Administration is direct and the necessary interdis- 
ciplinary skills and capabilities to achieve govern- 
mental objectives are under the span of control of 
a single responsible official; (2) Functions are easily 
identifiable to the public, and the goals of Govern- 
ment are visible and obvious; and (3) Energies and 
loyalties of the employees are focused on a given 
objective. 
The disadvantages and problems associated with 
functional organization are: (1) It is impossible to 
cleanly divide all the programs and work of Govern- 
ment into a few major functional categories with 
discrete responsibilities; (2) There is danger that sub- 
ordinate and related activities will be inadvertently 
suppressed or lost sight of because of the singleness 
of purpose; (3) Unity of control and direction over 
a functional area can lead to centralization of au- 
thority, monolithic attitudes, and constrained debate, 
thus reducing the benefits derived from constructive 
disagreement; and (4) A functional organization that 
is staffed and equipped from top to bottom to per- 
form the necessary activities without outside assist- 
ance can easily drift into an attitude of complete 
independence and indifference to external considera- 
tions. 
Organization by Resource 
Organization by resource is predicated on as- 
sembling governmental capabilities into a single unit 
that can accomplish the multiple objectives of a 
single target resource or target groups. Thus, 
Resource/Person organization is based upon orient- 
ing administration around classes of natural re- 
sources or identifiable public groups, e.g., veterans, 
labor, farmers, business (commerce), banks, forests, 
fisheries, marine mammals, ocean shippers, and 
truckers. Under a “resource” organizational scheme, 
some if not all of the functional activities are in- 
cluded under a comprehensive management system 
that embraces all of the program objectives that use, 
impact, or directly affect the resource base. 
Advantages of organizing by resource include: 
(1) Use and protection of a resource is simplified 
when all functional activities relating to the specific 
resource are in one organization; (2) Proficiency is 
gained through knowledge of the resource base as a 
result of in-depth involvement with the resource; and 
(3) Coordination of resource use and protection 
activities is easier when functional activities are 
focused through a resource-oriented organization. 
Disadvantages of organizing by resource include: 
(1) The same organization must perform a number 
of specialized functions; therefore, a resource or- 
ganization with multiple missions may not be capable 
of matching the proficiencies of an organization 
based on a single function; (2) Achievement 
of functional goals may be made more difficult by 
emphasizing ong resource’s values over other re- 
source activities through an organizational focus on 
a single resource; (3) Constitutent groups with a 
stake in a particular resource may be able to unduly 
influence an organization which is responsible only 
for a single resource base; and (4) Parochialism can 
develop over time if an organization deals solely 
with one resource and is remote from the considera- 
tion of other natural resources. 
Singling out the ocean as an integrating theme for 
a resource-oriented organization tacitly implies that 
there are characteristics and factors which distin- 
guish ocean resources from land and other resources. 
There have been no comparable proposals that there 
be a “land” agency as such, and clearly such a 
suggestion would be considered nonsense. Elliot 
Richardson identified four unique factors that dif- 
ferentiate ocean-based efforts from land-based ef- 
forts: * 
® Ocean resources are common property resources 
and are therefore wholly in the public domain. 
Decisions on allocation of ocean resources and 
resolution of conflicting usage are public policy 
decisions for governmental institutions to deal 
with in the public interest. 
@ Ocean activities interact and impact one another 
in a more direct way than comparable land- 
based activities. Remote uses may have a per- 
vasive influence on a corresponding use some 
distance away; thus a different kind of inter- 
disciplinary and interjurisdictional management 
effort is needed. 
e Technology needed for development of marine 
resources is significantly different from that as- 
sociated with similar land-based resource de- 
velopment. 
e The ocean constitutes an area in which US. in- 
terests butt up against the interests of other 
countries. Therefore, there is an important inter- 
national ingredient involved in resolving ocean 
problems. 
Whether the ocean, as a resource, is a sensible 
integrating theme for organizing the Federal ocean 
effort must be determined on the basis of these dis- 
tinguishing characteristics weighed against the or- 
ganizational options of “function” versus “resource” 
and modified by other reorganizational efforts in the 
Federal Government that may affect any possible 
reorganization of Federal ocean activities. 
Separation of Development and Regulatory Activities 
Governmental functions can be ciassified genert- 
cally as: (1) development (promotion), (2) regula- 
tion, (3) research, and (4) monitoring/services. How 
®US. Congress, House, Committee on Merchant Marine and 
Fisheries, National Ocean Policy, Hearings before Subcommittee 
on Oceanography. 94th Cong., 2d sess., Ser. 94-43, 1976, pp. 8-9. 
IX-27 
