Maritime Governance Analysis for Domestic Ferry Safety and Sustainability by Employing Principles, Criteria and Indicators (PCIs) Framework

Abstract

The Safety–Sustainability Governance (SSG) Framework is presented to address critical governance and safety challenges in the domestic ferry sector, particularly in developing countries. The sector faces persistent challenges, indicating the inadequacies in aligning national policies with international yardsticks despite the present global maritime safety standards. To foster an equilibrium between regulatory compliance and rights-based inclusivity, the SSG approach integrates Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) principles, socio-technical systems (STS), and maritime governance theory. Based on literature review and a wider range survey conducted across 48 countries, the study assesses the SSG approach through four key principles. These principles are proactive planning, vibrant governance policies, effective management and monitoring, and climate-resilient safety practices. The study employed a strong evaluation of governance metrics by using the Principles, Criteria, and Indicators (PCI) methodology which was supported by the Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique (SMART). In order to validate the reliability and consistency of findings, statistical tools, such as Pearson Correlation and Cronbach’s Alpha, were used. This not only unveiled high compliance in protective planning and operational monitoring but also highlighted shortcomings in policy enforcement, stakeholders’ engagement, and climate adaptation strategies. The SSG framework acts as an adaptable tool that enables stakeholders to execute targeted improvements and determine governance adequacy. The application of this framework emphasis the significance of stakeholder collaboration, advanced technologies, and regulatory alignment in promoting sustainability and safety in ferry operations. This research presents an innovative contribution by offering a practical model that links global safety standards with local operational realities by paving the technique for improved safety, governance, and sustainability in the domestic ferry industry.

1. Introduction

Ferries have preserved their importance in the global transport ecosystem not just in spite of competition from road and air, but because they bring unique advantages in sustainability and connectivity [1,2]. Ferries help in achieving sustainability goals through emissions and congestion reduction, with a passenger volume comparable to aviation [1,3]. In spite of international safety regulations, the domestic ferry sector faces significant socio-technical challenges, and weaken regulatory effectiveness, particularly in developing countries, where safety incidents persist [4,5]. The sector’s intricacy, deepened by a lack of governance and regulatory inefficiencies, raises the risks accompanying ferry operations [6]. Previous studies underline that such governance failures can only be addressed through integrated governance strategies and coherent policies [7,8].

Particularly in developing countries, the domestic ferry sector is hampered by frequent accidents and fatalities, revealing a elucidate necessity for boosted governance reforms and safety protocols [4,6,9]. Despite the environmental benefits ferries convey, the industry encounters regulatory breaches and systemic governance that obstruct their operational safety and sustainability. The research highlights interconnected challenges by institutionalizing a governance framework addressing the socio-technical complications of the domestic ferry industry. The industry’s governance challenges include inadequate safety standards, ineffective regulatory enforcement, and fragmented policies [5,10]. In developing countries, where insufficient management practices and limited resources lead to frequent accidents, these issues are particularly pronounced [11]. Ref. [7] claims that governance failures in the maritime industry can only be resolved by implementing a better governance strategy and policy.

The present study recommends a governance model stressing accountability, transparency, and continuous improvement by identifying key issues. This model intends to effectively mitigate challenges by aligning national policies with international best practices and strengthening a safety-oriented culture. Although IMO identifies the significance of addressing human factors and organizational for transformative change, yet this needs a re-evaluation of existing regulations [12]. A novel PCI (Principles, Criteria, and Indicators) framework is developed to systematically assess safety, governance, and sustainability within domestic ferry operations. While integrating emerging ESG standards to ensure a structured approach to maritime safety, the framework assesses governance adequacy and policy effectiveness at national and international levels.

The study’s novelty is twofold. First, the PCI framework is tailored specifically to domestic ferry governance, a sector where oversight has long been fragmented despite initiatives such as the IMO Model Regulations on Domestic Ferry Safety [13]. Unlike compliance-based mechanisms (e.g., ISM Code, Safety Management Systems) [14], the PCI framework emphasizes principle-driven evaluation, stakeholder inclusion, and continuous monitoring. Second, it integrates ESG considerations into maritime safety governance, a perspective widely applied in corporate sustainability but underutilized in maritime transport. This integration enables proactive governance practices that link safety, transparency, accountability, and sustainability.

The inclusion of ESG principles is vital to establishing sustainable governance within the domestic ferry industry [15,16,17,18]. Even though ESG frameworks are extensively applied in other sectors, they are still underutilized in the maritime domain, particularly in the domestic ferry sector [19]. The PCI framework addresses this gap by moving beyond investor-oriented ESG benchmarks to provide a principle-driven, operationally grounded tool. It captures governance adequacy through indicators directly linked to ferry operations, such as emergency preparedness, crew welfare, and emissions reduction, while embedding stakeholder perspectives from operators, regulators, crew, and passengers [20]. Unlike general ESG integration, PCI integrates socio-technical systems thinking and continuous improvement cycles [21,22], ensuring safety and sustainability are embedded into day-to-day governance practices.

The PCI framework draws lessons from governance failures documented in incidents such as MV Sewol, Bukoba, and Samina [23,24,25,26], contributing a structured assessment of policy effectiveness at both national and international levels.

This method assesses governance through principles accentuating proactive planning, policy coherence, and resilience, which are decisive to nurturing sustainable ferry operations. The investigation is guided by two research questions:

(1)

How can the PCI-based governance framework be formulated and applied to improve safety and sustainability in the domestic ferry industry?

(2)

To what extent can the PCI framework assess the adequacy of governance structures and operational practices in tackling safety and sustainability challenges specific to the domestic ferry industry?

Aligned with the fundamental objectives of the PhD research, the present study employs the PCI framework to analyze governance adequacy within the domestic ferry industry. The study proposes actionable recommendations aimed at bridging governance gaps through targeted stakeholder involvement and compliance with international safety standards, promoting policy coherence, and nurturing a proactive safety culture. The study institutionalized a framework that assesses both safety and sustainability in the sector by equipping stakeholders and embedding a rights-based, rule-based governance model.

2. Literature Review

Safety management for domestic ferries is inherently complex, encircling legal frameworks, regulations, policies, and the development of a safety culture [27,28,29]. Despite persistent efforts, accidents continue to occur, highlighting systemic governance and operational gaps both at national and international levels [30]. While IMO mandates such as the ISM Code promotes compliance and enforcement [14]. But still, domestic ferries often face challenges such as inadequate governance, limited resources, quality management, and insufficient training [31,32]. Key accidents such as Le Joola, Sewol, Easter Star, MV Samina, and MV PINAK 6 demonstrated systemic lapses in governance and regulation [26,33,34,35,36]. These cases are presented not as isolated events, but as illustrative examples of recurring governance and operational failures. A comparative examination allows identification of systemic patterns, including weak enforcement, inadequate safety culture, and fragmented regulatory frameworks, which continue to challenge domestic ferry safety.

Table 1. Maritime incidents in domestic ferry sector.

Incident	Fatality	Findings	Recommendations	Challenges
Le Joola Senegal [26]	1863 casualties	The government admitted errors; ministers resigned	Government errors; resignation of officials	Policy deficiencies; limited socio-technical integration
Sewol Ferry South Korea [24,34,38]	304 deaths	-Financial incentives and cost-cutting efforts moved the vessel to an unacceptable high-risk state, causing the accident Impose constraints and establish effective feedback by regulatory agencies and industry associations Systems approach needed for detection and prevention of safety gaps Excessive ship modifications made	Underline an in-depth national disaster response framework Emphasis on balancing safety with economic, efficiency, and performance restrictions Demonstrate a lack of awareness of risk, improper actions of the captain, and the need for risk mitigation options	Inadequate disaster management Recognize policy and governance gaps
MV Bukoba Tanzania [9,35]	894 fatalities	No ticketing controls Overloaded at an intermediate port Capsized without transmitting a distress call Rescue attempt failed Ship owners and crew overlooked regulations, inspection, and maintenance Officials were incompetent	Enforce regulations to avoid overloading, ticketing, and control at ports Develop a maritime safety culture Enhance rescue procedures Focus on crew qualifications, inspections, and maintenance	Poor safety culture, and legislation Identified gaps include an overloaded, negligence of safety standards and a poor maritime safety culture Inadequate crew training
Eastern Star China [36,39]	442 deaths	Capsized due to foul weather Lack of safety knowledge (the captain, chief officer, and senior management) Lack of realization regarding the importance of regulation and risk	Implement a safety management system and safety culture Address deficiencies in crew knowledge in emergency handling	Need for laws and mandatory safety devices; disaster response gaps
MV Samina Greece [23,25]	80 deaths	Poor navigation Insufficient safety equipment Inadequate crew information Failure in evacuation procedures Inadequate readiness of emergency power systems IMO’s ISM Code not properly implemented	Improve navigation Ensure life-saving equipment Provide proper crew support and information Enhance evacuation procedures Strengthen ISM Code implementation	Weak emergency preparedness Inadequate governance in safety training and equipment maintenance

Source: author’s compilation.

, consolidates these incidents, highlighting recurring deficiencies such as inadequate training, overloading, insufficient emergency preparedness, and lack of safety culture. These lessons emphasize that safety failures are rarely isolated technical breakdowns but manifestations of deeper governance and policy shortcomings [37].

High fatality rates in such incidents illustrated the urgent need for effective regulatory reform. Studies confirm that profitability pressures and fragmented governance systems weaken safety culture and undermine policy enforcement [4,33,40,41]. Figure 1 illustrates these interrelated challenges through a socio-technical systems (STS) lens, showing how human, organizational, and technological factors reinforce governance weaknesses [42,43].

Human factors are not merely proximate causes; they interact with governance structures, regulatory mechanisms, and organizational practices, creating latent vulnerabilities that amplify risks when unaddressed. For example, the Sewol disaster showed how economic incentives, poor decision-making, and inadequate crew training combined with weak regulatory oversight to produce systemic failure [24,34]. Safety literature emphasizes that frontline actions are shaped by broader organizational and policy environments [21,44,45,46]. From a socio-technical perspective, mismatches between human competencies, procedures, and equipment, such as insufficient emergency preparedness or poor communication systems, tend to amplify governance gaps. Leveson’s STAMP model further demonstrates how deficiencies in regulatory control structures and feedback loops allow unsafe conditions to persist [47]. Thus, evidence suggests that governance reforms must explicitly integrate human and organizational dimensions to ensure lasting safety gains [48]. This insight underpins our inclusion of socio-technical indicators in the PCI framework, ensuring that governance measures account for training, decision support, communication, and organizational accountability.

Beyond maritime studies, cross-sector governance insights, from aviation, energy, and transport, highlight effective risk management, structured stakeholder engagement, and adaptive policy design, which can inform domestic ferry safety strategies. Aviation highlights the role of proactive risk management and structured stakeholder collaboration [46,49,50]. The energy sector demonstrates how sustainability and efficiency can be institutionalized through regulatory and technological mechanisms [51]. Transport systems emphasize multi-level governance and inclusive stakeholder engagement to ensure adaptive policies [52]. These models suggest that effective governance requires balancing global standards with local operational realities. The domestic ferry sector, however, remains underexplored in this comparative governance literature, leaving a research gap that present study seeks to address.

The literature consistently shows that domestic ferry safety cannot be improved solely through prescriptive regulations. Effective governance requires integrated socio-technical approaches that account for human, organizational, and technological factors [21,44], adaptive policy structures informed by international best practices but tailored to local realities [53,54], and stakeholder-driven strategies that balance compliance, sustainability, and operational feasibility [37,55]. The PCI framework operationalizes these insights by translating governance principles into measurable criteria and indicators. Integrating ESG-driven sustainability, community well-being, and climate resilience, it bridges global safety standards with local operational contexts. It provides a practical governance tool that not only addresses regulatory compliance but also incorporates socio-technical indicators, ensuring safety and sustainability in domestic ferry operations.

3. Methodology

The study follows a structured methodology to develop, validate, and apply a Safety–Sustainability Governance (SSG) framework for domestic ferry operations. The process begins with a literature review and content analysis to identify governance gaps and systemic safety challenges. Governance principles are then translated into measurable criteria and indicators through stakeholder engagement and FGDs. Indicators are weighted, scored, and statistically validated for reliability and relevance. Finally, the framework is iteratively refined through case studies and participatory exercises, ensuring practical applicability across diverse maritime contexts.

3.1. PCI Framework Development and Rationale

The SSG framework was developed to address persistent safety and governance challenges in the domestic ferry sector, particularly in developing countries. Grounded in internationally recognized instruments such as IMO safety regulations, ISO standards, and ESG frameworks, the framework is adapted to local operational realities where regulatory enforcement is often weak [13,14,15,56,57,58,59,60]. The four governance principles were operationalized into 15 criteria and 51 indicators through systematic literature review, expert consultation, and participatory focus groups, ensuring that each indicator addressed critical aspects of safety, governance, and sustainability [40,42]. Indicators were further weighted and prioritized (see Section 3.7) to identify the most critical governance levers. A visual representation of the research design is provided in Figure 2, highlighting steps from gap analysis and expert consultation to empirical validation and iterative refinement through the 3Cs (Risk assessment) approach.

3.2. Literature Review and Content Analysis

The initial phase involved an in-depth literature review and content analysis to assess the current state of maritime governance. Studies reveal fragmented safety governance and underutilized ESG frameworks in developing regions [15,61,62,63,64]. Content analysis followed established procedures [65,66,67,68] to extract relevant principles for developing the PCI framework. Findings emphasized the need for an integrated model accounting for human, organizational, and technical dimensions.

3.3. Data Collection and Survey Scope

Both quantitative and qualitative data collection methods were employed by conducting surveys in 48 countries (see Figure 3), predominantly in Asia (76.5%), with significant participation from Africa (17.6%) and Europe (5.9%). Random sampling certified the existence of diverse representation among regulatory bodies, ferry operators and maritime safety experts by capturing a broad spectrum of ferry operational challenges [40]. To ensure wide participation, the survey was translated into six languages (Swedish, Chinese, Swahili, Indonesian, Japanese, and Tagalog). These regions were purposefully selected to reflect the diversity of maritime governance systems from Asia’s complex operational markets to Africa’s emerging safety frameworks and Europe’s established regulatory practices.

3.4. Ethical Considerations

Ethical research standards were strictly followed in accordance with the World Maritime University’s Research Ethics Committee. Participation was fully voluntary and anonymous, supported by QuestionPro’s Response Assurance Anonymity (RAA) feature. Data collection and storage protocols ensured participants’ confidentiality and upheld integrity in line with global academic standards.

3.5. Development of Governance Principles

The governance principles were built on foundational instruments including the IMO’s model safety standard, ISM Code, and voyage planning guidelines; ISO 9001:2015 (Quality Management Standards) [58]; ESG guidelines from the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB); Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD); and Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) [59,69,70,71]. The principles aim to ensure proactive planning, strong organizational governance, ethical management, and climate-resilient ferry operations. A participatory process involving stakeholders helped contextualize these principles within diverse governance environments. Network diagram analysis [72] further mapped interdependencies between system components. This approach enabled the visual identification of key governance gaps and connections across ferry operations.

Table 2. Four SSG principles for domestic ferry safety and sustainability.

Principle	Description	Rational
1.	Proactively plan and continuously improve safety measures, integrating voyage planning with ongoing safety developments	Emphasizes risk anticipation, operational planning, and safety readiness
2.	Advance safety-focused governance through policy, accountability, and informed decision-making across all organizational levels	Strengthens transparency, safety accountability, and legal coherence
3.	Embed quality management, social responsibility, and stakeholder well-being to foster ethical, sustainable operations through leadership and community engagement	Promotes social responsibility, quality assurance, and performance tracking
4.	Mitigate climate-related risks through safety-driven, certified operations that enhance resilience, environmental sustainability, and reputational value	Prioritizes eco-efficiency, resilience, and emissions-related risk management

Source: author’s compilation.

outlines the four core SSG principles, their scope, and rationale. Rather than operating as parallel silos, these principles intersect across organizational, policy, and sustainability dimensions, reflecting a socio-technical approach.

• Principle 1 involves criteria like voyage planning and risk assessment, with 13 indicators assessing emergency preparedness and sustainability integration.
• Principle 2 includes governance policies and communication standards, with 13 indicators supporting policy compliance and public accountability.
• Principle 3 spans quality management, crew welfare, and training, aligned with STCW standards, with 15 indicators.
• Principle 4 focuses on climate risk, emissions reduction, and eco-operations, evaluated through 10 indicators.

These principles aim to enhance proactive safety practices while embedding ESG values and sustainability into day-to-day ferry operations [73,74,75].

3.6. Participatory Validation and Practical Application

FGDs were conducted with maritime experts from different geographical regions. These sessions provided critical qualitative insights, helping to evaluate the applicability and clarity of governance principles and indicators across diverse operational contexts [76,77]. Expert feedback enabled the refinement of indicator definitions, ensured cultural and regional adaptability, and supported indicator weighting based on practical relevance. While the survey covered 48 countries (Section 3.3), FGDs were structured to balance representation by including voices from Asia, Africa, and Europe. The emphasis was on institutional diversity (e.g., regulators, operators, crew unions) rather than strict statistical proportions, ensuring perspectives from both high-capacity and resource-constrained governance systems were captured. A case study was conducted in Pakistan, findings from the case study supported further refinement of the PCI framework, revealing implementation gaps and areas for improvement [40].

3.7. Indicator Weighing and Scoring Mechanisms

The Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique (SMART) assigned weights based on perceived impact [78,79,80]. Indicators most directly tied to risk governance (e.g., incident response, operational oversight) consistently ranked highest, while supportive indicators (e.g., documentation detail) were assigned lower relative weights. This prioritization avoids the “checklist trap” common in ISO/IMO frameworks by highlighting high-leverage governance levers. The weighted score for each indicator was calculated using:

$$\mathrm{Weighted} \mathrm{Score}=\mathrm{Indicator} \mathrm{Weight}\times \left(\mathrm{Score}/5\right)$$

A compliance scale (

Table 3. Scoring/rating scale—PCI framework.

Level of Coherence	Rate/Scale	Percentage	Parameter
Full Compliance	5	100%	Strong configuration with safety standards, optimal execution of governance principles
High Compliance	4.0–4.99	80–99.99%	Meets most safety standards with minor areas for enhancement
Moderate Compliance	3.0–3.99	60–79.99%	Adequate implementation but with prominent areas for improvement
Low Compliance	2.0–2.99	40–59.99%	Noteworthy gaps in compliance; major improvements needed
Minimal Compliance	1.0–1.99	20–39.99%	Very limited adherence to governance standards, requiring reform
Not Applicable	0.1–0.99	1–19.99%	Indicator does not apply to existing ferry operations or governance context

Source: Author’s compilation.

) provided six performance levels, guiding operational evaluation.

3.8. Statistical Validation

To ensure analytical rigor and reliability of the PCI framework, survey data underwent thorough cleaning to remove incomplete responses and outliers [81]. Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, and Cronbach’s Alpha (α) were employed to validate both the relationships among governance indicators and their internal consistency [82]. For example, high correlation values between planning and incident response indicators highlight the importance of preparedness in ferry safety. Cronbach’s Alpha confirmed that grouped indicators consistently measured relevant aspects of governance and safety performance [83,84]. All indicators were carefully reviewed for clarity and contextual relevance, and the statistical validation confirmed their suitability for assessing and improving governance in the domestic ferry sector. Compliance scoring was conducted using a clear, six-level rating scale (Table 3), providing stakeholders with actionable performance benchmarks.

3.9. Integration of Governance Models and Risk-Based Approaches

The PCI framework amalgamates governance approaches. The 3Cs concept (Check, Change, Calibrate) present flexibility for evolving governance needs, while the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle provides structure for iterative enhancement [73,85]. These refinement through FGDs, surveys, and case studies ensures that the PCI framework remains dynamic, practical, and aligned with global safety and sustainability objectives.

4. Results

The survey findings feature the transformative capacity of the SSG Framework to address the critical shortcomings in governance, safety, and sustainability within the maritime sector. The framework provides a strategy for increasing operational resilience and compliance by incorporating principles of proactive planning, effective management practices, governance policies, and climate-resilient safety measures. The analysis discloses moderate to high compliance throughout the four principles, with prominent strengths in transparency and risk assessment. Nonetheless, the findings accentuate the dire need for targeted progress in climate adaptation policies and the consistent enforcement of regulatory mechanisms.

Table 4. Overall picture of PCI framework.

Principle	Overall Score	Index Score Range	% Age Range	Summary
Principle 1 Proactive Planning	153.8	3.8–4.9 (High)	75–90%	Strong compliance in emergency preparedness and risk assessments; post-incident reviews remain inconsistent
Principle 2 Governance Approaches	162.7	3.5–4.5 (Moderate-High)	75–85%	Transparency and stakeholder engagement are vigorous; policy enforcement and communication clarity necessitate improvement
Principle 3 Effective Management & Monitoring	138.0	3.0–4.2 (Moderate)	70–85%	Crew training and wellness initiatives are strong; gaps persist in technology adoption and community engagement
Principle 4 Climate-Resilient Safety Practices	142.5	2.9–4.1 (Moderate)	65–75%	Effective climate risk assessments; policy updates and stakeholder participation require reinforcement

Source: author’s compilation.

below presents a detailed assessment of the framework’s performance, including scores, index ranges, and percentage compliance for every key principle.

4.1. Principle 1—Proactive Planning for Safe Operations

Principle 1 accomplished high compliance, particularly in emergency preparedness and voyage planning. Survey results (

Table 5. Principle 1 compliance summary.

Criteria’s	Weighted Score	Compliance Level	Summary
Voyage Planning	45.0	High	Frequent risk assessments and route optimization donate to strong compliance.
Risk Management	29.2	Moderate	Assessments are inconsistent across operators; regularization is needed
Emergency preparedness	42.7	High	Strong commitment to emergency drills, though diverse drill scenarios must be carried out
Incident Response	36.9	Moderate High	Effective response actions but occasional incident reviews constrain learning from past events

Source: author’s compilation.

) show that 75–90% of operators employ adaptive technologies and route-specific risk assessments in route optimization, thus increasing operational safety. However, the principle discloses breaches in risk management consistency where only a percentage of operators frequently conduct post-incident evaluations or update risk assessments. This specifies a requirement for systematic reviews to reinforce proactive planning. These results suggest that proactive planning is institutionally recognized but not yet embedded as a continuous learning process. The absence of systematic post-incident reviews indicates that operators remain reactive rather than fully proactive, limiting governance maturity in this area.

4.2. Principle 2—Governance with Safety-Centric Approach

The results (

Table 6. Principle 2 compliance summary.

Criteria’s	Average Score	Compliance Level	Summary
Transparency and Accountability	33.3	High	Significant acceptance of transparency measures, yet 30% need more systematic implementation
Governing Policy and Legal Instruments	49.3	High	Strong alignment with safety standards; however, inconsistent policy enforcement demands attention
Communication and Coordination	39.7	Moderate-High	Regular communication practices are in place, though improvements in clarity are desired
Stakeholder Engagement	40.4	High	High engagement from authorities and the community, but further involvement required for 25% of operators

Source: author’s compilation.

) demonstrate 75% compliance in governance measures, with strong cohesion to transparency, accountability, stakeholder engagement, and safety metrics. Nevertheless, 25% of operators display moderate compliance in policy enforcement and communication clarity consistency. While transparency and engagement are strong, inconsistent enforcement and weak communication point to an “implementation gap.” Policies exist but are not uniformly applied, suggesting that governance effectiveness depends not only on the presence of legal instruments but also on their consistent institutionalization across operators.

4.3. Principle 3—Effective Management and Monitoring

The survey (

Table 7. Principle 3 compliance summary.

Criteria’s	Average Score	Compliance Level	Summary
Quality Management Systems	19.2	Moderate	Quality management practices are intact, but environmental stewardship absences prioritization
Employee and Passenger Well-being	42.8	High	Effective career development and wellness initiatives, improving operational safety and employee satisfaction
Crew Training and Competence	40.8	High	High compliance in training education and certification, with further improvement required in technology-based training
Community Impact	34.9	Moderate High	Community engagement refining; expanded initiatives required for better local trust

Source: author’s compilation.

) discloses 70–85% compliance in monitoring and management measures, with strong observance of crew training and quality standards. Although high scores in safety culture initiatives replicate alignment with the SSG Framework, yet interconnected challenges remain in internal audits and community engagement, and advanced technology integration. High compliance in training and well-being indicates a growing investment in human capital. However, persistent weaknesses in audits, technology uptake, and community engagement reveal fragmented management structures. This constrains the sector’s ability to operationalize socio-technical and ESG principles in a coherent governance system.

4.4. Principle 4—Climate-Resilient Safety Practices

Moderate compliance (65–75%) imitates progress in environment sustainability and climate risk assessment initiatives (

Table 8. Principle 4 compliance summary.

Criteria’s	Average Score	Compliance Level	Summary
Climate Risk Assessments	44.6	High	Progressive tools widely adopted; updates essential for evolving risk
Policy Development	27.7	Moderate	Policy observance high; regular updates essential for long-term relevance
Sustainable Solutions	70.2	Moderate High	Sustainable practices broadly adopted; deeper stakeholder participation recommended

Source: author’s compilation.

). But it signifies gaps in policy development and stakeholder participation hamper alignment with global environmental standards. The moderate scores here highlight that climate governance in the domestic ferry sector remains underdeveloped. While operators adopt risk assessment tools, policy updates and inclusive participation lag behind, pointing to limited adaptive capacity to emerging climate and sustainability challenges.

4.5. Cross—Principle Insights

The survey discloses noteworthy compliance with governance principles, thus reflecting progress in safety and sustainability within the domestic ferry industry. On one side, strengths comprise proactive stakeholder engagement, risk assessments, and crew training, while on the other hand challenges in incident reviews, internal audits, and policy enforcement. Although progressions in climate risk technologies are notable, yet policy updates and stakeholder inclusion need attention. These findings underline achievements and stress areas for focused governance and sustainability improvements.

Figure 4 highlights the weakest-performing criteria across the four governance principles. Risk management under Principle 1 recorded the lowest weighted score among proactive planning measures, indicating insufficient consistency in applying systematic reviews and advanced technologies. Under Principle 2, transparency and accountability lagged, reflecting weak institutionalization of reporting and public disclosure. Principle 3 revealed critical gaps in quality management systems, particularly in embedding rights-based standards and sustainable practices. Finally, under Principle 4, policy development scored lowest, emphasizing the need for continuous updates and climate-specific frameworks. These results feature that strengthening these weak criteria is pivotal for improving overall governance maturity in the domestic ferry sector.

5. Discussion

This discussion interprets the survey findings in light of the PCI framework, highlighting key insights for governance, safety, and sustainability within the domestic ferry sector. Statistical validation through Pearson Correlations and Cronbach’s Alpha confirm the reliability of the framework and strengthens confidence in the observed trends. Below, the principles are discussed with a focus on their strategic, theoretical, and policy implications:

5.1. Principle 1—Ensure Proactive Planning for Safe Operations

In maritime governance, the critical role of proactive planning is emphasized by Principle 1 with four key criteria acknowledged by stakeholders. It enlists safety and sustainability objectives by incorporating rule-based governance (regulatory compliance) and rights-based governance (stakeholder accountability). ESG considerations such as enhancing social responsibility and minimizing environmental impact are integrated into strategies like voyage planning, emergency preparedness, and risk management.

Enhanced safety and sustainability measures like fuel-efficient voyage planning and advanced risk management technologies contributing to emissions reduction are supported by proactive planning under the SSG framework. The findings for this principle are illustrated below in Figure 5.

5.1.1. Voyage Planning

Current Findings

Survey results indicate that 90% of ferry operators perform route-specific risk assessments and 85% use advanced technologies to optimize voyages. However, 10% of operators lack comprehensive assessments, and the use of real-time weather data (score 3.3) is inconsistent, particularly in regions with limited access to forecasting tools.

Future Implications

Despite the fact high compliance rates are notable, uneven underutilization of weather forecasting tools and adoption of route-specific risk assessments indicate challenges. Effective voyage planning integrates sustainability by improving passenger safety and satisfaction (social), adjusting routes to minimize fuel consumption (environmental), and certifying compliance with industry standards (governance). Dealing with these challenges will warrant better alignment with international standards in reducing safety risks, and optimization fuel efficiency including operational efficiency.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis supports these conclusions, showing a strong correlation between thorough voyage planning and safety outcomes (r = 0.75) and high reliability in planning measures (α = 0.82).

5.1.2. Risk Management

Current Findings

Risk management practices are moderately well in place, with 82% implementing risk mitigation strategies and 78% of respondents showing regular assessments. With variability in the regularity of risk assessments (score 3.8) and the use of advanced technology (score 3.6), the weighted score of 29.2 weighs partial compliance. The gaps in consistent risk assessments (22% non-compliance) disclose an opportunity to improve governance coherence by harmonizing practices across operators.

Future Implications

These gaps point to opportunities for harmonizing risk management across operators. Strengthening the use of predictive tools and standardized assessment practices can improve operational safety, resilience to unforeseen risks, and alignment with ESG principles.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis shows a moderate-to-strong correlation between risk management practices and safety outcomes (r = 0.68) and good reliability in the measures (α = 0.79), supporting the need for consistent implementation.

5.1.3. Emergency Preparedness

Current Findings

Emergency preparedness is generally strong, with 92% crew participation and 88% of operators conducting regular drills. Stakeholder engagement scored 3.8, while drill effectiveness scored 4.1, indicating good compliance; however, 12% of operators lack regular drills, exposing potential gaps in readiness.

Future Implications

Enhanced emergency preparedness requires addressing gaps in stakeholder participation and scenario diversity. Scenario-based drills strengthen safety culture and stakeholder engagement (social), minimize crisis impacts and environmental harm (environmental), and reinforce accountability and resilience in decision-making (governance), thereby aligning operational readiness with sustainable maritime safety objectives.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis confirms a strong link between preparedness and operational safety (r = 0.70), with high reliability in the measures (α = 0.81), reinforcing the importance of consistent and varied emergency drills.

5.1.4. Incident Response

Current Findings

Incident response practices are moderately implemented, with 80% implementing corrective actions and 75% of operators conducting post-incident reviews. The room for improvement is reflected by the weighted score of 36.9, particularly among the 25% of operators who do not execute regular reviews. Although completion rates for corrective actions scored 4.1, demonstrating commendable effort, gaps in review frequency decrease the overall effectiveness of incident response mechanisms.

Future Implications

Systematic incident review and timely corrective actions are essential to translate lessons learned into operational improvements. Improved documentation and tracking will strengthen accountability, regulatory compliance, and overall safety culture.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis shows a strong relationship between incident response and safety outcomes (r = 0.72), with high reliability in the measures (α = 0.80), emphasizing the need for consistent and timely post-incident actions.

Principle 1 metrics (Figure 5) overall govern substantial compliance with proactive planning measures but stress challenges in domains such as incident response and risk management. By addressing these challenges, we will reinforce the domestic ferry industry’s ability to perform safe and efficient operations. Improvement in technology and systematic review processes will additionally align sector practices with international standards, thus fostering a culture of continuous safety reform. The importance of proactive planning in ensuring safe operations is affirmed by statistical validation through Pearson Correlation and Cronbach’s Alpha.

5.2. Principle 2—Vibrant Governance Policies with Safety-Centric Approach

Principle 2 yielded a combined weighted score of 162.7, indicating substantial progress in governance integration. Key practices include transparency, accountability, safety-oriented policies, and stakeholder engagement. These elements are central to cultivating a safety culture in the maritime sector. Their strength lies in aligning operational goals with governance principles, reinforcing both compliance and organizational resilience.

Despite these advancements, the findings unveil areas requiring further improvement, particularly in consistent enforcement of governance measures and communication clarity. Additionally, Figure 6 below provides a summary of Principle 2’s metrics.

5.2.1. Transparency and Accountability

Current Findings

Seventy percent of ferry operators implement transparency measures, including audits and publishing safety metrics (weighted score: 33.3). While these practices enhance accountability and stakeholder trust, inconsistent reporting standards and limited resources in some regions reduce comparability and audit frequency, creating uneven compliance.

Future Implications

To address these inconsistencies, the SSG Framework promotes standardized transparency initiatives. Adoption of Standardized Reporting Mechanisms (SRM) and a centralized audit database can mitigate regional disparities. Training and resource support for under-resourced regions can enhance auditing practices, while intensifying transparency efforts supports alignment with ESG principles, reinforces stakeholder trust, and strengthens safety-centric governance.

Statistical Analysis

Pearson correlation (r = 0.74) confirms a strong link between transparency and improved safety outcomes, while Cronbach’s Alpha (α = 0.80) validates the reliability of these metrics, supporting their uniform adoption under the SSG Framework.

5.2.2. Governing Policy and Legal Instruments

Current Findings

Around 85% of operators align with national and international safety measures, replicated in a weighted score of 49.3. Policy implementation reviews (scored 3.4), certify that updates are tracked and compliance is sustained. The regular pre-voyage safety briefings for passengers scored highly encouraged to integrate safety awareness into daily operations. Delays in policy implementation reviews, however, can result in obsolete safety practices and non-compliance with developing standards. Areas with restricted regulatory capacity face challenges in the enforcement of policies, creating a disparity in adherence rates.

Future Implications

Alignment of national and international standards and incorporation of adaptive policy modules under the SSG framework could ensure the adaptability of policies and real-time tracking. A two-tier compliance system (mandatory audits followed by corrective feedback loops) should be adopted by regional regulatory bodies. These features warrant those policies to remain responsive to growing safety requirements, mostly under dynamic operational and environmental conditions.

Statistical Analysis

Pearson Correlation (r = 0.69) stresses the impact of policy compliance on safety outcomes and Cronbach’s Alpha (α = 0.83) confirming reliable application, both can jointly advocate for dynamic policy updates and higher enforcement.

5.2.3. Communication and Coordination

Current Findings

This criterion achieved a weighted score of 39.7, with frequent safety communications scoring 4.3. Real-time safety updates via passenger information systems scored 3.9, highlighting progress yet revealing accessibility gaps. Limited digital infrastructure and irregular communication channels reduce coordination among stakeholders and delay non-compliance resolution (score 3.6).

Future Implications

The SSG framework recommends digital communication platforms (DCP) and safety information hubs (SIH) to standardize messaging and improve accessibility. Automated tracking for non-compliance can reduce resolution times and enhance documentation, supporting a coordinated, safety-centric approach.

Statistical Analysis

Pearson Correlation (r = 0.73) recommends that clear and frequent communication is crucial in maintaining safety standards and Cronbach’s Alpha (α = 0.82) reflects high uniformity in communication practices. Still, both findings highlight the critical role of effective communication in maintaining safety standards and improving incident response times.

5.2.4. Stakeholder Engagement

Current Findings

Survey results show 72% of operators actively engage with local authorities and communities, achieving a weighted score of 40.4. Decision-making inclusion scored 4.1, while community engagement scored 4.5, demonstrating strong collaborative efforts. Limited participation from certain stakeholder groups, however, restricts opportunities for innovation and safety improvements.

Future Implications

The SSG framework encourages community-centric governance programs and Safety Councils with inclusive membership. This approach institutionalizes participatory decision-making, fosters trust, and strengthens the safety culture, particularly in regions facing governance challenges.

Statistical Analysis

The positive relationship between stakeholder engagement and safety outcomes is highlighted by the Pearson Correlation (r = 0.71). Whereas, Cronbach’s Alpha (α = 0.79) validates the potential of enhanced stakeholder engagement in nurturing a safety culture.

5.3. Principle 3—Encourage Effective Management and Monitoring

Principle 3 (overall weight score 138.0) focuses on promoting employees, enhancing quality management systems, and passenger well-being, thus not only improving crew training and competence but also fostering a positive community impact. Despite progress in specific areas, there are still significant gaps that require strategic improvements. An overview of findings (Figure 7), implications, and statistical analyses for each criterion is given below under Principle 3.

5.3.1. Quality Management Systems

Current Findings

Survey results indicate moderate adoption of sustainable procurement and maintenance practices (weighted score 6.0), with rights-based quality standards for crew and passengers scoring slightly lower (weighted score 7.5). Integration of renewable energy and advanced technologies scored 3.2 (weighted score 6.4), showing progress in hybrid engines and monitoring systems, yet gaps remain in widespread implementation. The total weighted score of 19.9 reflects mixed sectoral progress.

Future Implications

The SSG framework supports eco-friendly operations and systematic monitoring. Initiatives such as a Sustainability and Quality Monitoring App and Green Procurement Alliances can enhance compliance, pool resources, reduce costs, and improve access to sustainable technologies.

Statistical Analysis

Pearson Correlation (r = 0.76) suggests a strong connection between better safety practices and strong quality management systems. Cronbach’s Alpha (α = 0.81) shows a high consistency in how these systems are applied across operators. To sustain high-quality standards across the ferry sector, the statistical findings necessitate the need for frequent audits and feedback mechanisms.

5.3.2. Employee and Passenger Well-Being

Current Findings

This criterion scored a total weighted score of 42.8 reflects firm practices in some areas, such as onboard amenities (4.2, weighted score: 12.6) and job contentment (4.0, weighted score: 12.0). Yet, wellness programs (3.8, weighted score: 11.4) and the injury/health incident rate (3.2, weighted score: 6.4) disclose breaches in monitoring and management.

Future Implications

Well-being gaps could adversely impact employee retention and customer satisfaction. Introduction of the Integrated Wellness Platforms offers data-driven perceptions for preventive measures, whereas Passenger Experience Surveys as part of ESG reporting can equate well-being programs with safety and satisfaction goals. By taking initiatives like Safety-First Wellness Campaigns, we can improve crew health and alertness, thus fostering a stronger safety culture.

Statistical Analysis

Pearson Correlation (r = 0.75) underlines the connection between well-being programs and better service quality and safety outcomes. Cronbach’s Alpha (α = 0.80) approves high reliability in these initiatives thereby suggesting broader acceptance which could yield sector-wide developments in passenger satisfaction and operational efficacy.

5.3.3. Crew Training and Competence

Current Findings

Survey results show strong compliance with international training standards (STCW) with a weighted score of 13.5. Gaps exist in advanced technology training such as VR simulations (weighted score 10.2), while ongoing skills development programs scored moderately at 11.1. Expertise in safety drills and emergency response remains a critical area (weighted score 6.0), highlighting the need for improved practical preparedness.

Future Implications

Creating Advanced Competence Development Hubs with state-of-the-art technologies like VR simulators can boost training efficiency. Familiarizing two-stage certification systems with ongoing refresher courses will certify sustained skills development and compliance to international standards.

Statistical Analysis

Pearson Correlation (r = 0.77) specifies a strong association between overall safety and crew training. Cronbach’s Alpha (α = 0.83) proposes high reliability in the training imparted methods across domestic ferry sector operators. Increasing the use of technologically will aid training programs and maintain crew certifications, which will strengthen safety and competence levels.

5.3.4. Community Impact

Current Findings

In the community impact criterion, the total weighted score of 34.9 replicates moderate engagement. Environmental stewardship (3.3, weighted score: 9.9) and local infrastructure impact (3.5, weighted score: 7.0) specify progress, yet challenges remain in safety and security measures (2.9, weighted score: 11.6) and community engagement (3.2, weighted score: 6.4).

Future Implications

Community-Driven Safety Settings can incorporate local stakeholders in decision-making, whereas Port-Centric Green Zones with renewable energy and pollution controls can improve safety and environmental quality. The establishment of partnerships with local businesses can strengthen community influence.

Statistical Analysis

Pearson correlation (r = 0.74) highlights the strong link between community involvement and positive safety outcomes. Cronbach’s Alpha (α = 0.82) confirms the reliability of community engagement practices, emphasizing the need to expand initiatives that improve local infrastructure, safety awareness, and sustainable operations.

Principle 3 (Figure 7) signifies the pivotal role of effective management and monitoring in promoting safety and sustainability within the domestic ferry sector. Improved quality management systems, crew training, community engagement, and wellness programs, remain fundamental to advancing these aims.

5.4. Principle 4—Promote Climate-Resilient Safety Practices

The increasing challenges of climate change require a modification in ferry operations, integrating resilience as a fundamental aspect of safety and sustainability. Due to the escalating risks from rising sea levels, extreme weather, and environmental uncertainties, operators must adopt innovative strategies to enhance adaptability. This will help in overcoming the adverse weather or poor visibility (fog) challenges thus reducing the incidents at sea. This principle, with an overall weighted score of 142.5, highlights development in, policy modifications, climate-specific risk assessments, and sustainable technologies but emphasizes critical gaps in resource-constrained areas. To bridge these challenges, predominantly in developing countries, systemic inequalities claim collaborative efforts. Figure 8 below illustrates the significant metrics.

5.4.1. Climate Risk Assessments

Current Findings

Survey results show that 82% of ferry operators incorporate climate-related risk assessments, achieving a weighted score of 44.6. Climate-specific route optimization and eco-friendly fleet designs both scored 4.0, reflecting progress in adapting operations to environmental challenges. Turnover time efficiency scored 4.2 (weighted score 12.6), indicating efforts to maintain safety while minimizing delays. Regional disparities persist, particularly in developing nations, where limited resources restrict access to advanced risk evaluation tools and systematic adaptation strategies, such as early-warning systems.

Future Implications

In order to bridge these gaps, it is imperative to prioritize advanced tools and region-specific interventions. The proposed Resilience Index for ferry operators could serve as a gauge for evaluating preparedness against extreme weather, incentivizing improvements. Additionally, launching region-specific pilot programs in collaboration with international organizations like the Green Climate Fund and IMO could help test and refine adaptation strategies, including AI-based route optimization and integrated risk management systems.

Statistical Analysis

Pearson Correlation (r = 0.78) demonstrates a strong link between climate risk assessments and operational safety, while Cronbach’s Alpha (α = 0.82) confirms the reliability of consistent implementation. These findings highlight the importance of continuous climate monitoring and adaptive measures to enhance resilience across the sector.

5.4.2. Policy Development

Current Findings

Operators demonstrate solid progress in developing climate-focused policies, with risk management frameworks scoring 4.0 (weighted score 16.0) and frequent policy updates scoring 3.9 (weighted score 11.7). However, gaps remain in actionable guidelines and regional enforcement mechanisms. While global frameworks like the Paris Agreement provide a foundation, inconsistent implementation across countries leads to outdated regulations and policy inertia, limiting climate resilience.

Future Implications

The approval of digital policy dashboards is endorsed to allow climate-resilient practices with real-time monitoring of compliance. These dashboards would incorporate data on safety metrics, emissions, and policy updates, thereby helping accountability and transparency. Moreover, regional collaborations, such as those facilitated by the African Union ASEAN, are vital to developing actionable, confined policy frameworks that are in line with international standards while addressing distinct regional issues.

Statistical Analysis

Pearson Correlation (r = 0.70) reveals a strong connection between climate resilience and policy development, thus demonstrating how operators with updated policies are better prepared to tackle climate risks. Although Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.79 proposes moderate consistency in policy application yet specifies room for development. Operators in regions with updated policies scored 15% higher on resilience metrics, stressing the prerequisite for widespread policy revision and capacity building.

5.4.3. Sustainable Solutions

Current Findings

The sector progresses in adopting sustainable practices, accomplishing a total weighted score of 70.2. Main developments include the adoption of green technologies (score: 4.2) such as hybrid engines and eco-friendly materials, together with energy efficiency initiatives (score: 4.1) and load optimization strategies (score: 4.2). Until now, smaller operators face challenges such as high retrofitting costs and inadequate engagement in sustainability initiatives. Resistance to change and inadequately structured training programs further reduce the widespread adoption of sustainable solutions.

Future Implications

To increase the sector’s sustainability potential, targeted interferences such as financial incentives for retrofitting and expanded training programs are necessary. By adopting circular economy practices, including waste reduction and recycling, we can enhance environmental outcomes while reducing operational costs. Furthermore, integrating sustainability-focused Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) into operational audits will offer a structured mechanism for tracking and refining progress toward international environmental objectives.

Statistical Analysis

The connection between green tech adoption and operational efficiency (r = 0.73) emphasizes the potential for scaling sustainable solutions. Operators who financed energy-efficient retrofitting reported a 20% decrease in fuel costs within two years, demonstrating the long-term profits of such investments. Cronbach’s Alpha (α = 0.81) shows consistency in sustainability practices among most operators. Increasing stakeholder participation and accepting advanced energy efficiency measures will be critical to accomplishing broader environmental objectives.

6. Governance Model and PCI Framework Integration in Maritime Safety

In order to address the challenges presented in Section 5 (Discussion), the research outlined an SSG framework. For evaluating and enhancing maritime safety and governance, this integrated framework affords a structured, iterative, and adaptable tool, particularly in the domestic ferry industry. By embedding mechanisms that enable ferry operators to proactively respond to emerging maritime risks, policy shifts, and technological developments, the framework builds on the foundation of continuous improvement. Despite the strengths of the integrated governance framework, implementing the SSG framework presents significant challenges. Regulatory inconsistencies across countries can lead to inconsistencies in safety and environmental practices [86]. Operational barriers, such as capacity-building demands and compliance enforcement across regions with diverse capabilities, remain pressing concerns [32]. Cultural resistance to change, particularly in regions with entrenched traditional practices, and limited access to reliable data for monitoring and evaluation further complicate implementation [12,87]. However, these challenges can be transformed into opportunities through targeted solutions. For instance, region-specific training programs, inclusive governance mechanisms, and adaptive monitoring systems provide scalable and culturally attuned interventions. These measures align with the SSG framework’s emphasis on change management principles, including the unfreezing of resistance and establishing mechanisms for iterative adaptation [33]. Although implementing ESG-compliant systems involves initial investment, operators can adopt scalable interventions, such as phased implementation of monitoring tools or pooled procurement of green technologies, to reduce individual financial burden. Over time, benefits such as reduced accidents, improved efficiency, lower insurance premiums, and enhanced customer trust can offset these costs.

The PCI framework underpins this approach by translating governance principles into clear, measurable criteria and performance indicators. It guides maritime operations to focus on environmental responsibility (e.g., reducing carbon emissions), social welfare (e.g., crew safety and community engagement), and governance accountability (e.g., audits and compliance monitoring) through ESG principles. The framework also identifies areas for improvement, supporting interventions that enhance safety compliance and operational efficiency. To put this into practice, the SSG framework integrates ESG measures alongside safety standards, ensuring governance addresses environmental goals (e.g., energy-efficient vessels), operational efficiency (e.g., streamlined policymaking), and social objectives (e.g., equitable access to services). Continuous recalibration of ESG indicators is achieved through the 3C’s risk-based approach (Check, Change, Calibrate). Stakeholder engagement, including focus groups and compliance audits, highlights inefficiencies and informs actionable solutions such as policy updates and optimized ferry scheduling.

Figure 9 validates the practical application of this integrated governance model, showing how governance principles are converted into measurable criteria and indicators. The framework aligns safety, sustainability, and social responsibility through cycles of performance evaluation, governance recalibration, and environmental and social viability assessments. This approach ensures governance, safety, and sustainability practices are dynamic and continuously improved. Using the PCI framework, operators can monitor safety metrics on a single dashboard, offering a clear view of operational gaps and improvement opportunities. While initial implementation may involve costs, the framework can generate long-term benefits by reducing accidents, improving efficiency, lowering insurance premiums, and enhancing operator reputation. Ultimately, it strengthens the sector’s ability to meet evolving safety and environmental standards.

This integrated approach not only certifies that governance, safety, and sustainability practices are not static but also continuously evaluated and refined by concentrating on ESG principles. However, employing the PCI framework allows operators to monitor safety metrics collectively on one dashboard, providing a systemic understanding of operational and organizational gaps. This broad picture enables the identification of areas for improvement and the measurement of economic benefits through enhanced safety and efficiency. Despite the initial costs, the framework can lead to long-term savings by reducing accidents, improving efficiency, and enhancing the reputation of operators, resulting in lower insurance premiums and increased customer trust. In this way, it reinforces the sector’s ability to adjust to developing safety and environmental standards.

7. Key Recommendations

To strengthen safety, sustainability, and governance in the domestic ferry industry, a set of prioritized recommendations is proposed, sequenced by urgency and feasibility:

a.

Improve Policy Coherence—Align national regulations with international frameworks (IMO, ISO, ESG). This foundational step is broadly achievable and provides consistency across governance and safety practices.

b.

Promote Stakeholder Collaboration—Foster cooperation among operators, regulators, passengers, and local communities. Such collaboration builds trust, raises awareness, and supports collective problem-solving with limited financial demands.

c.

Integrate Advanced Technologies—Introduce real-time analytics, predictive modeling, and renewable energy solutions. Phased or pooled implementation can make adoption more viable for smaller operators.

d.

Focus on ESG Integration—Institutionalize ESG considerations within operational policies and encourage knowledge-sharing across operators. This promotes long-term sustainability and scalability in line with resource availability.

e.

Improve Safety Training and Drills—Strengthen crew training on climate adaptation, emergency response, and advanced technologies. Programs can be adapted regionally depending on infrastructure and training capacity.

f.

Address Governance and Policy Gaps—Establish regular reviews of governance structures to improve accountability, transparency, and rights-based policies. This ensures continuous adaptation to evolving safety and environmental requirements.

8. Conclusions

The SSG framework introduced here provides a novel contribution to maritime safety governance by bridging global standards (IMO, ISO, ESG principles) with local operational realities. Unlike existing frameworks, it offers a dynamic, risk-based, and stakeholder-driven model that integrates ESG practices, climate-resilient strategies, and advanced technology adoption, ensuring adaptive, inclusive, and future-ready governance. This demonstrates the significance of a transformative approach to maritime safety governance in the domestic ferry sector. The anticipated SSG framework combines socio-technical systems (STS) and ESG principles, thus highlighting critical gaps in safety practices, policy coherence, and stakeholder engagement. We discourse on the systemic challenges that negotiated safety improvements and proactive approaches in the daily operations of the domestic ferry industry. Although there are significant advancements in international maritime standards, our findings disclose persistent challenges in enforcement and compliance at the national level, mainly in resource-constrained regional countries.

The PCI framework provides a structured, adaptive approach to evaluate and improve governance, ensuring responsiveness to evolving challenges through the 3C’s method approach (Check, Change, and Calibrate). We acknowledge that (i) 76% of respondents were from Asia, which may introduce regional bias; (ii) the study focuses on the domestic ferry sector, limiting generalization to other maritime contexts; (iii) the framework requires further validation before formal legislative adoption; and (iv) long-term impacts of ESG integration and governance reforms remain to be evaluated. Once validated, the PCI framework could inform national regulations by providing a structured, evidence-based approach to harmonize safety, governance, and sustainability standards within domestic ferry operations.

The research advances prioritized recommendations to guide policy and practice in the domestic ferry sector. These emphasize advanced technologies, climate-resilient practices, stakeholder collaboration, and the integration of ESG principles into governance structures. Taken together, these measures promote transparency, accountability, and shared responsibility, while reinforcing long-term safety and sustainability goals. Our findings emphasize the transition from traditional safety measures to an integrated governance model that unites safety, sustainability, and operational resilience. This approach not only addresses current insufficiencies but also foresees future challenges, thereby ensuring the domestic ferry industry progresses into a safer, more sustainable, and resilient mode of transportation. Our study assists as a call to action for all stakeholders to promise transformative change, setting a global standard for maritime safety and governance.