Human element is a vital cog in maritime safety ecosystem:
https://safetyatsea.net/opinion/opinion-commentary/2019/a-vital-cog-in-the-safety-ecosystem/?utm_campaign=CL_SAS_Newswire1_20190924_SAS_e-production_E-45048_GT_0924_0400&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Eloqua
While technology take over more and more of the decision making it may be time to share the burden of responsibility of command between the Master and … WHO?
The question may not be who shares the burden of command, but how human judgment is preserved as autonomy assumes more operational decisions.
DoD 3000.09 requires “appropriate levels of human judgment,” yet we still lack an operational framework for defining, engineering, and evaluating what that means in practice. Accountability cannot simply migrate between people or systems—it must be anchored to the conditions that enable trustworthy human judgment under uncertainty.
Mission owners aren’t just responsible for delivering capabilities; they’re responsible for preserving the decision space that allows commanders to exercise sound judgment when it matters most. In that sense, preserving human judgment is itself an operational capability—one that deserves the same rigor as safety, resilience, and mission assurance.
IMO: as long as questions like these are phrased by academics, using jargon and buzzwords common only to academics, most sailors will ignore the question.
