Developing a STAMP-Based Port Risk Control Structure to Understand Interorganizational Risk Management in Canadian Ports
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interorganizational risk management (IRM) in Canadian ports faces significant challenges due to the interconnected nature of operations and the interdependence of safety, security, environmental, organizational, and technological risks. Existing siloed risk management frameworks often fail to capture these dynamic interrelations, underscoring the need for a more integrated, systemic approach. This study introduces a Port Risk Control Structure (PRCS) designed specifically for Canadian Port Authorities (CPAs), based on the Systems-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP). The PRCS maps control actions, feedback loops, and stakeholder roles across international, national, and local levels to better reflect the layered nature of port governance. The model aims to clarify the roles of key actors, such as the International Maritime Organization, Transport Canada, and local port stakeholders, and is designed to facilitate more structured risk identification, communication, and coordination across organizational levels. Although the model has not yet been empirically validated, its design suggests strong potential for scalability and adaptability across diverse port contexts. This research contributes to IRM literature by illustrating how STAMP principles can be operationalized within port systems. Future research will focus on integrating a taxonomy of IRM challenges to refine control structures and feedback mechanisms in response to evolving risks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".