PDF Download
PubReader
Export Citation
Email the Author
Share Facebook
Share Twitter
Cited by 0 Article
Metrics (View:229)
I. Introduction
The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States were the largest terrorist attack in human history. They hijacked four American airliners and crashed them into buildings including the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, killing more than 2,500 people, including 265 on board and 2,267 on the ground. The terrorists hijacked the aircraft by threatening the crew using legally carried items(Kang and Ahn, 2004). As a result of this aviation terrorist incident, aviation security has been strengthened internationally, and new organizations and systematic security have been implemented in aviation and airports. Additionally, aviation security in many countries has applied the same level of screening to all passengers and baggage(Kim, 2011). According to Article 32, Paragraph 1 of the Aviation Safety and Security Act, items prohibited from being carried onboard aircraft and checked baggage are categorized(Kim, 2013). As such, because aviation security is not a problem for just one country, international organizations have made multifaceted efforts to strengthen civil aviation security worldwide. In particular, ICAO(International Civil Aviation Organization) recognized the importance of security early on and established many regulations and various improvement programs to contribute to the development of international civil aviation security(Lee, 2019). However, despite various efforts, items brought onto aircraft are being used for in-flight disturbances and terrorism, posing a serious threat to the safety of passengers and air operations. In this way, items prohibited from being brought on board an aircraft are directly related to aviation safety and security, and are also important for the safe use of aviation by passengers boarding the aircraft. Since aircraft accidents usually result in the death of all on board, prior safety assurance and maintenance of order are required rather than after-the-fact relief measures(Jang, 2014).
The purpose of this study was to determine whether passengers can accurately judge the possibility of bringing items on board an aircraft based on accurate criteria, and whether the type of item affects their perception of risk and their judgment of the possibility of bringing items on board. As of October 2023, the number of cases of prohibited carry-on items exceeded 800,000. According to Korea Airports Corporation, the number of cases of prohibited items being caught onboard increased by 19.5% from a year ago to 802,578 due to the early recovery in international flight demand. The airport authority said that if this trend continues, the number of cases detected this year is expected to reach one million(Park, 2023). Ultimately, it is about taking precautions in advance, accurately publicizing carry-on items, and properly understanding and considering fixed perspectives according to the type of items. Passengers should also be aware that carelessness with carry-on items increases that threat onboard the aircraft. This study was conducted on approximately 179 members of the general public, dividing them into awareness, experience, perception, and risk regarding carry-on items.
II. Literature Review
Previous studies have investigated the potential impact on aircraft operation and risk improvement in relation to operational and management systems, legal considerations, punishment measures, and legal standards related to items carried on board aircraft. There has been no research, like this one, on the accuracy of information on passengers’ carry-on items and the relationship between risk and judgment according to type.
Park(2016) studied the operation and management system, introduction of equipment and new technologies, and institutional improvement related to air cargo, passengers’ baggage, airport and cargo terminals, focusing on Incheon Airport after the 9/11 terriorist attacks. Seo(2022) pointed out insignificant punishment and methods of laws related to hazardous items on board and sought more effective countermeasures. Kim(2020) pointed out the legal standards for portable electronic devices(PED) used on board, examined the causes, damage, and risks of fire and explosion accidents caused by lithium-ion batteries used as power sources for PED, and conducted research on supplementary and revised laws that can reduce the accident rate and spread of damage. Jeon(2023) proposed a security management system for preemptive response to potential cyber threats through electronic devices that use wireless networks and internet services in aircraft among in-flight items, strengthening the availability of wireless network services in aircraft, and countermeasures to ensure the safety of aircraft operation from cyber threats. Jang(2014) studied the insufficient standards for prohibited items on aircrafts, inadequate screening systems, and lack of publicity. In addition, research was conducted on issues of response and sanctions, such as confiscation of prohibited items, detention, sale, disposal, and insufficient punishment for bringing dangerous items on board. Lee(2019) sought ways to reduce cases of non-detection due to human error in security screening and to prevent difficulties related to prohibited items from passengers in advance.
III. Empirical Research
The collected data was statistically processed through data coding and cleaning processes, and then analyzed using SPSS v.25.0 statistical package program. Firstly, frequency analysis was conducted to determine the general characteristics. Secondly, a cross-analysis was conducted to determine the awareness, experience, perception, and risk level of carry-on items and to determine whether there were differences according to the general characteristics.
The following are the results of a cross-analysis conducted to find out about awareness and experience of carry-on items and to determine if there are difference based on the general characteristics of the survey.
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 2. There were statistically significant differences by gender, occupation, and residential are(p<.05). Since these parts are statistical results based on simple observations, there may be limitations in fully understanding the level of awareness of in-flight items.
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 3. There were statistically significant differences across occupations(p<.05). Lack of information and consistency on the part of airlines may be the reason for not being fully aware that carry-on items have different standards for each airline. And because there is only little concern about airline regulations and carry-on items during travel plans.
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 4. There were statistically significant differences by gender, occupation, and residential are(p<.05). Female, young people, and employees seem to be relatively well aware that the standards for carry-on items are different for international and domestic flights.
This is likely because they travel by air more often and have more opportunities to learn about the standards for carry-on items on international and domestic flights.
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 5. There were statistically significant different across occupations(p<.05). As a results, there is quite a lot of experience with returning and disposing of luggage. The reason seems to be that some people are not familiar with baggage return and disposal regulations, or even if they know the regulations, they do not follow them. There was differences in the level of experience depending on the occupation, but it was found to be high among employees. This is because employees often travel by air more frequently when on business trips or on vacation, so they often have experience returning or discarding their luggage.
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 6. There were statistically significant differences by gender and occupation(p<.01). As mentioned earlier, employees tend to travel abroad more often, so it is believed that they have a lot of experience encountering these regulations.
1) Possible to bring container containing chemicals
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 7. There were no statistically differences in general characteristics(p>.05). It was revealed that it is thought that bringing containers containing chemicals on board is impossible. This suggests that people perceive chemicals to be highly risky.
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 8. there were statistically significant differences by gender(p<.05). Overall, the chemicals appear to have been deemed highly hazardous onboard. This is considered to be a high risk regardless of the amount of chemical.
2) Possible to bring self-defense spray(tear gas, pepper spray, etc. of 100mL or less)
There were statistically significant differences by age and occupation(p<01). Although there may be some differences depending on age and occupation, it is generally believed that all sharp objects are items that cannot be brought on board(Table 9).
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 10. There were statistically significant differences across occupations(p<.01). Awareness of whether scissors and knives with blades less than 6cm in length can be carried on board was lower than awareness of whether razor, cutters, multi-purpose knives, and folding knives can be carried on board. This suggests that although sharp objects such as knives are perceived as dangerous, there is tendency to think that knives less than 6cm long are relatively less dangerous.
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 11. There were no statistically significant differences in general characteristics(p>.05). The reason why no significant difference was found seems to be because nail clippers are commonly seen and used in everyday life, so the risk on board was judged to be low. Another reason why it was determined that nail clippers could be brought on board is that although the blades are sharp, their use on board is limited, so it appears that they were judged to be low risk.
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 12. There were statistically significant differences according to age(p<.05). Overall, it appears that the decision was made to allow the carrying of tweezers on board. There were differences in awareness by age group, which is thought to be due to differences in awareness of aviation safety, management and interest in hazardous materials, and information on carry-on items.
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 13.
Statistically significant differences were found depending on the flight purpose(p<.05). In the case of soybean and red pepper paste, there was a statistical difference because the carry-on standards for domestic and international flights were different.
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 14. There were statistically significant differences by gender, age, and occupation(p<.05). In toiletries, there were many differences depending on age and occupation. Depending on age, it may have to do with cultural differences between generations, lifestyles, travel experiences, etc. Additionally, differences by occupation may be related to work tendencies, travel purposes, and frequency of cosmetic use.
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 15. There were statistically significant differences according to age(p<.05). The overall level of awareness of the risks of self-defense sprays was rated mostly as ‘high’ and ‘very high’. This is because it may cause confusion on board the plane, with results similar to those of self-defense sprays.
The results of the analysis are shown in Table 16. There were no statistically significant differences in general characteristics(p>.05). It was shown to have a relatively low risk compared to other items, and it is thought that there is a lack of accurate information about the risk of liquids and gels, or that there is only little interest in the items.
IV. Conclusion
This study examined whether passengers can accurately judge whether various items can be carried on board, and looked into whether the perceived level of risk for each type of item affected the decision on whether or not it could be brought on board. The main analysis results are as follow.
First, differences in understanding and experience with carry-on baggage regulations emerged across different groups participating in air travel. In general, the survey respondents were aware of carry-on items, but the level of awareness varied depending on gender, occupation, and residential area. This shows that understanding and experience of air travel services and regulations can vary widely across participants. Therefore, airlines and related organizations should take this diversity into account to provide travelers with clearer and more effective guidance on carry-on items and consider improving services and regulations to provide a better travel experience.
Second, there was an overall difference in the judgment ratio regarding whether or not items could be brought on board depending on the items. This revealed uncertainty regarding the items as they had different regulations across countries and airlines. This can be confusing for passengers due to the incovenience of having to be aware of multiple criteria. It can also be a burden not only to passengers but also to airlines and airport staff. Because it can affect the overall efficiency and quality of air travel, it is necessary to improve regulations on goods and to enhance the convenience of air travel by providing information through education, publicity and marketing.
Third, the risk ratio for each carry-on item showed a similar pattern to the judgment ratio. This suggests that passengers tend to refer to risk assessment criteria when judging specific items. Additionally, the fact that a greater proportion of respondents were unaware that this differed by country and airline proves that their risk assessments by item are being influenced. When information is insufficient, decisions are made on one’s own judgment. As this may cause confusion in aviation safety, it it believed that passengers need to understand the regulations and policies regarding carry-on items.
The results of this study suggest that when passengers are unclear about the standards or are ignorant about the risks involved in their judgments regarding carry-on items, their judgments are influenced by the level of risk. Airline passengers’ awareness of aviation safety information shows a significant relationship with their attitudes and behavioral intentions toward safe behavior. Therefore, in order to expect positive results for aviation safety, such as high awareness of passengers regarding aviation safety information and a favorable attitude toward safe behavior, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport and airlines need to engage in various activities, such as active event promotion, media promotion, and educational promotion, to raise awareness of the necessity and importance of aviation safety(Choi, 2017). If the analysis results of this study can increase passengers’ understanding of carry-on items, it will be helpful in improving aviation safety.
