1. Background
The seminar was organised because of a consensus
that marine research is becoming more expensive in character and
most nations do not have the resources to carry out all the investigations
that its scientists would wish to under Wce. Because of its global
nature, marine science has a well established tradition of international
participation in research projects. At the present time this is
exemplified by programmes such as WOCE, TOGA, GOFS etc., where
it is necessary for many countries to commit resources to allow
these experiments to be undertaken.
The cost of research vessels and their associated
equipment is a major factor, not only in large international experiments,
but also in many national marine science programmes. One of the
aims of this seminar is to consider ways of reducing that cost
by some form of pooling or sharing of ships, and indeed other
items of major equipment that the marine scientist may require.
This paper reviews three possible ways that the potential
for such sharing of resources may be approached, and briefly discussed
some of the associated administrative processes that may be required.
2. The Scientist
The primary aim of deploying a research ship and
scientific equipment in a particular area is to act as a platform
for data acquisition or the collection of samples for the scientist.
Accordingly, one way of addressing the problem of sharing resources
would be to attempt to match the requirements of individual scientists
or small scientific groups with the availability of berths on
ships that are already programmed to work in the areas of interest.
To some extent, this already occurs within co-operative projects,
but what is proposed here is at a lower level of formality. An
example might be that a European geophysicist has made a sound
scientific case to his funding organisation to carry out some
research in a distant sea or ocean. His own country may not be
able to programme a vessel to work in the area for financial or
other reasons, but his requirements could be met if he were offered
a berth and possibly the ability to use equipment on a foreign
vessel that was already programmed for geophysical research in
the area.
This exchange of berths should present few administrative
problems other than a mechanism for making known the availability
of the berths.
3. Ships
An alternative to the exchange of the occasional
berth on another ship is the exchange of agreed time slots on
another country's ships. The UK and USA (NSF) have already operated
such a scheme quite successfully, and it is understood that the
USA has similar bilateral agreements with a number of other countries.
For such a scheme to operate effectively, it is necessary
for the participating partners to be aware of the opportunities,
and be able to match them as closely participants should be aware
of, although not necessarily involved in, the cruise planning
processes of other organisations.
One of the prime aims of the current meeting is to
explore practical mechanisms for this mutual exchange of information
so that the shared utilisation of ships could be developed. A
question of great importance to this seminar is what should these
mechanisms be?
For an exchange scheme to operate successfully, two "notice boards" are necessary. The first comprises a full listing of planned ship dispositions for up to a year ahead, and the second might list scientific requirements that cannot be satisfied by the scientists' own national resources. The meeting will have heard of a scheme already available internationally which offers the first
notice board, but the second may be less easy to
set up. However, with the widespread access to international electronic
mail systems, the practical difficulties could be overcome given
a willingness of purpose and a modest level of financial support.
4. Equipment
Some major items of equipment are either unique to
a specific organisation or are too expensive to be universally
available. One possibility might be to consider shared use of
such equipment. This could take a number of forms. One would be
to make use of the equipment when it is fitted to the owner's
ship, in which case the arrangements would be as in the previous
sections. Another might be to arrange for the equipment to be
loaned when its owner's vessel was in a convenient geographic
location. Yet a third might be for the equipment to be loaned
on an exchange basis for shipment to the borrower's vessel wherever
it is working.
There are a number of potential difficulties to be
overcome here that will need considerable discussion. For example,
some arrangements would have to be agreed for indemnity to the
owner for loss of or damage to the equipment either in use or
transit. Again in the case of specialist equipment it is very
unlikely that the owner would agree to the loan without insisting
that his own support team go with it. Methods would need to be
found to pay or compensate for this support.
Another area that would enhance both the ability
of scientists to work on other countries' Ships and to facilitate
the exchange of equipment would be the development of containerisation
facilities for both laboratories and equipment. This must go hand-in-hand
with the development of agreed standards for the container fixings
and services.
5. "The Mechanics"
Whilst any or all of the above proposals are relatively
straightforward, actually making the arrangements could present
problems that should be addressed constructively at an early stage.
Clearly, exchange of berths can be effected on a "one-for-one"
basis, with the "guest" scientist making his or her
own travel arrangements, and the host ship providing the hotel
services on the cruise. Some discussion will be necessary on what
personal insurance cover for the guest scientists is required
and how this should best be achieved.
When the exchange of ships or equipment is being
considered, there is clearly a need to attach some notional value
to the resource being utilised so that the return in kind is fair
and equitable. In NERC's own case, we operate a number of ships
ranging in size from inshore fishing vessels through to vessels
with world wide capability, and we do not regard these as equal
value resources.
Similarly, the extent of scientific/technical support
that we can and do provide for any cruise can vary widely, and
so this too needs a notional value attaching to it. When these
factors are taken into account, they lead to a precondition that,
other things being equal, any exchange will have to be of ships,
equipment or support of broadly comparable notional value.
Unfortunately, this simple statement raises almost
more problems that it resolves unless the participating partners
are flexible in their interpretation of notional value. One factor
that might influence the mutual assessment of "value"
is the "guest's" strategic requirement to carry out
the research, which may dictate that he is prepared to offer an
apparently greater notional value to this host simply because
of the convenience in either time or geographical location that
he gains thereby.
Finally, it will be necessary to clarify beforehand
the users' responsibility for personnel and resource, i.e. ship
and/or equipment liability. If he has use of the ship or equipment,
what are his liabilities to the owners or third parties in the
event of loss or damage to the ship or equipment and what responsibility
will fall on the host organisation. A common approach to this
problem would offer a beneficial way forward.
6. Time scales
A key item in any collaboration will be the time
scales on which plans are prepared or on which they can be changed.
Some things, such as a strategic programming of a series of cruises
to a remote ocean, clearly dictate a longer lead-time than tactical
changes of port call within such a programme. Equally, circumstances
may change within a previously prepared cruise programme in such
a way that opportunities for collaboration may arise at short
notice or opportunities may disappear. It would be prudent, therefore,
in considering any notice-board approach, to recognise these two
conditions and make the appropriate arrangements for keeping the
"end user" in touch with developments.
7. Recommendations
The following recommendations on the way forward are by no means exhaustive, they are offered for consideration and discussion,