Carpe Diem!

Carpe Diem!

Efforts in making our environment safe and healthy to live are the responsibility of every mature homo sapiens. We have ourselves to blame for all the problems arisen, in the form of polluted air and waters, and increasing degradation of our environment. Things happened for a reason, and as human beings, we must always take notes of all these signs.

The oceans and inland fresh water lakes are our treasured resources. With the use of advance technologies, we can now measure, monitor and manage these resources in the most efficient way possible. At least, we now have at our disposals, the tools and infrastructure to make this happen. We have nobody to blame but ourselves, if we ignore these measure, monitor and manage paradigm.

Our country is unique because of these resources. In the dilemma between sustaining progress and maintaining the well-being of the nation, we must not lose sight of the need to preserve these ecosystems. The progress level of any civilization can be measured on the sustainability parameter. What is the use of progress if we end-up losing our natural resources, be it our land and/or our waters? What is the use of progress if it means destroying any valuable commodity that we have and substituting them with things that will certainly destroy us in the near future?

God have certainly gave us a rich and tremendous natural treasure. The time has come for us to be serious in guarding and protecting our land and waters. We must take note of the potential sources of destruction and find ways to remedy or to circumvent those threats. Nevertheless, the path to destruction has been initiated. We must now take tough decision, and act fast. There is no time to lose. But, all the urgency to act.

The potential threats are similar to what are being faced by countries at the global scale. The world is flat! Nowadays, it is quite difficult to differentiate specific problems faced by a country. All problems seem to have a global edge to them. What we are facing today maybe a similar threat being tackled by the Americans or Europeans, currently, or some time ago. We must now take stock and learned lessons from the others. This is the clever way.

As an engineering research fraternity, we can contribute to maintain the well-being of our natural resources. At any one of the three M’s, i.e. measure, monitor and manage mantras, we can certainly contribute something. We should play our role in sustaining the health of our oceans and fresh-water resources, be it lakes or rivers. We owe it to our future generations. We would want them to praise us, and not otherwise, for all our well-intentioned actions.

The resources may have the characteristics of the three D’s, i.e. Dull, Dirty and Dangerous, but we must venture into these research opportunities. It is far much easier for a trained engineer to become a biologist, than a trained biologist to become an engineer. This is the fact. The onus is on the engineer to make things happen. And it is us, engineer, that will hold the key to any potential changes in how human see the God-given resources, and in exploiting them. As what someone once said, “with great power comes great responsibility”, we have no option but to take charge and be responsible.

Carpe diem quam minimum credula postero!

To Where Do We Go From Here?

Research direction is a crucial element for any parties engaging in real problem-solving or life enrichment types of research efforts. A clear direction (or goals) will act as the catalyst in the good times, and reliable enough motivator in the downturn phase. With the goals, we can really “move forward”, i.e. in the research sense. If not, any outcome (no matter how novel it is at the micro or macro-scale) is deemed useless. As the saying goes, “If a skipper doesn’t know where to go, any port is the right port”. So, let us start with a clear research direction. But, can research direction be crystallized? As in “cast in stone” or fixed? As researchers, we seriously hope and assume this is the case. Alas, reality does not normally follow our desire. Research direction can be short and long terms. The point of contention is: how long can the agreed research direction be viable? 5 years? 10 years? 20 years? I do not think there is an easy answer to this question. ”It all depends”. This is possibly the best answer one can think of.

Research direction is paramount in ensuring we are working towards a fixed target. It is easier to aim as compared to something that is in a perpetual motion. That is why a forward looking analysis is the pre-requisite. Forward enough in order to anticipate possible breakthrough, and the technology cycle. Future scenario planning is a must. Nevertheless, this is a not an ability for fortune-telling, rather a projection based on intelligent analysis via concrete proof and life experiences. As much as we want our agreed research direction to be vivid and lucid, the element of flexibility to life challenges ensures that the direction is robust. So, on what motivation or basis should the research direction be carved? Is it economic? Is it for societal well-being? Is it for Capacity-building? Certainly, the rational we opt for will determine the kind of research direction we will end-up with. If you think economics per say, element of knowledge may not be of clear importance. Vice-versa, if the rational is grounded on advancement of knowledge, the element of clear economic returns may not be feasible. This is among the trade-offs we have to deal with.

Underwater research efforts are firmly grounded on solid justifications for sustainability of life on earth. The undisputed rational of forming a research direction in relation to underwater/marine resources may be convincing to some. But, there are others who are still oblivious to the arguments (read: explanations). Research direction which goes out to tackle and ensure sustainable exploitation of the marine resources is so novel, that it is difficult to fathom the doubters. Research direction is not the end, but it indicates the beginning. Destinations will never be reached if we do nothing but dreaming. Real efforts must be invested. This is akin to stumble upon a beacon while searching for guidance. We must walk towards the beacon. The beacon will never “walk” to us. No matter how strong and viable are the research directions that we have carved, we still need to put the efforts through. “No pain, No gain” certainly rings true. The anticipation and customary doubts on the chosen the research goals are part of the package. With uncertainty looming, the path will only be taken by the determined. Yes, winners are picked from the braves, neither from the cowards nor the pessimists. Underwater-related research is here to stay. And, we sure look forward for a more active participation from others.

“Setting goals is the first step in turning the invisible into the visible”

Shared responsibilites

Each one of us has their own set of responsibilities that need to be performed. It can be those personal ones, or/and which involves others. Making decisions to execute the tasks are solely dependent on each person involved. The tasks may be urgent and important, but the final act of delivery is never guaranteed. This is where free-will roam wild. The repercussion of non-delivery will be felt by all, either directly or indirectly. The interdependency of life on earth guaranteed this outcome. The limit of damage can sometimes be catastrophic, and has no relation to the size and type of action. The man-made disasters which have occurred in past centuries were mostly due to ignorance to those small seemingly insignificant indicators and danger signals. Non-performance of a particular person in any organisations is not unusual. The after-effect of such behaviour may be minor or otherwise. The organisations can be a real infrastructure or a project which has its own structure and inter/intra linkages. The ability for an organisation or a project to absorb this minor lax will determine whether it will survive in the long run. There must be some sort of absorption system in the organisation for this organisational behaviour. The robustness of adaptation to changes will be crucial. Antagonist elements may always be present, but the system robustness will be able to handle any such disturbance. The system is such that no modules or components are too important to the normal running of the process.

If only everyone who has some form of data and mode of communication take the necessary action to address the problem, then the normal incidence of organisational frictions and clashes can be avoided. The elimination of energy usage to this futile entanglement must be minimised. It can never be eliminated, but minimise it can be done. The only condition is that the person taking charge must know the task execution scope. Situational-aware and being conscious of the perimeters of influence are fundamental, so as not to trigger unnecessary dissatisfaction. Responsibilities are too big to be executed by a single person. The job must be shared optimally between capable personalities. Each one of us must deliver and execute our tasks to the best of our abilities. There are no other options. The understanding and execution of shared responsibilities are paramount. Completions of the responsibilities are normally tied with a clear understanding of awards and recognition. Nevertheless, working sincerely is the best way forward. Awards and recognition can never be enough to compensate for the sacrifices that we have made. Hence, the tendency to feel dejected is always present. This is the reason responsibilities must be done on the shoulder of sincerity and trustworthiness. No amount of awards can really commensurate the efforts that we have planted.