Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
EDUCATION AND TRAINING 187 One is to maintain the status quo, and thereby continue the strategy of piecemeal, short-term projects that are not necessarily informed by or coordinated with similar efforts conducted elsewhere. Experience has shown that this course of action does not lead to the coherent, long-term effort needed to implement Annex V fully. The other two options involve the establishment of a central managerâthe preferred way to create and sustain a coherent, long-term program. Apart from having access to the necessary expertise, a coordinating authority for Annex V education and training would have to be able to reach all maritime sectors, either directly or indirectly. The most obvious option would be to make official the leadership role now played by NOAA. The MERP and Sea Grant efforts have led the way in educating mariners and the public about marine debris and have proven that NOAA has vision. This agency is particularly effective in dealing with debris generated by fishing activities. However, NOAA would require assistance in dealing with the needs of some other groups (e.g., recreational boaters, cargo and cruise ships, the packaging industry) as well as port and technology issues. Furthermore, NOAA could not be expected to expand and enhance its current education and training efforts without additional resources designated for this purpose over the long-termâsomething that has not been available in the past and is unlikely to materialize in the near future. A third option would be to seek congressional action to establish a quasi- governmental private foundation chartered to focus on education, training, and information exchange related to Annex V implementation. There is precedent for this approach to coordinating national programs. The National Safe Boating Council and the Fish and Wildlife Foundation are examples. A foundation could bring together all the requisite expertise and would be less likely to be distracted from education and training than would overburdened federal agencies. A foundation also would have more flexibility than would a government agency in dealing with the private sector and pursuing national and international efforts. Carefully drafted, the charter for the foundation could articulate clearly defined goals and objectives supporting Annex V implementation. The foundation could develop a coherent program to be executed through appropriate channels, making the best use of past experiences in the field. Grants could be awarded to private industry and associations, academic institutions, public agencies, and non-profit organizations to develop and carry out programs. Secure Funding Funding for education and training is a significant problem. Perhaps as a result of the leadership vacuum, government agencies appear to have limited their investments in education and training at a time when such efforts could be particularly effective. The social ferment and the growth of environmental awareness and activism over the past two decades has created a climate that may be