Whilst STCW 95 is the commondenominator for global MET, it is also the
least common denominator. MET in many countries is more, sometimes even much more than
fulfilling requirements of a global convention. It is more for the people concerned, it is
more for the maritime field in a region or country. Moreover, MET is not something that
can prosper in isolation. It is interwoven with its environment and influenced by changes
in it.
The wider environment of MET - trade and society
The wider environment of MET consists of the international trade and
the national society. Developments in international sea trade impact on national sea trade
and national economy; developments in a national society impact on value system, attitude
and behaviour of the individual.
Obviously, there is a desire to maintain sea trade if it is profitable
or, to make it profitable, if competitors offer carriage of goods by sea at lower rates.
Such freight rates may be related to the cost of safety and environment protection
standards of ships and crews. Countries which need to remain competitive in order to
ensure the survival of their national merchant marine fleet - often under a second
register - tend to recruit cheaper labour for their ships. A consequence of such
development is a loss of jobs for national seamen, the use of less study places at MET
institutes and, consequently, an overcapacity of study places.
Not only national MET will be negatively affected by such development
but also the availability of national ex-seafarers in the shore-based maritime industry.
There will be a shortage of pilots. It can be expected to result in the lowering of
standards because pilot services will have to be maintained. There will be a shortage of
shipboard-experienced people where cargo is handled in ports and a loss of expertise.
There will be a shortage of ex-seafarers in positions of responsibility in shipping
companies and other maritime enterprises where shipboard practice is of advantage. There
will be a shortage of former seamen in maritime administrations where seafaring practice
is of benefit and facilitates the work.
Countries which cannot afford their national seafarers anymore, will
recruit cheap labour, which, in turn, will boost MET in the countries that provide such
seamen. There is justified concern that the quality of seafarers suffers in this process.
Whilst efforts to remain competitive have an impact on MET in high-cost
countries from the "sea side", changes in the society in these countries impact
on MET from the "shore side". Less seafarers are required; at the same time, the
interest in seafaring as a career is declining. Thus, demand and supply of seafarers in
affluent societies can often be seen as being in balance. What is not in balance are
demand and supply for shore-based positions in the maritime industry where shipboard
experience is essential or desirable. What is not in balance is the number of study places
available at MET institutes and the number of places used. There is often a considerable
surplus. It could be reduced by closing MET institutes but this seems to be difficult in
