The Discovery Of Fluorine Essays - Chemistry, Industrial Gases

The discovery of Fluorine title = The discovery of Fluorine The isolation of fluorine had challenged chemist for many years, taking the lives of at least two scientists in the process. Fluorine receives its name from the Latin, fluo, meaning flow. The first real attempt to free fluorine, was done by a chemist by the name of Humphyry Davy, between the years of (1811-1813). He first tried to liberate the element by using the chemical methods, but this failed. He then went on to try and electrolysis process using batteries. The problem with this was that the electrolytes used either produced Hydrogen and Oxygen or fluoric acid in vapor form, making it difficult to study. He then went on to fashion a electrochemical cell from horn silver because the hydrogen fluoride attacked glass. But this also failed , his hydrogen fluoride contained water. Davy gave up. Next Louis-Joseph Gay-Lussac and Louis-Jacques Thenard were able to create a liquid hydrogen fluoride free of water. But it doesn't conducted the electricity needed for electrolysis. Thus ended their weak attempts to create fluorine. In 1834, Faraday (God of Electrolysis), used the electrolysis of lead fluoride in platinum vessels to yield fluoride vapors, HORAA! But no after rigorous examination he too failed. Then along came a student of Faraday, Henri Moissan, he used electrolysis with hydrogen fluoride and Fremy's method , the result ,a yellow gas fluoride. Finally after the loss several scientists lives, not to mention the pain and suffering felt at the hands of chemists while strange chemicals ate through their vital organs. All of this in the name of Science, and there quest to find new elements. That can accomplish many new wonderful things such as the separation of uranium. That we can use in Nuclear power plants to supply 3 percent of the world's power and in nuclear weapons so powerful they can only be used for peace keeping. But Fluorine can also be used for other useful things like in pharmaceuticals, , insecticides, and high energy fuels. Hey these fuels can be used to make dragsters faster or help in NASA's quest.

An Introduction to Present Participles and Gerunds

An Introduction to Present Participles and Gerunds Things arent always what they seem. For instance, although weve known for centuries that the sun doesnt move around the earth, we still use the expression rising sun. And even though rise is ordinarily a verb, in this expression (with the -ing ending) it functions more like an adjective, modifying the noun sun. To top things off, we call rising a present participle, yet present participles dont really tell us much about time (past, present, or future). Leaving the astronomical issues to Neil deGrasse Tyson, well stick to English grammar. In particular, the question What is a present participle? In one respect, the present participle is a simple, straightforward construction. Whether rising or setting, eating or drinking, laughing  or  crying, waking or sleeping,  its formed by adding -ing to the base form of a verb. No exceptions. After that, however, it gets a little more complicated. For one thing, the label is misleading. Its true that the present participle (in the following example, sleeping)  sometimes seems  to indicate present time: He looks at the sleeping  baby. But when the tense of the main verb changes to the simple past, the time of the present participle appears to change right along with it: He looked at the sleeping  baby. And when the main verb points to the future, the present participle again tags along: He will look at the sleeping  baby. The truth is, the present participle really doesnt mark time at all. That job is reserved for the main verb and its auxiliaries  (looks, looked, will look). And for this reason, among others, many linguists prefer to use the term -ing form rather than present participle. The Multiple Personalities of Present Participles Weve already seen another peculiarity of the present participle (or -ing form): it has multiple personalities. Though based on a verb, the present participle often works as an adjective. In our examples so far, the present participle sleeping  modifies the noun baby.  But thats not always the case. Consider how the -ing words are used in this quotation, variously attributed to Confucius, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Vince Lombardi, and American Idol veteran Clay Aiken: Our greatest glory is not in never falling but in rising every time we fall. Both falling and rising function here as nouns - specifically, as objects of the preposition in. When a verb plus -ing does the job of a noun, it reveals its secret identity as a gerund,  or verbal noun. (The term verbal, by the way, refers to any verb form that serves in a sentence as a noun or a modifier,  rather than as a verb).   Then again, when an -ing word is combined with a form of the auxiliary verb to be, it functions (once again) as a verb: The price of oil is rising. This construction is called the progressive, which in fact is the most common use of the present participle in English. The present progressive is made up of a present form of to be plus a present participle (is rising). The past progressive is made up of a past form of to be plus a present participle (was rising). And the future progressive is made up of the verb phrase will be plus a present participle (will be rising).   Source Our Greatest Glory Is Not in Never Falling, But in Rising Every Time We Fall. Quote Investigator, May 27, 2014.

Mammal Species Characteristics

Mammal Species Characteristics Have you ever thought about what makes mammal species different from other vertebrates? If not, Im sure that you have noticed the differences between a snake, which is a reptile, and an elephant. Being a mammal myself, I have always found this particular class of vertebrates very interesting. As you will see, mammals have certain characteristics that differentiate them from other vertebrates. Lets take a look at some of these characteristics. Mammal Characteristics To begin with, mammal species are in the Class Mammalia, within the Subphylum Vertebrata, under the Phylum Chordata, in the Kingdom Animalia. Now that you have that straight, lets look at some specific traits of mammals. One main characteristic that mammals have is a feature that usually stands on end in frightening situations. Can you guess what it is? Yes, its hair or fur, whichever the case may be. This trait is useful in maintaining the constant body temperature that is important to all endothermic animals. Another characteristic is the ability to produce milk. This comes in handy while nourishing babies which are usually born fully developed (exceptions are the monotremes and the marsupials). Fertilization occurs within the reproductive tract of the female and most have a placenta that provides nutrients to the developing embryo. Mammalian young are usually slow to leave the nest, which allows for a longer period of time for the parents to teach skills that are necessary for survival. Respiratory and circulatory features of mammals include a diaphragm for proper lung ventilation and a heart that has four chambers to ensure that blood is circulated appropriately. Mammals can comprehend and learn things, which can be attributed to a larger brain size as compared to vertebrates of similar size. Finally, the existence of teeth that are different in size and function is a trait that is seen among mammals. All of these characteristics (hair, maintaining a constant body temperature, production of milk, internal fertilization, young born fully developed, highly developed circulatory and respiratory systems, larger brain size, and differences in the size and function of teeth) make mammal species unique among the vertebrates.

The Economic Environment of Business Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

The Economic Environment of Business - Essay Example Other market drivers for these milk products are the increased variety of products including flavoured milk, and also the increased advertising efforts by companies. Suppliers and processors of milk products have adopted measures that aid them to act on interest of consumers. However the market for milk products faced difficulties in the year 2001 to 2002 due to very low farm gate prices and the foot and mouth diseases that affected UK herds, UK milk quotas and the low farm gates has led to the prices being lower than the cost of production placing the farmers under great pressure and also extend on their limits. 2 Some of the major companies in the UK involved in the production of milk and milk products include; Robert Wiseman Dairies, Unilever Best foods UK Ltd, The Yeo Valley Organic Company Ltd, The Kerry gold Company, Kraft Foods UK Ltd, New Zealand Milk Product Ltd, Dairy Crest Group and the Muller Dairy company. 3 Milk and milk products producing firms assume an oligopoly market structure where there are restrictions or barriers to entry, these barriers to entry are associated with health issues and also the prevention of unhealthy competition, market prices are causing these firms to shut down and also the farmers are under pressure in the production of milk to these prices. Market structure that exists: The market structure that exists in this industry is an oligopoly structure, an oligopoly market structure the market is usually dominated by a few firms, this type of market structure falls between a perfect competition and a pure monopoly. This type of market there are times when there is high competition while at other times the firms in an oligopoly may collude by fixing prices and dominate the market.4 The firms in an oligopoly market are faced with a kinked demand curve and this is for the simple reason that if a firm raises the price of the product it is not followed by others. On the other hand if it reduces its prices he is followed by the others, this is the reason why the demand curve at high prices of the product is quite elastic and at lower prices the demand curve is quite inelastic. 5 This is diagrammatically illustrated below: Determination of price and quantity The average revenue curve represent the demand curve which in this case is kinked, if a firm in this industry raises its price it is not followed by others, if it reduces its price it will be followed by others, therefore the price and quantity in this industry is determined by the price of others, one firm will not raise its prices without considering the decisions to be made by other firms.6 However sometimes the firms may collude and dominate the market, therefore the price in this kind of market is determined by market forces and in this case they become price takers and sometimes the price is determined by the firms and this case they become the price makers. Barriers to entry Barriers of entry into the milk producing industry is necessary in that it helps in the prevention of

Native American, Cochise Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Native American, Cochise - Essay Example However, this traditional system of governance was gradually disrupted by the whites. In their quest to overturn the traditional, the white settlers faced some form of fierce resistance from the Native Americans under the leadership of their chiefs and these conflicts resulted in bloodshed in different situations. One of the chiefs remembered for his sworn hatred and resistance to American dominance is Cochise. The history of Cochise is a must read since it enlightens the readers about the events that took place in the 17th century before the birth of ‘democracy’ in America which characterises the present day government in this country. Cochise was an Apache Indian Chief and his territory covered parts of Arizona and New Mexico (HistoryNet, 2013. There are various key events that defined Cochise such as his involvement in different battles against the white settlers. When the white settlers invaded America, they were resisted by the natives which culminated in different battles. Cochise played a significant role in waging some of these battles in defence for their peace. The critical event in the history of Cochise happened in 1872 when a high powered delegation was dispatched to negotiate with him in order to stop Apache war in the Southern Arizona. According to Sweeney (n.d), the top officials sent from Washington had realised that Cochise was the key person to approach in order to obtain lasting peace with the Chiricahua apaches. Thus, it can be seen that this person was critical in as far as the attainment of peace was concerned. Born around 1810, Cochise grew up in the native America but somehow during his mid thirties, things began to change as they started experiencing some conflicts with the Mexicans as well as the white settlers. Having assumed chieftainship around this age, Cochise had no problem settling with these new comers. However, the turning point was in 1860 when cattle belonging to whites were raided and a child was kidnapped. Co chise was suspect in this incident and was summoned together with his family to try to address this issue. This led to the arrest of his family but he managed to escape and from then started to wage war with the whites in revenge for killing members of his family. After the incident, various battles ensued between Cochise’s people and the Americans and Mexicans and these resulted in loss of life. Cochise declared hatred against the white Americans for killing his people and he dedicated himself to fight until the bitter end in defence of his homeland and people. Originally, the Indians lived in the mountainous mountains in the Southwest and they managed to defend their homeland territory under the chieftainship of their great king until a peace treaty was signed in 1872. Up until today, Cochise is one of the few people recognised in the American history for waging a bitter war against the whites in defence of their territorial integrity and sovereignty. He is one of the nativ es to cause sleepless nights to the Americans since they could not easily subdue this great fighter who had a combative battalion. Up until the end, Cochise came to be admired by the Americans for his outstanding guerrilla warfare skills that resulted in the death of many Americans. Though he also lost a great number of his own people through these conflicts, Cochise was not defeated in his cause for defending the territorial integrity of his homeland. He is remembers as one native fighter who defeated the

F Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom Oceans Policy

F Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom Oceans Policy Introduction The Worlds current approach to ocean policy and sustainable maritime development is based on two main International strategic foundations: UNCLOS and UNCED. Both if integrated they provide the basis for oceans governance and oceans policy frame work. They enable states to exercise and protect Nationals sovereign rights and jurisdiction over marine resources and offshore areas. At the same time they obligate states to ensure ocean uses are ecologically sustainable. The implementation of the provisions of UNCLOS, related Conventions, rules and standards relating to the protection and preservation of the marine environment and to the conservation and management of living marine resources, as well as the implementation of the commitments agreed to in Chapter 17 of Agenda 21, present some of the major challenges facing the international ocean community. These challenges cannot be met by one region, one State, one ministry, or one local community alone. It is therefore very important to st rengthen cooperation and coordination at all levels. At the national level, the marine dimension must be integrated within the overall national policy. The adoption of an ocean policy is a very important mechanism to achieving an integrated, interdisciplinary, intersectoral and ecosystem-based approach to oceans management. A coherent legislative framework is also essential. However the development of this national oceans policy depends on every state situation. Vertical and horizontal integration between these two foundations, need a high political umbrella and a lead ministry for setting the national marine agenda. This agenda must be based on sound scientific priorities development plan required for understanding how best to protect Nationals marine biological diversity, the ocean environment and its resources, and on a wide consultation process with all stakeholder. Comparative analysis of the development process of national ocean policy in major maritime nations such as Austral ia, Canada, the United Kingdom, shows in spite of the fact that Agenda 21 has provided a clear defined programme and management activities, each country have followed a different approach in developing its national oceans management strategy. All of them have used these two international foundations and their guiding principles in developing their oceans policies. These approaches are integrated in content and are precautionary and anticipatory in ambit, as required by UNCLOS and as reflected in the Chapter 17 of Agenda 21 programme areas. The first programme in chapter 17 is Integrated management and sustainable development of coastal areas, including exclusive economic zones. (Agenda 21, 1992). To this end, and according to Chapter 17 the state should establish the necessary strengthening appropriate coordinating mechanisms (such as a high-level policy planning body) (Agenda 21, 1992). It further states Such mechanisms should include consultation, as appropriate, with the academic and private sectors, non-governmental organizations, local communities, resource user groups, and indigenous people. Also coastal states are required to improve their capacity to collect, analyse, assess and use information for sustainable use of resources, including environmental impacts of activities affecting the coastal and marine areas. Information for management purposes should receive priority support in view of the intensity and magnitude of the changes occurring in the coastal and marine areas. Other related management activities include: Preparation and implementation of land and water use and sitting policies; Implementation of integrated coastal and marine management and sustainable development plans and programmes at appropriate levels; Preparation of coastal profiles identifying critical areas, including eroded zones, physical processes, development patterns, user conflicts and specific priorities for management; Prior environmental impact assessment, systematic observation and follow-up of major projects, including the systematic incorporation of results in decision-making; Contingency plans for human induced and natural disasters, including likely effects of potential climate change and sea level rise, as well as contingency plans for degradation and pollution of anthropogenic origin, including spills of oil and other materials; Improvement of coastal human settlements, especially in housing, drinking water and treatment and disposal of sewage, solid wastes and industrial effluents; Periodic assessment of the impacts of external factors and phenomena to ensure that the objectives of integrated management and sustainable development of coastal areas and the marine environment are met; Conservation and restoration of altered critical habitats; Integration of sectoral programmes on sustainable development for settlements, agriculture, tourism, fishing, ports and industries affecting the coastal area; Infrastructure adaptation and alternative employment; Human resource development and training; Public education, awareness and information programmes; Promoting environmentally sound technology and sustainable practices; Development and simultaneous implementation of environmental quality criteria. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia stands at a cross road. The Kingdom has the opportunity to develop its maritime sector and sustainably manage national marine resources. The status of national marine resources and governance is not good; marine resources are degraded and marine governance is inadequate. This indicates that an urgent action is needed to save the threatened national seas and opportunities. As has been highlighted and underlined in previous chapters, Saudi Arabia marine governance must be reorganized under one document: a comprehensive National Marine Policy. Comprehensive national marine policies are a relatively new trend in ocean governance. As implied they address all marine and coastal issues. NMPs are a response to the sectoral fragmented approach currently dominating marine governance which often leads to unorganized management and authority as new responsibilities are delegated to different agencies as they arise. In addition to incorporating all marine and coastal i ssues, NMPs seek to integrate all levels of governance: local, provincial, national, regional and international. The term integrated management is used to describe this approach. Although many countries and regions have created comprehensive marine or ocean policies, I focus on marine policy development process and governance as developed and experienced in Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom for two reasons: First they represent the first three leading countries in the world that have developed comprehensive ocean policy and governance framework and is being implemented and tried to differing levels of success; Canada enacted the Oceans Act of 1996 followed by the release of Australias Ocean Policy in 1998. Great Britain followed in May 2002, with Safeguarding Our Seas: A Strategy for the Conservation and Sustainable Development of our Marine Environment. Each country has followed a different policy route to sustainable oceans development. While Australia has followed a totall y pure policy frame work by providing a new structure, mechanism and policy guidance for delivering its comprehensive national oceans policy; Canada followed a different approach by first providing a comprehensive legal framework for oceans uses and resources management within Canada different maritime zones including the 200nm EEZ and continental shelf, second by producing Canada Oceans Strategy in July of 2002. The United Kingdom has followed a totally different approach by first developing a conservation strategy followed by introducing a single piece of legislation to protect the marine environment by enacting in 2009 the Marine and Coastal Act. Second, the three countries have developed their policies in accordance with Chapter 17 of Agenda 21 and based on the 1994 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Being the world leaders in oceans policies, I focus on oceans policy development process in these three countries as examples; their successes and leadership role in oceans policy can guide the creation of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia National Marine Policy. Comparative Overview of Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom oceans policy Australia: Initiation Process: Australia is the first country to set in place a policy framework for an integrated and ecosystem based planning and management for all of Australias marine jurisdictions. With the release of Australias Oceans Policy (AOP) in 1998, Australia has demonstrated a world leadership by implementing a coherent, strategic planning and management framework for dealing with complex issues confronting the long term future of Australias oceans (AOP1, 1999). AOP was initiated by a political announcement from the prime minister, followed by a wide public consultation process using a consultation document (Oceans- New Horizon). AOP process was initiated by the end of 1995 when the Prime Minister at that time announced that the Commonwealth government had agreed to the development of an integrated oceans strategy that would deal with the management of Australias marine resources (AOP, 1998). However, due to the federal election and change of government little progress was achieved, but in 1996 the n ew government announced that it would continue developing the oceans policy as being an environmental protection policy and transferred the responsibility for developing the policy agenda from the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to the Department of Environment, Sport and Territories (DEST) (Bateman, 1997). Later on the name of this department has been changed to the Department of Environment and Heritage (DEH) charged with protecting and conserving Australias natural environment and cultural heritage. Lead Ministry: In 1996 the new Australian government announced that it would continue developing the oceans policy as being an environmental protection policy and transferred the responsibility for developing the policy agenda from the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to the Department of Environment and Heritage (DEH) (Vince, 2003). As a result of the transfer of responsibility for oceans policy development, Australia Environment Minister led the process by establishing an intergovernmental committee to assist with the preparation of the policy (Vince, 2003). Using the collaborative arrangements and formal intergovernmental linkages, the Minister established a committee encompassing members from major Commonwealth agencies involved in marine affairs. Also a number of other committees were formed during these early stages of development to assist with the development of a discussion paper (Vince, 2003). The Committee has prepared the Oceans-New Horizon paper which has been launched in M arch 1997 to assist in the first consultations round with State, Territory and Local governments, peak bodies and organizations and the general public. The New Horizon set out a draft vision, goal and objectives for Australia Oceans Policy and an indication of some of the broad issues relevant to an Oceans Policy as well as briefly introducing some of the features of Australia oceans (New Horizon, 1997). Consultation Process: After the publication of the New Horizon paper a second round of consultation begun through a public forum to review the draft policy paper (MAGOP, 1998). During this process, Environment Australia organised public forums where the public could get an overview of the Issues Paper and to provide comment. The forums consisted of two parts, the first part included a formal briefing from Environment Australia officials while the second component was an information session organised by the state branches of the Marine and Coastal Communities Network (MCCN) (Vince, 2003). Maritime Ministerial Board Before the release of AOP the Australian Government established a Ministerial Advisory Group on Ocean Policy in 1997 to provide advice to the Minister for Environment and Heritage on the views of the broad range of stakeholders of the policy and any other issues the Group thought relevant to the development of the policy (AOP1, 1998). It has also been suggested that the MAGOP was established to gain the support of NGOs during the Policy process as well as to promote public awareness (Vince, 2003). Later on the MAGOP was replaced by a National Oceans Ministerial Board (NOMB) of key Commonwealth Ministers, chaired by the Minister for the Environment and Heritage (Foster, 2005). The task of the board is to drive the implementation of the AOP by overseeing regional planning processes, furthering policy development, overseeing cross sector coordination, setting priorities for program expenditure and coordinating the Oceans Policy with State governments (AOP1, 1998). Oceans Strategy: Based on the wide policy consultation process Australia was quickly able to develop its sustainable National Ocean Policy and vision of Healthy oceans: cared for, understood and used wisely for the benefit of all, now and in the future(AOP1, 1998). The aim of the strategy is to overcome problems perceived to arise from a division of powers and responsibilities leading to jurisdictional overlap and inconsistencies in ocean management (Vince, et al. 2003). The strategy also intends to overcome the problems and limitations imposed by sector based management by supporting integration across sectors through regional marine planning. AOP came in two volumes (AOP1, 1998). The first volume targeted nine major objectives: 1) exercise and protect Australias rights and jurisdiction over offshore areas, including offshore resources. 2) To meet Australias international obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and other international treaties. 3) To understand and prot ect Australias marine biological diversity, the ocean environment and its resources, and ensure ocean uses are ecologically sustainable. 4) To promote ecologically sustainable economic development and job creation. 5) To establish integrated oceans planning and management arrangements. 6) To accommodate community needs and aspirations. 7) To improve expertise and capabilities in ocean-related management, science, technology and engineering. 8) To identify and protect Australias natural and cultural marine heritage. 9) To promote public awareness and understanding (AOP1, 1998). The key principles that were used in developing Australia ocean policy intrinsically; indigenous peoples interests; stewardship ethic; intergenerational and social equity; ecologically sustainable use; conservation of biological diversity; participatory, transparent and accountable decision making and management; and integrated planning and management(AOP1, 1998). Ocean Action Plan: The second volume of Australias Oceans Policy complements the first volume of the Policy by outlining specific measures that are being or will be pursued by the Commonwealth across ocean sectors and interest(AOP2, 1998). The Specific Sectoral Measures volume is comprehensive in its scope, covering the major environmental, industry, community, research, scientific, international and defence interests that the Commonwealth has responsibility for in marine jurisdictions. The document has identified 390 commitments across those five broad areas and detailed implementation schedule of actions. The schedule identified organisations responsible for implementing actions, priorities, milestones and resourcing (AOP2, 1998). This detail facilitated the auditing of the Policy and contributed to an assessment of its effectiveness. New Institution To implement AOP a National Oceans Office (NOO), was established to provide secretariat and technical support and programme delivery for oceans policy initiatives(AOP1, 1998). The NOO was responsible for coordinating the overall implementation and finalize the detailed implementation schedule of actions and further development of the Oceans Policy(AOP2, 1998). NOO also was responsible for coordination and distribution of information on oceans policy implementation and regional marine planning matters to all stakeholders(Addison and Chenko, et al. 2005). Other new institutions included the National Oceans Ministerial Board, Regional Marine Plan Steering Committees and the National Oceans Advisory Group (NOAG). In 2005 NOO lost its executive agency status and is now located within the Marine Division of the Department of Environment and Heritage (DEH, 2005). The Minister of Environment and Heritage has the responsibility for NOO through the department and reports to Cabinet on its prog ress (Haward and Vince, 2006). Ocean Research Priorities Plan: Whilst AOP development process was progressing, the Marine Science and Technology Working Group, comprising representatives of Australian Government marine science and related agencies, as well as State research institutions and non-government marine science interests; were working to develop Australias Marine Science and Technology Plan (Alder, 2001). The government aimed to develop and release the Plan as a companion to Australias Oceans Policy(Vince, 2004). The Marine scientific advisory committee was tasked with promoting coordination and information sharing between Government marine science agencies and across the broader Australian marine science community(AMSTP, 1999). The MSTC prepared a Marine Science and Technology Plan to provide a strategy, consistent with the Oceans Policy, for integrated and innovative science, technology and engineering. The Plan encompasses three major programs under each program multiple objectives(AMSTP, 1999): . Understanding the Marine Environment ( 7 objectives) Using and Caring for the Marine Environment ( 15 objectives) Infrastructure for Understanding and Utilising the Marine Environment ( 6 objectives). Legislation:   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Australia Oceans Policy has established new institutions to oversee the implementation of the Regional Marine Planning process. The institutions have emphasised a departure from traditional sectoral arrangements whilst incorporating over 100 laws and policy instruments addressing aspects of the management of the marine environment and the legal jurisdictional framework established through offshore federalism(Haward and Vince, 2006). The Offshore Constitutional Settlement (OCS) returned the jurisdiction over 3nm from the low water mark to the states(Stark, 2004). OCS remains the primary intergovernmental arrangement governing ocean and marine resources in Australia and makes up the jurisdictional framework for the development and implementation of the Ocean Policy(Vince, 2004). Since Australia Ocean Policy has been developed as being an environmental protection policy the principal Australian legislation is the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999(cth) (EPBC Act)(Akwilapo, 2007). The EPBC Act and the associated Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Regulation 2000 (EPBC Regulation) provide a national framework for Environment protection through focusing on protecting areas of national environmental significance and on the conservation of Australias biodiversity (Akwilapo, 2007). On the other hand, a commitment to ecologically sustainable development and multiple use management is embedded within the Oceans Policy framework emphasising a commitment to, inter alia, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Developments (UNCED) Agenda 21 principles and UNCLOS (Akwilapo, 2007). Integrated Marine Spatial Planning The AOP emphasised that Australia Regional Marine Plans is based on large marine ecosystems. This system helps to maintain ecosystem health and integrity while promoting multiple use of oceans by integrating sectoral commercial interests and conservation requirements. Australia approach to Integrated Ocean Planning and Management encompass the following(AOP2, 1998): Development of a new institutional arrangement comprising the National Oceans Ministerial Board, the National Oceans Advisory Group and the National Oceans Office and Regional Marine Plan Steering Committees. Providing policy guidance for oceans planning and management. Regional Marine Plan, based on large marine ecosystems. The first plan was developed for the south-eastern region of Australias EEZ. Funds for National marine resource surveys; development of sustainability indicators and monitoring; and rapid assessments of the biological resources of Australias oceans. The resulting information based was used to underpin effective regional integration for planning and management. These assessments also benefit industry by providing information on potential new resources such as deep-water fisheries and pharmaceuticals. Development of National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas. Development of Marine Parks and World Heritage Areas. Maritime Safety and Environment Protection Plan The Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) has developed a strategy to protect the marine environment from shipping operations through improved environmental management of shipping and related activities(Stark, 2004). The strategy encompass: designation of marine sensitive areas, promote improvement of waste reception facilities at ports, marinas and boat harbours, improve anti-fouling practices, management and piloting a national monitoring programme for marine debris, community and industry awareness, and support for the enhanced National Plan to Combat Pollution of the Sea by Oil and Other Noxious and Hazardous Substances (the National Plan) (AOP1, 1998). Under the AOP the Government committed to enhance maritime safety and highlighted the importance of enhancing regional cooperative arrangement for search and rescue, development and implementation of search and rescue arrangements; implementation of the Global Maritime Distress Safety System(GMDS S), pursue consistent requirements for the use of Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacons (EPIRBs) and maritime communications for small vessels(AOP2, 1998). To further ensure the Safety of Navigation, the Government committed to maintain efficient coast-effective maritime safety navigation services and infrastructure, expansion of the local area Differential Global Positioning Systems (DGPS) services; technological development in marine navigation, and involvement in the International Association of Lighthouse Authorities and other international forums to ensure global navigational safety policies, standards and new technologies(AOP2, 1998). Maritime Surveillance and Security Plan To ensure that there is an effective and efficient surveillance capacity for Australias marine jurisdictions and effective enforcement of national legislation throughout Australias marine jurisdictions. Under the Oceans Policy the Australian government continued to pursue through the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) and other; to increase action addressing illegal fishing in CCAMLR and adjacent waters; increased surveillance and enforcement measures in the Great Barrier Reef; continued to cooperate to review and rationalise effort involved in and capacity for surveillance and enforcement including reviewing legislation relating to enforcement in Australias marine jurisdictions(AOP2, 1998). The Oceans Policy highlighted that the Australian Defence Forces (ADF) tasks encompass safeguarding these areas, controlling of maritime approaches to exercise and protect Australias sovereignty and sovereign rights. This involve preparedness and continge ncy planning; maritime surveillance and response; fisheries law enforcement; search and rescue; hydrographic services; and the Australian Oceanographic Data Centre (AODC)(AOP2, 1998). Maritime Sector Development Plan During AOP development process the Marine Industry Development Strategy was also announced. The Strategy highlighted what the Marine Industry is worth what should incur for further resourceful developments(AOP2,1998). It illustrated that 90 per cent of Australias oil and gas is sourced offshore; that the shipbuilding industry supplies one third of the worlds high speed ferry market; wild capture fisheries represent a major primary industry; and that marine tourism is a booming industry(Vince, 2004). The Specific Measures Volume of Australia Oceans Policy underpinned several challenges facing the maritime sector and the various activities such as : fisheries; aquaculture; offshore petroleum and minerals; shipping; marine tourism; marine construction, engineering and other industries; pharmaceutical, biotechnology and genetic resources; and alternative energy resources. For meeting these challenges the policy proposed numerous activities under each one of them. For example to meet the shipping sector challenge to increase trade and regional development by delivering safe, efficient, competitive and environmentally responsible maritime infrastructure and shipping services(AOP2, 1998). The policy identified measures including: regulatory reform of the maritime sector with a view to removing barriers to competition, rationalise jurisdictional arrangements, harmonise standards and promote mutual recognition; and encourage continuous improvements in shipping and waterfront sectors to enhance the competitiveness of Australian trade and industry; to continue Australia leading role in international trade and maritime forums to ensure access to competitive and efficient international shipping services is maintained(AOP2, 1998). Marine Education and Training Plan Under Australias Marine Science and Technology Plan, NOO is responsible for providing advice to the Ministerial Board on marine research priorities relevant to the Oceans Policy to ensure that the marine research agencies are kept informed of the Governments emerging priorities(TFG, 2002). The NOMB is responsible to consider Government priorities for publicly funded marine research related to the implementation of the Oceans Policy including: community capacity building, networking opportunities, and community participation in marine management, research and monitoring and data collection; and provide opportunities for community representation on consultative committees in regard to marine resource management, the establishment of a new marine science research and teaching centre at Coffs Harbour; support for the Australian, Pacific and Global Oceans Observing Systems; establishment and operation of a Regional Office of the International Oceanographic Commission in Perth, Western Aus tralia; provision of quality maritime education and research; and training and employment in jointly managed parks; development of a long term marine education policy and programme for kindergarten to year 12 to be incorporated in curricula in all States and Territories; development of relevant resource materials for use in schools and Technical and Further Education colleges in cooperation with professional bodies; and support for the provision of quality practical educational material for teachers and students(AMSTP, 1999). National Maritime Information Center To improve monitoring and understanding of marine ecosystems and the impacts of resource use Australia government has developed the Australian Coastal Atlas, within the Environmental Resource Information Network (ERIN), to allow general access to adequate information for community involvement in oceans management as a fundamental element of the Australian Spatial Data Infrastructure(AOP2, 1998). Thus, the Australian government provided support for the Marine and Coastal Community Network to develop a comprehensive communication strategy to assist the public, industry and governments learn about and understand the role of Australias Oceans Policy. Also the government supported the Australian Surveying and Land Information Group (AUSLIGs) continuing development of the Australian Maritime Boundaries Information System as a national database of Australias maritime jurisdictional boundary data to provides Australias with an independent and scientifically credible information on Australias environment for decision-makers and the wider community(AOP2, 1998). AUSLIG is the Commonwealth focal point for coordination of geodetic information and works closely with State and Territory agencies, the Inter-governmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping (ICSM) and industry groups towards the provision of the highest quality geodetic infrastructure(AUSLIG, 2009). Moreover, AUSLIGs under the ocean policy is responsible for the development of a coordinated observations and methods to analyse and interpret the data that will make optimum use of information from remote and in situ measurements at the space and time scales required for effective monitoring, use, management and conservation(AOP2, 1998). It is clear that the lack of a comprehensive system of monitoring sites, and lack of long-term commitment to monitoring inshore and offshore, particularly on the scale of large marine ecosystems has affected Australia ability to assess changes in the condition of the marine environme nt. Thus, AOP recognized that Integration of coastal, inshore and offshore monitoring activities is vital to National capacity for future assessments and maintenance of marine and coastal environments(AOP1, 1998). National Oceans Forum To provide for Community representation and participation, the AOP established a National Oceans Advisory Group as a non-government consultative and advisory body to the National Oceans Ministerial Board(AOP1, 1998). The NOAG is responsible for promoting strategic management of the ocean environment and its resources; to provide opportunities for community representation on consultative committees in regard to marine resource management and facilitate consultation with peak indigenous groups on the requirements for establishing a national consultative mechanism, such as an annual forum(AOP1, 1998). Thus, to promote implementation of Australia Oceans Policy, the policy called for holding a National Oceans Forum to coordinate across the agencies responsible for the development of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and a broad national cross-section of those with a stake in the management of Australia oceans(IOC, 2007). International Cooperation: Given the dynamic nature of the marine environment, AOP recognized that the effective implementation of the Oceans Policy requires cooperation with immediate neighbours and other countries to address the transboundary impacts and improve regional cooperation on ocean issues(AOP1, 1998). Thus, AOP called for: peaceful use of the oceans and cooperation in access for national and international scientific research and monitoring programmes; cooperation with neighbouring countries and with industries to maximise resources; improved cooperation and coordination between existing coastal mo F Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom Oceans Policy F Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom Oceans Policy Introduction The Worlds current approach to ocean policy and sustainable maritime development is based on two main International strategic foundations: UNCLOS and UNCED. Both if integrated they provide the basis for oceans governance and oceans policy frame work. They enable states to exercise and protect Nationals sovereign rights and jurisdiction over marine resources and offshore areas. At the same time they obligate states to ensure ocean uses are ecologically sustainable. The implementation of the provisions of UNCLOS, related Conventions, rules and standards relating to the protection and preservation of the marine environment and to the conservation and management of living marine resources, as well as the implementation of the commitments agreed to in Chapter 17 of Agenda 21, present some of the major challenges facing the international ocean community. These challenges cannot be met by one region, one State, one ministry, or one local community alone. It is therefore very important to st rengthen cooperation and coordination at all levels. At the national level, the marine dimension must be integrated within the overall national policy. The adoption of an ocean policy is a very important mechanism to achieving an integrated, interdisciplinary, intersectoral and ecosystem-based approach to oceans management. A coherent legislative framework is also essential. However the development of this national oceans policy depends on every state situation. Vertical and horizontal integration between these two foundations, need a high political umbrella and a lead ministry for setting the national marine agenda. This agenda must be based on sound scientific priorities development plan required for understanding how best to protect Nationals marine biological diversity, the ocean environment and its resources, and on a wide consultation process with all stakeholder. Comparative analysis of the development process of national ocean policy in major maritime nations such as Austral ia, Canada, the United Kingdom, shows in spite of the fact that Agenda 21 has provided a clear defined programme and management activities, each country have followed a different approach in developing its national oceans management strategy. All of them have used these two international foundations and their guiding principles in developing their oceans policies. These approaches are integrated in content and are precautionary and anticipatory in ambit, as required by UNCLOS and as reflected in the Chapter 17 of Agenda 21 programme areas. The first programme in chapter 17 is Integrated management and sustainable development of coastal areas, including exclusive economic zones. (Agenda 21, 1992). To this end, and according to Chapter 17 the state should establish the necessary strengthening appropriate coordinating mechanisms (such as a high-level policy planning body) (Agenda 21, 1992). It further states Such mechanisms should include consultation, as appropriate, with the academic and private sectors, non-governmental organizations, local communities, resource user groups, and indigenous people. Also coastal states are required to improve their capacity to collect, analyse, assess and use information for sustainable use of resources, including environmental impacts of activities affecting the coastal and marine areas. Information for management purposes should receive priority support in view of the intensity and magnitude of the changes occurring in the coastal and marine areas. Other related management activities include: Preparation and implementation of land and water use and sitting policies; Implementation of integrated coastal and marine management and sustainable development plans and programmes at appropriate levels; Preparation of coastal profiles identifying critical areas, including eroded zones, physical processes, development patterns, user conflicts and specific priorities for management; Prior environmental impact assessment, systematic observation and follow-up of major projects, including the systematic incorporation of results in decision-making; Contingency plans for human induced and natural disasters, including likely effects of potential climate change and sea level rise, as well as contingency plans for degradation and pollution of anthropogenic origin, including spills of oil and other materials; Improvement of coastal human settlements, especially in housing, drinking water and treatment and disposal of sewage, solid wastes and industrial effluents; Periodic assessment of the impacts of external factors and phenomena to ensure that the objectives of integrated management and sustainable development of coastal areas and the marine environment are met; Conservation and restoration of altered critical habitats; Integration of sectoral programmes on sustainable development for settlements, agriculture, tourism, fishing, ports and industries affecting the coastal area; Infrastructure adaptation and alternative employment; Human resource development and training; Public education, awareness and information programmes; Promoting environmentally sound technology and sustainable practices; Development and simultaneous implementation of environmental quality criteria. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia stands at a cross road. The Kingdom has the opportunity to develop its maritime sector and sustainably manage national marine resources. The status of national marine resources and governance is not good; marine resources are degraded and marine governance is inadequate. This indicates that an urgent action is needed to save the threatened national seas and opportunities. As has been highlighted and underlined in previous chapters, Saudi Arabia marine governance must be reorganized under one document: a comprehensive National Marine Policy. Comprehensive national marine policies are a relatively new trend in ocean governance. As implied they address all marine and coastal issues. NMPs are a response to the sectoral fragmented approach currently dominating marine governance which often leads to unorganized management and authority as new responsibilities are delegated to different agencies as they arise. In addition to incorporating all marine and coastal i ssues, NMPs seek to integrate all levels of governance: local, provincial, national, regional and international. The term integrated management is used to describe this approach. Although many countries and regions have created comprehensive marine or ocean policies, I focus on marine policy development process and governance as developed and experienced in Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom for two reasons: First they represent the first three leading countries in the world that have developed comprehensive ocean policy and governance framework and is being implemented and tried to differing levels of success; Canada enacted the Oceans Act of 1996 followed by the release of Australias Ocean Policy in 1998. Great Britain followed in May 2002, with Safeguarding Our Seas: A Strategy for the Conservation and Sustainable Development of our Marine Environment. Each country has followed a different policy route to sustainable oceans development. While Australia has followed a totall y pure policy frame work by providing a new structure, mechanism and policy guidance for delivering its comprehensive national oceans policy; Canada followed a different approach by first providing a comprehensive legal framework for oceans uses and resources management within Canada different maritime zones including the 200nm EEZ and continental shelf, second by producing Canada Oceans Strategy in July of 2002. The United Kingdom has followed a totally different approach by first developing a conservation strategy followed by introducing a single piece of legislation to protect the marine environment by enacting in 2009 the Marine and Coastal Act. Second, the three countries have developed their policies in accordance with Chapter 17 of Agenda 21 and based on the 1994 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Being the world leaders in oceans policies, I focus on oceans policy development process in these three countries as examples; their successes and leadership role in oceans policy can guide the creation of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia National Marine Policy. Comparative Overview of Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom oceans policy Australia: Initiation Process: Australia is the first country to set in place a policy framework for an integrated and ecosystem based planning and management for all of Australias marine jurisdictions. With the release of Australias Oceans Policy (AOP) in 1998, Australia has demonstrated a world leadership by implementing a coherent, strategic planning and management framework for dealing with complex issues confronting the long term future of Australias oceans (AOP1, 1999). AOP was initiated by a political announcement from the prime minister, followed by a wide public consultation process using a consultation document (Oceans- New Horizon). AOP process was initiated by the end of 1995 when the Prime Minister at that time announced that the Commonwealth government had agreed to the development of an integrated oceans strategy that would deal with the management of Australias marine resources (AOP, 1998). However, due to the federal election and change of government little progress was achieved, but in 1996 the n ew government announced that it would continue developing the oceans policy as being an environmental protection policy and transferred the responsibility for developing the policy agenda from the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to the Department of Environment, Sport and Territories (DEST) (Bateman, 1997). Later on the name of this department has been changed to the Department of Environment and Heritage (DEH) charged with protecting and conserving Australias natural environment and cultural heritage. Lead Ministry: In 1996 the new Australian government announced that it would continue developing the oceans policy as being an environmental protection policy and transferred the responsibility for developing the policy agenda from the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to the Department of Environment and Heritage (DEH) (Vince, 2003). As a result of the transfer of responsibility for oceans policy development, Australia Environment Minister led the process by establishing an intergovernmental committee to assist with the preparation of the policy (Vince, 2003). Using the collaborative arrangements and formal intergovernmental linkages, the Minister established a committee encompassing members from major Commonwealth agencies involved in marine affairs. Also a number of other committees were formed during these early stages of development to assist with the development of a discussion paper (Vince, 2003). The Committee has prepared the Oceans-New Horizon paper which has been launched in M arch 1997 to assist in the first consultations round with State, Territory and Local governments, peak bodies and organizations and the general public. The New Horizon set out a draft vision, goal and objectives for Australia Oceans Policy and an indication of some of the broad issues relevant to an Oceans Policy as well as briefly introducing some of the features of Australia oceans (New Horizon, 1997). Consultation Process: After the publication of the New Horizon paper a second round of consultation begun through a public forum to review the draft policy paper (MAGOP, 1998). During this process, Environment Australia organised public forums where the public could get an overview of the Issues Paper and to provide comment. The forums consisted of two parts, the first part included a formal briefing from Environment Australia officials while the second component was an information session organised by the state branches of the Marine and Coastal Communities Network (MCCN) (Vince, 2003). Maritime Ministerial Board Before the release of AOP the Australian Government established a Ministerial Advisory Group on Ocean Policy in 1997 to provide advice to the Minister for Environment and Heritage on the views of the broad range of stakeholders of the policy and any other issues the Group thought relevant to the development of the policy (AOP1, 1998). It has also been suggested that the MAGOP was established to gain the support of NGOs during the Policy process as well as to promote public awareness (Vince, 2003). Later on the MAGOP was replaced by a National Oceans Ministerial Board (NOMB) of key Commonwealth Ministers, chaired by the Minister for the Environment and Heritage (Foster, 2005). The task of the board is to drive the implementation of the AOP by overseeing regional planning processes, furthering policy development, overseeing cross sector coordination, setting priorities for program expenditure and coordinating the Oceans Policy with State governments (AOP1, 1998). Oceans Strategy: Based on the wide policy consultation process Australia was quickly able to develop its sustainable National Ocean Policy and vision of Healthy oceans: cared for, understood and used wisely for the benefit of all, now and in the future(AOP1, 1998). The aim of the strategy is to overcome problems perceived to arise from a division of powers and responsibilities leading to jurisdictional overlap and inconsistencies in ocean management (Vince, et al. 2003). The strategy also intends to overcome the problems and limitations imposed by sector based management by supporting integration across sectors through regional marine planning. AOP came in two volumes (AOP1, 1998). The first volume targeted nine major objectives: 1) exercise and protect Australias rights and jurisdiction over offshore areas, including offshore resources. 2) To meet Australias international obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and other international treaties. 3) To understand and prot ect Australias marine biological diversity, the ocean environment and its resources, and ensure ocean uses are ecologically sustainable. 4) To promote ecologically sustainable economic development and job creation. 5) To establish integrated oceans planning and management arrangements. 6) To accommodate community needs and aspirations. 7) To improve expertise and capabilities in ocean-related management, science, technology and engineering. 8) To identify and protect Australias natural and cultural marine heritage. 9) To promote public awareness and understanding (AOP1, 1998). The key principles that were used in developing Australia ocean policy intrinsically; indigenous peoples interests; stewardship ethic; intergenerational and social equity; ecologically sustainable use; conservation of biological diversity; participatory, transparent and accountable decision making and management; and integrated planning and management(AOP1, 1998). Ocean Action Plan: The second volume of Australias Oceans Policy complements the first volume of the Policy by outlining specific measures that are being or will be pursued by the Commonwealth across ocean sectors and interest(AOP2, 1998). The Specific Sectoral Measures volume is comprehensive in its scope, covering the major environmental, industry, community, research, scientific, international and defence interests that the Commonwealth has responsibility for in marine jurisdictions. The document has identified 390 commitments across those five broad areas and detailed implementation schedule of actions. The schedule identified organisations responsible for implementing actions, priorities, milestones and resourcing (AOP2, 1998). This detail facilitated the auditing of the Policy and contributed to an assessment of its effectiveness. New Institution To implement AOP a National Oceans Office (NOO), was established to provide secretariat and technical support and programme delivery for oceans policy initiatives(AOP1, 1998). The NOO was responsible for coordinating the overall implementation and finalize the detailed implementation schedule of actions and further development of the Oceans Policy(AOP2, 1998). NOO also was responsible for coordination and distribution of information on oceans policy implementation and regional marine planning matters to all stakeholders(Addison and Chenko, et al. 2005). Other new institutions included the National Oceans Ministerial Board, Regional Marine Plan Steering Committees and the National Oceans Advisory Group (NOAG). In 2005 NOO lost its executive agency status and is now located within the Marine Division of the Department of Environment and Heritage (DEH, 2005). The Minister of Environment and Heritage has the responsibility for NOO through the department and reports to Cabinet on its prog ress (Haward and Vince, 2006). Ocean Research Priorities Plan: Whilst AOP development process was progressing, the Marine Science and Technology Working Group, comprising representatives of Australian Government marine science and related agencies, as well as State research institutions and non-government marine science interests; were working to develop Australias Marine Science and Technology Plan (Alder, 2001). The government aimed to develop and release the Plan as a companion to Australias Oceans Policy(Vince, 2004). The Marine scientific advisory committee was tasked with promoting coordination and information sharing between Government marine science agencies and across the broader Australian marine science community(AMSTP, 1999). The MSTC prepared a Marine Science and Technology Plan to provide a strategy, consistent with the Oceans Policy, for integrated and innovative science, technology and engineering. The Plan encompasses three major programs under each program multiple objectives(AMSTP, 1999): . Understanding the Marine Environment ( 7 objectives) Using and Caring for the Marine Environment ( 15 objectives) Infrastructure for Understanding and Utilising the Marine Environment ( 6 objectives). Legislation:   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Australia Oceans Policy has established new institutions to oversee the implementation of the Regional Marine Planning process. The institutions have emphasised a departure from traditional sectoral arrangements whilst incorporating over 100 laws and policy instruments addressing aspects of the management of the marine environment and the legal jurisdictional framework established through offshore federalism(Haward and Vince, 2006). The Offshore Constitutional Settlement (OCS) returned the jurisdiction over 3nm from the low water mark to the states(Stark, 2004). OCS remains the primary intergovernmental arrangement governing ocean and marine resources in Australia and makes up the jurisdictional framework for the development and implementation of the Ocean Policy(Vince, 2004). Since Australia Ocean Policy has been developed as being an environmental protection policy the principal Australian legislation is the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999(cth) (EPBC Act)(Akwilapo, 2007). The EPBC Act and the associated Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Regulation 2000 (EPBC Regulation) provide a national framework for Environment protection through focusing on protecting areas of national environmental significance and on the conservation of Australias biodiversity (Akwilapo, 2007). On the other hand, a commitment to ecologically sustainable development and multiple use management is embedded within the Oceans Policy framework emphasising a commitment to, inter alia, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Developments (UNCED) Agenda 21 principles and UNCLOS (Akwilapo, 2007). Integrated Marine Spatial Planning The AOP emphasised that Australia Regional Marine Plans is based on large marine ecosystems. This system helps to maintain ecosystem health and integrity while promoting multiple use of oceans by integrating sectoral commercial interests and conservation requirements. Australia approach to Integrated Ocean Planning and Management encompass the following(AOP2, 1998): Development of a new institutional arrangement comprising the National Oceans Ministerial Board, the National Oceans Advisory Group and the National Oceans Office and Regional Marine Plan Steering Committees. Providing policy guidance for oceans planning and management. Regional Marine Plan, based on large marine ecosystems. The first plan was developed for the south-eastern region of Australias EEZ. Funds for National marine resource surveys; development of sustainability indicators and monitoring; and rapid assessments of the biological resources of Australias oceans. The resulting information based was used to underpin effective regional integration for planning and management. These assessments also benefit industry by providing information on potential new resources such as deep-water fisheries and pharmaceuticals. Development of National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas. Development of Marine Parks and World Heritage Areas. Maritime Safety and Environment Protection Plan The Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) has developed a strategy to protect the marine environment from shipping operations through improved environmental management of shipping and related activities(Stark, 2004). The strategy encompass: designation of marine sensitive areas, promote improvement of waste reception facilities at ports, marinas and boat harbours, improve anti-fouling practices, management and piloting a national monitoring programme for marine debris, community and industry awareness, and support for the enhanced National Plan to Combat Pollution of the Sea by Oil and Other Noxious and Hazardous Substances (the National Plan) (AOP1, 1998). Under the AOP the Government committed to enhance maritime safety and highlighted the importance of enhancing regional cooperative arrangement for search and rescue, development and implementation of search and rescue arrangements; implementation of the Global Maritime Distress Safety System(GMDS S), pursue consistent requirements for the use of Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacons (EPIRBs) and maritime communications for small vessels(AOP2, 1998). To further ensure the Safety of Navigation, the Government committed to maintain efficient coast-effective maritime safety navigation services and infrastructure, expansion of the local area Differential Global Positioning Systems (DGPS) services; technological development in marine navigation, and involvement in the International Association of Lighthouse Authorities and other international forums to ensure global navigational safety policies, standards and new technologies(AOP2, 1998). Maritime Surveillance and Security Plan To ensure that there is an effective and efficient surveillance capacity for Australias marine jurisdictions and effective enforcement of national legislation throughout Australias marine jurisdictions. Under the Oceans Policy the Australian government continued to pursue through the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) and other; to increase action addressing illegal fishing in CCAMLR and adjacent waters; increased surveillance and enforcement measures in the Great Barrier Reef; continued to cooperate to review and rationalise effort involved in and capacity for surveillance and enforcement including reviewing legislation relating to enforcement in Australias marine jurisdictions(AOP2, 1998). The Oceans Policy highlighted that the Australian Defence Forces (ADF) tasks encompass safeguarding these areas, controlling of maritime approaches to exercise and protect Australias sovereignty and sovereign rights. This involve preparedness and continge ncy planning; maritime surveillance and response; fisheries law enforcement; search and rescue; hydrographic services; and the Australian Oceanographic Data Centre (AODC)(AOP2, 1998). Maritime Sector Development Plan During AOP development process the Marine Industry Development Strategy was also announced. The Strategy highlighted what the Marine Industry is worth what should incur for further resourceful developments(AOP2,1998). It illustrated that 90 per cent of Australias oil and gas is sourced offshore; that the shipbuilding industry supplies one third of the worlds high speed ferry market; wild capture fisheries represent a major primary industry; and that marine tourism is a booming industry(Vince, 2004). The Specific Measures Volume of Australia Oceans Policy underpinned several challenges facing the maritime sector and the various activities such as : fisheries; aquaculture; offshore petroleum and minerals; shipping; marine tourism; marine construction, engineering and other industries; pharmaceutical, biotechnology and genetic resources; and alternative energy resources. For meeting these challenges the policy proposed numerous activities under each one of them. For example to meet the shipping sector challenge to increase trade and regional development by delivering safe, efficient, competitive and environmentally responsible maritime infrastructure and shipping services(AOP2, 1998). The policy identified measures including: regulatory reform of the maritime sector with a view to removing barriers to competition, rationalise jurisdictional arrangements, harmonise standards and promote mutual recognition; and encourage continuous improvements in shipping and waterfront sectors to enhance the competitiveness of Australian trade and industry; to continue Australia leading role in international trade and maritime forums to ensure access to competitive and efficient international shipping services is maintained(AOP2, 1998). Marine Education and Training Plan Under Australias Marine Science and Technology Plan, NOO is responsible for providing advice to the Ministerial Board on marine research priorities relevant to the Oceans Policy to ensure that the marine research agencies are kept informed of the Governments emerging priorities(TFG, 2002). The NOMB is responsible to consider Government priorities for publicly funded marine research related to the implementation of the Oceans Policy including: community capacity building, networking opportunities, and community participation in marine management, research and monitoring and data collection; and provide opportunities for community representation on consultative committees in regard to marine resource management, the establishment of a new marine science research and teaching centre at Coffs Harbour; support for the Australian, Pacific and Global Oceans Observing Systems; establishment and operation of a Regional Office of the International Oceanographic Commission in Perth, Western Aus tralia; provision of quality maritime education and research; and training and employment in jointly managed parks; development of a long term marine education policy and programme for kindergarten to year 12 to be incorporated in curricula in all States and Territories; development of relevant resource materials for use in schools and Technical and Further Education colleges in cooperation with professional bodies; and support for the provision of quality practical educational material for teachers and students(AMSTP, 1999). National Maritime Information Center To improve monitoring and understanding of marine ecosystems and the impacts of resource use Australia government has developed the Australian Coastal Atlas, within the Environmental Resource Information Network (ERIN), to allow general access to adequate information for community involvement in oceans management as a fundamental element of the Australian Spatial Data Infrastructure(AOP2, 1998). Thus, the Australian government provided support for the Marine and Coastal Community Network to develop a comprehensive communication strategy to assist the public, industry and governments learn about and understand the role of Australias Oceans Policy. Also the government supported the Australian Surveying and Land Information Group (AUSLIGs) continuing development of the Australian Maritime Boundaries Information System as a national database of Australias maritime jurisdictional boundary data to provides Australias with an independent and scientifically credible information on Australias environment for decision-makers and the wider community(AOP2, 1998). AUSLIG is the Commonwealth focal point for coordination of geodetic information and works closely with State and Territory agencies, the Inter-governmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping (ICSM) and industry groups towards the provision of the highest quality geodetic infrastructure(AUSLIG, 2009). Moreover, AUSLIGs under the ocean policy is responsible for the development of a coordinated observations and methods to analyse and interpret the data that will make optimum use of information from remote and in situ measurements at the space and time scales required for effective monitoring, use, management and conservation(AOP2, 1998). It is clear that the lack of a comprehensive system of monitoring sites, and lack of long-term commitment to monitoring inshore and offshore, particularly on the scale of large marine ecosystems has affected Australia ability to assess changes in the condition of the marine environme nt. Thus, AOP recognized that Integration of coastal, inshore and offshore monitoring activities is vital to National capacity for future assessments and maintenance of marine and coastal environments(AOP1, 1998). National Oceans Forum To provide for Community representation and participation, the AOP established a National Oceans Advisory Group as a non-government consultative and advisory body to the National Oceans Ministerial Board(AOP1, 1998). The NOAG is responsible for promoting strategic management of the ocean environment and its resources; to provide opportunities for community representation on consultative committees in regard to marine resource management and facilitate consultation with peak indigenous groups on the requirements for establishing a national consultative mechanism, such as an annual forum(AOP1, 1998). Thus, to promote implementation of Australia Oceans Policy, the policy called for holding a National Oceans Forum to coordinate across the agencies responsible for the development of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and a broad national cross-section of those with a stake in the management of Australia oceans(IOC, 2007). International Cooperation: Given the dynamic nature of the marine environment, AOP recognized that the effective implementation of the Oceans Policy requires cooperation with immediate neighbours and other countries to address the transboundary impacts and improve regional cooperation on ocean issues(AOP1, 1998). Thus, AOP called for: peaceful use of the oceans and cooperation in access for national and international scientific research and monitoring programmes; cooperation with neighbouring countries and with industries to maximise resources; improved cooperation and coordination between existing coastal mo

Frankenstein Essay

Within the story of Mary Shelley’s, Frankenstein, we meet a character who comes head on with the advancements of science and the evolution of man. Victor Frankenstein is obsessed with the idea of creating life. He struggles with his own intelligence and the morality of the society around him. He is continuously bothered by the accepted laws of nature. The significance of his statement, â€Å"Destiny was too potent, and her immutable laws had decreed my utter and terrible destruction† he finally realizes that his efforts to create and sustain life were no match for the powers of nature. It is upon returning to school after the near death of Elizabeth and the death of his mother that he becomes obsessed with creating life. Victor makes the statement â€Å"I will pioneer a new way, explore unknown powers, and unfold to the world the deepest mysteries of creation†. (pg 33) This after hearing a lecture of modern chemistry by Professor M. Waldman. Over a period of time Victor collected a series of body parts from graveyards to assemble in a new human form. With his knowledge of chemistry, biology and anatomy he reanimated his creation into an eight- foot monster. After bringing life to his eight foot creation, Victor realizes he should not have gone against the laws of nature. Victor is horrified to realize his creation has murdered his brother William. Victor cannot explain his creation and its evilness to his family without them thinking he is mentally ill. Victor nearly goes mad with the realization that because of his creature, his brother is killed. Falsely accused of Williams’s murder, Justine is executed after hard evidence unfolds upon her. Because of his obsession of creating life, he has taken life away. In his depression, Victor decides that his creature must be found and destroyed. Natures Laws should not have been toyed with. Victor sets out on an expedition in the mountains and finds the monster. To his surprise the monster seems to be intelligent and refined, but the monster has resentment of Victor for having been sent out on his own with no one to teach or nurture him. It was because of the monsters resentment that ultimately William and Justine were killed. Victor’s scientific ambition consumed his life. To go against the Law of Nature to prove that man can create life. Mental and physical setbacks plagued Victor while dealing with the reality of his creation. He suffers because his passion for creating life has taken away those around him that he loved. The significance of his statement, â€Å"Destiny was too potent, and her immutable laws had decreed my utter and terrible destruction† he finally realizes that his efforts to create and sustain life were no match for the powers of nature.