marine
NavigationandSafetyofSeaTransportation.Advances
inMarineNavigation.Taylor&Francis
Group,London,
UK.
Torres,B.(2009).CollectingRecyclables:TheExperiencesof
Higher Education Students of Malaybay City,
Philippines. First International Conference on
MultidisciplinaryResearch,UniversidaddeZamboanga,
Philippines.
