Assignment Brief: Individual Technical Report

Module Code: MAR708

Module Title: Advanced Maritime Safety and Risk Management

Level: 7 (MSc)

Academic Year: 2025–2026

Assessment Type: Individual Technical Report

Weighting: 100% of module

Word Count: 3,000 words (±10%, excluding references, appendices, tables, and figures)

Submission Deadline: 15 May 2026, 12:00 noon (via Turnitin on the VLE)

Learning Outcomes Assessed

• Critically evaluate risk assessment methodologies applied to complex maritime operations.
• Analyse the interplay between human factors, technical systems, and regulatory frameworks in maintaining operational safety.
• Synthesise contemporary maritime safety challenges with evidence-based mitigation strategies.
• Demonstrate professional report-writing skills suitable for maritime industry stakeholders.

Assignment Title

The Safe Operation of Oil Tankers in the Maritime Industry: A Risk-Based Operational Analysis

Task

Prepare a 3,000-word technical report that conducts a risk-based operational analysis of the safe operation of oil tankers. Your report should identify and prioritise key operational risks associated with oil tanker voyages, cargo handling, and machinery management. Apply an established risk assessment methodology (such as Formal Safety Assessment (FSA), HAZID, bow-tie analysis, or equivalent) to evaluate these risks.

Discuss current mitigation measures under relevant international conventions and codes (e.g., SOLAS Chapter II-2, MARPOL Annex I, ISM Code, tanker-specific requirements such as inert gas systems and double-hull design). Incorporate analysis of human factors, emerging challenges (e.g., alternative fuels transition, ageing fleets), and lessons from at least one recent casualty or near-miss incident.

Conclude with practical, evidence-based recommendations for improving safety in oil tanker operations. The report must draw on peer-reviewed literature, IMO instruments, and industry guidelines.

Report Structure (recommended)

1. Executive Summary (300 words, not included in word count)
2. Introduction and Objectives
3. Literature Review of Oil Tanker Operational Risks
4. Risk Assessment Methodology
5. Analysis of Key Risks and Mitigation Measures
6. Case Study or Incident Analysis
7. Conclusions and Recommendations
8. References (Harvard style)
9. Appendices (if required, e.g., risk matrix)

Formatting and Submission Requirements

• Font: Arial or Calibri 11pt, 1.5 line spacing, justified text.
• Pages numbered, with student ID in header/footer.
• Submit as a single PDF or Word document via the VLE.
• Use Harvard referencing throughout.
• Late submissions will incur standard university penalties.

Marking Rubric

Oil tanker operations involve multiple high-consequence risks, particularly during cargo transfer and navigation in congested waters. Collision and grounding remain leading causes of major oil spills, despite regulatory advances. The application of Formal Safety Assessment (FSA), as outlined by the International Maritime Organization, provides a structured framework for identifying hazards, evaluating risk levels, and proposing cost-effective control options (IMO, 2018, MSC-MEPC.2/Circ.12/Rev.2, available at: https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Pages/FormalSafetyAssessment.aspx).

A bow-tie analysis of inert gas system failure, for instance, reveals ignition sources on the left (threats) and potential explosion or pollution consequences on the right, with preventive barriers such as regular maintenance under the ISM Code and reactive barriers including emergency shutdown procedures. Recent incidents, such as the 2021 grounding of an Aframax tanker in restricted visibility, highlight ongoing human factors challenges including fatigue and inadequate passage planning.

Mitigation effectiveness has improved through double-hull requirements under MARPOL Annex I Regulation 19, yet ageing fleets operating beyond original design life introduce structural integrity concerns. Transition to low-sulphur fuels and emerging alternative fuels (ammonia, LNG) introduces new fire and toxicity risks that current tanker designs are not fully optimised to address. Enhanced crew training in accordance with STCW Chapter V and investment in digital navigation tools offer practical pathways forward.

Risk prioritisation matrices consistently rank cargo operations and machinery failures as high-probability/high-severity events. Industry data indicate that procedural non-compliance accounts for over 60% of tanker incidents, underscoring the need for stronger safety management system audits.

References (Harvard Format)

• Goerlandt, F., Montewka, J., Kuzmin, V. and Kujala, P. (2019) ‘A risk-informed ship collision risk analysis framework’, Safety Science, 114, pp. 157–171. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.12.027.
• Psaraftis, H.N., Ventikos, N.P. and Papanikolaou, A.D. (2023) ‘Update on risk acceptance criteria for crude oil tanker fleet’, Safety, 11(4), p. 695. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/safety11040695.
• Ugurlu, Ö., Köse, E., Başar, E. and Öztürk, U. (2020) ‘Comparative analysis of tanker accidents using fault tree and event tree techniques’, Maritime Policy & Management, 47(6), pp. 745–763. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2020.1731000.
• International Maritime Organization (IMO) (2018) Revised guidelines for Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO rule-making process. MSC-MEPC.2/Circ.12/Rev.2. London: IMO. Available at: https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Pages/FormalSafetyAssessment.aspx.
• Chen, S., Wang, J. and Zhang, T. (2021) ‘A Bayesian network risk model for oil tanker operations’, Ocean Engineering, 238, 109754. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.109754.

Legal and Institutional Challenges in Implementing Maritime Safety Regulations in Developing States

1. Module Context and Assessment Overview

International maritime safety rests on a framework of conventions negotiated under the International Maritime Organization (IMO), including SOLAS, MARPOL, STCW, and the ISM Code. These instruments apply universally to flag states that have ratified them, but the capacity to implement and enforce them is distributed very unevenly across the global fleet. Developed maritime nations generally maintain functioning maritime administrations, trained surveyors, and established Port State Control (PSC) regimes. Many developing states do not, and the gap between treaty ratification and genuine operational compliance in these countries has been a persistent problem in global maritime governance for decades.

Reasons for this implementation deficit are simultaneously legal and institutional. On the legal side, questions arise about the adequacy of domestic legislation, the relationship between international convention obligations and national legal systems, and the scope of flag state versus coastal state jurisdiction. On the institutional side, the challenges involve underfunded maritime administrations, shortages of qualified marine surveyors, limited engagement with PSC MOU regimes, and dependency on foreign classification societies without adequate oversight. Together, these dimensions create a structural problem that neither rule-making alone nor capacity-building alone can resolve.

This assessment requires you to engage with that problem analytically. You are not being asked to describe the conventions or list the challenges. You are being asked to critically examine the interaction between legal obligations and institutional realities, and to develop a well-argued position on where the most consequential barriers lie and how they might be addressed.

2. Learning Outcomes Assessed

Completing this assessment demonstrates your ability to:

1. Critically analyse the legal obligations imposed on flag states under key IMO conventions and assess the adequacy of those obligations in the context of developing state capacity.
2. Evaluate the institutional barriers that prevent effective maritime safety regulation in developing maritime nations, drawing on documented cases and academic literature.
3. Apply relevant principles of public international law, including treaty obligation, good faith implementation, and sovereign responsibility, to the maritime safety governance context.
4. Construct a coherent and well-evidenced legal and policy argument about the reform of international maritime safety governance.
5. Produce a research essay that meets academic standards for legal and policy analysis at postgraduate or advanced undergraduate level.

3. Assessment Task

Write a 2,000–2,500-word individual research essay responding to the following question:

Your essay must address all three of the following analytical dimensions:

Dimension 1 – The Legal Framework: Obligations, Gaps, and Ambiguities

Examine the principal legal obligations imposed on flag states under SOLAS, MARPOL, and STCW, as well as the ISM Code. Critically assess whether the conventions provide sufficient legal clarity for developing state implementation, or whether ambiguities in drafting, broad discretionary language, or the absence of effective enforcement mechanisms at the international level contribute independently to the implementation deficit. Consider the role of Articles 91–94 of UNCLOS in anchoring flag state responsibility.

Dimension 2 – Institutional Barriers: Evidence and Analysis

Identify and critically evaluate the principal institutional challenges that developing maritime administrations face in implementing safety regulations. These may include inadequate surveyor capacity, dependency on open registries or flag of convenience arrangements, limited PSC participation or observer status in MOU regimes, under-resourced coast guards, and weak domestic maritime legislation. Use documented country-specific evidence or UNCTAD, World Bank, or IMO data to support your analysis. Avoid generalised assertions; your argument must be grounded in verifiable institutional realities.

Dimension 3 – Reform Pathways: Legal Change, Capacity-Building, or Both?

Having established your analysis of the legal and institutional dimensions, construct an argued position on the most effective reform pathway. Consider the IMO’s Integrated Technical Cooperation Programme (ITCP), the role of regional PSC MOU regimes in building enforcement capacity in developing regions (e.g., Abuja MOU for West Africa, Indian Ocean MOU), and whether amendments to existing conventions or new legally binding instruments would add meaningful value. Your position must be supported by evidence and must engage with at least one counterargument.

4. Format and Structural Requirements

This is a research essay, not a technical report. It should read as a continuous, structured academic argument with clear paragraph logic, not as a list of headings and bullet points. The following structural elements are required:

1. Title Page – Essay title, student ID (not name), module code, word count, submission date.
2. Introduction (200–250 words) – Frame the essay question, define key terms (flag state, developing state, institutional capacity), and state your thesis clearly.
3. Main Body (approximately 1,500–1,800 words) – Develop your argument across the three analytical dimensions. Subheadings may be used sparingly if they aid readability, but the essay must read as a coherent analytical progression, not three disconnected sections.
4. Conclusion (200–250 words) – Draw together the threads of your argument, restate your thesis in light of the evidence, and identify one significant implication for maritime governance practice or policy.
5. Reference List – Harvard format; minimum 8 sources, including at least four peer-reviewed academic sources (journal articles or edited book chapters) and at least two authoritative primary or institutional sources (IMO instruments, UNCTAD reports, PSC MOU annual reports, or MARAD/AMSA policy documents). All sources published from 2015 onward unless a foundational text requires earlier citation.

Formatting Standards

• Font: Arial or Times New Roman, 12pt, 1.5 or double line spacing.
• Margins: 2.54 cm (1 inch) all sides.
• Page numbers in the footer, right-aligned from page 2 onward.
• In-text citations in Harvard author-date format throughout.
• Word count must be stated on the title page. Submissions more than 10% above the upper limit will be penalised in accordance with the institutional assessment policy.

5. Source and Evidence Requirements

The essay must be grounded in legal and academic sources. Over-reliance on maritime trade press, general shipping websites, or non-peer-reviewed blog content will limit the mark ceiling to the Pass band regardless of the quality of the argument.

Acceptable and expected source categories include:

• Peer-reviewed journals: International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Ocean Development and International Law, Maritime Policy and Management, Lloyd’s Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly, Journal of International Maritime Law.
• IMO instruments and circulars: SOLAS Convention (as amended), MARPOL Annex I–VI, STCW Convention and Code, ISM Code (MSC-MEPC.7/Circ.8), UNCLOS Articles 91–94 and 217–220.
• Institutional reports: UNCTAD Review of Maritime Transport (annual editions), Paris MOU and Abuja MOU Annual Reports, World Bank Port Reform Toolkit, IMO ITCP Annual Progress Reports.
• Academic texts: Molenaar and Elferink (eds.), Mejia, Van Hooydonk, Churchill and Lowe, Özçayır.

6. Marking Rubric and Assessment Criteria

This assessment is marked out of 100 points, weighted at 35% of the module grade.

Grade Boundaries

7. Guidance for Students

Framing the Argument

The essay question is deliberately provocative. It presents one position — that the problem is institutional rather than legal — and invites you to test it critically. Your task is not to agree or disagree reflexively but to evaluate the claim with evidence and develop your own defensible thesis. Strong answers typically find that the legal and institutional dimensions are mutually reinforcing and that the dichotomy in the question, while analytically useful as a starting frame, does not hold up under scrutiny. However, a well-argued case for either position will score in the Distinction band if it is properly evidenced.

The Meaning of “Developing States” in This Context

Avoid treating developing maritime nations as a uniform category. West African states operating under the Abuja MOU face different challenges from small island developing states (SIDS) in the Pacific or rapidly industrialising flag states in South and Southeast Asia. Specificity strengthens legal and institutional arguments. Reference the UNCTAD Review of Maritime Transport for data on fleet distribution, flag state registry patterns, and PSC detention rates by region.

Legal Precision

When you refer to convention obligations, cite the specific article or regulation, not just the convention name. “SOLAS requires…” is insufficient. “SOLAS Chapter IX, Regulation 3 imposes a duty on the Administration to…” is the level of precision expected in legal analysis at this level.

What Distinguishes Merit from Distinction

Merit-level essays correctly identify the legal framework and the institutional barriers. Distinction-level essays critically examine whether the conventions were designed with developing state capacity in mind, identify the specific provisions that create compliance difficulties for under-resourced administrations, and construct an original argument about the systemic roots of the implementation gap rather than cataloguing its symptoms.

Assessment Brief: Individual Essay

Module Code: MAR712

Module Title: International Maritime Law and Governance

Level: 7 (MSc)

Academic Year: 2025–2026

Assessment Type: Individual Essay

Weighting: 100% of module

Word Count: 3,000 words (±10%, excluding references and appendices)

Submission Deadline: 22 May 2026, 12:00 noon (via Turnitin on the VLE)

Learning Outcomes Assessed

• Critically appraise the structure and operation of international maritime regulatory frameworks.
• Evaluate legal and institutional barriers to effective implementation of IMO conventions in diverse national contexts.
• Analyse the interplay between global governance instruments and national legislative capacities.
• Demonstrate advanced academic writing and research skills in maritime law.

Assignment Title

Legal and Institutional Challenges in Implementing Maritime Safety Regulations in Developing States

Task

Write a 3,000-word critical essay examining the legal and institutional challenges faced by developing states in implementing international maritime safety regulations. Focus on key IMO instruments such as SOLAS, MARPOL, STCW, and the ISM Code, alongside the IMO Member State Audit Scheme (IMSAS).

Identify principal barriers, including legislative gaps, limited institutional capacity, resource constraints, and political priorities. Draw on specific regional examples (e.g., West Africa, Pacific SIDS, or Southeast Asia) and discuss the effectiveness of IMO technical cooperation programmes. Evaluate proposals for overcoming these challenges, such as enhanced port state control, regional cooperation, or reformed audit processes.

Support your analysis with reference to primary legal sources (conventions, resolutions) and secondary academic literature. Conclude with reasoned recommendations for improving implementation in developing maritime administrations.

Essay Structure (recommended)

1. Introduction (including clear thesis statement)
2. Overview of Key IMO Safety Instruments and Implementation Obligations
3. Legal Challenges (e.g., incorporation into national law)
4. Institutional and Capacity Challenges
5. Case Studies or Regional Examples
6. Role of IMO Support Mechanisms and Their Limitations
7. Conclusions and Recommendations
8. References (Harvard style)

Formatting and Submission Requirements

• Font: Arial or Times New Roman 12pt, 1.5 or double line spacing, justified text.
• Pages numbered, student ID in header.
• Submit as a single Word or PDF document via the VLE.
• Use Harvard referencing; minimum 15 high-quality sources expected at this level.
• Standard university late submission penalties apply.

Marking Rubric

Sample Essay(Extract from Analysis Section)

Developing states encounter multifaceted obstacles when incorporating IMO safety conventions into domestic legislation. Legislative delays often arise from competing national priorities and limited drafting expertise. Institutional capacity remains constrained by inadequate training infrastructures and insufficient qualified personnel to conduct flag state inspections or port state control. Audits under the IMO Member State Audit Scheme consistently reveal non-conformities in areas such as enforcement mechanisms and delegation of authority (IMO, 2023, available at: https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/MSAS/Pages/IMSAS.aspx).

Resource shortages exacerbate these issues, particularly in least developed countries where maritime administrations receive minimal budgetary allocation. Regional disparities appear prominently in West Africa, where substandard shipping persists despite ratification of SOLAS and MARPOL. Technical cooperation programmes offer valuable assistance through workshops and model legislation, yet sustained follow-up proves limited. Enhanced regional memoranda of understanding on port state control have yielded improvements in some areas, though harmonisation remains incomplete.

Political will frequently determines implementation success, with corruption or industry influence undermining regulatory independence in certain jurisdictions. Proposals for differentiated responsibilities or extended compliance timelines warrant consideration, balanced against the universal nature of maritime safety obligations.

 Bibliography Guide

• Alamoush, A.S., Ballini, F. and Ölçer, A.I. (2025) ‘Exploring the multifaceted challenges and complexities involved in the effective implementation of international maritime regulations’, Sustainability, 17(2), p. 478. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su17020478.
• Deniece, A. (2023) ‘Contextual factors affecting implementation of IMO instruments’, PhD thesis, World Maritime University. Available at: https://commons.wmu.se/phd_dissertations/.
• George, R.E. (2023) ‘Combatting the marine litter crisis in the Windward Islands: challenges of implementation’, PhD thesis, World Maritime University. Available at: https://commons.wmu.se/phd_dissertations/.
• International Maritime Organization (IMO) (2023) IMO Member State Audit Scheme (IMSAS). London: IMO. Available at: https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/MSAS/Pages/IMSAS.aspx.
• Manuel, M.E. (2021) ‘Maritime governance and the human element: the role of the IMO in addressing implementation gaps’, Maritime Policy & Management, 48(5), pp. 612–629. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2020.1825802. (adapted for relevance)

LLM701: Assessment 2 – Legal and Institutional Challenges in Implementing Maritime Safety Regulations in Developing States (2026)

Module and Assessment Overview

Module code: LLM701 – Maritime Law and Governance
Programme: LLM / MSc Maritime Law, Maritime Affairs, Maritime Safety and Environmental Administration
Level: Postgraduate (Level 7)
Assessment type: Individual research essay / written assignment
Assessment number: Assessment 2
Weighting: 40% of module grade
Length: 2,500–3,000 words (excluding references and any annexed legislation)
Submission format: Word or PDF uploaded to LMS (Turnitin enabled)
Deadline: Week 9, Sunday 23:59 (local time)

Assessment Context

Most developing coastal and island states have ratified core maritime safety conventions adopted under the auspices of the International Maritime Organization. These include the SOLAS Convention, the MARPOL Convention, the STCW Convention and the Load Line Convention. Despite widespread ratification, accident statistics, port state control detention rates and audit findings continue to reveal persistent implementation gaps in areas such as vessel survey and inspection, flag state oversight, port state control performance and domestic enforcement.

In many jurisdictions, legislative frameworks formally incorporate treaty obligations through maritime Acts and subsidiary regulations. However, institutional constraints, political economy factors and resource limitations often prevent effective application in practice. The result is a recurring law in books versus law in action gap that directly affects safety of life at sea, marine environmental protection and the credibility of the state as a flag, coastal or port state.

This assessment reflects a recurring postgraduate task in maritime law and policy programmes. Students are expected to move beyond doctrinal description of conventions and instead diagnose why implementation fails or underperforms in specific developing state contexts. The essay therefore tests your ability to integrate treaty law, implementation processes, governance analysis and evidence based reform proposals.

Assessment Task

Essay Title

Legal and institutional challenges in implementing maritime safety regulations in developing states: a critical analysis of [choose one state or regional organisation]

Task Description

Write a 2,500–3,000 word critical research essay that analyses the legal and institutional challenges faced by a selected developing state, or regional arrangement of developing states, in implementing international maritime safety regulations.

You must:

• Select one of the following focus areas:

  • A single developing coastal or island state, or

  • A regional organisation primarily composed of developing states, such as the Southern African Development Community, the Economic Community of West African States, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations or the Caribbean Community, where maritime safety implementation is a shared concern.

  Your choice should be clearly justified in the introduction, with brief contextual data on fleet size, port activity or recent safety performance where relevant.

• Identify the main international maritime safety instruments relevant to your case. At minimum, this includes SOLAS, MARPOL, STCW and the Load Line Convention, together with any applicable regional memoranda of understanding, codes or guidelines. You should demonstrate an understanding of the substantive obligations imposed by these instruments rather than merely listing them.

• Analyse the process by which these instruments have been incorporated into national law or regional frameworks. This may include enabling Acts, delegated regulations, administrative circulars, or regional protocols. Where possible, refer to specific statutory provisions or reform timelines.

• Evaluate the key legal challenges to implementation, which may include:

  • Outdated, fragmented or overlapping legislation

  • Gaps between treaty obligations and domestic law

  • Weak sanctions, discretionary enforcement, or limited judicial oversight

  • Conflicts between safety obligations and other policy priorities such as trade facilitation, revenue generation or local industry protection

  You should critically assess whether these legal features structurally limit effective enforcement.

• Evaluate the key institutional challenges, for example:

  • Capacity constraints in the maritime administration, including staff shortages, inadequate training, limited funding or insufficient inspection equipment

  • Overlapping mandates and coordination problems between maritime authorities, port administrations, naval or coast guard services and environmental regulators

  • Corruption risks, political interference, or lack of political will to enforce regulations against powerful domestic actors

  • Weak data systems, inspection regimes and casualty investigation capacity

  Where possible, connect institutional weaknesses to measurable outcomes such as detention rates, casualty records or audit findings.

• Use at least one concrete case study, such as an accident investigation, port state control detention record, audit observation or regional safety initiative. The case study should illustrate the practical consequences of identified legal and institutional weaknesses and should be supported by official documentation or reputable academic sources.

• Develop realistic and context sensitive recommendations for strengthening both the legal framework and the institutional architecture of the selected state or region. These recommendations must be grounded in:

  • Existing IMO implementation guidance, including the III Code and related audit mechanisms

  • Recent empirical or doctrinal scholarship on maritime safety governance in developing countries

  Recommendations should be specific, feasible within the economic and political context, and clearly linked to the problems identified in your analysis.

Indicative Structure

The following structure is recommended. You may adapt it where justified, but the logic of progression from legal framework to institutional analysis to reform proposals should remain clear.

I. Introduction (approx. 300–400 words)

• Identify your chosen state or regional organisation.

• Explain why maritime safety implementation is a critical issue in this context.

• Set out your research aims, research question and the structure of the essay.

The introduction should do more than provide background. It should clearly signal your central argument or analytical position.

II. International and Domestic Legal Framework (approx. 600–700 words)

• Outline the main international safety conventions ratified by your case state or region.

• Explain how these have been transposed into domestic law or regional instruments.

• Highlight gaps or inconsistencies between treaty obligations and domestic legislation.

You are expected to demonstrate doctrinal accuracy and to identify areas where domestic law falls short of international standards.

III. Institutional Arrangements for Implementation and Enforcement (approx. 600–700 words)

• Describe the key institutions responsible for maritime safety, such as the maritime administration, coast guard, port authority and relevant courts.

• Explain their mandates, reporting lines and accountability mechanisms.

• Identify major institutional strengths and weaknesses affecting implementation.

Analysis should connect institutional design to real world enforcement outcomes rather than remaining purely descriptive.

IV. Case Study Analysis (approx. 500–600 words)

• Present one or two focused case studies.

• Use the case or cases to show how legal and institutional challenges operate in practice.

• Draw explicit links between the case evidence and your earlier doctrinal and institutional analysis.

The case study should function as analytical evidence rather than as an isolated narrative.

V. Recommendations and Reform Options (approx. 400–500 words)

• Propose concrete legal reforms, such as consolidation of maritime legislation, updating of safety regulations or strengthening of sanction regimes.

• Propose institutional reforms, including capacity building programmes, improved inter agency coordination mechanisms, digital data systems or anti corruption safeguards.

• Explain how each proposal addresses specific implementation problems and aligns with IMO guidance or regional best practice.

Recommendations must be justified with reference to scholarship, comparative practice or official guidance.

VI. Conclusion (approx. 200–300 words)

• Summarise your key findings on the most significant legal and institutional challenges.

• Reinforce the importance of sustained reform for safety of life at sea and environmental protection.

The conclusion should synthesise your argument rather than repeat earlier sections.

Submission and Formatting Requirements

• Word count: 2,500–3,000 words (essay text only; references excluded). Essays below 2,250 or above 3,300 words may be penalised. Students should include a word count on the first page.

• Font and spacing: 12 point readable font such as Times New Roman or Arial, 1.5 line spacing, normal margins.

• Referencing: Harvard style, with in text citations and a full reference list of at least 12–15 academic and official sources published between 2018 and 2026 where possible.

• Sources: Use peer reviewed journal articles, IMO documents, reputable institutional reports and official case material. Avoid unreferenced blogs and non academic commentary as primary authorities.

• Submission: Upload a single Word or PDF file via the LMS assignment link. Ensure your student ID and module code appear on the first page. Do not include your name if anonymous marking applies.

• Academic integrity: All work must be your own. Properly acknowledge legislation, case law, IMO instruments and secondary sources. Similarity checks and academic misconduct procedures apply.

Learning Outcomes Assessed

On successful completion of this assessment, students will be able to:

• Critically evaluate international maritime safety instruments and their domestic implementation in developing states.

• Analyse the interaction between legal frameworks, institutional capacity and effective maritime safety governance.

• Develop context sensitive reform proposals that reflect both legal doctrine and institutional realities.

• Communicate complex legal and policy analysis in a structured, evidence based written assignment suitable for professional practice and policy advisory contexts.

Marking Criteria and Rubric (Postgraduate Level)

Academic Discussion Guide

Effective implementation of maritime safety conventions in developing states requires more than formal ratification and legislative transposition. Empirical research demonstrates that compliance outcomes are strongly correlated with administrative capacity, stable funding streams and professionalised inspection services, which together determine whether survey regimes and port state control functions operate consistently over time. In several African and Southeast Asian jurisdictions, fragmented governance arrangements and weak inter agency coordination have diluted accountability and reduced the deterrent effect of sanctions, thereby undermining the preventive logic of international safety standards. As observed in recent regional studies, sustainable improvement depends on embedding legal reforms within institutional redesign that clarifies mandates, strengthens oversight and links performance evaluation to measurable safety indicators (de Sousa, 2022). This perspective reinforces the view that maritime safety governance must be understood as a systemic regulatory ecosystem rather than as a purely doctrinal question of treaty incorporation.

Bibliography Resources

• Benjamin, A. (2025) ‘Compliance levels and challenges in implementing maritime safety regulations: Evidence from Lake Victoria and Nigerian waters’, International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, 13(4), pp. 45–68.

• UNCTAD (2021) ‘International legal and regulatory developments and their implications’, in Review of Maritime Transport 2021. Geneva: UNCTAD, Chapter 6.

• Kamanga, T.W.T. (2020) Development and implementation of uniform safety standards for the Southern African Development Community. MSc dissertation. World Maritime University.

• Cavendish University Uganda (2023) An examination of international legal framework for maritime safety and security and its implementation challenges in Nigeria. Kampala: Cavendish University.

• de Sousa, L. (2022) ‘Regional organisations as mechanisms to ensure maritime safety and security: The case of SADC’, MSc dissertation, World Maritime University.

• Özçayır, Z.O. (2019) Port State Control. 3rd edn. London: Informa Law.

Assessment Task 2: Legal and Institutional Challenges in Maritime Safety Regulation

Assignment

• Target Level: Postgraduate (Level 7 UK, )

• Module Code/Name: MARLAW601 – Maritime Law, Regulation, and Governance

• Assessment Type: Research Essay / Technical Report

• Length Requirement: 2000–2500 words

• Weighting: 50% of the final module grade

• Academic Cycle: Semester 1, 2025/2026

This assessment is designed to evaluate advanced legal reasoning, policy analysis, and the ability to integrate international maritime law with domestic governance realities. Students are expected to demonstrate independent research skills consistent with postgraduate standards in the United Kingdom and Australia, including engagement with primary legal instruments and peer-reviewed scholarship.

Module Context and Task Description

Background Context

The global shipping industry operates on the principle of uniform international standards, primarily developed by the International Maritime Organization. Conventions such as SOLAS, MARPOL, and STCW are intended to ensure consistent safety and environmental protection standards across territorial waters and the high seas. However, the incorporation of these international instruments into domestic legal systems is rarely uniform.

Developing states often face significant legal, economic, and institutional constraints that hinder effective ratification, implementation, and enforcement. These challenges affect not only national maritime safety performance but also the integrity of the global maritime governance system. As future maritime lawyers, policy advisors, and maritime administration officials, you are required to critically examine the sources of these implementation gaps and evaluate their broader implications for international maritime regulation.

The Task

You must produce a 2000–2500-word research essay analysing the legal and institutional challenges that developing states face when implementing and enforcing international maritime safety regulations.

You are required to:

• Select a specific developing region or state as your primary case study, such as West Africa, Southeast Asia, or a Small Island Developing State.

• Ground your theoretical analysis in the operational and legal realities of the selected jurisdiction.

• Develop a clearly articulated thesis that moves beyond description and demonstrates critical engagement with competing perspectives in maritime governance.

Your argument should demonstrate structured reasoning, engagement with academic literature, and integration of relevant international legal instruments.

Specific Guidelines and Requirements

1. Legislative Integration

• Evaluate the domestic legal hurdles involved in ratifying and incorporating IMO conventions into national law.

• Address issues such as legislative backlog, constitutional limitations, dualist or monist legal traditions, and parliamentary capacity constraints.

• Consider the time lag between ratification and effective enforcement mechanisms.

Strong responses will distinguish between formal ratification and substantive implementation.

2. Institutional Capacity

• Analyse the operational capabilities of the selected state’s maritime administration.

• Examine flag state responsibilities, port state control mechanisms, inspection regimes, and certification procedures.

• Evaluate staffing levels, training standards, and institutional independence.

You should demonstrate understanding of how administrative weaknesses translate into regulatory enforcement gaps.

3. Socio-Economic Factors

• Discuss the impact of budget constraints, corruption risks, limited infrastructure, or shortage of trained maritime legal professionals.

• Consider how political instability or competing national priorities influence maritime governance.

• Assess how economic dependence on shipping revenues may create regulatory tensions.

Your analysis should connect socio-economic conditions directly to compliance outcomes rather than treating them as isolated background factors.

4. Remedial Strategies

• Propose realistic and context-sensitive policy recommendations.

• Consider regional cooperation agreements, technical assistance programmes, IMO capacity-building initiatives, and institutional reforms.

• Evaluate feasibility and sustainability of proposed reforms within the political and economic environment of the chosen case study.

Recommendations should be clearly linked to the weaknesses identified in earlier sections of the essay.

5. Formatting and Citation

• Structure your essay with a clear introduction, logically organised thematic sections, and a conclusion that synthesises your findings.

• Use the Harvard referencing system consistently for all in-text citations and the reference list.

• Support arguments with academic journal articles, official IMO documents, and where appropriate, domestic legislative sources.

• The word count excludes the bibliography and any appendices.

Students are expected to engage with a minimum of 10 high-quality academic or institutional sources to meet postgraduate research standards.

Grading Rubric / Marking Criteria

Knowledge and Contextual Understanding (25%)

High Distinction (80–100%)
Demonstrates an exceptional and nuanced grasp of maritime law and the socio-political realities of the selected developing state. Shows advanced contextual awareness and legal precision.

Credit / Merit (65–79%)
Shows strong understanding of IMO regulations and identifies credible institutional challenges within the case study.

Pass (50–64%)
Displays adequate knowledge of core regulations but relies on generalised assumptions about developing states.

Fail (Below 50%)
Lacks fundamental understanding of maritime safety conventions or fails to apply them to a relevant context.

Critical Analysis and Argumentation (30%)

High Distinction (80–100%)
Provides deep critical insights into tensions between international mandates and domestic legal frameworks. Arguments are coherent, evidence-based, and conceptually sophisticated.

Credit / Merit (65–79%)
Delivers solid critical analysis supported by relevant literature and case-specific evidence.

Pass (50–64%)
Primarily descriptive with limited critical engagement or theoretical framing.

Fail (Below 50%)
Weak argumentation, unsupported claims, or excessive generalisation.

Policy Evaluation and Recommendations (20%)

High Distinction (80–100%)
Proposes original, legally sound, and practically viable solutions grounded in institutional realities.

Credit / Merit (65–79%)
Offers practical recommendations clearly linked to identified challenges.

Pass (50–64%)
Provides generic suggestions lacking contextual specificity.

Fail (Below 50%)
Recommendations are absent, impractical, or disconnected from analysis.

Research Quality and Integration (15%)

High Distinction (80–100%)
Uses a wide range of high-quality peer-reviewed scholarship and authoritative institutional reports. Evidence is seamlessly integrated.

Credit / Merit (65–79%)
Engages with credible academic and institutional sources with appropriate citation practice.

Pass (50–64%)
Relies on limited or uneven sources. Evidence integration lacks sophistication.

Fail (Below 50%)
Insufficient research or heavy reliance on unreliable materials.

Academic Writing and Referencing (10%)

High Distinction (80–100%)
Precise academic tone, accurate legal terminology, and flawless Harvard referencing.

Credit / Merit (65–79%)
Clear and professional writing with minor referencing or stylistic errors.

Pass (50–64%)
Readable but contains structural weaknesses or inconsistent referencing.

Fail (Below 50%)
Disorganised writing and significant referencing failures.

Developing states frequently encounter systemic barriers when attempting to implement international maritime safety conventions within domestic legal frameworks. Resource limitations and inadequate institutional capacity often prevent maritime administrations from effectively enforcing standards mandated by the International Maritime Organization. Legislative backlogs complicate the domestic integration of conventions such as SOLAS. Regulatory bodies may struggle to retain qualified maritime lawyers and technical inspectors necessary for rigorous flag state control. As a result, substandard vessels may continue operating under weakened inspection regimes and inconsistent penalty enforcement. Research demonstrates that strengthened port state control cooperation and structured capacity-building programmes significantly improve compliance outcomes in emerging maritime economies (Cariou, Wolff and Mejia, 2021). Regional cooperation frameworks allow neighbouring developing states to pool expertise and share financial burdens associated with maritime governance. Sustainable improvements in maritime safety require ongoing technical support rather than purely punitive enforcement mechanisms.

Academic Commentary

The implementation gap between international maritime obligations and domestic enforcement reflects broader structural inequalities within global governance. Developing states often operate within constrained administrative systems that lack the institutional depth necessary to manage complex technical conventions. Empirical research suggests that robust port state control regimes and harmonised regional inspection mechanisms can partially compensate for flag state weaknesses by increasing oversight and accountability across jurisdictions (Exarchopoulos et al., 2018). However, long-term regulatory effectiveness depends upon strengthening domestic legislative coherence, judicial capacity, and administrative professionalism. Without sustained institutional investment, formal ratification of international conventions may remain symbolic rather than transformative.

Recommended Learning Materials / References

Cariou, P., Wolff, F.C. and Mejia, M.Q. (2021). The impact of port state control on maritime safety: A global perspective. Marine Policy, 129, 104523. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104523

Exarchopoulos, G., Zhang, P., Shirashige, M. and Dalaklis, D. (2018). The impact of the new harmonised system of survey and certification on maritime safety. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 17(2), 163–180. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-018-0140-5

Monios, J. and Wilmsmeier, G. (2020). Between path dependency and transitions: The role of institutions in port development. Marine Policy, 117, 103937. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.103937

Okeke, P.N. and Aniche, E.T. (2021). Legal and institutional frameworks of maritime security in the Gulf of Guinea. Ocean Development & International Law, 52(2), 163–178. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2021.1901344

Tanaka, Y. (2019). The International Law of the Sea. 3rd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Next Week Assignment / Discussion Post

Course Code: MARLAW601
Next Assessment Title: Comparative Analysis of Flag State and Port State Jurisdiction in Global Maritime Governance

Description:
In the following weeks, students will prepare a comparative analytical paper examining the evolving balance between flag state sovereignty and port state control enforcement mechanisms. The task will require evaluation of recent case law, regional Memoranda of Understanding on port state control, and debates concerning regulatory fragmentation. Students will assess whether port state control has become the de facto enforcement mechanism in international maritime law and consider implications for state sovereignty and global compliance equity. This assessment builds directly upon the institutional capacity issues explored in Task 2 and advances critical comparative legal analysis skills.

Midwifery Essay Assessment Task Write a 2500-word essay that discusses the importance of the professional, legal and ethical frameworks that underpin midwifery practice. You will then discuss the different types of maternity care systems in the UK and consider the impact of these on women, families and health care professionals. Following on from this you will explore the role of the midwife and the factors that influence maternal health and family wellbeing, evaluating effective communication and its impact on person centred and family centred care.

Assessment Number: 1 Assessment Type (and weighting): Essay – 2500 words (80%)

Learning Outcomes Assessed LO1: Discuss the importance of the professional, legal and ethical frameworks that underpin midwifery practice – Assessment 1: Essay

LO2: Discuss the different types of maternity care systems in the UK and consider the impact of these on women, families and health care professionals – Assessment 1: Essay

LO3: Explore the role of the midwife and the factors that influence maternal health and family wellbeing – Assessment 1: Essay

LO4: Evaluate effective communication and its impact on person centred and family centred care – Assessment 1: Essay

I would like to have a very high 2:1 or a 1st class mark if possible. I would like to have a minimum of 20 references and mainly within the last 5 years.

Draft Essay Plan Introduction (≈200 words) Purpose

Introduce midwifery as a regulated, autonomous profession

Establish the importance of professional, legal and ethical frameworks

Briefly signpost:

maternity care systems in the UK

the role of the midwife

communication and person-centred care

Key references

NMC (2018; 2019)

Marshall & Raynor (2020)

Royal College of Midwives (RCM) (2021) – Standards for Midwifery Education

LO1: Professional, Legal & Ethical Frameworks (≈700 words) Paragraph 1: Professional framework What to cover

Define the professional framework:

NMC Code

accountability

scope of practice

revalidation

Why it is important

consistency of care

public trust

professional identity

Example

Practising within competence

Reflective practice

Critical element

Consequences when professional standards are not upheld

Key references

NMC Code (2018)

McLeod et al. (2020)

Paragraph 2: Legal framework What to cover

Define the legal framework:

duty of care

consent

safeguarding

documentation

Why it matters

protects women and babies

protects midwives legally

underpins safe decision-making

Example

Informed consent

Safeguarding referral

Critical element

Tension between legal duty and woman’s choice

Key references

Dimond (Legal Aspects of Midwifery)

Montgomery v Lanarkshire

Paragraph 3: Ethical framework What to cover

Ethical principles:

autonomy

beneficence

non-maleficence

justice

Why ethics are central to midwifery

woman-centred care

shared decision-making

Example

Birth preferences

Cultural considerations

Critical element

Ethical dilemmas in practice

Key references

Beauchamp & Childress

Marshall & Raynor (2020)

Paragraph 4: Integration of frameworks What to cover

How professional, legal and ethical frameworks overlap

Why integration is essential for safe, compassionate care

LO2: Maternity Care Systems in the UK (≈600 words) Paragraph 5: Midwifery-led care (low risk) What to cover

What it is and how it works

Settings (home, birth centre)

Benefits

continuity

reduced intervention

woman satisfaction

Limitations

Not suitable for high-risk pregnancies

Key references

NICE Intrapartum Care

Sandall et al. (continuity of care)

Paragraph 6: Consultant-led care (high risk) What to cover

What it is and when it is used

MDT working

Benefits

specialist input

emergency management

Limitations

Potential loss of continuity

Medicalisation

Paragraph 7: Community-based care & Continuity of Carer What to cover

Community midwifery role

Continuity of Carer (CoC) model

Impact on

women

families

healthcare professionals

Critical element

Workforce pressures and sustainability

LO3: Role of the Midwife & Influences on Wellbeing (≈450 words) Paragraph 8: Role of the midwife What to cover

Antenatal, intrapartum, postnatal care

Health promotion

Advocacy

Safeguarding

MDT working

Key references

NMC (2018)

NHS England

Paragraph 9: Factors influencing maternal health & family wellbeing What to cover

Physical health

Mental health

Social determinants

Inequalities

Family support

First-class focus

Holistic, woman-centred approach

LO4: Communication & Person-Centred Care (≈450 words) Paragraph 10: Importance of effective communication What to cover

Builds trust

Enhances safety

Supports informed choice

Reduces errors and complaints

Key references

NMC communication standards

NHS patient safety literature

Paragraph 11: Person- and family-centred care What to cover

Define person-centred and family-centred care

Role of communication in:

inclusion

respect

shared decision-making

Contrast

Impact of poor communication:

anxiety

disengagement

poorer outcomes

Conclusion (≈150–200 words) What to include

Concise summary of each LO

Reinforce importance of:

frameworks

care systems

midwife’s role

communication

Forward-looking closing statement about safe, compassionate midwifery practice

Question 1 Article for Question 1 Food delivery service FoodPanda was investigated for touting free delivery for subscribers in widely circulated ads. The advertisement promoted “Unlimited Free Delivery on All Restaurants” for the service. This was displayed across multiple platforms including FoodPanda’s social media, its in-app marketing, billboards and signages at public areas such as bus stops. In fact, in respect of food delivery fees, FoodPanda subscribers only received a $3 discount for all restaurants, or a discount of up to $6 for selected restaurants. Contrary to the advertised “free delivery on all restaurants” which ran from 1 July to 30 September 2024, the Competition & Consumer Commission Singapore (CCCS) discovered that over 40% of food delivery transactions made by the subscribers on all restaurants, required a residual delivery fee to be paid after the discounts were applied.

Alvin Koh, chief executive at CCCS, said, “When a business offers ‘free’ services to entice the consumer to try a service, it is not unreasonable for an average consumer to understand “free” to mean that nothing will be charged. It is crucial that businesses ensure that their claims are accurate. Transparent pricing is crucial for consumers to make informed purchases and to allow all businesses to compete fairly.” Following the investigation, FoodPanda has acknowledged CCCS’s concern and agreed to take the following actions:

1. Provide a full refund of subscription fees to customers who had subscribed during the promotional period;
2. Provide clarification to customers who had subscribed during the promotional period and the public on the terms of the subscription;
3. Review its existing and future marketing materials for the subscription to ensure compliance with Singapore’s fair trading laws.

Question 1a As the marketing consultant for FoodPanda, you are tasked to educate and to equip the company on the legal requirements of price transparency in Singapore. With reference from CCCS’ Guidelines on Price Transparency and the Consumer Protection Fair Trading Act CPFTA, distinguish three (3) ways how the company’s marketing materials in the article, are misrepresentations to the public.

(15 marks)

Question 1b Design an improved version of the advertisement (in compliance to CPFTA) to correctly and clearly communicate this pricing . This one-page visual, is a stand-alone advertisement to target FoodPanda’s customers.

(15 marks)

Question 2 Question 2a To further facilitate FoodPanda and its staff on the legal compliance of pricing in Singapore, examine two (2) disadvantages of Price Fixing for businesses and convince why it is illegal in Singapore under the Competition Act.

(12 marks)

Question 2b If modern Artificial Intelligence AI ‘decides’ prices for competing businesses without human intervention, can the companies leveraging such modern technology still be held liable for AI-generated pricing? In the context of Singapore, inspect how AI-generated pricing pervades the three (3) aspects of law, technology, and the accountability of stakeholders.

(18 marks).

Question 3 Prepare and submit a Video recording (in .mp4 format) of the presentation following ALL the instructions below. Refer to Canvas T/TG/RESIT course site > Assignments > ECA_VIDEO for the step-by-step guide on how to submit the video. This Video file is a recording of you presenting answers for only Q2(a) and Q2(b). You may use any presentation software during your video presentation BUT this video must be submitted in .mp4 format. As you present, you should show your Presentation Slides (in Section C) in the background or be displayed in a screen next to you. Both you & the screen are to face the camera together and must be seen together in the same video frame. Length of video recording must NOT exceed 6 minutes. Ensure adequate clarity for both the video and audio quality of your submission. If Examiner is unable to either identify, see or hear, or understand the presenter clearly, he will not be able to assess therefore unable to award marks. You must label your Video file exactly as instructed in the guide in Canvas.

(28 marks)

Question 4 Prepare and submit a set of Presentation Slides (in PDF format) upon which the video presentation (in Section B) is based. Please note that only slides in PDF format will be accepted. This deck of Presentation Slides (upon which your video presentation is based) consists of your answers to only Q2(a) and Q2(b). This deck must be submitted in PDF format must NOT exceed ten (10) slides (exclude Cover Page, appendices, & References). You may use any presentation software for your video presentation. Submit online in Canvas via TurnItIn. Please DO NOT download and use PowerPoint slide design templates from the Internet. Indicate clearly the following particulars in the Cover Page of your submission: Course Code, Title of the ECA, your FULL name, SUSS PI No., and submission date. You must label your slide deck exactly as instructed in the guide in Canvas.

PSY 101 Introduction to Cultural Psychology Assessment 2026 | MU Singapore University Murdoch university (MU) Subject PSY 101 Introduction to Cultural Psychology PSY 101 Assessment Assessment Description In tutorial 1, you will participate in an activity that generates data relating to a Cultural Psychology topic. The data will then form the basis of the introduction plan and the lab report.

The introduction plan is to help you prepare the introduction of your lab report and to ensure you have a good understanding of the topic before writing your lab report.

Word limit: 500

Your plan needs to include the following:

An outline of the topic that you are researching Reference details for 3 peer-reviewed journal articles (presented in APA style) and a short statement of how each article is relevant to the topic* A statement of the specific aims of your study Clearly stated hypothesis *Do not include a separate reference list

Participants Participants were university students from a first-year psychology unit.

The data for 217 participants was used in the analysis: female, male, non-binary, and prefer not to say.

Data Screening Originally, there were 223 entries.

Three participants had duplicate entries. The most recent entry was kept, resulting in the removal of 4 data entries. The data from 2 participants could not be included due to a lack of UAI rating for their country of origin/cultural identity (Myanmar and Sudan). Age Range 17 years to 51 years with a mean age of 22.86 years (SD = 7.45).

Countries/Cultures 25 countries were included in the analysis. The majority of participants were from: Australia (55.76%) & Singapore (14.29%).

Data Participant/sample information Age Gender Country of origin/Nationality Individualism Rating SWB Valid 21 217 217 217 Missing 0 0 0 0 Variable Level Counts Total Proportion Gender Female 159 217 0.733 Male 47 217 0.217 Non-binary 8 217 0.037 Prefer not to say 3 217 0.014 Results: How do you report them in your lab report? How to report inferential statistics: To assess the size and direction of the relationship between Individualism Index rating and Subjective Wellbeing, Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) was calculated. The relationship between the variables was non-significant: r (215) = .06, p > .05, 2 tailed.

MKT371 Customer Insights and Analytics MKT371 End-of-Course Assessment Question INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS:

1. This End-of-Course Assessment paper comprises 8 pages (including the cover page).
2. You are to include the following particulars in your submission: Course Code, Title of the ECA, SUSS PI No., Your Name, and Submission Date.
3. Late submission will be subjected to the marks deduction scheme. Please refer to the Student Handbook for details.

Section A (100 marks) Answer all questions in this section.

The objective of this ECA is for students to apply the knowledge and skills learned in MKT371. You must interpret the results and make sense of the data. Read the case study “Case 3.3: Kimberly-Clark: Competing Through Innovation” on pp. 774-780 in the textbook. Assume that you are a data analyst for Kimberly-Clark tasked with analysing the survey data. Instead of stating the general statistical conclusions, it is imperative that you relate JMP results to the case context and make recommendations to Kimberly-Clark management.

Question 1 Refer to the accompanying JMP file to answer the following questions. Include relevant JMP outputs in your response to the questions.

Question 1a The directions of the rating scales used in this survey are inconsistent, making interpretation less intuitive. Reverse the coding for Q3, Q7, Q8, Q9, Q11, and Q12. Specifically, assign the lowest code to the least extent or the most negative descriptor and the highest code to the greatest extent or the most positive one; the code assigned to the ‘DK/Refuse’ option should remain the same. Save the recoded variables as separate variables.

Show and discuss a summary table of means and standard deviations for these recoded variables. (6 marks)

Question 1b After reviewing the mailer, respondents were asked to rate various aspects of it, including the featured brand (Huggies), across seven (7) questions: Q4a, Q4b, Q4c, Q7_recoded, Q8_recoded, Q9_recoded, and Q10b. However, these questions are overly tedious for subsequent analyses.

Solve this problem by running a factor analysis using principal components extraction with varimax rotation on these seven rating questions and determine any underlying factors inherent in the data.

You must do the following and print all the relevant statistics and JMP outputs:

1. Demonstrate the appropriateness of using Factor Analysis by Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity
2. Determine the number of factors to be extracted based on Eigenvalues, Cumulative Percentage and Scree Plot methods.
3. Appraise the dominant variables in each factor and the variance each factor accounts for.
4. Interpret the factors.
5. Save the factor scores (i.e., the rotated component scores). Calculate and examine the association between the factors. (20 marks)

Question 2 Refer to the accompanying JMP file to answer the following questions. Include relevant JMP outputs in your response to the questions.

Question 2a Based on Q2 data, 282 respondents would have opened the mailer if they received it in the mail, while 16 would not have (treat those who indicated ‘Don’t Know’ as missing data). Using a two-group discriminant analysis, examine whether the two respondent groups in Q2 (those who would have opened the mailer vs. those who would not have) can be derived from the factors extracted in Question 1 Part (b), the likelihood of using coupons (Q11_recoded), the age of the youngest child in diapers (QG), and the skin sensitivity of the youngest child in diapers (Q12_recoded).

You must assemble and discuss relevant JMP outputs comprehensively.

Note: In JMP Discriminant Analysis, select ‘Stepwise Variable Selection’ with the ‘Linear, Common Variance’ discriminant method for a preliminary analysis. Then, click ‘Enter All (Variables)’ followed by ‘Apply this Model’ to conduct a full analysis. (24 marks)

Question 2b Recommend two (2) appropriate actions for Kimberly-Clark management based on Question 2 Part (a) findings. (10 marks)

Question 3 Refer to the accompanying JMP file to answer the following questions. Include relevant JMP outputs in your response to the questions.

Question 3a Can respondents’ likelihood of purchasing Huggies diapers be predicted simultaneously by brand quality (Q4a), brand trust (Q4b), the gender of the youngest child in diapers (QH), and whether the youngest child in diapers is first-born (Q14)? Execute a multiple regression analysis with Q3_recoded as the dependent variable and Q4a, Q4b, QH and Q14 as the independent variables. Interpret the results. (20 marks)

Question 3b Propose two (2) strategies for Kimberly-Clark management to increase market share based on your findings in Question 3 Part (a). (10 marks)

Question 4 Demonstrate Quality of Writing and Presentation in your submission: The remaining ten (10) marks are allocated to the writing and presentation of your answers, which includes professional presentation of the JMP outputs, formatting and layout of the report, citations (if any), grammar, logical flow of discussion, effective use of headings/sub-headings, clarity and conciseness of writing, and AI usage declaration. Refer to the rubrics below.

ClusterMN3496K Clusters Small Business and International Entrepreneurship MN3496K Assignment 2026 Question Is innovation manageable or just a random gambling activity where you sometimes get lucky?  If it is manageable, how can firms organise and manage it – what general strategic approach might they use?

2500 words exclude bibliography

Introduction Brief introduction giving a quick profile of your chosen company Say why you have chosen this particular company Say if you are choosing to apply the business model canvas to the company as a whole or whether you are focusing on a specific division or area Graphic: Business model canvas Below your introduction, place a saved graphic of your completed business model for your company. Middle section: Spend about a third of your word count on explaining the business model that you have constructed Spend most of the remaining word count explaining how and where innovation fits in What are the key innovation processes, and how are they managed? What is the strategy to source, capture, and exploit innovation? How does what you find in your company relate to theoretical concepts/frameworks? What can your company do better in terms of innovation? Can you use a company that you have researched for another course ? Yes, though take care!! You can use the evidence/sources that you have collected, but this does not mean a cut and paste of text that you have submitted in another assignment. If you do that, you will be plagiarizing yourself, which is an academic offense.

– Use paragraph towards the end to explore your recommendation

– Conclusion

– Recommendation can be combined with the conclusion

Bibliography No need to provide references on the template Fill in all sections using brief bullet points When you are happy that you have all you need, save the template as an image and insert into your assignment Revenue stream – No need for lots of accounting detail. Provide just an overview of key revenue streams Cost structure – No need for lots of accounting detail. Provide just an overview of likely key cost drivers.