The International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters (Polar Code) was adopted by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and entered into force on 1 January 2017. It provides a comprehensive treatment of topics relevant to ships operating in Polar regions. From a design perspective, in scenarios where ice exposure and the consequences of ice-induced damage are the same, it is rational to require the same ice class and structural performance for such vessels. Design requirements for different ice class vessels are provided in the Polar Code. The Polar Operational Limit Assessment Risk Indexing System (POLARIS) methodology provided in the Polar Code offers valuable guidance regarding operational limits for ice class vessels in different ice conditions. POLARIS has been shown to well reflect structural risk, and serves as a valuable decision support tool for operations and route planning. At the same time, the current POLARIS methodology does not directly account for the potential consequences resulting from a vessel incurring ice-induced damage. While two vessels of the same ice class operating in the same ice conditions would have similar structural risk profiles, the overall risk profile of each vessel will depend on the magnitude of consequences, should an incident or accident occur. In this paper, a new framework is presented that augments the current POLARIS methodology to model consequences. It has been developed on the premise that vessels of a given class with higher potential life-safety, environmental, or socio-economic consequences should be operated more conservatively. The framework supports voyage planning and real-time operational decision making through assignment of operational criteria based on the likelihood of ice-induced damage and the potential consequences. The objective of this framework is to enhance the safety of passengers and crews and the protection of the Arctic environment and its stakeholders. The challenges associated with establishing risk perspectives and evaluating consequences for Arctic ship operations are discussed. This methodology proposes a pragmatic pathway to link ongoing scientific research with risk-based methods to help inform recommended practices and decision support tools. Example scenarios are considered to illustrate the flexibility of the methodology in accounting for varied risk profiles for different vessel types, as well as incorporating input from local communities and risk and environmental impact assessments.

While society benefits from Arctic shipping, it is necessary to recognize that ship operations in Arctic waters pose significant risks to people, the environment, and property. To support the management of those risks, this article presents a comprehensive approach addressing both short-term operational risks, as well as risks related to long-term extreme ice loads. For the management of short-term operational risks, an extended version of the Polar Operational Limit Assessment Risk Indexing System (POLARIS) considering the magnitude of the consequences of potential adverse events is proposed. For the management of risks related to long-term extreme ice loads, guidelines are provided for using existing analytical, numerical, and semi-empirical methods. In addition, to support the design of ice class ship structures, the article proposes a novel approach that can be used in the conceptual design phase for the determination of preliminary scantlings for primary hull structural members.

Expert knowledge was elicited to develop a life-safety consequence severity model for Arctic ship evacuations (Browne et al., 2021). This paper presents the associated experimental design and data. Through semi-structured interviews, participants identified factors that influence consequence severity. Through a survey, participants evaluated consequence severity of different ship evacuation scenarios. The methodology represents a two-phased mixed methods design. Life-safety consequence severity is measured as the expected number of fatalities resulting from an evacuation. Participants of the study were experts in various fields of the Arctic maritime industry. Sixteen experts participated in the interviews and the survey (sample size: n = 16). Sample size for the interviews was based on thematic data saturation. Predominantly the same group of experts participated in the survey. Interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. Interview data informed the development of evacuation scenarios defined in the survey. The interview guide and survey questions are presented. Data tables present the codes that emerged through thematic analysis, including code reference counts and code intersection counts. Data tables present the raw data of participant responses to the survey. This data can support further investigation of factors that influence consequence severity, definition of a broader range of evacuation scenarios, and establishment of associated consequence severities. This data has value to Arctic maritime policy-makers, researchers, and other stakeholders engaged in maritime operational risk management.