The Impact of the Current Regulatory Framework on Water Quality in Ireland

Lecturer: Aisling O’Gorman Waste Process Management Lecturer: Aisling O’Gorman Waste Process Management 08 Fall 08 Fall Submission Date: 11/10/2012 Word Count: 2387 Submission Date: 11/10/2012 Word Count: 2387 The Impact of the Current Regulatory Framework on Water Quality in Ireland: Maria McShaneThe Impact of the Current Regulatory Framework on Water Quality in Ireland: Maria McShane Introduction Based on the evaluation of various reports, papers, documents, regulations and legislation from numerous agencies, departments, directives and bodies it can be seen that although â€Å"on paper† major changes have been made so as to improve the quality of water in Ireland, realistically the amendments do not match up.This being that progress has been slow and minimal when compared to the reform of regulations and legislation and the introduction of the Water Framework Directive. Considering the key importance of water as a natural resource both to society and habitats alike it will be argued that although the intention is there to improve the quality of water in Ireland (and there have been some improvements) as an overall, actual major physical improvements to the water quality has yet to be seen.Report Firstly the Water Framework Directive will be examined to highlight its purpose, current status and goals for the future and how it fits into impacting Irelands water quality. The WFD was set up by the EU â€Å"in response to the increasing threat of pollution and the increasing demand from the public for cleaner rivers, lakes and beaches† (The Eu Water Framework Directive. [online] Available at: [Accessed on 08/10/12]). According to the Water Framework Directives’ website, their aims are to â€Å"protect/enhance all waters (surface, ground and coastal waters), achieve â€Å"good status† for all waters by December 2015, manage water bodies based on river basins (or catchments), involve the public and streamline legislationâ € 1 (The Eu Water Framework Directive. [online] Available at: [Accessed on 08/10/12]).In order to achieve these goals a timetable for implementation of the directive was created, starting from its transposition into Irish Legislation by the European Communities (Water Policy) Regulations 2003, (Statutory Instrument 722) on 22nd December 2003 (European Communities (Water Policy) Regulations 2003, (Statutory Instrument 722). (The Eu Water Framework Directive. [online] Available at: [Accessed on 08/10/12]). From the 22nd December 2003 to the 22nd June 2009 no Programmes of Measures were actually implemented in order to beneficially impact Irelands water quality by the WFD.Instead the WFD established (June 2004) and characterised (December 2004) Irelands River Basin Districts, submitted a National Summary Report on the characterisation of the RBDs to the European Commission (March 2005), developed classification systems for surface water and groundwater (June 2006), established and m aintained appropriate Monitoring Programmes (June 2006), prepared and published a work programme and timetable for the production of River Basin Management Plans (RBMP) (June 2006), identified the significant water management issues in each river basin (June 2007), drafted RBMPs and allowed six months for written comment (June 2008), and finally established environmental objectives and final Programmes of Measures and developed RBMPs for implementation (June 2009), (Water Framework Directive, [2005]). Although this research and reporting is a vital function of improving Irelands water quality, the timeframe in which this has been done means that physical progress has been hindered. The actual recovery progress made to Irelands water quality can be seen in various Environmental Protection Agency reports. According to the EPA’s Water Quality in Ireland Report of 2007-2009, between 1987 and 1990, 77. 3, 12. 0, 9. 7 and 0. % surveyed river channel length were unpolluted, slightly polluted, moderately polluted and seriously polluted respectively. By the 2001-2003 report the percentage of unpolluted rivers had dropped from 77. 3% to 69. 3% which is significant, in addition to this the percentage surveyed of seriously polluted rivers had risen from 0. 4% to 0. 6%, slight and moderate pollution had also risen by 5. 9 and 2. 6 percent respectively. By the 2007-2009 report the percentage of surveyed river that remained unpolluted had dropped again to 68. 9%, slight pollution had also risen to 20. 7%. Fortunately moderate and seriously polluted waters had seen a drop from 12. 3 and 0. 6 to 10. 0 and 0. 4 percent respectively (M. McGarrigle et al. [2009).Considering that the water quality of rivers for the 2001-2003 recording period was healthier than the 2007-2009 recording period, even though the 2001-2003 period coincides with the implementation of the WFD, highlights that for a period of six years that the WFD was in effect Irelands river water quality declined . This corroborates to the argument that yes the WFD has carried out reports, monitoring programs and drafted plans all well and good, but without any actual meaningful actions taken, what good is the WFD at all? This is not to say that the WFD has not done anything positive, for example since its introduction â€Å"the percentage of channel surveyed classified as seriously polluted has decreased to 0. 4 percent compared with the previous period when 0. 5 percent was seriously polluted† (M. McGarrigle et al. [2009]).It cannot be stressed enough that in order to improve the quality of water in Ireland research and reporting is fundamental, however the point being made is that pencil pushing and fiddling around writing reports and documents will not recuperate Irelands water systems. Six years is a very long timeframe for an EU commissioned directive to take no feasible action other than talk about and plan what it’s going to do and then expect to reach its target of ret urning all waters to â€Å"good status† by December 2015. To emphasise the case that without acting and merely focusing on the bureaucratic side of things the WFD has impeded its own progress, citing’s from the South Western River Basin Management Plan (2009-2015) report will be looked at.It states, â€Å"municipal wastewater discharge is one of the two most important sources of pollution in Irish rivers, accounting for 38% of the number of polluted river sites recorded (the other source being agricultural activities)† (South Western River Basin District [2010]). This is not new news, this has been known for quite some time and â€Å"the two top sectors responsible for the pollution of Irish rivers are municipal and agriculture† has even been quoted in the 1991-1993 EPA water quality in Ireland report. To add to this the Nitrates Directive was set up in 1991 for the â€Å"protection of waters against pollution by nitrates from agricultural sources† (Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, The Nitrates Directive. [online] Available at: http://www. nviron. ie/en/Environment/Water/WaterQuality/NitratesDirective/ [Accessed on 08/10/12]). This directive actually implemented legislation that â€Å"required the avoidance of practices by farmers which create a risk of causing pollution to water courses and provide for inspections by local authorities. They also provided for strengthened enforcement provisions and for better farmyard management. They included provisions relating to times of the year, weather and soil conditions when the application of fertilisers is permitted, the minimum setback distances from water sources for the application of fertilisers and minimum storage capacity for manures†. Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, The Nitrates Directive. [online] Available at: http://www. environ. ie/en/Environment/Water/WaterQuality/NitratesDirective/ [Accessed on 08/10/12]). Why then is the SWRBD reporting that agriculture is the second biggest cause of pollution to Irish rivers, number one when this has long been known and number two when measures have already been put in place a long time ago to address this problem? To add to this they also quoted â€Å"The main objective in relation to wastewater is to meet the requirements of the EU Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations (2001-2010) in full† (South Western River Basin District [2010]). Not to be crude, but are they for real?This is common sense, these regulations have been in place since 2001, and yes they would have been modified over the years but how in 2010 when this report came out can meeting these regulations still be just an objective? To highlight further the WFDs failure to have a significant positive impact on the quality of Irish water a recent EPA report on the assessment of aquatic ecosystem responses to POM’s intended to improve water quality in Ireland was released. Acco rding to this report, â€Å"results presented suggest that many existing POMs have proven or are proving ineffective in raising BWQ (biological water quality) and restoring ecological functioning† (D. Taylor et al. [2012]). An example of this can be seen in the â€Å"strategic replacement of 10% of septic tank systems in part of the Blackwater catchment in CO. Armagh† (D. Taylor et al. [2012]).The report showed that overall, prior and subsequent to the replacement of the septic tank systems phosphorous loads remained largely the same. In conjunction with this result, â€Å"in other parts of the Blackwater, the replacement and upgrading of septic tank systems had no significant phosphorous concentration effects, despite the implementation of additional POMs aimed at reducing phosphorous inputs from point and diffuse sources† (D. Taylor et al. [2012]). The report goes on to say that some of the â€Å"potential reasons why the implementation of POMs have had limit ed success include the delayed, incomplete or uneven application of measures† (D. Taylor et al. [2012]).This only solidifies the argument that the WFD spent too much time thinking about what to do, and then what measures they did put in place, for the most part either took too long to do so or did not implement the measure properly in order to meet their 2015 deadline. Which follows now onto a report that was released in July 2010 on behalf of the WFD entitled â€Å"Final River Basin Management Plans Background Documentation, Alternative Objectives: Approach to Extended Deadlines†, its main purpose, to focus on certain cases that require an extension past the 2015 deadline (kind of defeats the purpose of the WFD if they are admitting defeat five years before the deadline). Under section 4. 0 ‘Agriculture’ of this report, one of the cases for exclusion is nitrate losses from agriculture to groundwaters. The reason for this, â€Å"Scientific data indicates s tatus recovery extends beyond 2015. â€Å"Recovery of elevated nitrate levels in groundwater bodies is expected to take place in approximately 20 years even with full implementation of the Good Agricultural Practice regulations (Fenton et al, in press). So yes, while it is known that the natural recovery of a water system takes substantial time, with technology today could the WFD not invest in developing nitrate removal techniques such as, layered double hydroxides which â€Å"are of interest because of the potential to use LDHs to remove agrochemicals from polluted water, reducing the likelihood of eutrophication† (Wikipedia. org, Layered Double Hydroxins. [online] Available at: [Accessed on 08/10/2012]). Another case looked at in this report is wastewater discharges from some treatment plants.The reason for the exemption, a technical/practical constraint, it states â€Å"The time required to plan and design upgrades to treatment plants and to achieve approvals and licen sing means it is not technically possible to achieve good status in 2015,† the action applied is to leave â€Å"Local Authorities to upgrade plants through the Water Services Investment Programme† meaning that funding is one of the reasons that there will be a delay in the overhaul of wastewater treatment plants in Ireland. Unsurprisingly, according to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government website â€Å"with the changed economic climate and the finalisation of the first cycle of River Basin Management Plans, the new programme aims to prioritise projects that target environmental compliance issues† (Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, Water Services Investment Programme. online] Available at: http://www. environ. ie/en/Environment/Water/WaterServices/WaterServicesInvestmentProgramme/ [Accessed on 08/10/2012]). This here shown lack of initiative by the Government and the WFD by not investing in technology that can help recover Irish waters allows the development of this last argument. In a very recent position paper entitled â€Å"Reform of the Water Sector in Ireland† carried out by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government it was highlighted that â€Å"water services cost over â‚ ¬1. 2 billion to run in 2010, of which operational costs amounted to some â‚ ¬715 million, with capital expenditure of over â‚ ¬500 million†.The paper goes on to tell of the impending establishment of the state company ‘Irish Water’ â€Å"that will take over the water investment and maintenance programmes of the 34 county and city councils with the key aim of supervising and accelerating the pace of delivery of planned investments needed to upgrade the State’s water and sewerage networks† (Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, [2012]). This state company intends on funding its investments and programmes via water charges paid for by Irish householders. Despite the fact that Ireland is in a recession and its people are struggling as it is financially, the fact remains that Ireland is the only country in the OECD that does not pay for its water use (Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, [2012]).It states, â€Å"Our capacity to fund the future capital investment requirements from the exchequer is severally constrained. The Government’s plan for Infrastructure and Capital Investment 2012-16 shows a decline in exchequer capital investment in water and waste water services from â‚ ¬435 million in 2011 to â‚ ¬371 million in 2012 and a further decline to â‚ ¬296 million by 2014† (Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, [2012]). This is one of the reasons why Irish Water is a good idea as it will actually fund the necessary wastewater treatment plant changes that need to be done in order to tackle some of Irelands water pollution issues while als o effectively reducing the amount of treated potable water wasted everyday by Irish households.So to sum up, yes, introducing the WFD has had a positive impact as it has lead to developments in implementations that will help to recover the quality of Irelands waters, however the main argument being made in this paper is that they failed on several points. Firstly they spent too much time on the bureaucratic side of things, six years to be exact figuring out what the problems were and where, when a lot of them were obvious, had been known about and reported on several years previously and many had already been addressed. Secondly, a lot of POMs that were implemented were done so either to late or not properly, meaning that a lot of them have not lead to any significant positive changes.Finally where the WFD failed was a lack of investment into developing technologies that might help accelerate the return of Irish waters to their natural state, and a huge time lag into implementing wa ter charges so as to invest into Irelands infrastructure regarding wastewater treatment. Overall time here is what has been wasted, as for every day that no action is taken is another day when Irelands water and habitats suffer. Nature does not and can not wait for the pencil pushers. References 1. The Eu Water Framework Directive. [online] Available at: [Accessed on 08/10/12] 2. Water Framework Directive, [2005].The Characterisation and Analysis of Ireland’s River Basin Districts, National Summary Report. Ireland 3. Environmental Protection Agency, M. McGarrigle et al. [2009]. Water Quality in Ireland. Ireland 4. South Western River Basin District, [2010] South Western River Basin Management Plan. Ireland 5. Environmental Protection Agency, [1993] Water Quality in Ireland. Ireland 6. Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, The Nitrates Directive. [online] Available at: http://www. environ. ie/en/Environment/Water/WaterQuality/NitratesDirective/ [Accessed o n 08/10/12]). 7. Environmental Protection Agency, D. Taylor et al. [2012] Water Quality and the Aquatic Environment STRIVE Report 91. Ireland 8.Lag Time: A Methodology For The Estimation Of Vertical, Horizontal Travel & Flushing Timescales To Nitrate Threshold Concentrations In Irish Aquifers Fenton et al under review 9. Wikipedia. org, Layered Double Hydroxins. [online] Available at: [Accessed on 08/10/2012]. 10. Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, Water Services Investment Programme. [online] Available at: http://www. environ. ie/en/Environment/Water/WaterServices/WaterServicesInvestmentProgramme/ [Accessed on 08/10/2012]). 11. Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, [2012] Reform of the Water Sector in Ireland. Ireland The Impact of the Current Regulatory Framework on Water Quality in Ireland Lecturer: Aisling O’Gorman Waste Process Management Lecturer: Aisling O’Gorman Waste Process Management 08 Fall 08 Fall Submission Date: 11/10/2012 Word Count: 2387 Submission Date: 11/10/2012 Word Count: 2387 The Impact of the Current Regulatory Framework on Water Quality in Ireland: Maria McShaneThe Impact of the Current Regulatory Framework on Water Quality in Ireland: Maria McShane Introduction Based on the evaluation of various reports, papers, documents, regulations and legislation from numerous agencies, departments, directives and bodies it can be seen that although â€Å"on paper† major changes have been made so as to improve the quality of water in Ireland, realistically the amendments do not match up.This being that progress has been slow and minimal when compared to the reform of regulations and legislation and the introduction of the Water Framework Directive. Considering the key importance of water as a natural resource both to society and habitats alike it will be argued that although the intention is there to improve the quality of water in Ireland (and there have been some improvements) as an overall, actual major physical improvements to the water quality has yet to be seen.Report Firstly the Water Framework Directive will be examined to highlight its purpose, current status and goals for the future and how it fits into impacting Irelands water quality. The WFD was set up by the EU â€Å"in response to the increasing threat of pollution and the increasing demand from the public for cleaner rivers, lakes and beaches† (The Eu Water Framework Directive. [online] Available at: [Accessed on 08/10/12]). According to the Water Framework Directives’ website, their aims are to â€Å"protect/enhance all waters (surface, ground and coastal waters), achieve â€Å"good status† for all waters by December 2015, manage water bodies based on river basins (or catchments), involve the public and streamline legislationâ € 1 (The Eu Water Framework Directive. [online] Available at: [Accessed on 08/10/12]).In order to achieve these goals a timetable for implementation of the directive was created, starting from its transposition into Irish Legislation by the European Communities (Water Policy) Regulations 2003, (Statutory Instrument 722) on 22nd December 2003 (European Communities (Water Policy) Regulations 2003, (Statutory Instrument 722). (The Eu Water Framework Directive. [online] Available at: [Accessed on 08/10/12]). From the 22nd December 2003 to the 22nd June 2009 no Programmes of Measures were actually implemented in order to beneficially impact Irelands water quality by the WFD.Instead the WFD established (June 2004) and characterised (December 2004) Irelands River Basin Districts, submitted a National Summary Report on the characterisation of the RBDs to the European Commission (March 2005), developed classification systems for surface water and groundwater (June 2006), established and m aintained appropriate Monitoring Programmes (June 2006), prepared and published a work programme and timetable for the production of River Basin Management Plans (RBMP) (June 2006), identified the significant water management issues in each river basin (June 2007), drafted RBMPs and allowed six months for written comment (June 2008), and finally established environmental objectives and final Programmes of Measures and developed RBMPs for implementation (June 2009), (Water Framework Directive, [2005]). Although this research and reporting is a vital function of improving Irelands water quality, the timeframe in which this has been done means that physical progress has been hindered. The actual recovery progress made to Irelands water quality can be seen in various Environmental Protection Agency reports. According to the EPA’s Water Quality in Ireland Report of 2007-2009, between 1987 and 1990, 77. 3, 12. 0, 9. 7 and 0. % surveyed river channel length were unpolluted, slightly polluted, moderately polluted and seriously polluted respectively. By the 2001-2003 report the percentage of unpolluted rivers had dropped from 77. 3% to 69. 3% which is significant, in addition to this the percentage surveyed of seriously polluted rivers had risen from 0. 4% to 0. 6%, slight and moderate pollution had also risen by 5. 9 and 2. 6 percent respectively. By the 2007-2009 report the percentage of surveyed river that remained unpolluted had dropped again to 68. 9%, slight pollution had also risen to 20. 7%. Fortunately moderate and seriously polluted waters had seen a drop from 12. 3 and 0. 6 to 10. 0 and 0. 4 percent respectively (M. McGarrigle et al. [2009).Considering that the water quality of rivers for the 2001-2003 recording period was healthier than the 2007-2009 recording period, even though the 2001-2003 period coincides with the implementation of the WFD, highlights that for a period of six years that the WFD was in effect Irelands river water quality declined . This corroborates to the argument that yes the WFD has carried out reports, monitoring programs and drafted plans all well and good, but without any actual meaningful actions taken, what good is the WFD at all? This is not to say that the WFD has not done anything positive, for example since its introduction â€Å"the percentage of channel surveyed classified as seriously polluted has decreased to 0. 4 percent compared with the previous period when 0. 5 percent was seriously polluted† (M. McGarrigle et al. [2009]).It cannot be stressed enough that in order to improve the quality of water in Ireland research and reporting is fundamental, however the point being made is that pencil pushing and fiddling around writing reports and documents will not recuperate Irelands water systems. Six years is a very long timeframe for an EU commissioned directive to take no feasible action other than talk about and plan what it’s going to do and then expect to reach its target of ret urning all waters to â€Å"good status† by December 2015. To emphasise the case that without acting and merely focusing on the bureaucratic side of things the WFD has impeded its own progress, citing’s from the South Western River Basin Management Plan (2009-2015) report will be looked at.It states, â€Å"municipal wastewater discharge is one of the two most important sources of pollution in Irish rivers, accounting for 38% of the number of polluted river sites recorded (the other source being agricultural activities)† (South Western River Basin District [2010]). This is not new news, this has been known for quite some time and â€Å"the two top sectors responsible for the pollution of Irish rivers are municipal and agriculture† has even been quoted in the 1991-1993 EPA water quality in Ireland report. To add to this the Nitrates Directive was set up in 1991 for the â€Å"protection of waters against pollution by nitrates from agricultural sources† (Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, The Nitrates Directive. [online] Available at: http://www. nviron. ie/en/Environment/Water/WaterQuality/NitratesDirective/ [Accessed on 08/10/12]). This directive actually implemented legislation that â€Å"required the avoidance of practices by farmers which create a risk of causing pollution to water courses and provide for inspections by local authorities. They also provided for strengthened enforcement provisions and for better farmyard management. They included provisions relating to times of the year, weather and soil conditions when the application of fertilisers is permitted, the minimum setback distances from water sources for the application of fertilisers and minimum storage capacity for manures†. Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, The Nitrates Directive. [online] Available at: http://www. environ. ie/en/Environment/Water/WaterQuality/NitratesDirective/ [Accessed on 08/10/12]). Why then is the SWRBD reporting that agriculture is the second biggest cause of pollution to Irish rivers, number one when this has long been known and number two when measures have already been put in place a long time ago to address this problem? To add to this they also quoted â€Å"The main objective in relation to wastewater is to meet the requirements of the EU Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations (2001-2010) in full† (South Western River Basin District [2010]). Not to be crude, but are they for real?This is common sense, these regulations have been in place since 2001, and yes they would have been modified over the years but how in 2010 when this report came out can meeting these regulations still be just an objective? To highlight further the WFDs failure to have a significant positive impact on the quality of Irish water a recent EPA report on the assessment of aquatic ecosystem responses to POM’s intended to improve water quality in Ireland was released. Acco rding to this report, â€Å"results presented suggest that many existing POMs have proven or are proving ineffective in raising BWQ (biological water quality) and restoring ecological functioning† (D. Taylor et al. [2012]). An example of this can be seen in the â€Å"strategic replacement of 10% of septic tank systems in part of the Blackwater catchment in CO. Armagh† (D. Taylor et al. [2012]).The report showed that overall, prior and subsequent to the replacement of the septic tank systems phosphorous loads remained largely the same. In conjunction with this result, â€Å"in other parts of the Blackwater, the replacement and upgrading of septic tank systems had no significant phosphorous concentration effects, despite the implementation of additional POMs aimed at reducing phosphorous inputs from point and diffuse sources† (D. Taylor et al. [2012]). The report goes on to say that some of the â€Å"potential reasons why the implementation of POMs have had limit ed success include the delayed, incomplete or uneven application of measures† (D. Taylor et al. [2012]).This only solidifies the argument that the WFD spent too much time thinking about what to do, and then what measures they did put in place, for the most part either took too long to do so or did not implement the measure properly in order to meet their 2015 deadline. Which follows now onto a report that was released in July 2010 on behalf of the WFD entitled â€Å"Final River Basin Management Plans Background Documentation, Alternative Objectives: Approach to Extended Deadlines†, its main purpose, to focus on certain cases that require an extension past the 2015 deadline (kind of defeats the purpose of the WFD if they are admitting defeat five years before the deadline). Under section 4. 0 ‘Agriculture’ of this report, one of the cases for exclusion is nitrate losses from agriculture to groundwaters. The reason for this, â€Å"Scientific data indicates s tatus recovery extends beyond 2015. â€Å"Recovery of elevated nitrate levels in groundwater bodies is expected to take place in approximately 20 years even with full implementation of the Good Agricultural Practice regulations (Fenton et al, in press). So yes, while it is known that the natural recovery of a water system takes substantial time, with technology today could the WFD not invest in developing nitrate removal techniques such as, layered double hydroxides which â€Å"are of interest because of the potential to use LDHs to remove agrochemicals from polluted water, reducing the likelihood of eutrophication† (Wikipedia. org, Layered Double Hydroxins. [online] Available at: [Accessed on 08/10/2012]). Another case looked at in this report is wastewater discharges from some treatment plants.The reason for the exemption, a technical/practical constraint, it states â€Å"The time required to plan and design upgrades to treatment plants and to achieve approvals and licen sing means it is not technically possible to achieve good status in 2015,† the action applied is to leave â€Å"Local Authorities to upgrade plants through the Water Services Investment Programme† meaning that funding is one of the reasons that there will be a delay in the overhaul of wastewater treatment plants in Ireland. Unsurprisingly, according to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government website â€Å"with the changed economic climate and the finalisation of the first cycle of River Basin Management Plans, the new programme aims to prioritise projects that target environmental compliance issues† (Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, Water Services Investment Programme. online] Available at: http://www. environ. ie/en/Environment/Water/WaterServices/WaterServicesInvestmentProgramme/ [Accessed on 08/10/2012]). This here shown lack of initiative by the Government and the WFD by not investing in technology that can help recover Irish waters allows the development of this last argument. In a very recent position paper entitled â€Å"Reform of the Water Sector in Ireland† carried out by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government it was highlighted that â€Å"water services cost over â‚ ¬1. 2 billion to run in 2010, of which operational costs amounted to some â‚ ¬715 million, with capital expenditure of over â‚ ¬500 million†.The paper goes on to tell of the impending establishment of the state company ‘Irish Water’ â€Å"that will take over the water investment and maintenance programmes of the 34 county and city councils with the key aim of supervising and accelerating the pace of delivery of planned investments needed to upgrade the State’s water and sewerage networks† (Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, [2012]). This state company intends on funding its investments and programmes via water charges paid for by Irish householders. Despite the fact that Ireland is in a recession and its people are struggling as it is financially, the fact remains that Ireland is the only country in the OECD that does not pay for its water use (Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, [2012]).It states, â€Å"Our capacity to fund the future capital investment requirements from the exchequer is severally constrained. The Government’s plan for Infrastructure and Capital Investment 2012-16 shows a decline in exchequer capital investment in water and waste water services from â‚ ¬435 million in 2011 to â‚ ¬371 million in 2012 and a further decline to â‚ ¬296 million by 2014† (Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, [2012]). This is one of the reasons why Irish Water is a good idea as it will actually fund the necessary wastewater treatment plant changes that need to be done in order to tackle some of Irelands water pollution issues while als o effectively reducing the amount of treated potable water wasted everyday by Irish households.So to sum up, yes, introducing the WFD has had a positive impact as it has lead to developments in implementations that will help to recover the quality of Irelands waters, however the main argument being made in this paper is that they failed on several points. Firstly they spent too much time on the bureaucratic side of things, six years to be exact figuring out what the problems were and where, when a lot of them were obvious, had been known about and reported on several years previously and many had already been addressed. Secondly, a lot of POMs that were implemented were done so either to late or not properly, meaning that a lot of them have not lead to any significant positive changes.Finally where the WFD failed was a lack of investment into developing technologies that might help accelerate the return of Irish waters to their natural state, and a huge time lag into implementing wa ter charges so as to invest into Irelands infrastructure regarding wastewater treatment. Overall time here is what has been wasted, as for every day that no action is taken is another day when Irelands water and habitats suffer. Nature does not and can not wait for the pencil pushers. References 1. The Eu Water Framework Directive. [online] Available at: [Accessed on 08/10/12] 2. Water Framework Directive, [2005].The Characterisation and Analysis of Ireland’s River Basin Districts, National Summary Report. Ireland 3. Environmental Protection Agency, M. McGarrigle et al. [2009]. Water Quality in Ireland. Ireland 4. South Western River Basin District, [2010] South Western River Basin Management Plan. Ireland 5. Environmental Protection Agency, [1993] Water Quality in Ireland. Ireland 6. Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, The Nitrates Directive. [online] Available at: http://www. environ. ie/en/Environment/Water/WaterQuality/NitratesDirective/ [Accessed o n 08/10/12]). 7. Environmental Protection Agency, D. Taylor et al. [2012] Water Quality and the Aquatic Environment STRIVE Report 91. Ireland 8.Lag Time: A Methodology For The Estimation Of Vertical, Horizontal Travel & Flushing Timescales To Nitrate Threshold Concentrations In Irish Aquifers Fenton et al under review 9. Wikipedia. org, Layered Double Hydroxins. [online] Available at: [Accessed on 08/10/2012]. 10. Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, Water Services Investment Programme. [online] Available at: http://www. environ. ie/en/Environment/Water/WaterServices/WaterServicesInvestmentProgramme/ [Accessed on 08/10/2012]). 11. Department of Environment, Community and Local Government, [2012] Reform of the Water Sector in Ireland. Ireland

Small and Medium Enterprise

Accessibility Monorails for Urban Community in Jakarta Contemporary societies heavily depend on transportation and modern social life is possible only if people have mobility on a daily basis?the ability to move around so that they can do what they have to do or like to do (Augurs, 2004).On the one hand, high personal mobility and the lifestyle choices are features of modern societies but costs and constraints involved in meeting this demand threaten communities in important ways via financial impositions, increases in pollution and greenhouse effects and reduction of local amenity, promotion of dispersed development and the aka up of farm or bush land and depletion of scarce fossil fuel reserves (G, 1999, up. 11-122). Nowadays almost every day mass media in Indonesia review the issues about poor public transport and increasing levels of traffic congestion in Jakarta.The problem of congestion and poor of public transportation services is the triggers that increased of using private c ars in Jakarta which causes the high acceleration rate of growth private motor vehicles, both motorcycles and cars since 1999 (Table. L). Congestion reducing approach by push the using of private motor vehicles and evitable of public transportation services is to be important. Failure of transportation systems will interfere with the development of an area, affecting the efficiency of the urban economy.Provides good public transportation service will encourage people to change from private vehicles to public transportation. Based on this fact, the people in Jakarta hope that Jakarta Provincial Government immediately revivalist the public transportation services. Given the fact how important to managing for excellence in public transportation, one of those benefits is public transportation improves the quality of life in immunities by providing safe, efficient, and economical transportation service (Klein, 2005, p. 154).The availability and cost effectiveness of public transportation is also vital to ensuring a healthy economy and improving mobility. Improvements of public transport will help to reduce congestion, air pollution, also oil and energy consumption. One of our government program is to build monorails in Jakarta. The reason to build monorails, because each and every day hundreds of thousands of passengers are carried on monorails, environment friendly and also cost effective (Greenwood, 1963, up. 6-29). Lots of experts who concluded Jakarta will getting worse of congestion if not solving efforts from now.Some of other causes is the lack of public transport services and undisciplined road users in Jakarta. There are several ways or way out that can be used as an approach to solve the congestion problem in Jakarta. Certainly can be done as an approach, such as reducing the use of private motor vehicles and increased ethics, traffic discipline on the highway and revitalization the public Jakarta that fairly representative and already operates nearly aro und 9 years old with Eng corridors more than 200 Km, but Trans-Jakarta has not become a right answer of mass transportation in Jakarta.A new innovation that will implement in Jakarta is to build monorails transportation system. Build the monorails transportation system is not a purely economic and financial feasibility, but more than for the vision of a city. Life and economic activity of a city, depending on how easily people to travel or mobility and how often they can do it to various destinations in the city.Main objective from monorails transportation system is to provides the opportunity for people to improve the quality with a more liable, trustworthy, safe, comfortable, affordable and more economical. Monorails have often been lumped together with flying cars as part of a naive, cartoonist vision of the future (Kennedy, 2005, p. 2). The monorails society defines monorails as â€Å"A single rail serving as a track for passenger or freight vehicles. In most cases rail is elev ated, but monorails can also run at grade, below grade or in subway tunnels (Kennedy, 2005, p. ). Plan to build a monorails in Jakarta is still in a long-term process, but it would be better if the government has already started planning for NY particular infrastructure and study from an international reference about what, why in order to prepare and support this project. The reasons to support of using monorails; 1 . Monorails are nonpolluting, quite and automated, all these characteristics are approximately the same for any electrically powered modern transport system on a guide- way or rails. 2.Safety, the record has been extremely good, with serious operational accidents not yet encountered. 3. Personal safety has also been exceptional, and systems operate in controlled environments, and extensive surveillance programs done by monitors and safety response are in place. 4. Advanced technology image, monorails are associated in the public mind with technological advancement and vi sionary concepts, This may be a considerable positive force, possibly generating considerable public and civic support for implementation. Augurs, 2004). Monorails are categorized in Zero Accident or the safest public transpiration systems. Because of their elevated design, accidents with surface traffic are impossible. Zero accidents translates to no system down time, less liability suits and most importantly, no injuries or deaths where street rail systems with grade crossings (light rail, trams r trellises) can't offer this kind of safety. Also, passenger safety is a primary consideration in the design of modern monorails system.Various manufacturers are ensure passengers safety and comfort during their trips. These kind of modern cars benefited recent interior design techniques and modern convenience features such as fully automated air conditioning systems, the vehicles' air spring suspension and unobstructed passageways to bring an open atmosphere to the passengers, and to pro vide a pleasant time for passengers rather than a time feeling boxed in, as they feel like having fun walking in the air.Monorails are completely electric and produce zero emissions and, as meaner of transpiration, monorails aid in the removal of large amount of various motor vehicle traffics and reduced emissions by tons of carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOCE) and nitrogen oxides (Knox). Environmentalists have long sought to be rid of pollution and congestion caused by auto traffic in every preserved natural area. There are several examples of green monorails track through Jungle areas.Since most 66 monorails trains run above the surface, wildlife and humans would be safer, noise levels would be lower, and elution would be greatly reduced. Concerning CA emission in passenger transport the rail transport (including light, heavy rail and monorails) is four times more efficient than the car and three times more than the plane on average (Figure 4. 5); also because m ost of the modern light rail and monorails systems have electrical engines, the required energy is supplied by a stationary power supply system fed by the public power grid or a distant small size power plant.This meaner, the mentioned systems does not produce any local exhaust emissions. Assessment of the economic effects associated with the proposed monorails system as been divided into estimated cost values regarding construction period of the system and estimated benefit values associated with system services and consequent regional impact. Monorail systems are not cheap. They cost much more than bus systems. However they usually cost less than light rail systems, considerably less than heavy rail commuter railroads, and much less than underground light rail or subway systems.Even though bus systems normally cost much less, in the case of true bus rapid transit where specially-designed buses run on grade separated bus- only roadways, the costs may exceed that of a monorail line. Generally, there are many variables which influence the price of building a monorail system. Included factors are as follow: 1 . Total length of the system, in many cases, costs can be reduced the longer a system is. 2. Topography, is the terrain flat or hilly. 3. Location, what is the access for construction equipment?Will there be heavy traffic or other impediments to construction? 4. Utilities, relocation of water mains, power lines, telephone lines, etc. Can have a significant effect on cost increases. 6. Passenger requirements, what size and number of vehicles are required? How much time will they wait at stations? 7. Speed, what are the speed requirements of the system? Are there long enough distances between stations so that a higher speed is desired? 8. Number of stations, each additional station adds to the cost. 9. Special structures, such as tunnels, bridges.The swift evolutional technical advancements are inseparable part of our contemporary urban societies. These ongoi ng evolutional modifications, which will continue to reconstruct future cities, are inevitably leading us to dissect the unsent influences on our lives. While, the conventional public transportation does not yet provide the comfort level of a private vehicle, probably the most sensible way to deal with the negative effects of such transformations is to employ recent technical enhancements in our everyday transit systems.However, the relatively high cost of monorail construction has undoubtedly been a factor in limiting the size of these operating systems. Although, soaring costs, long construction timeshare, and immense complexity of required design elements prevent this type of transportation ode to be looked at seriously within the metropolitan areas, the overall benefits make monorail as one the best solutions for institutional usages. ( Danna Parapets ) Bibliography Greenwood, F. H. , 1963. Monorails for Metropolitan Transportation. Small and Medium Enterprise Accessibility Monorails for Urban Community in Jakarta Contemporary societies heavily depend on transportation and modern social life is possible only if people have mobility on a daily basis?the ability to move around so that they can do what they have to do or like to do (Augurs, 2004).On the one hand, high personal mobility and the lifestyle choices are features of modern societies but costs and constraints involved in meeting this demand threaten communities in important ways via financial impositions, increases in pollution and greenhouse effects and reduction of local amenity, promotion of dispersed development and the aka up of farm or bush land and depletion of scarce fossil fuel reserves (G, 1999, up. 11-122). Nowadays almost every day mass media in Indonesia review the issues about poor public transport and increasing levels of traffic congestion in Jakarta.The problem of congestion and poor of public transportation services is the triggers that increased of using private c ars in Jakarta which causes the high acceleration rate of growth private motor vehicles, both motorcycles and cars since 1999 (Table. L). Congestion reducing approach by push the using of private motor vehicles and evitable of public transportation services is to be important. Failure of transportation systems will interfere with the development of an area, affecting the efficiency of the urban economy.Provides good public transportation service will encourage people to change from private vehicles to public transportation. Based on this fact, the people in Jakarta hope that Jakarta Provincial Government immediately revivalist the public transportation services. Given the fact how important to managing for excellence in public transportation, one of those benefits is public transportation improves the quality of life in immunities by providing safe, efficient, and economical transportation service (Klein, 2005, p. 154).The availability and cost effectiveness of public transportation is also vital to ensuring a healthy economy and improving mobility. Improvements of public transport will help to reduce congestion, air pollution, also oil and energy consumption. One of our government program is to build monorails in Jakarta. The reason to build monorails, because each and every day hundreds of thousands of passengers are carried on monorails, environment friendly and also cost effective (Greenwood, 1963, up. 6-29). Lots of experts who concluded Jakarta will getting worse of congestion if not solving efforts from now.Some of other causes is the lack of public transport services and undisciplined road users in Jakarta. There are several ways or way out that can be used as an approach to solve the congestion problem in Jakarta. Certainly can be done as an approach, such as reducing the use of private motor vehicles and increased ethics, traffic discipline on the highway and revitalization the public Jakarta that fairly representative and already operates nearly aro und 9 years old with Eng corridors more than 200 Km, but Trans-Jakarta has not become a right answer of mass transportation in Jakarta.A new innovation that will implement in Jakarta is to build monorails transportation system. Build the monorails transportation system is not a purely economic and financial feasibility, but more than for the vision of a city. Life and economic activity of a city, depending on how easily people to travel or mobility and how often they can do it to various destinations in the city.Main objective from monorails transportation system is to provides the opportunity for people to improve the quality with a more liable, trustworthy, safe, comfortable, affordable and more economical. Monorails have often been lumped together with flying cars as part of a naive, cartoonist vision of the future (Kennedy, 2005, p. 2). The monorails society defines monorails as â€Å"A single rail serving as a track for passenger or freight vehicles. In most cases rail is elev ated, but monorails can also run at grade, below grade or in subway tunnels (Kennedy, 2005, p. ). Plan to build a monorails in Jakarta is still in a long-term process, but it would be better if the government has already started planning for NY particular infrastructure and study from an international reference about what, why in order to prepare and support this project. The reasons to support of using monorails; 1 . Monorails are nonpolluting, quite and automated, all these characteristics are approximately the same for any electrically powered modern transport system on a guide- way or rails. 2.Safety, the record has been extremely good, with serious operational accidents not yet encountered. 3. Personal safety has also been exceptional, and systems operate in controlled environments, and extensive surveillance programs done by monitors and safety response are in place. 4. Advanced technology image, monorails are associated in the public mind with technological advancement and vi sionary concepts, This may be a considerable positive force, possibly generating considerable public and civic support for implementation. Augurs, 2004). Monorails are categorized in Zero Accident or the safest public transpiration systems. Because of their elevated design, accidents with surface traffic are impossible. Zero accidents translates to no system down time, less liability suits and most importantly, no injuries or deaths where street rail systems with grade crossings (light rail, trams r trellises) can't offer this kind of safety. Also, passenger safety is a primary consideration in the design of modern monorails system.Various manufacturers are ensure passengers safety and comfort during their trips. These kind of modern cars benefited recent interior design techniques and modern convenience features such as fully automated air conditioning systems, the vehicles' air spring suspension and unobstructed passageways to bring an open atmosphere to the passengers, and to pro vide a pleasant time for passengers rather than a time feeling boxed in, as they feel like having fun walking in the air.Monorails are completely electric and produce zero emissions and, as meaner of transpiration, monorails aid in the removal of large amount of various motor vehicle traffics and reduced emissions by tons of carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOCE) and nitrogen oxides (Knox). Environmentalists have long sought to be rid of pollution and congestion caused by auto traffic in every preserved natural area. There are several examples of green monorails track through Jungle areas.Since most 66 monorails trains run above the surface, wildlife and humans would be safer, noise levels would be lower, and elution would be greatly reduced. Concerning CA emission in passenger transport the rail transport (including light, heavy rail and monorails) is four times more efficient than the car and three times more than the plane on average (Figure 4. 5); also because m ost of the modern light rail and monorails systems have electrical engines, the required energy is supplied by a stationary power supply system fed by the public power grid or a distant small size power plant.This meaner, the mentioned systems does not produce any local exhaust emissions. Assessment of the economic effects associated with the proposed monorails system as been divided into estimated cost values regarding construction period of the system and estimated benefit values associated with system services and consequent regional impact. Monorail systems are not cheap. They cost much more than bus systems. However they usually cost less than light rail systems, considerably less than heavy rail commuter railroads, and much less than underground light rail or subway systems.Even though bus systems normally cost much less, in the case of true bus rapid transit where specially-designed buses run on grade separated bus- only roadways, the costs may exceed that of a monorail line. Generally, there are many variables which influence the price of building a monorail system. Included factors are as follow: 1 . Total length of the system, in many cases, costs can be reduced the longer a system is. 2. Topography, is the terrain flat or hilly. 3. Location, what is the access for construction equipment?Will there be heavy traffic or other impediments to construction? 4. Utilities, relocation of water mains, power lines, telephone lines, etc. Can have a significant effect on cost increases. 6. Passenger requirements, what size and number of vehicles are required? How much time will they wait at stations? 7. Speed, what are the speed requirements of the system? Are there long enough distances between stations so that a higher speed is desired? 8. Number of stations, each additional station adds to the cost. 9. Special structures, such as tunnels, bridges.The swift evolutional technical advancements are inseparable part of our contemporary urban societies. These ongoi ng evolutional modifications, which will continue to reconstruct future cities, are inevitably leading us to dissect the unsent influences on our lives. While, the conventional public transportation does not yet provide the comfort level of a private vehicle, probably the most sensible way to deal with the negative effects of such transformations is to employ recent technical enhancements in our everyday transit systems.However, the relatively high cost of monorail construction has undoubtedly been a factor in limiting the size of these operating systems. Although, soaring costs, long construction timeshare, and immense complexity of required design elements prevent this type of transportation ode to be looked at seriously within the metropolitan areas, the overall benefits make monorail as one the best solutions for institutional usages. ( Danna Parapets ) Bibliography Greenwood, F. H. , 1963. Monorails for Metropolitan Transportation.

Ogden Nash Poem “Kindly Unhitch That Star, Buddy” Essay

All people in the world live their entire lives to become something greater than they actually are. The quest for success in life is never-ending and people are never satisfied with what they have. In the poem â€Å"Kindly Unhitch that Star, Buddy† Nash warns not to dream for a goal that cannot be attained, in other words people’s long and arduous journey through life is pointless and success is unattainable. Nash uses diction effectively in kindly unhitch that star to show how peoples quests for success differs in many ways. He uses the phrase â€Å"†¦ others seem to think they’ll get just as far by devoting their evenings to the stuffy of the difference between brunettance and blondance† (Nash 21) to show the superficial paths people take to become successful. The key words in this phrase are â€Å"brunnetance and blondance† (21), which are words made up by Nash to show that a person believes that by changing their hair colour to stand out more will help them achieve success. Nash uses well-organized diction when he writes: Which perhaps is just as well because if everybody was a success nobody could be contemptuous of anybody else and everybody would start in all over again trying to be a bigger success than everybody else so they would have somebody to be contemptuous of and so on forevermore (28-31) The word contemptuous is used twice in this phrase and it adds to the effect of the entire stanza. Contemptuous is a strong and effective word used to describe the feeling of successful people towards the average Joe, inferior or worthless. He uses this word to emphasize that if everyone was equal they would trying to become more successful which proves the idea that the journey through life will never be complete enough even if you end up being successful. In addition to the authors efficient use of diction he uses parallel structure to show the same ideas of methods on how to attain success in life. In line nine and ten are constructed parallel to lines twenty-two to line twenty-three the first idea, â€Å"Indeed, everybody wants to be a wow, /but not everybody knows exactly how.†(9-10) is parallel to the idea â€Å"In short,  the world is filled with people trying to achieve success, /and half of them think they’ll get it by saying No and half of them by/saying yes.†(22-23) these ideas both express the idea that all people want to be successful and nobody wants to be a failure but people have different views on how to go about achieving success. Another example of parallel structure within â€Å"Kindly Unhitch that Star, Buddy† is when Nash states â€Å"†¦ other people think they will be able to put in more time at Palm/ Beach and the Ritz.†(13-14) is related to â€Å"†¦ others seem to think they’ll get just as far by devoting their evenings to the stuffy of the difference between brunettance and blondance† (19-21). These two lines both compel the ideas of the shallow methods people will try to become successful in the world. In lines thirteen and fourteen the superficial idea of hanging around already famous people at the Ritz and Palm Beach will make you successful as well, similarly the idea in the other quote shows the idea that someone believes they will become more prosperous in life by simply changing their hair colour. The third literary device that is very evident in Ogden Nash’s â€Å"Kindly Unhitch that Star, Buddy† is irony. The entire poem is written in a very ironic fashion but this irony is most apparent very early in the poem when Nash writes â€Å"And in celestial circles all the run-of-the-mill angels would rather be/ archangels or at least cherubim and seraphim,† (5-6) This is ironic because angels are supposed to be higher beings without any superficial desires or wishes of successfulness. Nash uses this to show that angels should be satisfied with what they are and this can be compared to the lives of many people in the real world trying futilely to become successful. Another example of irony is used when Ogden Nash coins the phrase â€Å"Some people think they will eventually bear diamonds instead of rhinestones, / Only by everlasting keeping their noses to their ghrinestones,† (11-12). Nash modifies this phrase slightly by changing grindstones to ghrinestones to show that people want to bear diamonds in life but in the end all they will achieve is rhinestones, or failure. Nash uses irony effectively and efficiently throughout the entire poem but it is distinctively evident in lines thirteen to twenty one when Nash writes about the different methods of success people try: And other people think they will be able to put in more time at Beach and the Ritz By not paying to much attendance at the office but rather in being brilliant by starts and fits. Some people after a full days work sit up all night getting a college education by correspondence, While others seem to think they’ll get just as far by devoting their evenings to the study of the difference in temperament between brunetteance and blondance (13-21) In these nine lines Ogden Nash describes four different schemes that particular people have to become successful in life. He covers a lot of methods of achieving success such as hard work, eccentricity, and popularity to show that none of these pursuits will make you a successful person because in the end all your efforts to strive for success are in vain. Through diction, parallel structure and irony Nash demonstrates how an average Joe’s journey through life and his striving to become successful will most likely end in failure. The theme of the quest for success is futile in â€Å"Kindly Unhitch that Star, Buddy† is a good example of people’s obsession with success and the value of their life based on that success, people should be satisfied with their life and not trying to live up to something that is unachievable.

Deciding whether to use flexible staffing Case Study

Deciding whether to use flexible staffing - Case Study Example Flexible Staffing Services, FFC, is a late entrant into the staffing industry priding itself in the provision of qualified human resource. Kaiser Manufacturing Company on the other hand is an experienced company operating in the manufacture and sale of agricultural products. The company that has operated for the past fifty ears remained stuck in the traditional system of managing human resource thus resulting in the modern operational stalemate in the company. Kaiser Manufacturing Company, KMC, continues to experience diminish demand for its products while the labor costs in the company continues to rise owing to the fact that the company has an older workforce. Such a workforce boasts a well of experience in the traditional mechanisms of both production and marketing but do not appreciate the changes in the market a feature that validates the company’s dwindling fortunes. The company therefore requires the services of a contemporary staffing company, one that understands the industry and will sustain the provision and effective management of employees at the organization thus enhancing the company’s profitability. Flexible Staffing services provide employees in unique packages that safeguard the interests of the client. The situation at KMC requires a pool of employees hired in appropriate mechanisms in order to low the escalating cost of labor at the company. The Flexible Staffing Services promise the diverse workforce that the company require. The company furnishes its clients with numerous classes of employees qualified in varied sections of an organization including production, management, technical and clerical. KMC requires such a wide range of employees a feature that makes the staffing company essential. The company promises a group of unified employees besides the fact that the company will provide KMC with a large pool of possible employees to choose from (Klemmer, 2009). Among the primary

Zetioun, the Man Who Quit Money and the Hero With a Thousand Faces Essay

Zetioun, the Man Who Quit Money and the Hero With a Thousand Faces - Essay Example th three main stages: the hero’s departure from the common world (his/her community), the hero’s initiation into the new or strange world and finally the hero’s return to the normal and former lands where they use the skills built up while in the foreign world to help their communities. â€Å"A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man (Campbell 15).† A close examination of the two books â€Å"Zietoun† by Eggers and â€Å"The man who quit money† by Sundeen clearly fit in the category of mythical stories described here as they reveal the controversial lives of the two main characters Zeitoun and Suelo away from their homes where they battle life out to make ends meet. Zeitoun is said to have come from Syria to live in America where he meets his wife Cathy Zeitoun, a Christian- Muslim convert and with whom they later bear children. Suelo on the other hand abandons his home in America where he worked as a cook, traverses the deserts of Utah and resides within the caves in the desert far from his fellow bipeds, a decision which later on sterns his long term friend. â€Å"In the twenty first year of the twenty first century, a man standing by the highway in the middle of America pulled from his pocket his life savings- thirty dollars- lay it in a phone booth and walked away (Sundeen 1).† The beginning of Suelo and Zeitoun’s stories, narrating how they left their original homelands, went and lived in foreign spheres conforms to Campbell’s mythical format at the first stage where the hero leaves his home and settles in a foreign land on a call to adventure. According to Campbell, the hero often experience several trials while in the strange world as part of initiation into the new world, which they must always overcome. These challenges define the

Leadership Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 4000 words

Leadership - Essay Example There are some people in the organization who have tremendous qualities, which can be used for the growth of the organization. A good leader exploits those qualities and makes them unlocked for the attainment of the ultimate objectives of the organization. Some people get misunderstood with leaders and managers. An ideal leader always focuses on the people. The leaders inspire the people; motivate them to do right things and to shape the entities. A leadership has to perform the common activities on the organizational scenario, such as planning, organizing, directing and controlling. It has always been a debate whether the leaders are born or they are made. This debate between nature and nurture in leadership context has been an age-old topic of debate in management field. It is because some people have the innate leadership qualities. For example they are quite outspoken, very aggressive. Further they have natural intelligence. But an effective leadership needs some more traits beyo nd these qualities. The above mentioned qualities certainly are very useful for being good leaders, but it doesn’t mean that if they are absent in the persons, they cannot prove themselves as leaders. The best example of this was Mahatma Gandhi, a charismatic leader, who has a tremendous influence on people. The complicated and huge Indian society despite all its heterogeneous aspects, stood behind him, followed his ideals. Controlling such a hug and diverse nation like India was definitely not an easy task. Mahatma never stood in the benchmark of a good leadership; still he was one of the most influential leaders in the whole world. There are some exclusive qualities of the leaders, which are not found in some of the most influential leaders of the world. Still they have proved themselves as the leaders. No doubt, there are some born leaders. Many leaders have honed their leadership through extensive practice. It is because of their readiness to adapt them and equipped them with some qualities which were previously not in them. Importance of Effective Leadership on Organizational Scenario: In the changing market dynamics the people with various profiles join the organizations. There is fierce competition in the business world. In such crucial circumstances, the organization cannot survive just on the basis of knowledge. No doubt, the sound business knowledge is advantageous but for making things happen. However the effective leadership qualities cannot be neglected. For the survival and growth of the organization, it needs to develop certain strategies effectively. If there is a competition between equally competent organizations, and if the one organization is lacking effective leadership, and the other has a very strong leadership, ultimately the winner will be the organization with effective leadership. Effective leadership is regarded as the highest level of interpersonal dynamics. Learning Outcomes from playing scenarios: To sharpen the leadership qualities among the leaders the simulation has become a smart method. Simulation is nothing but a real life situation in which the trainers have been given the training of becoming the perfect leaders and not just a boss. For this I played games in which five different scenarios were given to me. I played the role the boss. I was not supposed to be just a boss, but to show my leadership qualities. All these scenes were useful for developing the fundamental skill of leadership and

A critical review of Kosovo Is Not Serbia Assignment

A critical review of Kosovo Is Not Serbia - Assignment Example However, the author fails to explain why Kosovo people are not allowed in America. Additionally he presents a picture of Americans discriminating Kosovo people. What he fails to address is what kind of life do the American live in Kosovo. In his discussion of soap operas that are managed by women, the author fails to explain the role of men in the same films. Furthermore, the article seems to criticize the films more and provide their transformations without giving the positive aspects of the soap opera. In discussing the situation in Serbia, the author provides the current status of Serbia. The article demonstrates that The Serbian language is no longer widely spoken. The county has been taken up by English men. The article notes that with almost every Serb ethnically cleansed, there's nobody left to speak it. The author further notes that Serbia lies in ruins. There are just empty Orthodox churches turned into tourist attractions while the town abounds with pizza and burger joints with English-language menus. Serbia too faces her challenges including traffic jam. However, the author seems to be biased in the discussion of the two countries. The article speaks much better of Kosovo than Serbia. For instance, the author blames Serbia for Kosovo’s problems. The author speaks of â€Å"the war crimes committed by Serbian military forces against the Albanian population, which led to the bombings by NATO in 1999† (Tesanovic Pg. 1, 2014). He did give any instance when Kosovo did something negative or inhumane.