A review in THE this week of the Handbook of Sustainability Literacy – the sort of review that authors might have thought of penning themselves had they been optimistic enough about how their achievements might be received (I had one of those reviews once I seem to remember). In focusing on the notion of ecological intelligence, the review raised a question in my mind that my own reading of the book hadn't raised. It's this: how does ecological intelligence relate to sustainability literacy? Is ecological intelligence something that you can acquire when you have sustainability literacy? Or is it the other way round: do you need ecological intelligence in order to develop sustainability literacy? Or are they much the same thing (or is one part of the other, perhaps)? Maybe they co-evolve as you work through issues; maybe there's no necessary link. Answers on a postcard to the usual address ...
Monthly Archives: November 2009
To Norway to give a talk on reorienting teacher education to address sustainability at a conference of teachers and teacher educators. A chance to think about the Unesco project that we were once part of, and to reflect on 30+ years of our PGCE environmental science programme. No one (except me) mentioned that nature might be thought of as the home of culture, but there was much talk of the, notionally translatable, but hard to understand, idea of the 'Kulturlandskap' which is just as tricky as Bildung to get a grip on (try a google search). The highlight for me was listening to the venerable Øystein Dahle, once of the Worldwatch Institute, who has neatly positioned himself as a one man nuscience to those in thrall to the status quo and who think that the future is the way forward. His rediscovery of the OHP was his metaphor for a simpler life. An example of his writing is here.
I know that what the world really needs is "love, sweet love", whether sung by Dionne Warwick or others, but what we've finished up is the Lucerne Declaration. As IRGEE 18.4 reports, this is actually the Lucerne Declaration on Geographical Education for Sustainable Development [ LDGESD ]. As the declaration notes:
"The International Geographical Union Commission on Geographical Education proclaims this Declaration and recommends the principles presented in this document as a basis for a sound Geographical Education for sustainable development to all geographers and governments in the world."
I suppose what I really want to know is why this isn't just a basis for a sound, mainstream geographical education that everybody does [full stop] If geographical education isn'tnow focused on sustainability, does it really deserve the name?
Nick Jones reminds me that John Westaway (QCA Geography officer) said in about 1998 that Sustainable Development would likely be the "saviour" of Geography. But Ofsted's gloomy 2008 report on Geography in schools seems to indicate the opposite:
"At a time when geographical issues such as floods, rising sea levels,
conflict resolution, famines and trade disputes constantly make the
headlines, there is some evidence that the provision of geography is
10 years on, and it's citizenship which seems to be some bookies new favourite in the Saviour Stakes.
I recently spent a very stimulating few hours with primary school headteachers from a London Borough – talking with them about sustainable schools during a couple of days devoted to this theme. Although there were a few Heads from the Borough not there, it was a pretty good turn out.
Only 25% of those there said that they'd heard of the sustainable school doorways, and none had come across the idea of ESD – or the Unesco Decade. What bliss, part of me thought. I do need to say, however, that some of the work being done by those who were aware of the idea of sustainable schools was commendable.
In a recent mailing, SEEd has said that it "is wanting to explore what it can contribute to the question about pedagogy and ESD", and it asks "some very basic questions:
- What can we say about pedagogy and ESD/global learning?
- What theories and for what purpose have different types of pedagogy been advised or tested?
- What types of pedagogy are in practice and with/by whom?
- What would be useful to explore to further this area of work and enable a better narrative to influence further change/take up of ESD/global learning?"
- “there are no pedagogies specific to ESD” and
- “all pedagogies can be thought of as appropriate to ESD”
Monday saw me at a GWR seminar from Exeter over its impressive "access grid" (all rather Iain M Banks). The topic was fairtrade and the presentation illuminated a number of issues around why schools (and universities, Bath amongst them) find it so compelling to see fairtrade as something to promote, rather than to examine critically. The idea of fairtrade as global citizenship came across strongly: buying fairtrade coffee / tea, for example, means that you're not really consuming a product but making a protest / voting / helping / mobilizing / establishing solidarity / creating common cause, etc, whilst pretending, to yourself at any rate, that this is a small step outside the capitalist economy. Mostly an illusion, of course, as the speaker explained. Rather than stepping away from consumption as fetish, this was its replacement by the commodificatioon of an ethical relationship.
I was struck by the compelling nature of the argument that fairtrade allows you to see yourself as going beyond a product to making a difference to a social system, and hence to people's well-being. And I couldn't help but compare this to the organic movement which tries to do the same thing (stressing, often rather unconvincingly, the enhancement of personal health and well-being). What organic farming might be better advised to do, of course, is to help you see yourself as going beyond the product to making a difference to ecosystems, and hence to the earth's well-being. If it were to do that it'd likely have less trouble from advertising standards folk.
In a recent radio programme the following exchange took place:
Jane Little's Introduction: “The Government’s former Chief Scientific Advisor, Lord May, has called on religious leaders to play a bigger role in helping to tackle climate change. The Peer said religious groups could use their influence to motivate believers on green issues and suggested that the belief in hell and a punishing God might spur them to action. Well joining me now to discuss the role faith groups can play are Chris Goodall, Green Party candidate for Oxford and Abbingdon West at the next election, and author of “How to Live a Low Carbon Life”, and by Martin Palmer, Secretary General of ARC, the Alliance of Religions and Conservation”.
Jane Little: "Martin, this fear of eternal damnation would be a good motivator to save the planet wouldn’t it"
Martin Palmer: “No, I don’t think so and in the 25 years or so in which most of the major religions have been very active on environmental issues, something that Lord May perhaps hasn’t noticed. What they have focused on is not fear, and sin and guilt, we have rather left that to the environmental movement. What they have focused on is celebration, empowerment, abundance and joy. Because if we go into an issue like this with a notion that if you can scare people into morality, you will discover what every religion has discovered, which is that that lasts for a very short period of time. Whereas if you speak to people, say in the Christian tradition or the Daoist tradition about partnership, both with the planet and with the Divine, then you’ve got something that is long lasting. It is slightly worrying that aetheists always want the very God that they want us to reject, ie angry, domineering, stroppy God and then they get very cross with us when we say that that is not actually the God we believe in.”
Thanks to Nick Jones for this link.