Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to highlight the contradictions in the current maritime education and training system (MET), which is based on competency-based education, training and assessment, and to theorize the failure to make the training useful. Design/methodology/approach – A case study of education and training in the international maritime domain was conducted. Data sources include historical documents, rules and regulations concerning MET, syllabi, handouts, sample questions, field notes, an ethnographic study in a maritime college and interviews conducted with experienced mariners and course lecturer. Findings – There are contradictions in the education and training system that do not allow the targeted objectives to be fulfilled. Fundamentally, the assessment system has changed the objectives of the education and training practices from learning skills and knowledge required on-board ships to passing competency examinations. Practical implications – The practical implication of this research is valuable for the International Maritime Organization, marine administration and maritime training institutes to think over the competency-based system in practice today and how to improve the present maritime training and assessment system in order to achieve its authentic objectives. Originality/value – This research identified and bridged the gap in literature and research of competency-based training and assessment in the maritime domain and provides practical solutions for improving this system.

Past and ongoing research in the design, development, and implementation of fully autonomous and unmanned ships has revealed operational, environmental, and financial benefits for the maritime industry. However, with the benefits of being highly intuitive and intelligent systems, there are risks of mistakes and failures caused by their operators i.e. the unavoidable human element. With predictions of both seafarers and non-seafarers to be involved in the critical operations of autonomous vessels, it was imperative to identify key maritime stakeholders and conduct research which would investigate their beliefs and perceptions on the training requirements of the future shore-based operators. The key maritime stakeholders were 37 participants who were a mix of seafarers, maritime regulators, maritime education and training providers, and persons involved in other facets of the maritime business. The qualitative research involving in-depth interviews with the participants provided key insights which helped in identifying essential skills and competencies towards building a recommendatory framework which can be used as a basis to reform the Standards of Training, Certification, and Watchkeeping (STCW) Code in order to make seafarers future ready.

Policy implementation research in general and educational policy in particular is loosely connected to policy-making processes. There is a gap particularly in the field of vocational education. This often leads to conflicts and contradictions between policy-maker objectives and end-user implementation. To avoid such a disconnect, the relation between the world of end users and the world of decision-makers should be carefully constructed. This might be done through connecting the process of decision-making to implementation and carefully developing methods that encompass the demands of decision-makers and the needs and informational requirements of end users. Our intensive case study research on the process of a vocational education reform in the marine sector confirms that the lack of robust connection and active engagement of implementers as the end-users in the design of the policy created challenges for its implementation. Using a theoretical framework based on the notion of boundary objects we bring an alternative to current practice by creating the potential to illuminate and remove tensions and challenges for policy implementation. From there we infer that adopting this concept for policy design may prevent such conflicts and contradictions and result in successful implementation.

The high frequency of maritime accidents and incidents occurring at sea has been a major challenge for the maritime industry in the last decades. The majority of these accidents are attributed to seafarers’ poor performance. This, despite the fact that the international maritime domain continues to adopt and update conventions regulating maritime safety to mitigate these accidents from occurring. In this paper, utilising a qualitative research approach, we show through a socio-cultural contextual perspective that time constraints as a major influencing factor in causing task deviations at sea which leads to dangerous situations. We analyse how some of the present barriers in place to prevent accidents at sea are in effect prompt seafarers who are working under time pressure to deviate from their task. Moreover, the paper discusses the social constituents such as job insecurity and the seafarers’ viewpoint towards the ship operators’ commitment to safe ship operations are crucial in motivating seafarers’ deviating from the task at hand when faced with time pressure.

Background: The maritime industry is undergoing a profound transformation to meet global decarbonization goals. As Industry 4.0 advanced digital technologies are increasingly integrated into shipping operations, the role of the human element is evolving significantly. This intersection of decarbonization, digitalization, and human element/workforce transformation lays the foundation for more structured initiatives such as Green Digital Shipping Corridors (GDSCs), a strategic solution to scale zero-emission, smart maritime routes. Methods: This paper explores the interconnected roles of decarbonization, digitalization, and human capital development through a systematic literature review. It examines how these pillars converge in the implementation of GDSCs, drawing on academic and industry sources to identify challenges and opportunities in workforce readiness, policy integration, and technological adoption. Results: The findings underscore the necessity of coordinated action across the three pillars, particularly highlighting the importance of structured training programs, cross-sector collaboration, and standardized regulations. GDSCs are presented as an applied framework to align these transitions, enabling scalable, digitally enabled, low-emission maritime routes. Conclusions: There is a significant gap in current research that holistically connects the human factor with technological and environmental imperatives in the context of maritime transformation. This paper addresses that gap by introducing GDSCs as a strategic outcome of integrated change, providing actionable insights for policymakers, industry leaders, and educators aiming to advance sustainable shipping.