education and training, particularly from the traditional maritime nations, tended to
address broader educational outcomes and skills than the focus of the current more
prescriptive regimes. It is interesting that “competence” was defined in 2002 by the
Dutch Higher Education Council as the potential to handle new, unexpected situations that one has not been specifically trained in. In such contexts, seafarers were
more equipped with analytical abilities and a broadmindedness that encouraged the
generation and maintenance of a safety culture beyond mere compliance with
externally imposed regulations.
As has been argued elsewhere,
47 law is not the only—and certainly not always the
best—mechanism for social behaviour optimization and professional performance.
Broad education, markets and intrinsically-generated motivation and value systems
are perhaps more reliable as long-term factors for the optimization of social behaviour. Ultimately a significant element of national self-regulation (as opposed to
extrinsic prescriptive regulation) is required. Not understanding and considering
this in the education of seafarers, creates the potential for over-prescriptive regulation and an undue emphasis in the international milieu on training at the expense of
other important factors. As has been noted from research conducted by
Bhattacharya,
48
“it appears that in the maritime industry there is a disproportionate
level of interest in developing seafarers’ competence, training and motivation”
which may disguise the relative importance of other issue such as manning levels,
shipowner/manager resource allocation, a consideration of seafarer participation in
safety and security of job tenure. Of course, this is debatable, given the economic,
environmental and safety costs of accidents caused by a lack of operator capabilities,
but such accidents can be caused by any or all of the other issues mentioned. In short,
when addressing the “human element”, one should not restrict oneself to education;
the wider organizational context of ship operation and management is also an active
contributor to optimum safety and environmental protection.
The question does remain as to how international legislation can overcome the
resistance offered by sovereignty without comprising the integrity of sovereign
states and their right to self-determination and rule and without drifting into overregulation in a prescriptive manner. It is essential, in this light, that the global
maritime community, understanding the limitations of international law, do not
regard the STCW Convention (and others like it) as the “be all and end all”, but
strive to build excellence on the foundation it provides.
Other issues confronting seafarer education and training in an international
context have implications for international law. A selection of these are discussed
below.
The 1995 amendments to the STCW Convention saw the IMO introduce the
notion of “fitness for duty” “for the purpose of preventing fatigue”. Not necessarily
47 Schuck (2000), Stanton-Ife (2018) and Frohnen (2015).
48 Bhattacharya (2009).
486
M. E. Manuel and R. Baumler
address broader educational outcomes and skills than the focus of the current more
prescriptive regimes. It is interesting that “competence” was defined in 2002 by the
Dutch Higher Education Council as the potential to handle new, unexpected situations that one has not been specifically trained in. In such contexts, seafarers were
more equipped with analytical abilities and a broadmindedness that encouraged the
generation and maintenance of a safety culture beyond mere compliance with
externally imposed regulations.
As has been argued elsewhere,
47 law is not the only—and certainly not always the
best—mechanism for social behaviour optimization and professional performance.
Broad education, markets and intrinsically-generated motivation and value systems
are perhaps more reliable as long-term factors for the optimization of social behaviour. Ultimately a significant element of national self-regulation (as opposed to
extrinsic prescriptive regulation) is required. Not understanding and considering
this in the education of seafarers, creates the potential for over-prescriptive regulation and an undue emphasis in the international milieu on training at the expense of
other important factors. As has been noted from research conducted by
Bhattacharya,
48
“it appears that in the maritime industry there is a disproportionate
level of interest in developing seafarers’ competence, training and motivation”
which may disguise the relative importance of other issue such as manning levels,
shipowner/manager resource allocation, a consideration of seafarer participation in
safety and security of job tenure. Of course, this is debatable, given the economic,
environmental and safety costs of accidents caused by a lack of operator capabilities,
but such accidents can be caused by any or all of the other issues mentioned. In short,
when addressing the “human element”, one should not restrict oneself to education;
the wider organizational context of ship operation and management is also an active
contributor to optimum safety and environmental protection.
The question does remain as to how international legislation can overcome the
resistance offered by sovereignty without comprising the integrity of sovereign
states and their right to self-determination and rule and without drifting into overregulation in a prescriptive manner. It is essential, in this light, that the global
maritime community, understanding the limitations of international law, do not
regard the STCW Convention (and others like it) as the “be all and end all”, but
strive to build excellence on the foundation it provides.
Other issues confronting seafarer education and training in an international
context have implications for international law. A selection of these are discussed
below.
The 1995 amendments to the STCW Convention saw the IMO introduce the
notion of “fitness for duty” “for the purpose of preventing fatigue”. Not necessarily
47 Schuck (2000), Stanton-Ife (2018) and Frohnen (2015).
48 Bhattacharya (2009).
486
M. E. Manuel and R. Baumler