MILITARY ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN ARMY by HENDRIK ADOLF ...

381 Pages·2017·9.19 MB·English

MILITARY ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN
ARMY
by
HENDRIK ADOLF PETRUS SMIT
Dissertation presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of
Arts and Social Sciences at Stellenbosch University.
Supervisor: Professor JH van der Merwe
December 2017
Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za
ii
DECLARATION
By submitting this dissertation electronically, I declare that the entirety of the work contained
therein is my own, original work, that I am the sole author thereof (save to the extent explicitly
otherwise stated), that reproduction and publication thereof by Stellenbosch University will not
infringe any third party rights and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it
for obtaining any qualification.
Signature: H.A.P. Smit
Date: December 2017
Copyright © 2017 Stellenbosch University
All rights reserved
Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za
iii
SUMMARY

Traditional military activities, such as fighting wars are inherently destructive. Modern
militaries undertake a diverse range of military activities; use large areas for military training and
operational purposes; and they are confronted by a global focus on environmentally responsible
behaviour. These conditions compel militaries to ensure that soldiers display the correct attitude
toward, behaviour in and knowledge about the diverse physical, social and cultural environments
they occupy and impact upon. In South Africa this is not only a moral obligation but a legal
imperative too.
The aim of this research is to determine the military environmental literacy (MEL)
(attitude, behaviour and knowledge regarding the environment in which the military operate) of
the members of the South African Army (SA Army). To reach this aim, existing environmental
questionnaires were evaluated to ascertain their suitability for use in a SA Army context. None of
them was usable to effectively gauge MEL in a SA Army context. Consequently, an iterative
process was initiated to develop a tailor-made, valid, reliable and organisation-specific
questionnaire to assess MEL in a SA Army context.
The resulting questionnaire comprises a covering letter elucidating the study, a section with
15 attitude items and a section with 13 items related to reported behaviour, both employing a 5-
point Likert-type scale. A third section has 14 multiple choice items to test the environmental
knowledge of respondents. The three sections form the subscales of the questionnaire to measure
the three components of MEL. Six open-ended questions constituted a fourth section in which
respondents are required to answer questions and motivate their answers. The final section aims
to elicit soldier biographical and service history information. A letter of consent that had to be
filled in and signed by each respondent, accompanied the questionnaire.
A stratified sample was procured from the nine different formations of the SA Army.
During the procurement of the stratified sample the correct percentages of possible respondents,
based on the size of formations as well as the rank and gender proportions, was ensured. Twenty-
five units situated throughout South Africa were selected. Of the 1203 questionnaires distributed
to the units, 1090 usable questionnaires were returned.
The returned questionnaires were scanned and the data was extracted using Formware
software. The database was analysed using the Lisrel 8.8 program. Analysis of variance was done
for the variables and Fisher’s least significant difference post hoc tests were performed for
instances where the data rendered significant differences. Pearson correlation coefficients were
Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za
iv
calculated to analyse the continuous data. The qualitative data was analysed using content analysis
to investigate the military environmental narrative.
The main products of the research are an organisation-specific, valid and reliable
questionnaire to assess MEL in a SA Army context and a baseline for MEL in the SA Army and
its nine formations. For all three components of MEL attitude (mean of 1.8 on a five-point Likert
scale), behaviour (mean of 1.8) and knowledge (mean of 65%) respondents recorded high scores.
The composite MEL of 75% denotes a high level of MEL for soldiers of the SA Army. Attitude,
behaviour and knowledge scores were recorded for rank, gender, age, time employed in the South
African DOD, deployment experience, home language, exposure to environmental positions in the
Army, environmental and geography education and level of general education. The correlation
between the components revealed that the strongest correlation exists between attitude and
behaviour (r = 0.56) with knowledge and attitude second (r = 0.35) and knowledge and behaviour
(r = 0.29) third. These results are supported by those of the qualitative analysis.
The main recommendation is that the findings should be used to enhance the quality of
environmental education and training in the SA Army through the Environmental Services
subdivision which is responsible for environmental education and training in the SA Army.
KEYWORDS
Corporate environmental policy statement, military environmental attitude, military
environmental behaviour, environmental implementation plan, military environmental knowledge,
environmental management system, military environmental questionnaire, military environmental
literacy, South African Army, South African DOD, qualitative research, questionnaire research,
mixed-methods research
Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za
v
OPSOMMING
Tradisionele militêre aktiwiteite soos oorlogmaak, is inherent vernietigend. Moderne
weermagte onderneem ‘n diverse reeks militêre aktiwiteite; hulle gebruik groot gebiede vir beide
oefenterreine en operasionele teaters; en hulle word gekonfronteer deur ‘n globale fokus op
omgewingsverantwoordbare optrede. Hierdie omstandighede dwing weermagte om te verseker dat
hul soldate die korrekte houding teenoor optrede in en kennis van die diverse fisiese, sosiale en
kulturele omgewings waarbinne hulle opereer, sal hê. In Suid-Afrika is dit nie net ʼn morele
verantwoordelikheid nie, maar ook ʼn wetlike vereiste.
Die doel van hierdie navorsing is om die militêre omgewingsgeletterdheid (MOG)
(houding, optrede en kennis van die omgewing waarbinne militêre optrede plaasvind) van lede van
die Suid-Afrikaanse Leër (SAL) vas te stel. Om hierdie doel te bereik is bestaande
omgewingsvraelyste geëvalueer met die oog op hul geskiktheid om in die konteks van die SAL
gebruik te word. Geeneen was geskik om die MOG in die SAL te bepaal nie. Gevolglik is ʼn
iteratiewe proses van stapel gestuur om ʼn pasgemaakte, geldige, betroubare en organisasie-
spesifieke vraelys te ontwikkel wat MOG in die konteks van die SAL kan meet.
Die vraelys wat uit hierdie proses voortgevloei het, bestaan uit ʼn dekbrief wat die studie
verduidelik, ʼn afdeling met 15 items oor houding teenoor die omgewing en 13 items wat oor self-
gerapporteerde optrede handel. In beide afdelings word ʼn vyfpunt Likert-skaal gebruik. ʼn Derde
afdeling bestaan uit 14 veelkeuse kennisitems wat die militêre omgewingskennis van respondente
toets. Hierdie drie afdelings vorm die subskale van die vraelys en toets die drie komponente van
MOG. Ses oop vrae maak die vierde afdeling uit. In hierdie afdeling moet respondente ʼn vraag
beantwoord en hul antwoorde motiveer. Die laaste afdeling bestaan uit vrae oor die biografiese en
militêre diensgeskiedenis van respondente. ʼn Toestemmingsbrief wat deur elke respondent ingevul
en onderteken moes word, het die vraelys vergesel.
ʼn Gestratifiseerde steekproef is uit die nege formasies van die Leër getrek. Daar is verseker
dat die korrekte persentasies van moontlike respondente, gebaseer op die grootte van formasies en
die rang en geslagsverhoudings binne elke formasie in die steekproef gereflekteer is. Vyf-en-
twintig eenhede, geografies versprei deur Suid-Afrika, is geselekteer. Van die 1203 vraelyste wat
versprei is, is 1090 bruikbare vraelyste terugontvang.
Die bruikbare vraelyste is geskandeer en die data is met behulp van Formware sagteware
onttrek. Die databasis is met die Lisrel 8.8-program ontleed. Variansie-analise van die
veranderlikes is onderneem en Fisher se kleinste betekenisvolle verskil post hoc toets is uitgevoer
in gevalle waar die data beduidende verskille tussen die veranderlikes aangedui het. Pearson
Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za
vi
korrelasiekoëffisiente is vir die kontinue data bereken. Die kwalitatiewe data is ontleed met behulp
van inhoudsanalise om die militêre omgewingsnarratief te ondersoek.
Die belangrikste produkte van hierdie navorsing is ʼn organisasie-spesifieke, geldige en
betroubare vraelys waarmee MOG in die SAL konteks gemeet kan word. Die vraelysdata het ʼn
basislyn vir MOG in die SAL sowel as die nege formasies van die Leër verskaf. Vir al drie
komponente van MOG, naamlik houding (gemiddeld 1.8 op ʼn vyfpunt Likert skaal), optrede
(gemiddeld 1.8) en kennis (65%) het respondente hoë tellings behaal, ʼn aanduiding dat die MOG
van die SAL se soldate hoog is. Die saamgestelde MOG vir die SAL van 75% dui op ‘n hoë vlak
van MOG in die Leër. Tellings vir houding, optrede en kennis is bereken volgens rang, geslag,
ouderdom, tyd in diens van die Departement van Verdediging, ontplooiingsondervinding, huistaal,
blootstelling aan omgewingsposisies in die Leër, omgewings- en geografie opvoeding en algemene
opvoedingsvlak. Met die berekening van die korrelasie tussen die komponente van MOG is bevind
dat die grootste korrelasie (r = 0.56) tussen houding en optrede voorkom met die korrelasie tussen
kennis en houding ( r = 0.35) in die tweede plek. Die swakste korrelasie (r = 0.29) bestaan tussen
kennis en optrede. Hierdie resultate is goed ondersteun deur dié van die analise van die
kwalitatiewe data.
Die belangrikste aanbeveling van hierdie studie is dat hierdie bevindings gebruik moet
word om die kwaliteit van omgewingsopvoeding en -opleiding in die SAL verder te verbeter deur
die Subdirektoraat Omgewingsdienste, die afdeling verantwoordelik vir omgewingsopvoeding en
-opleiding in die SAL.
TREFWOORDE
Korporatiewe omgewingsbeleidstandpunt, militêre omgewingshouding, militêre
omgewingsoptrede, omgewingsimplementeringsplan, militêre omgewingskennis,
omgewingsbestuurstelsel, militêre omgewingsvraelys, militêre omgewingsgeletterdheid, Suid-
Afrikaanse Leër, Suid-Afrikaanse Departement van Verdediging, kwalitatiewe navorsing,
vraelysnavorsing, gemengde-metodes navorsing
Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za
vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I sincerely thank:
 Professor JH van der Merwe, my supervisor, for his patient guidance over a long period of
time. You have been a true mentor.
 Professor Martin Kidd, of the Centre for Statistical Consultation at Stellenbosch University
for the many hours spent discussing the intricacies of exploratory and explanatory
statistics.
 Sub-Committee A of Stellenbosch University for two grants to develop and print the
military environmental literacy questionnaire and to execute the survey.
 The National Research Foundation for two grants to disseminate research results at
international conferences.
 Focus group members and members of the questionnaire evaluation panels for their time
and valuable input.
 Research assistants for assistance during the execution of the survey.
 Colleagues at the Military Academy, especially Andre, Hennie, Babalwa, Godwin,
Gerhard, Jacques, Noelle and Tyrel, for allowing me space to finish the study and for their
constant support.
 Copyeditors, Dr. PH de Necker, and B Russel-Smith for your thorough and methodical
scrutiny of the initial versions of the thesis.
 Aan my ouers: Baie dankie dat julle ALTYD daar is vir my. Julle is die beste!
 Aan my skoonouers: Dankie dat julle my ouers is, en nie my skoonouers nie.
 Aan die familie en vriende: Dankie vir die ondersteuning tydens moeilike tye. Dit is ‘n
seën om julle in my lewe te hê.
 Aan Surana en Sumari: Daar is nie woorde nie. Julle is my alles. Dankie.
 Aan my Hemelse Vader: Alle eer aan U.
Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za
viii
CONTENTS
ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY IN THE MILITARY 1
1.1 THE ENVIRONMENT IN CONTEXT ........................................................................ 2
The environment as a holistic concept................................................................. 2
Environmental literacy and military environmental literacy ........................... 3
1.2 THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPERATIVE OF THE SANDF ................................... 5
1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS, AIM AND OBJECTIVES .............................................. 6
1.4 METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH ........................................................................... 8
A place in military geography .............................................................................. 8
The geographical paradigm .................................................................................. 9
A mixed-methods approach ................................................................................ 10
1.5 SURVEY METHODS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY .............................. 12
Questionnaire structuring .................................................................................. 12
Questionnaire reliability ..................................................................................... 13
Questionnaire validity ......................................................................................... 14
Selection of the survey sample ............................................................................ 17
1.6 DATA ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 18
Quantitative data analysis .................................................................................. 19
Qualitative narrative analysis ............................................................................ 21
Theoretical models of MEL ................................................................................ 24
1.7 RESEARCH DESIGN AND TIMELINE ................................................................... 25
1.8 DISSERTATION STRUCTURE ................................................................................. 28
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN THE SANDF 30
2.1 MILITARY ACTIVITIES AND THE ENVIRONMENT: A PARADOX .............. 30
2.2 MILITARY GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH .................. 33
2.3 DAWNING OF MILITARY ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND
POLICY IN SOUTH AFRICA .............................................................................................. 35
2.4 IMPERATIVES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN THE SANDF . 37
The conservation focus of military environmental management .................... 37
From conservation to military integrated environmental management ........ 38
Environmental implementation plans for the DOD ......................................... 42
International cooperation in military environmental management ............... 45
An environmental management system for the DOD ...................................... 46
Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za
ix
2.5 COMPREHENDING ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY LEVELS IN THE
SOUTH AFRICAN ARMY .................................................................................................... 47
ORGANISATION-SPECIFIC QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN 49
3.1 INSTRUMENTS TO MEASURE ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY .................... 49
Instruments for civilian environmental literacy surveys ................................. 50
Suitability for use for the South African Army ................................................ 51
3.1.2.1 Criteria to determine the suitability of military questionnaires 51
3.1.2.2 Initial questionnaire selection 52
3.1.2.3 Questionnaire structure 52
3.1.2.4 Verdict on suitability 54
3.2 A SOUTH AFRICAN MILITARY QUESTIONNAIRE .......................................... 56
Questionnaire design ........................................................................................... 56
3.2.1.1 The design process 56
3.2.1.2 Questionnaire content and mode of conduct 57
3.2.1.3 Survey mode and length of questionnaire 58
3.2.1.4 Item appropriateness 59
Review procedures of the draft questionnaire .................................................. 61
Pretesting the draft questionnaire ..................................................................... 62
3.2.3.1 Mandate to pretesting panel 63
3.2.3.2 Composition of the pretesting panel 63
3.2.3.3 Outcomes of the pretesting 64
The final pilot questionnaire .............................................................................. 66
3.3 OBTAINING ETHICAL CLEARANCE .................................................................... 67
Principles of ethical research ............................................................................. 67
The university as knowledge custodian ............................................................. 68
SA Army custodianship ...................................................................................... 69
THE OPERATIONAL QUESTIONNAIRE 71
4.1 THE PILOT-TESTING PROCEDURE ..................................................................... 71
4.2 RESPONDENT PROFILES ........................................................................................ 72
Demographic profile of the respondents ........................................................... 72
Education and training profile ........................................................................... 74
Service profile ...................................................................................................... 75
Group summary profile ...................................................................................... 77
4.3 REFINEMENT OF QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS ...................................................... 77
Attitude scale items ............................................................................................. 78
Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za
x
4.3.1.1 Item total correlation 78
4.3.1.2 Reliability for the attitude scale 78
4.3.1.3 PLS path analysis of the attitude scale 79
Behaviour scale items .......................................................................................... 80
4.3.2.1 Reliability results for the behaviour scale 80
4.3.2.2 PLS path analysis of the behaviour scale 81
Knowledge scale items ........................................................................................ 82
4.3.3.1 Item difficulty on the knowledge scale 82
4.3.3.2 Item discrimination in the knowledge scale 83
4.4 THE MODIFIED SCALES .......................................................................................... 84
An adapted attitude scale ................................................................................... 85
An adapted behaviour scale ............................................................................... 86
An adapted knowledge scale ............................................................................... 88
Compilation of the final questionnaire .............................................................. 90
4.5 STATISTICS FOR THE QUESTIONNAIRE WITH REDUCED ITEMS ............ 92
4.6 THE STRUCTURE AND CONTENT OF THE FINAL QUESTIONNAIRE ........ 93
SURVEY CONDUCT IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN ARMY 96
5.1 ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN MILITARY . 96
5.2 SELECTION OF A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE................................................ 97
Sample stratification ........................................................................................... 98
Sample structure ............................................................................................... 100
5.2.2.1 Unit selection 100
5.2.2.2 Personnel selection by number 102
5.2.2.3 Selection of personnel by rank and gender 103
Geographical location of selected units ........................................................... 105
5.3 FINAL SURVEY LOGISTICS .................................................................................. 107
Initial planned survey strategies ...................................................................... 108
5.3.1.1 Planned survey procedures 108
5.3.1.2 Single unit test survey 109
5.3.1.3 The extended field survey 110
5.3.1.4 Initial survey experiences: A summary 112
A revised strategy: Survey assistance .............................................................. 113
5.3.2.1 Recruitment of research assistants 113
5.3.2.2 Execution of the assisted survey 114
5.4 FINAL SURVEY OUTCOMES ................................................................................ 115