The entry into force of the 2001 UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage
On 2 January 2009 the Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage (CPUCH; Paris, 2001) entered into force for the first 20 States that decided to become parties to it. The CPUCH can be seen as a reasonable defence against the disastrous regime on underwater cultural heritage set forth by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS; Montego Bay, 1982). In fact, the UNCLOS allows for a “freedom-of-fishing” regime where a State which has a cultural link with the objects cannot prevent the pillage of its historical heritage. The picture is worsened by the reference in the UNCLOS to “the law of salvage and other rules of admiralty” which have been intended by United States courts as meaning the application of a first-come-first-served approach in many cases relating to the underwater cultural heritage. The basic defensive tools included in the CPUCH are the elimination of the undesirable effects of the law of salvage and finds, the exclusion of a first-come-first-served approach for the heritage found on the continental shelf, and the strengthening of regional cooperation.
Underwater Cultural Heritage and International Law
1. The evolution of international law on underwater cultural heritage 2. Defining underwater cultural heritage 3. Ownership and other interests in underwater cultural heritage 4. Sunken state vessels and aircraft 5. Application of salvage law and the law of finds 6. Commercial exploitation of underwater cultural heritage 7. Rights, jurisdiction and duties under general international law 8. UNESCO Convention 2001: jurisdictional mechanisms 9. UNESCO Convention 2001: implementation issues 10. UNESCO Convention 2001: further matters Final reflections.
The qualitative research interview
Background  Interviews are among the most familiar strategies for collecting qualitative data. The different qualitative interviewing strategies in common use emerged from diverse disciplinary perspectives resulting in a wide variation among interviewing approaches. Unlike the highly structured survey interviews and questionnaires used in epidemiology and most health services research, we examine less structured interview strategies in which the person interviewed is more a participant in meaning making than a conduit from which information is retrieved.