No abstract

This paper examines the trends in costs associated with the various low technology shoreline cleanup methods that were used in the response to the Sea Empress incident, by drawing on information gathered during the response and the subsequent claims for compensation from the local government councils involved. Analysis of the costs allowed the level of effort invested in shoreline cleaning to be quantified and re-enforced the view that the return on effort invested decreases progressively as the level of oiling reduces. The trends also reflect occasions where additional effort had to be expended at a later stage in the cleanup as a consequence of problems generated by some techniques used earlier in the response.

What defines a successful response to an incident? Is it dependent upon satisfying potential critics; does it depend on money saved or received in compensation; is it defined by avoiding or mitigating pollution damage; or is it all of the above? Once an incident has occurred the success or otherwise of the response can be predicted based on relatively few key variables. In this paper. For example:Preparedness & Training – i.e. the extent to which a country is prepared for an incident and whether the roles and responsibilities of individuals expected to be involved in the response are clearly defined.Location of the incident – i.e. the country, the culture and reaction to the incident; whether it has occurred off-shore or near-shore etc.Port of Refuge – i.e. whether or not a clear process for dealing with a casualty is pre-established.Trust & Respect – i.e. the extent to which trust exists between the various parties involved in an incident and the level of knowledge and expertise needed to engender respect.Co-operation – i.e. the extent to which parties are willing to co-operate and work together; the degree of realism about what can be achieved, and the level of confidence exhibited by those with ultimate responsibility.Communication – i.e. the effectiveness of the command structure and the lines of communication between parties; willingness to communicate.Cost-control/accountability – i.e. attitude towards cost control and effective use of resources.Compensation – i.e. whether adequate systems are in place to compensate victims of oil pollution damage promptly and fairly; compensation versus punitive fines.3 Ps (Politicians, Press, Public) – i.e. the degree to which these are allowed to drive the response.Willingness to Learn – i.e. the extent to which past incidents are used to inform potential future incidents; realism during exercises and debriefs. This paper will draw upon incidents that ITOPF has attended in its 45 year history to identify patterns of behaviour and the degree to which these variables can influence the outcome of a response. Recognition of the relative importance of these variables ought to form the basis of learning in order to improve the chances of a positive outcome in future incidents.

No abstract

This chapter evaluates the effectiveness of measures taken by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to promote global governance of the ocean. These views are based upon the International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation’s (ITOPF) experience of having attended major oil and HNS incidents worldwide. The evaluation also takes into account the educational and outreach activities that the ITOPF has undertaken in conjunction with the IMO and several of the partners with whom the IMO works. The approach taken has been to consider, primarily, the measures in terms of the conventions that are in place governing Preparedness and Compensation and to highlight where measures appear to be working effectively as well as where there are obstacles. The ITOPF’s role does not extend to measures taken to prevent incidents occurring. Other conventions are mentioned briefly insofar as they have relevance to the work of the ITOPF.