67
June

http://www.wmujapan.net

2019

Indian “yell” - the fight against leprosy
Dr. Sasakawa Receives Gandhi Peace Prize

The Government of India has awarded theGandhi Peace Prize to Dr. Yohei Sasakawa,
Chairman of The Nippon Foundation, Emeritus
Chairman of the Sasakawa Peace Foundation,
and Chairman of Friends of WMU Japan, for
his contribution to the elimination of leprosy inIndia. The award ceremony took place at the
President’s official residence in New Delhi on
February 26, 2019, with a number of Indian government leaders in attendance.
The Gandhi Peace Prize was established by theGovernment of India in 1995 to commemorate
the 125th anniversary of the birth of Gandhi,
and recipients of the prize are awarded 10
million Indian Rupees (approximately $140,000).
Non-Indian individuals and organizations thathave been awarded the prize to date include
Nobel Peace Prize winners such as former President Nelson Mandela and former Bishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa, and the Grameen
Bank of Bangladesh. The award is regarded
internationally as a prestigious peace prize.
The Government of India bestowed the prize
on Dr. Sasakawa, who also serves as the World
Health Organization (WHO) Goodwill Ambassador for Leprosy Elimination, in recognition of
his efforts to control leprosy. At the award ceremony, President Kovind of India stated, “We are
grateful for your cooperation in our fight against
leprosy as a disease and the discrimination andstigma associated with it. On behalf of India, I
would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Sasakawa and his foundation's contribution.”
In his speech at the award ceremony, Dr. Sasakawa said, “I recognize this as an award bestowed
on me together with my many companions who

have fought against the problems of leprosy and,at the same time, as a “yell” from Dr. Gandhi. A
world without leprosy and the stigma anddiscrimination associated with it is not a distant
dream.” While expressing his gratitude at receiving the prize, Dr. Sasakawa made an appeal to all
people to cooperate in future efforts for the eradication of the disease. Dr. Sasakawa intends todonate his prize of 10 million Rupees to activities
to control leprosy.
During his visit to India, Dr. Sasakawa also
paid a visit to Mr. Rajendra Singh, Director
General of the Indian Coast Guard and held ameeting with him for about one hour. During
the meeting, Dr. Sasakawa and Director General
Singh spoke about the following matters:
・We are living in a time when we will have toseriously contend with the world’s maritime
problems. Most people are unaware of the environmental changes related to human survival
occurring in our maritime culture including

climate change, overfishing, marine resources,
and changes in ecosystems.
・ We would like to establish the WMU
Sasakawa Global Ocean Institute within theWorld Maritime University and contribute to
the development of both WMU and the new
institute.
Also present at the meeting was a Sasakawa
Fellow who works for the Indian Coast Guard.
At that time, Dr. Sasakawa expressed his gratitude to the Director General for sending such an
excellent student to WMU and also expressed his
congratulations at sending an outstanding staff
member of the Indian Coast Guard and WMU
Fellow who had graduated from WMU to
Malmö as a WMU teacher.*(Responsible for article text: Secretariat)*Dr. Anish Hebbar (Class of 2006, Maritime
Safety & Environmental Protection) assumed
the position on February 1, 2019.

Sustainable Blue Economy Conference in Kenya
Anas Saleh Mohammad Alamoush(Jordan, 2016)

I participated in the sustainable blue economy
conference (SBE) in Kenya from November
26-28, 2018, which was such a great experience.
Even though the term SBE is hasn’t been very
well known until now, I have just completed myresearch at WMU oriented toward thes u s t a i n a b l e d e v e l o p m e n t o f p o r t s . Th e
conference referred to SBE as the managementthat considers and encompasses the sustainable
use and conservation of the oceans, seas, lakes,
rivers and other resources. The conference not
only unlocked the potential to harness SBE
within the sustainable development of countries
around the world, but it also reiterated andemphasized the following stunning facts about
the blue economy.
Half of the world’s population lives within
60km of the sea; 75% of all large cities arelocated along the coast; 90% of the world tradefacilitation by volume and 70% by value is bysea; fishers, fish farmers and related supplying
services and goods guarantee the livelihood of
about 660–820 million people worldwide, withwomen accounting for about 15% of those

directly engaged in fisheries; and oceans absorb
about 25% of the extra CO2 emissions added to
Earth’s atmosphere by burning fossil fuels, etc.
However, there are a wide variety of challenges
that hinder the transition to a blue economy thatsustainably uses and conserves the oceans’ assets
and resources. Hence, the conference invited
experts from all over the world to share theirexpertise and build partnerships to unlock thepotentials of a blue economy in these areas:
shipping and ports; environment and pollution;
coastal management; partnerships; employment
and job creation; sustainable energy; ending
hunger and providing good health; climate
actions; gender issues and maritime security.
My participation was in maritime security - a
UN side event - and the role defense plays in thesustainable blue economy from a capacity
building perspective. Defense is important as it
maintains maritime stability and resilience bybuilding security, safety and a governancearchitecture in countries. By protecting seas andoceans, defense provides peace, security andstability, and thus makes the maritime space thekey driver for sustainable economic
development. In the absence of security, the vast
majority of economic activities associated withthe blue economy cannot be effectively carriedout. Unsecured ocean territories constituteungoverned spaces in which criminals,
insurgents and terrorists can operate with
impunity.
Defense - as seen with navies - counters amyriad of risks that compromise the blue
economy, e.g. piracy, IUU, pollution,
smuggling, illegal migrations, terrorism, crimes,
and climate actions. The point here is thatcountries with a strong defense capability needto share their experience and expertise throughcapacity building programs with those in need.
We all need to work hard for more sustainableseas and oceans and bring about a sustainable
blue economy.

Masanori Kobayashi

Senior Research Fellow,
Ocean Policy Research Institute of the Sasakawa Peace Foundation (OPRI-SPF)

Studies and reports have been released on thevalue of ocean ecosystems and the potential ofutilizing oceans and marine resources forpromoting sustainable development. Termed“the blue economy” in publications by OECDand the World Bank, it has become a central
topic in the ocean policy discourse. At the first
UN Ocean Conference held in New York in
June 2017, global leaders adopted the action plan
“Our ocean, our future: call for action”. Its
paragraph 3 calls for the advancement of asustainable ocean-based economy throughactivities such as fisheries, tourism, aquaculture,
maritime transportation, renewable energies,
marine biotechnology and seawater desalination.
The blue economy was featured as a main topic
at the 5th Our Ocean Conference held in Bali,
Indonesia in October 2018. In November 2018,
over 16,000 people participated in the
Sustainable Blue Economy Conference in
Nairobi, which was organized by theGovernment of Kenya and co-organized by
Canada and Japan. President Uhuru Kenyatta of

Kenya underlined the importance of promoting asustainable blue economy more proactively in
Africa.
Sasakawa Fellow alumni from WMU havedeveloped a network around the topic of the blue
economy. Alumni from Jordan, Namibia and theSolomon Islands attended the Nairobi
Conference. I moderated the session on foodsecurity and sustainable fisheries, and I met Mr.
Anas Alamoush, another alumni with whom I
had useful discussions.
In May 2019, I visited Namibia to attend theblue economy seminar organized by the
University of Namibia in Swakopmund. Fisheries
and Marine Resources Minister Bernhard Essau
emphasized the need to promote a blue economy.
Dr. Hage Gottfried Geingob, President of the
Republic of Namibia, is a member of the HighLevel Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy
established in September 2018. Dr. Atsushi
Sunami, President of the Ocean Policy ResearchInstitute of the Sasakawa Peace Foundation(OPRI-SPF) is appointed as a member of the2

Advisory Network to support the High Level
Panel.
After the seminar, I visited the Namibian Port
Authority (Namport) in Walvis Bay, where we
met Mr. Elias Mwenyo and Ms. Leena Ndahafa
Kagola, Officials of Namport who are also
Sasakawa Fellows. I also met Karin Reiss,
Sustainable Energy Expert at the Southern
African Development Community (SADC)
Centre for Renewable Energy and Energy
Efficiency (SACREEE) in Windhoek. She wasintroduced to me by another Sasakawa Fellow,
Mr. Tangeni Haimbala, whom I met at thereception to welcome Sasakawa Fellows inTokyo in May 2019.
Th e b l u e e c o n o m y a i m s t o c o m b i n e
conservation and sustainable use of oceans andmarine resources for sustainable development,
and the network being developed with OPRI
and Sasakawa Fellow alumni of WMU is
expected to help advance the blue economy.

Would you Like to Be a “Chair”?
~ advantages of chairing at IMO ~Dr. Susumu Ota

Director, Centre for International Cooperation,
National Maritime Research Institute,
National Institute of Maritime, Port and Aviation Technology

This is the first time for me to write an article
for the WMU newsletter, and actually the firsttime to write an article other than academic
papers and documents related to IMO in
English, as far as I remember.
I graduated from Yokohama National
University, in the naval architecture course, andI have been engaged in research at our institute.
I received a doctorate degree from the
University of Tokyo by researching liquefaction
and sliding failure of solid cargoes carried inbulk on ships. With regard to my experience
related to IMO, I have participated in morethan a hundred meetings as a member of theJapanese delegation, as well as coordinating
more than 20 correspondence groups andchairing more than 20 working and draftinggroups. I was the vice chairperson of the
Sub-Committee on Ship Design andEquipment (DE) from 2010-2013 and thechairperson of the Sub-Committee on Ship
Systems and Equipment (SSE) from 2014.
Based on these experiences, I would like topoint out what it’s like to get involved in IMO
activities.
First, I have to say that WMU graduates havea big advantage when contributing to projects at
IMO. One of the advantages is the ability to
speak a specific kind of English, called "IMO
English". Because of their level of IMO
English, the graduates of WMU are usually
proficient in communicating at IMO meetings.
I, on the other hand, had a language problem
the first time I participated in an IMO meeting.
I had neither worked abroad nor been a foreign
student. My first meeting was the 32nd sessionof the Sub-Committee on Container and
Cargoes, or BC (Bulk Cargo) Sub-Committee
held in 1993. Another advantage the WMUgraduates have is a basic understanding of IMO
requirements. Such basic knowledge makes itmuch easier to understand various IMO
regulations and recommendations. I, on theother hand, had some difficulty understanding
IMO regulations and recommendations becauseof my poor knowledge. In all honesty, it took along time for me to understand the Code of
Safe Practice for Solid Bulk Cargoes, or the BC
Code, known as the base instrument of theInternational Maritime Solid Bulk Cargoes
Code, which was relevant to theaforementioned meeting.
Participation in an IMO meeting is hard
work. First, it is necessary to read documents

Photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/imo-un/albums

that are submitted, which often total more than
one thousand pages. For example, at the fifthsession of the SubCommittee on Carriage ofCargoes and Containers (CCC 5) held in
September 2018, the number of documents was
106, and the total number of pages was 2,211.
At this meeting, I was in charge of only one
agenda item, item 5: "Amendments to the
IMSBC Code and supplements". Among the
106 documents, 42 were submitted under thisagenda item, and the total number of pages was
1,503. Together with some members at theheadquarters of the Ministry of Land,
Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, I readthese documents and summarized the contents
in Japanese, in order to allow Japan to respond tothem. I spent roughly 10 days doing this prior tothe meeting. Just participating in an IMO
meeting sometimes requires a few weeks’ work,from preparation to reporting. Many graduatesof WMU play an active part in various IMO
meetings, as well as IMO secretariats.
A correspondence group (CG) is a group that
discusses specific items between sessions of aCommittee or a Sub-Committee, usually via
e-mail. When a CG is established by aCommittee or a SubCommittee, the terms ofreference for the CG are determined. CGs play
an important part in the preparation of draft
IMO instruments. Participation in a CG as amember requires sufficient spare time, for thereason that participants need to consider thecoordinator's remarks, which sometimes arecomplex, and then submit comments, as
appropriate. The work of a CG coordinatorrequires much more time than that of aparticipating member. It can be outlined asfollows:(1) invitation to the CG;(2) preparation and circulation of

3

Coordinator's remarks for the round;(3) consolidation and circulation of comments
acquired in the round;(4) repeat (2) and (3) for respective rounds;(5) preparation and circulation of draft CG
report;(6) finalization of the CG report based oncomments on the draft report; and(7) submission of the report to the specified
session of the Committee or Sub-Committee.
Usually, three or four rounds are held in a
CG. Though being a CG coordinator is hard
work, it is an important contribution to theprojects of IMO.
Working groups and drafting groups are
established during sessions of respective
Committees or SubCommittees. Working
groups may discuss substantial issues, but thetasks of drafting groups are limited to drafting
works, namely, editorial improvement of
documents, which are draft IMO instruments
in many cases. The Maritime Safety Committee
and the Marine Environment Protection
Committee establish drafting groups for
mandatory IMO instruments every session toprepare sound and precise drafts. I haveparticipated in these drafting groups manytimes. Working and drafting groups often work
long hours. After being established, theysometimes start before 09:30, at the start of theplenary, and often continue into the night.
Chairpersons and secretariats for the respective
groups usually continue for a few hours more,
for the preparation of reports, which often
include draft IMO instruments. The reports ofworking and drafting groups are issued asworking papers, WPs, in three languages,
English, French and Spanish. As you cangather, being the chairperson of a working ordrafting group is also hard work.

A chairperson of a Sub-Committee is evenharder. Before a session, the chairperson must
work with secretariats in order to manage themeeting, including the preparation of a “chair's
brief”. During the session, together they prepare
the draft report of the Sub-Committee, andafter the session is over, they must finalize thereport. The chairperson of a Sub-Committee, in
principle, should also participate in theCommittee to which the Sub-Committee sends
the report.
So being a CG coordinator, a chairperson of aworking and drafting group or a chairperson ofa Sub-Committee are all hard work. And I
suppose that chairpersons of Committees are
harder than that. All these jobs are challenging,but worthwhile and rewarding, and sometimes
interesting.

As mentioned above, WMU graduates havesome advantages in IMO activities, andcontributing to IMO may lead to a promotionin their respective organizations, taking into
account the high soft skills that are required. I
would like to recommend to the graduates toundertake these important and honorable
projects if given the opportunity, andremember that these projects are completely
free of charge.

Photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/imo-un/albums

Shipbuilder's voice should be spread globally
Mr. Tomohiko Kajita
Ex-Secretary General,
Active Shipbuilding
Experts’ Federation

1. Ten shipbuilding associations
Three years have already passed since ASEF
(Active Shipbuilding Experts’ Federation) wasestablished in November 2015.
ASEF consists of members who are either
representative shipbuilders’ associations or
representative shipbuilding companies, and ASEF
members represent more than 90% of the global
share in terms of new vessels.
The initial 9 members have now increased to thefollowing 10 (in alphabetical order of theiracronyms):- Association of Marine Industries of Malaysia(AMIM), Malaysia- China Association of the National Shipbuilding
Industry (CANSI), China- Colombo Dockyard PLC, Sri Lanka- Turkish Shipbuilders’ Association (GISBIR),
Turkey- Indonesia Shipbuilding Offshore Industries
Association (IPERINDO), Indonesia- Korea Offshore & Shipbuilding Association(KOSHIPA), Korea- Shipyards Association of India (SAI), India- Shipbuilders’ Association of Japan (SAJ), Japan- Shipbuilding Industry Corporation (SBIC),
Viet Nam- Thai Shipbuilding and Repairing Association(TSBA), Thailand
ASEF gathers the technical capability of themembers to fulfill their objectives to contribute tovarious technical challenges that are debated at
IMO, ISO and IACS.

12th ASEF Forum on October 2018

There are currently 3 accredited Representatives
ASEF will participate in IMO meetings andactively communicate opinions and views of (Technical), who are tasked with administering theactivities of the TWG and SWGs and to
shipbuilding on the technical issues listed below.
communicate with other stakeholders, and who will
join IMO MSC, MEPC and other meetings to
3. Technical issues
At ASEF, members form a Technical Working deliver ASEF technical information, views andGroup (TWG) to convey their opinions and views opinions.
to IMO or IACS. Sub-Working Groups (SWGs)
are also formed to professionally deal with important 4. ASEF Forum and activities with related
technical challenges at an expert level. Currently organisations
The ASEF Forum started in 2007, long before
there are six:
- SWG1 : Performance standard for Protective ASEF was established as an NGO, and althoughc o a t i n g s ( P S P C ) & B i o f o u l i n g it is an annual event, its function is to widely
disseminate the issues and challenges at IMO,
management Issue- SWG2 : IACS UR and Class Rules for Structural and measures that are being discussed. The
Forum has promoted an exchange of views within
Design of Large Containerships
the shipbuilding industry as well as toward related- SWG4 : GBS and CSR maintenance- SWG5 : (1) Onboard use and application of industries.
In addition to engaging in the Tripartite
computer based systems (IACS UR
E22) and other IACS draft documents Meeting with shipowners’ associations and IACS,
ASEF further enhances the relationship withfor cyber related issues,(2) Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships classification societies and shipowners based in
Asia, where many ASEF members have their(MASS),(3) ISO/TC8 WG10 (Smart shipping) main offices.
for standard related issues- SWG6 : Reduction of GHG emissions from ships 5. Summary
ASEF is now in its second year, serving IMO- SWG7 : (1) Safe mooring operations,
2. Consultative status with IMO(2) Onboard lifting appliances and as an NGO, eager to live up to expectations in
For the purpose of directly communicating its
contributing to the world’s maritime cluster byanchor handling winches
opinions and views at IMO, ASEF acquired
Note: SWG3, relating to the issue of voicing a clear message in the shipbuilding
consultative status in December, 2017, and started
ISO 21984, is no longer active due to the industry on issues related to maritime safety andits activities from 2018.
marine environmental protection.
fulfillment of its objective.

4

Revising the Guidelines on Fatigue:
Challenges and Opportunities
Dr. Michelle Grech

Australian Maritime Authority

Introduction
In December 2018, the International Maritime
Organization’s Maritime Safety Committee
approved the revised Guidelines on Fatigue(MSC 1598) at its 100th session.
This revision was by no means a straightforwardand easy task but involved a multi-year processwith plenty of discussions, debate and effort thatwent into ensuring that the final productcontained relevant material for companies(operators), seafarers and the industry alike.
Ultimately this revision represents a change inthe right direction for the provision of guidanceon the way the risk of fatigue should be managed
in shipping.

was meant to test support, with the paper
highlighting the knowledge base available on
fatigue, and it was opportune to consider agoal-based approach to managing the risk of fatigue
at sea. The key principle was based on ensuring
adequate crewing (manning) with this particular
aspect being the basis of many discussions at IMO,
but ultimately was rightly retained and wellhighlighted in the revised guidelines.
Another more substantive paper (Australia,
co-sponsored by Dominica, the Marshall Islands,
Norway, IFSMA and the Nautical Institute) was
submitted to the 94th session of the Maritime
Safety Committee in November 2014, proposing
the review of the guidelines on fatigue to morereflect current fatigue, sleep and safety science andensure the inclusion of goal-based approaches infatigue risk management at sea. This proposal wasapproved, which started the revision process
through the inclusion of this work in the agendaof the HTW sub-committee, scheduled forJanuary 2015. To keep the ball rolling, Australia
put through another paper pre-empting theMaritime Safety Committee’s decision and laying
down the foundation for the revision of theguidelines on fatigue.
The brief that came out from HTW 2 wasagreement that the revision was necessary andshould consider the following:· a risk-based approach· the impact of fatigue at all levels (i.e. all
stakeholders)· ensure that the outcome should provide practical
tools for fatigue management· consider the link between manning and fatigue· be written and presented in a manner that could
be easily read and understood by all intended
end-users
This set in motion the preparation anddevelopment of a base document which was led anddeveloped by Australia in collaboration with somemember States and submitted to HTW 3 in 2016.
Of note is that this was based on contemporary
approaches in the area of fatigue risk management,using peer reviewed scientific literature and input
from subject matter experts in the field of fatigue
science and its management.
For the next few years a correspondence groupmade up of 33 Member countries and 11
organisations had lots of discussion and debate,some disagreements that brought progress to astalling point, extensions of deadlines, thenconsensus, and finally an agreement in late 2018 torelease it at the 100th session of the Maritime
Safety Committee.
Although some aspects included in the original
base document were discounted, what finally cameout was a consensus document that aligned with theoriginal goals and intent of what the revision aimed
to achieve.

So you may ask, why the changes?
By 2013, fatigue was becoming a major safetyconcern in shipping, with lack of fatigue
management identified as a contributory factor in a
number of serious maritime accidents. A searchthrough the IMO Global Integrated Shipping
Information System database revealed many more
accidents in which fatigue played a major role. The
evidence was indisputably clear that fatigue wasand still is contributing to short and long term
performance and health impairment and is adanger to seafarers and safety at sea.
Having myself joined the Australian Maritime
Safety Authority at the time, with a background inengineering and human factors, fatigue was an area
I was passionate about. With 15 years’ experiencebehind me conducting applied research on fatigue
at sea and having worked in this industry for morethan 20 years, I felt I was in a good position tounderstand the issue from a scientific and practical
approach and provide input. I recall reading theoriginal Guidelines on Fatigue (MSC 1041) andnoting that the information did not match fatigue
and sleep science understanding of the time. The
original guidelines also took an individualistic
approach to fatigue management at sea with the
responsibility mainly residing with the seafarer,which was contrary to safety science approaches
that acknowledge the inter-relationship between
seafarers, their workplace and organizational
factors that influence fatigue at sea.
So, with full organisational support I embarked
on what I now consider in hindsight to have beena highly challenging task – that is to commence
the process of revising the Guidelines on Fatigue.
My thinking at the time was ‘the issue is clear –how difficult can it be?’ I was warned that this What do the new Guidelines contain?
would present a few bottlenecks on the way, and I
The revision resulted in the guidance being
must admit that I did underestimate how this was structured more logically, with minimised
going to evolve once I set the ball rolling.
repetition, updated references and improved
readability overall. Central to these guidelines is theWhat was done?
concept of a risk-based approach to fatigue
In 2013, I put together an information paper management. This includes the approach that since
which was approved for submission at the 1st fatigue affects the safe operation of the vessel,
session of the IMO Human Element Training fatigue management should logically be an integral
and Watchkeeping (HTW) sub-committee. This part of safety management systems. The revised

5

Guidelines have been changed to include six
succinct modules as follows:· Module 1 (Fatigue causes and consequences)lays down the ground work, providing a general
overview of fatigue and its causes andconsequences, intended for all stakeholders
involved in managing or affected by fatigue.
· Module 2 (Fatigue and the company) is central
to all other modules and focuses on the
Company, with guidance for managing therisks of fatigue in operational environments,
ensuring that seafarers are well supported. In all
circumstances, fatigue risk management
approaches should ensure that seafarers areprovided with recovery, rest and sleep periods toenable them to perform their work effectively
and safely irrespective of the type of work
schedules adopted.
· Module 3 (Fatigue and the seafarer) contains
practical information intended for seafarers(master, officers, ratings and all other shipboard
personnel). It lays down the premise that thecompany is primarily responsible for creating awork and living environment that minimizes
fatigue-related risks. But seafarers are
responsible for ensuring that time available forrest and sleep is used appropriately.
· Module 4 (Fatigue awareness and training) has
been updated and simplified, noting this is a
support module to the other modules.
· Module 5 (Fatigue and ship design) supports
the need for the design of an adequate working
and living environment on ships and isimportant information for ship designers andnaval architects to consider. It introduces theconcept of human centred design (HCD),
which places the users (seafarers) at theforefront of any design process.
· Module 6 (Fatigue, the Administration andPort State Authorities). This includes guidancefor considering fatigue in port and flag Staterequirements.
The guidelines are also supported by tools
contained in the appendices that can be utilised bycompanies and seafarers alike.
Conclusion
We can learn from other industry experiences inthis area, using tried and tested approaches toeffectively manage the risk of fatigue pertinent to
the maritime domain. Ensuring maritime
stakeholders such as companies and seafarers
participate in the development of a fatigue risk
management system on board will bring about theconfidence and trust needed in its implementation.
There is no doubt that these revised guidelines,
especially the need to incorporate fatigue risk
management, will test the industry about whether
we are serious in reducing the risks of fatigue atsea. One of the challenges is the need for the
maritime industry in general to have sufficient
in-depth knowledge and understanding of fatigue
that enables them to meet their responsibilities inensuring that risks are being managed
appropriately.
The aim now is to disseminate this very
important piece of work and make it known toseafarers, companies and other relevant
stakeholders that these Guidelines are now
available for use.

Managing Health and Safety on Merchant Ships

Carolyn Annmarie Elizabeth Graham(Jamaica, 2008)

The Occupational Health and Safety (OHS)of merchant seafarers continues to be of great
concern. Psychosocial illness is increasingly
being raised in the maritime press and research
publications. Combined with personal injuries,
maritime casualties, piracy, criminalization andabandonment, there is overwhelming evidence
to support continued efforts to protect seafarers
during the course of their work. Researchers
who examine the shipboard work environment
are of the view that better health and safetyr e s u l t s w o u l d b e p o s s i b l e i f e ff e c t i v emanagement practices were in place. Amongthese management practices are arrangementsallowing seafarers to participate and have a say
in OHS decisions, a topic that is underexploredin the shipping industry.

Until the coming into effect of the MLC,
participation in health and safety for the global
seafaring workforce was an expected practicerather than a regulatory requirement. Seafarers
were expected to participate in carrying out thepolicies of the safety management systems
developed to comply with the International
Safety Management Code (ISM). Under the
MLC, the nature of the participation required issomewhat different, as it focuses on the labour
relations and social aspects of OHS, rather thantechnical and operational safety matters, as does
the ISM. The MLC mandates the selection ofsafety representatives and for them to sit on
OHS committees to address seafarers’ concerns
from their perspective, which is absent from thefunctional prerequisites of the ISM.
Nevertheless, recent research shows that the
Seafarers’ participation and
MLC provisions are not fully implemented on
consultation in health and safetyboard, as the nature, organization and control of
The arrangements for seafarers’ participation work present features that undermine aspects ofare found in the Maritime Labour Convention, the MLC.
2006 (MLC), Regulation 4.3, Standard A4.3
para 1c & 2d. Participation and consultation ofworkers or their representatives in OHS arerecognized work relations practices withstatutory backing in many countries, including
the advanced market economies of Europe,
North America and elsewhere. These practices
are also found in international and regional
standards governing workplace health andsafety, such as the conventions of theInternational Labour Organization (ILO) anddirectives of the European Union. Suchstandards provide for joint participation and
Additionally, there are tensions between
consultation of workers and place duties on embedded practices of the ISM and what is
employers to ensure an effective participatory expected under the MLC. According to thesystem where workers have an opportunity to latter, diseases and illnesses are among the topics
influence health and safety management in to be considered in addressing seafarers’ OHS
their workplaces.
risks. Yet, the experiences of seafarers who
participated in the research, which focused on
representation standards in the MLC, suggested
that barring fatigue and catering in someinstances, much less attention is given to
seafarers’ health. The study found that the ISM
takes priority. OHS committee meetings are
dominated by technical safety matters, andseafarers had little opportunity to present theirhealth concerns.
Seafarers reported that health management wasapproached informally and usually at the end ofsafety meetings. One seafarer explained that a
Courtesy by The Association for Promoting Safety
general question was asked at the end as a means
and Sanitation for Seafarers

6of checking on their health status. He said thecaptain would ask: “Is everybody OK?… You,
your family, everything OK?” This was theextent of this seafarer’s experience of healthmanagement, which was not very different fromwhat others reported. The research found that
the MLC provisions such as safety
representatives - who might have contributed to
an incorporation of seafarers’ views and therefore
more attention to health - had not impacted
practices to any great extent in the conduct ofsafety committee meetings and generalapproaches to OHS management on board.
Conclusion
Health and safety management is an
important aspect of workplace practices. Giving
workers the opportunity to influence suchmanagement is an accepted practice provided
for in laws and policies that support their
participation. This area is underdeveloped for
seafarers. Recent research shows that although
the MLC has mandatory provisions for
seafarers’ participation, their implementationand practice on board are limited and might
account for a skewed focus on safety overhealth. This is an important area to examine asthere is growing concern for OHS at sea. The
study reveals an absence of structured
programmes to address health in the magnitude
that safety is addressed and at a level that takes
psychosocial illnesses into consideration. In thisrespect, the industry might wish to seriously
consider implementing more appropriate
provisions for seafarers to effectively participate,as this mechanism has the potential to benefit
workers and employers.
References_________________________________
Steven Jones (2018) Seafarers’ happiness: the roleof management and design. Splash 24-7.
Tanya Blake (2017) We need to talk about
mental health in seafaring. Fairplay, 11 August.
Sampson, H., Ellis, N., Acejo, A., Turgo, N.
(2017) Changes in seafarers’ health 2011-2016: A
summary report Cardiff: SIRC, July.
Walters, D. and Bailey, N. (2013) Lives inperil: profit or safety in the global maritime
industry? Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Graham, C. A. E. (2019) Developing Labour
Standards for Representation on Ships. PhD
Thesis. Cardiff University.

Regional Training Course for Auditors in Busan, Korea
Damrongkiat Kiatopas (Thailand, 2011)

I graduated from the World Maritime University in 2011 as a Sasakawa Fellow and am currently
working as the Harbour Master in the Marine
Department of Thailand, under the Ministry ofTransport. I and my senior ship surveyor colleague
had the privilege to participate in the Regional
training course for auditors under the IMO
Member State Audit Scheme (IMSAS), which
was held in Busan, the Republic of Korea, from
October 29 - November 2, 2018. The regional
training course was kindly hosted by the Korean
Maritime Administration for candidates from 20
countries in Asia, Australia and New Zealand. The
training course was designed for personnel frommaritime administrations who will be tasked withpreparing for the implementation of IMSAS by
conducting internal audits and who may be madeavailable to the International Maritime Organization for audits of Member States under the
Scheme.
IMSAS was adopted by the IMO Assembly inJanuary 1, 2016, with the aim of determining theextent to which all Member States give full andcomplete effect to their obligations and responsibilities and to help promote consistent and effective implementation of IMO instruments byassessing how well Member States implement andenforce applicable IMO Conventions and instruments. The mandatory IMO instruments includedin the scope of the Scheme cover safety of life atsea (SOLAS), prevention of pollution from ships(MARPOL), standards of training, certification
and watchkeeping for seafarers (STCW), Loadlines (LL), tonnage measurement of ships (Tonnage) and regulations for preventing collisions atsea (COLREG).
The key objective of the training course was todevelop Member States’ audit capacity and capability in the context of the IMO Member States
Audit Scheme, with a view to further enhancing
the global and uniform implementation of applicable IMO instruments, and to provide them withvaluable feedback and advice on their existing
performance. Also, it was to effectively train

Mr. Matsushima (Japan, 2016)(left) and the author

personnel undertaking the IMO Member State
Audit based on documentation developed by IMO
and to provide them with up-to-date information tounderpin their knowledge on the principles forauditing Flag, Coastal as well as Port State functions of State maritime administrations, in order toestablish a level of compliance with the requirements of IMO instruments. Furthermore, thetraining course addressed the needs of internal andexternal auditors having the responsibility forassessing the effectiveness of the implementation of
IMO instruments in their respective countries.
The training course programme spanned fivedays, covering various aspects with regard to auditing, including Framework and Procedures for theaudit, IMO Instruments Implementation Code (III
Code), Non-exhaustive list of obligations under
instruments relevant to the III Code, IMSAS
Auditor’s Manual, Audit Findings and corrective
action plans as well as Audit reports. At the final
stage during the training course, mock audits wereconducted by dividing all participants into threeteams, and all teams played both roles as the Auditor and Auditee. All participants greatly benefitted
from the mock audits, as they provided actual experience for participants to use their knowledge andtechniques gained during the training course.
To ensure that IMSAS was supported byadequate numbers of qualified auditors, particularly
with the required language skills and from a broader
range of Member States, all Member States wereinvited by the IMO secretariat to nominate suitably
qualified individuals, especially those who have been
trained through this Regional training course as
IMSAS auditors. In this regard, Member States

7

were to ensure that the backgrounds of the nominees were in line with the qualifications and criteria set out by IMO, particularly with regard to
proficiency in at least one of the six official IMO
languages, knowledge of international conventions,functions of a maritime administration and previous auditing skills and experience.
It was reasonably expecting that the audit
scheme would bring numerous benefits, such as
identifying where capacity-building activities - forexample, the provision of technical assistance by
IMO to Member States - would provide the greatest outcomes. Member States themselves would
also receive helpful feedback from auditors, intended to assist them in developing and improving
their capability to put applicable instruments into
practice. Also, common lessons learnt from audits
would be provided to all Member States so thatthe benefits could be broadly shared among themselves. Moreover, the results of the audits could be
systematically fed back into the regulatory process,enabling IMO to make assessable improvementsin the effectiveness of the international regulatory
framework for international shipping.
Finally, I was very proud to be part of the
IMSAS course in Busan, as part of the Thailand
delegation. It gave me a precious opportunity tomeet many skillful maritime administrations
around Asia, Australia and New Zealand andexchange many views, experiences and knowledge
with others, strengthening our bonds and friendships. I really hope that this relationship will contribute to the success of IMO’s audit scheme in thenear future.

Your Commitments Invigorate our Network
To maintain and develop our Sasakawa Fellows Network, it isessential for us to know details of the movement of our members. This
newsletter and the directory are important tools in this process. The
following are some suggestions on how you as individuals can invigorate
and enrich these tools.
We encourage your active, voluntary contributions to this newsletter.
Page 8 in particular is a page open to everyone. Please feel free to sharenews of happy occasions such as births, weddings, promotions, orinteractions with fellows during visits to other countries, reunions, or
any other occasion. Of course, contributions of articles on various topics

are always welcome.
1. We believe that the directory, which is renewed every few years, isbeing delivered to you. To ensure delivery of this newsletter in the
future, please be sure to inform us as soon as possible of any changes
such as a transfer, career change, or change of address.
2. At every editorial meeting, we have passionate discussions about
what kind of articles to include in our newsletter to make itenjoyable reading for all of you. If there is any topic on which you
would like to exchange information with your colleagues in othercountries, please feel free to let us know.

Introducing Our New Secretariat Staff Member

Takeshi Mizunari

Research Fellow
Ocean Education Division,
SPF/OPRI

Hello, everyone. How do you do? My name is Takeshi, and I joined
the Ocean Education Division in April this year. Since taking up my
new position, I have been extremely busy with various tasks. I worked
on "The Selection Board Meeting for WMU Sasakawa Fellowship2019" and "Japan Field Study Trip 2019". Somehow I managed tocomplete both tasks safely. Although these major events are now over,my next tasks are piling up, and I realize that until I get used to mywork, the challenges that face me will continue for the foreseeable
future.
My connection with maritime affairs began when I entered the Japan
Coast Guard Academy in 1995. The Academy trains executive
personnel of the Japan Coast Guard. On patrol vessels, a relatively small
crew is tasked with practical operations such as search and rescue, andguarding TWs and EEZ, in addition to regular navigation activities.
In 1999, I set off for Hokkaido (the northernmost island of Japan) totake up my new post as a 3rd grade navigation officer. Immediately
after, a number of maritime incidents occurred. Many large cargovessels became trapped in drift ice. The patrol vessel I was working on(an icebreaker) was involved in evacuation operations to escort thesevessels to safer waters and subsequently received a commendation.

Later, when I was a 1st grade navigation officer, I worked on a patrol
vessel and claimed for repairing, and I also coordinated operations with
our office on land. After I transferred to land duty, I was involved infollowing up on international rules relating to wireless and information
communications and the search for new technologies.
In 2013, I resigned from the Japan Coast Guard (my last rank was
LCDR), and in 2014, I joined the Japan Association of Marine Safety, aprivate organization for the prevention of maritime disasters. There I was
in charge of investigation and research concerning prevention of ocean
pollution from vessels, and I also was part of the IMO Marine
Environment Protection Committee and the Sub-Committee on
Pollution Prevention and Response, as one of the Japanese delegation,compiling Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) maps for National
Petroleum Stockpiling Bases in Japan.
In April 2019, I took up my current position. During that month, I
read all the scholarship applications (I’m sure you’ve all had to submit
them before) and participated in the Selection Board Meeting mentioned
above. We plan to introduce the new Fellows in Newsletter No. 69. In
May, I participated in the Japan Field Study Trip together with 29
Fellows and Professor Laura, Ms. Susanna, and our guide Miyo-san. This
time we toured Tokyo, Yokosuka, Okayama, Kobe and Osaka. We’ll tell
you about the Field Study Trip in the next Newsletter.
My introduction has been somewhat long but I would like to say that I
am proud to be with Fellows who are presently studying, and all other
Fellows moving forward in their careers as marine professionals after
graduating.
I am looking forward to working for all of you. Thank you very much!

After graduating WMU in 2016, I transferred to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT) temporarily and worked on IMO issues. Participating in IMO sessions was a totally new experience and a challenge, because I wasjust an ordinary seafarer who had nothing to do with policy-making. However, contrary to my concerns, I had a good start at
IMO, as I was not alone there. There were many WMU alumni, including Sasakawa Fellows. One of the most memorable moments was when I joined the HTW Sub-Committee for the first time, and my classmate Mr. Henry Mwasaru, a Sasakawa
Fellow from Kenya, was sitting right next to me! In the plenary room of IMO headquarters, delegations of member states are
assigned their seats in alphabetical order, so after Japan came Kenya. This situation helped me relax and was a wonderful beginning for my work at IMO. I will always treasure my days at WMU and bonding with Sasakawa Fellows. Therefore, it is my pleasure to be a member of the Editorial Group of the newsletter “Friends of WMU Japan” and contribute to the development of the
Sasakawa Fellows’ network. Your articles and update letters are always welcome. Kindly contact me if you have anything you’d
like to put in the newsletter. Finally, on behalf of the editorial group, I would like to express my deep gratitude to the all contribKoki Matsushima
utors of this newsletter, number 67.