Education and Environment Essay ⋆ Environment Essay Examples ⋆ EssayEmpire

This Education and Environment Essay example is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic, please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.

Education is valued around the world as a means of promoting individual advancement and well-being, and for its potential to encourage economic growth and employment, empower women and minority groups, and reduce infant and child mortality rates. Universal access to education has been an international policy goal since the creation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, and since the 1960s it has also been increasingly linked to environmental management and international development efforts. This has been especially true since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (also known as the Earth Summit) was held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992. One of the important documents to come out of the conference was Agenda 21, a key set of plans and international agreements aimed at achieving global sustainable development in the 21st century. Education has a central role in the plans outlined by Agenda 21: “Education, including formal education, public awarenessand training should be recognizedas a process by which human beings and societies can reach their fullest potential. Education iscriticalfor promoting sustainable development and improving the capacity of the people to address environment and development issues. Whilebasic education provides the underpinning for any environmental and development education,the latter needs to be incorporated as an essential partof learning.”

While many people agree with the spirit of the ideas outlined in Agenda 21 , there is active debate about how best to implement them in practice. Educators, policymakers and activists around the world question what the content and aims of such educational programs should be, as well as what their benefits and costs might be for individual nations and communities. Governments, international organizations, and conservation and community groups promote environmental learning under a number of different labels, and employ a variety of different topics of study and teaching methods. These programs may be formal or informal, may be found in many different settings, and may address a number of different audiences.

Formally organized programs usually take place in schools, classrooms, museums, or protected nature areas (including national parks and privatelyowned conservation areas), while less formal community development and popular education projects or public awareness campaigns occur in other ways, such as through public meetings or the use of mass media. Public awareness campaigns, for instance, employ mass media such as newspapers, television and radio to spread environmental messages to the general public. Programs may do a variety of things; including promoting awareness of environmental concerns such as pollution or deforestation, encouraging environmentally sustainable behaviors such as recycling, reforestation, or the increased use of public transportation, or working to promote or protect specific kinds of knowledge about–and interactions with–local environments (for example, encouraging the use of local or traditional agricultural and harvesting practices).

Understanding Environmental Education

The contemporary environmental education movement began in the 1960s and 1970s–an era of history characterized by growing concern over the state of the natural world and also increasing interest in ecosystem and species preservation from the international scientific community. Environmental education in this period relied heavily on a style of public education and awareness-building that emphasized learning in the natural sciences, and especially in biology, botany, and ecology. Topics of particular interest included the scientific study of food and agriculture; tropical forests; biological diversity; desertification and drought; fresh water; oceans and coasts; energy; atmosphere and climate; solid waste and sewage management; and hazardous substances; as well as related concerns such as population growth, global security, and development.

The idea of promoting knowledge about the environment was also taken up by international conservation and development movements around this same time. Organizations such as the International Conservation Union (IUCN) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), for example, had begun creating curriculum materials for all levels of formal education as early as the mid 1960s. International support for environmental education continued to grow throughout the 1970s and1980s, and it was a major topic of discussion at a succession of important international meetings. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and UNESCO cofounded the International Environmental Education Program, for instance, and formally launched it at an International Workshop on Environmental Education in Belgrade in 1975. This important conference produced the first inter-governmental statement on environmental education, The Belgrade Charter–A Global Framework for Environmental Education. A followup conference, the First Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Edu cation, was hosted by UNESCO in Tbilisi, Georgia, USSR in 1977. The final report of this conference, known as the Tbilisi Declaration, contained recommendations for the implementation of environmental education in formal and informal education, as well as a framework for international co-operation that is still in use today. The next major international initiative came in 1980, with the publication of the World Conservation Strategy by IUCN,UNEP and the World Wildlife Fund. Further statements have followed, including the 1987 publicationof Our Common Future (a reformulation of the World Conservation Strategy, often known as the Brundtland Report), as well as the publication of Agenda 21 in 1992.

Although the term environmental education has dominatedpolicy language and practitioner vocabulary for the last several decades, its meaning changed significantly between the publication of The Belgrade Charter and Agenda 21. The text of The Belgrade Charter focuses on description of the unprecedented economic growth and technological progress of the 1970s, and how this is linked to severe environmental consequences. It identifies the goal of environmental education as: “To develop a world population that is aware of, and concerned about, the environment and its associated problems, and which has the knowledge, skills, attitudes, motivations and commitment to work individually and collectively toward solutions of current problems and the prevention of new ones.”

The document also calls for the use of environmental education to develop “a new global ethic… which espouses attitudes and behavior forindividuals and societies that are consonant with humanity’s place within the biosphere.” Environmental education, in this view, is intended to raise public awareness of the damaging effects of human activity on the natural world, and to encourage individuals and nations to adopt more environmentally friendly behaviors and lifestyles.

While the language of The Belgrade Charter emphasizes the need to protect the natural world from human activities, Agenda 21 , on the other hand, suggests that a balance must be found between addressing the needs of the environment and those of humankind. It specifically describes the interconnections between environmental management, and economic and social development, and therefore moves away from blaming environmental problems solely on human mismanagement. Environmental education – in this view – is not just about raising awareness of environmental problems like pollution or deforestation, but is an integral part of more complex and integrated relationships: “To be effective, environment and development education should deal with the dynamics of both the physical/biological and socio-economic environment and human (which may include spiritual) development.”

This changing understanding of the links between environmental management, education, and society had already begun in the late 1980s alongside criticism of the idea of development. The introduction and growing popularity of the concept of “sustainable development” led many educationalists to rethink the terms they used to describe their work. Some of these new terms included: education for sustainable development, education for sustainability, and education for a sustainable future. Narrow definitions of environmental education,which saw it as roughly equivalent to science education or nature study, were also expanded by some educators to encompass related ideas such as peace education, population education, and human rights education.

Some educators and theorists also added various qualifiers to the term in order to signal the expanded scope of their work, resulting in new concepts such as socially-critically environmental education or grassroots environmental education. Advocates of these alternate approaches argued that early understandings of environmental education-suchas those found in The Belgrade Charter – focused too heavily on the protection of natural environments and did not sufficiently take into account the needs and rights of human populations. International discussions about the relationships between environmental management and education since that time have centered on the different opportunities and limitations of these various approaches to education about the environment, as well as their potential to encourage environmentally friendly behaviors and social change.

Debates about education and the environment in the contemporary world, therefore, are closely related to wider discussions about how best to go about managing both the environment and the development process. In the simplest terms,these debates can be divided between perspectives that emphasize the teaching of science and those that seek to actively link environmental and social issues. Some styles of environmental education, for instance, promote awareness of environmental problems and the scientific or technical solutions for them (for example, the creation of strictly protected nature areas). Advocates of such science – oriented styles of education argue that when students are taught about these issues they will learn to love – and therefore be inspired to protect – the natural world from destruction. Other educators, however, argue that environmental concerns cannot be understood in isolation, but should be linked to the economic and social factors that influence human activity. This second kind of perspective on education reflects the increasing popularity of the idea of sustainable development, and encourages critical thinking about issues such as human rights, peace, poverty, and gender inequality, and the ways that these issues relate to both the successes and failures of environmental management.

Implementation

The style of educational programming promoted in a particular place, however, is often as much the result of national or local conditions and worldviews as it is of academic or policy debates.This is not just because of differences in perspectives on education and the environment in different locations, but is also related to the kinds of actor sinvolved in the process. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and especially international conservation groups, have been some of the most active promoters of environmental education since the 1970s. The World Wildlife Fund, for instance, is one of many international conservation NGOs with established educational programs and projects used by teachers and students around the world. National parks and protected areas in many nations also routinely include environmental education programs as part of their work in conservation, research, and tourism. Since1992, and in accordance with the recommendations of Agenda 21 , many national governments have been working to create national environmental education plans and strategies that address the inclusion of environmental topics in state school systems, higher education, government, and business. Atthelocal level, schools and community groups often take an active role in promoting environmental topics, either through activities in the classroom or outside the school walls (for example, visits to protected areas or participation in neighborhood clean-up campaigns).

Special Interests

Decisions about what are the most appropriate form and content of educational programs in a particular place are rooted in the interests and understandings of the specific organizations or individuals promoting them. Conservation NGOs or organizations that own large protected areas, for instance, are likely to employ programs that support their views on environmental protection, research, and advocacy. Sustainable development NGOs or advocacy groups, on the other hand, may choose to place a stronger emphasis on the social links between environmental management and society, or even more specifically on the interconnections between environmental management and the livelihoods of women, indigenous groups, or ethnic minorities. Schools or other formal education institutions are likely to promote learning when and where it fits most easily into existing teaching demands – whether that be within science or social science curricula.

The different needs and interests of these many actors can be a source of both conflict and collaboration. In Costa Rica, for instance, the state has taken a very active role in the promotion of environmental learning in the national education system since the late 1980s. The current national curriculum covers issues in ecology and biology, as well as making broader linkages to topics such as public health, poverty, and Costa Rican society. Support for these efforts has arisen from businesses, research and conservation groups, educational organizations, and individual citizens, many of whom have received significant financial benefits from the successful promotion of the nation as a premiere international ecotourism destination. In the United States,on the other hand, conflicts between powerful business interests, governments, conservation NGOs, and community groups, have meant that environmental education remains marginal to mainstream education systems and has instead been largely promoted by environmental NGOs and private conservation interests. Such different realities of environmental education practices illustrate that decisions about the content of programs or stylesof teaching, as well as opportunities for collaboration and conflict, depend on complicated economic, political, and social factors in every location.

Indeed, decisions about the implementation of environmental education, as well as its actual effectiveness in practice, often occur under serious economic and political pressures. National and international policymakers work to maximize investment in both basic and higher education in order to reduce poverty and to promote economic and social development, but these processes involve a wide array of individuals and organizations and are therefore farfrom simple. International financial organizations, such as the World Bank, have considerable influence on the national education policies of many developing countries, and have tended to provide more funding for science, technical and vocational subjects than for the arts and social sciences.

National education actors, such as education ministers and legislators, must therefore address international demands for education provision while also providing socially and culturally appropriate education that meets the expectations of educators, parents,and employers. At the local level,educators may be under significant pressure to meet state curriculum guidelines in order to prepare students for exams and to gain recognized qualifications, but must also remain sensitive to local economicand social conditions, and especially to local perspectives on the environment. Educators may also face pressure from local employers or other community members to provide students with knowledge and training that will lead to future employment.

Naturally, these relationships between educational actors do not just involve the imposition of pressure from the top downward. Each nation’s influence within international organizations also provides policymakers with opportunities to participate in negotiations of international educational policy and aid decisions. To take the example of Costa Rica again, national leaders and policymakers have a significant voice in international discussions of environmental management, education, and development, and have frequently been applauded for progressive legislation and programs. At the community level, too, students, adults and local organizations have the power to make their own decisions about participation in environmental education programs, as well as about the creation of locally appropriate projects for young people or the general public.

The economic, political, and social circumstances of individual nations and communities, in fact, can have a huge influence on how people think about and advocate – particular kinds of environmental knowledge and education. This is true both in terms of the specific topics chosen (such as reforestation, pollution reduction, water or waste management, or the participation and empowerment of vulnerable groups in environmental decision making) and the methods of teaching used (formal programs in schools, informal workshops provided by community organizations, or the use of mass media for public awareness campaigns). Education about the environment in every location and at every level – local, national, or international – is a dynamic process that involves many diverse actors,interests, and understandings of the links between the human and natural worlds.

Bibliography:

P.J. Fensham, “Stockholm to Tbilisi – The Evolutionof Environmental Education,” Prospects (v.4,1978);
JohnH uckle and Stephen Sterling, Education for Sustainability (Earthscan Publications, 1996);
Rosalyn McKeown and Charles Hopkins, “EE ESD: Defusing the Worry,” Environmental Education Research (v.9,2003);
Joy A. Palmer, Environmental Education in the 21st Century: Theory, Practice, Progress and Promise (Routledge, 1998);
Lucie Sauve,”Environmental Education and Sustainable Development: A Further Appraisal,” Canadian Journal of Environmental Education (v.1, 1996);
UNCED, Agenda 21, The United Nations Program of Action from Rio (United Nations, 1992);
UNESCO-UNEP, “The Belgrade Charter,”Connect, (v.1, 1976).