FACTORS AFFECTING COMPLIANCE OF AVIATION SAFETY IN CIVIL AVIATION

INDUSTRY: A CASE STUDY OF UGANDA

CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY

BY

MUGABE PATRICK

17-MPA-00-KLA-WKD-0029
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE SCHOOL OFMANAGEMENT SCIENCE IN

PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF

A MASTER’S DEGREE IN PUBLICADMINISTRATION

OF MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE

AUGUST, 2022

2
 DECLARATION

I, Mugabe Patrick declare that the information contained in this dissertation has been compiled by

me under the guidance of my supervisors and is submitted with their approval.

Sign ……………………………………. Date…17…/1…0/2…0…21………………

MUGABE PATRICK

17-MPA-00-KLA-WKD-0029

i
 APPROVAL

This dissertation is submitted for examination with my authority as the candidate’s supervisor.

Sign……………………………………. Date…17th October2021

DR. PAUL MALUNDA SUPERVISOR

Uganda Management Institute

Digitally signed by Alex Nduhura

Alex Nduhura o=Uganda Management Institute,

DR. ALEX NDUHURA

Sign P…hD…M.CIPS Date… Pohu…D=D…MeCp…IaPrS…

tm…en…to…fP…ro.c. urement
SUPERVISOR DNL:ocgni=stAilcesx&NdMuhaurkraetPihnDg, M

CIPS,

UgandaManagementInstitute

email=nduhuraa@gmail.com,c=UG Date: 2021.10.17 15:05:25+03'00'

Adobe Acrobat Reader version: 2021.007.20099

ii
 DEDICATION

I dedicate this work to my family; My Wife and Children, Mum Atwooki, my field supervisors Mr.

Andrew Kasozi of Uganda Civil Aviation Authority, and to all those persons out there who are

tirelessly trying to make civil aviation safe and safer.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, I want to thank the Almighty God who has been the source of wisdom and

financestoenablemecompletethiscourseleadingtotheawardofthishigherdegreequalification to me.

I am grateful to my supervisors; Dr. Stella Kyohairwe, Dr. Paul Malunda, and Dr. Alex Nduhura for

their professional guidance, commitment, and encouragement they extended to me, which enabled

me to accomplish this work in time.

My heartfelt gratitude goes to my wife and mother Atwooki who supported me all through to this

day, she still inspires and encourages me to pursue further studies against all odds.

Last but not the least, I thank the management of UCAA and its staff members who despite their

tight work schedules managed to put aside time to provide the necessary information that was

crucial for writing this report.

Thank you all and may God bless you abundantly.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION.......................................................................................................................................i

APPROVAL..............................................................................................................................................ii

DEDICATION.........................................................................................................................................iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT......................................................................................................................iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS.........................................................................................................................v

LIST OF TABLES..................................................................................................................................ix

LIST OF FIGURES..................................................................................................................................x

LIST OF ACRONYMS...........................................................................................................................xi

ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................................xii

CHAPTER ONE:.....................................................................................................................................1

INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................1

1.2 Background to study..........................................................................................................................1

1.2.1 Historical background....................................................................................................................1

1.2.2 Theoretical background..................................................................................................................2

1.2.3 Conceptual background..................................................................................................................3

1.2.4 Contextual background..................................................................................................................4

v
1.3 Statement of the Problem..................................................................................................................5

1.4 Purpose of the study...........................................................................................................................5

1.4.1 Specific objectives of the study.......................................................................................................6

1.5 Research questions.............................................................................................................................6

1.6 Hypotheses of the study.....................................................................................................................6

1.7 Conceptual framework......................................................................................................................7

1.8 Justification of the study....................................................................................................................8

1.9 Significance of the study....................................................................................................................8

1.10 Scope of the study.............................................................................................................................8

1.10.1 Content scope.................................................................................................................................8

1.10.2 Geographical Scope.......................................................................................................................8

1.10.3 Time Scope.....................................................................................................................................9

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW.....................................................................................10

2.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................................10

2.2 Theoretical review............................................................................................................................10

2.2.1 Swiss cheese Model on Aviation Safety.......................................................................................10

2.2.2 The Domino Effect Theory on Aviation Safety...........................................................................11

2.3 Actual literature review...................................................................................................................12

2.3.1 Organizational factors and aviation safety.................................................................................12

vi
2.3.2 Financial resources and compliance to aviation safety..............................................................16

2.3.3 Aviation infrastructure and compliance aviation Safety...........................................................17

2.4 Literature Summary........................................................................................................................19

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY............................................................................................21

3.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................................21

3.2 Research design................................................................................................................................21

3.3 Study Population..............................................................................................................................21

3.4 Determination of the Sample Size...................................................................................................21

3.5 Sampling Procedure.........................................................................................................................22

3.6 Data Collection Methods..................................................................................................................22

3.6.1 Primary Data Collection Methods...............................................................................................22

3.6.2 Secondary Data Collection Methods............................................................................................23

3.7 Data Collection Instruments............................................................................................................23

3.7.1 Self-administered questionnaires.................................................................................................23

3.7.2 Interview guides.............................................................................................................................23

3.7.3 Documentary Review Checklist...................................................................................................24

3.8 Reliability and Validity of the Research Instruments...................................................................24

3.8.1 Validity of the Instruments...........................................................................................................24

3.8.2 Reliability of the Instruments.......................................................................................................25

vii
3.9 Data Collection Procedure...............................................................................................................25

3.10 Data Analysis..................................................................................................................................26

3.10.1 Qualitative Data...........................................................................................................................26

3.11 Measurements of Study Variables................................................................................................26

3.12 Ethical considerations....................................................................................................................27

CHAPTER FOUR..................................................................................................................................29

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION................................................29

4.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................................29

4.2 Response rate....................................................................................................................................29

4.3 Findings on back ground characteristics.......................................................................................29

4.3.1 Age of the Respondents.................................................................................................................30

4.3.2 Education level of respondents.....................................................................................................31

4.3.3: Years of Service............................................................................................................................31

4.4 The effect of organizational factors on aviation safety in UCAA................................................32

4.5 The influence of financial resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority.................................................................................................................................................36

4.6: The influence of aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority.................................................................................................................................................40

CHAPTER FIVE....................................................................................................................................45

SUMMMARY, DISCUSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................45

viii
5.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................................45

5.2 Summary of key findings.................................................................................................................45

5.2.1 The effect of organizational factors on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority.................................................................................................................................................45

5.2.2 The influence of financial resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority.................................................................................................................................................45

5.3 Discussion of the study findings......................................................................................................46

5.3.1. The effect of organizational factors on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority.................................................................................................................................................46

5.3.2 The influence of financial resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority.................................................................................................................................................48

5.3.3. The influence of aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda...................................49

5.4 Conclusions.......................................................................................................................................50

5.4.1 The effect of organizational factors on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority.................................................................................................................................................50

5.4.2 The influence of financial resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority.................................................................................................................................................50

5.4.3 The influence of aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda....................................50

5.5 Recommendations............................................................................................................................51

5.5.1. The effect of organizational factors on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority.................................................................................................................................................51
ix
5.5.2 The influence of financial resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority.................................................................................................................................................51

5.5.3 The influence of aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda....................................52

5.6 Contributions of the study...............................................................................................................52

5.7 Suggestions for further studies........................................................................................................53

REFERENCES..........................................................................................................................................i

APPENDIX ONE: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR KEY RESPONDENTS.................................................i

APPENDIX TWO: INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR RESPONDENTS....................................................v

APPENDIX III: TABLE FOR DETERMINING SAMPLE SIZE FROM A GIVEN

POPULAT.................................................................................................................................................6

ION............................................................................................................................................................6

APPENDIX IV: FIELD ATTACHMENT LETTER............................................................................7

APPENDIX V: PLAGIARISM REPORT...........................................................................................vii

x
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Sample size of respondents........................................................................................................................22

Table 3.2: Results of content validity for research tools............................................................................................24

Table 3.3: Reliability test results of research instruments..........................................................................................25

Table 4.4: Response Rate............................................................................................................................................29

Table 4.5: Gender of respondents...............................................................................................................................30

Table 4.6: Age of the Respondents.............................................................................................................................30

Table 4.7: The effect of organizational factors on aviation safety in UCAA.............................................................33

Table 4.8: Correlation Matrix for organizational factors and aviation safety in UCAA...........................................36

Table 4.9: The influence of financial resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation Authority..................38

Table 4.10: Correlation Matrix for financial resources and aviation safety in UCAA...............................................40

Table 4.11: The influence of aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation Authority...........41

Table 4.12: Correlation Matrix for aviation infrastructure and aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority.....................................................................................................................................................................43

Table 4.13: Multiple Regression Analysis for lean production systems and Environmental Sustainability..............44

xi
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1: The conceptual framework showing the relationship between factors and compliance of

aviation safety..............................................................................................................................................................7

Figure 4.2: Highest Level of Education the Respondents..........................................................................................31

Figure 4.3: Showing years of service..........................................................................................................................32

xii
 LIST OF ACRONYMS

ACI: Airports Council International

ADB: African Development Bank

AFCAC: African Civil Aviation Commission

AFI Plan: Plan for Aviation Safety in Africa

AFI Region: Africa-Indian Ocean Region

AFI-CIS AFI: Cooperative Inspectorate Scheme

xiii
AFI-RASG: Africa-Indian Ocean Regional Aviation Safety Group

AFRAA: African Airlines Association

CAA: Civil Aviation Authority

CEs: Critical Elements

COSCAPs: Cooperative Development of Operational Safety and Continuing

Airworthiness Programme

EAC-CASSOA: East African Community Civil Aviation Safety and Security Oversight

Agency

EASA: European Aviation Safety Agency

EI: Effective Implementation

FAA: Federal Aviation Administration

GASP: Global Aviation Safety Plan

IATA: International Air Transport Association

ICAO: International Civil Aviation Organization

LEI: Lack of Effective Implementation

SARPs: Standards and Recommended Procedures

SHELL: Software-Hardware-Environment-Liveware-Liveware

SOPs: Standard Operating Procedures

USOAP-CMA: Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme Continuous Monitoring

Approach

UCAA; Uganda Civil Aviation Authority.

xiv
 ABSTRACT

This study examined the factors that affect compliance to aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority. The study focused on the following objectives to establish the effect of organizational

factors on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation Authority, to determine influence of financial

resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation Authority and to determine the influence of

aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda. The study used a cross-sectional survey in

design; and it was adopted by a triangulation of qualitative and quantitative research methodologies,

techniques, and strategies. The study used primary and secondary data collection methods.

Descriptive, correlation and multiple regression statistical analysis methods were employed to

analyze the data. The study results showed that the coefficient was. 688** and

p=0.000<0.05.Therefore, according to the results there was a significant positive relationship

between organizational factors and aviation safety. This means that an improvement in

organizational factors will lead to improved aviation safety. The results showed that the coefficient

was .777** and p=0.000<0.05. Therefore, according to the results there was a positive significant

relationship between financial resources on aviation safety. This means that an improvement in

financial resources will lead to improved aviation safety. Finally, the result showed that the

correlation coefficient was .622* and p=0.000< 0.05. Therefore, according to the results there was a

positive significant relationship between aviation infrastructure and aviation safety. It was therefore

recommended that; Uganda’s civil management system and regulations should be kept compliant

and updated with international standards all the time.

The study recommends that UCAA should consider efficiency, fairness and utility when allocating

resources needed to improve airport safety as this will guide them when faced with quagmires

arising from empathy elements. It also recommends that the airport safety zones should be clearly
xii
demarcated and communicated to the national government under the Ministry of Lands as well as

the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure who in turn should act swiftly to stop further

developments and remove illegal developments along the airports.

Think of adding population, sample size, sampling techniques, instruments, validity and reliability in the

abstract

xiii
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

In aviation, as in other high reliability, safety critical systems, its understood errors are inevitable.

In prior decades, human error has been considered a root cause of accidents in complex systems. As

the study of accident causation and human error has advanced, the active failures of front-line

operators have become considered outcomes of latent system deficiencies (Reason 1990). Thus,

research focused on conventional factors that affect compliance in aviation safety in Uganda. This

chapter presented the background to the study, problem statement, purpose of the study, objectives

of the study, research questions, and scope of the study, significance of the study and definition of

operational variables.

1.2 Background to study

This section is covering the historical, theoretical, conceptual, and contextual perspective about the

study phenomenon.

1.2.1 Historical background

Uganda is a signatory to the Chicago convention on international civil aviation and it is one of the

five EAC partner state. It is therefore under obligation to develop and implement international

standards and recommended practices. It is required to ensure that there is an institution entrusted

with the responsibility to ensure effective control and continued compliance with the established

civil aviation standards within the scope of the country’s civil aviation activities scope. To ensure

that the safety system is appropriate and compliant with the established international standards,

ICAO subjects each state to a repetitive five yearly compulsory Universal Safety Oversight Audit

Program (USOAP). A poor safety performance audit result is an indication of an ineffective states

civil aviation management system (Uganda Civil Aviation Authority (UCAA, 2018).
1
World

Africa

Uganda

Historical background should be re-written to bring out the historical lens through which to understand

civil aviation safety issues

1.2.2 Theoretical background

The study adopted a SHELL theory which defines “the relationship of human factors and the

aviation environment” (Reinhart, 1996). This concept originated from the SHEL theory by Edwards

in 1972, whereby the name was derived from the initials of its components (Software, Hardware,

Environment, and Live-ware). In 1975, Hawkins developed the concept into the SHELL theory

with an introduction of another Live-ware into the original concept, “SHEL Model” (Hawkins,

1987). The most different point between Edward’s SHEL theory (1972) and Hawkins’s SHELL

theory (1975) is that Hawkins urged for the necessity of another 17 Live-ware (the person) and

illustrated the interactions between the central Live-ware and each of other four systems (Hawkins,

1987). It is generally noted that most of the air accidents are related to human errors, while the

mechanical failures in aircraft maintenance today have enormously been on the decrease with a

number of new high technological equipment inventions (Hawkins, 1987). Furthermore, in the

perception of human factors, every individual, either who takes part in the operation or the

supporting part of aviation, has individual capabilities and limitations. Thus, many countries in the

world strive to secure the safety by training based on the interactions of each of SHELL

components (Hawkins, 1987). It is generally noted that most of the air accidents are related to

human errors, while the mechanical failures in aircraft maintenance today has enormously been on
2
the decrease with a number of new high technological equipment inventions (Hawkins, 1987).

Furthermore, in the perception of human factors, every individual, either who takes part in the

operation or the supporting part of aviation, has individual capabilities and limitations.

The main elements in the model are identified as hardware which entails various equipment, tools,

aircraft, workspace, buildings, and other physical resources. Without human elements in aviation,

the software comprises all non-physical resources such as organizational policies, rules, procedures,

manuals, and placards. The next element is the environment which entails not only the factors

which influence where people are working such as climate, temperature, vibration, and

noise,butalsosocio-politicalandeconomicfactors.Thelive-wareincludesfactorsliketeamwork,

communication, leadership and norms. The central live-ware can be defined as human elements

such as knowledge, attitudes, cultures and stress. This live-ware is regarded as the core of the

SHELL theory and other components match with the live-ware as the central figure (Hawkins,

1987).

The SHELL theory is of much importance as a safety analysis tool and was used as framework for

collecting data about human performance and contributory component mismatches during aviation

incident or accident analysis or investigations as recommended by the International civil Aviation

organization (ICAO), similarly the SHELL theory is used to understand systemic human factors

relationship during operational audits with the aim of reducing error, enhancing safety, and

improving aviation safety.

The SHELL theory is used as a licensing tool in helping clarify human performance needs,

capabilities and limitations thereby enabling competencies to be defined from a safety management

perspective. More So the SHELL theory is used as a training tool to help improve training

interventions and effectiveness of organization safeguards against errors in aviation industry.

3
1.2.3 Conceptual background

The key terms defined included aviation safety and factors affecting compliance aviation safety

which include organizational factors, financial resources, and aviation infrastructure. Aviation

Safety is defined by ICAO as "the state in which the possibility of harm to persons or property

damage is reduced to, and maintained at or below, an acceptable level through a continuing process

of hazard identification and safety risk management" (ICAO, 2016).

Organization factors: Is a systematic effort by business management to compare performance to the

predetermined standards, plans and objectives in order to determine whether performance is in line

with established standards and where necessary, to take remedial action (Hallsall, 1998).

Aviation Infrastructure: This refers to the basic facilities, services, and installations for the efficient

and effective functioning of the aviation industry. Infrastructure consists of the hard and visible

components such as airports, control towers, communication supported by its soft components such

as policies and regulations.

Financial Resources: Funds that is available to enable an organization to meet its mandate.

The conceptual background should feature customization of terms to the current study

1.2.4 Contextual background

Uganda is a signatory to the Chicago convention on international civil aviation and it is one of the

five EAC partner state. It is therefore under obligation to develop and implement international

standards and recommended practices. It is required to ensure that there is an institution entrusted

with the responsibility to ensure effective control and continued compliance with the established

civil aviation standards within the scope of the country’s civil aviation activities scope. To ensure

that the safety system is appropriate and compliant with the established international standards,

ICAO subjects each state to a repetitive five yearly compulsory Universal Safety Oversight Audit
4
Program (USOAP).A poor safety performance audit result is an indication of an ineffective states

safety aviation management system, (IATA, 2017).

A study carried out by the George Washington University Consortium (2004) indicates that many

civil aviation regulatory authorities mandated by national governments to ensure safety and security

of air transport operations are not able to sustain effective regulatory activities to match the pace of

traffic growth. However, the effective implementation of aviation safety relating to safety

surveillance actions and resolution of safety concerns remained low, 61% and 51% respectively.

Amongst others, Uganda had not established a mechanism to ensure the availability of sufficient

aviation safety oversight personnel, and the Safety Management System of the aerodrome operator

was not fully implemented. In addition, the establishment and effective function of incident and

accident investigation remained at 42% low (CAA reports, 2017).

The contextual background should bring out the status of civil aviation safety issues in CAA

1.3 Statement of the Problem

In November 2006, ICAO made mandatory the implementation of aviation safety in the contracting

states of which Uganda is a member. According to Article 37 of the Chicago Convention, Uganda

as a signatory is obliged to comply with the aviation safety standard. Conversely, management

prioritization of production goals over protection (Safety) goals in resource allocation and the lack

of organizational safety culture have negatively impacted the aviation safety implementation

process in Uganda. In a bid to ensure equitable resource allocation; among other concerns, (UCAA,

2019) has emphasized adherence to the perspective of Safety management as a core business

function. CAA as the regulatory authority; in the effort to ensure compliance has continuously

conducted SMS trainings for all stake holders at the Entebbe International Airport.

However, in the November 2008 safety audit by ICAO, under the Universal Safety Oversight Audit
5
Program (USOAP); conducted every five years, Uganda was rated at only 45.64% compliant with

the established regulatory requirements. This rating was far below the required minimum

performance level of 70% effective implementation (ICAO, 2018; Kitaka, 2010). For effectual

implementation of aviation safety, there is need for high level management commitment,

development of organizational safety culture and enforcement of regulatory compliance. The 2008

safety audit results are possible pointers that; among other factors, CAA as the regulatory authority

has not done enough to ensure aviation safety compliance among ATOs in Uganda, and if not

addressed, may lead to repeated occurrence of accidents and incidents. It is against this background

that this study examined the factors affecting compliance to aviation safety in Uganda Civil

Aviation Authority.

The statement of the problem should bring out a clear PUZLE the researcher wanted to solve

1.4 Purpose of the study

The purpose of the study was to examine the factors that affect compliance to aviation safety in

Uganda Civil Aviation Authority.

1.4.1 Specific objectives of the study

i. To establish the effect of organizational factors on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

ii. To determine effect of financial resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

iii. To determine the effect of aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda Civil

Aviation Authority.

1.5 Research questions

6
 i. What is the effect of organizational factors on compliance to aviation safety in Uganda Civil

Aviation Authority?

ii. What is the effect of financial resources affect compliance to aviation safety in Uganda Civil

Aviation Authority?

iii. What is the effect of aviation infrastructure on compliance to aviation safety in Uganda

Civil Aviation Authority?

1.6 Hypotheses of the study

H1: Organizational factors significantly affect compliance to aviation safety in Uganda Civil

Aviation Authority

H1: Financial resources significantly affect compliance to aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

H1: Aviation infrastructures significantly affect compliance to aviation safety in Uganda Civil

Aviation Authority.

1.7 Conceptual framework

The conceptual framework is a diagrammatic model or representation of the relationship between

variables and how they are operationalized for the purpose of research. In this case, it summarizes

the relationship between factors and aviation safety (Mugenda & Mugenda, 2003).

Factors (IV)
Organizational factors:
 Planning
 Controlling

Compliance to Aviation Safety (DV)

Financial resources:  Controlling Measures
 Appropriate fund allocation  Reduced air accidents
 Financial Independence  Compliance practices
7 Implementation
 Aviation infrastructural
 Ability to handle air traffic
 Up-to-date technology

Figure 1.1: The conceptual framework showing the relationship between factors and

compliance of aviation safety.

Source: (Adopted from; (ICAO, 2013; Yeun et al, 2014), and modified by the researcher, (2020).

The independent variable is conventional factors with dimensions such as Organizational factors

(Planning and Control), financial resources (appropriate fund allocation, Financial Independence),

and aviation infrastructure (ability to handle air traffic and Up-to-date technology). The dependent

variable is compliance to aviation safety with dimension such as Compliance practices, Controlling

Measures and Regulatory Compliance Statement and reduced accidents.

1.8 Justification of the study

The study fought out factors affecting compliance of aviation safety in Uganda and also solutions

that the oversight inspectors used to mitigate aviation hazards. The study is expected to contribute

to civil aviation body of knowledge in Uganda. Its findings are expected to benefit the civil aviation

management system developers and implementers when to establish aviation safety management

and performance strategies that would minimize aircraft accidents.

Reason

1.9 Significance of the study

The study findings will provide important information that will be integrated by aviation

stakeholders to improve Uganda’s aviation safety record. The Ministry of Transport and

Infrastructure will use the findings to review aviation regulations and policies with a view to
8
inculcating an aviation safety culture.

Donors and international aviation bodies will use the outcomes of the study to identify and establish

programmes that are tailored towards specific challenges facing aviation safety in Uganda.

Researchers, academicians, and aviation stakeholders will use the findings and recommendations of

this study as a reference.

1.10 Scope of the study

1.10.1 Content scope

The study considers different aspects of the two variables, factors affecting compliance of safety

aviation in Uganda Civil Aviation Authority, guided by the following objectives: the effect of

organizational factors on aviation safety, influence of financial resources on aviation safety and the

influence of aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda.

1.10.2 Geographical Scope

Geographically, the study was carried out at Uganda Civil Aviation Authority, Entebbe and the data

was collected from various departments at the institution like Aviation security and facilitation,

Aviation Operations Meteorological and Aeronautical inspector, and Quality Assurance.

1.10.3 Time Scope

The study considered literature from 2010 to date; this is because in this time a lot has happened in

civil aviation industry about compliance of aviation safety. This helped come up with coherent

information from the respondents as it enabled respondents to give responses that are typical of

their opinion from the observations made over this period.

9
 CHAPTER TWO:

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter presented a review of related literature about factors and compliance to aviation safety.

The review begins with a theoretical review of the theory under pinning the study before delving

into historical trajectory of factors and safety aviation. The review was based on studies by various

academicians.

2.2 Theoretical review

2.2.1 Swiss cheese Model on Aviation Safety

According to Wiegmann and Shappell (2003) industry-wide acceptance of the concept of the

organizational accident was made possible by a simple, yet graphically powerful model developed

by Professor James Reason, which provided a means for understanding how aviation operates

successfully or drifts into failure. According to the Swiss cheese model also known as the Reason

model; accidents require the coming together of a number of enabling factors, each one necessary,

but in itself not sufficient to breach system defenses. Professor Reason argues that complex systems

such as aviation are extremely well-defended by layers of defenses in-depth, single-point failures

are rarely consequential in the aviation system.

Equipment failures or operational errors are never the cause of breaches in safety defenses, but

rather the triggers. Breaches in safety defenses are a delayed consequence of decisions made at the

highest levels of the system, which remain dormant until their effects or damaging potential are

activated by specific sets of operational circumstances. Under such specific circumstances, human

failures, or active failures at the operational level act as triggers of latent conditions conducive to

facilitating a breach of the system’s inherent safety defenses. In the concept advanced by the

10
Reason model, all accidents include a combination of both active and latent conditions.

The Swiss cheese model of accident causation likens human system defenses to a series of slices of

randomly holed Swiss cheese arranged vertically and parallels to each other with gaps in- between

each slice. Reason hypothesizes that most accidents can be traced to one or more of four levels of

failure: organizational influences, unsafe supervision, preconditions for unsafe acts, and the unsafe

acts themselves. In the Swiss cheese model, an organization's defenses against failure are modeled

as a series of barriers, represented as slices of the cheese. The holes in the cheese slices represent

individual weaknesses in individual parts of the system and are continually varying in size and

position in all slices. The system as a whole produces failures when holes in all of the slices

momentarily align, permitting a trajectory of accident opportunity so that a hazard passes through

holes in all of the defenses, leading to an accident.

Reasons

Criticism

2.2.2 The Domino Effect Theory on Aviation Safety

The Domino Safety Theory was developed by pioneer industrial safety experts H.W. Heinrich

(1931) and Alfred Lateiner to provide a graphic sense of how industrial injuries can occur and how

they can be avoided as well. The domino effect theory is also known as the cause-effect theory or

causal model. According to the Domino effect theorists, an accident occurs from a sequence of

events. It is a chain reaction. In order to grasp the sequence, picture five dominoes in a row, the first

domino is background which represents a worker’s lifestyle and personality. The second domino is

personal characteristics representing a worker’s attitude, level of knowledge, and physical and

mental conditions. The third domino is unsafe acts and unsafe conditions represented by a worker’s

behavior and unsafe job conditions. The fourth domino is the accident represented by unplanned

11
event caused by an unsafe actor condition. The fifth domino is the injury represented by someone

getting hurt.

The Domino theorists contend that for any given incident, not much can be done about a worker’s

background and personal characteristics. The domino that must be targeted is unsafe acts and unsafe

conditions. When an unsafe act is detected, the worker should be stopped; the situation should be

studied; a safer way to perform the task must be found; instruct and train the worker to do it the

safer way; check and retrain as necessary; and a salute sort discipline the worker. When an unsafe

condition is detected, the condition needs to be removed, guarded, or warned against. Heinrich

insists that the responsibility lies first of all with the employer. Heinrich specifies that a truly safety-

conscious manager will make sure his foremen and workers do as they are told and exercise his

prerogative and obtain compliance follow through and see the unsafe conditions are eliminated.

Heinrich's remedy for such non-compliance is strict supervision, remedial training, and discipline.

Indeed, there are a number of perspectives on human error, each of which is characterized by a

common set of assumptions about the nature and underlying causes of errors. Unfortunately, from

the practitioner's point of view, there often appears to be as many human error models and

frameworks as there are people interested in the topic. Even worse, most error models and

frameworks tend to be theoretical and academic, making them of little benefit to the applied needs

of practitioners.

2.3 Actual literature review

2.3.1 Organizational factors and aviation safety

Planning: Understanding and implementing the functions of management, enables the organization

to realize its obligatory requirements and strategic objectives (Bateman & Snell, (2014). Planning is

the designing of an environment for effective performance of an organization, it involves

12
determining in advance what to do, how to do it, when to do it and who is to do it. It makes it

possible for things to occur that would otherwise happen as required. Without planning actions tend

to be uncoordinated, aimless and are left to happen by chance.

In civil aviation safety management context, the planning function requires designing systems that

will function and perform in compliance with the minimum standards established from time to time

by the International Civil Aviation Organization with the primary purpose of realizing the

international Acceptable Level of Safety (ALoS) to reduce civil aircraft accident rates. These

activities involve the designing of the safety oversight system (the CAA) adopting and issuing of

the civil aviation regulations, setting the scope of the state civil aviation activities depending on the

industry size and commitment (Balunywa, 2015).

On adhering to the convention, states agree to comply with certain principles and arrangements in

order that international civil aviation may be developed in a safe and orderly manner. It is a

contracting state responsibility to plan and establish an effective safety oversight system because

the absence of such threatens the safety of international civil aircraft operation (ICAO-A, 2016).

Civil aviation management planning must document its purpose, defined safety performance

targets, set evaluation criteria and monitoring schedules. The planed strategy should aim at

establishing means and ways to reduce serious incidents and fatal airline accidents. There must be

effective means and ways to measure the expected safety performance together with the positive

changes that are realized as a result of effective safety management systems. These key indicators

and targets are representative of effective management of hazards in the service provider’s

operational and work area (ICAO, 2019).

Right from the design stage civil aviation management planning must put safety in perspective and

13
decide exactly where it fits in the organization and what level of safety is needed. Safety concerns

must be well above lip service level where it is only meant to influence operations but placed within

the objective level where it is let to drive the operations (Wood, 2015). The modern safety

management perspective views accident analysis as an inherently reactive approach to civil aviation

safety management, pro-active means that include preventive and predictive measures must be

developed and implemented (FAA, 2017). Management planning provides for standardization of

application and implementation of the requirements, there must be workplace hazards identification,

definition, prevention and control, safety training and performance goals measurements. Safety

systems are required to focus on these values, ensuring that they are documented, compliant with

the minimum established international standards on civil aviation safety; and there should be

established means to ensure continued compliance and development of safety strategies by both the

regulator and the regulated (Ganson, 2016).

It is important to know that aviation safety objectives cannot be realized unless the industry is

prepared to accept the implications of the safety policies, including the need to commit the

necessary resources. Safety management strategic planning therefore should analyze and include

provisions to sensitize the industry on the importance aviation safety. The confidence the CAA

places in civil aviation service providers and the associated freedom and flexibility to administer

aviation safety is dependent on the service provider’s satisfactory demonstration of acceptable

documented operational procedures; regulations compliance declaration; effective enforcement

means; and the commitment to adopt the recommended industry best practices. The planning

function of a civil aviation management is based on the legal provisions of given by national Civil

Aviation Act, the associated Civil Aviation Regulations, the Chicago Convention and ICAO

minimum Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) (ICAO-A, 2016). Civil aviation

14
planning relates to the requirements of the first and second critical elements of a safety oversight

system that requires civil aviation legislation and regulations

Controlling: Civil aviation control is legally empowered by Civil Aviation Act, the associated

Regulations, the Convention and ICAO minimum Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs).

To achieve international civil aviation safety standards, Article 12 of the Chicago requires each

contracting state to develop and keep its own regulations uniform to the greatest possible extent

with those established from time to time under the convention to enable its safety management

system and the service providers to develop capacity and capability to execute its safety functions to

attain the acceptable level of safety (ICAO-A, 2016).

There is a close link between planning and controlling, while planning is a process by which an

organization’s objectives and the methods to achieve the objectives are designed, controlling is a

process which measures and directs the actual performance in compliance with the planned

objectives. Organization planning control instruments and tools like the state Acts and regulations

dictate the operational environment and scope within which the management system must function.

Civil aviation management control relates to the seventh critical element that calls for audit and

surveillance of the service providers to verify operational compliance and procedures in place to

enforce continued compliance, and the eighth critical element, that requires submission of

corrective action plans and establishment of procedures to resolve safety concerns identified during

audit and surveillance (ICAO-A2016).

Effective civil aviation safety control is dependent on the provisions in the state civil aviation Act

which mandates the establishment of a state civil aviation management institution, the development

and promulgation of the civil aviation regulations. The convention requires that the Act and the

15
regulations confer the necessary authority to the management institution to oversight and to enforce

compliance with the regulations and the standard and recommended practices. The key issue in

modern aviation safety control resides in the provisions put in place to control risks and operational

errors. Commercial civil aviation is considered safe when it is undertaken in compliance with an

inherently safe management system. In this regard, safety is increasingly being viewed as the

outcome of the management of organizational processes, which have the objective of keeping the

safety risks and consequences of hazards in operational contexts minimal and under organizational

control. Safety is defined as the state in which the possibility of harm to persons or damage to

property is reduced to and maintained at or below, an acceptable level through a continuing process

of hazard identification and safety risk management. It is has been observed that less than optimum

workplace conditions foster active failures by operational personnel, therefore, in addition to

regulation and SARP’s compliance and enforcement, civil aviation safety planning and organizing

should focus on improving workplace conditions to contain failures, because it is the concatenation

of all these factors that controls risks and produces safety breakthrough (ICAO, 2019).

2.3.2 Financial resources and compliance to aviation safety

Financial Resources and Aviation Safety Financial resource allocation and priority setting are

challenging issues faced by aviation safety decision makers requiring careful consideration of many

factors, including objective such as reason, and subjective like empathy elements (Bowman, 2009).

Criteria used to evaluate aviation safety interventions and allocations of resources are likely to have

profound implications, especially regarding ethical aspects. Ethical principles of resource allocation

set forth include efficiency, fairness, and utility (Ghaffar, 2017).

Consideration of these often-conflicting principles requires pragmatic frameworks and the

engagement of a broad range of stakeholders to provide. Limited resources in aviation safety in

16
both wealthy and developing countries underline the need to allocate optimally (Oncol, 2018). As

argued by various authors, choices may not be based on rational and transparent processes

highlighting the need for processes that take this into account. Indeed, if the mechanism employed

to guide the distribution of financial resources is inequitable, the outcome is also likely to be. Thus,

how resources are allocated for aviation safety around the world remains a challenging issue.

Priority-setting is defined as the process by which financial resources are allocated among

competing programs or people. In the context of increasing aviation safety costs in many countries

around the world, effective approaches to explicit appraisal and priority setting are becoming

critical to allocate resources to aviation accident interventions that provide them benefit to the

systems’ sustainability, equity and efficiency (Bowen, 2018).

In any organization, management is in control of the activities of personnel and of the use of

resources that are directly related to, or necessary for, the delivery of services. The organization’s

exposure to safety hazards is a consequence of the activities directly related to the delivery of

services (ICAO, 2009). Regardless of the size, complexity, or type of operation, the success of the

SMS depends on the extent to which senior management devotes the necessary time, resources and

attention to safety as a core management issue. An SMS will not be effective if it receives attention

only at the operational level (CAD, 2012). Setting up and maintaining an SMS will cost depending

on the size and complexity of the organization, but an accident will cost far more. History shows

that Organizations which have had fatal accidents often do not survive (CASA, 2012).

The perspective of safety management as an organizational process and a core business function

clearly places ultimate safety accountability and responsibility at the highest level of aviation

organizations. Nowhere are such accountability and responsibility more evident than in decisions

regarding allocation of both human and financial resources. Unless safety management is made a
17
core business function, a management dilemma, simply put, the dilemma of the two Ps” will arise

and this can be characterized as the conflict that would develop at the senior management level

because of the perception that resources must be allocated on an either/or basis to what are believed

to be conflicting goals: production or protection (safety) goals (ICAO, 2019).

2.3.3 Aviation infrastructure and compliance aviation Safety

Infrastructure and Aviation Safety According to Ali and Pernia (2016) infrastructure consists of

hard and soft components. The hard and visible infrastructure, such as roads, railways, electricity,

and telecommunications, must be accompanied and supported by its soft component, such as

policies and regulations, to enable the system to perform well and generate impacts. The right mix

and synergy of the two is important to ensure that the infrastructure system supports inclusive

growth and poverty reduction. Well-functioning and efficient infrastructure promotes inclusiveness

by expanding access to vital services and improving economic opportunities for all.

In a report by Ncube (African Development Bank, 2015), here iterates that the air transport industry

faces various challenges including poor airport infrastructures, lack of physical and human

resources, limited connectivity, and lack of transit facilities. Although substantial progress has been

made during the past decade, Africa still lags behind other regions in terms of “soft” and “hard”

infrastructure. It is therefore critical that African Countries invest in the soft as well as hard

infrastructure to support the industry.

Vision 2040 is Uganda’s national blueprint which is envisaged to create a prosperous country and

good life by 2040. In this vision, infrastructure falls under the economic pillar which include

amongst others; accelerating on-going infrastructure development by focusing on quality and

functionality; building infrastructure in support of identified flagship projects which contribute to

social equity and economic goals; improving efficiency and effectiveness of infrastructure at all
18
levels of planning, contracting, and constructing. The Government has put more emphasis on

infrastructure development: a number of strategies were employed to improve the available

infrastructure facilities to maximize economic and social goals (GoU, 2017).

The vision proposes a number of strategies to be pursued including strengthening the existing

framework and accelerating the speed of implementation. Others will include raising efficiency and

quality of infrastructure, enhancing local content of identified projects, support identified flagship

projects, benchmarking infrastructure facilities with globally accepted standards and targeting

projects in neglected areas to increase connectivity and stimulate economic activities. In addition,

the vision hopes to enhance Private Sector participation in provision of infrastructure facilities and

services strategically complimented by Public Sector Interventions, Infrastructure Financing

through Capital Markets. The government has expressed its intention to increase private sector

participation in the provision of infrastructure services to rehabilitate the national infrastructure. It

wishes to do so in order to lower the costs of doing business in Uganda, provide affordable and

efficient modes of transport for Uganda and increase overall living standards (ICAO-A,2016).

In 2011 the Uganda Airports Authority launched a five-year strategic plan that has become the

blueprint for the development of all the Uganda n airports. Consequently, UCAA has seen

unprecedented growth as a result of the implementation of five key areas that are entrenched in the

strategic plan which were, Revenue Enhancement and Business Growth, Product and Service

Improvement, Infrastructural development, Business Process Automation and the positioning of

UCAA as the Premier Hub of Africa. Despite all these initiatives, the increased air traffic flow,

rapid technological change and lack of sustainable strategies could still be a hindrance in

maintaining the current infrastructure (UCAA, 2017).

Literature on financial resources and compliance to aviation safety is largely scanty

19
2.4 Literature Summary

Civil aviation industry is strictly controlled by an international convention which dictates the

minimum acceptable management system regulatory requirements that must be complied with by

the state civil aviation management system. This enables the service industry to develop to an

acceptable level of aviation safety performance. An effective safety management system is designed

in compliance with the eight critical elements of an effective safety oversight system.

The literature has emphasized the importance of the organizational factors, human factors and

weather factors in influencing aviation safety. It has also identified gaps listed below in a civil

management system which if not addressed will negatively impact on aviation safety.

Failure to develop and issue regulations that are compliant with international minimum requirement

sand recommended practices established to standardize safety performance in Uganda civil aviation

safety would greatly be impaired.

Effective implementation of the requirements is dependent on the guidance information issued.

Failure to develop relationship of shared responsibility between the regulator and the regulated to

address safety issues as partners significantly compromises collective safety management.

Controls monitor and evaluate compliance; keep hazards and their risk consequences in focus.

Without effective control measures, the operation performance drift will not be observed. Control

provides the baseline for pro-active or predictive safety practices; and a means to keep safety risks

and consequences of hazards in the operational area under organization control. If the State Safety

Program (SSP) requirements are not mandated, Safety Management Systems (SMS)

implementation will be considered optional.

20
The literature summary given at the end does not bring out any gaps unearthed by the study

21
 CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter covered the research design, study population and area, sampling technique, data collection

technique, sampling size and selection, data collection methods, sources of data, quality control, data

analysis, data processing and limitations.

3.2 Research design

The study considered a cross sectional survey design to gather data from the sample population at

any particular time as it permitted collection of information from a sample that is drawn from a

predetermined population. Both qualitative and quantitative research approaches were used.

Qualitative method involved in-depth probing and application of subjectively interpreted data.

Qualitative data enabled the researcher to gather in-depth information about the study, for example

unstructured qualitative interviews served this purpose, (Creswell, 2014). Sekaran and Bougie,

(2016) states that quantitative methods are plans for carrying out research oriented towards

quantification and are applied in order to describe current conditions or to investigate relationships,

including cause and effect relationships. Quantitative approach such as questionnaires was used to

generate the empirical data for analyzing the compliance of aviation safety.

3.3 Study Population

The study targeted 120 respondents from Uganda Civil Aviation Authority (UCAA), from different

functional units such as, Aviation security and facilitation, Aviation operations Meteorological and

Aeronautical inspector and Quality Assurance. Out of which 100 were sampled out for the study.

Source for population figures not given

3.4 Determination of the Sample Size

22
According to Bougie, (2016) a sample is a subset of the population used to get a sample size. The

study consisted of 100 respondents as per Krejcie& Morgan (1970), determination model in the

table below:

Table 3.1: Sample size of respondents

Departments Population Sample size Sampling technique

Aviation security and facilitation 50 45 Random sampling

Aviation Operations 40 35 Random sampling

Meteorological and Aeronautical 20 15 Purposive sampling

Inspector

Quality Assurance 10 5 Purposive sampling

Total 120 100

Source: Primary data; Morgan Krejcie, 1970

Source for population figures not given

3.5 Sampling Procedure

3.5.1 Simple random sampling

Simple random sampling technique was used to sample 45 Aviation security and facilitation and 35

Aviation operations so as to eliminate bias by giving all respondents equal chance to be chosen

(Creswell, 2014).

3.5.2 Purposive sampling

Purposive sampling was used to select 15 Meteorological and Aeronautical inspectors and 5 Quality

Assurance who are knowledgeable about or experienced with a phenomenon of interest (Creswell,

2014). This ensured representation from every unit of the directorate. This also helped the

researcher to create generalizations from the sample being used in the study.

23
Sampling techniques should be described more (preferably in a separate setting) – bring out how equal

chance was ensur

3.6 Data Collection Methods

3.6.1 Primary Data Collection Methods

Primary data was collected using a self-administered questionnaire, and an interview schedule. The

questionnaires were issued out to the eighty respondents to fill and return to the researcher.

questionnaires were used because the research environment is open enough to allow full and honest

answering, the respondents were able to read and understand the questions and the information

required was straight forward, brief and not controversial (Denscombe, 2017). The interview guide

was used to collect qualitative data from key persons responsible for aviation safety in their

respective departments. They were conducted to get in-depth information on key areas on each

objective (Amin, 2005).

3.6.2 Secondary Data Collection Methods

Documentary review data collection method was used to collect specific pertinent information that

was required for the study. It focused on CAA records documents. This information was used to in

the study background and the study population in chapter three.

3.7 Data Collection Instruments

3.7.1 Self-administered questionnaires

Questionnaires were developed following recommended guidelines by various scholars that include

Cooper & Schindler, (2018) and in line with the objectives of the study. Quantitative questions

were close-ended and ranked on a five-point Likert Scale (where 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree,

3= Not Sure, 4=Agree and 5=Strongly Agree) to provide options of answers to questions that were

formulated, as recommended by Robbins (2008). Questionnaires were distributed to the aviation

24
security and facilitation officers, aviation operation officers and personnel licensing officers.

Questionnaire as a method of data collection was used because it is less expensive compared to

other methods of data collection. It is also filled at the respondent’s convenience, hence increasing

the chance of getting valid information. It also covers wide geographical areas in which the

researcher’s approach responds more easily through questionnaire than any other method (Amin,

2005).

3.7.2 Interview guides

The researcher designed an interview guide which was used during the interview of the key

informants of CAA. The researcher posed questions that helped respondents give data to meet the

objectives of the study and probe them in order to seek clarification about responses provided. A

structured interview guide was used for the senior management staff to stimulate them in to detailed

discussion about aviation safety. As a research tool, the interviews were carried out with definite

purposes of obtaining certain information by means of the spoken word. In addition, the interviews

gave an opportunity to the researcher to revisit some of the issues that may be an over-sight in other

instruments and yet they are deemed vital for the study.

3.7.3 Documentary Review Checklist

The documentary review was a study of records kept by CAA (U) Aviation Safety document center.

The review guided a documentary review checklist to obtain information on aircraft accidents in

Uganda; organizations that have been approved by CAA (U); organizations based in Uganda with

current approval certificates; pilots and engineers who have been issued with Uganda licenses,

those with current licenses and those working for organizations based in Uganda.

3.8 Reliability and Validity of the Research Instruments

3.8.1 Validity of the Instruments

This approach measured the degree to which the test items represented the domain or universe of
25
the trait or property being measured. In order to establish the content validity of a measuring

instrument, the researcher identified the overall content to be represented. Items were randomly

chosen from this content that accurately represented the information in all areas. By using this

method, the researcher obtained a group of items which represented the content of the trait or

property that was measured. The formula below was used to obtain validity.

CVI = Number of items rated as relevant

Total number of items in the questionnaire

Table 3.2: Results of content validity for research tools

Dimensions No of Items Relevant CVI

Organization factors 09 08 0.88

Financial resources 05 04 0.88

Aviation infrastructure 06 05 0.88

Aviation safety 07 06 0.85

Average % (CVI) 0.870

Table 3.2 presents average all 0.870 and (0.888, 0.888, 0.888 & 0.857 respectively) on all three

variableshadaCVIsthatwereabove0.7, imply that the tool was validity since it was appropriately

answering / measuring the objectives and conceptualization of the study. According to Mugenda &

Mugenda (2003), the tool can be considered valid where the CVI value is 0.7 and above as is the

case for all the four variables provided above.

3.8.2 Reliability of the Instruments

The instrument whose validity was tested and assured already was tested for reliability through

carrying out a pre-test or pilot study. Cronbach’s coefficient alpha (a) as recommended by Amin,

26
(2005) was used to test the reliability of the research instrument. The instrument was deemed

reliable at 0.7

Table 3.3: Reliability test results of research instruments.

Study variables Cronbach’s Alpha

Organization factors 0.745

Financial resources 0.986

Aviation infrastructure 0.876

Aviation safety 0.765

Average Cronbach Alpha coefficient for variables 0.843

Through the use of SPSS, the researcher undertook to judge and determine the co- efficient of

reliability of the research instrument. A reliability of 0.8 was considered relevant since a pretest

study was carried out by the researcher on 10 respondents and found 0.843 of 34 items.

3.9 Data Collection Procedure

An introductory letter was obtained from the School of Management Science of Uganda

Management institute, and this enabled the researcher to enter the field to gather the relevant data

from various safety aviation inspectors. This letter was asking for permission of study in a given

institution. Therefore, a letter and questionnaires were presented to the staff of Uganda Civil

Aviation Authority. There after interviews were conducted to those key informant respondents. The

responses from the duly filled questionnaires were coded for analysis.

The procedure for data collection does not tell the story

3.10 Data Analysis

Data was analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively

27
3.10.1 Qualitative Data.

Data processing involved editing raw data to detect errors and omissions, classifying data according

to common features, and tabulation to summarize and organize it. Data analysis involved qualitative

approach of identifying the major themes arising respondents’ answers; assigning of codes to the

themes; classification of the themes under the main theme; and integrating the responses into the

report in a more descriptive and analytical manner.

Indicate the themes adopted in qualitative data analysis

3.10.2 Quantitative Data

Data collected was sorted out, edited, coded, classified, and then tabulated. Descriptive statistics

were used in quantitative data analysis. Responses from closed–ended and open-ended questions

were transferred into a summary sheet by tabulating. These were then tallied to establish

frequencies which were converted into percentages. The numbers of respondents giving similar

answers were converted into percentages to illustrate relevant levels of opinion. The statistical

package for socials scientists (SPSS) and Microsoft excel was used to analyze data. In this exercise

of analysis, a multiple linear regression model was run to identify the relevance of the control

variables against the controllable variable.

3.11 Measurements of Study Variables

Quantitative data was measured using standard scales of measurement and testing. The level of

agreement or disagreement was measured using a 5-point Likert scale where; 1 = strongly agree, 2

= Agree, 3 = not sure, 4 = Disagree, and 5 = strongly disagree (Sekaran and Bougie, 2016).

Advantages of this method are that they are easily constructed, considered reliable, provide more

data, consume less time, and permit the use of statements with no direct relationship to the attitude
28
being studied. For qualitative data, narrative techniques of direct quotation and paraphrasing of

responses were used to facilitate comparison across different themes. Some of the reported

statements by key informants were quoted verbatim by indenting, the use of narrative description,

paraphrasing and direct quotation (verbatim) aided in presenting qualitative data from interviews

and documentary review.

3.12 Ethical considerations

According to Leary (2014), ethical issues refer to the integrity in the production of knowledge, as

well as the dignity welfare of the researched.

Confidentiality and privacy: It refers to the obligation of an individual or organization to safeguard

entrusted information. The research participant’s privacy was assured by the researcher, who kept

all the information safely locked up during the research process.

Anonymity: means that either the project does not collect identifying information of individual

subjects (e.g., name, address, Email address, etc.), or the project cannot link individual responses

with participants' identities.

Plagiarism: is presenting someone else's work or ideas as your own, with or without their consent,

by incorporating it into your work without full acknowledgement. All published and unpublished

material, whether in manuscript, printed or electronic form, is covered under this definition. This

was minimized by paraphrasing, citing, quoting, citing quotes, citing own material, and referencing.

Voluntary participation: The research participants were informed that their participation in the study

was not to be rewarded in anyway; it was entirely on voluntary basis. All the research participants

were informed of their rights to refuse to be interviewed, or to withdraw at any point for any reason,

without any prejudice or explanation.

29
Informed consent: Before starting the study, the researcher provided with accurate and complete

information to research regarding the purpose of the study. Participants agreed before the

interviews, and no respondent was forced to fill in the research form.

30
 CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION

4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents analysis and interpretations of the study findings. The findings are presented

according to the study objectives which included establishing the effect of organizational factors on

aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation Authority; determine influence of financial resources on

aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation Authority and to determine the influence of aviation

infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation Authority.

4.2 Response rate

This study covered simple of 80 participants who were given questionnaires which were filled well

and completed except that 19 people who never returned questionnaires, in total data of 61

questionnaires were entered for analysis. We observed that civil aviation employees had busywork

schedules; hence this was the reason for the 19 who failed to complete and return the

questionnaires. The results are provided in table 4.4.

Table 4.4: Response Rate

Instrument Target Actual Response Response rate (%)

Questionnaire 80 61 76

Interviews 20 15 75

Source: Primary Data (2021)

From table 4.4 above, out of the 80 questionnaires administered, 61 were returned correctly filled

representing 76%. Out of the 20 respondents that were targeted for interviews, only 15 were

interviewed implying a response rate of 75%. The overall response rates were considered good

enough since it was over and above the 50% as recommended by Amin (2005).

31
4.3 Findings on back ground characteristics

This section presents findings on demographic characteristics of the respondents as presented

below.

Gender characteristics of the respondents

The gender characteristics of respondents were investigated for this study, and findings are

presented in Table 4.5 below.

Table 4.5: Gender of respondents

Category Frequency Percentages

Male 33 54.1

Female 28 45.9

Total 61 100

Source: Primary Data (2021).

Table 4.5 shows that the majority of the respondents were male 33(54.1%) and female were

28(45.9%). The implication of this finding was that no much disparity in percentage of males and

females who attended the study, at least views of both males and females were captured which is

too vital in making a critical analysis on factors affecting compliance of aviation safety in Uganda

Civil Aviation Authority.

4.3.1 Age of the Respondents

The study looked at age distribution of the respondents by age using frequency distribution. The

results obtained on the item are presented in Table 4.6 below.

Table 4.6: Age of the Respondents

32
 Age bracket Frequency Percentage

Below 30 years 25 41

31-40yrs 17 28

41-50yrs 13 21

51 and above years 6 10

Total 61 100

Source: Primary Data (2021)

From the above Table 4.6, the majority of respondents who took part in the study were between 18-

25 years making a total percentage of 41%, 15.2% were between the age of 26-30 years, those

between 31-35 years were 21.2%, 10% were between 36-40 years and those that who were above

41 years were 13%. This indicated that all categories of respondents in reference to different age

groups were represented in this study.

4.3.2 Education level of respondents

The respondents were also asked to indicate their education levels which is illustrated in the figure

4.2 below.

Source: Primary Data (2021)

60

50

40

30
Percentage
20

10

0
Diploma Bachelors Masters
33 PHD
Figure 4.2: Highest Level of Education the Respondents

Findings in the figure above indicates that majority of the respondents were degree holders making

a total percentage of 30(49), Master’s degree were 15(25%), diploma holders were 10(16%), and

PHD holders were 6(4.9%). These results indicate that the respondents had good qualifications and

the right skills and knowledge to deliver. Besides, the respondents were able to understand, read,

interpret the questionnaire and gave relevant responses.

4.3.3: Years of Service

The respondents were also asked to indicate their years of service in the organization which is

illustrated in the figure 4.3 below

16 years and 0-5 years

above 13%
7% 11-15
Year
s
18%

6-10years
62%

Source: Primary Data (2021)

Figure 4.3: Showing years of service

Findings in Figure 2 above shows that 8(13%) of the respondents had worked with the organization

between 0-5years, 38(62%) of respondents had worked between 6-10years, 11(18%) had worked

between 11-15 years while 4(7%) had worked for over 16 years and above. This meant that

majority of the respondents had a working experience of 8 years and above, thereby having enough

knowledge to provide relevant information on aviation safety.

34
4.4 The effect of organizational factors on aviation safety in UCAA

The items on organizational factors were structured basing on the objectives of the study. Items

were measured on a five-point Likert scale where code 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 =

Not sure, 4=Agree and 5=Strongly Agree. The data is presented and analyzed basing on 8 items

which are statistically tabulated and presented in the table below with the frequencies and

percentages according to the responses collected.

Table 4.7: The effect of organizational factors on aviation safety in UCAA

Items SD D N A SA Mean Std.

Dev

The Civil Aviation Regulatory 14% 6% 24% 39% 15% 3.24 1.24

institution must be compliant with the ICAO (9) (4) (15) (24) (9)

standards

The compliance status of a Civil 8% 7% 13% 45% 23% 3.63 1 1.17

Aviation Authority is reflected in industry (6) (5) (8) (28) (14)

performance

Approvals are granted after 2% 3% 8% 39% 34% 4.15 .854

Demonstration of compliance with the (1) (10) (5) (24) (21)

requirements.

The CAA and operators have shared 8% 11% 11% 41% 27% 3.80 1.65

responsibility for aviation safety (5) (7) (7) (25) (17)

management

Sufficient safety standards 3% 14% 16% 26% 39% 3.79 1.20

Implementation guidance information has been (2) (9) (10) (16) (24)

issued.

Managing operational risks and errors 3% 11% 9% 36% 39% 3.85 1.12
35
 contributes to safety (2) (7) (6) (22) (24)

management control

Good work-place conditions promote 4.9% 11% 16% 31% 36% 3.80 1.20

(fosters) safety performance (3) (7) (10) (19) (22)

Uganda has documented a State 8.2% 11.5 11.5 41% 27.9 3.80 1.65

Safety Program (SSP) to guide Safety (5) %(7 % (25) %

Management Systems (SMS) ) (7) (17)

Source: Primary Data, (2021)

As to whether Civil Aviation Regulatory institution is compliant with the ICAO standards, the

respondent’s responses indicated that cumulatively, 14.8% strongly disagreed, 6.6% disagreed,

24.6% were Not sure 39.3% agreed and 15% strongly agreed. The mean = 3.24 indicated that the

majority of the respondents agreed that Civil Aviation Regulatory institution is compliant with the

ICAO standards. The interviewed respondents disagreed, that their guidelines to formulate

organization safety objectives and expected performance levels. Therefore, there is no established

means to measure and assess the safety performance. This meant that without guidance information,

safety objective realization is normally just assumed.

The interviewed respondents further indicatedthatthe39%respondents, who agreed, could have

represented organizations that strive for safety standards higher than the minimum established.

Relatedly, a respondent had this to say on whether the compliance status of a Civil Aviation

Authority is reflected in industry performance, 8.2% strongly disagreed, 7.8% disagreed, 13.1% not

sure, 45.9% agreed and 23% strongly agreed. The mean = 3.63 indicated that the respondents were

in agreement with the statement. This implies that The Establishment of a State Oversight System”

recommends that contracting states should organize safety requirement in a way that assumes

shared responsibility between the state regulatory institution and the service providers for the whole

36
spectrum of civil aviation activities and functions

With respect to whether approvals are granted after demonstration of compliance with the

requirements, 1.6% strongly disagreed, 3.3% disagreed, 8.2% not sure, 39% agreed, and 34.4%

strongly agreed. The mean = 4.15 which corresponded to agreed indicated that approvals are

granted after demonstration of compliance with the requirements.

The key informants revealed that;

The interviewed respondents raised a concern that the convention does not offer local

flexibility, common problems sighted include lack of communication, difficulties in

understanding the international regulatory regime of civil aviation and the consequences of

not meeting the State safety obligations under the convention. They were also of the view

that the disagreement that the regulations are appropriate f for the civil aviation industry in

Uganda was are flection of national sentiments, even with the knowledge of the obligations

of a contracting state to the convention on. Failure to recognize ICAO minimum acceptable

standards regulations would have a negative influence to Uganda civil aviation

management compliance status and aviation safety performance.

As to whether CAAandoperatorshavesharedresponsibilityforaviationsafetymanagement, 8.2%

strongly disagreed, 11.5% disagreed, 11.5% not sure, 41% agreed and 27.9% strongly agreed. The

mean = 3.80 meant that the CAA and operators have shared responsibility for aviation safety

management.

With respect to whether sufficient safety standard simple mentation guidance information has been

issued, 3.3% strongly disagreed, 14.8% disagreed, 16.4% were not sure, 26.2% agreed, 36.1%

strongly agreed. The mean = 3.79 which corresponded to agreed indicated the majority of the

respondents agreed with the statement.

37
Responses to the question as to whether the managing operational risks and errors contributes to

safety management control, 3.3% strongly disagreed,11.5% disagreed, 9.8% were notsure,36.1%

agreed, and 29.5% were not sure. The mean = 3.85 indicated that the majority of the respondents

agreed with statement.

As to whether good work-place conditions promote (fosters) safety performance, 4.9% strongly

disagreed, 11.5% disagreed, 13.1%notsure, 36% agreed, and 32.8%stronglyagreed. The mean=3.80

indicated that the majority of the respondents agreed with the statement.

With respect to whether Uganda has documented a State Safety Program (SSP) to guide Safety

Management Systems (SMS), 1.6% strongly disagreed, 3.3% disagreed, 8.2% not sure, 39% agreed,

and 34.4% strongly agreed. The mean = 4.15 which corresponded to agreed indicated that company

has documented a State Safety Program (SSP) to guide Safety Management Systems (SMS). This

implies that the operators do conduct safety trainings for all employees and have mechanisms in

place for monitoring the effectiveness of such trainings. One key respondent added that;

ICAO and IATA in conjunction with regulatory authorities usually conduct training of trainers’ workshops,

not only on SMS but also on other safety related subjects in which representatives are sought from all stake

holders.

Hypothesis testing one

Table 4.8: Correlation Matrix for organizational factors and aviation safety in UCAA

Organizational Aviation safety in

Factors UCAA

38
Organizational factors Pearson Correlation 1 .688**

Sig. (2-tailed) .003

N 61 61

Aviation safety in Pearson Correlation .688** 1

UCAA

Sig. (2-tailed) .003

N 61 61

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Source: Primary Data (2021)

The coefficient was .688** and p=0.003<0.05 and the significance level was 0.003. The result

indicates that there is a significant positive relationship between organizational factors and aviation

safety in UCAA. Therefore, the alternative hypothesis that was earlier stated in chapter one is

upheld.

4.5 The influence of financial resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation Authority

The (5) items on financial resources were structured basing on the objectives of the study. Items

were measured on a five-point Likert scale where code 1 = strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Not

sure, 4 = Agree and 5 = strongly Agree. The items are statistically tabulated and presented in the

table 4.10 below with the frequencies and percentages according to the responses collected.

39
Table 4.9: The influence of financial resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

Items SD D N A SA Mean Std. D

The organization is sufficiently 9% 11% 16% 27% 34% 4.26 5.64

funded to effectively carry out its (6) (7) (10) (17) (21)

mandate of safety oversight.

The organization has employed 19% 9% 18% 32% 19% 3.18 1.43

mechanism to ensure adequate (12) (6) (11) (20) (12)

financial sustainability.

The organization’s funds are made 14% 11% 27% 29% 33% 3.89 1.24

available to the critical safety (9) (7) (7) (18) (20)

oversight functions adequate.

Relevant personnel are involved 14% 8.2% 18% 31.1% 28% 3.89 4.27

in the budget planning of the (9) (5) (11) (19) (17)

Organization

Mechanisms have been put in 16% 11% 14% 37% 19% 3.17 1.32

place to discourage funds (10) (7) (9) (23) (12)

misappropriation.

Source: Primary Data, (2021)

With respect to whether the organization is sufficiently funded to effectively carry out its mandate

of safety oversight, 9.8% strongly disagreed, 11.5% disagreed, 16.4% not sure, 27.9% agreed and

26.2% strongly agreed. The mean = 4.26 which corresponded to agreed indicated the majority of

the respondents agreed that organization is sufficiently funded to effectively carry out its mandate

40
of safety oversight. The key informant observed that:

Resources are allocated aimed at effective SMS implementation and to ensure that the SMS

is performing to requirements.” Another interviewee added that; “For any key activities to

take place, resources need to be available.

Responses to the question as to whether the organization has employed mechanism to ensure

adequate financial sustainability, 19.7% strongly disagreed, 9.8% disagreed, 18% were not sure,

27.9% agreed and 19.7% strongly agreed. The mean = 3.18 indicated that the agreement with the

statement.

As to whether the organization’s funds are made available to the critical safety oversight functions

adequate. 14.8% strongly disagreed, 11.5% disagreed, 27.9% were not sure, 29.5% agreed, 7%

strongly agreed. The mean = 3.89 indicated that the majority of the respondents agreed with the

statement. These findings conform to a study conducted by Browman, (2009) who indicates that

financial resource allocation and priority setting are challenging issues faced by aviation safety

decision makers requiring careful consideration of many factors, including objective such as reason,

and subjective like empathy elements

Responses to the question as to whether relevant personnel are involved in the budget planning of

the organization, 14.8% strongly disagreed, 8.2% disagreed, 18% not sure, 31.1% agreed and

19.7% strongly agreed. The mean=3.89indicatedthatthemajorityoftherespondentsagreedthat

therelevantpersonnelareinvolvedinthebudgetplanningoftheorganization.Thiswassimilarto the

interview results where a respondent mentioned.

The regulatory authority has a safety policy which is not of much help in the SMS

implementation”

Another key informant added that,

“Operators strive on their own in order to ensure they effectively implement SMS.” While
41
 another interviewee stressed that; “There is an emphasis by the regulatory authority, on

holding senior management accountable for safety.”

With respect to whether mechanisms have been put in place to discourage funds misappropriation,

16.4% strongly disagreed, 11.5% disagreed 14.8 were not sure, 37.7% agreed and 19% strongly

agreed. The mean = 3.17 indicated that the majority of the respondents agreed with the statement.

As Oncol, (2008) argues, choices may not be based on rational and transparent processes

highlighting the need for processes that take this in to account. He emphasizes that if the

mechanism employed to guide the distribution of financial resources is inequitable, the outcome is

also likely to be the same hence compromising aviation safety.

Based on the key findings, the personnel are willing to make improvement and they have the

necessary capabilities to make the changes. This is in harmony with a statement where an

interviewee said that.

During these performance reviews, incident and accident reports are further analyzed and

recommendations made for improvement.” Another respondent further asserted that;

“Theirpersonnelhavegotthenecessarytrainingandthereforehavethecapabilitytomake the

necessary improvements based on the feedback from the analysis of the incident and

accident reports.”

Table 4.10: Correlation Matrix for financial resources and aviation safety in UCAA

Financial Aviation safety

Resources in UCAA

Financial Resources Pearson Correlation 1 .777**

42
 Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 61 61

Aviation safety in Pearson Correlation .777** 1

UCAA Sig. (2-tailed) .0000

N 61 61

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

The correlation coefficient was .777** and p=0.003<0.05 and the significance level was 0.003. The

results indicate that there is a positive significant relationship between financial resources and

aviation safety in UCAA. Therefore, the alternative hypothesis that was earlier stated in chapter one

is upheld.

4.6: The influence of aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

The items on aviation infrastructure were structured basing on the objective of the study. Items

were measured on a five-point Likert scale where code 1 = strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Not

sure, 4 = Agree and 5 = strongly Agree. (6) Items which are statistically tabulated and presented in

the table below with the frequencies and percentages according to the responses collected.

Table 4.11: The influence of aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

Items SD D N A SA Mean Std. D

The aerodrome ground 8% 9% 9% 29% 43% 3.78 1.76

infrastructure is adequate for the (5) (6) (6) (18) (26)

current aviation activities in the

43
country.

Planning and implementation of the 8% 6% 18% 39% 28%

civil aviation infrastructure is (5) (4) (11) (24) (17) 3.58 1.03

methodically integrated into the civil

aviation system.

The technology supporting civil 9% 16% 19% 34% 19% 3.64 1.23

aviation air traffic system is adequate (6) (10) (12) (21) (12)

and up to date.

Effective regulatory system to ensure 13% 8% 18% 27% 33% 3.73 1.45

control of developments around civil (8) (5) (11) (17) (20)

aerodromes to guard against

encroachment

The ICAO runway safety programme 8% 13% 19% 27% 31% 3.39 1.24

been implemented in the entire (5) (8) (12) (17) (19)

aerodrome where it applies.

Aerodromes ’infrastructure 9% 14% 16% 29% 30% 3.41 1.30

maintenance practices or programmes (6) (9) (10) (18) (18)

are adequate to ensure sustained

availability and compliance with

international standards.

Source: Primary Data, (2021)

With respect to whether the aerodrome ground infrastructure is adequate for the current aviation

activities in the country, 8.2% strongly disagreed, 9.9% disagreed, 9.9% not sure, 29.5% agreed and

44
29.5% strongly agreed. The mean=3.72 indicated the majority of the respondents agreed with

statement.

The hard and visible infrastructure, such as roads, railways, electricity, and telecommunications,

must be accompanied and supported by its soft component, such as policies and regulations, to

enable the system to perform well and generate impacts. The right mix and synergy of the two is

important to ensure that the infrastructure system supports inclusive growth and poverty reduction.

Responses to the question as to whether planning and implementation of the civil aviation

infrastructure is methodically integrated into the civil aviation system, 8% strongly disagreed, 6.6%

disagreed, 18% were not sure, 39.3% agreed and 28% strongly agreed. The mean = 3.58 indicated

that the majority of the respondents agreed with statement.

As to whether in the technology supporting civil aviation air traffic system is adequate and up to

date, 9.8% strongly disagreed 16.4% disagreed, 19.7% not sure, 34.4% agreed, 19.6% disagreed.

The mean = 3.64 indicated that the majority of the respondents agreed the statement.

Withrespecttowhethereffectiveregulatorysystemtoensurecontrolofdevelopmentsaroundcivil

aerodromes to guard against encroachment, 13% strongly disagreed, 8.2% disagreed, 18% not sure,

27.7% agreed 33% strongly agreed. The mean = 3.73 indicated the majority of the respondents

agreed with the statement.

Responses to the question as to whether the ICAO runway safety programme been implemented in

the entire aerodrome where it applies, 8.2% strongly disagreed, 13% disagreed, 19% not sure,

27.9% agreed with the statement and 31% of the respondents strongly agreed with the statement.

The mean = 3.39 indicated that the respondents agreed with statement.

45
With respect to whether aerodromes’ infrastructure maintenance practices or programmes are

adequate to ensure sustained availability and compliance with international standards, 9.8%

strongly disagreed with the statement, 14.8% disagreeing, 16% were not sure, 29% agreed with

statement and 30% strongly agreed with the statement. The mean = 3.41 which corresponded to

agree with the statement. The findings are supported by Ncube (African Development Bank, 2015),

he reiterates that the air transport industry faces various challenges including poor airport

infrastructures, lack of physical and human resources, limited connectivity, and lack of transit

facilities. Although substantial progress has been made during the past decade, Africa still lags

behind other regions in terms of “soft” and “hard” infrastructure. It is therefore critical that African

countries invest in the soft as well as hard infrastructure to support the industry.

Table 4.12: Correlation Matrix for aviation infrastructure and aviation safety in Uganda Civil

Aviation Authority

Aviation Aviation safety in

Infrastructure UCAA

Aviation Pearson Correlation 1 .622*

Infrastructure Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 61 61

Aviation safety in Pearson Correlation .622* 1

UCAA Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 61 61

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). Source: Primary Data (2021)

The result in Table 4.13 shows that the correlation coefficient is. 622*.The results show that there is

a significant positive relationship between aviation infrastructure and aviation safety in Uganda

46
Civil Aviation Authority. Therefore, the alternative hypothesis that was earlier stated in chapter one

is upheld.

Table 4.13: Multiple Regression Analysis for factors affecting compliance of aviation safety in

civil aviation industry

Unstandardized Standardized

Model Coefficients Coefficients

Variables
Std.

Beta Error Beta T Sig.

(Constant) 81.607 6.326 12.900 .000

Organization factors .224 .074 . 688 3.041 .003

Financial Resources .065 .142 .777 .456 .000

Aviation infrastructure
.260 .075 . 622 3.484 .000
1

.387
a
R

R Square .150

Adjusted
.139
R Square

13.6

F statistic 57

.000
b
Sig.

a. Dependent Variable: Aviation safety

b. Predictors: (Constant), organization factors, financial resources and aviation infrastructure

47
R square of. 150 imply that organization factors, financial resources and aviation infrastructure

explain the variance in aviation safety by 15%. This suggests that holding other factors constant,

one unit of improvement in organization factors, financial resources and aviation infrastructure

would result into an improvement in aviation safety by a magnitude of 0.15 units.

The regression model in table above shows that Organization factors had (Sig=.003), less than 0.05,

hence indicating that it is statistically a significant result. This implies that Organization factors

influence aviation safety. However, since the Beta coefficient is high (.688), it means that existing

financial resources are the most significant factors in improving aviation safety. The B (.224)

Coefficients implies that a 0.224 unit increase in organization factors will lead to 0.224 unit

increase in aviation safety at UCAA.

The regression model in table above shows that financial resources had (Sig=.000), less than 0.05,

hence indicating that it is statistically a significant result. This implies that financial resources

influence aviation safety. However, since the Beta coefficient is high (.777), it means that existing

financial resources are the most significant factors in improving aviation safety. The B (.065)

Coefficients implies that a 0.065 unit increase in financial resources will lead to 0.5 unit increase in

aviation safety.

The regression model in table above shows that aviation infrastructure had (Sig=.000), less than

0.05, hence indicating that it is statistically a significant result. This implies that aviation

infrastructure influence aviation safety. However, since the Beta coefficient is high (.622), it means

that existing aviation infrastructure are the most significant factors in improving aviation safety.

The B (.260) Coefficients implies that a 0.260 unit increase in aviation infrastructure will lead to

48
0.260 unit increase in aviation safety.

4.7 Aviation Safety

The items on aviation safety were structured basing on the study variable. Items were measured on

a five-point Likert scale where code 1 = strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Not sure, 4 = Agree

and 5 = strongly Agree. (8) Items which are statistically tabulated and presented in the table below

with the frequencies and percentages according to the responses collected.

Table 14: Aviation Safety

49
Items SD D NS A SA Mean Std. Dev

Uganda’s Regulations are adequate to 14% 6% 8% 56% 15% 3.91 1.24

acquire the international Acceptable Level (9) (4) (5) (34) (9)

of Safety.

Civil Aviation Management Institution 8% 7% 13% 45% 23% 3.63 1 1.17

performs regular performance audits and (6) (5) (8) (28) (14)

surveys

Industry safety audits are performed to 2% 3% 8% 39% 34% 4.15 .854

identify non conformity for correction and (1) (10) (5) (24) (21)

not for penalizing.

The certification process entrenches 8% 11% 11% 41% 27% 3.80 1.65

regulatory controls in the service providers (5) (7) (7) (25) (17)

procedures

Managing operational risks and errors 3% 14% 00% 43% 39% 3.79 1.20

contributes to safety management control (2) (9) (00) (26) (24)

Uganda has documented a State Safety 3% 11% 9% 36% 39% 3.85 1.12

Program (SSP) to guide Safety (2) (7) (6) (22) (24)

Management Systems (SMS)

50
 Good work-place conditions promotes 4.9 11% 5% 31% 48% 3.80 1.20

(fosters) safety performance % (7) (3) (19) (29)

(3)

As to whether Uganda’s Regulations are adequate to acquire the international Acceptable Level of

Safety, the respondent’s responses indicated that cumulatively, 14% strongly disagreed, 6%

disagreed, 8% were not sure, 56% agreed and 15% strongly agreed. The mean = 3.91 indicated that

the majority of the respondents agreed that Uganda’s Regulations are adequate to acquire the

international Acceptable Level of Safety. This means that if they are compliant with ICAO

minimum Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) then an acceptable level of civil aviation

safety standard can be realized. The findings above are supported by key informants views that:

Uganda civil aviation regulations were ICAO compliant, however the management system

lacked an effective arrangement to ensure they are kept revised to the latest amendment of

ICAO Annexes that are issued from time to time. This shortcoming could have could have

contributed to the poor score result in the ICAO USOAP in November 2008.

As to whether Civil Aviation Management Institution performs regular performance audits and

surveys, 8% strongly disagreed, 7% disagreed, 13% not sure, 45% agreed and 23% strongly agreed.

The mean = 3.63 indicated that the respondents were in agreement with the statement. This meant

that audits findings are not used to penalize but mainly to initiate timely corrective action and

measures to prevent re-occurrence. This is in direct support to the “No Blame Just Culture” safety

strategy that recommends non punitive voluntary reporting of errors incidents. It is also in support

of the open culture where information on error, incidents and accidents is shared with all

stakeholders in flight safety industry.

51
With respect to whether Industry safety audits are performed to identify non conformity for

correction and not for penalizing, 1% strongly disagreed, 3% disagreed, 8% not sure, 39% agreed,

and 34% strongly agreed. The mean = 4.15 which corresponded to agreed indicated that Industry

safety audits are performed to identify non conformity for correction and not for penalizing. The

results of statement C3 in Table: 4.6 indicate that all the respondents agreed that industry safety

audits are performed to identify non conformities for correction and not for executing penalties.

This meant that audits findings are not used to penalize but mainly to initiate timely corrective

action and measures to prevent re-occurrence. This is in direct support to the “No Blame Just

Culture” safety strategy that recommends non punitive voluntary reporting of errors incidents. It is

also in support of the open culture where information on error, incidents and accidents is shared

with all stakeholders in flight safety industry. The “No Blame Just Culture” however demands clear

definitions and clear separation between the “un safe acts” to which disciplinary action is neither

appropriate nor useful and “truly bad behavior or violations” that deserves punitive action. This

100% positive result supports the development the Just Culture.

As to whether Managing operational risks and errors contribute to safety management control, 8%

strongly disagreed, 11% disagreed, 11% not sure, 41% agreed and 27% strongly agreed. The mean

= 3.80 meant that the Managing operational risks and errors contributes to safety management

control. It indicates that there is committed effort to analyze work processes to identify risks and

hazards to safety in operational areas and creating an environment conducive enough for employees

to report observed or experienced safety related errors. It also indicate that impediments to Error

Reporting System in particular, human nature’s tendency to deny that we make mistakes, fear of

retribution or punishment for disclosing such mistakes, the feeling that you are darned if you report

52
and darned if you don’t and it has punitive implications that by far outweigh the advantages to the

individual are being overcome (Baron, 2008). This greatly enhances flight safety.

With respect to whether Uganda has documented a State Safety Program (SSP) to guide Safety

Management Systems (SMS), 3% strongly disagreed, 14% disagreed, 16% were not sure, 26%

agreed, 36% strongly agreed. The mean = 3.79 which corresponded to agreed indicated the majority

of the respondents agreed with the statement. This implies that the statement of compliance lists out

all the relevant and applicable regulations to the subject procedures and where (chapter, section and

page) in the manual the regulation requirements have been addressed. It is required to submit the

procedures manuals and all subsequent amendments to CAA for compliance evaluation to ensure

that all the regulations have been satisfactorily addressed before they are approved for application.

The approved procedures there after provide the base line upon which the organization functional

performance and compliance audits are based.

Responses to the question as to whether Good work-place conditions promotes (fosters) safety

performance, 3.3% strongly disagreed,11.5% disagreed, 9.8% were notsure,36.1% agreed, and

29.5% were not sure. The mean = 3.85 indicated that the majority of the respondents agreed with

statement.

53
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMMARY, DISCUSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction

This study examined the factors that affect compliance to aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority. This chapter presents a summary, discussion of findings, conclusions and

recommendations made by the study, and all these are in line with the research objectives.

5.2 Summary of key findings

5.2.1 The effect of organizational factors on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

The results showed that the coefficient was .688** and p =0.000 < 0.05. Therefore, according to the

results there was a significant positive relationship between organizational factors aviation safety.

Therefore, the alternative hypothesis that was earlier stated in chapter one is upheld. This means

that an improvement in organizational factors will lead to improved aviation safety

5.2.2 The influence of financial resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

The results showed that the coefficient was .777** and p=0.000 < 0.05. Therefore, according to the

results there was a positive significant relationship between financial resources on aviation safety.

Therefore, the alternative hypothesis that was earlier stated in chapter one is upheld. This means

that an improvement in financial resources will lead to improved aviation safety. The study

ascertained that other than the organization being well funded, it has employed mechanism to

ensure adequate financial sustainability by investing in efficient systems that will aid them in the

collection, attracting and retaining of funds collected. The study also revealed that the relevant

personnel were involved in the overall budget planning in the organization with all the stakeholders

being involved.
54
5.2.3 The influence of aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda

The result showed that the correlation coefficient was .622* and p=0.000 < 0.05. Therefore,

according to the results there was a positive significant relationship between aviation infrastructure

and aviation safety. The alternative hypothesis that was earlier stated in chapter one is upheld. As

far as airport infrastructure was concerned, the study revealed that the technology supporting civil

aviation air traffic system was dimmed adequate and up to date as the UCAA complied with

international standard relating to aerodrome certification. The study also revealed that the ICAO

runway safety program had not been entirely implemented in the aerodromes as the infrastructure

maintenance practices were inadequate. The national government and county governments also

contributed negatively to airport safety as they lacked effective regulatory system to ensure control

of developments around civil aerodromes, to guard against encroachment.

5.3 Discussion of the study findings

5.3.1. The effect of organizational factors on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

The second objective was: To assess how civil aviation organizing influences aviation safety in

Uganda. This objective guided the study to find out if the civil aviation management system in

Uganda has developed and issued information to interpret the regulations requirements; has directed

the industry on establishing effective management processes; and has standardized auditing,

evaluation, and enforcement functions of the safety inspectors. These are the functions that bring

together the civil aviation management system and aviation safety services providers

The results indicate a majority respondent’s agreement that appropriate resource allocation

including having sufficient numbers of qualified; well facilitated and equipped personnel will have

a positive influence on aviation safety. This result was in agreement with ICAO observation that

55
safety oversight systems that set themselves ambitious civil aviation management and aviation

safety objectives without deploying the necessary means and resources to deliver such objectives,

cannot realize the desired acceptable level of safety performance (ICAO, 2019). There should be

controls in place to ensure that proper level and quality of resources are available to the

organization at all times (Wood, 2015). Seventy per-cent (70%) of the respondents agreed that

requirements compliance evaluation is performed using standard and uniform procedures; and 80%,

that a definition of the type of aircraft accepted on Uganda civil aviation air craft register has been

issued. However, there was a disagreement that the civil aviation regulations are favorable to the

civil aviation industry in Uganda. This result was in conflict with to Article 12 of the Chicago

conventional that requires state regulations to be compliant with the minimum international

Standards and Recommended Practices (SAPs) established from time to time. And those

regulations are legally empowered by a State Civil Aviation Act of parliament.

Findings are supported by Bateman & Snell, (2014) who noted that planning is the designing of an

environment for effective performance of an organization, it involves determining in advance what

to do, how to do it, when to do it and who is to do it. It makes it possible for things to occur that

would otherwise not happen as required. Without planning actions tend to be uncoordinated,

aimless and are left to happen by chance.

Balunywa, (2015) revealed that in civil aviation safety management context, the planning function

requires designing systems that will function and perform in compliance with the minimum

standards established from time to time by the International Civil Aviation Organization with the

primary purpose of realizing the international Acceptable Level of Safety (ALoS) to reduce civil

aircraft accident rates. These activities involve the designing of the safety oversight system (the

CAA) adopting and issuing of the civil aviation regulations, setting the scope of the state civil
56
aviation activities depending on the industry size and commitment.

Findings are supported by ICAO-A, (2016) which indicated that civil aviation control is legally

empowered by Civil Aviation Act, the associated Regulations, the Convention and ICAO minimum

Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs). To achieve international civil aviation safety

standards, Article 12 of the Chicago requires each contracting state to develop and keep its own

regulations uniform to the greatest possible extent with those established from time to time under

the convention to enable its safety management system and the service providers to develop

capacity and capability to execute its safety functions to attain the acceptable level of safety.

5.3.2 The influence of financial resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

The results showed that the coefficient was .688** and p =0.000 < 0.05. Therefore, according to the

results there was a significant positive relationship between financial resources on aviation safety.

These findings conform to a study conducted by Browman, (2009) who indicates that financial

resource allocation and priority setting are challenging issues faced by aviation safety decision

makers requiring careful consideration of many factors, including objective such as reason, and

subjective like empathy elements. As Oncol, (2018) argues, choices may not be based on rational

and transparent processes highlighting the need for processes that take this into account. He

emphasizes that if the mechanism employed to guide the distribution of financial resources is

inequitable, the outcome is also likely to be the same hence compromising aviation safety.

The findings are in agreement with (Oncol, 2018). As argued by various authors, choices may not

be based on rational and transparent processes highlighting the need for processes that take this into

account. Indeed, if the mechanism employed to guide the distribution of financial resources is

inequitable, the outcome is also likely to be. Thus, how resources are allocated for aviation safety

57
around the world remains a challenging issue. Priority-setting is defined as the process by which

financial resources are allocated among competing programs or people. In the context of increasing

aviation safety costs in many countries around the world, effective approaches to explicit appraisal

and priority setting are becoming critical to allocate resources to aviation accident interventions that

provide the most benefit to the systems’ sustainability, equity and efficiency (Bowen,2018).

ICAO, (2019) noted that the perspective of safety management as an organizational process and a

corebusinessfunctionclearlyplacesultimatesafetyaccountabilityandresponsibilityatthehighest level of

aviation organizations. Nowhere are such accountability and responsibility more evident than in

decisions regarding allocation of both human and financial resources. Unless safety management is

made a core business function, a management dilemma, simply put, the “dilemma of the two Ps”

will arise and this can be characterized as the conflict that would develop at the senior management

level because of the perception that resources must be allocated on an either/or basis to what are

believed to be conflicting goals: production or protection (safety) goals (ICAO, 2019).

5.3.3. The influence of aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda

The result showed that the correlation coefficient is .622*. The results show that there is a

significant positive relationship between aviation infrastructure and aviation safety in Uganda Civil

Aviation Authority. The study findings are consistent with Ali and Pernia (2016) infrastructure

consists of hard and soft components. The hard and visible infrastructure, such as roads, railways,

electricity, and telecommunications, must be accompanied and supported by its soft component,

such as policies and regulations, to enable the system to perform well and generate impacts. The

right mix and synergy of the two is important to ensure that the infrastructure system supports

inclusive growth and poverty reduction. Well-functioning and efficient infrastructure promotes

inclusiveness by expanding access to vital services and improving economic opportunities for all.
58
The findings are in agreement with Ncube (2015) who reiterates that the air transport industry faces

various challenges including poor airport infrastructures, lack of physical and human resources,

limited connectivity, and lack of transit facilities. Although substantial progress has been made

during the past decade, Africa still lags behind other regions in terms of “soft” and “hard”

infrastructure. It is therefore critical that African countries invest in the soft as well as hard

infrastructure to support the industry.

The findings are incongruence with (ICAO-A, 2016) that noted that the vision proposes number of

strategies to be pursued including strengthening the existing framework and accelerating the speed

of implementation. Others will include raising efficiency and quality of infrastructure, enhancing

local content of identified projects, support identified flagship projects, benchmarking infrastructure

facilities with globally accepted standards and targeting projects in neglected areas to increase

connectivity and stimulate economic activities. In addition, the vision hopes to enhance Private

Sector participation in provision of infrastructure facilities and services strategically complimented

by Public Sector Interventions, Infrastructure Financing through Capital Markets.

5.4 Conclusions

5.4.1 The effect of organizational factors on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

The study concludes that mechanisms in place to ensure sustainability have a positive effect on

aviation safety as the organization has reserves that can be used in time of crisis. The study also

concludes that funds allocation mechanism has a significant impact on aviation safety since they

were not made readily available to the critical safety oversight functions. Further the study

highlights that resources in the aviation industry are limited hence the need to optimize and

prioritize them in order to reduce wastage and discourage funds misappropriation.

59
5.4.2 The influence of financial resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

The study concludes that mechanisms in place to ensure financial sustainability have a positive

effectonaviationsafetyastheorganizationhasfinancialreservesthatcanbeusedintimeofcrisis. The study

also concludes that funds allocation mechanism has a significant impact on aviation safety since

they were not made readily available to the critical safety oversight functions. Further the study

highlights that resources in the aviation industry are limited hence the need to optimize and

prioritize them in order to reduce wastage and discourage funds misappropriation.

5.4.3 The influence of aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda

The overall infrastructure is wanting and hence has a great effect on aviation safety. Components

ranging from aerodrome ground infrastructure, air traffic management system, layout of pavements

and infrastructure maintenance practices are ineffective hence compromising aviation safety. The

study concludes that the relevance of the existing TGMs is in line with the current practices in the

aviation industry; however, recommended revisions should be implemented as soon as possible.

5.5 Recommendations

5.5.1. The effect of organizational factors on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

All personnel in the organization should have free access to and/or get feedback about the analyzed

accident and incident reports. This will enable them to debrief their errors and violations and

improve their work performance accordingly Evaluate Uganda’s civil aviation management system

to identify noncompliance gaps in relation with the requirements of ICAO eight critical elements of

an effective safety oversight system. This is in terms of a supportive Civil Aviation Act; compliant

regulations; a well-structured regulatory authority; trained, qualified and experienced safety

inspectors; guidance information; services providers certification obligations; services providers

60
surveys and audit programs; and resolution of safety concerns arising.

Develop a state safety program (SSP) and enforce the implementation of safety management

systems (SMS)to enhance establishment of objective services providers acceptable level of safety.

Establish programs which ensure that the civil aviation regulations are continuously updated and

kept uniform to the greatest possible extent with the minimum Standards and Recommended

Practices (SAPs) established and issued from time to time under the Convention.

Develop and issue guidance information for all safety performance related activities to guide the

service provider’s effective compliance.

Promote a relationship between the regulator and the regulated for the shared responsibility for civil

aviation safety management, to enhance voluntary compliance with the regulations, voluntary error

reporting and non-punitive safety culture management system. This shall promote a culture that

shares audit safety findings, reported incidents, errors, and observed risks to aviation safety between

organizations to minimize re-occurrence.

5.5.2 The influence of financial resources on aviation safety in Uganda Civil Aviation

Authority

In order to curb the resource allocation deficiency in the aviation industry, the study recommends

that UCAA should consider efficiency, fairness and utility when allocating resources needed to

improve airport safety as this will guide them when faced with quagmires arising from empathy

elements.

UCAA should deploy mechanisms to effectively detect fraud and funds misappropriation which

should be in line with the public procurement oversight authorities laid down procedures for

61
accountability.

The accountable manager responsible for safety and dedicated SMS personnel in the organization

should have their roles clearly defined and personnel should be well educated on the reporting

channels so as to have a smooth flow of safety related information and resources.

5.5.3 The influence of aviation infrastructure on aviation safety in Uganda

It also recommends that the airport safety zones should be clearly demarcated and communicated to

the national government under the Ministry of Lands as well as the Ministry of Transport and

Infrastructure who in turn should act swiftly to stop further developments and remove illegal

developments along the airports.

In an effort to improve on the implementation effectiveness of provisions and policies set by ICAO,

the study recommends a more collaborative association between UCAA and ICAO in order to

develop and publish their own tailor-made technical guidance material to assist their technical

experts in implementing national regulations, procedures and practices.

5.6 Contributions of the study

This study is an addition to the existing body of knowledge in civil aviation management and

aviation safety in Uganda. Civil aviation safety is every one’s concern; it should not be left to the

Civil Aviation Authority alone nor is it a responsibility of the services providers only.

The knowledge in this study is expected to motivate general interest in an industry whose

management is currently considered exclusive. Civil aviation is an open industry; it accepts

constructive criticism and safety development ideas. Anyone with an idea that can improve aviation

safety, or notices anything that can put aviation safety at risk is encouraged bring it forward.

Voluntary safety information, identification of hazards and risky events in the operational areas
62
reporting, is the baseline upon which preventive and predictive civil aviation safety management

isbased.Thestudyfindingsinadditionmaybeusedbycivilaviationadministratorsandthepolicy makers to

enhance aviation safety management.

This study is an addition to the exiting body of knowledge about SMS. Although air transport is

among the safest means of transport, risk is a constant reality as is true of any human activity and in

effect aviation operations are prone to accidents. In order to keep safety risks at acceptable levels,

modern safety management practices are shifting from a purely reactive to being more proactive

and predictive. SMS is process-driven and proactive and must be infused into the management

system of ATOs for desired effects on safety. Furthermore, CAA can use the study findings to

enhance aviation safety, uplift and maintain Uganda’s safety rating above the required minimum, so

as to compete effectively in the global aviation industry.

5.7 Suggestions for further studies

This was a survey design study, on the civil aviation management system to find out how it

influences aviation safety.

Another related area for research would be a “Case design study on the Civil Aviation Authority” to

find out how the management system has been operationalized and how effective it is in respect of

promoting and maintenance of international aviation safety standards.

From the study and related conclusions, the study gives suggestions for further research in the area

of utilization and penetration of emerging technology in order to improve aviation safety and

security.

Further research could include the effect of additional variables like employee training among

63
others on aviation safety implementation and include approved maintenance organizations, air

traffic service providers and certified aerodrome operators in the study. This would give a

comprehensive picture on the level of safety compliance in the aviation industry of Uganda as a

whole

64
 REFERENCES

Aviation Safety Reporting System. (2016).ASRS program briefing [Power Point slides]. Retrieved

fromhttps://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/docs/ASRS_ProgramBriefing2016.pdf

Balunywa, J.W. (2015). A handbook of business management. Kampala: The Business Publishing

Group.

Bateman, T.S., & Snell, S.A. (2014). Management: the new competitive landscape (6th Ed.).

Brink M. (2019). Guidebook for Airport Safety Management Systems. Applied Research

Associates and International Safety Research Inc.

Caldwell, (2015), Investigating Human Error: Incidents, Accidents, and Complex Systems 1st

Edition

Cooper, D. R., and Schindler, P. S. (2018). Business Research Methods (8 th Edn). McGraw-Hill:

New York.

Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research Design 4th ed. Sage Publications, Inc

Cronbach’s, L. J. (1971) Test Validation: Educational Measurement, 2nd Edition Washington, D.C.

American Council on Education R. L. Thorndike

Cusick A & Rodrigues, (2012). Human Error Approach to Aviation Accident Analysis: The Human

Factors Analysis and Classification System.

Dekker B, (2018), Investigating Human Error: Incidents, Accidents, and Complex Systems 1st

EditionSupplementaryReport395.TransportandRoadResearchLaboratory, Crowthorne,

Berkshire, UK.

Denscombe, M. (2017), The good research guide: for small-scale social research projects. 6th ed.

London: Open University Press (Open UP study skills).

Douglas A. Wiegmann Author, Scott A. Shappell, A (2004) Human Error Approach to Aviation

Accident Analysis: The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System

i
FAA. (2016). Safety Management System Basis [Online].

Federal Aviation Administration (2016), Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge: FAA-H-

8083-25A,Aviation Standards Service, U.S. Department of Transportation.

Federal Aviation Administration. (2017). Next Gen priorities joint implementation plan rolling plan

2017-2019 (Executive Report).

GSmith(2011),NaturalDisasterVulnerability:ARealRiskforAirports,AviationSpecialReport, pp. 14-

15.

Ganson, G. (2016, March). Safety Matters - Developing a Health and Safety Program. Aircraft

Technology Journal, 42-43

Gonzalez, (2017), Weather and aviation: How does weather affect the safety and operations of

airports and aviation, and how does FAA work to manage weather-related effect? The

Potential Impacts of Climate Change on Transportation, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.

Guégan et.al, (2018): Role of wind shear at different vertical levels. Geophysical research

atmosphere, 13

Hawkins F. H. (1987).Human Factors in Aviation (2nd Ed.) Ashgate (Aldershot, UK),

1987.Helmreich, R. L. (1991). Strategies of Study of Aviation Crew Behaviour. In

International Civil Aviation Organisation, Report of the Aviation Safety and Human Factors

Regional

Seminar. Bangkok, Thailand

IATA (2015). 2012 Best in History of Continuous Safety Improvements. Number 8.

ICAO (2000) Annual report of the Council. International Civil Aviation Organization, Montreal,

Canada.

ICAO (2015), Aircraft Operations, Volume I, Aviation Procedures (Doc 8168OPS/611).

International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).

ii
ICAO (2017). Safety Management Manual (Doc 9859 AN/474). International Civil Aviation

Organization (ICAO).

ICAO Safety Report (2014) Montreal, Canada International Air Transport Association (IATA,

2020).

International Civil Aviation Organization. (2013). Civil and commercial Aviation harmonized

accident rate drops by 33%. Retrieved from https://www.icao.int

International Civil Aviation Organization. (2016). Safety report: 2016 edition. Montreal, Canada:

ICAO.

International Civil Aviation Organization. (2016). Universal safety oversight audit program:

Continuous monitoring approach results. Montreal, Canada: ICAO.

InternationalCivilAviationOrganization.(2017).Listoflow-costcarriers(LCCs):BasedonICAO

definition. Montreal, Canada: ICAO. Retrievedfromhttps://www.icao.int

International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO’s) (2016). State of Global Aviation Safety:

Evolving Toward a Risk-based Aviation Safety Strategy. 999 University Street, Canada.

Kang H. W. (2011). Safety Culture and Safety Management Systems – Enhancing the Heartware of

Managing Aviation Safety. Journal of Aviation Management, Singapore Aviation Academy

Knecht et al., (2010), Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge: FAA-H-8083-25A, Aviation

Standards Service, U.S. Department of Transportation

Krejcie, R .V. & Morgan, D .W. (1970).Determining Sample Size for research activities,

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Sage Publication

Layton, G. (2012). Aviation Safety: Comparing National and Regional Governmental Regulatory

Commercial Oversight Affiliations. International Journal of Business and Social Science,

Vol. 3 No. 3, pp.83-88

Magono, (2017), Natural Disaster Vulnerability: A Real Risk for Airports, Aviation Special Report,
iii
 pp. 14-15

Mahapatra and Zrnic, (2016), Sensors and Systems to Enhance Aviation Safety against Weather

Hazards, Proceedings of the IEEE, 79, 9, pp. 12341267.

McGuinness D. (2017). Aircraft Ground handling and human factors: A comparative study of the

perceptions by ramp staff and Management Report No. NLRCR-2010-125.

Mthuli N. (2012), African Development Bank, Africa’s Aviation Industry: Challenges and

Opportunities.

Nyeru J. (2015) Factors Affecting the Successful Implementation of Safety Management Systems

in the Aviation Industry in Uganda, School of Economics, Moi University, Nairobi, Uganda.

Reason D. (1990), Analyzing Aviation Safety: Problems, Challenges, and Opportunities.

Research in Transportation Economics

Reinhart E, Jentsch F, (1976), Human Factors in Aviation, 2nd Edition

Ross,G.,& Tomko,L.(2017,May).Perturbingpermutations:Ananalysisofco-occurringfactors during

events of pilot confusion. Poster presented at the 19th International Symposium on Aviation

Psychology, Dayton, OH.

Salas E, Jentsch F, Maurino D (2016), Human Factors in Aviation, 2nd Edition

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2016). Research methods for business students. Harlow:

Pearson Education Limited.

Sekaran, U & Bougie, R.(2016).Research Methods for Business (7thed). John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Shanhua and Xueqing,(2017),A Discussion on First Aid and Medical Support Capabilities

of Highland Airports [J], Aviation, 10, 82, pp. 55.

Walker, et al., (2016) Human Error Approach to Aviation Accident Analysis: The Human Factors

Analysis and Classification System

Wanjiru Mwangi (2018): The implications of wind and shear incidences on aviation operations at
iv
 JKIA in Uganda .

Wiegmann, D.A., S.A. Shappell (2003). A Human Error Analysis of Commercial Aviation

Accidents Using the Human Factor Analysis and Classification System (HFACS), Office of

Aerospace Medicine, Washington D.C., February.

Wood, R.H. (2015). Aviation safety programmes - a management handbook. Colorado USA:

Jeppesen Sanderson Inc

World Bank (2010), Africa’s Infrastructure: A Time for Transformation. African Development

Forum Series, World Bank, Washington DC, 2010.

Xiao yang liu et al, (2015): Role of wind shear at different vertical levels. Geophysical research

atmosphere, 13

Yeun et al, (2014). Safety Management Systems for Regular Public Transport Operations. CAAP

SMS-1(0). Civil Aviation Safety Authority, Canberra, ACT

v
 APPENDIX ONE: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR KEY RESPONDENTS

I am Mugabe Patrick currently pursuing the master’s degree in Public Administration at Uganda

Management Institute, Kampala. I am requesting you to answer this questionnaire which is intended

to collect information on the factors affecting compliance of aviation safety in civil aviation

industry: a case study of Uganda civil aviation authority. The study is purely for academic purposes

and any information given will be treated with maximum confidentiality. Please kindly answer the

questions to the best of your knowledge. Indicate your opinion by simply marking with a tick in the

space provided.

Thank you so much in advance for your cooperation and for your precious time.

SECTION A: BIO-DATA

1a Gender

Female Male

2a Age (Yrs)

Below 30 31-40 41-50 51 and above

3a Highest level of education

Diploma Masters

Bachelors PHD

4a Duration in the institution

0-5 years 11-15 years 6-10 years 16 years and above

i
SECTION B: THE EFFECT OF ORGANIZATIONAL FACTORS ON COMPLIANCE TO

AVIATION SAFETY IN UGANDA CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY

Kindly respond to the following statements as Strongly Agree (1), Agree (2) Neutral (3), Disagree

(4) And Strongly Disagree (5) based on your view on how organizational factors affect compliance

to aviation safety in Uganda civil aviation industry.

Statements 1 2 3 4 5

The Civil Aviation Regulatory institution must be compliant with the

ICAO standards

The compliance status of a Civil Aviation Authority is reflected in industry

performance

Approvals are granted after demonstration of compliance with the

requirements.

The CAA and operators have shared responsibility for aviation safety

management

Sufficient safety standards implementation guidance information has been

issued.

Managing operational risks and errors contributes to safety management

control

Good work-place conditions promotes (fosters) safety performance

Uganda has documented a State Safety Program (SSP) to guide Safety

Management Systems (SMS)

SECTION C: TO DETERMINE INFLUENCE OF FINANCIAL RESOURCES ON

AVIATION SAFETY IN UGANDA CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY

iv
Kindly respond to the following statements as strongly agree (1), agree (2) neutral (3), disagree

(4) and strongly disagree (5) based on your view on how human factors affect compliance to

aviation safety in Uganda civil aviation industry.

Statements 1 2 3 4 5

The organization is sufficiently funded to effectively carry out its

mandate of safety oversight.

The organization has employed mechanism to ensure adequate financial

sustainability.

The organization’s funds are made available to the critical safety

oversight functions adequate.

Relevant personnel are involved in the budget planning of the

Organization

Mechanisms have been put in place to discourage funds

misappropriation.

SECTION D: TO DETERMINE THE INFLUENCE OF AVIATION INFRASTRUCTURE

ON AVIATION SAFETY IN UGANDA

Kindly respond to the following statements as strongly agree (1), agree (2) neutral (3), disagree (4)

and strongly disagree (5) based on your view on how weather factors affect compliance to aviation

safety in Uganda civil aviation industry.

Statements 1 2 3 4 5

The aerodrome ground infrastructure is adequate for the current aviation

activities in the country.

v
 The aerodrome ground infrastructure is adequate for the current aviation

activities in the country.

Planning and implementation of the civil aviation infrastructure is

methodically integrated into the civil aviation system.

The technology supporting civil aviation air traffic system is adequate and up

to date.

Effective regulatory system to ensure control of developments around civil

aerodromes to guard against encroachment

The ICAO runway safety programme been implemented in the entire

aerodrome where it applies.

Aerodromes’ infrastructure maintenance practices or programmes are

adequate to ensure sustained availability and compliance with international

standards.

The results of statement C2 in Table: 4.6 indicate that 2% of the respondents agreed while the

majority 98% disagreed that the civil aviation management institution performs regular audits and

surveys to evaluate industry safety performance. This result indicates that the Institution does not

carry out any compliance surveys or audits and regular safety performance surveys and audits

regulatory requirements to ensure and to enforce continued compliance with the established

standards. Interviewed CAA inspectors response on the statement indicated that at least one annual

audit is carried out for the approval certification renewal.

vi
 The interviewed service provider’s opinion was that the civil aviation management

institution does not have the sufficient numbers of inspectors to perform the required regular

audits. These results reflect significant shortcoming on the civil aviation management

control function capability; and it must have significantly contributed to the poor

implementation results score rating in the ICAO USOAP of November 2008.

Statements 1 2 3 4 5

Uganda’s Regulations are adequate to acquire the international

Acceptable Level of Safety.

Civil Aviation Management Institution performs regular

performance audits and surveys

Industry safety audits are performed to identify non conformity

for correction and not for penalizing.

The certification process entrenches regulatory controls in the

service providers procedures

Managing operational risks and errors contributes to safety

management control

Good work-place conditions promotes (fosters) safety

performance

Uganda has documented a State Safety Program (SSP) to guide

Safety Management Systems (SMS)

End

vii
Thanks for cooperation and your time

viii
 APPENDIX TWO: INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR RESPONDENTS

Introduction

This interview schedule has been prepared for a study on how conventional factors affecting

compliance of aviation safety in civil aviation industry: a case study of Uganda civil aviation

authority. The information you will provide shall be used for academic purposes of this study. It

shall help me to evaluate the effectiveness of the civil aviation management system and how it

influences the industry’s aviation safety in Uganda.

I kindly request you to respond frankly and honestly because your answers will determine the

validity of this study results and conclusions.

I thank you very much for the opportunity you have accorded me to interview you. . Approvals are

granted after demonstration of compliance with the requirements Acceptable Level of Safety

performance has been defined by CAA

i. The CAA has capacity for the civil aviation activity scope in Uganda

ii. It is a state’s obligation to adopt ICAO recommended industry practices Civil Aviation

Organizing the CAA and operators have shared responsibility for aviation safety

management.

iii. Approved are based on safety management competency.

iv. A standard format is applied for requirements compliance evaluation and implementation.

Acceptable behavior; un-acceptable behavior; errors and violations have been defined.

v. CAA has defined Safety “unsafe acts and bad behaviors.

vi. Uganda’s Regulations are adequate to acquire the international Acceptable Level of Safety.

CAA performs regular audits and surveys to evaluate industry safety performance.

v
vii. Uganda has documented a State Safety Program (SSP) to guide Safety Management

Systems (SMS)

END

Thank you for your time and contribution

vi
 APPENDIX III: TABLE FOR DETERMINING SAMPLE SIZE FROM A GIVEN

POPULATION

N S N S N S N S N S

10 10 100 80 280 162 800 260 2800 338

15 14 110 86 290 165 850 256 300 341

20 19 120 92 300 169 900 269 3500 346

25 24 130 97 320 175 950 274 4000 351

30 28 140 103 340 181 1000 278 4500 354

35 32 150 108 360 186 1100 285 5000 357

40 36 160 113 380 191 1200 291 6000 361

45 40 170 118 400 196 1300 297 7000 364

50 44 180 123 420 201 1400 302 8000 367

55 48 190 127 440 205 1500 306 9000 368

60 52 200 132 460 210 1600 310 10000 370

65 56 210 136 480 214 1700 313 15000 375

70 59 220 140 500 217 1800 317 20000 377

75 63 230 144 550 226 1900 320 30000 379

80 66 240 148 600 234 2000 322 40000 380

85 70 250 152 650 242 2200 327 50000 381

90 73 260 155 700 248 2400 331 75000 382

95 76 270 159 750 254 2600 335 100000 384

APPENDIX IV: FIELD ATTACHMENT LETTER

7
8
vi
vii
APPENDIX V: PLAGIARISM REPORT

viii
ix