A hybrid methodology to identify port state control issues in Asia–Pacific

Port State Control (PSC) inspections play a crucial yet challenging role in detecting substandard ships. However, the process becomes more complicated when several states in large geographical regions agree to collaborate with the same rules. This study addresses this challenge by proposing an innovative hybrid methodology that combines content analysis of PSC appeal cases with the Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (F-AHP) to assess regulatory inconsistencies within the Asia–Pacific region. A total of 43 PSC appeal cases from the Tokyo MoU were analysed to identify key areas of regulatory disputes. The findings indicate that SOLAS (53%) and MARPOL (26%) regulations are the most frequently contested, followed by document validity and equipment maintenance issues. Notably, in 84% of successful appeals, PSC officers were found to have applied overly strict interpretations or detained ships without conducting sufficient additional tests. Post-2015, successful appeals favouring shipowners increased to 68%, primarily due to deficiencies related to the International Safety Management (ISM) Code. By applying F-AHP and expert reviews, the study prioritised the most problematic areas of disputes, assigning a combined weight of 0.728 to procedural non-compliance and PSC officers' omissions. Key examples include expired ship equipment certificates (0.159), disagreements on regulatory interpretation and allegations of hidden defects by the crew (0.145), and failure to perform detailed examinations or additional tests (0.131). To address these challenges, the paper recommends adopting digital tools for recording inspections and real-time verification of certificates. Furthermore, clear communication of PSC procedures to seafarers may reduce disputes in ship detentions. These findings offer practical insights for policymakers and port authorities to reduce unnecessary delays and improve compliance through inspection consistency.