Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Autonomous ships: A study of critical success factors

  • Special Issue - Autonomous Shipping
  • Published:
Maritime Economics & Logistics Aims and scope

Abstract

Autonomous ships are promising technologies to enhance ocean sustainability (i.e., reduced air and water pollution, and illegal waste discharge), safety, maritime shipping automatization, and efficiency. Hence, examining the critical success factors (CSFs) of autonomous ship adoption is important. Nonetheless, no studies have holistically investigated the enablers of autonomous ship adoption, anchoring on strategic management principles. Hence, our paper addresses this research gap by proposing a theory-driven model which identifies and ranks the CSFs. Four theories, namely, diffusion of innovation, resource-based view, stakeholder theory, and contingency theory are synthesized to identify the four main CSFs and 17 sub-factors. Interviews were conducted and a survey questionnaire was administered to 126 managers working in shipping companies. Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process was applied to evaluate the relative importance of CSFs. It is found that the main CSFs are: (1) technological readiness, (2) environmental fit, (3) organizational resources, and (4) stakeholder readiness. Policy recommendations on promoting technological advancement in autonomous ships; formulating supportive legal frameworks and insurance regimes; creating an innovation-supportive environment; enabling cost subsidization; and providing workforce planning, training and allocation are provided to support autonomous ship adoption.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Source: Chang (1996)

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://marine-offshore.bureauveritas.com/ni641-guidelines-autonomous-shipping.

  2. https://nfas.autonomous-ship.org/resources_page/documents/.

  3. https://www.maritimeuk.org/media-centre/publications/maritime-autonomous-surface-ships-uk-code-practice.

References

  • Ahvenjärvi, S. 2016. The human element and autonomous ships. TransNav, the International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation 10: 517–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Álvarez-SanJaime, Ó., P. Cantos-Sánchez, R. Moner-Colonques, and J.J. Sempere-Monerris. 2013. Competition and horizontal integration in maritime freight transport. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 51: 67–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anning-Dorson, T. 2018. Innovation and competitive advantage creation. International Marketing Review.

  • Barney, J.B. 2001. Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on the resource-based view. Journal of Management 27 (6): 643–650.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J., M. Wright, and D.J. Ketchen. 2001. The resource-based view of the firm: Ten years after 1991. Journal of Management 27 (6): 625–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, E., A. Bryman, and B. Harley. 2018. Business research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogusawski, K., M. Gil, J. Nasur, and K. Wróbel. 2021. Autonomous shipping and its implications for maritime education and training (MET): A cadet’s perspective. Maritime Economics and Logistics.

  • Busby, J.S. 2019. The co-evolution of competition and parasitism in the resource-based view: A risk model of product counterfeiting. European Journal of Operational Research 276: 300–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carey, L. 2017. All hands off deck? The legal barriers to autonomous ships.

  • Chaal, M., Valdez Banda, O.A., Glomsrud, J.A., Basnet, S., Hirdaris, S. and Kujala, P., 2020. A framework to model the STPA hierarchical control structure of an autonomous ship. Safety Science, 132, 104939.

  • Chang, D.-Y. 1996. Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European Journal of Operational Research 95 (3): 649–655.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Z., Chen, D., Zhang, Y., Cheng, X., Zhang, M. and Wu, C., 2020. Deep learning for autonomous ship-oriented small ship detection. Safety Science, 130.

  • Choi, J.K., and Y.G. Ji. 2015. Investigating the importance of trust on adopting an autonomous vehicle. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 31 (10): 692–702.

    Google Scholar 

  • Da Cruz, M.R.P., J.J. Ferreira, and S.G. Azevedo. 2013. Key factors of seaport competitiveness based on the stakeholder perspective: An Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) model. Maritime Economics & Logistics 15 (4): 416–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • de la Peña Zarzuelo, I., M.J. Freire Soeane, and B. López Bermúdez. 2020. Industry 4.0 in the port and maritime industry: A literature review. Journal of Industrial Information Integration 20: 100173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L. 2001. The contingency theory of organizations. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • DuBois, D., and H. Prade. 1997. Fuzzy sets and systems: Theory and applications. New York: Academic Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felski, A., and K. Zwolak. 2020. The ocean-going autonomous ship—Challenges and threats. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 8 (1): 41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.E., J.S. Harrison, A.C. Wicks, B.L. Parmar, and S. De Colle. 2010. Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gausdal, A.H., K.V. Czachorowski, and M.Z. Solesvik. 2018. Applying blockchain technology: Evidence from Norwegian companies. Sustainability 10 (6): 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghaderi, H. 2019. Autonomous technologies in short sea shipping: Trends, feasibility and implications. Transport Reviews 39 (1): 152–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goerlandt, F. 2020. Maritime autonomous surface ships from a risk governance perspective: Interpretation and implications. Safety Science 128: 104758.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, K.W., and R.S. Moore. 2017. Abstract: Firm-level technology adoption processes—A qualitative investigation. In Creating marketing magic and innovative future marketing trends, ed. M. Stieler, 1123–1124. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halawi, L.A., J.E. Aronson, and R.V. McCarthy. 2005. Resource-based view of knowledge management for competitive advantage. The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management 3 (2): 75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, T., and S. Ghosh. 2016. Autonomous merchant vessels: Examination of factors that impact the effective implementation of unmanned ships. Australian Journal of Maritime & Ocean Affairs 8 (3): 206–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • IMO. 2018. IMO takes first steps to address autonomous ships.

  • Karvonen, H., and J. Martio. 2019. Human factors issues in maritime autonomous surface ship systems development. Proceedings of the 1st international conference on maritime autonomous surface ships. SINTEF Academic Press.

  • Kilincci, O., and S.A. Onal. 2011. Fuzzy AHP approach for supplier selection in a washing machine company. Expert Systems with Applications 38 (8): 9656–9664.

    Google Scholar 

  • Komianos, A. 2018. The autonomous shipping era. Operational, regulatory, and quality challenges. TransNav: International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation. https://doi.org/10.12716/1001.12.02.15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kretschmann, L., H.-C. Burmeister, and C. Jahn. 2017. Analyzing the economic benefit of unmanned autonomous ships: An exploratory cost-comparison between an autonomous and a conventional bulk carrier. Research in Transportation Business & Management 25: 76–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latif, B., Z. Mahmood, O. Tze San, R. Mohd Said, and A. Bakhsh. 2020. Coercive, normative and mimetic pressures as drivers of environmental management accounting adoption. Sustainability 12 (11): 4506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K. 2018. A communication challenges and framework for the control and monitoring of autonomous ship. In Advances in computer science and ubiquitous computing. Springer, Berlin, pp. 477–482.

  • Liu, Y., C.M. Eckert, and C. Earl. 2020. A review of fuzzy AHP methods for decision-making with subjective judgements. Expert Systems with Applications 161: 113738.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loh, H.S., K.F. Yuen, X. Wang, E. Surucu-Balci, G. Balci, and Q. Zhou. 2020. Airport selection criteria of low-cost carriers: A fuzzy analytical hierarchy process. Journal of Air Transport Management 83: 101759.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luken, R., and F. Van Rompaey. 2008. Drivers for and barriers to environmentally sound technology adoption by manufacturing plants in nine developing countries. Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (1, Supplement 1): S67–S77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallam, S.C., S. Nazir, and A. Sharma. 2020. The human element in future maritime operations–perceived impact of autonomous shipping. Ergonomics 63 (3): 334–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martins, E.C. and F. Terblanche. 2003. Building organisational culture that stimulates creativity and innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management.

  • McCann, L., H. Gedikoglu, B. Broz, J. Lory, and R. Massey. 2015. Effects of observability and complexity on farmers’ adoption of environmental practices. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 58 (8): 1346–1362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munim, Z.H. 2019. Autonomous ships: A review, innovative applications and future maritime business models. Supply Chain Forum: an International Journal 20: 266–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munim, Z.H., R. Saha, H. Schøyen, A.K.Y. Ng, and T.E. Notteboom. 2021. Autonomous ships for container shipping in the Arctic routes. Journal of Marine Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00773-021-00836-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nurani, A.I., A.T. Pramudyaningrum, S.R. Fadhila, S. Sangadji, and W. Hartono. 2017. Analytical hierarchy process (AHP), Fuzzy AHP, and TOPSIS for determining bridge maintenance priority scale in Banjarsari, Surakarta, International Journal of Science and Applied Science: Conference Series, 60–71.

  • Omalaja, M.A., and O. Eruola. 2011. Strategic management theory: Concepts, analysis and critiques in relation to corporate competitive advantage from the resource-based philosophy. Economic Analysis 44 (1–2): 59–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, K.-S., Y.-J. Seo, A. Kim, and M.-H. Ha. 2018. Ship acquisition of shipping companies by sale & purchase activities for sustainable growth: Exploratory fuzzy-AHP application. Sustainability 10 (6): 1763.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porathe, T., Å. Hoem, Ø.J. Rødseth, K. Fjørtoft, and S.O. Johnsen. 2018. At least as safe as manned shipping? Autonomous shipping, safety and “human error”. Safety and reliability–safe societies in a changing world. Proceedings of ESREL 2018, June 17–21, 2018, Trondheim, Norway.

  • Rogers, E.M. 2010. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. 1980. The analytic hierarchy process: Planning, priority setting, resource allocation. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T.L. 1990. Multicriteria decision making: The analytic hierarchy process: Planning, priority setting resource allocation. Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T.L. 2008. Relative measurement and its generalization in decision making why pairwise comparisons are central in mathematics for the measurement of intangible factors the analytic hierarchy/network process. RACSAM-Revista De La Real Academia De Ciencias Exactas, Fisicas y Naturales. Serie a. Matematicas 102 (2): 251–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabahi, S., and M.M. Parast. 2020. Firm innovation and supply chain resilience: A dynamic capability perspective. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications 23 (3): 254–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seyal, A.H. 2015. Examining the role of transformational leadership in technology adoption: Evidence from Bruneian technical & vocational establishments (TVE). Journal of Education and Practice 6 (8): 32–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, A., and T.-E. Kim. 2021. Exploring technical and non-technical competencies of navigators for autonomous shipping. Maritime Policy & Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2021.1914874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song, D.-W., and K.-T. Yeo. 2004. A competitive analysis of Chinese container ports using the analytic hierarchy process. Maritime Economics & Logistics 6 (1): 34–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, A.J., D. Buhalis, and M. Moital. 2012. A hierarchical model of technology adoption for small owner-managed travel firms: An organizational decision-making and leadership perspective. Tourism Management 33 (5): 1195–1208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streng, M., and B. Kuipers. 2020. Economic, social, and environmental impacts of autonomous shipping strategies. In Maritime supply chains, ed. T. Vanelslander and C. Sys, 135–145. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tran, T.M.T., K.F. Yuen, K.X. Li, G. Balci, and F. Ma. 2020. A theory-driven identification and ranking of the critical success factors of sustainable shipping management. Journal of Cleaner Production 243: 118401.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNCTAD. 2018. Review of maritime transport

  • UNCTAD. 2020. Review of maritime transport.

  • Utne, I.B., B. Rokseth, A.J. Sørensen, and J.E. Vinnem. 2020. Towards supervisory risk control of autonomous ships. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 196: 106757.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Laarhoven, P.J.M., and W. Pedrycz. 1983. A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 11 (1): 229–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., K.F. Yuen, Y.D. Wong, and C.C. Teo. 2018. An innovation diffusion perspective of e-consumers’ initial adoption of self-collection service via automated parcel station. The International Journal of Logistics Management.

  • Yuen, K.F., F. Ma, X. Wang, and G. Lee. 2020. The role of trust in influencing consumers' adoption of automated vehicles: An application of the health belief model. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 1–13.

  • Yuen, K.F., X. Wang, F. Ma, G. Lee, and X. Li. 2019. Critical success factors of supply chain integration in container shipping: An application of resource-based view theory. Maritime Policy & Management 46 (6): 653–668.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuen, K.F., X. Wang, L. Ng, and Y. Wong. 2018. An investigation of customers’ intention to use self-collection services for last-mile delivery. Transport Policy 66: 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuen, K.F., X. Wang, Y. Wong, and Q. Zhou. 2017. Antecedents and outcomes of sustainable shipping practices: The integration of stakeholder and behavioural theories. Transportation Research Part E Logistics and Transportation Review 108: 18–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, X.-Y., J.-J. Huang, F.-W. Wang, Z.-L. Wu, and Z.-J. Liu. 2020. A Study of the application barriers to the use of autonomous ships posed by the good seamanship requirement of COLREGs. The Journal of Navigation 73 (3): 710–725.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, T., S. Haugen, and Y. Liu. 2019. Human factor challenges and possible solutions for the operation of highly autonomous ships.

  • Zhu, T., S. Haugen, and Y. Liu. 2020. Human factor challenges and possible solutions for the operation of highly autonomous ships, Proceedings of the 29th European safety and reliability conference, ESREL 2019, 261–268.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    Xue Li & Kum Fai Yuen

Authors
  1. Xue Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kum Fai Yuen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kum Fai Yuen.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table

Table 11 Main factors and sub-factors for autonomous ship adoption
Full size table

11.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, X., Yuen, K.F. Autonomous ships: A study of critical success factors. Marit Econ Logist 24, 228–254 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-022-00212-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-022-00212-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation