## 3 Competence Identification Model for RO
### Goal-Based Gap Analysis (GBGA)  
Goal-based gap analysis (GBGA), constructed in the present research, integrates the goal-based method and gap analysis (see Figure 2).  
Figure 2: Scheme of goal-based gap analysis.  
The first step of GBGA is to set a goal that is clear and easy to understand. Theoretically, a high level of autonomous ships might enable to decrease the workload of RO since the autonomous system, such as autopilot, can replace some of the navigation tasks. If the automation system has some decision-making ability on its own with higher and sufficient reliability in the future, RO can trust the system and decide with low SA [14]. Nevertheless, it is expected that RO will be sought to retain the high level of SA for deciding with confidence, e.g., in case of sudden overtakes of the task from the autonomous system. In fact, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [30] suggest that navigators who retain better quality SA tend to decrease the chance to face accidents because they are aware of and control the critical condition more comfortably. Their study also points out that the poor SA is 'a sharp end causal factor' for human error. [PERSON] [31] stresses that SA should be maintained during remote control. DNVGL further suggests that RO should retain the same or better level of SA despite the lack of 'human sense' [32]. Taking these into account, it is appropriate to set the goal as to keep the same quality of SA for RO as OOW onboard a ship.  
The second step is to identify the goal constraint, which is almost the same as the goal obstacle, which [PERSON] [33] defines as 'behaviours or other goals that prevent or block the achievement of a given goal'. The beginning of goal constraint in Figure 2 is the restriction on the interface of the information between RCC and the environment inside/outside the bridge of a ship because of, for example, the limit of data communication capacity. This restriction leads to the lack of information resources, especially ship sense, i.e., RO will have limited ship sense [34]. The lack of information resources connects the lack of required information for each SA. High level of lack emerges as the difficulty of ROs for being engaged in the navigational watch (RQ1 in Section 1) arises.  
Once the goal constraints are identified, the next step is to set measures to overcome the limitation and keep the provided goal. Since the present research focuses on the competence of RO, it adopts the acquisition of additional competence as a solution to supplement the lack of ship sense.  
Finally, regulatory requirements on competence for RO will be identified by utilising the provisions of the STCW Convention. These additional competence and regulatory requirements, especially regulatory requirements, are the answers of RQ2 in Section 1.  
Through all stages, gap analysis is used. Maritime UK [5] recommends HAZard and OPerability studies (HAZOP) to develop training materials for MASS operators, including ROs. The gap analysis of workshop-type is used to compare the current training level with further training requirements. [PERSON] [35] utilises related accidents that happened in the past to analyse the relationship between the cause of the accidents and the lack of competence on a power plant in a ship. [PERSON] et al. [36] use a questionnaire survey to OOW of commercial vessels. The method by [PERSON] et al. [37] is to measure the gaps in paediatric practice training through a focus group discussion. Although there are various methods for gap analysis, one of the key points is to involve experienced experts who have enough knowledge, in this case, on competence-based assessment and training described in the STCW Convention as participants of the discussion.