Journal of Scientific Research & Reports 25(2): 1-7, 2019; Article no.JSRR.52608 ISSN: 2320-0227 A Comparative Analysis on Maritime Disaster Management between Korea and Sweden Lock Namkung1* 1Department of Security Management, Kyonggi University, Suwon, Gyeonggi, Republic of Korea. Author’s contribution The sole author designed, analysed, interpreted and prepared the manuscript. Article Information DOI: 10.9734/JSRR/2019/v25i230188 Editor(s): (1) Dr. Rahul Kumar Jaiswal, National Institute of Hydrology, WALMI Campus, Bhopal, India. (2) Prof. Dr. Ani Matei, Faculty of Public Administration, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration Bucharest, Romania. Reviewers: (1) Danny Faturachman, Universitas Darma Persada, Indonesia. (2) Helder Cesar Tinoco, Federal Institute of Rio de Janeiro (Instituto Federal do Rio de Janeiro), Brazil. (3) Yung Yau, City University of Hong Kong, China. Complete Peer review History: http://www.sdiarticle4.com/review-history/52608 Received 20 August 2019 Original Research Article Accepted 24 October 2019 Published 25 October 2019 ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to illustrate the importance of crisis management planning and effective governance by comparing and analysing cases related to crisis management in disasters. Firstly, this study analyses the sinking of the MV Sewol of Korea, one of the worst ship accidents in the world, and criticise the crisis management plan. It also applies relevant methodologies to identify how to manage incidents and how to perform them for better management. Secondly, this analyses the sinking accident and crisis management plan of MS Estonia in Sweden which is one of the worst ship accident in the world. As a result, MS Estonia disaster triggered improvements in safety policies in Sweden. This study argues that Korean government can learn important lessons from Sweden to avoid the "vicious cycle" that exists in South Korea's policy decisions related to safety issues. Compared with the case in Sweden, this study suggests that further measures are needed to end the vicious circle of low safety standards and low confidence in Korea. Compared to the case in Sweden, a few policy recommendations are suggested in this study. Keywords: Disaster management; maritime disaster; vicious cycle; MV Sewol; Ms Estonia. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ *Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected]; Namkung; JSRR, 25(2): 1-7, 2019; Article no.JSRR.52608 1. INTRODUCTION citizens in Korea visited approximately 2,204,224 people in the first 100 days after the sinking, and The purpose of this study is to illustrate the 67 memorials were established [2]. In addition, importance of crisis management planning and citizens expressed sympathy by wearing a yellow effective governance by comparing and ribbon. They demanded that the government analysing cases related to crisis management in enact new safety laws and thoroughly investigate disasters. Firstly, this study analyses the sinking the events and punish those directly contributing of the MV Sewol of Korea, one of the worst ship to the chain of events. In summary, the MV accidents in the world, and criticise the crisis Sewol sinking focuses on Korea's policy management plan. It also applies relevant decisions with defined by Birkland [3]. Relatively methodologies to identify how to manage uncommon; the potential to cause a potentially incidents and how to perform them for better larger future can be identified or defined as management. Secondly, this analyses the harmful. It is harmful to a specific geographic sinking accident and crisis management plan of area or community of interest. "It is known to MS Estonia in Sweden which is one of the worst policy makers and the public at the same time." ship accident in the world. As a result, MS Following a generally focused event is a series of Estonia disaster triggered improvements in new policy developments in the field. Therefore, safety policies in Sweden. the Korean government can adopt or develop new safety-related policies in response to the This study argues that Korean government can Sewol disaster [2,4]. learn important lessons from Sweden to avoid the "vicious cycle" that exists in South Korea's Cheonghae Shipping has continuously pursued policy decisions related to safety issues. Also it economic benefits. First, the company minimized provides two figures. First, it presents relevant security investments, accounting for only 0.001% data on the safety levels of Sweden and Korea of the 2013 safety training session gross revenue. (and some other OECD countries) and analyses Second, the company did not regard the crew as the fundamental structural reasons for the a top priority. Three of the five MV Sewol crew, relative success and failure of the two safety including the captain, were temporary workers. policies. Second, this study analyses the Their overall salary was 20-30% lower than other theoretical framework through the Sendai coastline shipping companies paid. This poor framework of the tragedies of MV Sewol and MS environment and lack of safety education clearly Estonia. affected the way the crew responded in the event of a disaster [5]. 2. THE SINKING OF MV SEWOL IN SOUTH KOREA Third, Cheonghae shipping did not comply with regulations to increase profits. Before the On April 16, 2014, the South Korean ship MV disaster, MV crew members forged the has sunk nearby the southwest of Jindo. This documents indicating the amount of cargo and tragedy took away 304 people's life and students the number of cargoes when reporting to the who made a school excursion to Jeju Island Korea Maritime Institute, which is responsible for occupied a significant portion of the victims so passenger and cargo safety. The reported numerous Korean people grieved throughout the amount was 657 tons of cargo and 150 country. The public was quick to pay attention to passenger cars. However, the ship actually had the fact that this disaster occurred artificially. If the cargoes of 2,142 tons, and 185 vehicles. The appropriate safeguards and crisis management ship would have to have 1565 tons of ballast procedures had been in place, it could have water, but only had 761 tons in the ballast water easily been prevented [1]. tanks which was not enough to actually stabilize the ship on the day of the disaster. This Media reports have focused on issues such as fabricated reporting risked the lives of the failure of the Korean government to manage passengers, yet the company falsified 56 of the disasters and the unethical business practices of 118 trips from January to April 2014 [6]. people related to Cheonghae Shipping, a MV- age holding company. The families of the victims Fourth, the MV crew members were found to waited months in the Pang-Mok harbor, hoping to have contributed to the tragedy by committing find dead bodies in the sea. The pressure on the bribes three members of the Incheon Coast government's inability that was the main cause of Guard after the vessel was renovated. Thereby the disaster spread widely. After the disaster, the avoiding the Cheonghae Shipping from 2 Namkung; JSRR, 25(2): 1-7, 2019; Article no.JSRR.52608 submitting important documents. Finally, the shipbuilding industry was limited, and foundation Cheonghae Shipping lowered the ship's weight work for the construction of the bow visor was by 100 tons and over-estimated the ship's not well established" [8]. Crucially, the report carrying capacity to be approved by the Korean suggested that the accident was not caused by shipbuilding company. Ultimately, the problems related to corruption, crew failure, or incompetence of the shipbuilding industry and clear regulatory failure. Instead, the "Black the production of the Chunghaejin Shipping were Swan" catastrophe occurred and all existing jointly responsible for the tragedy of the Sewol [7]. safeguards overwhelmed due to weather conditions at night [8]. 3. THE SINKING OF MS ESTONIA IN SWEDEN Since the sinking of MS Estonia, the Swedish government has worked with all interested MS Estonia sank on September 28, 1994, and parties to establish an agency to investigate the killed 852 people, including 501 Swedes and 290 cause of the accident. Table 1 summarises the Estonians. The ship was first introduced in 1980 main activities of the first year after the accident. by the Finnish company Rederiaktiebolaget and Immediately after the accident, on 29 September operated the routes between Turku (Finland), 1994, after the meeting of the Prime Ministers of Mariehamn (Finland) and Stockholm (Sweden). It Finland, Estonia and Sweden, a joint accident was sold to the Estline Maritime Company in investigation committee was formed to Estonia in 1993. All members of the crew were investigate the technical cause of the accident. qualified, and the language of communication on The second group, "analysgruppen", was formed board was Estonian, which everyone understood by the Swedish government to investigate the [8]. actions of all state bodies (including parastatal bodies) involved in dealing with accidents and MS Estonia departed from Stockholm at 7:15 pm their repercussions [8]. on September 27, and 989 people boarded. The weather showed serene breezes and mild The commission initially consists of nine maritime weather, but later weather worsened and some and judicial experts from three countries, passengers reported seasickness immediately Sweden, Estonia and Finland, and has only one after midnight. At 1 am, one of the crews heard a career politician. It was free to work loud sound like a wave of ship bow. He reported independently of the government. The analyst it as a normal occurrence, but there was no group, discussed further in the next section, ordinary incident, MS Estonia's bow visor was consists of five Swedish nationals (three scholars, dismantled at 1:15 am and seawater began to one union leader and the head of the Swedish penetrate. At 1:20 am, the crew alarmed and the Red Cross).