Assessment 3: Research Essay

Module: Maritime Security and Law

Solent University (Warsash Maritime School)

Course: BSc (Hons) Nautical Science

Semester: 1, Academic Year: 2025/2026

Submission Date: 20 January 2026

Weighting: 40% of Module Mark

Context

The Gulf of Guinea remains a hotspot for maritime piracy and armed robbery against ships, impacting global trade routes and regional economies. This assessment requires students to investigate the current security challenges in this area, considering factors like economic disparities, weak governance, and international responses. By analyzing these issues, you will gain insights into effective strategies for enhancing maritime safety and the role of legal frameworks in combating threats.

Task Description

Produce a 2500-word research essay that evaluates the effectiveness of international and regional initiatives in addressing piracy in the Gulf of Guinea. Your essay should cover key incidents, stakeholder roles, legal instruments such as the Yaoundé Code of Conduct, and recommendations for improved security measures. Use case studies to illustrate points and discuss implications for nautical operations.

Requirements

• Word count: 2500 words (+/- 10%), not including references or appendices.
• Format: Times New Roman font, size 12, double-spaced. Include a cover page with module details, your name, and word count.
• Structure: Abstract, introduction, literature review, analysis sections, conclusion, and Harvard reference list.
• Sources: Minimum of 10 sources, prioritizing peer-reviewed articles, official reports, and legal documents.
• Submission: Submit electronically through the university’s learning platform by the due date. Penalties apply for late work per Solent policy.
• Originality: Ensure all content is your own; use Turnitin for plagiarism checks.

Marking Criteria / Rubric

1. Knowledge of Topic (25%): Shows comprehensive understanding of piracy issues and security initiatives in the Gulf of Guinea.
2. Analysis and Evaluation (30%): Critically assesses effectiveness of measures with evidence-based arguments.
3. Research Quality (20%): Integrates diverse, credible sources with proper Harvard referencing.
4. Structure and Organization (15%): Clear logical progression, well-defined sections, and cohesive writing.
5. Academic Writing (10%): High standard of grammar, spelling, and formal tone.

Piracy in the Gulf of Guinea has escalated over the past decade, with attacks often targeting oil tankers and crew for ransom. Regional navies struggle due to limited resources, leading to inconsistent patrols and response times. International collaborations, such as those under the Yaoundé Architecture, aim to coordinate efforts among coastal states for better information sharing and joint operations. However, challenges persist in enforcement, as corruption and porous borders undermine these initiatives. Effective countermeasures include capacity building for local forces and enhanced legal prosecutions to deter perpetrators. One study highlights how integrated maritime domain awareness systems can reduce incident rates by improving real-time monitoring (Ukeje and Ela, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1080/09700161.2019.1665978).

Kamal-Deen, A., 2019. The anatomy of Gulf of Guinea piracy. Naval War College Review, 72(1), pp.93-118. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26607106

Onuoha, F.C., 2020. Piracy and maritime security in the Gulf of Guinea: Trends, concerns, and propositions. Journal of the Middle East and Africa, 11(4), pp.365-383. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/21520844.2020.1848904

Jacobsen, K.L. and Nordby, J.R., 2021. Maritime security in the Gulf of Guinea. Nordic Africa Institute. Available at: https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1524242/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Bueger, C. and Edmunds, T., 2022. Blue crime: Conceptualising transnational organised crime at sea. Marine Policy, 135, p.104852. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104852

Otto, L., 2023. Maritime piracy in the Gulf of Guinea: A threat to regional stability. African Security Review, 32(2), pp.145-162. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/10246029.2023.2189015