NATO CCMS Pilot Study Forms of Environmental Education in the Military and their Impact on Pro-Environmental Attitudes Record of Proceedings of the 4th meeting Centrum Hotel, Vilnius, Lithuania: 27 - 28 October 2003 Agenda Items: Day 1 Welcome to the participants: - by the Pilot Study Co-directors Dr. Anna Kalinowska, co-director of the Pilot Study opened the fourth meeting noting that we have two further meetings left in which to finalize our ambitious but undoubtedly valuable project. Together with the co-director, Michael Dawson of National Defence Canada, she pointed out that the next to final meeting will take place in Bucharest Romania in late March or early April 2004 with the venue of the final meeting (scheduled for October 2004) to be determined. The co-directors forecast that the Final Report will be tabled at the March 2005 plenary meeting of the Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society (CCMS) in Brussels. This means that all members of the Pilot Study must devote some time once back home to completing their contributions to the study in a timely fashion.
- by the representative of the Lithuanian Ministry of Defence Major Algimantas Kutanovas welcomed participants on behalf of the Lithuanian Ministry of Defence whose officials provided invaluable logistical support in planning for the meeting. Inspirational Lecture: Ms. Laima Galkute, Ph.D., Coordinator of Educational Projects for the Regional Environmental Centre Country Office of Lithuania and National Coordinator of Education for Sustainable Development within the “Baltic 21” gave an overview of the Baltic 21’s (this is the regional task force dealing with the UNCED Agenda 21) work.
She noted that the uniting element is water and that, in the words of Agenda 21, “Education is critical for promoting sustainable development and for improving the capacity of people to address environmental and development issues. For the Baltic States, education for sustainable development should: • Complement and build on existing environmental education initiatives; • (be) based on an integrated social, economic and environmental approach; • address diversity and prevent conflicts; • (be) included in all curricula; • (be) open to critical thought and increased competence to act; • create conditions for social learning and democratic process; • (be) community-oriented; and. • clarify local action in the global context. These standards are particularly applicable to our project. “Where are we?” (Review of Progress) Dr. Kalinowska then situated representatives as to “where we are” in the project in the context of the 5 objectives of environmental education: awareness, knowledge, attitudes, skills, and participation. She noted that the key element in our final report, the CD was behind schedule in that the content, format and technical issues involved in production not to mention the funding of the product were all undecided. The theme of “water” was reiterated and accepted in principle on the understanding that water is both a source of conflict and cooperation. The co-director led a brief discussion of the proposed format for the Final Report, specifically that it will contain: An Introduction; A Glossary of Terms; A Compendium of Best Practices; Conclusions and recommendations; and’ A Demonstration CD of innovative educational tools. Participants agreed that the format and content of the Final Report should remain as originally agreed at the 2nd and confirmed at the 3rd meetings. Progress reports on each of the sections followed. Introduction: The lead on the introduction (Michael Dawson, National Defence Canada) presented a draft of the introduction for consideration by members. The revised draft Introduction, incorporating members’ comments to the extent possible and with a bridging reference to the theme of water in the CD is attached to this report as Annex 2. The lead on the glossary of Terms (Hakim Seyirden, Ministry of Defence,
Turkey) presented the most recent edition of the Glossary and requested guidance as to its final version (See Annex 2). There was some discussion as to the nature, scope and source of entries. Members generally agreed that the final glossary cannot be completed until the final draft of the report is completed at which time any terminology in question will be identified and defined. There was also some confusion as to the use of the term “glossary” itself in light of NATO direction on the subject that were initially misunderstood by some members. The title “Glossary of Terms” to be contained in the Final Report will stand. Compendium of Best Practices: The lead for this section (Bryan Pellerin, National Defence, Canada) reviewed the status of materials received to date including recent additions from the Belgian MoD. There is no doubt that a great deal more material is in circulation among member ministries than has found its way into the compendium and that a concerted effort is needed by all members to increase their participation. The lead also demonstrated the revised template. Participants agreed to be responsible for updating their submissions in the revised format. Day 2 Dr. Kalinowska opened the session with some logistical and administrative changes that were considered and accepted by members.. The day was devoted to moving forward various elements of the Final Report such as the Introduction (See Annex 2) Members also reiterated that a section on terrorism as requested at the first NATO CCMS plenary meeting held in the wake of the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States will continue to be an integral part of the Final Report. A lead writer for this section as well as its placement within the Final Report have yet to be finalized. There was considerable discussion on the purpose of the CD and its theme, stemming largely form misconceptions from members as to the underlying goal of the demo CD. In effect, the demo is designed to provide the target audience of the Final Report with practical examples of the types of training tools that can be used for transferring environmental awareness a nd knowledge through military organisations. Originally, it was hoped that – for consistency and clarity – best examples of various training approached (examples, film, video, overhead presentation, brochure etc.) could feature the theme of water. Water was chosen because of its universal application to the military sector and because it is currently a “hot topic” at the United Nations and in other international fora. Since we do not have enough water-related educational tools to showcase every educationa l approach, this proposal cannot be implemented as planned.
Nonetheless, members agreed that a carefully worded reference to the demo in the Introduction would suggest to the audience for the Final Report that any virtually any training technique could be adapted to virtually any subject area, including water with varying degrees of success. The meeting adjourned with the understanding the Romanian MoD will host the next meeting in late March or early April 2004.
Annex1: Last version of Glossary of terms Annex 2: Draft Introduction to the Final Report Annex 3: Water treatment – presentation from Turkey by Hakan Seyirden
Annex 1 Last version of Glossary of terms Enviromental education Training - UNESCO - NATO certification Audience Forms of education Evaluation ENV. Attitude ENV. Skills ENV. Awareness Env. Knowledge Env. competence ENV. Material Methods of education Objectives of education Communication Forms of communication Continuing education Env. PRINCIPLES Sustainable development - NATO - UNESCO/UNEP Best practices Template in ENV. EDU content Personal behavior Organizational behavior ENV. Terrorism ENV. Risk ENV. Instruments for EDU Training ENV. Advisors Media Env. effectiveness Tools and forms to remember about: Booklets Leaflets etc.
Annex 2 Introduction
In early, 2000, the NATO Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society (CCMS) approved the proposal by the Polish national representative to conduct a Pilot Study on forms of environmental education in the armed forces and their impact on the creation of pro-environmental attitudes. This document is the record of the deliberations of the members of the Pilot Study (see List of Participants) and the recommendations arising out of those deliberations. The need for this study is evidenced by the fact that, while there is a wealth of information available on specialist training (including a previous CCMS Pilot Study that examined the competency-based training of military personnel), there is little understanding of the nature and extent of the tools and techniques designed to shape environmental consciousness of the averaged member of the armed forces. Military training has been studied since the first organised forces banded together to protect and expand their territories in a time before written records. It might therefore appear at first glance that there is little to add to the discussion. Nonetheless, human society has evolved and expanded more in the 100 years of the last century that in the rest of recorded history combined. The unprecedented advances in communications and transportation technology that expanded almost geometrically in the closing decades of the 20th century coupled with the corresponding advances in transportation and communications have indeed created what Marshal McCluhan called “the global village”. With this sea change, comes the recognition that the military forms an integral element of the society it serves. In the face of this new reality, governments have recognized the fragile nature of political frontiers, particularly when it comes to such modern day phenomena as the trans-boundary migration of air - and water borne pollutants and toxins. Chernobyl is but a single sobering example. This fact of life is perhaps more relevant for none other than for the modern day armed forces around the world. Like never since the inception of the concept of a societal sector dedicated to defence, the military is de facto, an integral element of the society in which it functions and the attitudes of its personnel, shaped by their individual awareness of the world around them, influences the way they interact with the environment. Added to this, the military brings to society at large a wide range of unique technologies and operations the impact of which not only on their own but also on all the surrounding societies could well be said to be incalculable.
Within McCluhan’s global village, new technologies are researched, developed and, promulgated at a lightning pace with the result that the military sector faces virtually the same range of challenges and opportunities at the same time. This is particularly true of environmental challenges and opportunities. The acquisition use and disposal of hazardous materials, the disposition of unexploded ordnance and energetics with due regard for their carcinogenic potential, the sustained use of land for training are but a few of the environment-related issues for which virtually every military organisation is seeking timely, cost-beneficial and environmentally sound solutions. It is true that many of the environmental issues facing military organisations are somewhat esoteric in the larger scheme of things (e.g. the use of depleted uranium in weapons). Nonetheless, every aspect of military operations requires not only an appreciation of the technical specifications and considerations but also an appreciation of the impact of that operational aspect on the environment and the interconnection among the society, the economy and the environment – the basis of sustainable development. In this context, a proactive curriculum that seeks to imbue military personnel with an individual sense of their place in the society they serve with emphasis on their individual power to affect the environment positively or negatively both on and off duty is key to producing good corporate citizens in the long term. In the short term, a soldier who understands concepts of mitigating negative environmental impacts on training areas contributes to the sustainability of those areas in an era when the availability of such lands is at a premium. Environmental education whether competency-based training, administrative development or general awareness must contain a reference to the broader issue of the environment to ensure that environmental education is always connected to the broader picture of society and our place in it. In addition to this Final Report with its recommendations for implementing our conclusions, the Pilot Study group has developed a demonstration Compact Disc (the “demo CD”) that contains a wide range of examples of education and awareness tools and techniques to provide readers with a range of options for framing their environmental massages takes a single but universal issue (water) and shows the full complexity and range of impacts and need for awareness. Given the increasing preoccupation internationally with water -related issues from potability to security and consumption, it is timely that we adopt this theme. In that context, readers of the Final Report might wish to select one or more of the tools contained on the demo CD and adapt them to an educational package on one or more aspects of water.
Annex 3 Water treatment – presentation from Turky by Hakan Seyirden
Water disinfection and reuse in greenhouse hortic ulture.
The production in European greenhouse horticulture is not yet as water efficient as it could be. Soilless growing systems are becoming common in horticultural practice in most of the European countries, although not in each country on a large scale yet. The advantages of soil- less growing systems compared to soil grown crops are as follows:  • • • • Growth and yield are independent of the soil type of the cultivated area; Better control of growth by use of improved water quality and a better fertilization; Increased quality of products; Pathogen- free start by use of substrates other than soil and/or easier control of soil-borne pathogens. The required high quality of water; High investments and high costs for fertilizers; Low quantity of the water.
The disadvantages of these systems are: • • •
In most cases open or run- to- waste systems are adopted. In such open systems, superfluous nutrient solution freely leaches to ground and surface water. Because of economical motives and environmental concerns c losed soil less systems can be applied. These closed systems are more efficient with the use of water and fertilizers, and cause less damage to the environment. The disadvantage of the closed systems is the risk of a rapid dispersal of soil- borne pathogens by the recirculating nutrient solution. To eliminate these pathogens, several disinfection methods can be used: Ozone treatment can be used to disinfect the drain water . Ozone is the second most powerful sterilant in the world and its function is to destroy bacteria, viruses and odors. An ozone supply of 10 g/h/m3 water with an exposure time of 1 h is sufficient to kill all pathogens . Another way to disinfect the drain water is the use of UV-radiation . Ultra- violet radiation (or UV) is a proven process for disinfecting water, air or solid surfaces that are microbiologically 2 contaminated. For eliminating bacteria and fungi an energy dose is recommended of 100mJ/cm . 2 For viruses a dose of 250 mJ/cm is recommended. When heat treatment is applied, a solution is heated for about 30 seconds to a temperature of 95 C. At this temperature all pathogens are killed. A disadvantage of heat treatment is the consumption of gas. Also warm drain water contains less oxygen.
For several years commercial growers have used a slow sand filtration installation to eliminate pathogens.    Sand filtration is frequently used and a very robust method to remove suspended solids from water. The filtration medium consists of a mu ltiple layer of sand with a variety in size and specific gravity. Sand filters can be supplied in different sizes and materials both hand operated or fully automatically.
Slow sand filtration
HAKAN SEYIRDEN ENG. CAPTAIN WATER TREATMENT EXP.